Created in the cloud with Aspose.Words for Cloud. http://www.aspose.com/cloud/word-api.aspx

TB risk-based trading scheme set for launch Published Date : 2013-11-08 13:57:41

UK cattle buyers will be able to view the bovine TB history of animals they are about to purchase after the launch of a risk based trading scheme by DEFRA.

Under the scheme farmers will be able to see when an animals last pre-movement test was carried out and the date of the sellers last routine herd test. In the case of herds that have had a TB breakdown, the date on which it was last declared officially TB free will also be available.

This would seem like a very practical use of technology and information already available to DEFRA to transfer some of the supply chain risk management tools and skills available to help farmers.

Whatever does the future hold? Published Date : 2013-10-31 22:42:18

Perhaps it is a not sufficiently late in the year to be gazing into crystal balls and looking at the future of the food industry and its attempts to protect the food supply chain, but what the heck! Horizon scanning is good at any time.

It is apparent that the US food industry is getting to grips with third party certification and has now passed the UK in numbers of certificated plants and businesses. The Food Safety Modernisation Act is proving to be a challenge but the enforcers and the enforced are coming to terms with it.

The continued development of the food industries in Eastern Europe, in South America and in Asia is also set continue.

In all these regions a common experience will drive them naturally to take the next steps toward a mature food safety system that efficiently deals with the volume of work involved in effective supply chain risk management.

The UK’s Food Standards Agency recently pointed out that to be able to protect the food supply chain the key would be the collection, analysis and exchange of information. The mature UK food industry has already appreciated that and has been turning more and more toward effective and efficient supplier monitoring systems.

The USA is now beginning to appreciate the benefits of using experienced technical food professionals allied with proven web based communication systems to safely relieve them of some of the burden of auditing suppliers.

It is not something to rush into. It has to be weighed and considered. It is the kind of decision helped by talking to someone who is already involved. It is likely therefore that US companies that move first into supplier risk assessment and supplier approval management systems will be those who first talked to their UK based branches.

The sooner the better because the pressure on food supplies around the world will grow.

The shortage of ingredients will result in a race to ‘get the good stuff’, but who will be the good suppliers? Can they meet your product specifications? Are their factory specifications going to satisfy you and your customers?

Having the right information from a reliable source will become key to success. Having access to a good and proven quality management software will protect your company’s future.

A good tip for the future: get your celebratory wine bought early.

Haven’t you heard there is a world shortage!

Ready to Recall? Published Date : 2013-10-30 22:55:33

Good food producers are not in the business of being good at recalls.

They are in the business of being good at producing food that doesn’t need to be recalled.

The whole objective of establishing and effectively operating good manufacturing practices and a sound HACCP management system is to produce safe wholesome food.

In the UK the majority of recalls in recent times have been modest in size and precautionary in nature. The mislabelling of products with incorrect allergen declarations offer potential risk for the unaware allergic consumers. Products have been occasionally withdrawn for packaging risks with unwanted glass contamination or risks in bottles that may be exposed to unplanned pressure.

The expense of operating a good quality and food safety system supported by effective supplier management and monitoring can be modest when weighed against the potential costs of a large scale withdrawal.

The latest precautionary withdrawals in the USA of several products from a number of companies concerned about Listeria Monocytogenes contamination is beginning to move into nightmare proportions when a whole months output is now being recalled by one producer.

It is surely a great incentive to heighten internal hygiene performance levels and look more closely at food complaints reports. Is your food supply chain management system up to scratch? Can you react quickly if an ingredient supplier starts a recall? Will your track and trace system allow you to identify the batches at risk and the customers who took delivery?  And who can you turn to now for a safe replacement ingredient?

Ultimately is that big Elephant in your board room a total lack of pre-planning and scenario experience for managing a major food recall before it happens?

Good news or bad news? Published Date : 2013-10-30 12:00:06

Recent news reports have told of a new rapid microbiology test system that could identify salmonella contamination of products, especially Pork, within minutes.

The equipment it is said may cost as little as £500 and tests would cost £3 each.

Wonderful news.

It will help to drive down and manage salmonella contamination in pork products and reap the rewards from an assured public in the same way they are enjoyed by the Lion egg producers.

Terrible news.

That’s the view of those smaller pig producers who believe that the cost of reducing salmonella contamination will be too much for them and they will go out of business.

On the other hand perhaps the premium paid for tested, salmonella free meat may well outweigh the cost of better contamination management.

Product recall insurance not as expensive as thought Published Date : 2013-10-29 11:21:08

The risk of a product recall or contamination incident results in lots of lost sleep for technical managers across the food supply chain.

Customer specifications are in place to ensure clear definition of what is required and to what standard.

QA checks on intake are in place to identify non-conforming product.

Supplier management programs are in place to reduce supplier risk.

Money is spent on specification management software and quality management software to ensure effectiveness.

Allergen management programs are in place to reduce cross contamination risks

Customer complaints management systems are in place to spot trends early

Supply chain auditing is in place to increase supply chain compliance

But hey, things can still go wrong

And when they do it may be worthwhile having product recall & contamination insurance in place.

A report I read recently from an insurance company indicated that the premium for contamination insurance could be as low as £10,250 for companies £100m turnover and £24,275 for companies with £250m turnover.

Margins are tight across the food industry but this seems like reasonable cost insurance for the potential value if something does go wrong.

The Lion Roars Published Date : 2013-10-28 21:21:06

In 2013 we can celebrate a strange silver anniversary.

It may be odd to celebrate a food safety calamity that almost wiped out an industry and tarred a nation with the brush of unsafe food. What we do today is the result of new laws and changes in food safety management systems that have stemmed from one moment in time in 1988.

In an effort to head off the threat of a looming public health crisis a junior health minister spoke to the media about the need to cook eggs correctly to stop salmonella. Edwina Curry had good intentions.

However overnight the public stopped eating eggs. The British Government started to re-write the laws on food safety and the UK food industry started on the long road to improve its approach to food safety.

The British egg industry took 10 years to recover from the shock. Once it had developed a system of food safety control and management it drove down salmonella levels to almost zero.

It branded the products.

It reaped the rewards and became one of the most trusted food brands.

This year it introduced the seventh version of the British Lion Code of Practice.

It has added additional elements of control targeting Salmonella Typhimurium in its vaccination program. It has added new elements to its audit and inspection regime.

It has also taken account of recent public concerns about fraud.

How does anyone produce fraudulent eggs?

They do it badly, they do it cheaply and then put a false logo on it.

They put a layer of Lion eggs on top of unmarked layers of cheap imported salmonella contaminated eggs and try to fulfill contracts stipulating Lion Quality eggs.

As Mark Williams the chief Executive of the British Egg industry council said recently you cannot stand still you must keep moving forward to maintain and improve standards….and protect your brand.

But what of Edwina Curry?

As with many brave whistle blowers she lost her job

Leicestershire residents vote to save trading standards Published Date : 2013-10-28 07:58:24

A survey in which more than 7,000 people took part has found that trading standards is the 9th most important council service, and street lighting the least.

In August, Leicestershire County Council sent out more than 230,000 questionnaires asking people which of its services should be cut in order to save £110 million and the results were interesting.

While residents voted to save trading standards they voted to cut the following:

1. Street lighting2. Grants for communities3. Funding for agencies4. Travel to schools5. Grass cutting6. Early learning7. Children’s centres8. Funding for businesses9. School support

10. Museums

I was amazed with this outcome, as there were 7,000 respondents this survey has to be treated with some respect.

It would appear that trading standards and their role in reducing food safety risk /complaint reporting should be valued.

The cost of moving the goalposts …….. Published Date : 2013-10-25 15:38:26

On both sides of the Atlantic the regulatory authorities are contemplating changes to the inspection regimes and they are inviting comment from interested parties.

The UK’s Food Standards Agency is preparing to respond to proposals from the European Commission to replace EU regulation 882/2004 and ‘modernise’ legislation around food, feed, live animals, and plants. The FSA say views are welcomed and stakeholders should have their responses submitted by 9 January 2014

The FSA has pointed to the potential changes in inspections and the possibility that it will have an impact on costs. It is intended that industry will pay all costs of inspection. At present, the system for funding and charging is mainly left to the discretion of individual EU member states. Under the Commission’s proposed plans, member states would be expected to recover the full cost of official controls.

Now is perhaps the best time for the food industry to be asking the EC/Government regulators across the EU to create a formal framework that would allow the European food industry’s private inspection and food safety certification schemes to be recognised.

Why pay twice for the same inspection?

………………and levelling the playing field Published Date : 2013-10-25 15:36:21

As the European Commission is looking to review its inspection requirements, changes to the rules relating to imports area also being finalised in the USA. They have been described as “Aiming to Even the Playing Field between Domestic and Foreign Food Suppliers”. The process is intended to ensure that products from abroad are produced in accordance with the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) being applied domestically.

So a Foreign Supplier Verification Program (FSVP) is being started to fulfil the part of Section 301 of the FSMA regulations which require food importers to provide the FDA with adequate assurances that their foreign food suppliers provide the same level of food safety as that required of domestic food suppliers. Food importers will have to participate in an FSVP to verify that foreign food suppliers are using appropriate preventative controls. An importing company failing to comply with an FSVP could result in the food they are importing being refused admission into the U.S

The new proposed rules will also allow the FDA to establish a third-party audit and certification program. Under this certification program the FDA recognizes accreditation bodies that accredit third-party auditors and certification bodies that audit foreign food facilities and issue food and facility certifications.

Under the proposed rule, food facility audits by third-party auditors must be unannounced and include a records review, an on-site assessment and, where appropriate, an environmental or product sampling and analysis.

For some exporters to the USA and some of the US importing companies this sounds like more complexity and management worries. For companies using systems like the QADEX supplier monitoring service this would be so straightforward and simple. The auditors’ and certification companies’ status of recognition could be checked and kept up-to-date. Reports and reminders would help to reduce the risks of expensive dockside embargoes and blocking of date sensitive product and produce.

Grangemouth refinery strike and the food supply chain Published Date : 2013-10-24 11:04:06

While the ongoing rumblings about a strike/shutdown of the grangemouth refinery continues, has anyone given thought to the impact on the food supply chain.

Grangemouth is a huge domestic producer of raw materials for everything from cars to plastic bottles, including many feedstocks for food packaging.

Most businesses look at supply chain risk and supplier risk from the perspective of food safety, but in a globally interconnected world with longer and leaner supply chains it becomes necessary to consider financial & commercial risks as part of a supply chain risk management strategy.

NFU seeks to reverse the decline in self-sufficiency Published Date : 2013-10-23 11:18:33

Figures show the UK is only 62% self-sufficient in food and the gap between food imports and exports is now more than £19.4 billion.

In 1984 the UK was 95% self-sufficient in indigenous food types, in 2012 this figure had dropped to 76%.

Whilst it is easy to see why the NFU are jumping on these DEFRA sourced figures I would also contend that food businesses should also take note.

From a supply chain risk management perspective this trend may also increase risk. Supplier certification schemes such as Red Tractor provide a level of assurance which cannot be matched by imports. From an ethical and corporate social responsibility perspective there is merit.

If these imports were replaced with UK sourced materials there would be a bit more cash floating around in the UK which would benefit all of us.

Is ten enough?

Published Date : 2013-10-22 22:48:23

In a week when the on-line food media are publishing reports about what happened in the horse meat fraud scandal and the Chinese Government has identified a major food oil fraud the European Union issued a report that identified what they believe are the ten foods most likely to be fraudulent.

The report points to key factors likely to tempt the fraudsters.

Ease of creation. Greatest potential for profit. Reduced likelihood of discovery.

The ten foods are:  Fish, Olive oil, and Organic food, Powders, Pastes or Milk, Grains, Honey and Maple syrup, Coffee and Wine, Spices, Tea and some Fruit juices.

Perhaps red meat was omitted because the food industry is now focussed and testing and therefore the fraud is most likely to be exposed, but what about high strength spirits like Vodka.

There are tests available that will expose many of the fraudulent products.

The country of origin of meat can be identified. The true identity of fish is but one genetic test away.

Are they used frequently enough?  Are they easy to use, quick to give a result and reasonably priced?

Who is developing the next generation or the tests to meet the challenges of the next fraudulent product?

All the products on the list have been publicly exposed when frauds has been exposed.

Are there any missing that were found by the food industry’s diligence in supplier monitoring?

What indicators do you use that may offer early warning of temptation to defraud?

A change in price in a tight market? A new supply of scarce ingredients at competitive rates? A new supplier with an unbelievable financial record?

Or will it sneak up on you?

A good supplier monitoring system is more likely to provide a food processor with better protection from fraudulent ingredients.

Testing can be considered the cherry on the cake of diligent supplier risk assessment.

If you systematically re-assess your approved suppliers list and review the way they do business then perhaps you may spot that one rare fraudster before you spot the fraud.

Life in the freezer cabinet, refreshing coverage Published Date : 2013-10-22 08:25:52

Last night BBC2 aired the first of a 3 part documentary titled Iceland Foods: Life in the freezer cabinet.

For those who have not seen it I recommend catching up on the BBC iPlayer.

Trish, the Iceland TM was excellent, professional, relaxed and full of personality whilst grappling with some of the issues faced as part of her role.

Their complaint reporting system highlighted an increase in complaints on a chicken supreme product, as part of the complaint investigation samples were put on taste panel internally, comments and feedback to camera were refreshingly frank. I suspect this product will have since been reformulated.

Buyers were followed working on new food product development launches and it was refreshing to see that just like the supply chain, they were also under pressure to deliver innovative new products and keep one step ahead of the competition. One of the buyers visited a Thai party food supplier and I was impressed with the quality of the infrastructure and cleanliness in the Thai plant, the only gripe from my perspective was that the camera crew had to go to Thailand to film an impressive food plant, it would have been great to film an impressive UK facility and give ourselves some positive PR for a change.

Towards the end of last nights programme the dark clouds of the horsemeat scandal were approaching and more of that next week.

Compulsive viewing, I am rooting for Trish and the rest of the team, I really hope they continue to do well out of this.

Food sustainability - At what price? Published Date : 2013-10-21 20:21:40

Have you read reports that attempts to broaden the consumption of protein derived from insects took a new turn recently?

There have been stories about research projects that are examining the use of insect protein in animal feed. It gets past the western consumers reluctance to eat ‘creepy crawlies’ and provides a huge potential resource to feed mankind in the future.

The use of this protein in animal feed could result in a more sustainable production of meat .

However the main stumbling block appears to be that under EU legislation insects are currently not allowed in animal feed-stuffs. The reports suggest efforts are underway to get these rules changed.

I am reminded of an interview I had with an insect specialist a number of years ago at the time of the crisis in cattle.

This respected head of a research department said that small insects with access to cattle feed were thought to have absorbed the prions then suspected of causing the BSE in cattle.

Shortly after that the department was closed due to spending cuts and I heard no more.

The switch to a radically new animal feed source to be used in a new way must surely be cause for concern and be the subject of extensive research and trial.

Fake pesticides risk within the food supply chain Published Date : 2013-10-21 13:06:46

Research conducted by Harper Adams University has identified that the worldwide market for fake crop protection products is estimated to be worth £3.63bn per annum.

In some markets in the EU it is thought that 25% of the pesticides sold originate from the black market and are either substandard or counterfeit versions.

This poses yet another challenge within supply chain risk management and supply chain auditing.

Businesses who are using food specifications to manage maximum residue limits (MRL’s) within their supplier management and supply chain compliance programs will be exposed.

If the farmer has used a fake product inadvertently and completed all paperwork correctly how would the auditor pick it up.

Modern Day Food Frauds Published Date : 2013-10-18 12:39:57

When we look at supply chain risk and develop our supplier audit programs we often refer to product categories where there is a long history of food fraud.

As a result we are always looking back and using history to guide our horizon scanning.

We may even assess supplier compliance by doing risk based QA checks on intake with non conforming product being rejected.

But all of this is historical.

What are the risks of the future which we should be incorporating into our supply chain risk management processes.

I would like to suggest the following for some attention:

High value or PDO foods High value commodities Nature identical products GMO free products

By looking very carefully at your food specifications you will quickly identify the PDO, NI and GMO free products.

By talking to purchasing colleagues you will identify high value commodities.

Should you be increasing the supply chain risk assessment scores for these items?

A question of Salmonella? Published Date : 2013-10-18 08:44:43

An outbreak of Salmonella heidelberg in chickens in at least 17 States in the USA is highlighting a number of issues relating to several elements of food safe production.

The outbreak is thought to have started in March lasted and has run through to at least September with a total so far of 317 people made ill. Of these 42% have been hospitalised. Across the seven S.heidelberg strains identified from the victims there is a high level of resistance to at least eight antibiotics. This makes normal GP prescription practices less effective and explains the high rate of hospitalisation.

The Epidemiologists found that 80% of the patients ate chicken at home before the illness, compared with 65% of a healthy control group. Nearly 80% of patients identifying the brand of chicken named Foster Farms or a brand they are known to produce. Sampling by USDA in September showed that raw chicken processed by three of the company’s plants contained one or more of the seven strains of salmonella linked to the outbreak.

Foster Farms is a major poultry producer based in California with a turnover of around $2 billion and employing around 10,000 people. The company is reported to have had previous outbreaks of S.heidelberg in 2004 and 2012. At the end of 2012 the “USDA-FSIS told all establishments producing uncooked ground or comminuted poultry products, they must reassess their HACCP Plans. A salmonella outbreak tied to raw Foster Farms chicken is reported to have begun in January this year and ended in July infecting 134 people in 13 states.

A retail customer using chickens to produce rotisserie cooked chickens was surprised to find it needed to withdraw several thousand cooked chickens contaminated with S.heidelberg. Though they claimed they were cooked thoroughly.

The USDA told Foster Farms on 7th October it would “withhold the marks of inspection and suspend the assignment of inspectors at the three facilities in California unless the firm submitted plans to prevent the persistent recurrence of salmonella contamination.”

Throughout both outbreaks the company has re-emphasised the need to cook the poultry correctly and underlined their belief that in the same period 25 million consumers have safely eaten their product.

US government agencies have said that the Debt crisis shutdown has not stopped them carrying out their usual inspection duties in the plants, and their public protection operations with regard to this outbreak.

What can we learn from this?

Should the potential of contamination from antibiotic resistant bacteria cause you to reassess your raw material specifications?

At what point do you think that a poultry supplier’s salmonella contamination levels might have become a bit too high even if you are then controlling the cooking the chickens!!!!

If you were a US company would you have added a check to your supplier audits and SSAQs to see if your poultry suppliers had revised their HACCP management plan following the USDA-FSIS instruction in January?

It has been reported that consumers interested in food safety in the USA are campaigning for salmonella to be declared an adulterant like the HUS causing E.coli bacteria.

This would make it illegal to sell any product containing salmonella.

The perfect meatball? Published Date : 2013-10-17 11:40:47

Reports on recent trials at the University of Missouri explained how they looked at ways of improving the US consumers diet.

Dietary fibre levels are one cause for concern with most people consuming half the recommended amount. So trials were carried out with meatball recipes and the research team looked at replacing some of the bread crumb ingredient with citrus powder derived from orange peel.

Doctoral student Ms Ayca Gedikoglu, and Professor Andrew Clarke discovered that the addition of between 1% and 5% of citrus powder resulted in meatballs that were acceptable to the consumer.

It seems to be a plus on many levels.

Dietary Fibre levels raised.

Product yields increased.

Potential antioxidant benefit

Possible flavonoids addition

A food marketers dream.

So what about new recipe meatloaf, burgers, sausages, Bolognese.

The report points out that the powder is relatively cheap though how that relates to the price of crumb was not clear. By finding another use for a waste product of the fruit juice industry there could be benefits for that industry also.

Too good to be true?

Is it a challenge to product description legislation? Is this an EU approved ingredient? What would be the impact on supply chain security? Is the product open to fraudulent substitution?

With an efficient and effective supply chain management system these questions could be answered with assurance, product specifications could be resolved and we could perhaps look forward to pork and orange meat balls.

Air India investigates "worm sandwich" allegations Published Date : 2013-10-17 10:41:09

Every month that goes by I am seeing more evidence of the growing influence of social media on businesses customer complaints management processes.

ThisAir India incident is yet another example.

From a brand protection perspective this is a nightmare as the highlighted BBC story also brings up other recent safety related issues affecting Air India.

What is the cost to the brand from such coverage?

Beef fraud with another twist Published Date : 2013-10-15 21:29:24

Reports this week from South Korea have shed light onto another form of fraudulent beef trading.

The nature of the fraud wasn’t the substitution of another species or pretending brisket was steak.

It was the relabeling of US beef with different labels of origin.

There were economic benefits because the US beef is cheaper than Australian or locally produced beef so there was the familiar economic benefit beckoning the defrauders.

The added twist is that US beef is banned in South Korea because of feed additives.

The country has suspended some US beef imports after the feed additive Zilpaterol was found in meat supplied from a US producer.

The product is used to increase the size of cattle and the efficiency of feeding them. Of particular concern is the use of the veterinary additive as a finisher prior to slaughter. If the withdrawal period before slaughter is not sufficiently long enough there is a risk to the consumer and may result in consumer toxicity.

The South Korean Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs reported that since January this year a total of 181 cases or over 75 tonnes of this beef was found to be deliberately mislabeled.

This feed additive is not approved in the EU.

Is this something you have covered in your supply chain risk assessment?

Might there be a need to re-examine your veterinary residue testing programme?

There is no doubt that this new twist on the continuing story of beef fraud should stimulate a fresh examination of your meat supply chain.