1. Tendències de futur en seguretat alimentaria
relacionades amb el sector porci
INNOVAC
Setembre 2011
Dr Marta Hugas
Unit on Biological Hazards, Head

2. 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
3

4. Working together
Cooperation with:
• 30 national food safety agencies
• 400 research institutes
• 1500 experts
• EU Agencies
• 3rd country and international
organisations
4

5. How do we do it?
EFSA’s scientists evaluate, assess, advise
5

6. Risk Analysis [CAC,01]: a decision paradigm
for Food Safety Governance
Preliminary
Review activities
Monitoring
EC
EFSA
EC+EFSA
RISK
RISK RISK
MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT
COMMUNICATION
COM
= =
=
The Policy The Science
The Exchange
Implementation
Options
Options
selection
identification
6

7. 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.

8. Zoonoses in humans; notification rates
in EU, 2009, EUSR
Campylobacteriosis (198,252)
Based on the reported Salmonellosis (108,614)
fatality rates and the Yersiniosis (7,595)
total numbers of VTEC (3,573)
reported confirmed Toxoplasmosis (1,259)
cases, in 2009: Q fever (1,987)
Zoonoses
Listeriosis
- 270 deaths due to (1,645)
Echinococcosis (790)
listeriosis;
Trichinellosis (748)
- 90 deaths due to Brucellosis (401)
salmonellosis; and
Tuberculosis caused by M. bovis* (115)
- 40 deaths due to Rabies (1)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
campylobacteriosis
Notif ication rate per 100,000 population
8

9. Salmonellosis in humans in EU, 2005-2009;
EUSR
45.0
Confirmed cases per 100,000 population 40.0
35.0
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
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

10. Listeriosis in humans in EU, 2005-2009;
EUSR
0.40
confirmed cases per 100,000 population
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
• 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

11. L.monocytogenes in ready-to-eat foods,
meeting the EU criterion ,2006-2009
Fishery products
% non-compliance at retail (smoked fish),
RTE products of meat origin
soft/semisoft
cheeses and RTE
Soft and semi-soft cheese, meat products
RTE
have highest % of
2006
2007
non-compliance
Hard cheese, RTE
2008 with the 100 cfu/g
2009 criterion (0.3 -1.1%)
Fishery products, RTE
No major changes
Other RTE products
observed over the
years
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0

12. Yersiniosis in humans in EU, 2005-2009:
EUSR
• Yersiniosis in humans has decreased in EU in 2005-
2009 with a statistically significant trend
12

13. Food-borne outbreaks in EU, 2009, EUSR
Unknown
Salmonella
Viruses
Bacterial toxins
Campylobacter
Verified outbreaks
Other causative agents
Possible outbreaks
Escherichia coli, pathogenic
Parasites
Other bacterial agents
Number of outbreaks
5,550 food-borne outbreaks; 48,964 human cases, 4,356 hospitalisations
and 46 deaths in 2009.
Main causes Salmonella (31%), viruses (19%), bacterial toxins (10%),
Main vehicles eggs (17%), mixed meals (8%), pork (8% )

14. Trends in food-borne outbreaks
2007-2009; EUSR
Unknown
Salmonella
Viruses
Bacterial toxins
Campylobacter
2007
Other causative agents 2008
2009
Escherichia coli, pathogenic
Parasites
Other bacterial agents
Number of outbreaks
• Salmonella outbreaks declined, virus and
bacterial toxins outbreaks increased
14

15. Food-borne outbreaks caused by
Salmonella in EU, 2009
Distribution of food vehicle in verified outbreaks caused by Salmonella in the EU, 2009
15

16. 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

17. Results : SA based on microbial subtyping,
EU-level

18. Results : SA based on microbial subtyping,
by EU-regions

19. Results : SA based on microbial subtyping,
by reporting country

20. 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

21. Prevalence of Salmonella in pig
production holdings
Baseline survey in EU - 27 in 2008

22. Prevalence of Salmonella-positive
breeding holdings, 2008
Spain
Netherlands
Ireland
United Kingdom
Italy
France
Cyprus
Portugal
Denmark
Luxembourg EU prevalence:
Hungary
EU 28.7% (95%CI: 26.3-31.0)
Germany
Latvia
Belgium
Switzerland MS prevalence:
Slovakia
Czech Republic ranged from 0 to 64%
Poland
Austria
Bulgaria
Sweden
Estonia
Finland
Lithuania
Slovenia
Norway
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Prevalence of Salmonella positive holdings
22

23. Prevalence of Salmonella-positive
production holdings, 2008
Netherlands
Spain
Ireland
United Kingdom
Italy
Portugal
Denmark
France
Belgium
EU
Latvia EU prevalence:
Hungary
Luxembourg
33.3% (95%CI: 30.9-35.7)
Germany
Slovakia
Cyprus
Czech Republic MS prevalence:
Switzerland
Slovenia ranged from 0 to 55.7%
Poland
Lithuania
Austria
Estonia
Bulgaria
Norway
Sweden
Finland
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Prevalence of Salmonella positive holdings
23

24. Prevalence of Salmonella-positive breeding
holdings versus production holdings, 2008

25. PH risks from Salmonella in pigs
Breeder Contribution Slaughter Contribution Human
(%) (%)
pigs pigs cases
Prevalence Prevalence Prevalence
Farm level Transport, lairage, slaughter
Sources of infection Contamination of carcasses
Treatment/control Control measures
25

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 contamination
at 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 26

27. 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

28. Main risks to PH by Meat Inspection of Pig
carcasses
• 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

29. 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
Hazards ranked based on: prevalence in carcasses, source attribution of
human cases to pork and incidence and severity in humans

30. 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

31. 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)
32

33. Risk assessment on use of recycled hot
water as decontamination technique of
carcases
Question No EFSA-Q-2009-892
33

34. Hot water decontamination
Deluge cabinet for pig carcasses : 80°C for 15 s
Source:
DTU
Denmark
34

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
35

36. 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
37

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).
38

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 monocytogenes
surface contamination of raw fish
39

40. THANK YOU!!!
EFSA is committed to:
Excellence,
Independency,
Responsiveness and
Transparency
www.efsa.europa .eu