The Food Safety
Journey
Steve Tsuyuki
Senior Director – Food Safety
November, 2009
1
Outline
Listeria 101
Regulatory Environment
Maple Leaf’s Environmental Monitoring
Program (EMP)
Best Practices and Emerging Technologies
Q&A
Listeria 101: Background
Six species – only Listeria monocytogenes causes human
illness
Can be found almost everywhere including soil, water and
foods
First recognized as a human pathogen in 1929, but not
associated with food until 1981- there have been 16
recalls in 2009
1-10% of certain ready-to-eat foods contain low levels of
Listeria monocytogenes
Survives/grows in vacuum-packed refrigerated meats
unless an inhibitor is introduced
Grows at refrigeration temperatures and withstands
freezing
Easily destroyed by cooking processes
Listeria 101: A Cause of Foodborne
Illness
Listeriosis is a serious infection caused by eating food
contaminated by Listeria monocytogenes
Listeriosis is rare, affecting 1-5 in one million people per
year
High risk individuals – need to consume a large number of
Listeria monocytogenes cells to develop a clinical infection
Pregnant woman
Newborns
People with weakened immune systems ie. elderly,
cancer, AIDs etc.
Healthy people, including children are normally resistant
Listeria 101: Three Scenarios of Food
Borne Listeriosis
1. Isolated case
2. Cases due to a single event or lot of
food
3. Clusters and isolated cases scattered
by time and location.
Source: Tompkin, R.B. (2002) J. Food Prot. 65:709-725
Listeria 101: Industry Priorities
1. Prevent conditions that lead to extended
outbreaks (scenario 3).
2. Control conditions to minimize the risk of
isolated cases and clusters (scenarios 1
and 2).
3. Control conditions to satisfy regulatory
requirements.
Source: Tompkin, R.B. (2002) J. Food Prot. 65:709-725
Listeria 101: Seek and Destroy
Listeria Management
The keys to Listeria control in the food
processing plant:
Aggressive environmental testing for
Listeria – FIND IT!
Aggressive corrective actions when
positives detected – FIX IT!
Prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in
RTE Meat and Poultry Products in U.S.*
5
Percent Positives
4.5
4
3.5
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
*FSIS results of routine regulatory testing of finished RTE products analyzed for
Listeria monocytogenes. Approx. 4,000-10,000 samples taken annually.
Regulatory Environment: CFIA Listeria
Policy Effective April 1, 2009
CFIA
Product
Testing
M200
Operator
Mandated
Product
Testing
Operator
+
Food Contact
M205
CFIA
Mandated
Industry Voluntary
Programs
Product
Testing
Environmental
Monitoring
Program
Food Contact
Operator
Investigational
Swab Testing
Which Type of Testing is Better?
Environmental Testing
Designed to find positives – these are treated as a success!
Cast widest possible net by focusing on Listeria spp, not
Listeria monocytogenes
Results obtained 2-3 days sooner than Listeria
monocytogenes results, allowing much more expedient
reaction times
Product Testing
Another tool to assess whether a system is working as
designed
Not as useful as environmental – limitations exist but it does
play an important role
Used as a verification of the food safety system
“New” Environmental Monitoring
Program (EMP)
Over 2,000 environmental tests weekly across 24 RTE plants
comprised of 120 production lines
Over 105,000 routine test samples taken annually
Positive incident rate of less than 1%, well within U.S. FSIS reported
data
Additional targeted sampling allows for in-depth line root cause
analysis to eliminate harbourage points
Product testing (verification of the monitoring program)
Approximately 1,300 routine product samples annually, excluding
additional targeted samples as part of ‘hold and release’
Daily senior management call to review testing results
Discuss positive results daily
Plants discuss their “seek and destroy” activities
13
Swab Sites: What Surfaces Are Tested
Required Sites (Surfaces that come in direct contact with food)
Level 1 (L1): Food Contact Surface (FCS) with potential harborage and product
build-up conditions: e.g. slicer blades and rollers, product conveyors, multivac surfaces,
product contact hands/gloves, pipeline interiors, product storage vessels, fillers, utensils, scrapers,
worktables, shredders, grinders, recirculated brine etc.
Investigative Sites (Surfaces that if contaminated, could result in the
transfer of contamination onto a FCS)
Level 2 (L2): Indirect and non food contact surfaces which may have indirect or
potential contact with exposed RTE product. Areas and surfaces adjacent to
product: e.g. exterior of equipment; chill units; slicer and conveyor framework; equipment
housing, panels, operator control buttons, weight control data input, weight scales, aprons, broom
handles, gloves, etc.
Level 3 (L3): Non food contact surfaces within the processing room that are
more remote from product contact surfaces: e.g., phones; mules; forklifts; walls; drains;
floors, equipment legs, wheels, employee foot traffic, etc.
Level 4 (L4): Areas remote outside the processing room:
e.g., bathroom doors, cafeteria,
halls, cooler floors, plant entrances, refuse/recycle areas, etc.
The assumption is that Listeria is present in the production environment. It is our
responsibility to mitigate the risk of contamination on food through an effective
monitoring program AND a response that is predictive in its approach and focused on
finding and eliminating sources of contamination when they are detected.
EMP Testing Protocol
EMP Swabs
10 – Level 1 Sites
(composite
adjacent sites to
make 5 test
samples)
Test Results for
Listeria spp
Negative
Positive
Seek & Destroy
and
Quarantine
Production
Operations as
normal
3 consecutive
days of enhanced
swabbing of
Level 1 sties
Positive
Destroy product
and Initiate N60
product testing
for Lm
Test Results
for Lm
3 consecutive
days of N60
sampling and
implement HOLD
procedures
Negative
Request product
release on a day
by day basis.
Request line
release
Drive for Continuous Improvement
AUDIT
Increased number of testing sites and
frequency of sampling on every line across
our 24 RTE plants. Audit teams for support.
ACT
Continual improvement of protocols
based on lessons learned and rolled
out ensuring appropriate
accountability and training. Learnings
shared immediately across the
network through technical bulletins.
INTERPRET
Analysis of consolidated plant data, as well
as individual analysis, to reveal root cause;
supported by trending analysis & results
tracking
REMEDIATE
Prescriptive protocols to address positive test results
(first, second and third level responses) which include
increased forensic sampling, supplementary and
intensive sanitations, and holding of finished product
pending further test results
EMP High Level Results
Steady progress in Listeria control across all RTE plants through:
aggressive swab sampling, investigative root cause analysis, and
verified corrective actions
Listeria L1 Regular Protocol - By Week
% Positive - Average with a 95% Confidence Interval
4.0%
Grand Total
5 w eek moving average
2.0%
1.0%
0.0%
40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Week
2008
2009
% positive
3.0%
Linear (Grand Total)
Best Practices and Emerging
Technologies
Diacetate/Lactate
Sodium diacetate was approved for use by Health Canada in
September 2008 as a recognized method for providing an additional
level of food safety in ready-to-eat food products
Widely used as a growth inhibitor by food manufacturers in the
United States since 2001
Blend of sodium or potassium lactate and sodium diacetate (40%
acetic acid, 60% sodium acetate) – Maple Leaf uses potassium and
sodium to balance performance and levels.
Lactate (weak acid) and diacetate (half neutralized vinegar) are
simple chemical compounds, which occur frequently in nature and
are completely absorbed by the human metabolism
Lactate/Diacetate is a unique blend of flavour and effectiveness with
a neutral pH
Bacteriostatic properties (ongoing suppression of pathogen growth)
Best Practices and Emerging
Technologies
Diacetate/Lactate
Sodium diacetate/Potassium lactate have recently been
added to:
Sure Slice Deli Meats
Main Street Deli Meats
Healthy Selections line
Best Practices and Emerging
Technologies
Ultra High Pressure (UHP)
The application of high pressures to food products in the range of
50,000 to 90,000 psi for the purposes of microbial destruction and
extended shelf life under refrigeration
87000 psi
= 2 ½ elephants standing on a
piston the diameter of a dime
Best Practices and Emerging
Technologies
UHP
Ability of UHP to destroy food borne pathogens and spoilage
microorganisms has been recognized since the 1890’s
Denaturation of enzymes and possible creation of ‘pores’ in the cell wall
of the organism
Cell then loses ability to control the inflow of nutrients or outflow of
waste materials- hence cell death
Since pressure effect is on macro-molecules, smaller molecules
responsible for color, flavor and nutrition are less affected - hence,
improved sensory performance
Pressure is applied isostatically (evenly from all sides)
At this point, no products in the foodservice line-up undergo UHP
Benefit of Diacetate and/or UHP
Impact to Listeria monocytogenes growth in relation to CFIA
product classification
Alt 3
1000000000
Alt 2B
100000000
10000000
cfu/g
1000000
Alt 3
100000
10000
Alt 2B
Alt 2A
1000
ALT 1
100
Alt 2A
10
Alt 1
1
0
30
60
90
time - days
Alt 3 (Sanitation) – Bacteria growth not impacted
Alt 2B (Diacetate) – Suppresses bacterial growth throughout product shelf life
Alt 2A (UHP) – Kills bacteria. Some cells may revive and growth can occur.
Alt 1 (Diacetate and UHP) – Kills bacteria AND suppresses growth of any cells that may
revive over time.
Multiple Hurdle Intervention
‘Firewalls for Microbial Control’
Environmental
Monitoring
Program (EMP)
Equipment /
Facility Re-Design
Sanitation /
Equipment
Disassembly
Cooking
Alt 1 / Alt 2
(Antimicrobial
or lethality
treatment)
What is the comparative risk between ready-to-eat
products sliced & packaged at retail versus by the
manufacturer?
Listeria monocytogenes:
Risk Assessments to Inform Food Safety Decisions
Janell Kause, Director
Risk Assessment and Residue Division
Office of Public Health Science
June 30, 2008
IFT Annual Meeting
Information Sources
• FSIS Comparative Risk Assessment for Lm in
Ready-to-Eat Meat and Poultry Products (2008)
• Evaluated the risk of listeriosis between deli meat
sliced at retail vs. manufacturer
• Built from FDA/FSIS Listeria risk assessment
• Retail-to-table comparative risk assessment
− NFPA/GMA & NAFSS data used
Comparative Risk Assessment: Findings
Evidence of cross contamination at retail
establishments (time of day and site visit)
Greater prevalence and concentrations for retail
sliced
Retail sliced causes ~80% of deaths, and is
over 4x riskier on per annum basis.
Thank You
Follow-up Questions…
Please contact:
Steve Tsuyuki, Senior Director – Food Safety
(905) 285-1643 Office
(905) 251-0617 Mobile
tsuyukst@mapleleaf.ca