Richard N. Baines

Escherichia coli O104:H4 outbreak from sprouted seeds

From May to July 2011, one of the largest reported outbreaks of haemolytic uraemic syndrome (HUS) and bloody diarrhoea caused by the Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli (STEC) O104:H4 occurred in Germany and France. The hypothetical origin of the outbreak strain was a combined enteroaggregative E. coli and an enterohaemorrhagic E. coli with the ability to resist multi-antibiotics and produce Shiga-toxin 2. The combination of aggregative ability, antibiotic resistance and the production of Shiga-toxin 2 significantly affected the severity of the symptoms presented. Since humans may be the primary reservoir, it is likely that contamination could have occurred through contact with infected individuals. Farm food safety management, and hand hygiene training programmes are crucial to primary production to prevent or reduce risks of contamination.

Fresh produce‐associated outbreaks: a call for HACCP on farms?

Purpose – This paper is intended to be the first in a series addressing food safety in the fresh produce chain, with particular emphasis on the contributing factors that lead to farm‐based safety breakdowns.Design/methodology/approach – A desktop study of recent outbreaks and recalls that have occurred in the USA and EU was undertaken with a view to determining the produce items implicated and factors causing the emergence of outbreaks. The question “A call for HACCP on farms?” is explored.Findings – Minimally processed fresh‐cut produce represents a particular challenge to food safety. The research has highlighted the need to mitigate risk at all stages but with specific emphasis at the pre‐farm gate stage. A more comprehensive and integrated approach to risk management is arguably needed. A call for HACCP on the farm or farm food safety management system may be warranted in future if fresh produce outbreaks continue to rise. However, further research is needed to establish the guidelines of HACCP adopti...

Escherichia coli O157:H7 in beef cattle: on farm contamination and pre-slaughter control methods

Abstract This paper addresses food safety in beef cattle production, with particular emphasis on factors that affect the prevalence of Escherichia coli O157:H7 in beef cattle and on control methods that have been investigated. Product recalls and foodborne diseases due to this organism continue to occur even though control measures have been under investigation for over 20 years. Most meatborne outbreaks are due to improper food handling practices and consumption of undercooked meat. However, the majority of pathogenic bacteria that can spread at slaughter by cross-contamination can be traced back to the farm rather than originating from the slaughter plant. This would ideally require the adoption of rigorous on-farm intervention strategies to mitigate risks at the farm level. On-farm strategies to control and reduce E. coli O157:H7 at the farm level will reduce the risk of carcass contamination at slaughter and processing facilities although they will not eliminate E. coli O157:H7. The most successful strategy for reducing the risk of contamination of beef and beef products will involve the implementation of both pre- and post-harvest measures.

Field application of farm-food safety risk assessment (FRAMp) tool for small and medium fresh produce farms.

The objective of this study was to develop a farm food safety-risk assessment tool (FRAMp) which serves as a self-assessment and educational tool for fresh produce farms. FRAMp was developed in Microsoft® Excel spreadsheet software using standard mathematical and logical functions and utilised a qualitative risk assessment approach for farmers to evaluate their food safety practices. The FRAMp tool has since been tested on 12 fresh produce farms throughout UK. All the farms determined that FRAMp was interesting but 17% found it too long while 25% of the farms felt the tool was too complicated. The instructions on FRAMp usage were revised and farmers were given the options to skip and select specific steps in the farm risk assessment. The end users (farmers/farm managers) determined that developing their own action plans and using it as proof of assessment for future third-party audits were most useful to them. FRAMp tool can be described as an illustrative risk ranking tool to facilitate farms to identify potential risk factors during their crop production.

Irradiation Applications in Dairy Products: a Review

The demand for raw and fresh dairy products with the desired organoleptic characteristics and health benefits led to research in non-thermal processing technologies aiming to retain all the product qualities and nutrients. Irradiation is an emerging non-thermal technology used in destroying micro- and macroorganisms that might exist in food by exposure to either gamma (γ) rays from radioactive isotopes (cobalt60 or caesium137) or an electron accelerator (electron beam or X-radiation) under a controlled environment. With the endorsement of many international food and health organisations such as the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and World Health Organization (WHO), irradiation is becoming more widely researched as a process to maintain quality, improve safety and reduce quarantine and post-harvest loss. Irradiation has the potential for allergenicity reduction and the provision of a sterile diet for immunocompromised patients. Unlike other food categories, the use of irradiation as a preservative technique on dairy products has received little attention due to the complexity of the product varieties. Whilst being accepted in some countries, the adoption of irradiation as an alternative measure of treating and preventing potential problems in the food chain faces strict opposition in many countries. In this review, the focus is on the radiation processing as an emerging technology and its specific application on dairy products.

What is food poverty? A conceptual framework

Purpose – Recently, food poverty has been subject to much academic, political and media attention following the recent reduction in consumer purchasing power as a result of food and energy price volatility. Yet the lack of consensus related to food poverty terminology acts as an inhibitor in both identifying and addressing the issue in the UK, specifically as a separate problem to that of food insecurity. Misunderstanding of terminology is an impediment to identifying similarities and differentials with both developed and developing countries. The purpose of this paper is to address these issues and enhance political and academic discourse. Design/methodology/approach – An exploratory approach utilising secondary research was conducted to assemble sufficient information to ensure an extensive examination, consisting of several sources inclusive of academia, government and non-governmental organisations. The literature was screened for relevance following a broad search which primarily focused upon UK publications, with the exception of national data relevant to specified countries of USA, Canada, Yemen and United Republic of Tanzania (Tanzania). Findings – Economic access, quality, quantity, duration and social dimensions were the common features identified in the majority of the literature. Based upon these elements the proposed concise definition was constructed as; food poverty is the insufficient economic access to an adequate quantity and quality of food to maintain a nutritionally satisfactory and socially acceptable diet. Originality/value - – This study provides a conceptual approach in defining food poverty. Comparative to the countries examined, the UK has significant gaps in understanding and providing strategies in relation to individuals experiencing food poverty, causes and symptoms, methods of alleviation and coping strategies. There is no peer reviewed paper clearly discussing the definition of food poverty, hence, this review paper is original in three areas: establishing a definition for food poverty; clarifying the relationship between food poverty and food security; and discuss food poverty in UK with international comparison.

Farm food safety and diseases risk assessments: case studies from the horticultural and salmonid farms

This study explores the perceptions of selected fresh produce and salmonid farms on the types and importance of various risk assessments conducted at the primary production level. Both the fresh produce and salmonid farms in this study are vigilantly conducting risk assessments to prevent or reduce potential food safety and infectious diseases from occurring. The participating farms generally carried out at least eight types of risk assessments such as health and safety, water, workers’ hygiene, site assessment and pesticides/veterinary medicines on an annual basis. Health and safety, pesticides/veterinary health, fresh produce safety and fish health assessments are some of the most important types of risk assessments for the farms. Most farms will continue with the good practice of conducting risk assessments even if it is not required by their customers or regulations but would prefer to reduce the amount of paper/electronic-based risk assessments.

Achieving successful farmer engagement on greenhouse gas emission mitigation

This paper explores the potential for farmers’ engagement on the issues related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emission mitigation in extensive low-input livestock farming systems. The framework used was based on Participatory Action Research. This involved integrating quantitative evidence on GHG emission impacts at the farm level and qualitative data on the obstacles to the adoption of innovation based on farmers’ perceptions and attitudes to climate change. The study aims at building social capital among 14 farmers in the South West and West Midlands regions in England, and it evaluates the potential for the adoption of emission mitigation strategies. The Rapid Farm Practices Appraisal (RFPA) tool was created to assess farm practices based on their mitigation potential. Practices were assessed twice over 6–9 months. Semi-structured interviews were used to assess barriers and opportunities to farmer engagement and on-farm innovation. Farmers were invited to a focus group meeting to network with other farmers and engage with researchers. All farmers participated in the 2 farm assessments, but only half the farmers adopted changes in farm management. All farmers appreciated the RFPA tool, the clearness of the information provided and the focus of the tool on practices directly. The main obstacles to innovation were limited financial capital, lack of trust in government action and confusion over the effectiveness of farm advice on mitigation. The lack of long-term flexibility of agricultural policies and the source of information greatly influenced the acceptance of advice. Results suggest the potential for the expansion of the RFPA tool to include economic assessment of farm practices and the engagement of a larger pool of farmers and farming systems. The tool could be used to support the GHG Action Plan and future environmental policies, and as an integrated self-assessment tool for farmers under Environmental Stewardship Schemes.

Managing food safety risks in the agri-food industries

Introduction Risk Assessment Introduction References Managing Risks in the Horticultural Sector Introduction Main Risks Associated with Fresh Produce Sources of Produce Contamination at the Farm Level Prevention and Intervention Strategies Case Study of Breakdown in Fresh Produce Farms References Managing Food Safety Risks in the Beef and Dairy Industries Managing Food Safety Risks in the Beef Industry Managing Risks in the Dairy Industry References Managing Risks in the Broiler and Pig Industries Managing Risks in the Broiler Industry Managing Food Safety Risks in Pigs References Managing Food Safety Risks in the Wild Game and Fish Capture Industries Managing Food Safety Risks in Wild Game Managing Food Safety Risks in the Fishery Industries References Managing Food Safety Risks in Farmed Fish and Shellfish Managing Food Safety Risks in Farmed Fish Managing Food Safety Risks in Shrimp References Perceptual and Actual Risks and How We Communicate Them Introduction Dimensions of Risk Perception Risk Communication How to Change Bad Food Handling Behavior References. Index

Have You Disinfected Your Boots? A Case Study of Food Safety and Biosecurity Practices of a Salmon Farm in Chile

This article explores the food safety practices and biosecurity measures of a Chilean salmon farm. The farm participated in detailed discussions on biosecurity and farm food safety practices and, in addition to the biosecurity measures, the following all play important roles in ensuring fish health and reduction of mortalities and outbreaks: optimum stocking density, respect and coordination between different farm sites in relation to the Area Management Agreement, and quality of smolt during fish transfer. From this and other studies, it is evident that we need to look for a balance between biosecurity measures and management factors; however, we are still unable to quantify biosecurity measures. One practical and cost-effective way would be to look at past epidemiological and mortality data and the period when biosecurity measures were applied to see if there was an association between application of biosecurity measures and subsequent reduction in mortalities and infections. If yes, then this is a good sign signifying that the strict biosecurity measures are working. Similar to Good Aquaculture Practices, biosecurity measures need to be adopted as a whole package, and the reduction of one point may have significant consequences on the whole process. The present study captured a snapshot of real-time farm food safety and biosecurity practices of a Chilean salmon farm. However, because of the limited nature of this study, the findings should not be extrapolated to all farms in the country or region.