A Global Perspective on Food Safety Today

2009 ThermoFisher Scientific Food Safety Seminar Tour

Europe, USA, Canada, Asia, Japan

OutlineIntroduction – definitions

Stakeholders in food safety

EU perspectives on food safety

Food analysis – the global market

“Farm-to-Fork” – the integrated food chain

Regulatory analysis of food

Contaminants & residues

Analytical methodologies - SWOT

Qualitative analysis

Quantitative analysis

Future Prospects2

Introduction – definitions

Food safety is about ensuring that food is free from

microbiological or chemical contaminants/residues

that might cause harm to human health

Food security is about ensuring a plentiful supply of

safe food

Food security means that energy and nutritional needs are met,

whether at the global, national, community, or household level.

Food fraud is about deliberate adulteration of food

to deceive consumers

Food fraud may not have food safety implications although most cases

of adulteration invariably involve addition of illegal substances to

foods.3

Introduction – what is safe food?

To establish that food is free of contamination/residues requires

setting of chemical and microbiological standards.

Risk managers balance protection of human health (safety) with

facilitating trade and are responsible for establishing standards &

putting them into food law.

...Safe Foods: Science Comes to the Dinner Table...

4

Food safety must always be seen within the overall

context of a highly competitive business environment.

Competition at company, sector and regional levels.

Food safety threatens all players in the food chain

Food safety as major example of cooperation

between direct competitors.

Challenges of Food safety

5

Stakeholders in food safety

Government

Consumers

Independant Agencies

Food producers

6

Stakeholders in food safety - Government

Governments world-wide have a prime responsibility for

ensuring a secure and safe supply of food for their populace.

Agriculture Departments in Government represent

the interests of the farmers

Industry Departments in Government represent the

food manufacuring/ processing sectors

Health Department – more focussed on disease

7

Stakeholders in food safety - consumer

Consumers need to have confidence in food

producers and in Government

Consumers need independant advice on food

safety

Consumers need transparency about food

production and food safety

8

Trust must extend throughout the food chain

9

A crisis of confidence in Government’s handling of food

safety in year 2000 led to establishment of independant Food

Safety Agencies worldwide

e.g.

UK – Food Standards Agency (FSA)

Germany - The Federal Office of Consumer Protection and

Food Safety (BVL)

India – Food Standards & Safety Authority (FSSAI)

Japan – Food Safety Commission

Agencies have responsibility for enforcement of standards

through monitoring imports & national monitoring programmes

and official control.

Stakeholders in food safety –Independent Agencies

10

Stakeholders in food safety – producers

Industry & agriculture must demonstrate due diligence

HACCP is required for prevention & analysis is required to

prove effectiveness

Sectors in the Food Chain:-

Fruit, vegetables & cereals

Meat, dairy and fish sectors

Animal feed suppliers

Food manufacturers and processors

Food packaging supply chain

Food retailers

Increasing food safety requirements at farm level

11

The EU integrated approach to food safety aims to assure

a high level of

food safety,

animal health,

animal welfare,

plant health

within the EU through coherent farm-to-table measures and

adequate monitoring, while ensuring the effective

functioning of the internal market.

Food Safety – EU approach

12

Food Safety – EU approach

The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), an

independent European Agency, is the cornerstone of EU risk

assessment regarding food and feed safety.

EFSA has six main tasks:-

Provides independent scientific advice on food safety

issues

Advises on technical issues to underpin policy and

legislation

Collects and analyses data on dietary exposure

Identifies emerging food safety risks

Supports European Commission in case of crisis

Communicates to the general public

13

„Farm-to-Fork‟ Integrated Food Chain

Meat, milk etc.

INDUSTRY

ATMOSPHERE

WATER

PRODUCT

Freshwater fish

Shellfish

Sea fish

Poor disposal and leaching

Waste

discharge

Processing

Accident

Sewage Emissions

Incineration

Accidents

Fruit and

vegetables

WASTE

SOIL

Herbage

Pathways for environmental

contaminants to enter the food

chain

This slide shows that you cannot separate

segments of the food chain – whatever

happens at any point from farm-to-fork will

impact ultimately on the final product.14

Significance of the food chain

Case study:- fungal infection

Growing

Crop

Fruiting Harvest

Storage

Infectioninfection

SortingDryingHarvestFruitingGrowing

Crop

Toxin

Production

Toxin

Production

Toxin

ProductionToxin

Production

infection infection infection

Transport

Pre-harvest Post-harvest

This slide illustrates that for one source of potential contamination

(fungal infection and myctoxin production) numerous points in the chain

are vunerable, and need to be carefully monitored.

It is significant that one should look at the chain as an integrated whole.

15

Consumer demand for imported seasonal products to be

available all year-round.

Consumer demand for processed food that is ready-to-eat

and high in quality but low in cost.

In developed countries food is sourced globally and

international trade in food is substantial.

A long food chain makes control over safety and quality of

raw materials difficult to maintain – reliable analysis critical.

Food analysis – the global market

16

Food standards and regulatory limits drive food

analysis

Sourcing raw materials - testing

Export – testing to show compliance

Import – testing to check compliance

Food control in marketplace

Food surveillance

Drivers for food analysis

17

Micro-organisms- Salmonella, Listeria, E-coli

Microbial toxins

BSE & Scrapie

Viruses

Parasites

Yeasts and moulds

Analysis from farm-to-fork

Biological hazards:-

18

Environmental contaminants

Natural toxicants

Pesticide residues

Veterinary drug residues

Processing contaminants

Additives

Packaging migration

Trace elements (metals)

Authenticity and traceability

Adulteration

Analysis from farm-to-fork

Chemical hazards:-

19

207

Food is complex matrix for analysis

Food Testing-Environmental contaminants

Issue:- combustion products or waste disposal entering the

food chain through contamination of soil, air & water.

Examples :– PCDDs (75 cogeners), PCDFs (135 cogeners),

PCBs (209 cogeners), PAHs etc..

Scientific challenge – low toxicity therefore high sensitivity

required (ppt) but combined with high specificity to separate &

measure individual cogeners e.g. 2,3,7,8-TCDD

Regulation – limits from 0.75-12.0 pg/g fat based on WHO-TEQ

(EU Directive 1881/2006)

21

Analytical solution

Extensive sample cleanup (carbon column fractionation)

High resolution GC/MS using stable isotope

internal standards

Cost - $900-1300 + per sample for dioxins/PCBs

(1 week turnaround)

Business challenge – Introduce low-cost screen

(e.g CALUX), reduce costs and improve throughput

Food Analysis-Environmental contaminants

22

Issue:- secondary metabolites produced by fungi (molds) in

agricultural crops (cereals, nuts, fruit). Can be formed pre

harvest and during storage.

Examples :– Aflatoxins, ochratoxin A, 4-deoxynivalenol,

fumonisins, patulin

Scientific challenge – Universal extraction conditions for

multi-toxin methods, effective sampling, identifying novel

toxins.

Regulation – limits from 0.1 to 1000 µg/kg depending on toxin

and specific foodstuff (EU Directive 1881/2006)

Food Analysis – Natural Toxins/Mycotoxins

23

Analytical solution

Sampling protocol involving 30 kg samples (100 sub-

samples).

LC/MS/MS multi-toxin assays without cleanup

LC-TOF (Orbitrap) screening for unknowns

Cost - $90-135 + per sample for aflatoxins (1 day

turnaround)

Business challenge – multi-disciplinary approaches to

solve problem of unknown toxins, better screening e.g.

using NIR for quality control

Food Analysis – Natural Toxins/Mycotoxins

24

Challenge:Ultra-fast liquid chromatography

Small particle size (e.g. 1.8 µm)

Short narrow-bore columns

(e.g. 50 mm x 4.6 mm)

Higher pressures than conventional

columns (up to 600 bar)

Short analysis times (1-3 min)

No loss in column efficiency25

Mycotoxin analysis - conventional and fast methods

Mycotoxins

Retention times in min

Conventional

analysis

Fast

analysis

Ochratoxin A 8.1 2.2

Aflatoxin B1 19.2 4.0

Aflatoxin B2 16.1 3.3

Aflatoxin G1 13.2 2.9

Aflatoxin G2 11.2 2.3

Zearalenone 6.9 3.8

Aflatoxin M1 4.9 0.9

Fumonisins B1 B2 45.0* 4.5**

26

*by LC with derivatization **LC/MS underivatized

Aflatoxin analysis – affinity column -clean-up, HPLC

27

m

25cm x 4.6 (5µm)

50 x 4.6(3.5µm)

28

Fast chromatography with 4 min run time + 5 min turn-around = 5-6 hours.

Need only one HPLC system

Cost-benefits of fast analysis – routine testing

4000 dried fig samples in triplicate pa + spikes,

blanks etc = 15,000 analytical runs per annum

Conventional HPLC analysis time of 30 min

per run = 30 hours analysis time per day.

Need two dedicated HPLC systems.

Issue:- toxins produced in sea by dinoflagolates - seen as

‘algal blooms (red tide). Shellfish filter feed on phytoplankton

and bio-accumulate toxins.

Paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) toxins can cause tingling of

the tongue, loss of respiratory failure. Diarrhetic shellfish poisoning

toxins (DSP) - less severe-diarrhoea, nausea & vomiting.

Analysis – mouse bioassay, LC & LC/MS/MS

Challenges –. Replace mouse bioassay with instrumental

Method

Regulation – Total concentration of PSP toxins must not exceed

80mg/100g of mollusc flesh' (EC Directive 91/492/EEC).

Food Analysis – Natural Toxins/Phycotoxins

29

Food analysis – Pesticide residues

Issue:- Herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, rodenticides,

plant growth regulators etc are licensed for use in a way that

should ensure residues are below MRLs.

Examples :– organophosphorus, organochlorine, carbamates,

Scientific challenge – increase numbers of pesticides in

multi-residue methods, handle intractable pesticides without

single residue methods, improve handling of difficult

matrices, faster lower-cost methods.

Solutions - QuEChers cleanup, GC/MS/MS and LC/MS/MS

Regulation –EC Regulation No 396/2005 list MRLs from 0.01

to 10 mg/kg

30

Issue:- Veterinary drugs are either banned i.e not permitted

at any level or are authorised with MRLs applied to final

product. Animal products include red meat, poultry, salmon

and trout, eggs, wild and farmed game, and milk.

Examples :– Tetracyclines, chloroamphenicol, nitrofurans,

malachite green, sulphonamides, clenbuterol

Scientific challenge – many diverse chemical classes,

binding to matrix, metabolites not parent compound in some

cases, intractable analytes

Food analysis – Veterinary drug residues

31

Solutions - Screening tests (Primi-Test) applied to test for

classes of drugs followed by LC/MS/MS being applied to

multi-class drug confirmation.

Regulation – Assessing safety of residues and setting MRLs

(Regulation 2377/90), Controls on hormones and beta

agonists in farm animals (Directive 96/22/EC),

Surveillance for residues in food (Directive 96/23/EC)

Food analysis – Veterinary drug residues

32

Issue:- during heating, processing or storage of foods,

toxicologically undesirable compounds can be formed either

by chemical reactions of food components and/or additives.

Examples :– N-nitrosamines, acrylamide, furan, 3

monochloropropane-1,2-diol (3-MCPD), hydroxymethyl

furfural, ethyl carbamate, benzene

Scientific challenge – To seek ways to minimize formation.

To anticipate whether so far unrecognised biologically active

contaminants are present in processed foods.

Regulation – Mostly unregulated although 3-MPCD limit of

20 µg/kg in soy sauce (EU Directive 1881/2006)

Food analysis – Processing contaminants

33

Issue:- Plastics, paper & board, ceramics, metals, printing

inks, coatings are widely used in direct and indirect contact

with foods & contain a complexity of potentially toxic

substances which can migrate into foods.

Examples :– acrylonitrile & styrene monomers, di-2-ethyhexyl

adipate, ITX (photoinitiator) & BADGE from can coatings

Scientific challenge – To develop a systematic analytical

scheme to cover a wide range of migrants of differing MWt

and polarity

Solution:- GC/MS, SPME, LC/MS/MS, ICP/MS all routinely

used

Food analysis – contact materials/migration

34

Regulation – EU positive list of permitted substances with

SMLs in food ranging from 10 µg/kg for vinyl chloride

(Directive 2002/72/EC) to an overall migration limit of 60

mg/kg.

Permitted additives covered by Directive 2004/19/EC

and gaskets by Directive 2007/19/EC.

Business challenge – to carry out exhaustive analysis of

packaging materials, coatings, printing inks, adhesives etc

and assess any potential future problems.

Food analysis – contact materials/migration

35

Food analysis – authenticity & adulteration

Case study:- HONEY

36

Volatile Components

SIRMS

Carbohydrates•Fructose

•Glucose

•Sucrose

•Maltose

•Rafinose

•Etc..

Free Amino Acids

pH

•Ala

•Arg

•Asn

•Asp

•Cys

•Glu

•Gln

•Gly

•His

•Hpr

•Leu-ileu

•Lys

•Met

•Phe

•Pro

•Ser

•Thr

•Tyr

•Trp

•Val

Pollen

Water Activity

DNA Sequencing

Trace Elements

Sensory

Parameters Instruments Units

1. Free Amino

Acids

LC/MS mg/100g

2. Volatile

Components

SPME-GC/MS relative percent

3.Carbohydrates HPLC/RID mg/100g

4. Pollens Microscope relative percent

6. Water Activity Water Activity

Instrument

aw

7. Stable Isotope

Ratio

IRMS ‰

37

[Agriculture]

δ 15Nδ 13C

δ18O δ 143Nd

δ 87Sr

δ 2º8Pb

δ 34S

δ2H

Biological

(photosynthesis,

food chains)

[Physiology][Environment]

[Geography]

Climatically

(precipitation,

vaporization)

Geological

(rocks, soil)

Anthropogenius

(emissions,

natural &

industrial)Indicator

function

of

13C

15N

18O

2H

False Origin !!!

2H, 13C, 18O in bulk,32S, 15N, 2H, 13C in

protein were measured

Measurements

Chemometry:-solution of data analysis

38

PCA highlights data clusters relating to the

botanical origin of the honeys. the

separation of rhododendron honey from the

other floral types.

rhododendron(○), multi-floral(♦),

chestnut(□) and Anzer honeys (■).

Analysis of amino acid data with

‘mean-centering’ showing the discrimination of

rhododendrum, chestnut, honeydew and

Anzer Turkish honeys

Qualitative methods (screening)

Helpful Harmful

S W

O T

• Low cost

• Fast

• Provide on-site analysis

• Low skills needed

39

• % False negatives

• Need confirmation

• Can be too specific or too

sensitive

• Poor validation

• Tests based on biological

activity

• Tests based on groups of

compounds

• Proprietary products no

longer available

40

Quantitative methods

Helpful Harmful

S W

O T

• Unequivocal results

• Quantitative analysis

• Flexible instrumentation

40

• High capital costs

• Running costs high

• Skilled operators needed

• Dependence on service

engineer

• Reduce capital cost

increase availability

• Improve specificity

• Quickly out-dated

Sensitivity of analytical techniques is more than sufficient

Focus of interest is on reducing costs and increasing speed

of analysis

Multi-methods are being developed covering classes of

analyte but need to be ‘fit-for-purpose’.

Methodologies are converging with increasing use of

LC/MS/MS

Economy of scale is beginning to reduce capital costs of

instruments and improving accessability.

Food legislation MUST protect consumers WW.

41

Future Prospects

Thank you, teşekkürler

FoodLife International Ltd

www.foodlifeint.com

info@foodlifeint.com

42