Dr Declan Bolton, Principal Research Officer at Teagasc, member of the safefood Knowledge Network Expert Facilitation Group and Member of the EFSA Biohazard Panel, discusses the importance of new guidelines for small food retailers proposed by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

It was recognised that the implementation of food safety management systems by small retailers can be very challenging, therefore EFSA has proposed a simplified approach. Lack of expertise and technical hurdles can mean that small businesses – such as grocery shops and butchers – cannot fully implement the current requirements under European hygiene legislation. In acknowledgement of this, the European Commission requested that EFSA develop simpler rules for five types of business – a bakery, a fishmonger, an ice cream shop, a butcher and a grocer. The result is a more streamlined system that can be easily managed by these types of businesses.

Dr Declan Bolton chaired a working group with the support of the EFSA secretariat, to address this mandate. As he explains: “I think there was a realisation that HACCP as legally mandated in EC 852/2004 presented real difficulties for small food retailers, not least because of lack of staff expertise, staff turnover, costs/limited resources, etc.” According to Declan, there are five key changes. Firstly, that the retailer need only be aware that a hazard (biological, chemical, physical or allergen) may occur at a particular stage. Being aware of this hazard is sufficient, without having an in-depth knowledge of that hazard: “for example, knowing there may be a biological hazard associated with raw meat without knowing it is Salmonella.” Retailers also need to be aware that a failure to perform certain activities – separating raw from cooked meat – presents a hazard. In addition, allergens can be treated as a separate hazard, as opposed to a chemical hazard.

Declan also points out that controls may be based on pre-requisite programme (PRP) activities such as good hygiene practices (GHP) etc., thus recognising that there may not be a specific intervention that can be relied upon to reduce/eliminate a given hazard.

Finally, he notes that the draft legislation removes most of the requirements for validation and verification and minimizes the need for record keeping. “Most PRP activities are based on qualitative and not quantitative parameters and thus are evaluated as being ‘acceptable’ or ‘unacceptable’. Cleaning, for example, may be based on visual inspection. Other PRPs (e.g. cooking or chilling) are based on quantitative parameters (e.g. temperature) and their correct application may be assured by setting critical limits that must be achieved to ensure food safety. In the simplified approach the former PRPs, based on qualitative parameters, do not require record keeping but for the latter, based on quantitative parameters, monitoring is required to ensure critical limits are achieved and records should be kept to demonstrate compliance.”

Commenting on the fact that the food retailer can only control one step in the chain, Declan states: “We must recognise that hazards often enter the chain during primary production and the key intervention, e.g. cooking, is at the other end of the chain. Thus processors, retailers, etc. must ensure they do everything to minimise any hazards through proper cleaning and hygiene procedures.” 

The new legislation, based on the EFSA Opinion, is still in the draft stage. When passed, Declan believes it should result in a more effective and user-friendly food safety system for small food retailers.

For further information, visit https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/170302

About Declan

Hobbies/Interests: Coach/Member of Metro Saints Brigid’s AC, Porterstown, Dublin.

Favourite ways to unwind: Running marathons, reading and watching movies.

safefood is delighted to offer one lucky crossword winner a luxury hamper of gourmet food from Arcadia Delicatessen in Belfast.

Simply find the hidden word in the crossword, made up from the letters highlighted, and send the answer to knowledgenetwork@safefood.eu before 27th October 2017. This competition is open to Knowledge Network Members on the island of Ireland only.

ACROSS

1 Breakfast staple (4)
2 Mass produced food served quickly (4, 4)
3 A common garden or house plant (8)
7 Expels air from lungs (7)
8 Crab’s pincers (5)
10 A pause (5)
11 Bread producer (5)
16 Puts in danger (11)
18 Neither good nor bad / ‘So, --‘ (2)
19 First rate (3)
20 To cut into portions (5)
21 Country in Northern Africa divided by the River Nile (5)

DOWN

1 American term for aubergine (8)
2 Sparing or economical (6)
4 A party, in Spain (6)
5 A flat, shallow container for food (4)
6 Mottled appearance, horse’s marking (7)
9 Torte or gateaux (4)
10 A cry of approval, hurrah! (5)
12 Italian pastries from Sicily (7)
13 Edible pods, coffee source (5)
14 Fundamental, the starting point (5)
15 To squabble or quarrel (6)
16 Precious stones (6)
17 An alcoholic beverage created by fermenting honey with water (4)

Dr Bill Doré, of the Marine Institute, Galway, talks about the productive work being done to tackle the issue of shellfish contamination.

Shellfish is a popular choice for restaurant-goers, particularly in seaside towns and villages, but it can be one of the more high-risk food items. Thankfully, in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), there is an organisation dedicated to testing shellfish for viruses.

Dr Bill Doré is the Team Leader of the National Reference Laboratory in the Marine Institute in Galway, which focuses on the microbiological monitoring of shellfish. He moved to ROI from the UK in 2004 and has almost 30 years of experience in this field.

He explains: “We provide support for the industry in terms of testing for viruses in shellfish. We’re also involved in running the programme for E. coli testing in shellfish, which is used to classify shellfish production areas, and environmental monitoring for bacteria. Furthermore, we provide advice to the industry and the competent authorities in this area including the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority (SFPA) and Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI).”

The team offer food producers testing and advice on management procedures in order to control the risks associated with shellfish and reduce the chance of contamination.

“I guess the first thing to stress is that generally the shellfish that are produced in ROI are of a good standard; they’re pretty clean and most of the time don’t cause any problems. It’s not a big issue here,” Bill says. “However, the fact is that shellfish – and we’re talking about bivalve shellfish, so oysters and mussels – they filter feed, so they sit in the water and basically they filter anything in that water. 

“The issue is then, like all countries around the world, we have a problem with what happens to human waste. Sewage does get discharged into the coast and while it’s usually treated, it is untreated at times (this usually happens when there’s excessive rainfall and there’s an overflow of the cisterns). Of course, sewage contains a lot of microbiological bacteria and viruses from the human population. As a result, shellfish can become contaminated with what can be human pathogens.

“The main problem we see from time to time is contamination with viruses which can cause illnesses. In particular, the main virus is norovirus, which gives you vomiting and diarrhoea. It’s a gastrointestinal illness and it’s fairly mild but can last 48 hours or so. It’s not a particularly significant illness but it’s very common. We seem to have a particular problem with this virus because it binds specifically to the shellfish, and it tends to be a problem with oysters because they’re eaten raw.”

While contamination can and does happen, Bill acknowledges the fact that there is a greater risk in other countries: “Potentially any virus or bacteria that is in sewage can end up in shellfish and could potentially be a risk, but in general we don’t see illness. In other countries, where it’s endemic, hepatitis A virus is also seen, but we don’t see it here because it’s just not really present in the population.”

This practical issue is exacerbated by the fact that there is currently no regulation for viruses in shellfish, as Bill explains: “It’s been a sort of emerging issue over the past 10 years and until recently we haven’t had particularly good methods to detect viruses in shellfish. That’s why it’s still an area that isn’t very well controlled at a regulatory level, although in the EU there’s now quite a lot of progress being made towards trying to implement a standard for shellfish. We are actually involved in a survey, along with lots of other countries in Europe, which looks at the prevalence of norovirus in shellfish across Europe and that’s all being moved towards regulation.

“But in the absence of regulation, there’s still a problem for quality control and quality assurance for producers.
Obviously, from their own point of view, it’s not good for business if they’re making customers sick. They’re keen to implement procedures and testing to ensure that they’re producing a safe product and also because a lot of our shellfish is being exported to other countries. There’s a lot of trade to the Far East, China and Hong Kong, where they have implemented testing and so there’s always the risk that producers will send products, they’ll get tested and rejected – that can be very costly. So we have been, and are, working with producers, doing testing for them for norovirus and that’s happening when they’re getting ready to send them.”

This testing process can also reveal trends and help shape processes to tackle the issues, says Bill: “For instance, norovirus is a particular problem in the winter so, during that time, we’ve helped one producer in particular to select another, less contaminated site. Basically, he moves shellfish there during the winter so that they’ll be less contaminated.

“There’s also a process called depuration where shellfish are put into tanks of clean sea water onshore and allowed to purge themselves of contaminants. This doesn’t work too well for viruses, but you can improve it by increasing the time and temperature of that process. It can help to reduce, to some extent, the level of virus.”

Another piece of advice that Bill suggests is that food business operators introduce their own risk management procedures. “There’s a bit of a grey area because, as I mentioned, there is no standard and there is no definite level that is considered a risk that’s definitely going to make you sick. The test that we use is a molecular method and when we detect the virus, we can’t tell from that test whether it’s infectious or not infectious, so technically the test can pick up ‘dead virus’ if you like.”

Bill believes that the ROI is approaching the topic carefully and thoroughly: “I think, because we’re exporting a lot and because we have this test available, there’s probably more testing going on here than in many other countries. This extra quality control is a very positive thing.

“There’s also close cooperation between ourselves, the FSAI, SFPA and industry. There’s a body that meets quite regularly called the Molluscan Shellfish Safety Committee as well and what we do is advertised through it. More and more producers now are asking for testing.”

While it is clear that more is needed in terms of official standards and regulations in this industry, it seems that working together is getting results.

Inter-disciplinary work underway at the Northern Ireland Antimicrobial Resistance Network is ensuring joined up thinking on this important issue.

The threat of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is an increasingly serious global public health issue which jeopardises the effective prevention and treatment of infections. From a food safety perspective, antibiotics are used in food animals not only for treatment, but also for disease prevention and growth promotion in some non-EU countries. The World Health Organisation and other international bodies have recognised that antimicrobial use in animals contributes to resistance problems in human health. Foodborne infections caused by resistant bacteria, such as Salmonella and Campylobacter spp., pose a particular risk to human beings because of possible treatment failure. Resistant commensal bacteria, such as Escherichia coli and Enterococcus spp., also pose a risk, as they can carry resistance genes that can be further transferred to human pathogens.

As Dr Patrick Dunlop – Chair of the Northern Ireland Antimicrobial Resistance Network – explains, it is a ‘One Health’ issue. “This big problem of antimicrobial resistance joins everyone together. It links human health, animal health and the environment because our ecosystem is one continuous circle.”

Patrick, a lecturer at the School of Engineering in Ulster University, says: “Antibiotics were developed and commercialised back in the 1940s and 1950s very successfully. As new compounds were introduced, people stopped using the old ones and we were able to keep one step ahead of the bugs. However, this pipeline dried up and there have been no new classes of antibiotics in 30 years. This is a big problem. Bacteria have developed resistance against low levels of antibiotics used in human medicine – and in many cases they can share their resistance traits. Bacteria sitting beside each other ‘shake hands’ and physically exchange genetic elements encoding resistance - referred to as horizontal gene transfer. These natural exchanges, along with random mutations, can develop quickly due to the speed that bacterial organisms replicate. This advantageous trait is carried on as well - it's natural selection". Patrick highlights that antibiotic development has gone out of fashion in the pharmaceutical industry: thee is not enough return on antibiotics to develop new compounds. 

In addition, he says an increase in the use of growth promoters in human and animal systems in other nations is contributing to this problem, "and with Brexit we may not have the protection we currently have with imports".

The Northern Ireland Antimicrobial Resistance Network started as an unsuccessful grant proposal - "I had applied for a multidisciplinary grant. It wasn't successful but then I realised that I had a group of people gathered together from government departments, academia and industry who were keen to address AMR issues so we decided to meet up anyway". The first meeting was in April 2015. Patrick anticipated 20 people turning up and 50 arrived. "There turned out to be a real appetite for a cross disciplinary approach to tackle AMR. Getting people from all areas – medical, veterinary, academics, industry – meant that we could address the real problems on the ground. It was also a great way to meet people working in different fields. The island of Ireland is a small place and these connections are a big strength for the network’s aims. We are all working under the same ‘one health’ banner and meetings allow for opportunities to learn and share collective thoughts and expertise. 

“From an academic point of view, it is really interesting for me. There is really good crossover between the sectors, which helps me to expand out different applications of technology,” he continues.

The Network has grown since that first meeting, from 50 to 200 members. The aim of the network is to address the threat of AMR and allow for joined up thinking which is mostly achieved through formal workshops, meetings and via social media. “The interdisciplinary approach is at the heart of what we do. We have representatives from a range of organisations who are heavily involved. On the clinical side, the network includes lab scientists, doctors, nurses and the whole sphere of people working in infection control.” Vets and veterinary consultants, pharmacists and health care workers who look after medical management are also involved and the Network looks to address common issues between human and animal medicine.

For industry, some of the largest food companies on the island of Ireland are members, while academics in every shape and form are involved from both Northern Ireland institutions, including chemical engineers, microbiologists, environmental scientists and psychologists. “On the computer side of things, storing information, examining animal and human health care data and predicting where problems might arise in order to come up with solutions is also key to addressing AMR.”

Patrick points out some of the progress that has been made by the network. “Firstly, we’ve identified commonality between companies and organisations that may have appeared to be in competition before. Now they are working together towards a common goal. We have actively encouraged companies to work together on early research at competence centres funded by Invest NI, such as AgriFood Quest. Projects have come out of the Network into funded structures such as these, while from an academic point of view, the Network has been indirectly involved in bringing in €50m of EU funded projects and £15m from UK Research Councils, where we can act as a route for dissemination for these proposals. We try to have funding at the heart of our agenda and encourage companies to become involved in R&D.”

ABOUT PATRICK

Hobbies/Interests: If I’m not looking after my kids, it’s rugby – I’ve had to stop touring around Europe following Ulster rugby but I still make it to Ravenhill for the home games. 

Campylobacter is the leading cause of bacterial food poisoning on the island of Ireland (IOI) with 3,772 cases reported in 2015 (Health Protection Surveillance Centre 2016, Public Health Agency 2016). Poultry is the main food associated with Campylobacter food poisoning.

Reducing levels of Campylobacter on poultry products by 1 log has been estimated to decrease human risk by between 50% and 90% (European Food Safety Authority, 2011). There are a number of processing methods that can be applied to poultry to reduce the overall level of Campylobacter contamination, however, the consumer acceptability of these methods is unknown.

Hence, safefood commissioned a research project to investigate the consumer acceptance of poultry decontamination methods on the IOI. The research project was led by University College Dublin and aimed to gain an understanding of the acceptability of new and existing decontamination methods in poultry processing. These included methods currently in use and authorised for use in the European Union. The reported efficacy of the decontamination methods was also looked at, through data gathering in focus groups with industry stakeholders and in scientific literature.

To ascertain consumers’ understanding of the problem of Campylobacter contamination in poultry, both focus groups and telephone surveys were conducted to determine attitudes to present and potential interventions, and identify barriers to consumer acceptance of interventions and how acceptability might be improved.

The final results should help to inform policy makers of the challenges faced by industry and consumers. The key findings of this project were:

• There is little awareness of Campylobacter among consumers.
• Consumers have no knowledge of how bacteria enter the poultry supply chain, or of potential interventions to control bacteria.
• Consumers on the IOI place their trust in retailers to sell them safe food.
• A consumer’s reaction to any decontamination process is strongly influenced by the vocabulary used to describe it.
• Consumers from the IOI show a preference for what they perceive as “natural” and non-invasive decontamination processes.
• Irradiation and organic and chemical washes are considered invasive.
• Forced air chilling ranks is the most acceptable intervention followed by crust freezing, steam ultrasound and cold plasma.
• Chemical washes are the least acceptable decontamination method.
• 67% of respondents would like to see information on the product label about treatments used in the processing plant to kill bacteria.

You can see the full report on safefood.eu.

Earlier this year, safefood published a new video called ‘Food Allergy & Food Intolerance – What’s the difference?’ In this video, Dr James McIntosh, answers some frequently asked questions on food allergy, food intolerance and coeliac disease. It also includes information on what people should do if they think they may have a suspect food allergy or intolerance. To view the video, visit our YouTube channel, safefoodTV.

View a full playlist of all our videos related to food allergy, food intolerance and coeliac disease.

Climate change is a growing concern for a number of industries, particularly the food industry. From the spread of disease to the possibility of contamination, a recent research project commissioned by safefood took a closer look at the potential risks facing those in the dairy industry.

Climate change has the potential to impact almost every aspect of food production on the island of Ireland (IOI). In 2016, safefood commissioned research to find out how vulnerable the dairy industry on the IOI is to the effects of climate change. The research was headed by Prof. Thia Hennessy of University College Cork in collaboration with Teagasc and Queen’s University Belfast. According to Prof. Hennessy, “stakeholders from right across the dairy supply chain demonstrated a high level of awareness of climate change as well as a commitment to collective action to avail of any opportunities climate change may bring.”

Climate change is predicted to have both positive and negative impacts on food production worldwide. On the IOI, warmer temperatures will lead to a longer growing season but extreme weather events will take their toll and possibly lead to the spread of pests and diseases. This will have implications for the availability and price of animal feed, for fodder production, and may lead to a change in consumer attitudes towards the food they buy, including dairy products.

The research identified a number of food safety risks involving disease, chemical contaminants and natural toxins. Of particular note is the potential for an increase in the range and occurrence of mycotoxins. These fungal toxins can cause disease in both humans and animals. Dr. Katrina Campbell of Queen’s University Belfast explains “Climate change may also pose a threat for food safety as one of the most prevalent food safety hazards within the dairy industry are mycotoxins which can contaminate animal feed. Warmer and wetter climates, such as those projected for the IOI, would favour greater fungal growth and thereby increase the risk of mycotoxin contamination.” To counter the potential impact of climate change on food safety within the dairy supply chain, new and innovative technology and monitoring systems are required to identify hazards before they are transmitted through the food chain.

The findings of the research were presented at two seminars; the first was in partnership with Teagasc and was held at the Ashtown Food Research Centre in Dublin in February. The second event, in partnership with Queen’s University Belfast was held at the Ramada Shaw’s Bridge hotel, Belfast, in March. The seminars were attended by over 120 people, representing a broad range of stakeholders, particularly those working in the dairy industry. As well as presentations by the researcher collaborators, the Dublin programme also included a keynote presentation from Prof. Alan Matthews, emeritus professor of European Agricultural Policy at Trinity College Dublin.

The seminars heard that science and technology can play a major role in mitigating climate change, but that there are obstacles getting technology from the lab to the farm. Stakeholders felt that technologies being developed to address greenhouse gas emissions should be discussed with farmers in the developmental stage to establish their practicality.

To view the full research report please visit www.safefood.eu/Publications/ Research-reports.aspx

Joe Ahern, Innovation Manager of Food Systems at the Kerry Group, explains what clean labelling is and why the food industry is getting behind it.

Over the last number of years, consumers have become increasingly preoccupied with what ingredients are in the foods they are eating. To satisfy this growing desire for less processed foods, manufacturers are embracing the trend known as clean labelling.

Clean labelling is essentially about making the ingredients in food products as natural and simple as possible, replacing any additives, chemicals or preservatives with a naturally-occurring ingredient or the closest natural form without compromising the flavour, safety or shelf-life of the food.

As Innovation Manager, Joe Ahern’s role is to research such alternatives and provide solutions to assist clean labelling, a process that has been brought about by public demand.

“Generally speaking, I think people are concerned about certain E-numbers and preservatives based on the comments from the World Health Organisation on processed meats…People want to trust what they’re eating,” he explains.

As well as regaining the trust of the public, another desired outcome of clean labelling is that, one day, we could potentially have food that is free from E-numbers. Joe argues: “The reality is saying a product is free of E-numbers changes people’s mindset from a food being processed to thinking of a product as food they have prepared or would cook themselves.

“One of the goals of clean labelling is to change public perception that foods are heaped with chemicals and preservatives, which removes it far away from the authentic product. The ultimate aim for anyone in my role is to have no E-number preservatives in a product.”

Of course, it must be noted that the safety of consuming E-numbers has been verified and moreover, they have allowed us to avail of a wide variety of foods.

Joe acknowledges this: “The materials that are being used, the E-numbers, have been proven to be effective at their job and up to a certain level their general safety has been proven as well. But that’s not sufficient for consumers. They want more, they want better, they want a food ingredient rather than a chemical.”

In other words, the ingredient list of a food product is paramount in terms of a consumer’s priorities when buying food. While the push for clean labelling continues to spread, it’s not exactly a new phenomenon and is something that the Kerry Group has been investing in for many years.

“The idea here was to create a better perception when launching products, and a better degree of safety of the foods being supplied,” Joe reveals.

Of course, it’s not just processed meats that are being looked at, confectionery is another product that has come under scrutiny over the past few decades, particularly in relation to the effects of the levels of of E-numbers and colouring it contains. In the European Union, the response to this was legislation, meaning that companies now have to notify the public clearly on the label when such colours are included.

Going one step further, Joe and his colleagues are trying to find suitable and safe alternatives: “In the lab, we decide what can really be done to replace particular E-numbers, and with ingredients like colours. They need to be able to do the same job as E-numbers but also be more acceptable to consumers.”

An example of where clean labelling has worked effectively is in the confectionery industry, specifically in relation to food colouring. Companies have embraced the trend by swapping E-numbers with natural alternatives. For example, the synthetic red food colour E122 can be replaced with natural red cabbage extract.

Even still, there are challenges facing food businesses hoping to adopt a clean labelling approach, namely cost and sustainability. While manufacturers can take pride at the idea of taking raw ingredients from sustainable sources, it has to be affordable and long-lasting. However, Joe believes that it’s worth the effort and is a process that all companies will inevitably have to get on board with. In the long term, clean labelling will be beneficial to both food businesses and the consumer.

Environmental Health Officer Sinead Smith explains why planning is the key to success when it comes to food businesses.

As an Environmental Health Officer (EHO) for the Health Executive Service, one of Sinead Smith’s main duties includes ensuring food safety. Based in Co. Meath, Sinead carries out advisory visits to start-up food businesses.

“For me, it’s all about helping them get their food safety systems into place. Sometimes it’s to break down and clarify legislation, sometimes it’s more to make sure they have all their paperwork and plans ready.

“A lot of the time, when people feel they’re ready to produce food, they come to ourselves. Then when we ask for a food safety management system, traceability system, or to see their labelling, we realise they might not have thought there were so many background areas to cover.”

For Sinead, planning is crucial for any food start-up business. By working with EHOs as early as possible, businesses can later avoid problems and save themselves unexpected costs.

“We like to work with people when they’re at the early stages, before they commit to premises or put in any structural facilities. The process is really to contact us, plan ahead and do the research,” Sinead explains. Following years of experience, Sinead is confident that when looking at floor plans or storage, an EHO will spot potential pitfalls for a new business and their possible expansion. 

Speaking about the early stages of design, Sinead says, “If we can see floor plans of say a proposed unit, or even the premises of a restaurant or shop and we know their plans, we can identify if they’ll need more storage or floor space for food safety in the future – before they invest any considerable amount of money.

“I think the one lesson I’ve learned from watching start-ups is to plan ahead.”

EHOs have a two-pronged approach when it comes to food safety; compliance and enforcement. To achieve compliance, EHOs will work with food businesses and make them aware of the supports and resources that are available to them. Where there are serious non-compliances and risks to public health, EHOs can take enforcement action. There are a number of enforcement actions available to EHOs under current legislation, such as the options to seize, remove or detain foodstuffs suspected of contamination. They can also issue improvement notices, prohibition notices and closure orders.

While Sinead emphasises that EHOs do not want to close business premises, she stresses that protecting the public is always their number one priority.

“Food business closure is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The closure, and how quick that happens, always depends on the risk to the public at that time.”

When a business does pose a threat to public safety, Sinead explains that an EHO must follow a process of discussing the risks and the threat with a Designated Officer (a person appointed by the FSAI to ensure enforcements are performed in a transparent manner). In cases where the threat is immediate, an EHO will process a closure immediately.

Addressing the biggest obstacles that could derail their start-up success, Sinead advises food businesses to dig deep and research their supply chain.

Sinead explains, “One of the biggest challenges facing the food industry at the moment comes in the form of supplier control. By that I mean, careful selection of reputable and registered suppliers and stringent delivery intake procedures are essential. Intrinsically linked to supplier control is food fraud, which has become one of the biggest emerging risks and is part of our daily control duties.” During inspections, Sinead and her team will routinely assess the proof of the origins of food products and in practical terms investigations may include sampling and analysis such as DNA testing and chemical analysis. Such investigations often involve cross-border and cross-agency co-operation with environmental health and control colleagues in Northern Ireland (NI) and other government officials in the Department of Agriculture and Revenue in the Republic of Ireland (ROI).

“Like any good building foundation, the food product is only as good as its ingredients,” warns Sinead.

“The final trader, such as the local butcher or restaurant owner may unwittingly become the victim of food fraud. Without stringent supplier control procedures, each food business could be placing its reputation and its very survival in the hands of their suppliers.”

“I think the main message to new business ventures is as always: do your research and plan ahead. Consult with your local EHO officer prior to commencing a food business.”

To contact your local EHO in ROI visit www.hse.ie and in NI visit the website of the local council for more information.

With over 70,000 local people employed in the agri-food sector in Northern Ireland, Agri-Food Quest Manager, Stephane Durand explains how collaboration and research will shape the future of the food industry.

Stephane began his studies in Paris at the Pierre and Marie Curie University where he completed an undergraduate degree in Chemistry and Biochemistry, before undertaking an MSc in Food Science and Technology. Stephane has been working in the food industry for the last 10 years and is also a member of the safefood Knowledge Network Expert Facilitator Group, where he advises on current and emerging food safety issues. In 2015, Stephane took up the role of Agri-Food Quest Manager at the newly formed Northern Ireland Technology Centre at Queen’s University Belfast.

As part of his role at the Agri-Food Quest Competence Centre, Stephane is responsible for encouraging research projects that focus on key issues facing the food industry. On these issues, he explains: “It could be anything such as shelf-life extension, food safety, security around food supply or looking at ways to add value to products.”

However, the most important part of the entire process isn’t identifying or even informing people about the challenges, it’s finding the resources and finances to support research in these areas. Specifically, a minimum of three member companies have to combine forces with at least one university or research organisation to be considered for funding.

This is where Stephane comes in, as he explains: “I’m the cement between the blocks. I’m not really a researcher, I’m a project coordinator who connects the industry to the right researchers in the areas of interest or expertise.”

While getting this right requires time, it’s often worth the effort. He admits: “It’s exciting to watch the realisation for companies that, by working together, they can solve a big problem that they could not solve on their own. It’s very rewarding to get different areas of industry working together, solving problems and looking at serious barriers like environmental issues and sustainability.”

On the topic of sustainability, Stephane adds: “The reality is we will have to produce more, but within the same amount of land. We need to examine how we do that in a sustainable way. If all the farmers and processors are thinking about this and choose to pool their resources, they will have a much better chance of actually solving those big societal problems.”

A new challenge that the food industry in Northern Ireland (NI) is currently facing is the impact of Brexit. Along with food resources and exports, a ‘harsh Brexit’ could potentially impact on cross-border trading between NI and the Republic of Ireland (ROI) as well as current EU trade agreements.

Stephane explains: “Brexit is really the key of uncertainty – nobody can control it, or how it will affect them. We don’t know what is going to happen, so Brexit is by far the biggest risk in relation to the local food industry.”

On the other hand, Stephane suggests that it could turn out to be beneficial by strengthening the willingness to collaborate across industries and borders: “I think that ROI and NI have been successfully collaborating for decades. I hope this can continue, as we are facing the same issues. The projects we are working on have been really successful because they have been across borders.” While the future remains uncertain now in terms of Brexit, joining forces is the way forward in terms of tackling issues and solving problems within the food industry, giving companies across the island of Ireland plenty of food for thought.

safefood is delighted to offer one lucky crossword winner a luxury hamper of gourmet food from Arcadia Delicatessen in Belfast.

Simply find the hidden bacteria in the crossword, made up from the letters highlighted, and send the answer to knowledgenetwork@safefood.eu before 2nd June 2017. This competition is open to Knowledge Network Members on the island of Ireland only.

ACROSS

6 Spanish bubbly (4)
7 Dining chair with arms: knife to cut cooked meat (6)
8 Bacon serving: more hasty (6)
9 Bakery item: sharp, sour (4)
10 Sauce: Latin American dance (5)
12 Soup or stew made by boiling meat and vegetables in water; stockor a gravy (5)
15 Hard Dutch cheese (4)
17 Meat once popular, particularly in a stew or a pie (6)
19 Pickled flower buds used as a relish in various dishes and sauces: gambols (6)
20 Condiment; preserving agent (4)

DOWN

1 Starchy yellow fruit (6)
2 Dish of minced meat, onions and mashed or cubed potato: complete mess (4)
3 Cut into the skin of a piece of meat, like pork when making crackling (5)
4 Kitchen utensil for food preparation (6)
5 A sweet edible fruit which is wider at the bottom (4)
11 Slow cook below boiling point for certain foods: seethe (6)
13 Dessert of fruits, jelly, custard and cream on a sponge base, often laced with sherry: something of small importance (6)
14 Salad greenery (water and garden varieties) (5)
16 Measure of Scotch whisky, especially in Scotland: apothecary’s weight (4)
18 Food fish of freshwater and sea varieties: lowest register of the male voice (4)

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) publish a report annually which details the trends and associated sources of foodborne illness reported in 32 European countries (specifically, 28 member states and four non-member states). The 2015 report named ‘The European Union summary report on trends and sources of zoonosis, zoonotic agents and foodborne outbreaks’, was recently published and here are some of the findings for 2015:

• Campylobacter continued to be the most common cause of bacterial food poisoning in the European Union with 229,213 confirmed cases.
• 26 member states reported a total of 4,362 foodborne outbreaks, including waterborne outbreaks.
• Overall, these outbreaks caused 45,874 cases of illness, 3,892 hospitalisations and 17 deaths.
• Most foodborne outbreaks reported were caused by bacterial agents (33.7% of all outbreaks), in particular Salmonella (21.8% of all outbreaks) and Campylobacter (8.9% of all outbreaks).
• Bacterial toxins ranked second amongst the causative agents in foodborne and waterborne outbreaks and were reported in 19.5% of the total outbreaks.
• Viruses accounted for 9.2% of total outbreaks.
• Parasites and other agents, in particular histamine, were reported in less than 3% of the outbreaks.

For more information, please visit: https://www.efsa. europa.eu/en/efsajournal/pub/4634

Dr. Lisa Connolly is a leading academic in Toxin Food Safety and an expert in the Bioassay Analysis of Endocrine Disruptors at the Institute for Global Food Security based in Queen’s University Belfast. Lisa explains how chemicals found in food and the environment could be endangering our health. 

Endocrine disruptors are chemicals found in food that can affect our hormones and are linked to a host of health issues. These include cancer, infertility, obesity and diabetes. Dr. Lisa Connolly, an internationally recognised researcher, is leading the way in these studies. Having originally obtained a BSc in Biological Sciences at the University of Ulster in 1994, Lisa went on to be awarded a Ph.D in Biological Sciences specialising in cancer research at Dublin City University. It was at this time that her interest began to pique in the area of endocrine disruptors. “I believe that many diseases today may originate from endocrine disrupting contaminants in our diet and environment. I firmly believe that we could prevent a lot of these diseases by improving our understanding and safety against the exposure of endocrine disruptors,” explains Lisa.

The team of researchers working on PROTECTED will try to identify new and emerging endocrine disruptors and understand the complex effects of their mixtures. The new information can then be used to inform food production legislation and protect the consumer. PROTECTED differs from previous research on endocrine disruptors. While most projects have focused solely on the effects of man-made chemicals on the endocrine system, Lisa and her team suspect that natural chemicals such as fungal toxins may be creating a mixture with man-made chemicals and the natural hormones in the body, causing adverse health issues.

Researchers working on this project will examine the effects of endocrine disruptors on cells, development and brain function, plus explore the links that these toxins may have with the rise in modern diseases.

The team will also work on developing effective communication strategies to the public. The social science aspect proves an ongoing challenge, so Lisa and her team will work closely to evaluate how much the consumer understands about endocrine disruptors.

“Once we know this, we can start developing tools by which we can explain the true risk of endocrine disruptors to the consumer, what they should be concerned about and how they could avoid them.”

Traditionally, legislation has protected the consumer from individual compounds, but legislation hasn’t always taken into account that on a daily basis we can be exposed to many different types of chemicals. We suspect that they may form mixtures in our body together with our own natural hormones, increasing the risk to our health. Legislation needs to consider the risk posed by mixtures of both man-made and natural endocrine disruptors. We hope to help this process through knowledge gained in the PROTECTED project.

While legislation is currently controlling the introduction of chemicals to our food chain, the processes used to produce food is continually changing, meaning new risks.

“We need a new generation of experts who can tackle this global problem and come up with innovative ways and strategies to control these threats and protect our health now and in the future.

“Human health will be our main focus over the coming months. An added advantage of hosting this project internationally is that the results will be different in each country due to differing factors like climate, the natural environment and temperature. We’re looking at chemicals that can gain entry into the environment, water resources, soil and food chain and how these can affect the health of the consumer. We are ultimately developing a new generation of researchers with the innovative capabilities of producing research tools to tackle this ongoing problem now and in the future.”

Having just launched the PROTECTED project, Lisa acknowledges that a collaborative effort is required to protect the public: “The overall difficulty is that it’s very hard to individually warn a consumer on what they can do. So I think we need a combination of consumer practice, scientific research and informed legislation to control the overall problem.

“In four years time, we hope to have produced an army of innovative and expert world leaders in the area of protecting the consumer against endocrine disruptors.”

PROTECTED has received its funding from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme for research, technological development and demonstration.

For further information please see the PROTECTED project website on: Protected.eu.com

With Christmas dinner prep just around the corner, be sure to get the most out of your grocery shop:

• Plan ahead this Christmas
• Plan your meals and know how many people you are cooking for
• Make a shopping list and stick to it
• Don't go shopping on an empty stomach - you'll buy more than you need
• Buy a turkey that will suit your needs
• Only buy what you need - the shops are only shut for two days!
• Buy food with a long shelf-life such as tinned, pickled or frozen foods
• Cooking food extends it's use-by date
• Freeze leftovers

Eddie O’Neill, Artisan Food Specialist for Teagasc, reveals how inadequate cleaning regimes could be causing cross contamination in food processing plants.

In terms of food safety, hygiene is one of the most important factors that can influence our decision as consumers to buy a product. So, understandably, it can be distressing for businesses when they are faced with the news that their food processing plant has been contaminated with biofilms. A biofilm is a group of bacteria that are protected by an impermeable layer that can provide resistance to cleaning agents and detergents. Biofilms can release bacteria regularly, causing contamination to both food products and work surfaces in a food processing plant.

Eddie is increasingly aware of the threats that biofilm contamination pose to food processing companies. While he works on developing new food products on a day-to-day basis, Eddie confirms that an increasing amount of his work involves working with Dr. Kieran Jordan, providing support and information to businesses on hygiene. “When it comes to biofilms, prevention is key,” he says.

It is important for food businesses to know what biofilms are and know how to deal with them. Eddie finds that, in the majority of cases, when it comes to biofilm formation, companies have already spotted the signs of cross contamination.

Biofilms pose two serious threats to food processing plants, with Eddie warning “It can be incredibly serious – not only as a food-safety issue, but it takes its toll on a business owner’s mental health.”

Despite a company’s attempt to implement an effective cleaning regime, if the routine isn’t completed carefully, it could result in reduced shelf-life of a food or product recalls.

In a worst case scenario, the food may cause illness to a consumer, and cause incredible mental stress to the business owner and to employees working there. If you have a product recall, then the name of your company and reputation can be called into question.

Hygiene is critical when it comes to preventing biofilm formation. Eddie notes a number of steps to prevent biofilm formation, advising companies to:

• Remove any food residue using either hot or cold wash
• Wash the area with a detergent
• Rinse all surfaces with water
• Follow with a sanitiser. The sanitiser is key as it destroys the bacteria.

Eddie also advises to follow the manufacturer’s instructions when using cleaning agents. Remember - Temperature, Concentration and Time:

Temperature - Use cleaning agents at the temperature the manufacturer recommends. If you use cleaning agents outside of their specified temperature range it may render the chemical ineffective and may be dangerous to use.

Concentration of the cleaning agent – It is important to dilute the cleaning agent as per the manufacturer’s guidelines.

Time - The amount of time you leave cleaning chemicals on a surface is important. Remember, cleaning agents need time to work.

Unfortunately, biofilms are invisible to the naked eye, which means they may only become apparent when there are increased levels of unwanted bacteria in your final product. With a few exceptions, the majority of food environments are wet areas and this moisture promotes the growth of bacteria, mould and viruses. To prevent biofilm formation, your cleaning regime should include frequently missed areas such as right-angle corners, crevices or cracks in tiles and flooring. Knowledge is power, and Eddie assures that if you have a properly maintained food processing facility, then you will largely eliminate the potential for biofilm formation.

When it comes to cleaning, it is attention to detail that can be the difference between food safety and cross contamination in the food processing chain: “When we’re talking about cleaning, it’s very easy to see a clean table. It’s easy to see a shiny work surface but it’s very difficult to see underneath a table’s edge, drains, and wheels on equipment, underneath shelves, things like that. That’s where bacteria harbour to a large degree.

“If you can imagine any food environment, all the washing ends up in the drains. So the drains are absolutely huge issues for cross contamination. So we often emphasize the proper inspection and thorough cleaning of drains. We also discourage the use of high-pressure hoses.” High-pressure hoses cause cross contamination throughout a plant where people use them to clean drains, belts and equipment. They can spread bacteria around a food facility. Thankfully, there is help on hand for businesses who need advice developing an effective cleaning regime. Reaching out to the right organisations can provide the information to bring practices up to speed. This is where Teagasc and other organisations can offer services. “We can advise companies on the ground, and through collaborations with organisations like safefood, we deliver free workshops around the country every year for people working in the food industry," Eddie reveals. "We offer advice, and counsel on a one-to-one basis with companies who may not wish to talk publicly about the issues they have onsite.”

Eddie cites networking as the greatest solution to any potential challenges in food production on the island of Ireland. Taking advantage of people’s ability to connect should not be overlooked. Eddie feels there is a missed opportunity in the way food businesses network. He advises looking to experienced peers who can share their own insight into building a business with sustainable growth:

“There’s a wonderful range of helpful individuals out there, who have years and years of experience in the food industry. They’re only too happy to offer advice to not only people in the food industry, but to people starting out as well. It can be a great resource for those who want to grow their businesses and develop their products too. So for me, networking is key in the future of food production.” 

About Eddie

Hobbies/ Interests: I love the sea and like fishing – it relaxes me. When I’m fishing, I find I’m in a world of my own and it’s not about catching fish.

Favourite Food: I love to eat seasonal. I think that it is important to understand the seasonality of produce. I prefer to look at the seasons than eating one specific style of food.

Providing training and support to parents and early childcare providers on all aspects of food, healthy eating and food safety, Shirley Hawkes, Operation Manager for Early Years, talks about food allergen training in the early childcare sector in Northern Ireland.

The role of early childhood educators and food safety management are now undeniably linked. While early educators are being trained to teach and protect young children, one agency based in Northern Ireland (NI) saw a real need to introduce food management and allergy training to bene t not just children but their parents and practitioners as well. Established in 1965, Early Years aims to promote high quality childcare for children aged 0-12 years and their families in NI.

When Operation Manager Shirley Hawkes learned of the ‘Little Bites’ initiative in the Republic of Ireland (ROI), she reached out to safefood for guidance in adopting a similar approach in NI.

The Little Bites programme, originally created as a partnership in the ROI between safefood and Early Childhood Ireland, is a website offering insight and educational resources to parents and early childhood sector workers on a range of topics from healthy eating guidelines, to promoting food safety management for young children.

One area that needed urgent attention in NI was the lack of food safety and food allergen training for anyone in the childcare sector. With this realisation, and after conducting research, Shirley and her team in Early Years decided to adopt the idea of a Little Bites programme for NI.

“We had recently been out on the ground working with the sector and through focus groups, audits and discussions, we found people were struggling to get relevant information,” Shirley explains. After analysing feedback from the groups and surveys, the team in Early Years uncovered a worrying trend of childcare sector workers being forced to go online to source information without guidance. “They weren’t sure what the source was, or where it was coming from. We thought it would be very good to get a one- stop shop so that we could direct our membership and so that we could be assured that they were getting the right information from the right agency.”

As well as providing health guidelines and healthy eating campaigns, the Little Bites website offers information on nutrition, food hygiene, food allergies, intolerances, teaching and minimum standards for playgroups and daycares. It also provides training resources in nutrition and food hypersensitivity, which has not been widely available in NI until now.

Food hypersensitivities are essentially food allergy, food intolerance and coeliac disease. The symptoms can range from mild (such as stomach upset) to severe (such as shock or severe breathing dif culties), particularly in the case of severe food allergies. These are frequently diagnosed in early childhood and this training helps the Early Years staff manage food allergens and accommodate children with food hypersensitivities in their care.

Shirley explains how Early Years worked closely with safefood and pediatric dietician Ruth Charles, to develop both the content of the website and on-the-ground training. “The information was rolled out by safefood and Early Years over ten training sessions across NI.

“Over 350 frontline Early Years staff received the training, and this was across preschool, daycare, afterschools and schools. “The training provided aimed to ensure there was greater knowledge and understanding of food allergies and staff were also trained to know what to do in an emergency.” Another bene t to the training was that staff were supported on how to work with parents and children, as well as writing policies in relation to food allergens. Speaking about the uptake in training, Shirley re ects on the challenges facing the early childhood sector when it comes to food safety, training and management: “Up until now, the main concern was the lack of training or knowledge. We were not receiving this from local level or from trust level and only that safefood came along we wouldn’t have it at all. It’s now up to us to keep this going and keep the training in practice”.

What is Little Bites?

The Little Bites website was originally developed as a one- stop-shop for food safety, food allergen and healthy eating advice for all early childcare providers in the Republic of Ireland. The site is a collaboration between safefood and Early Childhood Ireland. Early Years recently adapted the programme as part of a training series for frontline workers in the early childhood sector in Northern Ireland. 

About Shirley

Hobbies/Interests: Getting more active with my three children who are between the ages of 8-13. I do 5k runs, colour runs and park runs with my family.

Favourite Food: Coming from a farming community, I think it’s much more about the meat and veg rather than salads. There’s nothing better than a Sunday roast.

For Christmas, safefood is delighted to offer two lucky crossword winners a luxury hamper of gourmet food from Arcadia Delicatessen in Belfast.

Simply find the hidden word in the crossword, made up from the letters highlighted, and send the answer to knowledgenetwork@safefood.eu before Friday 23rd December 2016. This competition is open to Knowledge Network Members on the island of Ireland only. Winners will be drawn in January 2017.

2016 has seen major changes to our Knowledge Networks, with the main one being the change from seven different networks and separate facilitators looking at different food safety topics, to one over-arching new Knowledge Network.

The Network is focused on food safety across the food chain, in six different sectors: red meat; poultry and pork; animal feed; sh and shell sh; fresh produce and dairy. This new framework will allow us to focus on the most important food safety challenges, and be exible enough to respond to new issues as they emerge, making sure that our members have the most up-to-date information possible.

To help us achieve our goals, we have assembled a single group of experts from industry, research and public health who will strategically lead the Network, guiding the activities and advising on required training and supports, new services for members and providing insights around both existing food safety risks and emerging issues. We believe the expertise of this group, chaired by Prof. Chris Elliott, will be invaluable to our members and to the strategic direction of the Network. The group has met twice over the last few months, and have had productive discussions around priority food safety issues, innovative solutions to current food safety problems, and insights into the issues that may face us in the future.

We have already begun planning for 12 workshops for small food businesses in 2017, building on the workshop programme with Teagasc and CAFRE this year. During 2017, the Network will continue to keep the members up to date on food safety issues and trends, encouraging shared learnings and discussion of emerging food safety risks and potential solutions. Our members can avail of events, brie ngs, workshops, newsletters and our website (www.safefoodkn.eu), and will have access to new resources, videos and webinars. With the support of the Expert Group, this all-island initiative will help ensure that food industry, regulatory and academic members, have access to the very latest developments in food safety innovation, emerging issues and in the detection and control of hazards in food.

Chairing the group is Prof. Chris Elliott Pro-Vice-Chancellor, Queen’s University Belfast, while other members include Stephane Durand, Agri Food QUEST Manager, Northern Ireland Technology Centre; Micheál Cosgrove, Operations Manager, Glanbia Milk; Michael Bell, Executive Director, NI Food and Drink Association; Jenny Morris, Head TifSiP, Chartered Institute of Environmental Health, London; Dr. Kieran Jordan, Principal Research Of cer, Moorepark, Teagasc; Prof. David McDowell, Emeritus Professor Food Microbiology, Ulster University; Robin Irvine, Chief Executive Northern Ireland Grain Trade Association; and Dr. Declan Bolton, Principal Research Of cer, Ashtown, Teagasc. Also pictured are Dr. Gary Kearney (safefood), Dr. Linda Gordon (safefood), Dr. Sarah Norberg (safefood) and Michael Hills (Queen’s University Belfast).