Food Protection Trends - December 2008 - (Page 922)

TABLE 3. Food safety technologies used by meat and poultry processors, by type of product produced (percentage of plants) Inputs to Further Processing 54.7 32.6** 30.9 Food Safety Technology Metal detection equipment Conveyor belts made of materials to prevent bacterial growth Bioluminescent testing system for preoperative sanitation checks Decontamination interventions Application of antimicrobial chemicals High-pressure processing Infrared technology Irradiation equipment Other types of pasteurization RTE Products 34.6 24.1 20.1 NRTE Products 26.8+++ 23.2 14.7+++ All Plants 29.3 24.3 16.8 42.4 4.9 3.0 0.3 14.5 30.3+++ 3.8 2.4 0.7 8.3+++ 45.4 7.4 5.5* 1.1 22.3** 32.5 4.2 2.1 0.6 10.4 RTE = ready-to-eat; NRTE = not ready-to-eat. Note: Plants may produce products in more than one category and thus may be represented in more than one column of this table. +++ = Difference between plants producing RTE product versus NRTE product is statistically significant at 0.01 level. ++ = Difference between plants producing RTE product versus NRTE product is statistically significant at 0.05 level. + = Difference between plants producing RTE product versus NRTE product is statistically significant at 0.10 level. = Difference between plants producing RTE product versus inputs to further processing is statistically significant at 0.01 level. ** = Difference between plants producing RTE product versus inputs to further processing is statistically significant at 0.05 level. * = Difference between plants producing RTE product versus inputs to further processing is statistically significant at 0.10 level. important ways for meat processors to reduce pathogens is to reduce the microbial load of incoming product. About twothirds of all plants stipulate practices for controlling pathogens in purchase specifications for raw meat and poultry; based on the survey results, very small plants are somewhat more likely than large plants to use this practice (P < 0.05). Plants that produce NRTE products are also more likely to use this practice than plants that produce RTE products (P < 0.01). Compared with plants that produce RTE products, plants that produce inputs for further processing are more likely to iden- tify and track products by lot, backward to suppliers (P < 0.05) and forward to specific buyers (P < 0.01). These plants are also more likely to conduct independent audits and have a quality control or quality assurance department (P < 0.01). Microbiological testing practices Seventy-one percent of meat and poultry plants conduct voluntary testing of raw product and/or finished product for pathogens of concern, such as Salmonella and E. coli (Table 6). Processors conduct microbiological testing as a means to check their suppliers, satisfy contracts with their customers, and verify that their processes produce safe food (22). Meat and poultry plants that manufacture RTE product that is exposed to the environment after lethality treatments may also conduct testing of food contact surfaces to verify that their activities for controlling L. monocytogenes are effective. One-half of plants that receive raw meat test it before fabrication, grinding, or further processing. The majority of these plants test raw meat for E. coli O157:H7 (75%), Salmonella species (57%), and generic E. coli (56%). Surprisingly, 48% test 922 FOOD PROTECTION TRENDS | DECEMBER 2008

Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Food Protection Trends - December 2008

Food Protection Trends - December 2008 Contents Sustaining Members Perspectives from Your President Commentary from the Executive Director Observed Hand Washing Behaviors of Young Adults during Food Preparation Adoption of Interventions to Improve Food Safety at Meat and Poultry Processing Plants in the United States Call for Awards – IAFP 2009 Affiliate Officers IAFP Committee, PDG, Task Force and Affiliate Council Mission Statements New Members What’s Happening in Food Safety Industry Products Coming Events Index to Volume 28 Advertising Index IAFP Financial Report Journal of Food Protection Table of Contents Audiovisual Library Order Form Booklet Order Form Membership Application

Food Protection Trends - December 2008

For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.