Try your hand at this issue’s quiz and you could be in with a chance to win a fantastic prize!

Questions
Question 1. Imperial Star, Lorca and Madrigal are varieties of what vegetable?
Question 2. What food would you avoid if you had alektorophobia?
Question 3. Where would you expect to eat street food snack, Jing Leed?
Question 4. What T is a traditional Moroccan cooking vessel?
Question 5. Peppercorns date back to the 4th century BC. True or false?
Question 6. What American company invented the stand mixer?
Question 7. Ackee and saltfish is the national dish of this country.
Question 8. On average, how long does mild food poisoning last?
Question 9. How many eggs does Paul Newman eat in the film, Cool Hand Luke?
Question 10. What is a beurre blanc?

Safefood is delighted to offer one lucky quiz winner a fantastic food hamper (similar to pictured). To enter: Simply complete the quiz above and send your answers to  knowledgenetwork@Safefood.net before 28th February 2025. This competition is open to Knowledge Network members on the island of Ireland only.

Congratulations to Hilary Condon, Environmental Health Officer, HSE National Environmental Health Service, St Canice’s Hospital, Kilkenny.

Following the introduction of new EU regulations, Safefood set out to uncover attitudes to, and awareness of, food safety culture among small food businesses on the island of Ireland

In March 2021, the European Commission updated its regulation on hygiene and safety of foodstuffs (Regulation (EU) 2021/382) (EU, 2021) to include new regulations on food safety culture (FSC). The new EU regulations say that all food businesses must put an appropriate food safety culture in place and have evidence of it. Committing to a culture of food safety excellence can help a Small Food Business (SFB) to not only remain compliant and reduce any nonconformities but also to enhance their business performance. In September 2024, Safefood concluded research into the current attitudes to, and awareness of, FSC among SFBs on the island of Ireland (IOI), and to identify the barriers to, and facilitators for, adopting a culture of food safety within the businesses. The research project was divided into four stages: a rapid review; group discussions; a consumer survey, and follow-up group discussions.

Rapid evidence assessment
The rapid review of available academic studies and grey literature (e.g. government reports) yielded 17 studies of food safety interventions. No intervention focused on FSC as a whole or addressed more than one component of FSC. Most studies aimed to improve knowledge among food handlers (such as proper handwashing techniques, cleaning practices and temperature control of food) which was found to be lacking across the food businesses. No sustained behavioural change was reported following any intervention, which suggests that interventions to improve food safety should be dynamic and ongoing if they are to ensure lasting change.

Stakeholder discussions
Thirty-three participants (10 external experts and 23 SFBs) from across the IOI were recruited to the study. Results indicated a general lack of awareness of FSC and current EU legislation relating to FSC. The following themes emerged:

• Understanding FSC as a strategic imperative
• Investing in FSC-focused capacity building
• Prioritising FSC alongside business survival
• Encouraging continuous communication on food safety
• Embedding a mindset of FSC culture
• Striking the balance between regulation, reassurance and safety.

Survey of owners, managers and operatives
A total of 459 respondents (34% from Northern Ireland and 66% from Ireland) from SFBs participated in the phone survey. They were asked to assess the FSC within their SFB using an FSC maturity index score with 9 FSC components. Participants had to be aged 18 years or over, work in an SFB (50 or fewer employees) on the IOI and be either the owner/manager or a staff member handling food. Results revealed that 79% of owners/ managers and operatives were aware of the term FSC. However, fewer (61%) were aware of the EU legislation on FSC. Overall, managers/owners and operatives all considered their food business had implemented a high standard of FSC (total mean FSC score 5.18/6).

According to FSC component scores, operatives believed everyone in their food business took on their responsibility to encourage safe food practices (highest component score 5.46/6). Owners/managers considered there was strong FSC leadership within their business (highest component score 5.24/6). The research identified the following areas needing improvement.

• For operatives: communication and information sharing about food safety practices throughout the business to ensure all staff meet expectations and address safety concerns (5.17/6).
• For owners/managers: inclusion of food safety in businesses management systems such as processes, policies and procedures (4.96/6).

Level 3 food safety and hygiene training was the highest level of training undertaken by most owners/ managers. This suggests there is an opportunity for further development and training. Both operatives and owners/managers preferred training formats that could be tailored to the needs of the business and delivered face-to-face.

Follow-up discussions
External experts (EE) and small food business (SFB) owners and managers who had participated in Stage 2 or 3 were re-contacted and invited to join a follow-up discussion. Twenty-one people including 9 EEs (Northern Ireland 7, Ireland 2) and 12 SFB owners/managers (Northern Ireland 6, Ireland 6) participated. Three themes emerged:

• Harnessing a holistic approach to FSC
• Cultivating a clear understanding of FSC
• Supporting SFBs with appropriate resources

Recommendations
The research project provided valuable insights at each stage on awareness, understanding, and practices in regard to food safety culture within small food businesses on the island of Ireland. The key recommendations that emerged are as follows:

1.A whole-systems approach for interventions on FSC is required. Proposed interventions should consider:

• An ongoing dynamic approach rather than a once-off intervention
• Sustained behaviour-change as the intended outcome
• The influence of novel incentives on FSC
• A range of teaching techniques, particularly demonstrations in the workplace and group discussions
• Including management staff in the target group

2.A multi-functional tool for FSC measurement, auditing, and research should be developed to better assess the cultural aspects of food safety. This could be achieved by:

• Planning in partnership between environmental health officers (EHOs) and SFBs
• Identifying proxy measures of FSC
• Linking business performance to overall FSC performance

3.Development of a business-to-business awareness-raising campaign for SFBs. Key messages should emphasise the importance of integrating FSC into management systems and communication within a business. The messages should consider:

a. Defining FSC and its importance

b. Dedicated training support and resources on FSC

c.Safefood as an information source and point of contact for SFBs

d.Promotion of level 3 and above food safety training to owners/ managers

4.Development of training courses on FSC, taking account of training preferences (such as on-site and interactive training), tailored to: a.

a.EHOs – FSC concept; its importance; how to assess it; and tools to support SFBs

b.SFB operatives – FSC concept; its importance; and how it is implemented within a business

c.SFB owners/managers – FSC concept; FSC as a strategic imperative; how to communicate FSC within their business; and how to implement it within a business through business systems

5.Integration of the FSC concept within existing FS training programmes and communications

6.Development of a practical resource area for EHOs and SFBs on the Safefood website (such as templates, multi-lingual resources, leadership role model examples, and case studies). This could be combined as part of the awareness-raising campaign

7.Promotion of a co-design approach for implementing a FSC within an SFB

8.Development of a live app chatbot, ping notifications and mapping of accredited food safety trainers to support SFBs with their FSC training needs and communication

9.Creation of an FSC network for SFBs and stakeholders, covering all aspects of FSC and incorporating many of the above recommendations

10.Proposal to implement a food hygiene rating scheme for Ireland

To read the full report please visit www.safefood.net/research

Image www.freepik.com

Adaptability and ongoing learning are key to career success, advises Colm Walsh, laboratory technician in the Public Analyst Laboratory in Cork

With a Bachelor of Science in Analytical Chemistry with a focus on Quality Assurance, Colm Walsh’s career began in the private sector, where he developed a strong foundation in analytical techniques and quality control processes. “I love the challenges that science presents, its ever-changing nature keeps me interested and passionate about my work, as no problem is ever truly the same.”

In his current role as a laboratory technician in the public sector, his primary focus is on the analysis of food samples to detect the presence of heavy metals. “This position allows me to contribute directly to public health by ensuring that the food products people consume are safe and compliant with regulatory standards,” he says.

As a laboratory technician, Colm’s core responsibilities include preparing and analysing food samples that are sent to the laboratory by various government agencies. He explains: “These samples are analysed using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS), a highly sensitive technique that allows for the precise detection of heavy metals such as arsenic, cadmium and lead. Through this process, we can determine whether food products meet the safety limits set by EU legislation. Our work is critical in ensuring that foods entering the market are safe for consumption, and we play an essential role in protecting public health by identifying non-compliant products before they reach consumers.”

Ongoing evolution
One of the most challenging aspects of his role, he says, is navigating the ever-evolving landscape of food safety legislation. “As new research and studies emerge, we gain a deeper understanding of potential sources of heavy metal contamination in the food supply chain. This often leads to the introduction of new regulatory limits and sampling matrices, which means our laboratory must adapt quickly. New matrices and updated limits require us to validate our existing analytical methods continuously to ensure their accuracy and compliance.” This dynamic environment keeps his work challenging, he says, as it demands both adaptability and a commitment to maintaining high standards of precision and accuracy in analyses.

For anyone interested in pursuing a career in food safety and laboratory work, Colm’s advice is to strive to improve and remain open to learning. “The world of science is constantly evolving and it’s crucial to keep pace with new developments. Staying current with scientific literature and advances in analytical instrumentation can prove incredibly useful, as these tools and techniques can help address unexpected challenges in the lab. Adaptability and a commitment to professional growth are key attributes for success in this field. Embrace the mindset of continuous learning, and you’ll find opportunities to make meaningful contributions to food safety.”

Peer learning
Workshops are an excellent way to learn about the latest developments in food safety, he believes, and a recent workshop at the Technical University of Denmark afforded training and facilitated knowledge-sharing among food safety professionals from across the EU. “The European Union Reference Laboratory for Metals and Nitrogenous Compounds in Feed and Food (EURL-MN) hosted a workshop titled, Training in the determination of inorganic arsenic in feed and food by HPLC-ICPMS. This experience allowed me to bring back new insights and methodologies to our laboratory, helping us to stay at the forefront of food safety testing. These workshops not only offer practical training but also serve as platforms for exchanging information, discussing emerging trends, and building networks that help to improve our understanding of food safety standards across the EU.”

Colm’s participation in this workshop was supported by the Safefood Knowledge Network Food Safety Skills Fund. “The primary aim of my visit was to gain comprehensive training on the inorganic arsenic HPLC-ICP-MS method. This trip was intended to equip me with the necessary skills and knowledge to implement this method effectively within our laboratory, thereby enhancing our ability to detect inorganic arsenic. The training I received was comprehensive and has since become integral to my daily work. It has significantly enhanced the food safety activities in our laboratory, allowing us to improve our methodologies for detecting inorganic arsenic in food products. The detection of inorganic arsenic is crucial for ensuring food safety, given its toxic nature and potential health risks. This training was relevant to our laboratory’s goals of maintaining high safety standards and complying with EU regulations.

“Beyond the technical training, the workshop also provided a platform for connecting with experts and peers from various countries. This network has become a valuable resource, enabling us to share insights, best practices and new research findings. The connections established during this event continue to support our lab’s efforts in maintaining high standards of food safety through improved detection methods,” Colm explains.
Image www.freepik.com

From developing flavour profiles to uncovering food adulteration, Nick Birse discusses the work of the ASSET Technology Centre

Nick Birse is a lecturer in mass spectrometry at the Institute for Global Food Security (IGFS) and the School of Biological Sciences in Queen’s University, Belfast. He speaks to us about the ASSET Technology Centre, a leading analytical chemistry and mass spectrometry research hub within the IGFS, that hosts the National Measurement Laboratory’s Centre for Excellence in Agriculture and Food Integrity.

“The ASSET Technology Centre, which stands for assured, safe and traceable, was established by Professor Chris Elliott a decade ago when he founded the IGFS. It was inspired by incidents such as the dioxin scandal that occurred in the pig industry in Ireland, the horsemeat scandal in Ireland, the UK and the Netherlands, and the melamine-in-milk scandal in China.

Inside the lab
The laboratory was established to provide a variety of experts to support the local agricultural sector in Northern Ireland. “Agriculture is such a large and important part of the economies of Northern Ireland and Ireland that we want to ensure we have the skills and expertise on site, not just to undertake product development testing for companies, but also to train the next generation of food scientists and analysts that will be employed in the sector,” says Nick.

The laboratory has a dual structure with a two-tier testing approach, Nick explains. “We’ve got a spectroscopy side with a variety of handheld, portable instrumentation: near infrared, mid infrared, ultraviolet, and elemental spectroscopy, as well as larger bench-top instruments that are very sensitive but work better in a laboratory environment.”

Queen’s University has worked with a spin-out company, Bia Analytical, to develop handheld devices that use advanced computer modelling technology. “The data is transferred through Bluetooth onto your smartphone and transferred up to the cloud, where it’s processed. The result is then sent back to the smartphone so the user can see in real time if the product is passing or failing testing.

“This computer modelling technology can achieve a wide variety, from assessing quality to checking the flavour or taste characteristics producers are looking for, through to identifying for contamination or adulteration,” Nick explains. 

The advantage of the spectroscopy approach, he says, is that it moves away from genetics and DNA, meaning it can identify where non-biologic ingredients like brick dust, soil or clay have been added. “If you were to test something like a chilli powder that’s been adulterated with brick dust genetically, all that’s in there is 100% chilli, but it could be 50% brick dust. Lead chromate is put into turmeric to make it brighter. The genetic profile of the product remains unchanged, so if a genetic test is used, it will look as if it’s passed. But using the spectroscopy, there’s a difference in the chemical fingerprint, and we can see that we’ve got a problem.”

Adulteration can be caused by a variety of things from deliberate criminality such as adding clay powder to bulk out a product, to pesticide residue as a result of weather conditions. Nick elaborates: “Most pesticides are designed to break down when they’re exposed to light and ozone. In Ireland the ideal weather conditions may not occur, and the pesticide may not degrade as quickly as expected. When the product is harvested, there could be a higher level of pesticide residue than expected which can lead to illness.”

Another function of the lab is to work with industry to examine new products to ensure they have the correct levels of certain key ingredients like vitamins and minerals. “This can be food products or animal feed. We do a lot of work with the grain traders associations to ensure that new animal feeds have the correct composition.”

Elsewhere in the lab, he says, staff are working on new novel animal feeds and supplements to reduce methane emissions and improve animal health. There are ongoing trials on willow in animal feed to help the gut microbiome in sheep and cattle and cut methane emissions.

“Some of the other work that we do is consumer preference understanding. We can do all of this work to deliver new food products that are better for the environment, have lower emissions or enhanced nutrition, but if its unpalatable to consumers, particularly if it tastes worse than what is available at a lower cost, or if it just doesn’t taste pleasant, consumers won’t buy it,” he says.

Market forces
Food safety issues change depending on market demand, supply and availability. According to Nick: “For example, if it’s been a particularly poor year for grain yields, grain that’s been sitting on farm with higher levels of fungal mycotoxin contamination might make it onto the market. There might be some blending and other illegal activities to try and get it under the thresholds.”

Trending food items, often driven by cookery programmes, can also have an impact on food safety, something Nick calls the ‘Delia Smith effect’. “If organic chicken is trending, suddenly you will find that the supply starts to accommodate demand, but production hasn’t changed, so products can be mislabelled to meet demand.”

The lab can be notified of these fraudulent cases through a number of channels, from supermarkets to government agencies. Nick outlines a recent example: “There was a case recently where consumers in Scotland reported to Trading Standards that their vodka had an odour, smelling a bit like nail varnish remover. Trading Standards seized it and sent it for testing, which revealed that isopropyl alcohol was present. When they looked at the product and packaging in more detail, they could also see that it was missing laser etching on the bottle.

“A previous collaborator of ours, Roy Goodacre at the University of Liverpool, has worked on a spatially offset ramen spectroscopy system. This is a handheld device that can be placed against a bottle to indicate if there is a problem with the contents without having to open it. This is an example of where scientists can collaborate with government on quick and easy ways to test items without necessarily having to open up the packet and get an answer.”

Daily routine
A typical day for Nick involves lecturing, project management, grant writing, training and school board meetings. “Work in the lab usually starts at 8:30am or 9am. The instrument does the work rather than the person so we will have samples lined up and running automatically. “We’ll double check that anything running overnight has completed, check for errors or if there is anything to repeat. Then we start to analyse and process the data and get our next set of samples prepared. The results can steer what we do in terms of further work.”

Advances in food safety technology have meant that the volume of samples processed by the lab has increased. “We’re able to get more samples processed in a shorter period of time. If we have a grain ship arriving at Belfast Harbour and it takes us an hour to process each grain sample, it’s going to take us a long time to get representative samples from 20 or 30,000 tonnes of grain. With rapid technologies, we can now process 15 or 20 times as many samples, and this allows us to overcome representative sampling. More samples mean more data, and better quality results give us more certainty, more confidence.”

These advances help in other ways, too, he says. “We have simplified many of the techniques, and instrumentation has become more sensitive, so there isn’t as much sample clean up or pre-processing required. Consequently, the number of people involved to get samples into instruments has reduced.”

The simpler something is in terms of a test, he explains, the more robust it is. “There are fewer failure points compared with how things were done 10 or 15 years ago, so we can have more confidence in the results that we provide.”

Try your hand at this issue’s quiz and you could be in with a chance to win a fantastic prize!

Question 1: What K is a fermented milk drink?
Question 2: What is the fear of eating with other people known as?
Question 3: What helpful kitchen appliance did Perry Spencer invent?
Question 4: Kohlrabi, January King and Cannonball are varieties of what vegetable?
Question 5: In the film, The Big Lebowski, what is The Dude’s favourite drink?
Question 6: What is a cooking slurry?
Question 7: What is the national dish of Georgia?
Question 8: Dried fruit like raisins, prunes, figs and apricots are a good source of calcium. True or false?
Question 9: How often should you replace your dishcloth?
Question 10: Where in Ireland is the Butter Museum?

safefood is delighted to offer one lucky quiz winner a fantastic food hamper (similar to pictured). To enter: Simply complete the quiz above and send your answers to knowledgenetwork@safefood.net before 15th November 2024. This competition is open to Knowledge Network members on the island of Ireland only.

Congratulations to the winner of issue 29’s quiz, Jackie Doody, Catering Officer in the South Infirmary Victoria University Hospital, Cork.

Dessie Brady, a Senior Food Technologist in CAFRE’s Knowledge Advisory Service, writes about the expanding role of robotics and automation in food production for SMEs

Food technologists at the College of Agriculture, Food & Rural Enterprise (CAFRE) support industry in a number of ways including technical support in food innovation, minimising food waste, food for health, food regulatory requirements, food packaging alternatives and plastics reduction. I lead advanced manufacturing support in areas such as food processing, robotics and automation, and digitalisation. CAFRE also delivers food education courses and I’m keen to bring current industry themes and challenges into the learning environment to support knowledge transfer.

Our collaboration with the Advanced Manufacturing Innovation Centre (AMIC) at Queen’s University Belfast helps Northern Ireland’s agri-food small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to optimise their operations for the present and future. This includes learning about demands, identifying constraints, and pinpointing areas for improvement.

We partner with the AMIC on digital simulation models to virtually explore potential solutions that incorporate robotics, automation, and other advanced manufacturing tools. Digital simulation enables businesses to investigate the benefits and potential risks associated with these interventions before they invest in costly equipment or overhaul their production lines.

Several businesses have adopted automation solutions after considering the digital concepts identified through simulations, resulting in increased efficiency and throughput, labour redeployment and enhanced food safety and quality for their operations.

By embracing these advancements, SMEs can unlock significant advantages. While there’s an initial investment, automation can free up staff for higher-skilled roles and potentially reduce overall labour costs in the long run. Another benefit is improved sustainability: smarter factories can optimise resource usage and minimise waste, leading to a more sustainable food production system. CAFRE’s collaboration with the AMIC is pioneering a future where Northern Ireland’s agri-food SMEs can leverage the power of digital simulation to empower them to make informed decisions about their future, unlock efficiency gains, and become more competitive in the global marketplace.

However, integrating these technologies can pose challenges:

• Financial constraints: Robots and automation systems can require significant upfront investment.
• Skills: Operating and maintaining these systems may require additional technical skills or training for existing staff.
• Limited labour availability: For SMEs with a small workforce, there may be concerns that automation could displace existing staff. The focus should be on redeployment, with automation freeing up employees for higher-value tasks.
• Time constraints: Busy SMEs may struggle to dedicate the necessary time to thoroughly research, plan, and implement automation solutions.
• Stock keeping unit (SKU) range: Many SMEs frequently make a wide range of products; this reduces the plant efficiency due to line changeovers often requiring line In addition, many food manufacturing businesses have different allergen and ‘free from’ claims to manage to ensure product authenticity and quality. 
• Space limitations: Established businesses may not have space to accommodate robots or automated production Careful space planning and potentially reconfiguring existing layouts might be necessary. This is where digital simulations can help SMEs to visualise potential interventions. 
• Return on investment (ROI) uncertainty: Accurately calculating the ROI for automation can be complex for Factors like production volume, labour costs, and product type all influence the ROI equation, making it difficult to predict the true payback period. 
• Integration challenges: Existing production lines and equipment may not be readily compatible with new automation systems. Ensuring seamless integration and smooth data flow between old and new technologies can be a challenge.

Despite these challenges, the potential benefits of robotics and automation are significant for SMEs in the agri-food sector. By carefully considering these hurdles and exploring options like collaborative robots (cobots) and scalable automation systems, SMEs can make informed decisions and pave the way for a more efficient, productive, and competitive future.

Benefits of automation
Automation can help to improve food safety throughout production processes. Repetitive tasks like product handling, weighing and cleaning are prone to human error. Automation removes this human element, ensuring consistent and accurate execution. Automated systems offer better precision, minimising the chances of mistakes which reduces the potential of introducing foreign objects or cross contamination.

Automated cleaning systems can thoroughly sanitise equipment and surfaces, promoting a cleaner production environment. These systems implement rigorous cleaning protocols consistently, eliminating the risk of human error or shortcuts. The use of input sensors to monitor water pressure, volume, chemical concentration, time and temperature during the cleaning process can help verify that the cleaning process is adequate. This is key for clean-in-place (CIP) operations but also for general object cleaning. The data that the sensors collect can be analysed and stored digitally for audit purpose.

Maintaining consistent temperatures throughout production is crucial for food safety and automated monitoring and control systems ensure precise temperature regulation across storage, processing, and packaging stages. Sensors on the production line continuously gather data, allowing for real-time adjustments and minimising the risk of bacterial growth or spoilage due to temperature fluctuations.

Automation goes beyond basic tasks: vision systems equipped with advanced cameras and image recognition software can inspect products for blemishes, foreign objects, or imperfections at high speeds and with unmatched accuracy. This significantly reduces the risk of faulty or contaminated products reaching consumers.

Modern automation systems offer real-time tracking and data-logging capabilities through integrated sensors. This data allows for precise identification of ingredients, batches and processing details for each product. In the event of a food safety concern, this detailed traceability, coupled with sensor data, enables swift and targeted product recall, minimising risk to consumers. Additionally, sensor data can be analysed to identify trends or potential problems before they occur, promoting a proactive approach to food safety.

By minimising human error, enhancing cleaning protocols, ensuring temperature control with real-time monitoring, utilising vision systems for reduced non-conformances and improved quality assurance, facilitating traceability with sensor data, and enabling data-driven decision making, automation plays a vital role in safeguarding food safety within the agri-food sector. This not only protects consumers but also bolsters brand reputation and consumer confidence.

Future focused
The use of robotics in food production is rapidly evolving and the future holds exciting possibilities. As part of CAFRE’s future campus redevelopment plans, we are keen to support the demonstration of new robotic capabilities in our new Robotics, Automation and Packaging Innovation Centre (RAPIC) in Loughry, which we hope to construct in the years ahead. The ambition is to establish an innovation space for key equipment suppliers to create bespoke solutions for food manufacturers. This facility will also use Industry 4.0 technologies like digitalisation to de-risk investment and promote technology transfer. The current rate of technological advancement is exponential. Here are some of the key trends I predict:

1. Increased collaboration and dexterity Cobots will become even more sophisticated, seamlessly working alongside human employees in tasks requiring dexterity and adaptability. Imagine cobots or humanised robots assisting with delicate food handling, packing, or final product inspection.
2. AI-powered automation and smart factories We’ll see an increase in automation systems that will use artificial intelligence to learn, adapt, and optimise production processes in real-time. This could involve robots autonomously adjusting settings based on product variations or dynamically re-routing production lines for maximum efficiency. The concept of ‘smart factories’ where robots, sensors and AI work together will become increasingly prevalent. 
3. Advanced robotics for unfavourable environments Robots designed for harsh or hazardous environments will play a bigger role. e.g., robots equipped for high-heat sterilisation processes or handling tasks in cold storage facilities, thus minimising human exposure to these conditions. 
4. Sustainable and hygienic robotics This could involve biodegradable materials in robot construction or robots with self-cleaning capabilities to minimise contamination risks. 
5. Greater integration Robots will become even more integrated with big data and the Internet of Things (IoT) networks. This will allow for real-time monitoring of food production processes, predictive maintenance for robots, and data-driven optimisation of food quality and safety. 
6. Ethical considerations and transparency As robotic integration becomes more widespread, discussions around ethical considerations and transparency in the food production chain will gain importance. Consumers will want to know how their food is produced, and the responsible use of robotics will be crucial for maintaining trust.

The future of robotics in the food industry promises greater efficiency, improved food safety, and potentially even more personalised food experiences for consumers.

ABOUT DESSIE BRADY

What activities do you enjoy in your spare time?
My first love is Gaelic football. I have been both a player of the sport, and a coach of young football teams. When I finished playing Gaelic, I took up golf and I’m a member of the challenging Warrenpoint Golf Club. My favourite meal is a steak dinner and my quest to create the perfect meal continues, someday I will nail it.

What are you currently watching?
I tried to watch as much of the Paris Olympic Games as possible. I’m always amazed at the dedication and ambition of all the athletes regardless of the sport. I was delighted to see Armagh win the All- Ireland – for the players, the manager and their sponsors.

Try your hand at this issue’s quiz and you could be in with a chance to win a fantastic prize!

Questions

Question 1
What is gochujang?

Question 2
What flower produces a vanilla pod?

Question 3
What drink did Dr John S. Pemberton invent?

Question 4
What is the recommended maximum refrigerator temperature to ensure food safety?

Question 5
Grissini, challah, and injera are types of what?

Question 6
What fruit does grenadine come from?

Question 7
What is Joey from Friends’ favourite food?

Question 8
What fish is found in Caesar salad dressing?

Question 9
What would you consume from a chawan?

Question 10
Raw chicken should be washed – true or false?

safefood is delighted to offer one lucky quiz winner a fantastic food hamper (similar to pictured). 
To enter: Simply complete the quiz above and send your answers to knowledgenetwork@safefood.net
before 26th July 2024. This competition is open to Knowledge Network members on the island of Ireland only.

Congratulations to the winner of issue 28’s quiz, Stephen Ahern, Chief Medical Scientist and Technical Manager
in the Public Health Laboratory, Microbiology Department, University Hospital Waterford. 

Answers: 1) Natasha’s Law; 2) Carbohydrates; 3) Cepelinai; 4) Fabaceae family; 5) True; 6) Apple; 7) Mozzarella; 8) Onion, celery and carrot; 9) Pink; 10) True

Are smart devices in the kitchen a recipe for contamination?

In today’s digital age, where technology seamlessly integrates into our daily lives, even the most traditional spaces like the kitchen are not spared. From searching for recipes to watching cooking tutorials, capturing moments for social media, smart devices have become indispensable tools for many during meal preparation. A recent research project commissioned by safefood investigated the use of smart devices and food preparation in domestic kitchens across the island of Ireland. Led by a team from Queen’s University Belfast, St Angela’s College Sligo, and Ulster University, this study revealed important insights into consumer behaviour and associated microbiological food safety risks.

Understanding Consumer Behaviour
Observations from the in-kitchen observational study revealed a significant reliance on smart devices during meal preparation, with smartphones emerging as the device of choice for most participants. However, what caught the researchers’ attention was the fluctuating adherence to food safety practices. Despite the awareness of potential hazards, such as cross-contamination, observed behaviours often fell short of recommended guidelines. Notably, hand hygiene, particularly after handling raw ingredients like chicken and eggs, was found lacking in a significant portion of participants.

The Microbial Terrain
The microbial analysis further illuminated the potential risks lurking on our smart devices. Food poisoning bacteria such as Salmonella and E. coli were found to survive on smart device screens for more than 24 hours. In addition, Enterobacteriaceae contamination was detected on 6% of pre-cleaned tablets, showing cross-contamination of these devices during the cooking activity.

Insights from Consumer Perspectives
Delving into consumer perceptions through focus groups and an online survey uncovered nuanced attitudes towards food safety and smart device usage. While participants acknowledged the risk of bacterial transfer from devices, there existed a low perceived risk of contracting food poisoning at home. Moreover, socio-demographic factors such as gender and education level influenced both selfreported and observed behaviours, indicating varying levels of attentiveness to hygiene practices.

Implications and Recommendations
The findings of the research project have implications for both public health and consumer education. Despite the widespread use of smart devices in the kitchen, there
exists a critical need to enhance consumer awareness of the associated food safety risks. This is particularly relevant for more vulnerable people such as those who are over 65, pregnant or have an underlying medical condition which compromises their immunity. 

Recommendations from the project included promoting regular disinfection of smart devices and advocating for a dedicated kitchen device could mitigate the risk of cross-contamination. In addition, by encouraging consumers to adopt simple, yet effective measures, such as handwashing between handling raw ingredients and touching devices, we can collectively strive towards safer kitchen environments. 

Dr Mairead McCann, Technical Executive at safefood, emphasised the importance of this research, stating, “Understanding the potential risks associated with using smart devices in the kitchen while cooking high-risk foods is crucial for ensuring food safety in our homes.” This sentiment underscores the necessity of addressing these findings to safeguard public health.

In conclusion, while smart devices have transformed the way we approach cooking and meal preparation, their integration into the kitchen presents its own set of challenges. By combining technological convenience with an awareness of food safety, we can keep our cooking both creative and safe for everyone. For more information, please see www.safefood.net/research

New research into mycotoxins – fungal pathogens that can cause serious health issues

Dr Brett Greer is a Senior Research Fellow at the School of Biological Sciences at Queen’s University Belfast. Here, he shares the findings of his safefood-funded research into mycotoxins in cereals for human consumption.

What are mycotoxins and what food safety threat do they pose?
Mycotoxins are fungal pathogens that are naturally produced by fungi (moulds) and which can have serious implications for human and animal health, with the main route of exposure being through ingestion of contaminated food/feed. Their health effects range from kidney and liver damage, and gastrointestinal issues, to acute poisoning and longterm effects such as immune deficiency and cancers. They are also known to cause sickness, with one of the main mycotoxins, deoxynivalenol (DON), also being known as vomitoxin. They naturally contaminate the majority of cereal grains such as oats, barley, wheat, corn, maize etc. while growing and in storage. 

The type of fungus and the mycotoxins produced are very much dependant on the climate in which the cereal is grown, with climate change expected to drive the contamination of these crops, necessitating greater surveillance and control to safeguard the food chain. Of the hundreds of mycotoxins identified, only twelve have been legislated for in human food and animal feed, including; Aflatoxins, fumonisins, ochratoxin A, zearalenone, deoxynivalenol, T-2 and HT-2 toxin, with the latter two (T-2 and its metabolite HT-2) being important mycotoxins in the oat industry on the island of Ireland.

Can you share the objectives of your research?
There were several objectives in this research project, including:
• Review the current commercially available rapid screening methods for the detection of the T-2 and its metabolite HT-2 in cereals for human consumption;
• Conduct a comprehensive survey of oats and barley to determine the mycotoxins that frequently contaminate these cereals in Ireland and the UK;
• Analysis of oat samples before and after processing to assess the impact of the processing procedure on the levels of T-2/HT-2. 

Cereal grains such as oats can be analysed at the farm or facility, where they are processed for human or animal consumption. In this case, commercially available rapid diagnostic kits were used to analyse oat samples; these are usually used for screening, i.e. to check if something may be present, and are not confirmatory. 

This type of analysis is rapid due to the requirement for an answer as soon as reasonably possible in order for a batch to be released after processing, and in fact, the same technology was used for COVID testing. In comparison, testing laboratories generally use confirmatory methodologies that are usually performed on more (expensive) technological platforms such as liquid chromatography coupled to mass spectrometry (LC-MS), with this technology considered the gold standard in the industry. LC-MS instruments, although more expensive and analytically complex, give an end result that is fully confirmatory, accurate and provides more information in regard to other mycotoxins possibly present.

One of the main objectives of the project was to evaluate the accuracy of the commercially available rapid test(s) used by the industry, with several test kits for the analysis of T-2 and its metabolite HT-2 compared against the same sample analysed by LC-MS.

What were the key findings of your study?
One hundred oat samples were analysed using several of the commercially available rapid test kits, with the results compared to the same samples analysed by LC-MS (gold standard). Overall, with the current legislative standards for the control of T-2 and HT-2 toxins in oats, two of the commercially available rapid test kits demonstrated reliable results when compared with LC-MS, including the number of false negative/false positive results generated. In terms of unprocessed oats, T-2/HT-2 toxins were detected in 94% of samples, with 16% of unprocessed oat samples exceeding the current EU indicative limits set for the sum of T-2/HT-2. In addition, unprocessed oat samples were analysed for other regulated mycotoxins such as deoxynivalenol and zearalenone, with their reported concentrations well below their respective legislative limits, while another mycotoxin, ochratoxin A, exceeded its legislative limit in 3% of unprocessed oat samples. 

Another finding was the co-occurrence of T-2/HT-2 and deoxynivalenol, T-2/HT-2 and ochratoxin A, and T-2/HT-2 and zearalenone, with one sample containing all four of these mycotoxins. This is important because co-occurring mycotoxins can have an effect greater than their sum. In regard to the processing of the oats to the finished product for human consumption, although the prevalence of T-2/HT-2 was still high (94%), no regulatory violations were observed, indicating that the industrial processes used are effective in reducing contamination levels of these toxins in oats. Similarly, the other regulated mycotoxins, such as deoxynivalenol and zearalenone were detected in the finished product after processing, albeit at concentrations well below the legislative limits.

How do these findings impact consumers and the food industry?
In terms of the unprocessed oats, 16% of samples tested were in breach of the current EU indicative limits set for the sum of T-2/HT-2 (1,000 μg/kg). However, if the regulatory limits are halved from 1,000 to 500 μg/kg, 34% of samples would exceed these new limits, doubling the original number of samples that would be non-compliant. Furthermore, although none of the processed oats that were tested exceeded the current EU guideline values, halving these values, [as mooted by the EU], could lead to some processed oat samples exceeding the new thresholds, thereby increasing the number of non-compliant samples and creating challenges for the sector.

What are your research recommendations for improving mycotoxin control and monitoring in the cereal processing industry?
At present, I am working on another mycotoxin-related project alongside leading EU experts, Mycotox-I, which aims to assess the risk of mycotoxin contamination of cereals produced on the island of Ireland, focusing predominantly on oats. There are several parts of the project, with the overall aim of reducing the natural contamination of oats by mycotoxins as much as possible. 

To do this, various factors will be assessed, including the growing, storage and processing of oats to produce the final product for consumption. State-of-the-art analytical tools including LC-MS will be used to analyse the mycotoxin levels produced by mycotoxin-producing fungi from various trials carried out in both glasshouse and field experiments. The field-based surveys will determine the prevalence of fungi and the subsequent mycotoxin levels, with post-harvest analysis used to determine the levels of mycotoxins in the final milled product after processing. The glasshouse and field-based studies will help to determine how disease management systems can reduce mycotoxin levels under current and future climatic scenarios, with the aim of reducing the use of fungicides by 50% by 2030. 

By using state-of-the-art machine learning technology in conjunction with data on the weather (e.g. rainfall and temperature), oat variety, and previous crops grown in the field, it is hoped a new decision-making system will be tailored for Irish agricultural systems in order to support the industry and reduce the mycotoxin load in food produce. For more information, please see www.safefood.net/ research

Learn more about opportunities provided by The Food Safety Skills Fund Programme

In the dynamic world of food safety, continuous learning and collaboration are essential for ensuring the highest standards. The Food Safety Skills Fund Programme, an initiative by safefood, is a beacon for professionals committed to advancing food safety across the island of Ireland. This innovative programme provides bursaries to safefood Knowledge Network members, empowering them to enrich their skills, broaden their experiences, and foster vital connections within the food safety community. 

“At its essence, the Food Safety Skills Fund Programme strives to cultivate a culture of excellence and collaboration in the realm of food safety,” shares Trish Twohig, Director of Food Safety, safefood. “We firmly believe that by investing in the development of our members, we not only elevate individual competencies but also strengthen the collective capacity to safeguard public health and enhance consumer confidence.” 

The programme is currently run on an annual basis with this term ending in December 2024. The programme offers a limited number of funded bursaries, up to €1,200 or sterling equivalent, subject to vouched costs. These bursaries empower participants to embark on diverse learning opportunities, ranging from visits to laboratories and attendance at conferences to engagement with centres of excellence and participation in specialised training events focused on food safety. The programme is open to members working in food safety based on the island of Ireland. safefood strongly encourages cross-border collaboration through this initiative, not only to enrich participants’ perspectives but also to facilitate the exchange of best practices and the alignment of food safety standards across the island. 

Emma Duffy, an Environmental Health Officer based in Belfast, shares her enthusiasm for the programme, stating, “I thoroughly enjoyed the Train the Trainer course I attended through the Food Safety Skills Fund Programme. I hope to cascade certain elements of the course to my colleagues, certainly on giving feedback when we present and looking at the way we give training. I hope to record some webinars for training purposes for our food businesses and also for our external council website.” 

The impact of the programme extends beyond individual development to broader outcomes, including contributions to policy development and bolstering the knowledge economy. By equipping professionals with the latest insights and tools, the programme empowers them to actively shape policies that uphold the highest standards of food safety and support sustainable economic growth. 

For those aspiring to join the safefood Knowledge Network and avail themselves of the opportunities offered by the Food Safety Skills Fund Programme, the process is straightforward. Simply sign up for membership through the safefood Knowledge Network website (www.safefoodkn.net) and submit a completed application form. With no set closing date for applications, interested individuals are encouraged to apply at their earliest convenience, as bursaries are allocated on a first-come, first-served basis or until the programme fund is exhausted. 

In conclusion, Trish Twohig reiterates safefood’s commitment to advancing food safety excellence across the island of Ireland. “Together, through initiatives like the Food Safety Skills Fund Programme, we can build a resilient food safety ecosystem that not only meets current challenges but also anticipates and adapts to future ones.” For more information, please visit www.safefood.net/food-safety/skills-fund

Try your hand at this issue’s quiz and you could be in with a chance to win a fantastic prize!

Question 1 What allergen labelling law affects prepacked for direct sale (PPDS) foods in Northern Ireland?
Question 2 A pre-workout snack should be high in...
Question 3 What is the national dish of Lithuania?
Question 4 What plant family do legumes belong to?
Question 5 Foods labelled ‘Gluten-free’ means the gluten concentration is up to 20mg of gluten per kg – true or false?
Question 6 Honeycrisp, Rome, and Winesap are varieties of what?
Question 7 What cheese would you traditionally find in a calzone?
Question 8 What three vegetables go into a mirepoix?
Question 9 What colour is the skin of a dragon fruit?
Question 10 Storing fruit in a paper bag can hasten ripening – true or false?

safefood is delighted to offer one lucky quiz winner a fantastic food hamper (similar to pictured). 

Congratulations to Sinead Reilly who was the winner of issue 27’s quiz.

Answers: 1) Red chili; 2) Little ears; 3) Raw; 4) Okra; 5) The boot; 6) Peru; 7) 75ºC; 8) Berlin, Germany; 9) Challah; 10) Basil

A safe and tasty Christmas with safefood 
This December, safefood is reminding home cooks to use a meat thermometer when cooking their Christmas turkey: just pop it in the thickest part of the turkey and when it reaches 75 degrees Celsius, it’s both safe and tasty. The two-week campaign includes the memorable “75!” advertising across TV, radio and online as well as free information leaflets for food shoppers, available in more than 250 butcher shops and food retail settings. For the complete guide to cooking your Christmas turkey including an interactive turkey cooking calculator and food shopping guide, visit www.safefood.net/Christmas

All-island Environmental Health Forum 2023
safefood hosted an all-island Environmental Health Forum (pictured right) on the 17th of November in the Ballymascanlon Hotel, Dundalk. The forum was the first event of its kind and bought  together environmental health representatives from the Northern Ireland Councils and Health Services Executive in Ireland to exchange information and ideas, and discuss challenges faced by both services.

Gluten Free Roadshow 2023
The Gluten Free Roadshow 2023 was held at the Rochestown Park Hotel in Cork on Sunday 22nd of October, and safefood sponsored an update on the importance of annual blood tests and bone health for coeliacs that was given by Dr Alfonso Rodriguez-Herrera. Dr Herrera (pictured left) is a medical consultant in paediatrics with special interest in paediatric gastroenterology and nutrition. His main research topics are biomarkers of dietary compliance, including those pertaining to coeliac disease.

 All-island Public Health Laboratory Forum 2023 
safefood were delighted to host a Public Health Laboratory Forum meeting in the Ashling Hotel in Dublin on the 16th November. The meeting bought together representatives from public health laboratories across the island to discuss mutual interests, share knowledge, and exchange ideas.

A safe and tasty Christmas with safefood 

This December, safefood is reminding home cooks to use a meat thermometer when cooking their Christmas turkey: just pop it in the thickest part of the turkey and when it reaches 75 degrees Celsius, it’s both safe and tasty. The two-week campaign includes the memorable “75!” advertising across TV, radio and online as well as free information leaflets for food shoppers, available in more than 250 butcher shops and food retail settings. For the complete guide to cooking your Christmas turkey including an interactive turkey cooking calculator and food shopping guide, visit www.safefood.net/Christmas

All-island Public Health Laboratory Forum 2023 
safefood were delighted to host a Public Health Laboratory Forum meeting in the Ashling Hotel in Dublin on the 16th November. The meeting bought together representatives from public health laboratories across the island to discuss mutual interests, share knowledge, and exchange ideas.

All-island Environmental Health Forum 2023
safefood hosted an all-island Environmental Health Forum on the 17th of November in the Ballymascanlon Hotel, Dundalk. The forum was the first event of its kind and bought  together environmental health representatives from the Northern Ireland Councils and Health Services Executive in Ireland to exchange information and ideas, and discuss challenges faced by both services.

A forensic toxicologist and forensic science lecturer, Dr Geraldine Dowling’s current focus is on metabolomic data management.

Dr Geraldine Dowling is a forensic toxicologist, lecturer in forensic science, and chief executive officer/chairperson of ForenSics InnovAtion in ReseArch and Nutrition (SARAN). “I have a first-class honours degree in Industrial Environmental Chemistry from South East Technological University, but I have been working mainly in the area of analytical chemistry, food safety, toxicology and in laboratory-based analysis.” Previously, she has held posts in ISO 17025-accredited laboratories in The Marine Institute, Teagasc and The State Laboratory for 12 years during which time she obtained a research M.Sc.and Ph.D. in analytical science, veterinary and human toxicology.

She subsequently moved into academia in 2016 and in her current role in Atlantic Technological University, she lectures and researches in the fields of food safety, forensic science, chemistry education, analytical science and metabolomics. “We are developing techniques and strategies for data management and interpretation because metabolomic data is very cumbersome – you get a huge amount of information. We are looking at potential biomarkers that can be used in a variety of fields, both in food safety and forensics.” One example she cites is identifying poisoning cases: “Here, we are looking at the potential biomarkers for example, for certain compounds or drugs that may have short detection windows. Another example is looking at obesity and the impact of metabolites in the body as a result of various diets.” 

There are ample opportunities for her students to apply these learnings. “Some of them take up roles in analytical and nutrition companies, others in pharmaceutical companies, government laboratories or forensic organisations.” Geraldine is also an experienced researcher and has published/produced over 70 projects in various fields. “Many of the projects I work on concern method development, data management or validation studies, trying to see what type of data can be used and applied to food safety or other studies such as metabolomics or forensic work.”  

When asked about the current food safety and toxicology challenges, she cites the detection of biomarkers in food safety and toxicology using metabolomics studies and data interpretation from these studies. Earlier this year, Geraldine availed of a safefood Food Safety Skills Fund grant to attend the TIAFT 2023 conference in Rome which focused on this issue. “The aim of the visit was to evaluate the use of metabolomics for non-targeted approaches for analytical toxicological applications in food safety, nutrition and food fraud. In addition, to explore the potential for ATU to collaborate with international partners. 

“The use of Quadrupole Time-of-flight Mass Spectrometry (Q-TOF-MS)/mass spectrometry (MS) and Full-scan Accurate MS for routine analysis allows detection of target analytes as well as non-targeted compounds in food safety and metabolomics studies. However, the technique generates an enormous amount of data and, depending on the matrix, this can make the identification and quantitation of analytes difficult. Strategies and databases can be built which allow a wider range of substances to be screened for. Metabolomics for biomarker monitoring is now being applied in food safety, nutrition and toxicology globally but data management is challenging.”

Meeting the needs of coeliac customers can be very lucrative for Irish businesses, as Frances Buckley explains

Frances Buckley is an applied culinary nutritionist, licenced food safety trainer and chef with over 25 years of professional cooking experience in restaurants and diplomat catering. “My classical training was in Dublin College of Catering, Cathal Brugha Street. I have worked for over five years in food sensory science evaluation with Teagasc and Diageo as part of their food sensory testing panels, and for several years, I have been a guest judge for the Associated Craft Butchers of Ireland.” 

Frances attained a Master of Science in Applied Culinary Nutrition at Technological University of Dublin in 2020. “It provides me with the expertise to apply culinary skills and nutrition knowledge in developing food for health and wellness. It combines advanced nutrition science with professional culinary skills to provide health-supportive meal solutions. In my applied research project on coeliac disease, I evaluated the understanding of coeliac disease in workplace catering, together with the potential deficiencies in the gluten-free diet.”

Frances works with the Coeliac Society of Ireland and the Dublin and Dún Laoghaire Education and Training Board educating and training chefs, catering staff and health professionals about coeliac disease and the gluten-free diet. “I developed a Catering Training Programme funded by the Restaurant Association and Skillnet. Catering Safely for Coeliacs is a guide to the importance of good practice to avoid cross-contact with gluten. 

“This programme was created for the Coeliac Society, and it stemmed from my Masters: The workplace chef’s understanding of nutrition in the coeliac diet. What I explored was if you were a chef working in places with a cohort of people for a long period of time, such as a boarding school or a prison, what does the chef understand about what should be included in food for coeliacs. They may know what they have to avoid – wheat – and about ‘hidden’ or less obvious sources of wheat such as some condiments like mustard. But are they aware of what the coeliac diet can lack in terms of nutrition?”

Coeliacs suffer from malabsorption of certain nutrients as a direct result of the damage to the lining of the small intestine in those with coeliac disease. Increased intake of calcium, magnesium, iron, B vitamins, vitamin D and fibre is important in a coeliac diet, and pseudo cereals (ancient grains) such as amaranth, sorghum and teff can help to mitigate the risk of nutrient deficiency. Frances says, research has shown that if you eat foods higher in those nutrients, you will absorb more of them.

The programme incorporates videos of real situations, procedures for the safe production of foods for coeliacs, with a guide to good practice to avoid cross-contact with gluten aimed at chefs and managers, and front-of-house staff. “Very often, chefs will understand the needs of the coeliac customer, but the communication doesn’t reach the wait staff, mistakes happen and the person is given the wrong plate. For example, we have heard of cases where the customer will be told the soup is gluten free, but it will arrive with croutons sprinkled on top of it.” The programme also looks at non-verbal communication of front-of-house staff when interacting with the coeliac customer. “If your front-of-house staff is giving the eyes turned up to heaven when you say you are coeliac, then regardless of what is coming from the kitchen, the customer has already lost faith in it.” Restaurants and catering operations that participate in the programme receive a certificate and a ‘coeliac circle’ sticker that highlights that they are trained in the safe production of food for the coeliac customer.

The instance of coeliac disease has risen in Ireland, probably, Frances says, due to better testing, and meeting the needs of this audience can be very lucrative. “The most common request for ‘free-from’ foods in restaurants and other catering outlets is for gluten-free food, so the provision of dishes for coeliacs can be a valuable part of your business. You may decide to provide a separate menu, this can allow you to produce the dishes for this selection at a different time (time zoning) or in a different section to minimise disruption to the kitchen workflow. 

“It’s not just the person living with coeliac disease your business could be missing out on as a customer, but their entire party. Research shows that 63% of coeliacs eat out once a month with the average spend on food €120, and 70% of coeliacs will be the decision-maker on what restaurant the party goes to, based on menu choices without gluten and staff understanding of their needs. It’s worth about €1 million to business a year.”

Following the International Heads of Food Agencies Forum, Bernie Commins speaks to FSAI Chief Executive, Dr Pamela Byrne

The Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) recently welcomed global food regulators to Dublin for the fourth annual International Heads of Food Agencies Forum. This forum facilitated discussion on how best to prepare for food safety crises and manage food safety incidents in what is becoming an increasingly complex global food system. “Predicting the future of food safety, even on an Irish scale, is uncertain let alone on a global scale,” says Dr Byrne. “That said, some of the main drivers are clear: climate change, geopolitical instability, advances in technology, sustainability of the food system. Online selling continues to challenge the traditional organisation of food safety oversight and authorities like the FSAI must adapt and adopt new techniques to address unsafe foods promoted and sold electronically.” 

Climate change, Dr Byrne explains, disrupts food supply: “Extreme weather events cause food scarcity by destroying harvests, forcing supply chains to switch to sources that are less familiar and that have a food safety track record that is not so well established. Potential food safety threats linked to weather include increased mycotoxin concentrations in crops caused by fungal growth, spoilage of food and ingress of bacterial pathogens a well as contamination threats from poorer quality water sources.” 

Sustainability, she says, will broaden the availability of different protein sources where research will be needed to establish safety – in the case of edible insects, for example – and consumer responses will drive changes to eating patterns that will make fringe diets become more mainstream. “With that comes higher demand for new foods, which can expose a greater proportion of the population to food safety issues associated with these. For example, with the rise in demand for vegetable proteins comes a rise in the threat of bacterial toxins from Bacillus cereus if appropriate preservation strategies are not adopted,” says Dr Byrne.

Risk and assessment
The FSAI has an active emerging risk identification system in tandem with other EU Member States and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA). “Our vision is ‘safe and trustworthy food for everyone’ and within that context we assess food safety risks.” Assessment takes the form of inspections of food businesses, sampling of the food supply, audits, responding to consumer complaints, dealing with protected disclosures, engagement with regulatory partners at national, European and international level, and developing horizon scanning tools to identify emerging risks. 

“From these assessments, we take the appropriate action to remove, manage or mitigate the risk within the bounds of the legal framework,” says Dr Byrne. “Proactively, we support food businesses to understand their legal obligations through the provision of materials, resources and engagement with subject-matter experts. However, we also take enforcement action when a food business is not complying with the law such as issuing closure orders, improvement notices, prohibition orders, right through to prosecution. Our national, European and international networks, such as the International Heads of Food Agencies Forum, are important in ensuring ongoing communication between peer organisations as well as building trust that supports our engagement in times of crises.”

Food safety crises
On average, there are approximately 600-700 food safety incidents per year. “The FSAI has a risk management team in place, which is working on a 24/7 basis as required by law. There are protocols that provide a framework for how we deal with food safety incidents as well as food safety crises. These protocols were developed in collaboration with the food safety inspectorate and other stakeholders, including Government departments and other State agencies, to ensure we are prepared to manage food incidents and crises when they arise.”

“Every three to four years, we carry out simulation exercises either at a national or European level and use the learnings from these to adapt and evolve our approaches. We also ensure we are connected to our European and international counterparts, so that we gain access early to incidents that are going on in other countries that may impact Ireland. “As a member of the EU, we are connected to the Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed, which ensures timely and accurate dissemination of information, as well as rapid response to that information. “At global level, we are the Irish contact point for the FAO/WHO International Food Safety Authorities Network, which facilitates the rapid exchange of information across borders and between members, during hundreds of food safety events. Our ultimate goal is to protect consumers in Ireland and the consumers of Irish food in 180 markets across the world from risk and these protocols and systems are critical in enabling us to do our job.” 

The importance of a solid food safety reputation for Irish food and drink exporters cannot be overstated: “A recent Eurobarometer survey of almost 27,000 EU citizens in 27 Member States identified that food safety matters for 50% of European citizens,” says Dr Byrne. “Seven out of 10 citizens recognise the important role that science and scientists play in ensuring food safety. In Ireland, 47% of consumers surveyed take it for granted that their food is safe and 84% trust the national authorities as sources of information on food risks. This trust is based on a strong system of regulatory controls and transparency regarding reporting of the results of these food safety control measures,” says Dr Byrne. 

Abroad,  Ireland is seen as having one of the most trusted food safety control systems and, by extension, safe and trustworthy food. Dr Byrne explains that this is down to the hard work of the food industry in Ireland which recognises the importance of only placing safe food on the market. “Reputation of any entity, public and private, is hard fought for but easily damaged when the proper action isn’t taken when things go wrong,” she says. “And things do go wrong but Ireland has always taken prompt action, and this is recognised internationally. The FSAI’s primary focus on the protection of public health through science-based decision-making is critical in ensuring Ireland’s reputation as a producer of safe food is maintained. But the industry needs to continue to work hard to comply with the law. We encourage companies that are finding it difficult to comply to engage with us and use the resources we make  available on our website to gain as deep an understanding as possible of their legal obligations.”

Room to improve
The food supply system is very complex and becoming more complex year-on-year, says Dr Byrne. “Supply chains are interwoven; therefore, traceability of food is critical. Businesses need to fully understand their suppliers and supply chains and if there is a change in those, build those into their food safety management systems.” Another area that needs improvement is culture, she says. “We have identified a number of businesses, some through disclosures made to us under the Protected Disclosure legislation, over the last few  years where the culture of food safety is not at the standard it should be. We all know the impact of culture on organisational performance and where the culture is not right, issues arise, and this applies to food safety also.” 

Numerous investigations have revealed where shortcuts have been taken and workarounds have been put in place, some of which raise serious questions over the safety of the food, according to Dr Byrne. “And where we can’t get verification of traceability, for example, we have no other choice but to take the appropriate enforcement action.” 

A third area relates to authenticity. Food information must be accurate, clear, and easy to understand for the consumer. It must not be misleading. “A strengthening of the EU food safety control system for the detection of fraudulent and deceptive practice, following the horsemeat scandal, is now in place and the FSAI, along with our counterparts across the EU have structures and systems in place to control this. 

“Food businesses should be assessing the vulnerabilities of their supply chains and taking appropriate action to remove or minimise those vulnerabilities, thereby gaining greater assurance regarding the authenticity of their products.” says Dr Byrne.

Bursaries to enhance food safety skills and experience 
Did you know that if you’re a member of safefood’s Knowledge Network that you can apply for our Food Safety Skills Fund Programme? The programme aims to enhance members’ skills, broaden their experience and create linkages between those involved in food safety on the island of Ireland. The programme funds visits to other laboratories, and attendance at conferences, centres of excellence and other food safety training events. For more information or to apply please see www.safefood.net/food-safety/skills-fund

Queen’s University Belfast: Best Food Safety Essay Winner
Pictured: Robyn Moore (Best Food Safety Essay, BSc in Food Quality, Safety and Nutrition at QUB) alongside Michaela Fox (safefood) and Prof. Geoff McMullan Head of School for Biological Sciences. Robyn’s essay was entitled: Food, is it safe to eat? The microbiological safety of vegetables

safefood organised a forum for Public Analyst’s Laboratory staff recently in Limerick. The event was the first of its kind to be held and was attended by Executive Analytical Chemists from the three Public Analyst’s laboratories in Ireland, as well as the Public Analysts themselves. Dr James McIntosh from safefood chaired the meeting at which issues of mutual concern and interest to the laboratories were discussed. The event was a great opportunity for staff networking and cooperative development.

Pictured: Public Analyst laboratory staff from Cork, Dublin and Galway joined by Dr Gary Kearney and Dr James McIntosh (safefood).

Events: Free workshops for small food businesses on Effective Food Safety and HACCP & Record Keeping

• 16th October (in association with Newry, Mourne and Down District Council) Canal Court Hotel, Newry, Co. Down.
• 17th October (in association with Bia Innovator Centre) Bia Innovator Centre, Athenry, Co. Galway.

The workshops will cover Effective Food Safety training, Practical HACCP and Record Keeping, and participants can avail of a 15-minute 1-to-1 consultation with the workshop
facilitators. To register or for more information please visit www.safefood.net/events