Safety Net
Safety Net
by Lynn Petrak
Amid security concerns, processors act to ensure overall
quality.
If an ounce of
prevention is worth a pound of cure, then the dairy industry has long
understood the true weight of food safety. From the development of
refrigerated transportation to the first pasteurization techniques in the
early part of the 20th century to today’s sophisticated system of
controls and evaluation, the measures taken by dairy processors have
consistently been proactive.
Food safety remains a major top-of-mind issue
for dairy industry leaders, farmers, manufacturers, distributors and
marketers alike, as well as for government officials, retail and
foodservice operators, not to mention consumers themselves. The issues may
vary over time, focusing on different pathogens like Salmonella, E. coli
and Listeria, and headline-grabbing events like domestic cases of bovine
spongiform encephalopathy (BSE). But quality and safety are never very far
from the top of the list of processor concerns and investments.
The dairy industry has focused on safety as a
priority over the years for a number of reasons, among them the fact that
the perishability of its product has always led to a greater scrutiny of
its operations. “Fortunately, if there is one thing you can say about
dairy, it is that the industry has built so many precautions in its
processing and distribution systems that you would be hard-pressed to find
another area in the food industry where any more attention is focused on
safety,” says Bill Haines, vice president of product innovation for
Dairy Management Inc., (DMI), Rosemont, Ill.
Likewise, Cary Frye, vice president
of regulatory affairs for the International
Dairy Foods Association (IDFA), Washington, D.C., says collaborative
efforts have been effective in the safety area. “My opinion is that
the industry has really made great strides. I see more sophisticated
systems, I see plants with ISO,” she says. “I see customer and
consumer-driven reasons for adding quality parameters and I see more
self-audits to ensure that food safety every single day is an important
part of the system.”
Dairy processors, who live daily under a host of
regulations and standards, agree with the assessment that the industry has
been successful because of its commitment to safety. “From a
food-safety standpoint, the dairy industry is very regulated and protected.
Our view is that everything we do is about the customer — anything
that would compromise the customer is at the top of our list of
concerns,” says Carl Schroeder, vice president of manufacturing for
Maplewood, Minn.-based Schroeder Dairy Co. “We have to work on food
safety every day. It is never done and it never ends.”
As Schroeder notes, while there are many
firewalls in place in the production and distribution chain to guard
against problems ranging from harmful microbes to spoilage, the battle for
food safety is far from over. Statistics from the Atlanta, Ga.-based
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) peg the number of annual
food-related illnesses at 76 million, hospitalizations at 325,000 and
deaths at 5,000. One of the largest illness outbreaks in U.S. history,
still discussed today, is the 1985 incident of Salmonella
typhimurium linked to
post-pasteurized milk that sickened more than 170,000 people.
Occasional and largely isolated outbreaks still
occur, some linked to raw milk and others to other types of dairy products
or tied to cross-contamination. Although tainted meat and poultry products
have garnered much of the attention and have spurred major recalls over the
past decade, dairy products are still considered vulnerable.
Practices Make Perfect
Ironically, while the dairy industry has grown
more advanced over the years, technology may have spurred new
vulnerabilities. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), in fact, is
currently reviewing good manufacturing practices (GMPs) for food and
beverage companies, which were last revised in 1986.
“Since food GMPs are an integral part of the
nation’s control over food safety problems, it is essential that they
adequately address the needs of today’s food processes and foodborne
hazards,” acting FDA commissioner Dr. Lester M. Crawford said in a
speech last May. “We believe this effort, like our work on current
good manufacturing practices for medical products, will improve the safety
of these products and create new opportunities for introducing better
manufacturing techniques.”
When the FDA decided to revise GMPs, it
assembled a panel of food-safety experts to assess current risks and
hazards in the food and beverage industry. In its recently released report,
“Good Manufacturing Practices for the 21st Century: Food
Processing,” the panel noted refrigerated foods pose some of the
highest risks for food safety problems. The experts cited the dairy
industry as among the four leading segments facing the greatest food safety
issues, with specific concerns relating to training and biofilms.
Currently, dairy industry leaders are submitting
comments to the FDA, which is expected to issue final changes on GMPs
within a year. For its part, IDFA is assembling a member task force to
provide FDA with industry insight and make its own recommendations for any
potential changes.
“The industry could see new regulations
relating to virtually every aspect of the plant environment, including
employee hygiene, process controls and facility maintenance,” says
Allen Sayler, senior director of regulatory affairs and international
standards for IDFA.
Processors are keeping an eye on FDA’s
actions on GMPs as well. Stonyfield Farm, Londonderry, N.H., for example,
conducts annual employee training on GMPs and recently began a new audit
program, in addition to other proactive activities. “In 2004,
Stonyfield Farm created the position of director of corporate and
regulatory compliance to serve as the food-safety champion and coach for
the company,” adds Alton Bradshaw, who holds that new title and role
within the company.
Likewise, Sargento Foods Inc., Plymouth, Wis., recently added
a new full-time food safety employee, who monitors GMPs, among other responsibilities.
According to Barbara Gannon, vice president of corporate and marketing communications,
the new position reflects the company’s overall efforts to deliver on
safety. “At Sargento, we design our food-safety practices as a system
— all must be in place and working properly to keep risks low,”
she says.
Among its recent efforts, Sargento has increased employee training and is now linking GMP audit scores to bonuses.
Among its recent efforts, Sargento has increased employee training and is now linking GMP audit scores to bonuses.
Indeed, the major hallmarks of GMPs —
training, audits, documentation and validation/evaluation — are
already in place at many dairy plants. “Employee training is critical
to the quality of finished products and we are putting more and more
emphasis on training and hiring,” reports Schroeder, adding that
Schroeder Co. also has updated food-safety practices in conjunction with
renovations at its processing facility.
South Burlington, Vt.-based Ben &
Jerry’s Homemade Inc., a wholly-owned and autonomous subsidiary of
the international firm Unilever, also stresses the principles of GMPs.
“When it comes to food safety we focus on
all aspects of public health. We begin with the employees with complete
training for personal hygiene and product handling and allergen training
and awareness,” says Chrystie Heimert, director of public relations.
“GMPs are reviewed and updated as needed when new products and
processes are implemented. New equipment, processes, and special ingredient
handling requirements will prompt a review to determine if a revision is
necessary. We also require all employees to be trained and pass a written
exam annually.”
In addition to GMPs, many dairy processors have
implemented hazard analysis critical control point (HACCP) programs, which
are currently mandatory for juice production but remain voluntary for
strictly dairy operations. Still, the program has proven a popular tool in
the food safety front; all of the dairy processors mentioned above, for
example, have HACCP programs in place, with at least one system dating to
1992.
According to Haines, implementing an official
HACCP program is not a big stretch for dairies already running operations
under tight controls. “HACCP is already pretty well incorporated in
the industry. If you really read the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance (PMO), it
really is about HACCP, although they don’t call it that,” he
says.
Sayler concurs that HACCP is widely embraced by
the industry as part of multi-hurdle approaches to safety. “HACCP
itself is nothing new in the dairy industry, but we are seeing more
comprehensive implementation. I think it is continuing along because it has
proven itself as an excellent system for ensuring and building confidence
on food safety,” he says.
Underscoring the importance of the key
principles of HACCP, IDFA is continuing its successful certification
program, which follows a HACCP model with requirements like written
documentation, training and inspections.
To keep up to date on HACCP or to start up a new
program, dairies can sign up for various seminars on the topic. At the
University of Wisconsin-Madison, for example, the Wisconsin Center for
Dairy Research in the school’s food science department conducts
annual HACCP workshops. The most recent workshop in July attracted the
stated limit of 45 participants.
“I think more and more suppliers are
looking to have something in place. If they have one incident, it has
repercussions for all of the industry,” says Marianne Smukowski,
safety quality applications coordinator for the center, adding that HACCP
is now expanding to all sectors of dairy production. “We are seeing
more people in the artisan and farmstead type of cheeses who are coming in
and taking dairy HACCP programs.”
Likewise, Brian Collis, principal of Collis
Consulting Co., Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada, has seen interest in voluntary
HACCP systems steadily grow, both in the United States and north of the
border. It is at the point now, he says, that the trend is more about
refinements to the program. “What they have been doing in the past,
they are now doing better,” Collis says. “What I am seeing are
enhancements of the existing base of technology.”
Another trend, Collis says, is the shift toward
HACCP as part of broader practices and approaches. “Over the last
couple of years, HACCP has been integrated in a total quality management
system in some of the bigger companies — it has become a subset of
larger management programs,” he explains. “Companies are seeing
that HACCP fits nicely in with the whole quality management stream, and are
saying, ‘Why don’t we just use this as a reference point to
build in other business processes’?”
Tools of the Trade
Within the parameters of GMPs and HACCP —
and sometimes beyond them — dairy processors are pursuing and
implementing a host of tools to help them in the battle for food safety.
Pasteurization remains the most obvious, ubiquitous and venerable weapon in
the industry arsenal, eliminating most harmful microbes from raw milk
before they get a chance to become problematic.
In addition to pasteurization, sanitation has
emerged a key component of safety programs, encompassing measures from
clean-in-place equipment features to sophisticated disinfectants. That
emphasis is sure to continue, especially in light of FDA’s recent
report that listed poor plant and equipment sanitation among the top food
safety problems faced by food manufacturers.
Smukowski agrees that sanitation has become a
focal point for many in the industry and that technology has spurred
strides in that area. “Cleaning and sanitation has always been a big
issue, but I am seeing a shift in that it is being done on the first shift
rather than the third shift,” she says. “You have more
experienced people and more management on first shift.”
In his consulting work with dairies, Collis has
also noted sanitation evolving as a cornerstone of safety.
“Sanitation and personnel training are the most critical aspect of
moving the HACCP system forward and a lot of companies are going in and
making those areas better,” he says. “Suppliers are always
coming in with innovative ways to try to control environmental
contaminants.”
For their part, processors say they understand
the significance of sanitation and its role in everyday safety.
“Besides actively sharing best practices within the industry, we
consider effective equipment sanitation and proper scheduling our most
effective defense,” relates Heimert, adding that Ben &
Jerry’s typically partners with ingredient suppliers and equipment
manufacturers to improve sanitary design.
Schroeder Co. also regularly evaluates the
latest sanitation offerings. “We are always looking for ways to
improve the environmental conditions,” Schroeder says. “Some
examples of measures we have invested in recently include a captive uniform
program uniforms, sanitizing sprays in walkways and increased floor, walls
and ceiling cleaning.”
Companies that supply equipment and materials
for sanitation purposes to dairy companies continually offer new products.
Biomist Inc., Park Ridge, Ill., for example, recently launched a new
Biomist® Power Disinfecting system that allows operators to
power-spray a disinfectant solution of concentrated alcohol, alleviating
flammability issues associated traditional alcohol use.
On the equipment side, Sani-Matic Inc.,
introduced two new cleaning and sanitation systems in 2003, including a
multi-tank CIP washer and portable Ultra Flow system that provides
faster equipment cleaning and sanitizing; both systems have programmable
controls and stainless steel wetted parts. Other innovations focus on the
efficacy of sanitation measures. Weber Scientific, Hamilton, N.J., for
instance, recently introduced a rapid cleaning validation and sanitation
monitoring device called SpotCheck, used to detect invisible glucose
and lactose residue on surfaces.
Meanwhile, processors can also work with
suppliers on comprehensive programs, such as St. Paul, Minn.-based Ecolab
Inc. The company’s integrated “EcoShield” intervention
system includes an array of customized tools, such as livestock disease
interventions, advanced sanitation technologies, personnel hygiene
programs, food surface treatments and food irradiation, depending on the
type of operation. Ecolab also provides a complete diagnostic evaluation of
a company’s sanitation program.
Getting Testy
While keeping things clean is essential in a
plant environment, so too is regular testing and evaluation. Over the past
several years, dairy processors have increasingly relied on testing to help
enhance the safety and quality of their products.
Tests that determine the presence of pathogens
have grown more sophisticated over the years, with some results available
within hours rather than the previous standard of days. “Rapid
testing is big. Companies are doing environmental testing because they want
to know right away whether there is any type of problem,” says
Smukowski.
According to Haines, DMI has helped sponsor
research projects on rapid testing in recent years and may soon evaluate
new products along those lines. “There are some companies that have
done very well with this technology, for E.
coli and other pathogens,” he
says, adding with a note of caution, “These rapid methods are useful
for monitoring — they raise the red flag — but they may not be
for regulatory compliance. You may have to back them up with traditional
methods.”
Silliker Laboratories, Homewood, Ill., is one of
the largest laboratory services in the country dedicated to food safety and
offers the latest testing technology on a variety of fronts for food and
beverage processors. In its labs around the country, Silliker regularly
tests dairy processor samples for Salmonella, Listeria and other microbes.
Most recently, for the dairy business, the
company has been working on new tests used for routine monitoring or when
operators suspect a potential problem with their pasteurizing equipment.
The current approved test will no longer be valid by FDA standards after
October 1.
In its place, Silliker will use a PasLite test
developed by Charm Sciences Inc., which detects and quantifies alkaline
phosphatase levels for the monitoring of pasteurization processes. That
test was selected for use in Silliker’s labs because of its
reliability and cost effectiveness, according to Kathy Alamo, operations
manager for the company’s Dairy Center in Modesto, Calif.
“We find most of the industry has gone
with the Charm PasLite test and we try to work with our clients as much as
possible,” Alamo says, adding that the test can be used for quality
control as well as a diagnostic tool for detecting potential pasteurization
problems.
Other companies have designed advanced detection
systems as well. DuPont Qualicon, Wilmington, Del., for example, has added
a new Bax® system PCR assay for detecting Enterbacter
sakazakii, an emerging pathogen that has
been associated with milk-based powdered infant formulas.
Back in the plant, processors also have various
testing systems in place. Ben & Jerry’s regularly tests for
harmful microorganisms as well as for various allergens, which are an issue
in the production of ice cream. “Allergens are monitored with the use
of neogen test kits,” Heimert says, “and a well-equipped
analytical laboratory verifies ingredients, finished products and any
unusual consumer complaints with gas chromatography or other advanced
analytical test methods.”
Evaluation and testing aren’t just
relegated to the detection of contaminants. Another industry trend relating
to safety has been the growing use of third-party audits and evaluations.
In fact, periodic audits and inspections of facilities and raw material
suppliers are one of the recommendations put forth in FDA’s report on
improving GMPs.
Some audits are also tied into the 3-A certification
of dairy plant equipment, while others are done as an assurance to a
manufacturer’s customers. Through its certification program, IDFA
also sponsors checkups of facilities to ensure best practices and proper
controls.
Although the use of evaluation has been done for
years, there has been a notable shift to the use of outside experts.
“In the last 10 years, versus the last 50, processors are using
independent sources to do third party audits. It came along with the
management of HACCP,” Haines says.
Collis, who conducts on-site audits as part of
his consulting work, says that business realities are driving the latest
spate of independent evaluations. “The bottom line is that customers
are becoming very demanding. Having third-party audits is just a fact of
life now,” he says. “Food service and retail companies are
saying, ‘If you do business with us, here are some of the conditions
you have to meet.’” Ingredient suppliers are also increasingly
subject to third party audits, he adds.
Many independent audits focus on recordkeeping,
which is another key suggestion in the improvement of best practices
espoused by FDA and other safety experts. The recent clamor over BSE
affecting the beef industry has focused even more attention on the notion
of accurate recordkeeping and, ultimately, traceability throughout the
chain.
“It means not only better recordkeeping
but that you have a system in place to follow every drop of milk in the
system. If there is a problem that appears at the end of the supply chain,
you can go back to the cow,” notes Haines, adding that such a task
may sound daunting but is realistic. “A lot of that information is in
place, it just needs to be linked.”
At Issue
As processors and industry leaders work on
preventative and evaluative measures, they must also keep their eye on
emerging challenges. One recent issue is the possibility of a link between Mycobacterium paratubuculoris (MAP) found in post-pasteurized milk and
Crohns’s disease in humans.
In an ongoing study, food safety researchers at
Marshfield Clinic Laboratory in Marshfield, Wis., have been evaluating
samples of whole pasteurized milk for the bacterium as part of their
efforts to aid in the development of a rapid detection method for MAP.
It is a topic that industry leaders are tracking
closely. “Should there be any evidence that the organism is linked to
Crohn’s disease in humans, we would have to be sure that
pasteurization would remove it,” Haines says. “To date,
research shows that standard pasteurization in the U.S. effectively
eliminates MAP in milk, although it is a very difficult organism to work
with.”
IDFA also has been involved in ruling out any
link, Frye says. “Almost four years ago, IDFA established a
paratuberculosis task force, which did initial research,” she says,
noting the study was done in conjunction with a leading USDA researcher in
Ames, Iowa.
“We went in with a totally open
mind,” Frye says. “There is a lot of information and data, but
the simple takeaway is that pasteurization as practiced and validated in
the U.S. does eliminate MAP from raw liquid milk.” The final results
of the study are expected to be published in a peer-reviewed journal this
fall.
On the issues-management front, IDFA has also been
active working on behalf of the industry with the government on the topic
of Listeria monocytogenes.
“We have the final risk assessment that
clearly shows some dairy products are high risk and others are low risk.
High-risk products will continue to be a focus of regulatory enforcement
and testing and we will support that,” notes Frye. “On the
other side, IDFA is asking for regulatory action limit for low-risk
foods.” In that scenario, she explains, products like hard cheese and
ice cream would be evaluated for risk based on a limit of 100 organisms per
gram, thus enabling an appraisal by criteria rather than by a category
definition.
Meanwhile, although BSE has proven to be more of a
beef industry issue, it was a dairy cow that was diagnosed with BSE in
Washington state in December 2003, the first case found in the United
States. Still, education efforts put forth by industry organizations like
IDFA, DMI, the National Milk Producers Federation and the U.S. Dairy Export
Council along and individual processing companies, showing that dairy
products pose no safety risk to humans, were effective. “When we
heard about the diagnosis in December, we put our joint industry crisis
management plan into action,” recalls Marci Cleary, IDFA’s
senior communications manager. “We went out immediately with
information to our members and to dairy farmers and the industry only
received a few media calls because we had the message out that milk does
not contain or transmit BSE. The answer was definitive and the issue was
put to bed.”
Haines concurs. “We had to make sure that
it didn’t spill over into the dairy business. We have a good issues
response program and linking to state and regional dairy programs gives us
tools to get information out in a hurry, whether it’s on safety or
economic issues,” he says. “We did get a few calls on BSE but
the dairy industry did not seem to suffer any adverse consumer reaction to
it.”
As any food or beverage processor knows, issues
and crises relating to food safety can crop up virtually any time, which is
why programs and tools are in place at various organizations and companies.
As Haines points out, the stakes are high when it comes to the safety and
security of the food supply: “Maintaining consumer confidence in
dairy products is one of five key strategic areas in our
organization.” df
Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!