Superior Food Safety delivered a successful Implementing SQF Food Safety Code for Manufacturing and SQF Quality Code to 40 Honduran Food Safety Inspectors, and Academia last January 15 through January 17, 2019
Thursday, January 31, 2019
Monday, January 28, 2019
Matrix Matters: Why Allergen Test Kits Are Only Half the Story
On-site and third-party allergen testing is an important part of FALCPA and FSMA compliance, but allergen test kits are not one-size-fits-all. Knowing the challenges of your matrices can help you make informed decisions about the products and services to include in your allergen control plan.
On-site rapid tests for allergens are an important part of any manufacturing facility’s allergen control plan. Several companies offer allergen test kits for day-to-day use, and it can be hard to tell the differences between them or determine which is the best fit for a given facility. What’s a busy QA professional to do?
One of the most overlooked factors when choosing an allergen test kit actually has almost nothing to do with the test kit itself. Instead, it’s much closer to home: The matrices being tested are just as—if not more—important to consider than the test kit itself.
Before you commit to any allergen test kit, you should talk to someone extensively about the types of products you plan to test. There are a variety of surprising and counterintuitive ways that your matrices can impact the functionality of a test, and you’ll save time and money by understanding information BEFORE you start testing. Below, we’ll review some of the most common matrix challenges.
High Fat Matrices
Let’s imagine a facility that makes ice cream and sorbet. Let’s assume they make a gourmet strawberry ice cream and a fat-free strawberry sorbet, both of which ought to be peanut-free—but since some of the ingredients come from a supplier who also works with peanuts, the QA team decides to run a rapid peanut test on the strawberry products.
Much to the team’s surprise, the sorbet tests positive for peanut but the ice cream does not. What could be happening? Of course, the simplest explanation is possible: The sorbet has peanut residue in it and the ice cream does not. However, there’s another, trickier possibility: They could have the same amount of peanut residue, but the full-fat ice cream could inhibit the test kit’s ability to detect the allergen.
In general, the higher the fat content of your matrices, the higher the detection limit on your test kit. It’s an imprecise spectrum: Using rapid tests to find traces of allergenic protein on an oil is nearly impossible, on fat-rich items like ice cream or cream-based soups it’s a challenge, on items with little or no fat it shouldn’t be an issue. That isn’t to say there couldn’t be other issues with low-fat items, as we’ll review below.
Matrices Processed with High Heat
Let’s say our ice cream facility starts making a peanut-butter-swirl flavor. Perhaps they will begin testing their rinsewater for peanut residue after running that flavor, to ensure satisfactory cleaning. The kit they use says it can detect peanut allergen to 5 ppm, and rinsewater is not a high-fat matrix, so they should be good, right?
In this exact example, it’s probably just fine. However, it’s important for the QA team to consider the temperature at which peanuts were roasted. While raw peanut might be detectable at 5 ppm, roasted peanuts could have a detection limit that is much higher. In fact, very strongly roasted peanuts could only be detectable at levels of 500 ppm or more. This doesn’t mean there is no reason to test—but it’s important to know that many antibody-based tests will respond differently to an allergen processed with high heat than one that is raw. The same detection challenge can sometimes be seen with canned or tinned items that are subjected to high heat in processing.
Fermented or Hydrolyzed Matrices
Two of the trickiest items when it comes to allergen detection are soy sauce and fish sauce. In both of these condiments—and many other common ingredients subjected to these types of processing—the allergenic material is subjected to heavy modification. As proteins get folded and broken in unpredictable ways, they become more challenging for antibody-based test kits to detect. In fact, soy sauce and fish sauce are nearly undetectable by most kits.
When validating a cleaning process after using one of these ingredients, often the safest thing to do is to test for a different allergen—formulated in a simpler way—that is also present. Sufficient cleaning after a product made with fish sauce and breadcrumbs, for example, could be proven with a gluten kit; that second allergen will be unaffected by the fermented allergens in the recipe.
Matrices without Multiple Proteins
Some kits look for a variety of proteins commonly found within one allergen. Other times, though, each test kit will be looking for one specific protein. It’s important to confirm that the allergenic protein your facility works with is, in fact, an allergenic protein that your test kit is trained to recognize.
Perhaps the most common FALCPA allergen where this plays a role is milk. While there are a number of proteins in milk, casein is the most common and accounts for approximately 80% of the protein in milk, making it a common target for allergen test kits (both rapid and ELISA). The remaining 20% of protein is comprised of various whey proteins, most commonly beta-lactoglobulin.
In the case of our ice cream and sorbet facility mentioned above, a kit that detects casein OR beta-lactoglobulin OR both proteins together could be suitable for confirming that the sorbet is truly milk-free. However, there are other types of product that contain only whey proteins, which are a popular way to increase protein content in a variety of foods and beverages. If a facility that works exclusively with whey proteins uses a kit that only detects casein, they will never have a true understanding of their allergen contamination risk.
Another challenging FALCPA allergen is fish, as there are many different species of fish with quite divergent protein structures. If you are testing for fish contamination, it’s important to understand which species of fish the test you are considering can detect, and which species may pose a problem. If there is a mismatch between kit and matrix, then you’ll need to find a different way to ensure safety.
How to Troubleshoot Your Matrices
If you are beginning an allergen testing program, find time to talk with the manufacturers of any allergen kits you are considering. You may also want to talk with the representatives of any labs that are doing third-party testing for you. Some questions to ask include:
Your kit manufacturer (or third-party testing lab) should make you feel confident that they understand the quirks of your specific matrices—and they should have ideas for how to troubleshoot any challenges that they foresee. If a supplier tells you that their kit will work equally well across all matrices and declines to offer proof that corresponds to your needs, beware (or at least be prepared to conduct rigorous validation on your own). Allergen detection is complicated, and as with so much of life: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Article Source: https://foodsafetytech.com/column/matrix-matters-why-allergen-test-kits-are-only-half-the-story/
On-site rapid tests for allergens are an important part of any manufacturing facility’s allergen control plan. Several companies offer allergen test kits for day-to-day use, and it can be hard to tell the differences between them or determine which is the best fit for a given facility. What’s a busy QA professional to do?
One of the most overlooked factors when choosing an allergen test kit actually has almost nothing to do with the test kit itself. Instead, it’s much closer to home: The matrices being tested are just as—if not more—important to consider than the test kit itself.
Before you commit to any allergen test kit, you should talk to someone extensively about the types of products you plan to test. There are a variety of surprising and counterintuitive ways that your matrices can impact the functionality of a test, and you’ll save time and money by understanding information BEFORE you start testing. Below, we’ll review some of the most common matrix challenges.
High Fat Matrices
Let’s imagine a facility that makes ice cream and sorbet. Let’s assume they make a gourmet strawberry ice cream and a fat-free strawberry sorbet, both of which ought to be peanut-free—but since some of the ingredients come from a supplier who also works with peanuts, the QA team decides to run a rapid peanut test on the strawberry products.
Much to the team’s surprise, the sorbet tests positive for peanut but the ice cream does not. What could be happening? Of course, the simplest explanation is possible: The sorbet has peanut residue in it and the ice cream does not. However, there’s another, trickier possibility: They could have the same amount of peanut residue, but the full-fat ice cream could inhibit the test kit’s ability to detect the allergen.
In general, the higher the fat content of your matrices, the higher the detection limit on your test kit. It’s an imprecise spectrum: Using rapid tests to find traces of allergenic protein on an oil is nearly impossible, on fat-rich items like ice cream or cream-based soups it’s a challenge, on items with little or no fat it shouldn’t be an issue. That isn’t to say there couldn’t be other issues with low-fat items, as we’ll review below.
Matrices Processed with High Heat
Let’s say our ice cream facility starts making a peanut-butter-swirl flavor. Perhaps they will begin testing their rinsewater for peanut residue after running that flavor, to ensure satisfactory cleaning. The kit they use says it can detect peanut allergen to 5 ppm, and rinsewater is not a high-fat matrix, so they should be good, right?
In this exact example, it’s probably just fine. However, it’s important for the QA team to consider the temperature at which peanuts were roasted. While raw peanut might be detectable at 5 ppm, roasted peanuts could have a detection limit that is much higher. In fact, very strongly roasted peanuts could only be detectable at levels of 500 ppm or more. This doesn’t mean there is no reason to test—but it’s important to know that many antibody-based tests will respond differently to an allergen processed with high heat than one that is raw. The same detection challenge can sometimes be seen with canned or tinned items that are subjected to high heat in processing.
Fermented or Hydrolyzed Matrices
Two of the trickiest items when it comes to allergen detection are soy sauce and fish sauce. In both of these condiments—and many other common ingredients subjected to these types of processing—the allergenic material is subjected to heavy modification. As proteins get folded and broken in unpredictable ways, they become more challenging for antibody-based test kits to detect. In fact, soy sauce and fish sauce are nearly undetectable by most kits.
When validating a cleaning process after using one of these ingredients, often the safest thing to do is to test for a different allergen—formulated in a simpler way—that is also present. Sufficient cleaning after a product made with fish sauce and breadcrumbs, for example, could be proven with a gluten kit; that second allergen will be unaffected by the fermented allergens in the recipe.
Matrices without Multiple Proteins
Some kits look for a variety of proteins commonly found within one allergen. Other times, though, each test kit will be looking for one specific protein. It’s important to confirm that the allergenic protein your facility works with is, in fact, an allergenic protein that your test kit is trained to recognize.
Perhaps the most common FALCPA allergen where this plays a role is milk. While there are a number of proteins in milk, casein is the most common and accounts for approximately 80% of the protein in milk, making it a common target for allergen test kits (both rapid and ELISA). The remaining 20% of protein is comprised of various whey proteins, most commonly beta-lactoglobulin.
In the case of our ice cream and sorbet facility mentioned above, a kit that detects casein OR beta-lactoglobulin OR both proteins together could be suitable for confirming that the sorbet is truly milk-free. However, there are other types of product that contain only whey proteins, which are a popular way to increase protein content in a variety of foods and beverages. If a facility that works exclusively with whey proteins uses a kit that only detects casein, they will never have a true understanding of their allergen contamination risk.
Another challenging FALCPA allergen is fish, as there are many different species of fish with quite divergent protein structures. If you are testing for fish contamination, it’s important to understand which species of fish the test you are considering can detect, and which species may pose a problem. If there is a mismatch between kit and matrix, then you’ll need to find a different way to ensure safety.
How to Troubleshoot Your Matrices
If you are beginning an allergen testing program, find time to talk with the manufacturers of any allergen kits you are considering. You may also want to talk with the representatives of any labs that are doing third-party testing for you. Some questions to ask include:
- What matrices have you validated your tests for?
- Do you anticipate any issues with my matrices?
- How should I validate your tests for my products?
- What factors impact the sensitivity of this kit?
- Does the detection limit change based on the matrix?
Your kit manufacturer (or third-party testing lab) should make you feel confident that they understand the quirks of your specific matrices—and they should have ideas for how to troubleshoot any challenges that they foresee. If a supplier tells you that their kit will work equally well across all matrices and declines to offer proof that corresponds to your needs, beware (or at least be prepared to conduct rigorous validation on your own). Allergen detection is complicated, and as with so much of life: If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Article Source: https://foodsafetytech.com/column/matrix-matters-why-allergen-test-kits-are-only-half-the-story/
Friday, January 25, 2019
On-site PRIVATE Classes in English & Spanish and Consulting Services
Classes Available in English & Spanish and Consulting Services
WE OFFER PUBLIC AND ON-SITE TRAINING CLASSES:
- HACCP Workshop
- Implementing SQF Training - Version 8.0 - English and Spanish
- FSMA Preventive Controls for Human Foods
- FSPCA For Human Food Compliance
- Produce Safety Rule Training Official Program
- SQF Quality Systems For Food Manufacturers
- Internal and External GFSI Audits
- Crisis Management
- Gluten-Free Certification Program
- SQF Advanced Practitioner Course
- Prerequisite Programs
WE ALSO OFFER:
Food Safety Consulting Services
We offer On-Site private classes in English and Spanish. Please email us for a quote: info@superiorfoodsafety.com
Tuesday, January 22, 2019
Upcoming Classes Available for Registration - NEW Classes Added!
All SQF classes are official, advertised by SQF, and provided by Superior Food Safety a SQF Licensed Training Center.
All Food Safety Preventive Controls for Human Food classes are authorized and posted by FSPCA, and provided by Oscar Camacho a FSPCA Lead Instructor.
The fees to attend these classes are subsidized through a joint venture between Napa Valley College-Superior Food Safety and funded by ETP-Employment Training Panel Program of California.
PRICE STARTS AT $125.00 + Administrative Fees PER CLASS (See each link below for details)
Please DOWNLOAD, COMPLETE and SUBMIT the forms below to CMonahan@napavalley.edu before you begin the registration process.
January 23, 24, 2019
January 25, 2019
February 20, 2019
March 11, 2019
April 4, 2019
May 8, 2019
May 10, 2019
June 6, 2019
Saturday, January 19, 2019
Register Today for Our February FSPCA Preventive Controls for Human Food
Date And Time
Wed, Feb 20, 2019 - Fri, Feb 22, 2019,
Location
Napa Valley College
2277 Napa Vallejo Highway, BLDG 3000, RM 3004
Napa, CA 94558
In partnership with Superior Food Safety, Napa Valley College is hosting this timely and important workshop.
Through the California Employment Training Panel (ETP), Napa Valley College is able to offer a discount of $550 to qualified companies. Click on the following link - https://tinyurl.com/ybf76a6a and complete application to see if your company is eligible for an ETP discount (please note that an ETP 104 form must also be completed for each attendee from your company). After your forms are completed, please send all forms to Valerie Bible (707) 256-7250 / VBible@napavalley.edu. Once you are certified, you will receive the code to register for the ETP pricing of $300. If you are already ETP certified and need a code, please contact Valerie Bible (707) 256-7250/VBible@napavalley.edu.
Attend this 2-1/2 day course starting on Wednesday, February 20th and ending on Friday, February 22nd.
Course Description - What You'll Learn:
- Meet the requirements for training under Title 21 Code of Federal Regulations Part 117.155 for the Preventive Controls “Qualified Individual”
- Learn and understand the responsibilities of a preventive controls qualified individual
- Learn How preventive controls build on established food safety principles
- Understand and identify the Components of a Food Safety Plan
- Learn how to conduct Food Safety Plan activities such as developing and reviewing a food safety plan
- Provide the necessary skills for validating preventive controls, verifying and validating process controls among others.
Three-Day Course:
- Wednesday, Feb 20th from 8AM-5PM
- Thursday, Feb 21st from 8AM-5PM
- Friday, Feb 22nd from 8AM-12PM
Who Should Attend:
- Companies, especially small and medium sized, producing human foods that must comply with the Preventive Controls for Human Foods rule that is part of FSMA.
- Food Industry Senior Management
- GFSI Leads (SQFP)
- Operation and Production Managers
- Quality Assurance Managers and Supervisors
- HACCP Coordinators
- Supply Chain Management Personnel & Purchasing Managers
- Auditors
- Food Plant and Facility Managers
- Risk Management Managers
- Government and Food Regulatory Personnel
- Food Safety and Quality Management Consultants
Oscar Camacho has more than 28 years of experience managing food safety and quality systems. Mr. Camacho's special insights come from years of first-hand experience in the food industry, and from client weaknesses he identified and solved while providing auditing and consulting services.
Wednesday, January 16, 2019
Still Time to Register for January Classes
All SQF classes are official, advertised by SQF, and provided by Superior Food Safety a SQF Licensed Training Center.
All Food Safety Preventive Controls for Human Food classes are authorized and posted by FSPCA, and provided by Oscar Camacho a FSPCA Lead Instructor.
The fees to attend these classes are subsidized through a joint venture between Napa Valley College-Superior Food Safety and funded by ETP-Employment Training Panel Program of California.
PRICE STARTS AT $125.00 + Administrative Fees PER CLASS (See each link below for details)
Please DOWNLOAD, COMPLETE and SUBMIT the forms below to marthacamacho@superiorfoodsafety.com before you begin the registration process.
Upcoming Courses Available for Registration
January 23, 24, 2019
January 25, 2019
Sunday, January 13, 2019
How the Government Shutdown Affects Food Safety
Mission critical activities, including responding to foodborne illness outbreaks, will continue.
–UPDATE —January 9, 2019 – Today FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. gave an update about food inspections in the context of the government shutdown. He chose Twitter to deliver his statement. He said FDA is expanding the scope of food safety surveillance inspections that are occurring during the shutdown to ensure that high-risk food facilities are address (31% of domestic inspections are high risk). He added that the agency continues to conduct all foreign food inspections.
“We assess risk based on an overall, cross-cutting risk profile. The primary factors contributing to a facility’s risk profile include: the type of food, the manufacturing process, and the compliance history of the facility. Commodities deemed high risk include, but aren’t limited to: modified atmosphere packaged products; acidified and low acid canned foods; seafood; custard filled bakery products; dairy products including soft, semi-soft, soft ripened cheese and cheese products, unpasteurized juices; sprouts ready-to-eat; fresh fruits and vegetables and processed fruits and vegetables; spices; shell eggs; sandwiches; prepared salads; infant formula; and medical foods.” – Scott Gottlieb, M.D., FDA
–END UPDATE–
As the third-longest government shutdown in U.S. history continues, businesses across industries are concerned about what resources are available.
At FDA, “All our work is important, but only some of our work is permitted to continue during a lapse in funding,” according to an agency statement. This work includes any activities that are considered “mission critical”:
At USDA, FSIS will continue much of its food safety activities Field inspection of meat, poultry and egg products will continue, as well as regulatory enforcement and product testing in labs. The agency will also continue its enforcement and food safety surveillance and investigations, which includes recall initiation, traceback/traceforward investigations.
“The agency must ensure adequate senior level management and coordination of the agency’s public health responsibilities during a shutdown. Excepted activities include responding to intentional and unintentional food safety events. A small number of individuals will support these activities for the duration of the shutdown, while others will be available on call if such an event occurs, including recall staff, scientists; recall communication specialists, significant incident specialists.” – USDA
In addition USDA/FSIS personnel at the agency’s three field labs are considered “excepted” during the shutdown. A full breakdown of FSIS activities that will continue are available on the USDA’s website.
Article Source: https://foodsafetytech.com/news_article/how-the-government-shutdown-affects-food-safety/
–UPDATE —January 9, 2019 – Today FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D. gave an update about food inspections in the context of the government shutdown. He chose Twitter to deliver his statement. He said FDA is expanding the scope of food safety surveillance inspections that are occurring during the shutdown to ensure that high-risk food facilities are address (31% of domestic inspections are high risk). He added that the agency continues to conduct all foreign food inspections.
“We assess risk based on an overall, cross-cutting risk profile. The primary factors contributing to a facility’s risk profile include: the type of food, the manufacturing process, and the compliance history of the facility. Commodities deemed high risk include, but aren’t limited to: modified atmosphere packaged products; acidified and low acid canned foods; seafood; custard filled bakery products; dairy products including soft, semi-soft, soft ripened cheese and cheese products, unpasteurized juices; sprouts ready-to-eat; fresh fruits and vegetables and processed fruits and vegetables; spices; shell eggs; sandwiches; prepared salads; infant formula; and medical foods.” – Scott Gottlieb, M.D., FDA
–END UPDATE–
As the third-longest government shutdown in U.S. history continues, businesses across industries are concerned about what resources are available.
At FDA, “All our work is important, but only some of our work is permitted to continue during a lapse in funding,” according to an agency statement. This work includes any activities that are considered “mission critical”:
- Maintaining core functions that handle and respond to foodborne illness outbreaks
- High-risk food recalls
- Screening foods imported into the United States
- The pursuit of civil and/or criminal investigations when the agency believes that the public health is at risk
At USDA, FSIS will continue much of its food safety activities Field inspection of meat, poultry and egg products will continue, as well as regulatory enforcement and product testing in labs. The agency will also continue its enforcement and food safety surveillance and investigations, which includes recall initiation, traceback/traceforward investigations.
“The agency must ensure adequate senior level management and coordination of the agency’s public health responsibilities during a shutdown. Excepted activities include responding to intentional and unintentional food safety events. A small number of individuals will support these activities for the duration of the shutdown, while others will be available on call if such an event occurs, including recall staff, scientists; recall communication specialists, significant incident specialists.” – USDA
In addition USDA/FSIS personnel at the agency’s three field labs are considered “excepted” during the shutdown. A full breakdown of FSIS activities that will continue are available on the USDA’s website.
Article Source: https://foodsafetytech.com/news_article/how-the-government-shutdown-affects-food-safety/
Thursday, January 10, 2019
Still Time to Register for Developing and Implementing SQF Systems Edition 8.0 ENGLISH - January 23 & 24
Date and Time
Wednesday, January 23, 2019, & Thursday, January 24, 2019
8:00am- 5:00pm
Location
Napa Valley College
2277 Napa Vallejo Highway, Bldg 3000, Rm 3004
Napa, CA 94558
DESCRIPTION
Attention food manufacturing professionals!
In partnership with Superior Food Safety, Napa Valley College is hosting this timely and important 2-Day workshop on Developing and Implementing SQF Systems Edition 8.0.
SQF Code, Edition 8 introduces a new approach for assessing individual food industry sectors with customized requirements in separate, stand-alone codes: Food Safety Fundamentals, Primary Production (Produce), Manufacturing, Distribution, Food Packaging, Retail, and Quality.
Attend this two-day course offered by Napa Valley College.
Course Description:
- Promote an understanding of the SQF Code.
- Create a knowledge base to facilitate the successful implementation of an SQF System and understand the process for aligning with FSMA regulatory requirements.
- Show how a HACCP-based approach manages food safety and quality hazards in an operation.
- The SQF Food Safety Code for Manufacturing applies specifically to Food Sector Categories 7-22, 31-34 and includes Modules 2 (Systems Elements) and Module 11 (Food Safety Fundamentals for Food Manufacturing).
- Designed to provide current and new SQF Practitioners, Sr. Management, Production Personnel, and their team members with the tools and knowledge to develop and maintain their SQF food safety management system and understand the process for aligning with FSMA regulatory requirements
Who Should Attend?
SQFP, Food Safety Professionals, Sr. Management, Suppliers, Food Safety Auditors, Support Staff.
Two Day Course: January 23 & January 24, 2019, from 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM each day.
Price: Only $125 for an entire 2-day course thanks to special grant funding.
Price Includes:
Event registration, morning and afternoon snack breaks, lunch for both days, course materials and certificate of attendance.
Questions? Contact Charlie Monahan at 707-256-7254 or cmonahan@napavalley.edu.
Monday, January 7, 2019
Upcoming Course: nternal and External GFSI Audits Workshop on January 25
NAPA: Internal and External GFSI Audits Workshop - 1-day course #74449
Napa Valley College ETP Program
Friday, January 25, 2019
8:00 AM to 5:00 PM (PST)
Napa, CA
In partnership with Superior Food Safety, Napa Valley College is hosting this timely and important workshop.
Provide and improve the knowledge, skills, and abilities required by GSFI auditors, food industry professionals and internal auditors on:
- Food Safety Management Systems
- Good Manufacturing Practices and Good Agricultural Practices
- HACCP Program
- Review ISO-19011 Auditing Principles
- Gain understanding of the GFSI schemes (SQF, BRC, FSSC2200, Global G.A.P.) from the auditor point of view
Who Should Attend?
SQF, BRC, Global G.A.P., Internal Auditors, Consultants and Professionals looking to register as GFSI-qualified auditors, Quality Assurance Managers, and Supervisors, Personnel involved in Production, Purchasing, Procurement, Human Resources, Harvesting, Packing, Transport, Distribution and Sales of Food Products.
MSc. Oscar Camacho has more than 28 years of experience managing food safety and quality systems. Mr. Camacho's special insights come from years of first-hand experience in the food industry, and from client weaknesses, he identified and solved while providing auditing and consulting services.
Friday, January 4, 2019
How To Implement An Effective Food Safety Program
Oscar Camacho with Superior Food Safety gives a brief description of how to implement an effective food safety program into your organization. See more at http://www.superiorfoodsafety.com
Tuesday, January 1, 2019
Happy New Year!
Let the old year end and the New Year begin with the warmest of aspirations. Happy New Year!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)