Risk based meat inspection in 1905, but not in 2005?

1
Risk based meat inspection in 1905, but not in
2005?

• Truls Nesbakken
• Professor
• Norwegian School of Veterinary Science
• Dept. of Food Safety and Infection Biology

2
A litte about.

• The history of meat inspection
• The new EU regulation
• Zoonotic agents - possibility for intervention in
  the meat chain
• The Nordic project
• Some future possibilities
• in relation to research

3
Gro Harlem Brundtland former director-general in
WHO

• We need to accept that the systems we use in
  Europe to ensure food safety are not as good as
  we have come to believe.
• To improve these systems and re-establish
  consumer confidence, we must reassess them all
  the way from the farm to the table

4
The meat inspection in 2005

• Why should you go to the doctor if he only
  examined you for diseases that occurred 100 years
  ago?
• In a tabloid context, meat inspection might be
  described in the same way. The meat inspection of
  today has a focus on a disease panorama that was
  relevant long time ago
• Accordingly, the important zoonoses of today are
  not detected and the consumer has not an optimal
  defence against these diseases

5
The background for the classic meat inspection
The German Scientific Breakthrough (1850-1900)

• Pathology, Parasittology
• Trichinella
• Tapeworms
• Echinococcus
• Microbiology
• Tuberculosis
• Robert Koch
• Louis Pasteur

6
Risk based meat inspection in 1905 (Robert von
Ostertag)

• Inspection
• Palpation
• Incision
• Lymph nodes
• Muscles
• Organs
• Specific investigation
• Trichinella

7
Bovine tuberculosis - history in Norway, still a
problem in UK
8
The compulsory procedure of incisions of the
submaxillary lymph nodes (EU commission)
This lymph node contains Yersinia bacteria in
about 15 of all slaughter pigs in Norway
9
Slaughter hygiene (pigs) Contamination of
carcasses with Salmonella due to meat inspection
procedures (The Netherlands)

• 5-35 of contamination due to meat inspection
  and the procedures after this position

10
Possibility for intervention / reduction of
zoonotic agents in the meat chain
11
CODEXYoung Oceania against old Europe

• A basic disagreement about who and how meat
  inspetion shold be performed and the degree of
  official inspection and control Australia
  ltgt Austria/Germany
• - Industrial quality - Official employees
• systembased on
• HACCP
• - Audits - Inspection
• - Dynamic - Static

12
(No Transcript)
13
The new EU regulation Hygiene 3

• A risk based meat inspection based on scientific
  evidence
• Meat inspection based on the zoonotic panorama in
  the region
• The official veterinarian has a central role
• Food chain information

14
EU post - mortem inspeksjon

• Visual post mortem inspection (pm) of pigs from
  integrated production systems
• Other animal species might be assessed in
  relation to future visual pm
• Possibility for dispensation for trichinella
  tests of pigs from integrated production systems
  under particular circumstances

15
Do not let what you cannot do interfere with
what you can do!

• John Wooden

16
Some scientific aspects in relation to protection
of the consumer against zoonoses.
17
Categorisation as a system for control with
zoonotic agents

• Animals carrying zoonotic agents might be picked
  out by
• Serological or bacteriological testing of flocks
  at herd level
• Serological testing in the abattoir
• Historical data based on such tests

18
(No Transcript)
19
One example of categorisation in the Nordic
countries

• The Danish salmonella program based on serology
  of slaughter pigs
• The level of salmonella in fresh meat has dropped
  from 2.3 in 1996 to 1.4 in 2004,
• Prevalence of salmonellose in humans caused by
  pig related salmonella has dropped from about 20
  per 100.000 people in 1993 to 3.8 in 2003.

20
Modern meat inspection in a Nordic context
(2002-2006)
21
The Nordic countries

• Represents more than 20 mill. people
• Sweden
• Denmark
• Norway
• Finland
• Iceland
• Mainly small farms, but also big farm units (in
  particular pig production in Denmark)
• No animal markets and animal auctions

22
Project organisation

• Funded by the Council of Nordic Ministers
• In the steering group, each of the Nordic
  countries is represented by
• one person from the authorities
• one person from the organisation of the
  slaughterhouses
• The steering group has pointed out two abattoirs
  in each of the Nordic countries
• to carry out projects by the meat inspection
  units in co-operation with the slaughter houses

23
Steering group meeting in Oslo 25.-26.8.2005

• Ron Dwinger from the EU Commission paid us a visit

24
Vision

• A risk-based meat inspection based on a
  sustainable Nordic primary production with
  healthy animals providing safe meat to healthy
  consumers (visionary meat inspection)
• containing any performance objective,
  performance criterion or process criterion
  developed according to risk analysis principles.

25
Vision (cont.)

• Such a vision may result into a risk-based meat
  inspection based on
• Risk management of animals according to important
  zoonotic agents
• audits
• delegation of rational and reasonable tasks to
  the industry with the goal that food safety
  aspects and consumers confidence are not
  compromised
• cost effectiveness

26
The overall objective 

• To investigate and test solutions to achieve an
  efficient and risk based meat inspection in the
  Nordic countries

27
The specific objectives

• At Nordic level, evaluate practical and relevant
  ways of
• Risk assessment of important Nordic
  zoonoses
• Food chain information
• Staffing of meat inspection

28
The specific objectives (cont.)

• To propose new and relevant training programs for
  both veterinarians and technicians working in
  meat inspection to achieve relevant
  qualifications according to the new regulations,
• Argue for a change in the legislation towards a
  visionary meat inspection system, and more based
  on employees from the industry and audits from
  the authorities

29
The specific objectives (cont.)

• Argue for a change of the legislation towards a
  real risk-based meat inspection also comprising
  cattle, sheep and lambs (and not only pigs),
• Communicate results from the project to the
  authorities in the Nordic countries, the Nordic
  meat industry and the EU Commission during the
  whole project period.

30
Examples of specific projects running

• Risk assessment on specific zoonotic agents in a
  Nordic context
• Food chain information
• Theoretical
• Practical
• Relevant number of veterinarians and technical
  personnel in meat inspection units
• Professional qualifications

31
Examples of specific projects running(cont.)

• Ante mortem inspection at herd level? (Norway)
• Improvement of the quality of slaughter pigs
  (Finland)
• Categorisation of herdsbased on historical
  dataToxoplasma in lamb as an example
  (Norway/Iceland)

32
and we hope to use this one

• When a Member State adopts national measures
  implementing a pilot project to try out new
  approaches to hygiene controls on meat in
  accordance with paragraphs 3 to 7, the Member
  State shall communicate the results to the
  Commission as soon as they are available.
• The Commission shall then consider proposing
  general measures in with paragraph 1.

33
The European and global aspects

• EU
• EFSA
• 6th og 7th Framework programs
• Codex WHO WTO
• Veterinary Public Health

34
The future meat inspection system

• From farm to table
• Flexible and dynamic
• Protects the consumer
• Based on risk assessment
• A meaningful work
• Based on cost-benefit

35
Questions about the project?

• .please, send an e-mail to the co-ordinator
  truls.nesbakken_at_veths.no