Interested in linking to "Secure your plant "?
You may use the Headline, Deck, Byline and URL of this article on your Web site. To link to this article, select and copy the HTML code below and paste it on your own Web site.
Secure your plant
Food plants are fertile ground for product contamination from tiny microbes to terrorists. You need a plan that extends beyond HACCP.
By Mike Pehanich, Plant Operations Editor | 01/05/2006
To cast your vote, log in or become a member. This quick, one-time registration gives you access to members-only site benefits.
1 vote
|
Time for an irradiation comeback? In 1993, five children died and hundreds more became severely ill due after eating undercooked hamburgers contaminated with E. coli. “The product [ground meat] came out of a plant with several barriers in place to prevent [microbial] contamination,” notes Richard Hunter, CEO and president of Food Technology Service Inc., Mulberry, Fla. “Those barriers failed. That’s why processors must put up multiple barriers.” Had the hamburgers been cooked thoroughly, the outbreak would not have occurred either, Hunter notes, marking another breakdown in the system. But one measure not then implemented would also have done the job. “Irradiation could have prevented five kids from dying and another 500 from getting sick,” says Hunter. “We see irradiation as part of a multiple barrier approach. The good thing is that irradiation is an excellent barrier.” Food Technology Service provides contract irradiation service to food processors. Irradiation received its first clearance from the FDA for use on spices in the 1980s and has been approved since for poultry, ground red meat, oysters and pork, with shellfish and other approvals on the horizon.  To date, consumers have remained wary of the process (actually regarded as an “ingredient” under current food law). Wrongly, they associate it with radioactivity. Time and a small but safe history have eroded some resistance. With the potential of deliberate contamination by a food terrorist adding to the prospects of microbiological contamination in foods, processors — and maybe even the public — may be looking at the radura (at right, symbol of an irradiated product) in a whole new light.
Colorado Boxed Beef of Auburndale, Fla., offers irradiated poultry and ground beef to its restaurant and institutional customers. Equally significant, it regards the radura as a marketing plus. “This (radura) symbol offers you an important new choice of premium quality product,” the company reports to customers and prospective buyers of its New Generation ground beef. “The symbol is your assurance that this food product has been treated to reduce the possibility of bacterial contamination. While America has one of the safest food supplies in the world, millions still become ill each year because of harmful microorganisms in the food we eat.” Omaha Steaks, based in Omaha, Neb., markets irradiated vacuum-packed and frozen beef, poultry, pork and other products to its retail, mail order and foodservice customers. Irradiation provides exceptional protection for product that may undergo unintended freeze-thaw cycles before the product is finally consumed. Three methods of irradiation — gamma-ray, electron beam and X-ray — may be used. Each involves sending a pulse of energy through the product and package. Product treated by Food Technology Service undergoes a single gamma-ray treatment after the product has been packaged. The energy hitting a pathogen or spoilage organism breaks the DNA in the organism and kills it. The company has taken a conservative marketing approach, offering irradiation as but one barrier in a multiple barrier approach to food safety and security. “One advantage is that you can treat the product in the final package,” notes Hunter, identifying the effectiveness of the technology against salmonella, listeria, E. coli, and other dangerous pathogens. “No other technologies really compete with it. Irradiation has no real equals.” Even opponents of the technology admit that it does not leave the product radioactive. Their opposition continues to focus on “unique radiolytic products,” that is by-products of the treatment that may produce deleterious effects on consumers. Several years ago, such a by-product — known as 2-ACB — was discovered. According to Hunter, researchers at USDA and other institutions do not regard the by-product as a human health hazard. |
To cast your vote, log in or become a member. This quick, one-time registration gives you access to members-only site benefits.
1 vote
FoodProcessing.com is the go-to information source for the food and beverage industry. We offer processing best practices as well as new products, equipment and ingredients for food and beverage processors.
Most Popular Check out the most popular content on FoodProcessing.com, as determined by our visitors.
Sponsored Links
