IS THE FOOD STANDARDS AGENCY’S ENFORCEMENT ACTION PROPORTIONATE TO THE
RISK?
A lack of transparency and
information forthcoming from the Food Standards Agency is fuelling speculation
on the exact nature of the issues identified during recent audits of meat
cutting plants and cold stores. When the concerns first came to light the
information released from the FSA was limited to the fact that “they had
uncovered serious non-compliance that
related to a number of issues including concerns about procedures and processes
around use by dates.” Since the communication no further clarification has been
circulated which has catalysed the media into searching for whistle blowers and
hypothesising that meat suppliers might have also been caught changing use by
dates and country of origin labelling.
The requirement to label foods with a minimum durability (best before
date) declaration is mandatory except for a few exemptions under Regulation
(EC) No 1169/2011. Within the regulations, the date of minimum durability of a
food is defined as the “date until which the food retains its specific
properties when properly stored.” The best before date relates to the quality
of the food and is not an indication of when the food becomes unsafe to eat.
The regulation then continues to state that “In the case of foods which,
from a microbiological point of view, are highly perishable and are therefore
likely after a short period to constitute an immediate danger to human health,
the date of minimum durability shall be replaced by the “use by” date. After
the “use by” date food shall be deemed to be unsafe.” Thus the use by date
relates to the safety of food.
The terms “highly perishable” and “short period of time” are not defined
within the regulation, which makes it problematic for both food producers and
regulators to assess whether some types of food should be marked with a use by
or a best before date. The responsibility of setting a durability date lies
with the food business operator however the chosen durability chosen can be
challenged by the enforcing authority.
With regard to the durability marking of raw meat, there are two schools
of thought amongst food safety professionals. It is a well-known fact that raw
meat is highly likely to be contaminated with bacteria which, if the shelf life
is too long will have time to multiply. Therefore raw meat should have a use by
date. However, a handful of food safety professionals argue that raw meat
should be given a best before date and consequently they were mystified by the
claim that any alleged non-compliance related to use by dates at all.
Most raw meat sold on the open market, is intended to be eaten only when
it has been thoroughly cooked, although it has got to be said that there are a
handful of meat establishments that have official approval for the production
of speciality raw minced meat and raw meat preparations which are intended to
be eaten less than thoroughly cooked. These establishments have to be able to
prove that their products will not present a risk to health if served lightly
cooked, for example pink burgers and they usually sell directly to catering
outlets only. That aside, if standard raw meat cooking is undertaken correctly
then any food poisoning bacteria present, should be eliminated or at the very least, be reduced to a safe level.
But food poisoning bacteria are
not the only microorganisms found on raw meat. The surface of meat is teeming
with spoilage bacteria. Most food poisoning bacteria do not compete well with
other microorganisms and consequently spoilage bacteria will proliferate thus
controlling the growth of pathogens. Consequently the meat will noticeably
spoil before food poisoning bacteria could reach a level that might compromise
the safety of the meat. This hypothesis is the reasoning behind the belief by
some food safety professionals that raw meat should be allotted a best before
date. Obviously this supposition relies heavily on the competence of the person cooking the food and this might explain decisions made by food business
operators and why use by dates are so commonly found on prepacked raw meat.
One major area of concern among food safety professional regarding
pre-packed food arises when it is packed in a reduced Oxygen atmosphere, for
example vacuum packed or food packed under a modified atmosphere. The
potentially fatal food poisoning bacteria, Clostridium
botulinum will happily grow
under such conditions even when under refrigeration, producing a deadly toxin. For
this reason guidance has been issued by the Food Standards Agency limiting the
shelf life of chilled vacuum packaged foods etc. to a maximum of 10 days. However,
Clostridium botulinum will not grow
at temperatures below 3°C and the guidance expressly exempts foods that are
held at such low temperatures. The majority of cutting plants and cold stores
will be provided with walk in chiller units capable of maintaining temperatures
at just above freezing and consequently if they vacuum pack the meat for cold
storage, then their major issue with regard to durability will be to do with
the quality of the product rather than the safety. The hazard of the growth of Clostridium botulinum only becomes a
real issue when it leaves the control of the food business operator and the
product is in the hands of the retailer or the final consumer. To reduce food
waste, maybe the recommended 10 day shelf life clock should start ticking once
the pre-packed meat is dispatched.
The durability labelling of raw meat can be seen to be a contentious
issue and other nations in the developed world set a variety of standards. In
the U.S.A food business operators are allowed to store vacuum packed raw meat
for a maximum of 30 days if it is held at 5°C or below. However, perceived poor
food safety standards in America are the subject of much media attention at the
moment, so maybe they are not the best example to follow. In Australia vacuum packed raw meats are usually labelled with a best
before date and can have a recommended shelf life of 3 to 6 weeks for beef and
2 to 5 weeks for lamb, dependent on whether the raw meat is a whole primal cut
or sliced. The Australian guidance on choice of durability date labelling and recommended
shelf life has been established by The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial
Research Organisation (CSIRO) which claims that “under normal circumstances of
hygienic handling and storage, uncooked meat and meat products will be spoiled
before an unacceptable food-safety risk arises.”
Reducing food waste is high on many a governments’ agenda and back in
November 2017 the Waste and Resource Action Programme (WRAP) released a
document entitled Labelling Guidance – Best Practice on Food Date Labelling and
Storage Advice. The document carries the official logos of both The Food
Standards Agency and The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs
(DEFRA), although the document clearly states that “the content has not been
endorsed by the organisations and individuals featured within it.”
Although the guidance does bring a level of clarity to the durability
labelling requirements, it does contain some ambiguity with regard to the
labelling of raw meat. On one count it claims that a use by date is normally
applied to raw (“fresh”) meat. However, it then goes on to ask the question in
a decision tree scenario, “Is the food ready to eat (i.e. is intended by
the producer or manufacturer for direct human consumption without the need for
cooking or other processing, effective to reduce to an acceptable level or eliminate
microorganisms of concern)?” On answering “no” to this question, the decision
tree then asks “Could any microbiological hazard remain after the intended
cooking or other processing?” As thorough cooking of raw meat
will eliminate or reduce any food poisoning bacteria to safe levels, then the
answer to this should be “No”, therefore raw meat should have a best before
date.
The first vacuum packer was invented
in the 1940’s and the technology started to be utilised by the food industry
from the 1960’s onward. Vacuum packaged
raw meat has an excellent track record with regard to food safety and there
have been no reported outbreaks of Botulism poisoning associated with the
practice of the vacuum packaging of raw meat. However, available guidance from
the Food Standards Agency clearly indicates that the policy stance is that raw
meat, even though intended to be cooked must be allotted a “use by” date and if
stored chilled in a reduced Oxygen atmosphere, then that “use by” date must not
extend to more than 10 days from the date of packaging.
Maybe it is time that the Food
Standards Agency reviewed the guidance that it uses as a base line for judging
the degree of compliance with the food hygiene regulations.
