Is food poisoning a growing problem in Britain? After a number of years of declining outbreaks, concerns are beginning to be expressed about rising levels of food poisoning associated with certain types of bacteria notably listeria and campylobacter in the elderly.
Some suggest that growth in listeriosis in the elderly, for example, might have something to do with changes in behaviour such as the way people store and eat food. And, as we all come under pressure not to waste food, consumer confusion about 'best before', 'use by' and 'sell by' dates could be adding to the problem.
While the UK's food processing industry is generally praised for the exceedingly high levels of food safety it maintains, recent media exposés have shown that controls can occasionally still be woefully inadequate.
However, less sensationally, some food safety experts have begun to question what influence changes in food manufacture might be having on food safety. In particular, experts on the Food Standards Agency's (FSA's) Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (ACMSF) have asked whether recent developments in the reformulation and manufacture of food might also be having some potentially adverse effects on food safety.
ACMSF chair professor Sarah O'Brien, for example, raised the spectre at last month's FSA General Advisory Committee on Science (GACS) meeting that pressure to reformulate foods to reduce salt and sugar in an effort to address the obesity epidemic might also have some unintended consequences on food safety since these ingredients also act as preservatives.
O'Brien even called into question advice issued by FSA's Standing Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) regarding the reduction of these ingredients in food. "The issue of reducing salt and sugar in food has implications for microbiological safety because they are preservatives," she told the GACs meeting. "ACMSF was blindsided by the advice coming from SACN we didn't know it was coming."
Against this background, GACS, which acts as a watchdog for the robustness of the Agency's science, has set up a special working sub-group to examine how the FSA's different advisory committees (of which there are 17 in total, including GACS) co-ordinate their advice so that what emerges from them is consistent across all areas of expertise.
In 2009 food safety has taken centre stage across the globe. From the major salmonella contamination outbreak in peanuts at the start of the year in the US which caused eight deaths and numerous cases of illness to the new food safety law implemented in China following the melamine-contaminated powdered milk scandal in 2008. Not forgetting the UK's professor Hugh Pennington, who published a report on the 2005 E.coli outbreak in South Wales this year.
The US House of Representatives passed a far reaching food safety bill in July, which has major implications for the way the food supply chain in the States is regulated.
Meanwhile, in the UK the FSA has taken Pennington's criticisms firmly on board, putting in place measures to address failures in public sector controls here.
Across the globe, manufacturers and retailers have also attempted to improve their own 'due diligence' procedures, adopting a number of new control measures.
New safety certification schemes
It has been a year in which third-party food safety certification has witnessed significant development.
Earlier this year we reported (Food Manufacture, April 2009, p4) on the launch of the new Food Safety System Certification (FSSC 22000). This received "conditional recognition" in May from the Board of the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) the body responsible for benchmarking the five existing international schemes. FSSC 22000, managed by the Foundation for Food Safety Certification (FFSC) based in The Netherlands, has now been benchmarked against the requirements laid out in GFSI Guidance Document version 5.
Before FSSC 22000 moves to full implementation, it is necessary for certification bodies (CBs) around the world to apply for accreditation against the scope of the scheme.
So far 17 CBs have been licensed to use FSSC 22000, including NSF-CMi, which claims to be one of its first approved certifiers.
"The FSSC scheme is a natural partner to ISO 22000 and the advantage for manufacturers who already have ISO 22000 certification is that they only require validation of their certification and a review against PAS [publicly available specification] 220 in order to achieve this new standard," says Amanda McCarthy, processing scheme manager at NSF-CMi. "The FSSC scheme is likely to be most popular among larger companies who may favour a sophisticated management systems-based standard."
Once fully implemented, FSSC 22000 is expected to become the sixth standard to join the stable of GFSI recognised schemes BRC, IFS, SQF 1000 and 2000, and Dutch HACCP [hazard analysis critical control points]. However, there has been speculation that since FFSC owns both FSSC 22000 and Dutch HACCP, the latter which has seen less take up than BRC, IFS or SQF may eventually be dropped.
Food safety consultant Kevin Swoffer, who is also chairman of the GFSI technical committee, expects FSSC 22000 to have a significant impact when it is fully approved probably later this year or early next year. "This will happen a large number of certification bodies are interested," said Swoffer. "The scheme that we have seen is good; it's robust and it is not just based on ISO 22000, it's based on the PAS system, which I welcome. It is a very robust system of control, which is what the retailers and the manufacturers really want."
At the other (entry level) end of the food safety certification assurance scale a new low cost web-based scheme, SOFHTe is being officially launched next month by the Society of Food Hygiene and Technology. This will go head to head with the not for profit Safe and Local Supplier Approval (Salsa) scheme launched in 2007.
It remains to be seen how these two entry level schemes, both aimed at smaller producers, will fair. But Salsa, which has now been in operation for a couple of years, already had 1,800 companies registered to the scheme by August this year. Over 500 buyers are now said to be using it and over 500 approved local suppliers are listed in its online directory, with many more working towards approval. The number of approved suppliers is expected to double over the next couple of years.
"One of the strengths of Salsa is that we are resourced on a local level," says Salsa scheme director Chris Grimes, referring to the practical involvement of the scheme's 74 mentors and 60 auditors located across the country plus the financial support provided to those adopting the scheme via regional food groups and the FSA.
"It isn't just a standard and it isn't just about certification, it's actually a scheme that gives support, help and advice to small producers, because that's what they lacked."
As well as recognition from major retailers such as Asda, Sainsbury, Waitrose, Booths and Whole Foods Market and foodservice operators Elior and 3663, Tesco and Morrisons also use Salsa on an "ad hoc basis" for some of their individual small suppliers as part of their due diligence framework, claims Grimes.
"We know Morrisons is using the scheme, but at the moment it is not policy." However, he adds: "We are in discussion [with Morrisons] and are hopeful that Morrisons will become more formal about our relationship and specify Salsa in the near future."
As far as potential competition from SOFHTe is concerned, Grimes said: "We were surprised that anybody thought there was room for a commercially based scheme, when Salsa had effectively been very successful and established a clear presence in the market."
He adds: "I struggle to see how an online only scheme without person-to-person contact built into the scheme will provide the level of food safety improvement that we see in Salsa."
Grimes also firmly rejects criticism that Salsa audits are sometimes inconsistent. "None has been reported to us, although every auditor will have a different style and approach," he says. "One of the things with Salsa is that we were able to identify auditors with the right industry experience in the right location every intervention with Salsa leads to a real improvement."
Grimes concludes: "There seems to be potential for confusion rather than additional benefit by introducing another scheme which may or may not have some crossover with what Salsa is trying to achieve." FM