Tendències de futur en seguretat alimentariarelacionades amb el sector porci

INNOVACSetembre 2011

Dr Marta Hugas

Unit on Biological Hazards, Head

Estructura

� EFSA

� Toxiinfeccions alimentaries en la UE (sector porci)

� Riscs importants en inspeccio carnia de canals de porc

� Avaluacio de riscos Salmonella en porcs

� Avaluacio de tecniques decontaminacio de canals

3

From field to plate

We advise on food/feed safety across the entire food chain

Working together

• 30 national food safety agencies

• 400 research institutes

• 1500 experts

4

Cooperation with:

• EU Agencies

• 3rd country and international organisations

EFSA’s scientists evaluate, assess, advise

How do we do it?

5

6

COM

RISKASSESSMENT

=

The Science

RISK

MANAGEMENT

=

The Policy

RISK

COMMUNICATION

=

The Exchange

EC+EFSA

Preliminary

activities

Options

identification

Options

selection

Implementation

Review

Monitoring

Risk Analysis [CAC,01]: a decision paradigm for Food Safety Governance

EFSAEC

The BIOHAZ Panel

The Panel on Biological Hazards deals with questions on biological hazards relating to Food Safety and Food-borne Diseases, including:

� Food-borne Zoonoses;

� Food Hygiene;

� Microbiology;

� Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies;

� Associated Waste Management.

Zoonoses in humans; notification rates

in EU, 2009, EUSR

8

(1)

(115)

(401)

(748)

(790)

(1,645)

(1,987)

(1,259)

(3,573)

(7,595)

(108,614)

(198,252)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Rabies

Tuberculosis caused by M. bovis*

Brucellosis

Trichinellosis

Echinococcosis

Listeriosis

Q fever

Toxoplasmosis

VTEC

Yersiniosis

Salmonellosis

Campylobacteriosis

Notif ication rate per 100,000 population

Zo

ono

ses

Based on the reported

fatality rates and the

total numbers of

reported confirmed cases, in 2009:

- 270 deaths due to listeriosis;

- 90 deaths due to salmonellosis; and

- 40 deaths due to campylobacteriosis

Significantly decreasing trend in human cases since 2005; decrease of 17.4% compared to 2008

Decrease supposed to be mainly due to successful controls of Salmonella in laying hens, breeding flocks and eggs 9

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Co

nfi

rme

d ca

ses

pe

r 10

0,0

00

po

pu

latio

n

Salmonellosis in humans in EU, 2005-2009; EUSR

• In 2009, listeriosis in humans increased; of concern in EU

• High case fatality rate of 16.6%, approx. 270 deaths

• The highest notification rate in those aged over 65 years: covering 58.5 % of the reported cases

Listeriosis in humans in EU, 2005-2009; EUSR

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

co

nfi

rme

d c

as

es

pe

r 1

00

,00

0 p

op

ula

tio

n

L.monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods,

meeting the EU criterion ,2006-2009

Fishery products (smoked fish),

soft/semisoft

cheeses and RTE meat products

have highest % of non-compliance

with the 100 cfu/gcriterion (0.3 -1.1%)

No major changes

observed over the years

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

Other RTE products

Fishery products, RTE

Hard cheese, RTE

Soft and semi-soft cheese, RTE

RTE products of meat origin

% non-compliance at retail

2006

2007

2008

2009

Yersiniosis in humans in EU, 2005-2009: EUSR

• Yersiniosis in humans has decreased in EU in 2005-2009 with a statistically significant trend

12

5,550 food-borne outbreaks; 48,964 human cases, 4,356 hospitalisationsand 46 deaths in 2009.

Main causes Salmonella (31%), viruses (19%), bacterial toxins (10%),

Main vehicles eggs (17%), mixed meals (8%), pork (8% )

Other bacterial agents

Parasites

Escherichia coli, pathogenic

Other causative agents

Campylobacter

Bacterial toxins

Viruses

Salmonella

Unknown

Number of outbreaks

Verified outbreaks

Possible outbreaks

Food-borne outbreaks in EU, 2009, EUSR

Trends in food-borne outbreaks 2007-2009; EUSR

Other bacterial agents

Parasites

Escherichia coli, pathogenic

Other causative agents

Campylobacter

Bacterial toxins

Viruses

Salmonella

Unknown

Number of outbreaks

2007

2008

2009

• Salmonella outbreaks declined, virus and bacterial toxins outbreaks increased

14

Food-borne outbreaks caused by Salmonella in EU, 2009

15

Distribution of food vehicle in verified outbreaks caused by SalDistribution of food vehicle in verified outbreaks caused by Salmonella in the EU, 2009monella in the EU, 2009

Causative agents in food-borne outbreaks, 2009; EUSR

• Egg and egg products outbreaks – 97% caused by Salmonella

• Pig meat outbreaks – Trichinella 40%, Clostridium 22%, Salmonella 16%

• Mixed and buffet meals outbreaks – Salmonella

23%, Bacillus 20%, Clostridium 20%, Staphylococcus 17%

• Fish outbreaks – 65% histamine

• Fruit and vegetables outbreaks – 65% viruses

Results : SA based on microbial subtyping,

EU-level

Results : SA based on microbial subtyping,

by EU-regions

Results : SA based on microbial subtyping,

by reporting country

Conclusions (1)

Covered by the microbial subtyping approach:

• the relative contribution of sources varied between regions and countries

• At EU-level :

• eggs were estimated to be the most important source, contributing with 48% of all Salmonella cases, followed by pigs (29.6%)

• turkeys (4.4%) and broilers (3.7%) were estimated to be less important sources.

• around 10% of cases were reported as travel-related, and 3.9% were part of outbreaks with unknown source

• Regional analysis:

• eggs were the most important source in Northern, Eastern and

Western Europe, whereas pigs were the major source in Southern Europe

• A large proportion of reported cases in Northern European countries were acquired abroad

Prevalence of Salmonella in pig production holdings

Baseline survey in EU - 27 in 2008

Prevalence of Prevalence of SalmonellaSalmonella--positive positive

breeding holdings, 2008breeding holdings, 2008

EU prevalence:

28.7% (95%CI: 26.3-31.0)

MS prevalence:

ranged from 0 to 64%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Norway

Slovenia

Lithuania

Finland

Estonia

Sweden

Bulgaria

Austria

Poland

Czech Republic

Slovakia

Switzerland

Belgium

Latvia

Germany

EU

Hungary

Luxembourg

Denmark

Portugal

Cyprus

France

Italy

United Kingdom

Ireland

Netherlands

Spain

Prevalence of Salmonella positive holdings22

Prevalence of Prevalence of SalmonellaSalmonella--positivepositive

production holdings, 2008production holdings, 2008

EU prevalence:

33.3% (95%CI: 30.9-35.7)

MS prevalence:

ranged from 0 to 55.7%

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Finland

Sweden

Norway

Bulgaria

Estonia

Austria

Lithuania

Poland

Slovenia

Switzerland

Czech Republic

Cyprus

Slovakia

Germany

Luxembourg

Hungary

Latvia

EU

Belgium

France

Denmark

Portugal

Italy

United Kingdom

Ireland

Spain

Netherlands

Prevalence of Salmonella positive holdings23

Prevalence of Prevalence of SalmonellaSalmonella--positive breeding positive breeding

holdings holdings versusversus production holdings, 2008production holdings, 2008

25

Breeder pigs

Slaughter pigs

Human cases

Prevalence PrevalencePrevalence

Farm level

Sources of infection

Treatment/control

Transport, lairage, slaughter

Control measures

Contamination of carcasses

Contribution (%)

Contribution (%)

PH risks from Salmonella in pigs

26

QMRA Salmonella in pigs(EFSA-Q-2006-176)

• Objective:

estimate to which extent human salmonellosis cases can be

reduced by reducing the prevalence of Salmonella in slaughter and breeder pigs and/or by reducing the carcass contaminationat slaughterhouse level

• Conclusions;

– 80% or 90% reduction of prevalence in slaughter pigs should result in a comparable reduction in the number of human cases

– A reduction of two logs of Salmonella numbers on contaminated carcasses would result in a 60-80% reduction of the number of human cases

– At farm level, control measures are most effective if they achieve Salmonella-free breeder pigs and feed, and prevention of introduction of Salmonella via environment (i.e. rodents, birds)

– At slaughterhouse level prevention of feacal leakage and carcass decontamination are considered efficient

Recommendations

• The slaughterhouse remains a critical step of the

pig meat chain in respect to pig and carcass

contamination. Studies to properly assess the

ways carcasses become contaminated should be encouraged

• Field trials of possible interventions are urgently required.

• The airborne transmission of Salmonella in the abattoir should be paid more attention

• Hazards from scientific literature were ranked qualitatively based on:

– their prevalence in carcasses

– source attribution of human cases to pork

– incidence and severity in humans

�Resulting in a shortlist of hazards

Main risks to PH by Meat Inspection of Pig carcasses

• High relevance: Salmonella

• Medium relevance: Yersinia enterocolitica, Toxoplasma gondii

Trichinella

• Low relevance: Listeria

Campylobacter

VTEC

Clostridium

Mycobacteria

Staph aureus

HEV

Main risks to PH by Meat Inspection of Pig carcasses

Hazards ranked based on: prevalence in carcasses, source attribution of human cases to pork and incidence and severity in humans

Inspection methods for new hazards currently

not covered by the meat inspection system

• A comprehensive pork carcass safety assurance, combining a range of preventive

measures applied both on-farm and at-abattoir is the only way to ensure effective control of the hazards identified above.

• A prerequisite for this system is setting targets in respect to the main hazards to be

achieved on chilled carcasses. These would also inform what has to be achieved at earlier steps in the food chain.

• At abattoir level, the risk reduction for the main hazards can be achieved through programs based on GMP/GHP and HACCP, including:

– hygienic and technology-based measures aimed at avoiding cross-contamination with Salmonella and Yersinia enterocolitica; with additional interventions such as surface decontamination of carcasses if considered necessary;

– heat- or freezing-based treatments of carcass meat to inactivate intramuscular parasites Toxoplasma gondii and Trichinella if considered necessary and as alternative to related laboratory testing of carcasses;

– FCI should be used to differentiate incoming pigs in respect to hazard risks based on herd status via sampling at farms or abattoirs, and to differentiate risk-reduction capacity of abattoirs (process hygiene).

• At farm level, the risk reduction for the main hazards can be achieved through

measures such as herd health programs, closed breeding pyramids, GHP and GFP and categorisation of animals based on the carrier state of these agents.

30

Decontamination of carcasses

32

Background

• Art 3(2) of Regulation (EC) No 853/2004: legal basis to approve/authorise the use of substances other than

potable water to remove surface contamination from products of animal origin

• Before risk management decision, a risk analysis should

be carried out taking into account the results of a risk assessment

• EFSA issued a revision of the guidance document(EFSA, 2010)

33

Risk assessment on use of recycled hot

water as decontamination technique of

carcases

Question No EFSA-Q-2009-892

34

Hot water decontamination

Deluge cabinet for pig carcasses : 80°C for 15 s

Source: DTU

Denmark

35

Conclusions (1)

Microbiological risk assessment

• Published available data on the efficacy of recycled hot water decontamination are very limited and relate only to treatment of bovine and porcine carcasses;

• No significant differences in microbial decontamination efficacy, between clean hot potable and hot recycled water, by using the recycling operations considered in this document

• Application of proper heating regime is the main option to control bacterial cells and protozoan parasites

• The main potential microbiological risks in the recycled water derive from heat-resistant bacterial spores

• The control option for spores is to define a proper criteria for the HACCP

Scientific Opinion on the evaluation of the safety and efficacy of lactic acid for the removal of

microbial surface contamination of beef carcasses, cuts and trimmings

EFSA-Q-2011-00032

37

Application dossier

• EC received an application dossier from USDA for

approval of lactic acid for uses to reduce microbial contamination of beef hides, carcasses, cuts and

trimmings and requested EFSA to deliver a Scientific Opinion (BIOHAZ and CEF)

• Approval was sought for treatments

• Beef hides, carcasses, cuts and/or trimmings

• Spray washing or misting

• Lactic acid (LA) concentrations: 2% - 5%

• Temperatures: < 55°C

38

Efficacy: conclusions

• Naturally occurring Enterobacteriaceae counts

⇒ reduced to variable degree, but usually reductions were significantly higher compared to untreated or water treated controls (HIGH).

• Salmonella and/or STEC/VTEC prevalence

⇒ reduced to variable degrees depending on study design and contamination level, but reductions were generally significantly higher compared to controls (HIGH/MEDIUM)

• Inoculated pathogens (Salmonella and/or STEC/VTEC) counts

⇒ reduced to variable degree. Usually reductions higher on carcasses compared to meat cuts and trimmings (MEDIUM).

39

Other dossiers in progress

• CECURE - cetylpyridinium chloride (“CPC”) in raw poultry products - to be delivered by 2012

The purpose of the treatment: food processing aid to control the following organisms: Salmonella, Campylobacter, Listeria, Staph.aureus, E.coli (including O157:H7), Pseudomonas, total coliforms, viruses, and other naturally occurring microorganisms on raw poultry carcasses

• LISTEX P100 (bacteriophage) – for fishery products to control Listeria monocytogenessurface contamination of raw fish

EFSA is committed to:

Excellence,Independency,

Responsiveness and Transparency

www.efsa.europa .eu

THANK YOU!!!