Foodfocus
Te P o u O r a n g a K a i o A o t e a r o a
Kai time –
food safety on the Marae
Is it safe? A risky calculation
Dinner diving dangers
FBI under surveillance
June 2009
Foodfocus
Cover: Whaea Donna Richards welcomes Andrew McKenzie
to Turangawaewae Marae
Contents
Features
12
FBI under surveillance
10
Kai time – food safety on the Marae
12
Dinner diving dangers
14
Is is safe? A risky calculation
16
Regular columns
14
2
16
19
1
In focus: Pasifika and Food Shows
2
– Neudorf’s winning whey
3
NZFSA News: Canada-NZ: ranking FBI risk
4
– A matter of policy
4
Science: Strategy to reduce foodborne salmonellosis
5
Campylobacter: Study provides some surprises
6
International trade: Off to market – negotiating FTAs
8
NZFSA News: Beekeeper stung by fine
9
– NZFSA’s turkey appeal upheld
9
Foodsafe Partnership: New Foodsafe Partnership strategy
18
– FBI case files coming to your school
18
Food safety: Hot tips for a safe sausage sizzle
19
– Tasty treat with a nasty bite
19
– Not berry nice
19
Fact sheet: Intense food sweeteners
20
FBI: A pain in the gut – E.coli O157:H7
21
Every effort has been made to ensure
the information in this publication
is accurate.
In Focus: ACVM under the spotlight
22
NZFSA does not accept any
responsibility or liability whatsoever
for any error of fact, omission,
interpretation or opinion that may
be present, however it may have
occurred.
DFR: FCPs working well, councils say
24
– Food safety in 5 languages
24
NZFSA Publications
25
21
22
Food Focus is a publication of the
New Zealand Food Safety Authority.
It is published three times a year
and widely distributed. For more
information, or editorial enquiries
about Food Focus please contact
Elspeth McIntyre, Senior Advisor
(Communications) on 029 894 2608 or
email [email protected]
For subscription enquiries or changes
to your subscription details, please
contact Elspeth McIntyre, as above.
New Zealand Food Safety Authority
PO Box 2835
86 Jervois Quay, Wellington,
New Zealand
Phone 04 894 2500
Fax 04 894 2501
Editorial
IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER
Foodfocus
Editorial
“NZFSA is committed
to engaging with
any community
which has identified
food-related risks,
to improve its food
safety and nutritional
practices.”
One of NZFSA’s chief strategic objectives is to
engage with communities with identified food
risks, and to provide sound science-based advice
on safe food practices and nutrition to support
better health.
To do this, NZFSA staff are forging links with
different communities to find practical and
achievable ways of reducing food-related risks.
As an organisation, we are committed to the
guiding principles of partnership, protection
and participation. We are aiming for culturally
appropriate outcomes and are using a variety of
media to get the message across.
Community groups with information gaps on
food safety are identified in a variety of ways. It
could be that, as in the case of our 2005 Umu
Pasifika project, a community representative
takes the initiative and approaches NZFSA to
look into a community’s needs. Or, it might be
that other regulators working in food recognise
a need and make a suggestion to us. Te Kai
Manawa Ora, the Marae Food Safety Guide we‘ve
just launched, and which is the subject of this
issue’s cover and pictorial feature, was written in
response to requests for further information from
whanau, hapu and iwi after the release in 2004 of
NZFSA’s Hangi Guide. From NZFSA’s perspective,
Te Kai Manawa Ora is a significant milestone in
our ongoing efforts to provide science-based
food safety information in the non-regulatory
environment.
We’re all very proud of this latest publication. Te
Kai Manawa Ora is an attractive 105-page booklet
bringing together the most up-to-date scientifically
robust food safety information in a culturally
appropriate way. It’s designed to provide Marae
cooks and their helpers with sound, practical
advice for catering for large numbers of diners. It
incorporates food safety information on a range
of traditional Maori food practices including hangi
and gathering foods such as puha and shellfish.
The launch was an impressive affair at
Turangawaewae Marae, one of New Zealand’s
most prestigious Marae and the ancestral home of
Kingi Tuheitia. The welcome we received from the
people of Turangawaewae was humbling and we
were gratified by the positive reception the new
resource received.
After a long period of development, all those
involved can be proud of the outcome. The next
priority will be to publicise the guide and help all
Marae use it.
NZFSA is committed to engaging with any
community which has identified food-related risks,
to improve its food safety and nutritional practices.
Andrew McKenzie
June 2009 1
IN FOCUS
Foodfocus
NZFSA at Pasifika
Foodsafe Feleti with friend at Pasifka 2009
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority’s (NZFSA’s) 2009 show schedule kicked off at the Pasifika
festival in Auckland.
Over 200,000 attendees braved the rainy weather to attend the
Pasifika festival at Western Springs Park in March. Pasifika is the
South Pacific’s largest Pacific Islands community event with 150 stalls
selling Pacific Island food – from fresh coconuts and mangoes to food
prepared and cooked in the traditional umu or lovo.
NZFSA staff had a busy day handing out fridge magnets, stickers
and brochures to festival-goers to remind people of our food safety
messages – Clean, Cook, Cover, Chill. We were helped by our
Pacific Island mascot Foodsafe Feleti who is always a big hit with
younger visitors to the festival.
Food safety message taken to
food shows
Consumer enquiries advisor Kelly McKenzie
talks to visitors at the Christchurch Food Show
NZFSA’s busy events schedule includes attending food
shows around the country.
One effective way for NZFSA to get the food safety message out to
consumers is to have a stand at annual food shows. It’s a great way
of connecting directly with the person who does most of the buying,
storing, preparing and cooking of food at home, or with food business
operators. The first food show for the year, in early April, saw NZFSA
communications and technical staff in Christchurch, and then in
Wellington in May. Hundreds of magnets and balloons were given away
to children while their parents picked up information from NZFSA’s stand.
A new booklet Food Safety in the Home and our brochure
Healthy eating checklist were very popular, and received many
positive comments from consumers. All NZFSA’s publications are
available free of charge. Call freephone 0800 693 721 or email
[email protected]. Most of our consumer publications can be
downloaded from our website. See www.nzfsa.govt.nz and click
on the green Consumer tab and look for a topic that interests
you, or go directly to the dark blue tab titled All Publications.
NZFSA will be at the Auckland Food Show during the first weekend in
August so drop in to say hello.
2 June 2009
IN FOCUS
Foodfocus
Neudorf Dairy head cheesemaker Fiona Guyan slices up some of the company’s award-winning Rawhide cheese at the Nelson Farmer’s Market
Neudorf’s winning whey
A cheese company that controls
production from the paddock to
the plate has scooped the New
Zealand Food Safety Authority’s
new cheese award.
Neudorf Dairy’s Rawhide sheep’s milk cheese
was named the New Zealand Food Safety
Authority Champion New Cheese at the
Cuisine New Zealand Champion of Cheese
awards.
Entrants had to show they complied with
relevant food safety laws. Judges then
selected the category winner based on the
cheese’s aroma, flavour, texture and body,
appearance and rind development.
Brian and Sharon Beuke have been farming
sheep on their picturesque 380 hectare
property near Upper Moutere, Nelson for
over 35 years. They got into cheesemaking
in 2005 - building a purpose-built factory
onsite - after the cheesemaker they supplied
milk to shut up shop.
Head cheesemaker Fiona Guyan joined the
company in late 2005, having spent seven
years learning the trade on European farms.
She had only ever made one batch of
sheep’s milk cheese before starting work at
Neudorf, but was quickly converted.
“It’s much thicker and creamier than cow’s
and goat’s milk and has a higher proportion
of milk solids, which reduces the making
time,” she says.
“It also has a lovely sweetness and a
beautiful yellow colour that gets deeper and
deeper with age.”
On a good day, Neudorf Dairy’s 600 East
Friesian sheep produce about 500 litres
of milk, which is pumped into the factory,
pasteurised and made into one of six
varieties of cheese.
Soft cheeses can be eaten the next day,
but some of the harder cheeses are kept in
a ripening cellar for a little over two years
before they are ready.
The young company has had a golden run.
In addition to the NZFSA Best New Cheese
award, Neudorf Dairy has won best washed
rind cheese in 2006 and 2007, and sheep’s
milk cheese in 2008, along with six gold
medals and one silver medal at various
Champion of Cheese awards.
Fiona says the semi-firm Rawhide cheese,
which is sold at Nelson’s Saturday markets,
speciality cheese shops, and cafes and
restaurants throughout the country, is aged
for six months and has a hard, stonecoloured rind and smooth, creamy centre.
“I’d serve it with something simple, some
fresh crusty bread and grapes or sliced
pears. It has a very subtle flavour which you
don’t want to mask.”
Fiona says having the farm onsite means
she and her two assistants have greater
control over every stage of production, from
paddock to plate.
The company changed hands since the
awards ceremony, with husband and
wife team Michael Smith and Barbara
Hewitt taking over the reins. Michael is
keen to continue Neudorf Dairy’s success,
and increase production - still using milk
provided by the Beukes’ herd of sheep.
She says the idea of milking sheep is still
very new to Kiwis, and the lower milk yield
stops more people from producing sheep’s
milk products.
“We want to retain the high quality product,
get the sheep’s milk volume up and start
looking at other cheese varieties as well,”
he says.
Control from paddock to plate
June 2009 3
NZFSA NEWS
Foodfocus
Canada-NZ:
ranking FBI risk
NZFSA’s science group learned more about Canada’s system for
ranking foodborne illness risks with a visit from Guelph University
professor Valerie Davidson.
Professor Davidson has been working
with the Public Health Agency of Canada,
Health Canada and the University of
Massachusetts on a risk-ranking system
which considers four factors that may
be important to risk managers: public
health, consumer perceptions of risks
and acceptance, market impacts, and
social sensitivity. NZFSA’s system focuses
principally on public health implications
and potential food sources.
NZFSA’s principal adviser on public health,
Donald Campbell, says despite the
different approaches, there are several
areas of overlap between Canadian
and New Zealand risk-ranking systems.
For example, both organisations use a
tool called Disability Adjusted Life Years
to quantify the impact of foodborne
pathogens on public health. This was
developed by NZFSA and adopted by
Canada. Also, the protocols involved in
NZFSA’s 2007 Acute Gastrointestinal Illness
Study, which used phone surveys to gain
a better understanding of the size of the
foodborne illness problem in New Zealand,
were modelled on a Canadian study.
NZFSA’s science group and the Canadian
organisations will continue to work closely
on a variety of international food-related
projects, primarily through the International
Collaboration on Enteric Disease Burden of
Illness Studies.
Professor Valerie Davidson of Guelph University, Canada
A matter of policy
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) is updating and overhauling the policy statements on its
website so consumers and industry have easier access to a succinct summary of the national food regulator’s
position on a range of important or topical food safety issues.
Policy director Carole Inkster says ensuring
concise, clear policy statements are available
upfront provides consumers with clarity about
food safety issues and certainty for business.
“Each statement links to comprehensive
background documents for anyone who
wants more detailed information on the
rationale behind the policies we’ve adopted.”
standards as being of equivalent to their
own in terms of the food safety outcomes
they want, so that costs to food producers
who export are kept as low as possible.
“NZFSA’s policies directly link to its mandate
of protecting consumers of New Zealand
food, whether here or overseas,” Carole says.
NZFSA’s existing policy statements cover
a range of food safety issues, such as
organics, wild food, and market access and
official assurances. Other policy statements
are being revamped and a further 10
policy statements are being developed on
subjects ranging from NZFSA’s participation
in international forums to the role and
importance of ‘equivalence’ – where
countries accept each others rules and
NZFSA’s policy statements are on
www.nzfsa.govt.nz under ‘Policy & Law’.
“Over time the format, content and
length of our policy statements has varied,
depending on the topic and who we were
trying to reach. We’ve decided to make all
the policy statements more succinct, more
readable and more consistent.
4 June 2009
SCIENCE
Foodfocus
Strategy to reduce foodborne
salmonellosis
Salmonella is recognised as one
of the three most important
foodborne pathogens in
New Zealand, second only to
Campylobacter. Illness due to
salmonellosis is estimated to cost
New Zealand around $2.8 million
a year. That’s why NZFSA has
earmarked this disease as one
of its key strategic priorities and
devised a strategy to reduce its
incidence. NZFSA’s Salmonella Risk
Management Strategy spells out
a specific programme of work for
the next year.
Just a single bacterium of Salmonella lodged
in the wall of your intestine is enough to
make you sick. It acts quickly. If you have
salmonellosis, you will probably suffer
nausea, vomiting, abdominal cramps,
diarrhoea, fever, and headache within 72
hours. The discomfort usually lasts between
one to seven days but in more severe
cases it can go on for up to 10 days. Most
Salmonella infections resolve themselves
and don’t usually require treatment other
than lots of fluids and rest. In a small
proportion of cases salmonellosis can lead
to septicaemia and sometimes death. People
most at risk from salmonellosis include the
very young, the frail elderly or people with
low immunity due to chronic illness or recent
major surgery.
NZFSA’s strategy focuses on non-typhoid
Salmonella because it is fairly common in
the environment and can sometimes be
found on food. There are also typhoid and
paratyphoid strains of Salmonella. These are
rare in New Zealand and, while they can be
spread by infected food handlers, the most
common sources of infection are by water,
such as drinking untreated water or eating
shellfish collected from contaminated areas.
While there is anecdotal evidence to suggest
that non-typhoid Salmonella may come from
a variety of sources, lack of scientific data is
a problem. The early stages of the strategy
will focus on gathering information from a
wide range of domestic food sectors and
imported foods to try to identify the main
sources of the disease. This information
will provide a sound scientific basis for
pinpointing where in the food chain we can
take action to reduce or stop the disease
developing.
NZFSA has three strategic goals in relation to
non-typhoid Salmonella:
1. to achieve a 30% reduction in reported
annual incidence of foodborne
salmonellosis after five years
2. to detect and control exotic versions of
Salmonella that are known to be more
virulent and/or have multiple antibiotic
resistance, and so require specific risk
management strategies
3. to support market access by having
in place robust systems to control the
presence and level of Salmonella in food
produced in New Zealand.
The strategy will be updated annually,
building on the knowledge we gain as we
progress.
The Salmonella Risk Management
Strategy 2009 – 2012 and other
information on Salmonella is available
on our website www.nzfsa.govt.nz
June 2009 5
CAMPYLOBACTER: NZFSA’S STRATEGY IN ACTION
Foodfocus
Campylobacter study provides some
surprises
When going to war it pays to
know as much as possible about
your enemy. Recently released
research has given NZFSA and
the poultry industry valuable
information to use in the
battle against Campylobacter
– a bacteria which causes
campylobacteriosis in thousands of
New Zealanders each year.
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority
(NZFSA) funded study conducted by Massey
University and MidCentral Health in the
Manawatu looked at people who fell ill
with campylobacteriosis over a three year
period (March 2005 – February 2008). It
established how many of them got sick
because of something they ate and how
many got sick from environmental sources,
such as contaminated water or person-toperson transmission.
probably the most detailed look anyone
has had worldwide at source attribution of
campylobacteriosis. It has provided some
surprising findings.
NZFSA public health principal advisor
Donald Campbell says the study is
It was also surprising to discover that a
particular Campylobacter strain (ST-474) that
“The proportion of cases that were
attributed to consumption of poultry meat
came out at around 75% and that was
higher than we expected. Up until now we
had worked off a figure of 60% based on
earlier studies
New Zealand’s monthly campylobacteriosis cases
2,500
2,000
2005
2006
2004
Cases
1,500
1,000
2008
2007
2009
500
0
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Source: ESR
6 June 2009
CAMPYLOBACTER: NZFSA’S STRATEGY IN ACTION
Foodfocus
is relatively rare internationally was responsible for a
quarter of the annual cases of people getting sick here.
“This leads us to ask: is this a different organism? Are
people perhaps more likely to get sick from this strain
than other ones?” Donald says.
Most other cases of campylobacteriosis recorded in
the study were attributed to sheep and cattle. Donald
says the animal strains were far more dominant in
people from rural areas, especially children, than city
dwellers and work is likely to go ahead to determine
whether this is caused by environmental factors, such
as animal contact and occupation.
“It might very well be a health promotion campaign
that is needed to address this issue rather than a food
safety initiative.”
Figures showed a small number of people got sick
from environmental sources such as water and birds.
75ºC
Poultry
Minced meat
and sausages
No pink should be visible
New
recipe for
cooking
poultry
65ºC
Fish
For years the New Zealand Food Safety Authority has been advising
consumers not to be chicken about meat safety. Heat kills harmful bacteria,
so it is important that meat and poultry is properly cooked to avoid getting
sick from any bugs that might be on the raw meat. NZFSA has recently
reviewed and lowered the temperature it advises people cook poultry to.
The recommendation is now 75°C.
Research guiding the way forward
The data from the study has been a valuable tool
in NZFSA’s discussions with the poultry industry
because the findings have been able to inform and
demonstrate where the problem is.
NZFSA’s microbiology principal advisor Roger Cook says this new advice
has come out of a comprehensive study looking at the heat sensitivity of
Campylobacter and the time/temperature combinations needed to kill off
the bacteria.
“It also gives a tool for evaluating the work that has
already been happening with our Campylobacter Risk
Management Strategy to combat the problem and it
confirms that we are definitely on the
right track.”
“Campylobacter is just a normal everyday bug and so it is easy to kill
off. But because chicken consists of lots of muscle bundles and there are
different crevices that the bacteria can get into and hide in, people have
said ‘maybe we need to increase the temperature it needs to be cooked to
so we are absolutely certain bacteria are killed off’.”
There was a small decline in the proportion of
campylobacteriosis cases attributable to consumption
of poultry meat in the final year of the three-year
study. Interestingly, the national surveillance figures
show a gratifying drop of almost 50% of human
cases in 2008, Donald says.
Over the years people involved with food safety have adopted this
precautionary approach and added a safety margin by increasing the
recommended temperature by a few degrees. Dr Cook says that although
it is widely acknowledged that undercooked chicken is one factor
leading to campylobacteriosis in New Zealand, recommending a cooking
temperature that is higher than necessary doesn’t give consumers extra
protection; it merely leads to overcooking.
“We’re waiting to see if this is just a blip or a
sustainable trend. We have had swings before but not
as large, so it looks promising.”
The study has provided a valuable way to monitor
where the numbers are dropping off, which has
prompted ongoing work seeking to understand what
has caused this decline.
Donald says the model used in this research has
worked well.
“We are keen to use this for other diseases – such as
salmonellosis and E. coli O157:H7 infection – and we
are currently deciding where to focus on next.”
The study on recommended cooking temperatures has also looked at how
to kill off other harmful bacteria commonly found in meat and poultry,
such as Listeria, Salmonella and E. coli O157:H7.
While the recommended cooking temperature for poultry has changed,
NZFSA’s other safety tips remain the same:
• Always defrost poultry in the fridge and not the bench where harmful
bacteria can multiply quickly.
• Place poultry in the bottom of the fridge, where juices won’t leak on
to and contaminate other foods.
• To get an accurate reading of the temperature, use a meat
thermometer. Insert it into the breast, which is the thickest part of the
bird, taking care not to touch the bone.
• When cooking a stuffed chicken or turkey, the centre of the stuffing
must reach 75°C.
June 2009 7
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
Foodfocus
Off to market – negotiating free trade
agreements
Better market access through free
trade agreements is being touted
by many commentators as the way
forward in the face of the world
economic slowdown.
There is optimism that removing trade
barriers under free trade agreements (FTAs)
will open up overseas market opportunities
for New Zealand businesses, create jobs,
and cushion New Zealand exporters from
the current crisis facing the global economy.
New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA)
market access director Tony Zohrab says the
value of free trade agreements is that they
allow New Zealand’s voice to be heard by its
trading partners and provide a framework
for ongoing trade cooperation.
“FTAs give us a vehicle and framework
for cooperation into the future. They
identify who we need to talk to on the
rules affecting trade in food. They allow
both parties to describe exactly what they
understand or mean by ‘equivalence’ and
record mutually agreed rules relating to food
safety and animal or plant health. The aim
is to provide transparency and commercial
certainty. And, they provide an opportunity
8 June 2009
to talk and inject our ideas in advance of our
trading partners finalising their import rules.
team draws on NZFSA colleagues with
scientific or technical expertise as needed.
“This kind of ‘foot in the door’ is crucial
in terms of our long-term strategic trade
relationships.”
World Trade Organization (WTO) rules on
food safety and animal and plant health
standards are set out in the Sanitary and
Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) Agreement.
NZFSA, MAF and Biosecurity NZ are New
Zealand’s expert bodies on SPS requirements
and rules.
New Zealand signed two free trade
agreements in the past year, one with China
in April 2008 and one in February 2009
with Australia and the 10 Asian countries
making up the Association of South East
Asian Nations (ASEAN). Another five FTAs
are either under negotiation or expected
to start in the next 12 months: with the
Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) which
represents six Middle Eastern countries;
Malaysia; Korea; India; and the trans-Pacific
Partnership, formerly known as the P4 which
includes New Zealand, Chile, Singapore,
and Brunei and which may be expanded
to include Peru and the United States.
NZFSA’s role in trade
NZFSA supports Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade negotiations with technical expertise on
the parts of the agreements that impact on
food safety. NZFSA has eight people working
in the market access area, with backgrounds
as varied as food technology, veterinary
science, and trade policy. The market access
The SPS agreement allows countries to
set their own standards, but it also says
regulations must be based on sound
science. They should be applied only to the
extent necessary to protect human, animal
or plant life or health, and may not be used
to disguise technical barriers to trade.
The advantage to countries which use
these internationally-agreed international
standards, guidelines and recommendations
is that they are unlikely to be challenged
legally in a WTO dispute. The SPS agreement
names the joint FAO/WHO Codex
Alimentarius as the relevant standard-setting
organisation for food safety. However,
countries may use measures which result
in higher standards if there is scientific
justification and they apply the standards
in a consistent, not arbitrary, way. Where
INTERNATIONAL TRADE
necessary, there are avenues for applying the
‘precautionary principle’, a kind of ‘safety first’
approach to deal with situations where there is
concern with a product or process which has not yet
been subjected to proper scientific scrutiny.
Tony Zohrab says New Zealand’s 1997 agreement
with the European Union on sanitary measures
which apply to trade in live animals and animal
products is still the ‘gold standard’ in terms of New
Zealand’s international sanitary trade agreements.
“We’re still using the model, with a few
modifications. It’s a very enabling model and
reflected the maturity of the bilateral relationship
when it was developed. But the principles we
abide by in negotiation remain the same – empathy
and a good understanding of the political and
global context, honesty, patience and a thorough
understanding of both New Zealand’s and the
importing country’s food requirements.”
By the numbers benefits of FTAs
New Zealand’s FTA with China was that
country’s first with a developed nation.
At the time of signing, exports to China
were worth NZ$2 billion a year with a large
proportion in the food sector. China is our
third largest individual trading partner, our
largest source of international students and
our fourth largest source of tourists. This
FTA was estimated to benefit New Zealand
by growing our exports by up to $350
million a year and, in due course, reducing
tariff payments by $115 million.
The signing of the NZ/Australia-ASEAN
FTA gives us further access to a combined
market of more than 560 million people
and GDP of $US737 billion. ASEAN accounts
for about 25% of Fonterra’s exports worth
around NZ$2.2 billion. Meat and wool
exports to ASEAN nations are worth a
further NZ$330 million. And, the potential
is enormous, with a 77 per cent rise in
exports to ASEAN countries in 2007.
FTA benefits in the SPS area are less
tangible, but come down to greater
certainty and consistency in the application
of trade rules.
NZFSA NEWS
Foodfocus
Beekeeper stung by fine
A Whangamata beekeeper who admitted selling honeycomb
that poisoned 22 people at Easter a year ago has been ordered
to pay more than $3000 reparation to victims in a case brought
by the New Zealand Food Safety Authority.
Kevin Prout, of Projen Apiaries, had earlier pleaded guilty to four charges
under the Food Act. Three related to the sale of contaminated honeycomb,
and a fourth covered incorrect labelling.
In March, Prout was spared a fine for the charges relating to the sale of
honeycomb, but told to pay a total of $3350 reparation to victims plus
$750 in laboratory costs and $450 in solicitor’s fees. He was convicted and
discharged for the labelling offence.
Under the Food Act, all food sold to the public must be safe to eat and
sellers of food must be able to show they have taken all reasonable
precautions to ensure the food they sell is safe.
The Food (Tutin in Honey) Standard 2008 that came into force in January
2009 sets a maximum level of tutin in honey sold for human consumption.
It also requires beekeepers in risk areas to ensure their product is safe by
complying with at least one of a number of risk management options.
NZFSA’s turkey appeal upheld
A Gisborne restaurateur has been ordered to pay more than
$11,000 after his poor food safety practices caused more than 50
Christmas Day diners to fall ill.
The Bushmere Arms provided a buffet lunch for 110 diners, with a selection
of ham, beef and turkey on Christmas Day 2006. In the days following, 57
diners reported stomach pain, abdominal cramps and diarrhoea.
A Health Protection Officer found the symptoms were consistent with food
poisoning caused by Clostridium perfringens. The bacteria were also found in
samples of the leftover turkey, and the enterotoxin from the bacteria in faecal
samples from two of the ill diners.
The restaurant’s owner-operator Robin Pierson was convicted for selling
contaminated food at a trial in Gisborne District Court in June 2008,
and fined $400. He appealed against the conviction in the High Court at
Gisborne in February this year, arguing the prosecution had failed to prove
beyond reasonable doubt the turkey had caused the illnesses. The New
Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) appealed against the inadequacy of
the original sentence.
In a Gisborne High Court appeal judgement released last month, Pierson
was ordered to pay $400 in fines, along with $850 in reparation to victims
and $10,414 in costs to the Crown.
NZFSA assistant director of compliance and investigation Justin Rowlands
said he was pleased the court had recognised the serious effect poor food
handling practices could have on members of the public.
June 2009 9
Foodfocus
NZFSA public health principal advisor Donald Campbell
FBI under surveillance
A day off work with a squiffy tummy which we blame on a dodgy dinner is a
commonplace experience for thousands of New Zealanders. It’s a scenario that is
thought to cost the country around $86 million a year, mostly in lost productivity due
to time off work. It’s also a cost that NZFSA is working to reduce.
New Zealand Food Safety Authority
(NZFSA) public health principal advisor
Donald Campbell says having accurate,
detailed data is vital in developing public
health policies that improve food safety and
reduce the cost to society of foodborne
illness. Counting the numbers is called ‘FBI
(foodborne illness) surveillance’.
“It’s important not just to count the
numbers – it’s got to translate into public
health action, and that’s what we’re doing
with our three public health strategies for
Campylobacter, Salmonella and Listeria,”
Donald says.
FBI surveillance is an important first step in
making sensible decisions about where to
focus energy and resources. To get data,
NZFSA relies on the national communicable
disease notification system (EpiSurv) run by
Crown research institute, the Institute of
10 June 2009
Environmental Science and Research (ESR),
under contract to the Ministry of Health.
Doctors and laboratories are required by
law to notify public health units of patients
with anything on the list of 54 notifiable
diseases. NZFSA’s interest is food safety,
so it has ESR extract annual data for
potentially foodborne illnesses, especially
those traced back to contaminated food or
linked to a food source.
Acute gastroenteritis illness is a general
term for stomach upsets which may
or may not be traced to a specific
bug. Common foodborne bugs (which
include bacteria, protozoa or viruses)
are Campylobacter, Salmonella, Listeria,
Escherichia coli (E.coli), and norovirus.
Campylobacter etc is the name of the
pathogen that makes you sick, while
campylobacteriosis is the name of the
disease the bug causes.
The tip of the iceberg
The actual numbers notified are just the tip
of the iceberg, says Donald.
“It’s very difficult to get accurate
information about the causes of many
acute gastro illnesses – especially which of
them are from food, as opposed to contact
with infected animals, water, or people. We
rely on data that has been officially notified
by doctors or laboratories and then where
the type of illness has been confirmed by
laboratory tests.
“The reality is, many people don’t go to
the doctor in the first place, or if they do
go they don’t have lab tests done, or they
might have tests which then fail to identify
the pathogen that’s caused the illness.
There is fallout all the way through the
system and this affects the accuracy of the
information we get.”
Foodfocus
Reported to notification system
This pattern is called the ‘notification
pyramid’ (right).
“We don’t know the number of cases
of foodborne illness that go either
unrecognised or unreported, but we do
know that it is much greater than we see in
actual numbers notified,” Donald says.
Estimates of the true impact of foodborne
illness on human health and costs to
the community are based on two kinds
of studies. The first are localised studies
undertaken by choosing a random sample of
general practices, then taking stool samples
from every person with diarrhoea who walks
in the door to screen for the kinds of bugs
that cause acute gastro illnesses. It’s very
expensive, with one such study in Britain
costing £5m.
In New Zealand, we’ve approached it by
doing a community survey, Donald says.
Over a year, about 300 people a month
were surveyed randomly by phone. They
are asked if they have had diarrhoea or
vomiting or other symptoms of acute
gastro illness, and time off work as a result.
“The trouble with that approach is that
you can only say they’ve had acute gastrointestinal illness, but you don’t know
what type they’ve had. But it helps build
a picture of the cost to the community
in terms of work days lost due to acute
gastro-intestinal illnesses.”
NZFSA then uses the British or USA
localised studies to estimate how many of
those illnesses are from food sources.
“We can use the UK and US figures and
extrapolate information for the New
Zealand situation using different multipliers
for different diseases. We know for
example that almost 100% - or 1 in 1 of
listeriosis cases get notified because almost
everyone who gets ill from Listeria seeks
medical help and ends up in the system.
But for Salmonella it’s about 1 in 3 and for
Campylobacter is more like 1 in 8.”
Positive test results
Specimens submitted to lab
Specimens taken by doctor
Visits to doctor
Cases of acute
gastro illness
Shaping public health goals
Salmonellosis came a distant second
So, counting the numbers gives good
in the numbers game, with just 1,274
baseline information and allows for
notifications – around 60% of those due
ongoing monitoring and evaluation of
to food. The choice of salmonellosis as a
programmes. But what about the all-
public health goal allows us to see how
important action? Information from the
New Zealand’s monitoring programme
foodborne illness surveillance data was
stacks up against those in the United
used to select NZFSA’s three strategic public
States and United Kingdom, providing
health goals: reducing campylobacteriosis
international comparisons on the
by 50% and salmonellosis by 30% over
effectiveness of our food safety strategies.
five years, and seeing no increase in the
incidence of foodborne listeriosis despite
In developed countries, effective surveillance of
an increasing range of higher risk foods
foodborne illness is fundamental to food safety
becoming available.
systems. Because of this, the World Health
Organization is developing a global approach
“We chose these diseases because
to improve foodborne disease surveillance.
two are the most commonly notified
New Zealand is part of that initiative.
(campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis)
and listeriosis is one of the most severe,”
“It is useful to be part of the global
Donald says.
network for foodborne illness surveillance
because it allows us to share approaches
Campylobacteriosis and listeriosis between
and to compare and validate the results. It
them create the highest human health
allows us to get more bang for our buck,”
burden in New Zealand. In 2007 more
Donald says.
than 12,776 cases of campylobacteriosis
were reported with the majority of them
attributed to food. Listeria had just 26
cases notified, but 20 were attributed to
food, and the potential effects of listeria
are the most severe as it can cause abortion
or stillborn births in pregnant women and
death in other vulnerable groups.
June 2009 11
Foodfocus
Kai time –
food safety on the Marae
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority’s (NZFSA’s) new Marae food
safety guide, Te Kai Manawa Ora, was launched following a powhiri
at Turangawaewae Marae in April.
NZFSA community extension programme manager Raniera Bassett said Te Kai Manawa
Ora provides step-by-step guidance on procedures to keep kai safe when gathering,
preparing, cooking and serving.
“In te ao Mäori, the Marae is where Maori have cultural and spiritual responsibilities
to maintain the tapu, the mana and dignity of kaumatua, whanau hapu and iwi. An
essential element to ensure this is to provide kai. This food safety guide has a place
on all Marae for that reason,” Raniera says.
The guide, in Mäori and English, provides clear, easy to follow scientifically-based
and culturally-appropriate food safety information for Marae cooks and their
helpers who often cater for large numbers of diners. It also includes food safety
information on traditional Maori food practices including hängi and gathering
kaimoana, watercress and puha. It contains templates of maintenance and cleaning
schedules which Marae kitchen workers can use to document their food safety
practices to help keep their whanau and guests free from foodborne illness.
Food safety minister Kate Wilkinson was joined at the launch by associate
minister for Maori Affairs Georgina te Heuheu, Kingi Tuheitia’s sister Heeni
Katipa, NZFSA kaumatua Bunny Tumai, NZFSA staff, and representatives of
Marae who had contributed to the project.
NZFSA chief executive Andrew McKenzie presented certificates of appreciation
to representatives of Marae who helped inform and test the advice in
developing the guide.
“Engaging with the community is an integral part of NZFSA’s commitment to
informing consumers about New Zealand’s special and unique food-related
customs and practices. We want to expand our work with groups who have
identified specific food-related risks and to provide science-based advice on
safe food practices and nutrition.”
Turangawaewae Marae committee chair Pokaia Nepia welcomes the manuhiri
12 June 2009
Kai is an essential part of Marae manaakitanga
and hospitality
Foodfocus
Manuhiri being welcomed onto Turangawaewae Marae
Raniera Bassett, Minister Wilkinson and Mere Williams
Te kaitiaki Mere Williams and Minister Wilkinson
Representatives of Kawiti Marae,
Kawakawa, with Andrew McKenzie
The Marae food safety project team
June 2009 13
Foodfocus
Dinner diving dangers
You’ve probably heard the saying ‘one man’s trash is another man’s treasure’,
but a small number of people are taking the saying to unsafe extremes.
“Dumpster diving (also called ‘skipping’)
has recently been highlighted with the
arrest of three Dunedin students, and it’s
a practice we would also strongly advise
against,” says New Zealand Food Safety
Authority microbiologist Roger Cook.
“Anybody who eats food from a dumpster
is putting themselves as well as the
people they share the food with at risk of
foodborne illness,” Roger said.
Dumpster diving involves sifting through
other people’s rubbish, mostly commercial
skip bins, and taking out what someone
considers to be perfectly good and usable
merchandise.
Supermarkets throw away food for a range
of good reasons: food may be past its bestby or use-by date, damaged or subject to
a recall.
Generally, this means appliances and
clothes but it can also extend to food – and
that’s where it worries NZFSA.
While it might be tempting to make a meal
from the food others toss out, because of
philosophical reasons or hard economic
times, there are serious food safety
concerns.
14 June 2009
Why supermarkets throw food
away
Most commonly, the food is past its best-by
or use-by date. Best-before dates relate to
food quality – food generally loses some of
its quality and taste if eaten after this date.
Use-by dates are a marker for food safety
– food should not be eaten and cannot be
sold after this date.
Sometimes, food will be thrown out before
it reaches these dates to clear shelf space
for newer products – but that does not
mean it is safe to consume once in the
dumpster. Use-by and best-by dates are
dependent on food being stored in the
correct conditions, Roger says.
“If it is stored at 4 deg C in the cabinet,
and you throw it into a dumpster with
an external temperature of 20 deg C, the
product starts to spoil and the use-by date
concept goes out the back door.”
Food may be thrown out because it is
bruised or its packaging is damaged,
allowing bacteria to grow more easily inside.
Food subject to a recall may also be thrown
out so it does not pose a health risk to
consumers. In New Zealand, if a decision is
made to dispose of a recalled product in a
dumpster bin, a Food Act officer will make
sure the products are marked so it is clear
Foodfocus
What the
supermarkets say
New Zealand’s two major grocery
store groups strongly advise against
retrieving waste from rubbish bins,
saying there is a serious risk from
cross contamination and potential
personal injury. The activity could also
constitute theft.
Foodstuffs and Progressive say they
are committed to ensuring food waste
is kept to a minimum. Both groups
donate food where possible, under
very controlled conditions.
they cannot be sold. They will also open
the food and use a pungent cleaner and/
or spray paint on it so it is clearly smelt
and seen to be contaminated. Dumpsters
holding recalled food are generally locked
and taken to a rubbish tip as soon as
possible.
Wrapping offers little protection as it may
be permeable to some chemicals or get
smeared with bacteria from other food.
If people do not wash their hands after
handling contaminated packaging, they
could transmit the bacteria to other food
or their mouths, and make themselves sick.
Dirty dumpsters
There’s also no guarantee heating
the food will kill any bugs as cooking
destroys only some of the bacteria that
could contaminate food in the trash.
Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin, for
example, is not inactivated by cooking,
and cooking has little effect on chemical
contamination.
Dumpsters can expose food to a range
of physical, chemical and microbiological
hazards. Who knows what was last in the
dumpster before it was carted to the tip,
emptied and then dropped off ready for
more waste?
Food for disposal can mix with items such
as glass shards. It can also get covered in
chemicals like cleaning products or motor
oil, which may have been discarded into
the same skip.
The confined dumpster conditions create
a potential breeding ground for flies
and bacteria, which can contaminate
food and lead to foodborne illness.
Campylobacter bacteria, for example, are
found on raw poultry and can grow very
rapidly in warm, moist conditions like
those inside a dumpster.
“Foods that are eaten raw, like lettuces,
may have been sloshed with old poultry
juices and become cross-contaminated
with Campylobacter,” Roger says.
Campylobacter is New Zealand’s leading
cause of foodborne illness.
At Foodstuffs, individual stores gift to
charities and food banks where the
quality and safety of the products can
be guaranteed.
Progressive has in the past gifted food
to food banks when there is a printing
error or small dent in the product
but the food quality and safety is not
affected.
Garbage is not food
Once food is dumped, it is exposed to
a range of hazards, including crosscontamination from other items and lack
of refrigeration, as well as rats, flies and
bacteria.
So although it may be tempting to make
a meal out of the food your neighbours
or your supermarket throw out, it’s simply
not worth the risk.
“While food is in a shop or restaurant, it
is subject to the food safety programmes
or assurances provided by food hygiene
regulations,” Roger says.
“As soon as food is out of these
controlled conditions, it’s garbage. You
cannot treat it as food.”
June 2009 15
Foodfocus
NZFSA toxicologist
John Reeve calculated
the minute levels of
melamine accidentally
present in an ingredient
of milk powder posed
no threat to health
Is it safe? A risky calculation
Food contamination on a large scale can happen at anytime. Sometimes the culprit is microbiological –
caused by bacteria or viruses – or chemical. Chemical contaminants in food can be naturally-occurring,
like tutin and cyanide, or man-made, like melamine. When chemical food contamination occurs, NZFSA
toxicologists conduct a risk assessment to calculate the possible risk to the health of anyone who eats the
contaminated product. The answer is rarely clear cut, but the public want certainty in the advice they’re
given about food safety.
New Zealand Food Safety Authority (NZFSA)
toxicologist John Reeve says consumers’
perceptions of risk from food are often
not the same as the risks identified and
assessed in the objective science-based
processes used by regulators.
“This makes it difficult to deliver clear
messages. Scientists and regulators consider
food okay to eat when the levels of hazards,
like chemical residues, are either not
present at all or are within acceptable limits.
Consumers find it difficult to accept that
safety is anything other than black or white.”
Everything including the
kitchen bench
In February 2009, NZFSA was notified that
an imported iron supplement used to fortify
some milk products was contaminated with
the industrial chemical melamine.
Just months earlier some babies had died
and thousands had reportedly been made
very sick following deliberate criminal
16 June 2009
adulteration of milk powder in China, so of
course alarm bells were ringing. This time,
there was no criminal adulteration – the
contamination was accidental due to a
processing glitch in the overseas factory
where the ingredient was made. Tests at
an approved laboratory showed that due
to dilution of the ingredient in processing,
the melamine would not even be detected
in the final product – mostly milk powder
which was then itself used as an ingredient
in products like biscuits. So, was this latest
event even a safety concern at all?
Initial tests of two samples of the iron
supplement ingredient showed they
contained residues of melamine in excess of
the 5ppm level for food ingredients which
prompts the involvement of New Zealand’s
food safety regulator, NZFSA. Melamine is
not a permitted additive in food and there
is no safety level set for it.
Melamine is widely used in plastics,
adhesives, benchtops, dishware,
whiteboards, flame retardants and
fertilisers. Food safety regulators now
recognise that incidental contamination is
unavoidable through leaching into food
from processing equipment and packaging
materials. As a result, the World Health
Organization has set a tolerable daily intake
(TDI) for melamine. The TDI, which is very
similar to an acceptable daily intake or ADI,
represents the amount of a substance in
food that a person can ingest on a daily
basis for a lifetime without showing any
health effect. The TDI allows national
authorities to set limits in food that would
spark a withdrawal of a food product
should melamine be detected as a result of
intentional adulteration.
So, when melamine was found in an
ingredient for food products that would
take time to confirm had not already
reached shop shelves, the question
everyone wanted the answer to was: “if
I have eaten any, is it safe?” To find out,
John Reeve ran a quick risk assessment
Foodfocus
based on a worst case scenario which
assumed all foods containing the iron
supplement were contaminated by
melamine at its detection limit, even
though none had been detected in testing.
“We take a very conservative approach
when it comes to food safety. It’s highly
unlikely that a chemical found to be safe
would turn out not to be, while something
thought to be unsafe could prove to be
okay at low levels. So we always calculate
risk based on the highest possible dose
of the substance consumed by the most
sensitive individual.”
In this case, John says, it was a relatively
straightforward calculation.
Safety as the sum of all things
÷ 100
The toxic effect of eating melamine-tainted
food is fairly well known as a result of data
collected following a melamine-tainted
pet food scandal in the United States
in 2007, then the 2008 adulteration of
milk with melamine in China. From this
information and the test results, John had
some certainties as a starting point for his
calculation.
John knew the highest level of melamine
likely to be found in the iron supplement
ingredient. He knew how much of the
iron supplement ingredient was used in
the food. He knew how much of the final
food product a person would be likely
to consume, based on national nutrition
surveys which supply a wealth of useful
detail about what we eat, how much and
how often. He also knew from animal
studies the highest dose of melamine at
which there is no observable adverse effect
(NOAEL) on the body, and that melamine
doesn’t accumulate but is excreted fairly
rapidly through urine.
As well as considering what we know
for certain, the calculation also factors
in all those things we don’t know, aren’t
sure about, or which vary from individual
to individual. These ‘uncertainty factors’
include: the difference in the effects of the
substance on laboratory animals for which
we often have accurate data and humans,
for which we may not; varying ages, body
weights and health of consumers; whether
the available data is complete; and the
quality of the available data which may also
be variable.
Traditionally, the dose just below where an
effect can be seen is divided by uncertainty
factors in order to build in an acceptable
level of safety. The calculation always starts
by dividing by two 10-fold uncertainty
factors to account for the fact that usually
the available data applies to animals rather
than humans, and for differences between
individuals. That means assessment of
the risk starts with estimating a level of
contaminant a person needs to consume
that is more than 100 times less than that
we would expect someone to consume
before showing any observable adverse
health effect. Further uncertainty factors
(UF) are then used as appropriate.
The calculation looks like this:
Highest acceptable intake =
NOAEL
UF1 x UF2 x UF3 x UF4… etc
(where UF1 is for extrapolation of data from
animals, UF2 is variation between most and
least sensitive human, UF3 is quality of data,
UF4 is used if the available data is less than
ideal, and so on.)
From this information John could calculate
the potential health risks to anyone
eating food containing the contaminated
ingredient. On the basis of assuming the
worst, he calculated the highest possible
amount of melamine that a susceptible
person might eat each day.
“In this case, by comparing the highest
possible intake of melamine with the
acceptable intake we were able to say with
certainty that the melamine in the imported
ingredient did not pose a health risk. But it
shouldn’t have been there. People often think
that if it shouldn’t be there and there are no
safe levels set for it, then it’s dangerous but it
doesn’t always work like that.
“The definition of ‘safety’ in these sorts
of incidents is our best judgement about
the level of exposure to something that
has a reasonable certainty of no harm to
humans. People take risks of varying sorts
every day. We drive cars, cross busy roads
with earphones impairing our awareness, use
electrical equipment, smoke cigarettes. It’s
how we manage those risks that’s important.”
Managing food safety risks is another story,
John says.
“In NZFSA we try to keep risk assessment and
risk management separate. As someone who
assesses risk I have to be completely focussed
on what the science is telling me is safe or
not safe. It’s up to the risk managers to then
balance the science and other factors such as
what people believe to be an acceptable level
of risk to come up with strategies or tactics
for ensuring that any risk is acceptable while
being fair and necessary.”
What does
toxicological
risk assessment
involve?
Toxicologists are the science world’s
jacks of all trades, according to NZFSA
toxicologist John Reeve.
“Toxicologists have to have a good
understanding of the life sciences:
pharmacology, biochemistry, genetics,
physiology, and so on, because many of
the systems affected by toxins are interrelated or interdependent. Changes to
one organ can cause changes to other
systems or parts of the body.”
Toxicological risk assessment involves
biological and systemic detective work,
tracking and understanding changes in
the body possibly caused by chemicals,
rather than the ‘normal’ fluctuations or
unrelated events that occur from time to
time in the body’s systems.
“We’re all subject to daily ups and
downs of moods or physiological
responses. These reactions might be due
to a toxin, or they may be blips that are
entirely unrelated and natural. The trick
is working out which is which.”
June 2009 17
FOODSAFE PARTNERSHIP
Foodfocus
New Foodsafe Partnership strategy For the first time, the Foodsafe
Partnership is using a targeted
approach to try to improve
food safety practices in the
home. Such an approach tries
to influence behaviour for a
social good. The new strategy is
based on the New Zealand skin
cancer control strategy, which
is an internationally-recognised
model with a proven track record
of success in getting people to
reduce their risk of skin cancer.
“The Foodsafe Partnership has adopted this
approach because it focuses on positive
behaviour change which we hope will
translate into better food safety practices in
the home,” says New Zealand Food Safety
Authority (NZFSA) communications manager
Gary Bowering.
Food safety messages are being targeted
at different consumer groups according to
the setting in which they operate such as at
home, at school, at work, or at play. It has
been estimated that 40% of all foodborne
illness in New Zealand is caused by inadequate
food handling practices in the home.
“This is an area that cannot be regulated
and relies on public information to change
behaviour,” Gary says.
The Foodsafe Partnership working group
compromises Consumer NZ, Environmental
Science Research, regional public health
boards, the poultry industry and NZFSA.
The partnership is developing a strategic
direction and priorities to 2012.
The Foodsafe Partnership’s goal for this
year is to reduce the percentage of New
Zealanders who get a foodborne illness. Its
three main objectives are to:
1. increase the proportion of consumers who
are aware and understand the causes and
consequences of foodborne illness
2. increase the proportion of consumers
who use good food safety practices, and
3. increase stakeholder support and
participation in Foodsafe Partnership
activities.
The partnership’s strategies to achieve these
objectives include:
• educational campaigns aimed at food
preparers
• identifying key areas associated with
recreation to promote food safety
• incorporating food safety messages
into existing education resources and
networks
•
•
engagement at a national and local level
to increase stakeholder support
using current stakeholders to increase
message reach and frequency.
“The Foodsafe Partnership strategic
plan has clearly defined goals and
objectives, and is well supported by
everyone involved,” Gary says.
The New Zealand Foodsafe Partnership was
established in 1998 to promote consistent
and appropriate food safety messages to
New Zealand consumers.
The partnership is open to anyone interested
in promoting food safety messages. It
comprises representatives of the food industry
including food and service organisations,
consumer groups, science organisations,
public health groups and NZFSA.
National Foodsafe campaigns have been
running for the last five years with increased
emphasis during the summer months and
a particular focus on a national Foodsafe
week in November.
Visit the Foodsafe Partnership website
at http://www.foodsafe.org.nz/ for
more information.
FBI case files coming
to your school
There has been an overwhelmingly positive response from primary and
intermediate schools in New Zealand to book the new ‘FBI Case File’ resource.
It has already been successfully used this year in a number of schools to teach
students about the importance of food safety in the home.
The mobile pull-up stands replicate a ‘crime scene’ and can be set up in a
classroom or library so students can solve the food safety crimes with the help
of clues in the ‘FBI Case File’ booklet.
The clues revolve around hand hygiene and the 4Cs of food safety (clean, cook,
cover, chill).
This is a free resource and can be booked on a two week rotational basis by
contacting [email protected] or phone 04 894 2526.
18 June 2009
FOOD SAFETY
Foodfocus
Hot tips for a safe sausage sizzle
Sausage sizzles are a popular
way to raise money for schools,
sports teams, charities and
community groups. But if the food
is not prepared, stored or cooked
properly it can make people sick.
Event organisers need to ensure
the food they sell at their sausage
sizzle is safe.
NZFSA has published information online called
Hot tips for a safe and successful sausage
sizzle. It is part of a series of food handler
guidance information sheets which give food
safety tips for selling food at occasional events
and food safety tips for event organisers, as
well as sausage sizzle advice.
there may be local requirements, particularly
concerning where food may be sold. Before
making any firm plans, event organisers
should contact their local council to discuss
what food they want to sell and where they
want to sell it. The council’s Environmental
Health Officer will tell you about any
requirements the council may have, such as
a permit to sell the food.
Hot tips for a safe and successful
sausage sizzle and other food handler
guidance can be viewed on NZFSA’s
website at http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/
policy-law/projects/domestic-foodreview/ under the section on Food
Handler Guidance
Most fundraising activities involving food,
including sausage sizzles, are not required
to meet the same registration requirements
expected of food businesses. However,
While it is very unlikely a person could eat
enough to be at risk, the unripe green berries
can be mildly toxic and should be avoided.
Black nightshade (Solanum nigrum) berries
have been found in several packets of
frozen vegetables. The plant is distinct from
deadly nightshade (Atropa belladonna)
which can be fatal but is rare in New
Zealand.
NZFSA compliance director Dr Geoff Allen
says the contamination probably occurred
when the berries were inadvertently
harvested with peas.
Hot tips for a safe and successful sausage
sizzle provides clear advice to help
fundraisers plan, prepare, cook and serve
food safely.
In particular, you should:
• Organise to collect food from your
supplier as close as possible to the event
so it is fresh and at a safe temperature.
• Ensure everyone who will help on the
stall thoroughly washes their hands, is
clean and healthy, and free from colds,
cuts and skin rashes.
• Cash handlers must not handle food
unless they wash their hands thoroughly
between tasks.
• Store food so it’s kept clean and
protected from contamination, such as
in a chilly bin or portable fridge.
• Cook sausages right through to the
centre, until there are no pink bits left.
• Keep cold food cold (below 4ºC) and
hot food hot (above 60ºC) to prevent
harmful microbes from growing.
• Throw away any cooked food that has
been on display but hasn’t been sold by
the end of the day.
Not berry nice
The New Zealand Food Safety Authority
(NZFSA) is investigating how black
nightshade berries got into some frozen
vegetables packets.
“Black nightshade is a common weed
in New Zealand so it’s possible for small
numbers of the berries to be found in any
product that contains peas.”
While NZFSA believes it is unlikely to be a
safety issue, it is not appropriate for frozen
vegetable products to contain the numbers
of berries that have been reported.
Tasty treat with a nasty bite
It may be a traditional treat to lick the bowl
and spoon when baking, but the New
Zealand Food Safety Authority is advising
against it after an outbreak of salmonellosis
was linked to some brands of flour.
Eating uncooked flour in batter or homemade play-dough is one of the possible
activities associated with a salmonellosis
outbreak in December 2008.
Raw ingredients such as flour and eggs
aren’t sterile. Cooking will kill any bacteria
and make home-baked goods safe to
eat. Licking the bowls and utensils during
cooking exposes you to raw ingredients that
could contain harmful bacteria.
“We are working with the companies
concerned to make sure they have put in
place solutions that will minimise the chance
of a repeat of the problem,” Geoff says.
Unripe black nightshade berries are similar
in size, shape and colour to peas but have
star-like scales where the berry originally
connected to the stem. They also reveal
seeds when squeezed.
If you find berries in a frozen vegetable
product, remove them or return the product
to your supplier. If you find a large number
of berries, alert your local public health unit,
and see a doctor if you have any health
concerns.
June 2009 19
FACT SHEET
Foodfocus
Intense food sweeteners
Intense sweeteners replace the sweetness normally provided by sugar to
provide low calorie or sugar-free alternatives.
Intense sweeteners cannot always simply
replace sugar or other sweeteners as sugar
may also be used for other reasons in food
such as to thicken, help retain moisture
or prevent ingredients from separating (as
thickeners, humectants or emulsifiers) or to
provide bulk and texture.
Unlike sugar, intense sweeteners contain
little energy so they are suitable for people
with medical conditions affected by sugar
– such as diabetes or obesity. Their use can
also reduce tooth decay caused by added
sugars.
Intense sweeteners are often called ‘artificial
sweeteners’ but some are naturallyoccurring plant extracts such as steviol
glycosides from the stevia plant. Intense
sweeteners are food additives and are
regulated under the Australia New Zealand
Food Standards Code.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand
(FSANZ) carries out safety assessments to
ensure the permissions to use food additives
including these sweeteners do not exceed
safe levels even in high consumers.
Intense sweeteners are identified on labels
under the class name ‘Sweetener’ followed
by their name or number.
A-Z of intense food sweeteners
These intense sweeteners are approved for
use in food in New Zealand:
Acesulphame potassium (950)
(Acesulphame-K) is 200 times sweeter than
sugar. Acesulphame potassium is used as
a tabletop sweetener, and with aspartame
in many food and drinks, confectionery,
canned food, oral hygiene products and
pharmaceuticals.
Alitame (956) is about 2000 times sweeter
than sugar, about 10 times sweeter than
aspartame and has no aftertaste. It is used
in toiletries and pharmaceuticals, but rarely
as a sweetener in foods or drink.
20 June 2009
Aspartame (951) is more than 200 times
sweeter than sugar. It is used in low-energy
or sugar-free foods, including carbonated
soft drinks, yoghurt and confectionery.
Aspartame has been safely used for at
least 25 years as a sugar alternative, and
is one of the most studied sweeteners on
the market. Aspartame does carry a risk
for a small number of people with the rare
inherited disorder phenylketonuria (PKU).
They are advised not to consume aspartame
because they are unable to metabolise the
amino acid phenylalanine, which could
accumulate to potentially harmful levels. All
products containing aspartame must have a
warning about phenylalanine.
Aspartame-acesulphame salt (962) is
about 350 times sweeter than sugar and
is produced by combining aspartame
and acesulphame potassium under acidic
conditions. It is used in a range of foods,
drinks, confectionery and chewing gum.
As with aspartame (951), all products
containing this sweetener must have a
warning about phenylalanine.
Cyclamate (952) is 30–50 times sweeter
than sugar. It is used in confectionery and
many foods and drinks. It is often paired
with saccharin to make the food product
taste better.
Neotame (961) is 7,000 to 13,000 times
sweeter than sugar. Neotame is used in
a range of food, canned fruit, drinks and
confectionery. It is structurally similar to
aspartame, but the potential release of
phenylalanine from neotame is so limited
that a warning for patients with PKU is not
necessary.
Saccharin (954) is about 300 times sweeter
than sugar and has no calories. It is used
in many foods and drinks, confectionery,
medicines and toothpaste.
Stevia (Steviol glycosides) (960) is a
naturally-occurring sweetener from plants in
the sunflower family. It has a slower onset
and longer duration of taste than sugar. It is
250–300 times sweeter than sugar.
Sucralose (955) is about 600 times sweeter
than sugar and has no calories. It is commonly
used in food, drinks and confectionery.
Thaumatin (957) is an intensely sweet
tasting protein (about 100,000 times
sweeter than sugar) originally extracted
from a West African plant. It can now be
manufactured by genetically-modified
bacteria. Thaumatin tastes different from
sugar because the sweet sensation builds
very slowly and lingers for a long time
leaving a liquorice-like aftertaste.
Sugar alcohol sweeteners
There are a range of food additives other
than intense sweeteners that act as
sweeteners but are generally less sweet
than sugar and are often used for their
other properties, as emulsifiers, thickeners
or humectants.
These are sugar alcohols which cannot
be completely digested, so eating too
much can lead to diarrhoea. Certain sugar
alcohols used as sweeteners are required
to have an advisory statement that excess
consumption may have a laxative effect.
Sugar alcohol sweeteners include: Erythritol
(968), Isomalt (953), Sorbitol (420),
Mannitol (421), Xylitol (967), Maltitol (965),
and Lactitol (966).
For a copy of NZFSA’s brochure Intense
food sweeteners look under food
additives in the consumer section of the
website (www.nzfsa.govt.nz) or call
0800 693 721 or email [email protected]
FOODBORNE ILLNESSES
Foodfocus
A pain in the gut – E.coli O157:H7
There are a wide variety of
Symptoms of E. coli O157:H7
bacteria, fungi, parasites, viruses
E. coli O157:H7 is a notifiable disease in
New Zealand - there are approximately
100 reported cases each year. This is
relatively low compared to other notifiable
diseases such as campylobacteriosis and
salmonellosis but due to the severe effects
of this bacterium it is of great concern.
and other organisms living
in the environment that can
cause illness. Many of these can
contaminate food. Escherichia
coli (E. coli) is one bacterium that
can make people sick through
exposure to contaminated food.
E. coli is a common bacterium that normally
lives in the intestines of humans and warmblooded animals such as sheep, cows, cats
and dogs. Most strains of this bacterium are
harmless but some strains, such as E. coli
O157:H7, can cause severe gastroenteritis
and kidney damage.
Sources of contamination
Foods and causes linked overseas to E.
coli O157:H7 infections include eating
undercooked meat, usually minced meat,
contaminated during the slaughter process,
eating raw vegetables that haven’t been
washed properly, drinking untreated water
or unpasteurised milk, and handling farm
animals that are shedding the bacterium.
In contrast, not one human case in
New Zealand has been attributed to the
consumption of regulated food.
Like any illness of the gut, the bacteria are
shed for a fortnight or more and are easily
spread to food and surfaces through poor
hand hygiene.
People infected by E. coli O157:H7 can
experience a range of symptoms. In most
cases symptoms appear within one to eight
days and include severe abdominal pain,
watery diarrhoea that can become bloody,
and occasional vomiting. People who
experience these symptoms are advised to
seek medical attention quickly.
Most people recover fully without
antibiotics within five to 10 days. However
in a small number of severe cases,
particularly in children under five years of
age or older people, the infection can cause
a complication called haemolytic uraemic
syndrome (HUS). This is a serious disease
which causes the red blood cells to rupture,
leading to anaemia and kidney failure. In
these cases blood transfusions or bloodclotting factors, as well as kidney dialysis
may be necessary. While most people with
HUS recover fully, it can be fatal.
Refrigeration will stop E. coli from
growing but it won’t kill the bacteria. Raw
vegetables, such as lettuce and spinach,
should be rinsed thoroughly under clean
running water to wash off dirt and faeces,
and any associated bacteria. The outer
leaves of lettuces, such as iceberg lettuces,
should be removed and discarded. If
possible, pat vegetables dry with a paper
towel to avoid splashing any remaining
bacteria onto other foods or surfaces.
E. coli is heat sensitive so cooking food
thoroughly will remove the risk of infection.
Bacteria contaminate the outside surfaces
of whole meat so if you like your fillet
or rib-eye steak rare make sure that the
surface is well seared.
Particular attention should be paid to
minced meat products where the bacteria
may be mixed right through to the centre.
In 1993, eating undercooked hamburgers
at a fast-food chain in the United States
resulted in hundreds of people falling ill and
the death of four children. Make sure the
cooked meat is brown throughout (with
no pink bits), and the juices run clear. If in
doubt, use a meat thermometer to check
the internal temperature – it should be
above 65ºC.
Prevention
Always follow the ‘wash + dry = clean
hands’ rule immediately after touching
animals, using the toilet, and before
touching food. This will reduce the risk of
spreading the bacteria.
June 2009 21
IN FOCUS
Foodfocus
ACVM operations manager Maree Zinzley
ACVM under the spotlight
Agricultural chemicals and
veterinary medicines imported
or manufactured for sale
and use in New Zealand are
subject to the provisions of the
Agricultural Compounds and
Veterinary Medicines (ACVM)
Act, administered by NZFSA.
With more than 2000 products
currently registered for sale and
use in New Zealand, NZFSA’s
ACVM operations programme
manager Maree Zinzley takes her
role very seriously. We invited
Maree to talk about the role her
team plays in ensuring NZFSA’s
commitments under the ACVM
Act are met.
Put very simply, NZFSA’s primary
responsibility is to ensure that any product
intended for use on animals, plants or
primary produce in New Zealand is safe,
and does what the product applicant says
it is going to do. I guess you could liken
our role to that of the Ministry of Health’s,
in the sense that they ensure human
medicines pose no risk to patients or users.
22 June 2009
NZFSA ensures agricultural chemicals, such
as fertilisers and pesticides, and veterinary
medicines pose no risks to public health,
trade in primary produce, animal welfare
and agricultural security. NZFSA also ensures
that the use of these products does not
exceed limits set for domestic food residues.
Under the provisions of the Act, NZFSA
assesses the risks associated with
agricultural chemicals or veterinary
medicines to determine their safety and
suitability for plants and animals. Before
any agricultural chemical or veterinary
medicine can be imported, manufactured,
sold or administered in New Zealand, NZFSA
approval must be sought.
Products undergo robust
assessment
NZFSA’s approvals process is very robust
because we need to be convinced of the
safety and efficacy of the product when it
is used as it is supposed to be. The process
of registering an agricultural chemical or
veterinary medicine for the ‘first timer’ is
quite complex. People who are new to the
process are encouraged to talk to one of
the consultants listed on our website before
submitting their application.
Applicants are required to submit a draft
product label, a product data sheet
(essentially an application form) which
includes key information about the product
such as if it’s a powder or a liquid, the
intended target animal or plant, and how it
will be administered. They must also provide
supporting chemical and manufacturing
data and proof that the manufacturer
has an approved good manufacturing
programme (GMP) in place. Every
application is assigned a unique ACVM
identifying number – if the application is
successful, this is the number consumers see
printed on the label of a registered trade
name product.
Once we are satisfied that the
documentation is complete, the file is
then handed over to our technical team
for review. This team comprises people
who appraise the veterinary, agricultural
chemical, chemistry, and maximum residue
level aspects of each product. There are also
a number of specialist experts available.
The criteria used to assess the safety and
suitability of an agricultural chemical
differs to that of a veterinary medicine. All
products must comply with the levels set
under the Food Act for residues allowed
in domestic foods, and there must be
sufficient consumer information available
about the product on the label. We also
look at the effect the product will have on
plants, produce and animals. In the case of
veterinary medicines, the appraiser would
IN FOCUS
also consider whether the product is likely
to cause any unnecessary pain or distress
to the animal. We all know that some
medicines cause side effects. We need to
be sure that the side effects are not going
to compromise the health and wellbeing of
the animal during the treatment process. In
some instances, appraisers will recommend
that an application is approved subject to
specific conditions being imposed, such as
the product can only be administered by a
registered veterinarian.
Before any recommendation can be made
to approve an agricultural chemical or
veterinary medicine, appraisers must be
firmly convinced that the data provided
has met the requirements, and that any
risks associated with the product can be
managed.
Straightforward applications for the
registration of brand new chemicals that
have been submitted with a complete
dossier of information are likely to be
approved within six to twelve months.
However, for more complex products or
where there is insufficient supporting
data, or approval is needed from the
Environmental Risk Management Authority
(ERMA), or the Ministry of Health (MoH),
this can take longer.
NZFSA operates a ‘smart-track’ system for
simpler applications, for example where a
registrant is updating an application due
to a change in manufacturer. Registrants
of agricultural compounds and veterinary
medicines are required to renew their
product registrations every three years.
Border control
Agricultural chemicals and veterinary
medicines cannot be imported into New
Zealand unless they are registered with
the ACVM group. MAF Biosecurity New
Zealand (MAF BNZ) operates a ‘class
determination process’ on behalf of NZFSA
at the border. Products purchased overseas
that can’t be clearly identified are held
Foodfocus
in quarantine until MAF BNZ receives
notification from NZFSA that the products
can be cleared.
Products exempt from
registration
What are
agricultural
compounds?
Not all products available in the New
Zealand market require registration, such as
some domestic pet shampoos. As long as
the product isn’t making claims to treat or
cure a specific condition or disease, and the
ingredients are recognised as being safe –
they must be listed on NZFSA’s ‘substances
generally recognised as safe’ (GRAS)
list – the product may be exempt from
registration. This is a difficult area to police,
especially with the influx of homeopathic
products on the market that often claim to
treat animal ailments. People need to be
aware that they use these types of products
largely at their own risk if they don’t have
an ACVM registration number printed on
the label.
Agricultural compounds are agricultural
chemicals and veterinary medicines
used in the production of primary
produce (farmed plants or animals).
They are also used by home gardeners,
and for the health of domestic animals
such as cats and dogs.
Types of agricultural
compounds:
•
veterinary medicines, including
those used on domestic pets
•
agricultural chemicals, including
herbicides, fungicides, insecticides,
plant growth regulators, surfactants,
and adjuvants
Non-compliance
•
NZFSA takes non-compliance with the Act
very seriously. The best way to tell if an
agricultural chemical or veterinary medicine
is registered is to look for the unique ACVM
identifier number printed on the label.
NZFSA also publishes a list of registered
trade name products on its website.
vertebrate toxic agents that are
used to kill animals such as possums
and rodents
•
fertilisers and soil conditioners
•
animal feeds, including some
domestic pet foods.
People who suspect a product of making
false claims, or suspect products of
being imported, manufactured, sold or
administered illegally are encouraged to
report it to NZFSA.
For more information about the ACVM
group or to view an up-to-date list
of registered agricultural compounds
or veterinary medicines visit NZFSA’s
website at http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/
acvm/registers-lists/index.htm
June 2009 23
DOMESTIC FOOD REVIEW
Foodfocus
FCPs working well, councils say
Nine months on from the voluntary implementation of food control plans (FCP) for the food service and
catering sector, benefits for both food operators and councils are starting to show, according to those
overseeing the introduction of the programme.
Local government and NZFSA staff have
been sharing information about how the
new system is working, and discussing
next steps in the voluntary implementation
programme. They have highlighted a
number of successful strategies, and
identified some areas where changes would
be beneficial.
Most reported the new system’s change
in focus – from inspecting premises to
checking a business’s food safety system
– was helping to improve relationships
between operators and councils.
“This new approach changes the way
environmental health officers interact with
food operators. It encourages a system of
co-operation and dialogue and has a real
focus on actual food handling practices
ensuring that food safety is put first. It’s
about working positively in partnership
with food operators and guiding them
through the changes, rather than the
old system where we tended to focus on
the negative, pointing out mistakes and
issuing instructions,” said Carole Simpson,
Auckland City Council’s environmental
health team leader.
Councils working together to share
expertise and resources was cited as another
bonus of the system. Rodney District Council
environmental health manager Ian Farrell
said that as a medium-sized council, they
don’t have the resources to run food safety
training courses so being able to share
expertise with Auckland City Council is a
great help.
A similar scheme is underway in the
Wellington region, with the Wellington
Regional Cluster Group welcoming
operators from Upper Hutt, Hutt, and
Porirua City Councils, and Kapiti, Masterton
and South Wairarapa District Councils to
join training programmes held at various
locations across the Wellington region.
Napier City Council’s regulatory services
manager Mike Webster said some operators
were initially concerned at what they
perceived to be considerable paperwork.
“At first operators are a bit put off by the
size of the FCP but once they’ve worked
through it, they find it takes them just an
extra few minutes each day to record the
required information. It becomes part of
their routine just like unlocking the doors
and turning on the lights,” said Mike.
Local government representatives and
NZFSA staff are now looking at gaps in the
content and scope of the FCP. Extra topics
such as dealing with private water supplies
and foods such as sushi and kebabs are
being developed and will be available soon.
The local council staff are confident about
the future of food control plans and are
looking forward to increasing the number of
operators registering plans in their areas.
Food safety in 5 languages
Chinese, Korean, Vietnamese and
Hindi food business operators now
have access to a free food safety
management plan in their own
languages.
The Food Control Plan for food service and
catering businesses has been translated into
the four most common languages of food
operators (after English) in New Zealand
and is available to download from NZFSA’s
website.
“It’s important to make this information
accessible to the large number of operators
who don’t speak English as a first language.
It will reduce barriers for operators and
improve food safety for everyone,” says
NZFSA’s policy director Carole Inkster.
24 June 2009
The Food Control Plan provides operators
with a ready-written food safety
management system. It identifies potential
risks at each point of a food business’s
operation, from receiving and storing goods,
to preparing, cooking, displaying and
serving food, and contains procedures to
keep food safe at each point.
Sixty-four of New Zealand’s 73 local councils
have joined the voluntary food safety
management scheme and more than 280
food operators have signed up since the
plan was launched in August last year. It
aims to reduce the rate of foodborne illness
in New Zealand.
After downloading the plan from NZFSA’s
website, food operators can contact their
local council to help get them underway.
The Food Control Plan in all five
languages can be found at: http://
www.nzfsa.govt.nz/policy-law/projects/
domestic-food-review/food-controlplans.htm
RESOURCES FROM NZFSA
Foodfocus
Publications
NZFSA publishes a variety of booklets, leaflets and fact sheets covering various food safety topics.
All are available for download from NZFSA’s website www.nzfsa.govt.nz. Hard copies can be ordered
by freephone 0800 693 721 or email [email protected]
Eating safely when you have
food allergies
This 24-page A5 booklet provides
information that will help allergy
sufferers make better food choices when
managing their allergy.
Understanding food labelling
FOOD LABELL
ING
This booklet will help anyone who wants
to understand food labels, including date
marks, such as ‘Best before’ and Use by’.
Understand
ing food labe
Te Pou O
ranga
Consumer Resource
Catalogue
My cool lunchbox
Meet the bugs
A A5 size 4-panel brochure gives simple
An
ffood safety messages for school kids and
parents to help keep lunchboxes ‘cool’.
p
An 8-panel brochure provides information
about the most common pathogens that
cause foodborne illness – their symptoms
and likely sources of infection.
Consumer Resource
Catalogue
Revised Food safety
in pregnancy
This 12-page A5 booklet lists the freely
available resources produced by NZFSA.
This is a handy reference for schools,
medical centres and anyone who
regularly uses food safety material.
Pregnant women have lower levels of
immunity than usual and may be more at
risk of getting diseases carried by food. This
booklet provides advice and guidance on
cooking, storing, and eating out – in New
Zealand and overseas. A 20-page A5 booklet..
otearoa
Te Pou Oranga Kai O A
Kai O A
otearo
ls
a
How to get your own free copy of Food Focus
NZFSA’s flagship quarterly publication, Food Focus, is freely available. Just fill out your details below and post or fax it back to us:
NZFSA, PO Box 2835, Wellington; fax 04 894 2501. Or call us on our freephone 0800 693 721 or email [email protected].
Please let us know if your address has changed so we can keep your details up to date. This will help us make sure you always get
your copy of Food Focus.
First name:
Phone number:
Last name:
Email address:
Job title:
Industry sector you most identify with:
Company name:
Postal address:
City and postcode:
Country:
Yes I would like to receive email notices in the future.
(To check you have the correct post code, visit New Zealand Post’s website www.nzpost.co.nz.)
June 2009 25
www.nzfsa.govt.nz
New Zealand Food Safety Authority
86 Jervois Quay
PO Box 2835, Wellington
NEW ZEALAND
Telephone 04 894 2500
Facsimile 04 894 2501
FOOD SAFETY CONCERNS
0800 NZFSA1 (0800 693 721)
ISSN 1175-9348 (Print)
ISSN 1178-170X (Online)