Food Safety and Human Health

2019

Chapter 1

Current Issues in Food Safety With Reference to Human Health

Ram Lakhan Singh¹ and Sukanta Mondal²,    ¹Department of Biochemistry, Dr. Rammanohar Lohia Avadh University, Faizabad, India,    ²Animal Physiology Division, ICAR-National Institute of Animal Nutrition and Physiology, Adugodi, India

Abstract

Food safety is an inexorably global public health problem as people experience the ill effects of a plethora of foodborne diseases. Food should be the source of nourishment for human beings and not an open door for potential pathogens, which can cause serious and life-threatening sickness. Many foodborne pathogens have reemerged because of aspects identified with way of life, including political, economic, and ecological changes. Ensuring food safety to protect public health remains a significant challenge in both developing and developed nations. Governments throughout the world are heightening their efforts to enhance food safety so that no consumer encounters any infection or disease following the consumption of food. Recent innovative approaches will certainly increase agricultural production and will ensure food safety; however, their usefulness and safety must be acknowledged by the customers. Moreover, internationally agreed upon procedures should be followed for the evaluation purpose.

Keywords

Foodborne diseases; food hazards; chemical hazards; food safety; risk assessment

Outline

Introduction 1

Foodborne Diseases 3

Salmonella 3

Escherichia coli 5

Pseudomonas 6

Food Safety Management Systems 8

Strategies for Food Safety 10

Strengthening Surveillance Systems of Foodborne Diseases 10

Improving Risk Assessments 10

Developing Methods for Assessing the Safety of the Products of New Technologies 11

Nanotechnological Approaches 12

International Regulatory Frameworks 12

References 13

Further Reading 14

Introduction

Food safety is an increasingly global public health issue as humans suffer from a plethora of foodborne diseases. The diseases caused by foodborne pathogens constitute a worldwide public health concern. Ensuring food safety to protect public health remains a significant challenge in both developing and developed nations. Effective food safety systems are vital to maintain consumer confidence in the food system and to provide a sound regulatory foundation for domestic and international trade in food, which supports economic development. Food safety has become an increasingly important international concern, as food contamination creates a huge economic burden on the communities and their health (Fig. 1.1). Governments worldwide are intensifying their efforts to improve food safety so that no consumer experiences any infection or disease following the consumption of food. Developing nations are encountering quick changes in their well-being and social situations, and the strains on their restricted assets are aggravated by growing urbanization, expanding reliance on stored foods, inadequate access to safe water, and facilities for secure food production. Food security programs are progressively concentrating on a farm-to-table methodology as a successful method for decreasing foodborne risks. Among various factors, foodborne microbial diseases account for 20 million cases annually, and their incidence is increasing. In developing countries, foodborne diseases cause an estimated 2.2 million deaths each year, of which 1.9 million are children. Food should be the source of nourishment for human beings and not an opportunity for potential pathogens, which can cause serious and life-threatening illness. Globalization of the food supply has created conditions favorable for the emergence, reemergence, and spread of foodborne pathogens.

Figure 1.1 Issues in food safety.

Many foodborne pathogens have reemerged due to factors related to lifestyle and political, economic, and ecological changes. In industrialized nations, one out of every three persons has a foodborne illness event every year. The globalization of food markets has increased the challenge to manage the microbial risks. The recent technologies, for example, genetic engineering, food irradiation, ohmic heating, and modified packaging, may be utilized to raise the agricultural production, broaden shelf life, or make food more secure.

Foodborne Diseases

Microorganisms are defined as microscopic living organisms that occur ubiquitously in the environment. Although some are harmless, some are virulent and could cause infections. The infections are due to several factors including violation of certain basic food hygienic practices. For example, foodborne diseases (FBDs) are caused by microorganisms or toxins transmitted through person-to-person, animal-human, or human-animal contacts and through contact with the environment such as through human-to-surface or through equipment. Transmissions of infections are recorded to either be directly or indirectly from food and/or water, which, in most cases, act as vehicles for infection. Contamination by food poisoning agents can occur at various stages during the food chain in raw products, prior to harvesting, during slaughter, or in processing or as cross-contamination in the kitchen by the food handlers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) further recorded that eating food containing pathogens or their toxins (poisons) is the leading cause of foodborne illness. The CDC further stated that there are four types of microorganisms that could contaminate food and cause FBDs: bacteria, viruses, parasites, and fungi. The National Restaurant Association has recorded the nutrients that supported these microorganisms to grow including food, acidity, temperature, time, oxygen, and moisture. Almost all of these are derived from foods that humans consume. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), foodborne illnesses are reported daily the worldwide in both developed and developing countries. Further reports indicated that illnesses caused by contaminated food constitute one of the most extensive issues and is a primary driver of decreased monetary profitability. The prevalence rate of FBDs has raised much concern, since the magnitude of the problem was previously unknown due to lack of reliable data. According to WHO, FBDs have increased, and even more challenging is the reemergence of drug-resistant microorganisms, which are viewed as a big threat to the hospitality industry. According to the CDC, Escherichia coli 0157, H. Listeria monocytogenes, and Salmonella enterica are three of the eight known pathogens that account for the vast majority of reported FBD, hospitalizations, and deaths each year (Sonnier et al., 2018). For example, outbreaks of Salmonellosis have been reported for decades, but within the past 25 years the disease has increased in many continents.

Salmonella

Infections are usually traceable to various food products derived from meat, eggs, milk, and poultry. Although Salmonella traditionally is thought of as being associated with animal products in the past, fresh produce also has been the source of major outbreaks, particularly recently. Salmonella infections can originate from household pets containing the bacteria; improperly prepared meats and seafood; or the surfaces of raw eggs, fruits, or vegetables that have not been adequately disinfected. In Europe and other Western countries, Salmonella serotype enteritidis (SE) had become the predominant strain (Boyce et al., 1996). In Australia, Canada, the United States, European countries, and South Africa, infections with E. coli serotype 0157:H7 are reported to be a major cause of bloody diarrhea and acute renal failure (Motarjemi and Kaferstein, 1998). Outbreaks of these infections are associated with beef consumption and were said to be fatal particularly in children. Many developed nations have encountered flare-ups of illnesses because of recently perceived foodborne pathogens, for example, E. coli 0157:H7, Campylobacter jejuni, and L. monocytogenes. Campylobacter and Vibrio parahaemolyticus, which are the most common pathogens in fish, are most probably transmitted in the market or while cooking, according to Adams and Moss (2000). Other contaminants like pesticide residues or environmental chemicals are also reported in fruits and vegetables. Examples included Bacillus, Clostridium, and L. monocytogenes, which are said to be introduced from the soil, as well as viruses such as rotavirus and bacteria including Shigella, Salmonella, and E. coli. The problem is not limited to developing countries alone. Studies in industrialized nations evaluated that every year, 5%–10% of the populace experienced FBD. In many countries, Salmonella enteritidis is cited as the predominant pathogen, and poultry, eggs, and egg products are identified as the major source. Globally, about 60%–80% of poultry are accounted to be contaminated with S. enteritidis which was mostly associated with dairy products beef, poultry, and eggs. In developing countries, in Latin America, Asia, and Africa, the rate of infection has been less documented, yet these countries have borne the brunt of the problem due to the presence of a wide range of FBDs. Salmonella and Shigella are considered as main pathogens responsible for most of the foodborne diseases and had been largely associated with diarrhea, abdominal pains, nausea, and vomiting (Motarjemi and Kaferstein, 1998). Although viruses did not grow on food, raw fruits and vegetables have been cited to provide avenues for infection.

Campylobacteriosis

The genus Campylobacter includes a number of species, but C. jejuni and C. coli are mainly responsible for human enterocolitis (Pal, 2007). Campylobacter is recognized as one of the principal causes of human acute gastroenteritis worldwide (Allos, 2001; Pal, 2005). C. jejuni represents 80%–90% of enteric sicknesses. Campylobacter species are part of typical intestinal microflora of wild animals, livestock, and birds. Animals utilized in production of food including poultry, swine, cattle, and sheep are the primary reservoir (Blaser, 1997). The family pets, for example, dogs, cats, and birds, are additional animal reservoirs. In spite of the fact that discharge of Campylobacter is not related to manifestations in poultry, diarrheal sicknesses are depicted in mammalian pets and domesticated animals, and this adds to the contamination of surface water. Ingestion of contaminated water, interaction with colonized pets, especially puppies and kittens, and consumption of unpasteurized milk or undercooked poultry or meat are all associated with human disease (Pal, 2007). Campylobacter is responsible for about 5%–14% of all diarrheal sicknesses worldwide (Anon, 2000a,b).

Brucellosis and Other Pathogens

Brucellosis is another FBD that has raised concern. It occurs worldwide; however, in North America and Western Europe, incidents have been reported to have decreased due to strict surveillance and the application of the hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) system. However, the disease still remains an important health problem in the Mediterranean countries (Egypt, Greece, Italy, Morocco, and Tunisia), the Middle East (Iraq, Iran, and Saudi Arabia) Mexico, Peru, and some regions of China and India. V. parahaemolyticus is listed as another pathogen that causes acute gastroenteritis. In developing countries, especially in Africa, the microorganism constitutes a group of pathogens that caused persistent diarrhea. This group includes Giardia lamblia, Cryptosporidium sp., and Entamoeba histolytica. These pathogens mainly affected children and people with impaired immunity. Raw and uncooked meat and vegetables are major routes for their transmission. Other parasites transmitted through raw meat included Trichinella spiralis, Taenia solium, and Taenia saginata (Mensah, 2002). The most recent FBD is the avian influenza. According to WHO (2005), the virus, which attacks birds, is highly pathogenic. The flu started in Asia, moved to Europe, and more recently moved to Africa. It was reported that the virus infected human beings through contact with infected live or dead poultry. Exposure may have also occurred when the virus was inhaled through dust and possibly through contact with contaminated surfaces. The avian flu virus was found in the respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts of infected birds and not in the meat. Regardless, accessible information demonstrated that profoundly pathogenic viruses, for example, H5N1 strain, may have been spread through marketing and distribution channels, since low temperature was conducive for viruses. Available data further indicated that the virus survived in poultry droppings for at least 35 days at low temperature of 40°C, while at 37°C, it could survive for 6 days (WHO, 2005). It was also noted that H5N1 was not killed by refrigeration. Further reports indicated that the eggs could contain H5N1 virus both on the shell and on the inside (white and yolk). As a result, it is recommended that eggs from areas with H5N1 outbreak are not supposed to be consumed raw or partially cooked (runny yolk for breakfast). In line with this, cooked poultry is supposed to be served piping hot. Although there is no evidence indicating that individuals have been contaminated with H5N1 infection after consumption of properly cooked poultry or eggs, previous studies showed that the major risk of exposure to the virus infection was through handling or slaughtering of live infected poultry. Good sterile practices are, therefore, essential during and postslaughter handling to check cross-contamination from poultry to other food and from food preparation surfaces and equipment.

Escherichia coli

According to WHO (2005), enterohemorrhagic E. coli is another serious pathogen with regard to food safety. Enterohemorrhagic E. coli (EHEC) 0157:H7 serotype was first identified as a human pathogen in 1892 in the United States. This was after two main outbreaks of hemorrhagic colitis (bloody diarrhea). Since then, it is reported that flare-ups of this pathogen have turned into a significant health issue throughout the different areas of the world (Schlundt, 2001; Clarke et al., 2002; Ram et al., 2009). Further examinations on the thermal sensitivity of E. coli 0157:H7 in ground beef uncovered that heating kills E. coli strains as well as Salmonella spp. The optimum temperature for growth of E. coli 0157:H7 is 37°C, whereas below 10°C, growth is not observed (Yanamala et al., 2011). On the other hand, E. coli 0157:H7 survived freezing. The study also reported that E. coli 0157:H7 was more acid resistant than other E. coli strains. Podolak et al. (2009) observed that monitoring of Salmonella typhimurium was of great importance because of its high survivability. The commonly involved food vehicles were raw or insufficiently cooked foods of bovine origin, particularly half-cooked, ground or minced beef, and unpasteurized milk. Likewise, various flare-ups were additionally connected with the utilization of raw or insignificantly processed fruits and green leafy vegetables. It was reported that beef was the main source of 46% of US foodborne outbreaks between the years 1993 and 1999. Other products include improperly pasteurized cow’s milk. It was also realized that pasteurization eliminated pathogens from milk, including E. coli 0157:H7. Further research additionally affirmed that the fruits and vegetables contaminated with E. coli 0157:H7 brought about various flare-ups (Ackers et al., 1998). Green leafy vegetables were referred as the wellspring of 26% of FBD in the United States between 1998 and 1999. Although contamination of vegetables could occur in different ways, the utilization of manure or water contaminated with fecal matter is suspected to be the most possible route of infection (Solomon et al., 2002). In addition, suspected fertilizer from nearby cattle and poor sewage treatment is considered as another source of E. coli 0157:H7 strains detected in cabbage plants. The ingestion of E. coli 0157:H7 infection extended from asymptomatic to death. Incubation period is usually ranged from 1 to 8 days. Symptoms begin with abdominal cramps and nonbloody diarrhea, which further progresses to bloody diarrhea inside 2–3 days (Mead and Griffin, 1998). More severe manifestation of E. coli 0157:H7 infections included hemorrhagic colitis (bloody diarrhea), in which the most vulnerable groups are children and the elderly. Green leafy vegetables are said to grow low to the ground and are, therefore, recognized as another source of E. coli 0157:H7 infection.

Pseudomonas

Pseudomonas are described as rod-shaped Gram-negative aerobic, nonspore-forming type of bacteria commonly found in water, or some type of plant seeds. They are widely found in the environment such as soil and water plants. They thrive in moist areas and are found in hospital setups. The infection acquired in hospitals is referred to as nosocomial infection. Free bacteria found in wet areas such as sinks, antiseptic solutions, and urine receptacles cause pseudo infections. Healthy persons are usually not at risk of infection. Pseudomonas infections were considered opportunistic infections, that is, they only cause disease when a person’s immune system is already impaired. These include patients in burns units, cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, HIV patients, and cystic fibrosis or presence of a foreign body such as catheter. Infection in the blood is called bacteremia. Symptoms include fever, chills, fatigue, and muscle and joint pains. Infection of the lungs, pneumonia, was indicated by symptoms, which include chills, fever, productive cough, and difficulty in breathing. Others include skin infection called folliculitis—itchy rash, bleeding ulcers, and headache. The isolation of pseudomonas could be attributed to wet surfaces in the kitchen.

Chemical Hazards

Synthetic compounds are a critical wellspring of foodborne ailments, despite the fact that impacts are generally hard to connect with a specific food. Chemical compounds can enter in the food chain, either due to their existence in the environment through unexpected contamination of food, or to their purposeful use along the food production chain. For the most part, industrial pollutants are unexpected contaminants of foods; hence, even if regulated, it might be difficult to control. Chemicals used in agriculture are intentionally applied to land or crops during production, so their utilization may be controlled. Some harmful chemical compounds can present naturally in foods and in nature. Naturally occurring chemicals are generally incorporated in plants by chemical toxicants in food; for example, glycoalkaloids; natural contaminants, for example, mycotoxins and marine toxins; and environmental contaminants, such as mercury, lead, radionuclides, and dioxins. The nourishment supply is increased by incorporation of food additives and supplements (vitamins and essential minerals, pesticides, and veterinary medication residues), but it should be ensured that every single such use is safe. Food contamination by chemicals can influence well-being after a single exposure or, more frequently, after long-term exposure. However, the health consequences of chemical compounds exposure in food are not clearly understood.

Factors Contributing to Foodborne Diseases

Foodborne diseases occur for a number of reasons, including, among others, increase in international travel and trade, microbial adaptation, changes in the food production, and globalization of food supply. In North America, for example, from 1996 to 1997, an outbreak of cyclosporiosis was linked to contaminated raspberries imported from South America. According to WHO, introduction of pathogens into new geographical areas is also viewed as a contributing factor to the emergence of FBDs. For example, Vibrio cholera was introduced in the waters off the coast of the southern United States when a cargo sheep discharged contaminated ballast into the water in 1991. It is assumed that a similar mechanism led to the introduction of cholera in South America that same year. Further reports indicated that there are many risks associated with food safety due to industrialization and mass food production. Other factors such as the emergence of longer complex food chains, fast-food consumption, street-vended foods, and growing habits of eating foods out are cited as the major causes of food safety problems (Panisello, Quintic, and Knowles, 1999). In addition, travelers, refugees, and immigrants exposed to unfamiliar foodborne hazards while abroad are also contributing factors to FBDs. In Sweden, for example, it is estimated that about 90% of all cases of Salmonellosis are imported. Other factors experienced by many countries include changes in the microbial population, which lead to evolution of new pathogens and development of new variant strains in old pathogens. This transformation results in antibiotic resistant organisms making a disease more difficult to treat. This has been observed when a microorganism isolated in one country exhibits different characteristics in another country, making it difficult to be identified and controlled.

Increases in the global population of highly susceptible persons are a warning trend to various nations with respect to FBDs. The upward trend is attributed to aging, malnutrition, an HIV/AIDS pandemic, and other underlying medical conditions. Elderly individuals are likely to be infected more because they have low immunity to infection. In fact, people with weak immune system are even infected with pathogens at lower doses. For example, persons suffering from cancer or HIV and AIDS are more likely to succumb to infections with Salmonella, Campylobacter, listeria, toxoplasma, cryptosporidium, and other foodborne pathogens. In addition, in developing countries, poor nutritional status lead to reduced immunity, particularly in children and the elderly, who consequently become more susceptible to foodborne infections. A change in lifestyle contributes significantly to the spread of food-related infections. Behaviors and practices such as eating in restaurants, canteens, fast-food joints, and informal dining outlets increases chances of consumption of contaminated foods. In many countries, effective food safety education and control do not match the boom in food service establishments. As a result, unhygienic preparation of food provides good opportunities for contamination and growth and survival of foodborne pathogens. Processing factors that contribute significantly to FBDs are related to how food handlers manage various stages of food purchase and preparation, up to the point of service. Major documented factors associated with FBDs in homes and institutional settings, especially in the restaurants, include improper holding temperature, inadequate cooking, contaminated equipment, and poor personal hygiene. According to Cody and Keith (2001) and WHO (2005), these factors have to be controlled to keep the foods safe. Boyce et al. (1996) reported that undercooking contributes to outbreaks due to Clostridium botulinum (91%), V. parahaemolyticus (92%), Clostridium perfringens (65%), Salmonella species (67%), and T. spiralis (100%). Raw seafoods are sources of V. parahaemolyticus and enteric viruses. Raw pork meat is potentially infected with Trichinella larvae. All foods must be heated to the time, temperature, and values required to kill pathogens (Cody and Keith, 2001; WHO, 2005). Though FBDs are a burden to both developed and developing countries, the challenges in developing countries are aggravated by socioeconomic factors such as widespread poverty, large-scale migration to already crowded cities, and rapid growth of population, among others (Martin, 2001). Moreover, climatic factors exacerbated food hygiene problems because high ambient temperatures are conducive to the growth of mesospheric bacterial pathogens. The high levels of humidity are also cited as favorable for the growth of other microorganisms (Martin, 2001). Sanitary conditions are also considered as a big challenge. WHO (2006) reported that about 2.6 billion people in the developing world lack toilets, and about 1.1 billion have no access to potable water. Poverty at the individual level is also cited to increase food safety problems due to lack of facilities for the hygienic preparation and storage of food.

Food Safety Management Systems

Food Safety Management System is defined as a group of programs, procedures, and measures for preventing FBDs by actively controlling risks and hazards throughout the flow of food. Food safety systems address issues related to basic sanitation and operation conditions, which include personal hygiene programs, supplier selection, and food specification programs. This is in relation to the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international body set up by WHO with the aim of ensuring the safety of the consumer and fair practices in the food trade. The European Union (EU) was among the organizations using the program. Codex Alimentarius Commission and Food Hygiene Committees made efforts to clarify the principles of food hygiene by elucidating the rationale behind these principles and providing examples as to how the principles are to be applied (Mitcham et al., 2007). Food safety management systems also entail active managerial control (AMC), which manages food safety risk and focuses on the five most common risk factors responsible for FBDs as identified by the CDC. The points include purchasing food from unsafe sources, failing to cook food adequately, holding food at improper temperatures, using contaminated equipment, and generally practicing poor personal hygiene (Mitcham et al., 2007).

Several systems addressing food safety are put in place in different countries. Such systems include HACCP, which ensures quality service and product delivery in the entire food flow, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), the world’s largest developer of voluntary international standards. The ISO standards are related to different fields as follows:

ISO 9000: Quality Management Standard

ISO 14000: Environmental Management Standard

ISO 22000: Food Safety Management Standard

ISO 17025: Laboratory Management Standard

The most relevant standard to this study is ISO 22000, related to Food Safety Management Standard. The food hygiene standards, which have been in operation in many institutions, include The General Food Safety Hygiene regulations and Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)/WHO Codex Alimentarius Commission Standards. Although HACCP has been introduced as one of the best food safety measures, the system is viewed as expensive and difficult to implement due to lack of capacity, and long processes, which many institutions feel, are tedious and out of reach for them due to financial constraints. Recently, the ISO certification came up with certification of institutions, which complied with the set standards for management of various activities in an organization. A brief look at ISO 22000 gave a clearer understanding of the management systems.

ISO 22000, an international standardization also known as generic food safety management system, is specifically designed to be used for certification or registry purposes, mainly because an accredited auditor formally registered an institution if it was compliant with the requirements of the system. The system comprehensively describes a set of general food safety requirements that applies to all organizations in the food chain. In this context, food chain is explained as a complete outline involved in the creation to consumption of food products. This includes every step from initial production to final consumption, and involves production, processing, distribution, storage, and handling of all food ingredients. However, since the food chain also includes the organizations that do not directly handle raw materials used in food production, a number of categories of organizations are included in the food flow:

• Primary producers: Farms, fisheries, ranches, dairies

• Processors: Fish, meat, poultry, feeds

• Manufacturer: Bread, soup, snack, cereal, canned food

• Food service providers: Restaurants, cafeteria, hospitals, airlines, cruise ships

• Nursing homes, senior lodging, grocery stores

• Other service providers including storage service provider, catering service provider, transportation, sanitation service provider, cleaning service provider, among others

ISO 22000 uses policies and structures defined by HACCP. The system, therefore, is involved in identification, prevention, and control of food safety hazards. This implies that ISO comprehensively deals with how to conduct a food safety hazard, identifies critical control points (CCPs), establishes limits for each CCPs, develops procedures to monitor CCPs, designs a corrective action to handle critical limit violations, creates food safety record keeping, and validates and verifies the system.

Critical control limits define a set of values that separate acceptability from unacceptability. These parameters, according to the CDC, if maintained within permissible limits confirm the safety of food products. In other words, critical control points provide a tolerance level in the food flow. For instance, critical control point analyses checked on optimal temperature for each step in a food flow and the duration required for any step in food production procedures. Questions asked in such analyses include how, where, when, and who. How defines the methodology used to monitor the critical limit, where defines the location for undertaking the activity, when defines the time or frequency of the activity, and who defines the responsibility for undertaking the monitor (Mitcham et al., 2007).

Strategies for Food Safety

Strengthening Surveillance Systems of Foodborne Diseases

The worldwide burden of FBDs in humans is extensive, and the causative pathogens are generally zoonoses. There are an expected 76 million instances of FBDs in the United States annually (Mead et al., 1999). There were approximately 1.3 million instances of FBDs in England and Wales in 2000 (Adak et al., 2002). Surveillance of FBDs is mainly concerned with the public health issues in many nations. The main objectives are to evaluate the burden of FBDs, to survey its relative effect on well-being and financial matters, and to assess disease prevention and control programs. It is also essential for conducting risk assessment, and more comprehensively for risk management and communication. The principle targets of FBD surveillance are to build up the degree to which food acts as a route of transmission for specific pathogens and to recognize high-risk foods, practices, and populaces (Borgdorff and Motarjemi, 1997). Surveillance of FBDs should be coupled with food monitoring information along the whole feed-food chain. The detailing of foodborne sickness ought to be coordinated into the modification of the international health regulations.

Improving Risk Assessments

Risk analysis is widely recognized as the fundamental methodology underlying the development of food safety standards. As per Codex, risk management ought to pursue an organized methodology including the components of hazard assessment, risk management option assessment, usage of the executive’s choice, monitoring, and audit. Risk assessment of hazards includes identification of a food security issue, establishment of a risk profile, ranking of hazards for risk assessment and risk management priority, establishment of policy for conduct of risk assessment, commissioning of the risk assessment, and review of the outcomes. Identification of the food security issue is the passage point for preliminary risk management exercises and may go to the consideration of the risk manager through disease surveillance information and request from a trading accomplice or consumer concern. The essential objective of food-related risk management is to secure general well-being of the public by managing such risks as essentially as conceivable through the choice and execution of suitable measures. The development of a globally accepted system for analysis of risk by Codex, which serves as a basis for setting food norms at universal dimensions, has focused attention on the acceptability of risk assessments.

In association with FAO, WHO gives the scientific guidance as the proof for Codex norms, and in additional standards, recommendations, and policy options. WHO has the authority and assembling power in the field of worldwide public health to attempt this essential function. Scientific guidance has been given for decades through long-standing and settled systems, in particular, the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR), and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on Microbiological Risk Assessment (JEMRA). Emerging and emergency problems and in addition complex evaluations should be addressed through targeted ad hoc expert gatherings.

Developing Methods for Assessing the Safety of the Products of New Technologies

The usage of biotechnological tools in production of food presents consumers with new difficulties and challenges. The greatest risk brought about by genetically engineered (GM) foods is that they may have negative impacts on the human body. It is a general presumption that utilization of such foods can result in diseases resistant to antibiotics. Additionally, as GM foods are new innovations, very little is known about their long-term impacts on humans.

Resolution WHA 53.15 perceived genetic engineering of food as a critical public health problem, and to settle that, WHO needs to fortify its ability to give a scientific premise for decisions on the impacts of genetically modified foods on human health. The uniformity approach was designed by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Consultation on foods in June 2000 as a starting step in evaluating security and risks associated with genetically modified food. The evaluation of food safety itself requires a consolidated, reliable, case-by-case way to deal with the assessment of such foods. Major emphasis was laid on the allergenic capability of genetically modified foods by the experts. However, the allergenic capability of genetically engineered foods needs to be assessed. These discussions address the inception of a series of expert gatherings examining genetically modified foods. WHO continues to participate in discussions regarding this matter by giving expert advice on the health risks of these new advancements and by adding to a better comprehension of new improvements in order to address the concerns of consumers. WHO will continue to give a logical structure to the security and dietary evaluation of genetically modified foods, and also for the incorporation of other logical parts of such foods. WHO will support the broadening of assessment, with the goal that environmental, money-saving advantage, socioeconomic, and other concerns can be coordinated in a progressively rational framework.

Nanotechnological Approaches

Nanotechnology is one of the most advanced innovations in this century. The food industry has applied this innovation in the majority of its divisions. Nanotechnology has a huge prospective in food and agriculture, including enhancing agricultural and food production, improving food flavor and nutrition, and progressive food packaging and preservation. However, the novel properties of nanoscale materials that permit useful applications are additionally accompanied with vulnerabilities, even obscure dangers.

The uptake and targeted delivery has been improved by incorporation of nanoparticles in nanoceuticals and nutritional supplements (colloids of zinc nanoparticles and other nanosized minerals, and nano-encapsulates (Bouwmeester et al., 2009). Nanochips or nanosensors have been found to be useful in the detection of storage conditions accommodating for spoilage (e.g., temperature or moisture problems) (Bouwmeester et al., 2009). The detection of E. coli O157, Campylobacter, and Salmonella in food has been carried out by using nonnanotechnology biosensors (Patel, 2002). Even nano-based inserts are being developed to detect Category B agents (CDC list) such as Salmonella, E. coli, and other pathogens. Nanosensors can also be developed to detect Category A agents such as anthrax and botulism pathogen and also other toxic contaminants, for example, heavy metals (e.g., lead, mercury and arsenic) and chemicals (e.g., furans, dioxins, polychlorinated biphenyls [PCBs] and harmful pesticide residues).

International Regulatory Frameworks

The need of coordination and integration for management of food safety and plant and animal health from the farm to the table are frequently not given by the present international policy and regulatory system. The Codex Alimentarius Commission, WHO, and International Plant Protection Convention developed the international public guidelines. These guidelines and related sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) standards are executed and implemented to a more noteworthy or lesser degree, depending upon accessible assets, through a variety of uncoordinated national activities regulated by different ministries in various nations. In spite of the fact that the majority of agricultural products are not traded internationally, national agricultural planning and agricultural knowledge, science and technology (AKST) speculation is progressively oriented toward export markets and intended to follow international trade rules. In principle, trade-related SPS guidelines and control measures may likewise be connected promptly to domestic SPS programs. In practice, developing nations enact few international measures domestically since they lack the assets and specialized limit for execution. The expense of meeting private international guidelines, for example, those administered by the Global Food Safety Initiative, is borne by primary producers. There are some studies that evaluate infrastructural and consistence expenses of international public and private standards execution and usage.

References

1. Ackers ML, Mahon BE, Leahy E, et al. An outbreak of Escherichia coli O157:H7 infections associated with leaf lettuce consumption. J Infect Dis. 1998;177:1588–1593.

2. Adak GK, Long SM, O’Brien SJ. Intestinal infection: trends in indigenous foodborne disease and deaths, England and Wales: 1992 to 2000. Gut. 2002;51:832–841.

3. Adams M, Moss MO. Food Microbiology second ed. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry; 2000.

4. Allos BM. Campylobacter jejuni infections: update of emerging issues and trends. Clin Infect Dis. 2001;32:202–226.

5. Anon, 2000a. Microbial pathogen data sheets. New Zealand Food Safety Authority, http://www.nzfsa.govt.nz/science-technology/data-sheets/ (accessed 28.10.04).

6. Anon, 2000b. Notifiable diseases on-line. Public Health Agency of Canada. http://dsol-smed.hc-sc.gc.ca/dsol-smed/ndis/index_e.html (accessed 2.11.04).

7. Blaser MJ. Epidemiologic and clinical features of Campylobacter jejuni infections. J Infect Dis. 1997;176:103–105.

8. Borgdorff, M.W., Motarjemi, Y., 1997. Surveillance of foodborne diseases: what are the options? WHO/FSF/97 (Geneva, Switzerland).

9. Bouwmeester H, Dekkers S, Noordam MY, et al. Review of health safety aspects of nanotechnologies in food production. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol. 2009;53:52–62.

10. Boyce TG, Koo D, Swerdlow DL, et al. Recurrent outbreaks of Salmonella enteritidis infections in a Texas restaurant: phage type 4 arrives in the United States. Epidemiol Infect. 1996;117:29–34.

11. Clarke SC, Haigh RD, Freestone PP, Williams PH. Enteropathogenic Escherichia coli infection: history and clinical aspects. Br J Biomed Sci. 2002;59(2):123–127.

12. Cody MM, Keith M. Food Safety for Professionals: A Reference and Study Guide second ed. Chicago: American Dietetic Association; 2001.

13. Martin S. Forced migration and professionalism. Int Migr Rev. 2001;35(1):226–243.

14. Mead P, Griffin P. Escherichia coli O157:H7. Lancet. 1998;352:1207–1212.

15. Mead PS, Slutsker L, Dietz V, et al. Food-related illness and death in the United States. Emerg Infect Dis. 1999;5(5):607–625.

16. Mensah P. Street foods in Ghana: how safe are they?. Bull WHO 2002;3–9.

17. Mitcham EJ, Crisosto CH, Kader AA. Bushberries: blackberry, blueberry, cranberry, raspberry. Recommendations for Maintaining Postharvest Quality Davis, Calif., Dept. of Pomology, Univ. of California 2007; Available at: http://postharvest.ucdavis.edu.

18. Motarjemi Y, Kaferstein F. Food safety, hazard analysis and critical control point and the increase in foodborne diseases: a paradox?. Food Control.