The “Food and Safety” is the assurance that food will not cause harm to consumers when they are prepared and / or eaten according to the purpose for which they are intended.
The “Food and Safety” and “food and safety” are two words used to express the same thing. If you sometimes use to use the second term (food and safety), it is fair to mark the difference between “food and safety” and “food security”.
The “food security”, contrary to common usage, refers in fact the safety of food supplies in sufficient quantity and adequate quality. The “Food and Safety” is therefore only one component of “food security”.
Food safety has become a major concern for consumers: it reflects a growing concern vis-à-vis a system designed to remove the eater of raw materials of its food, through the many changes leading to food eating more and more elaborate.
The aim of this paper is to present some basic concepts of food and safety as well as different approaches to it.
Fundamentals
Before discussing the different approaches to food and safety, it would be useful to address key concepts in this area to clarify and remove any confusion that may exist on their use.
Concept concept of danger and risk
Overall, danger is a person or thing that threatens the safety or lives of someone or something.
Restricted to the area of food and safety, the danger is defined as “a biological, chemical or physical agent in a food may cause an adverse effect on health” (ISO 22000: 2005).
A hazard in the food sector is characterized by:
His nature: biological, chemical or physical;
its frequency of occurrence: that its presence in food (data obtained by statistics) and
the seriousness of its consequences on health (manifestations): the ability to cause an adverse effect on health (data collected by epidemiological surveillance). Generally, the morbidity and mortality are two indicators that are used to objectively characterize the events of danger. However, media events and rumors are also factors which increase the severity of danger without being based on solid reasons.
The risk, often confused with danger, is the probability that an event otherwise occur during a defined period.
In the field of food and safety, risk is defined as “the function of probability of an adverse effect on health and the severity of this effect resulting from one or more hazards in food” (AFNOR) . In other words, the risk is the probability of expression of one or more hazards in the form of an adverse event.
The assessment of this probability is necessary to judge the appropriateness of taking into account a danger that “risk assessment”. It is used for hazard analysis in the context of HACCP, it is sometimes called “risk assessment”, but it is best to reserve “risk assessment” for the steps in “Risk Analysis “it is only the first of three stages. The other two stages are “risk management” and “risk communication”.
The risk assessment is based on scientific knowledge and has four stages:
Identification and Characterization of the hazards;
assessing the effects, and qualitative or quantitative;
the exposure assessment, qualitative and / or quantitative and
risk estimation: summary of previous steps, including uncertainties, the probability of occurrence and severity of adverse effects known or potential, in the context of the study.
Hazard Analysis and Risk Analysis
Risk analysis is generally the responsibility of States under the World Trade Organization (WTO). It can lead to regulatory decisions or incentives prescriptive. So it will never be asked of a professional to conduct “risk analysis” itself, for cons, it will have to conduct a “hazard analysis” as part of HACCP. Therefore, the trader will have to conduct a “risk assessment”, always in the context of this approach.
Hazard Analysis
The hazard analysis is the first principle of HACCP. It is, first, to list all hazards that may reasonably be expected at each stage – primary production, processing, manufacturing, distribution and final consumption. Then, we must conduct a risk assessment to identify hazards to eliminate or reduce them to acceptable levels.
For each hazard deemed it necessary to consider any measures to be used for control.
Risk Analysis
Risk analysis is a systematic way to better assess the various aspects related to risk and to foresee all the consequences related to its management.
According to a definition developed by an expert consultation jointly organized by FAO and WHO (Geneva, 13-17 March 1995) and adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (session of June 1997), risk analysis includes three components: risk assessment, risk management and risk communication.
Risk Assessment
Risk assessment (risk assessment) allows, through a structured approach to assess the risk and the positive and negative factors that influence it.
In practice, risk assessment is divided into two stages: the collection of epidemiological data and scientific exploitation of these.
The collection of epidemiological data:
The government can not act appropriately if they have relevant data. In terms of safety of food products, these data come mainly from epidemiological surveillance, that is to say the collection of information on all diseases and epidemics of origin.
The effectiveness of epidemiological surveillance can therefore be assessed against a primary endpoint: the completeness of data supplied by its network.
Epidemiological surveillance involves the establishment of a health information system.
Operation scientific data (expertise data):
Expertise data aims to identify and assess risks using data collected while taking into account scientific research on food safety. It provides an interface between the research and political bodies to which it offers various options for risk management.
Risk Management
Risk management (risk management) is to weigh policy alternatives based on the results of risk assessment and, if necessary, to select and implement appropriate control measures, including regulatory measures ;
Also, two categories can be distinguished in risk management: development regulation and its implementation.
Rulemaking:
A risk can be managed only if a regulation that specifies practices to meet the limits not to exceed, etc.. The regulations are developed in cooperation between different stakeholders: governments, authorities, scientists, professionals and consumers.
Implementation of regulations:
The implementation of the regulation is ensured by government through the inspection services and professionals, through the establishment of self.
The control applied by public bodies has two aspects: It takes a hand in the finished product to ensure compliance thereof and secondly, it comes at a professional level to ensure effectiveness of the control system they have implemented.
Risk Communication
Risk communication (risk communication) is all that relates to the exchange of information on the risks that it is between those responsible for their evaluation and management or between managers and other stakeholders (professionals and consumers).
Concept of crisis and crisis management
Definition of crisis
The term “crisis” is generally used to express a difficult situation. To define it properly, it must involve a specific area.
In the food, the food crisis has two definitions depending on the context in which it is used:
It is defined as “a situation of shortages, even famine” (Wikipedia) or
as “a food-borne collectively widespread, affecting dozens of people, or more, and has a broad impact media” (Wikipedia).
The first definition relates to food security (food availability), while the second definition, that which interests us is related to food safety. However, this definition is incomplete because it ignores the nutritional risk. Indeed, the consequences of poor nutrition (anemia iron for example) can sometimes be more serious than the food-borne infections. In addition, the number of people affected is not an indicator for triggering a crisis of food safety, it is especially the degree of media coverage of hazard events that triggers the crisis. The examples below give us proof.
Some recent food crisis
Crises related to food safety headlines more and more a chronicle, each having lived more intensely than before. This importance, more and more increasing, given the crisis of health foods is due largely to the media often played a role as an amplifier.
Crisis of mad cow
The “crisis of mad cow disease” means, in the 1990s, the collapse of market beef due to a sense of concern for consumers after the epidemic of bovine spongiform encephalopathy that affected European farms from 1986. This disease, also called “disease of mad cow is suspected to transmit to humans a variant of the disease” Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. This crisis has been a huge media coverage, despite the very low number of human cases, about 100 people worldwide.
After a long hesitation, the European Community in 1996 decreed the ban on beef from Britain, which was first recognized outbreak. The disease gradually reaches the rest of Europe. To limit its development, several countries decided to systematically destroy the herds in which an animal is reached.
On this occasion, the audience discovers that the animals intended for consumption are fed only grass and plants, but also dietary supplements of mineral origin, synthetic or animal.
As a precaution, consumers buy less beef, causing the collapse of the market. The meat of poultry have benefited from the crisis, thus registering significant increases.
The European Union and the countries concerned have reacted by introducing legislation to reassure consumers and ensure better food safety: control of imports and farming, hygiene and stricter implementation of traceability systems .
Crisis chicken dioxin
On May 28, 1999 European real crisis begins. The Ministry of Health Belgian withdrew from sale all chickens and eggs produced in Belgium as a high rate of substance similar to dioxin has indeed been discovered in a lot of animal fat used as food for poultry
Despite the presence of a single batch suspect, the European Commission has decided to withdraw from the market and destroy all chickens and eggs may come from Belgian farms. For its part France is blocking the “precaution” the production of certain farms.
The crisis has had a wide media coverage, but no deaths were recorded. Consumption of poultry meat has greatly lowered. But a rapid response by the government and the poultry industry (poultry and birds) were quickly mitigated the effects of the economic crisis.
Listeriosis crisis
The listeriosis crisis has affected France twice in 1992 and 2000. In 2000, she was responsible for 3 deaths. In 1992, 85 deaths were officially attributed to listeriosis. However, the weight of media deaths in 2000 is compared with the benefits recorded in 1992 as a result of many deaths.
Melamine in food products
Melamine (1,3,5-triazine-2 ,4,6-triamine in the IUPAC nomenclature) belongs to the family of amino resins derived from urea, thiourea and cyanamide. Its formula is C3H6N6 and has a high content of nitrogen atom.
Melamine has several times been intentionally introduced into food to make believe they were richer in protein than in reality. Indeed, the analytical methods used measure the rate of nitrogen content in the sample to connect the protein level. We then realized that adding a compound rich in nitrogen can cheat these tests easily and cheaply.
In March 2007, an agri-food scandal has made that fact known in North America, with the recall of 60 million cans of food for dogs and cats manufactured in China and sold under different brands, the United States, the Canada and Mexico. These boxes contained wheat gluten contaminated with melamine. The toxic melamine in some circumstances could cause serious kidney complications, including the formation of kidney stones, which may explain some deaths of dogs and cats that consumed the food.
In May, July and finally in September 2008, four Chinese babies died and tens of thousands have fallen sick after consuming the artificial infant milk containing melamine. Several thousands of tons of contaminated products have been withdrawn. However, this crisis, which coincided with the Olympics, has not seen a high media profile. Indeed, the instructions given to Chinese media during this period rank among others about food safety as “off limits”.
Crisis management
Crisis management is the set of measures adopted by the government to return to normalcy.
Crisis management is based on two principles:
The implemented corrective measures in order to stop or mitigate the consequences of the crisis and stop its spread: the sick, recall or withdrawal of the suspected products, consumer awareness, etc..
The implementation of preventive measures to avoid reoccurrence of the crisis again. In this context, risk analysis is the basic tool for developing a prevention strategy.
Food safety: One goal, several approaches
The main purpose of food safety is to protect consumer health. This claim is one of the fundamental rights of consumers that are recognized by the United Nations: “Consumer protection against risks to their health and safety.”
To achieve this goal, two approaches can be distinguished: the classical or traditional approach and the new approach.
Traditional approach
This approach is based primarily on a food control at the end of string. The measures may be taken by professionals to control their products are part of a proactive approach and are imposed by any regulation. Food safety is a mission of government.
The effectiveness of this approach remains limited. Indeed, it relies on repressive measures against the offender and does not provide for remedies and / or preventive remedy for non-compliance and avoid the non-conforming product is consumed elsewhere. In addition, food safety can be ensured by the involvement of all operators in the food chain.
New Approach
The various food crises, including the crisis of mad cow in 1996, was originally a challenge to the foundations governing food safety. Thus was born the new approach to food safety.
The new approach is based on two principles:
The separation between assessment and risk management and
A comprehensive approach based on the food chain “from farm to fork”.
Principle of separation of assessment and risk management
The separation between risk assessment and risk management can not turn the scientific advice for management decisions. Indeed, when the two tasks are not separate, administration tends to rule out any evaluation that thwarts the management guidelines previously defined. The separation of organic and functional assessment and risk management is needed to ensure food safety.
Principle of the approach based on the Food Chain
To the extent that governments are not able to provide only the control of each link in the food chain, the overall approach involves significant administrative reorganization and a change in the general philosophy of regulation to incorporate more preventive approach based on regulation shared between government, professionals and consumers.
The holistic approach assumes complete coverage of the food chain, both in regulation to that of controls. It is based on accountability of all operators in the food chain, each in what concerns:
The state conducts risk analysis and determines, by regulation, the objectives for food safety. It ensures that these rules are respected at all levels of the food chain.
The accountability of professionals based on the development of HACCP, hygiene and traceability as basic tools for the control of food safety. Professionals must identify the operations of their production line in which the potential risks of contamination are highest and to concentrate largely controls on these critical points. The government checks for their part must ensure the effectiveness of checks carried out by professionals.
Consumers, meanwhile, exert considerable pressure to ensure that professionals are becoming more vigilant and more governments improve their tools to monitor and ensure food safety.
Adaptation of existing control systems to the new approach
Most countries adapt now, according to their traditions and administrative constraints of their own, their national imperative to approach the global food chain.
In France, the draft law on the sanitary quality of food for human consumption or animal responds to this integrated approach in extending controls on farm products and agricultural farms. It also harmonises the rules and sanctions controls, whatever the Product (animal or vegetable origin, produced or imported).
In the United States, two plans to improve food safety have been presented in 1997. They take into account all the links in the food chain to the consumer. The title of the first one, called “Farm to Table” in this regard is unequivocal.
In Morocco, the creation of the national office of the Food Safety (ONSA) and the draft law on food safety are also part of a process of adaptation of national control system to the new approach.
In other countries, arrangements for adapting the official control systems cover a relatively wide range, ranging from maintaining the traditional checks to a quasi-privatizing the inspection services. The most radical change is embodied in New Zealand has considered a possible privatization of part of the inspection service of the Ministry of Agriculture: the state simply to set outcomes and of ensure control checks, routine checks being entrusted to private parties.
