Food Act Report 2009/2010 - SA Health - SA.Gov.au

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Appendix 7ResultsTable 1. Microbiological quality of raw chicken meatSamonella Skin-on chicken meat Skin-off Total samplesNot detected 42 25 67S.sofia 5 0 5S.typhimurium-135a 3 1 4S.infantis 0 1 1S.typhimurium-RDNC/A015 2 0 2S.orion var 15+, 34+ 1 0 1Total 53 27 80Campylobacter Skin-on chicken meat Skin-off Total samplesNot detected 14 11 25C.coli 2 1 3C.jejuni 35 17 52Total 51 29 806Salmonella on Chicken MeatSalmonella Positive543210S.sofiaS.typhimurium135aS.infantisS.typhimuriumRDNC/A015S.orion var15+,34+Salmonella spp. was detected on 20.8 % of samples of skin on chicken meat and on 7.4 % of skin off poultry meat, giving a combined totaldetection of Salmonella spp. on 16.25% of poultry meat samples.60Campylobacter on Chicken MeatCampylobacter Sample50403020100C.coliC.jejuniCampylobacter was detected on 72.5% of samples of skin on chicken meat and on 62.1% of skin off poultry meat, giving a combined totaldetection of Campylobacter on 68.75% of poultry meat samples.Food Act Report Year ending 30 June 2010 page 66
Appendix 7Discussion of ResultsEighty raw chicken products were analysed for the presence of Campylobacter spp Salmonella spp. The survey resultsindicated a moderate level of microbiological quality, with 16.25% of samples analysed producing positive results forpresence of Salmonella spp and 68.75% of samples producing positive results for Campylobacter spp. Campylobacterwas present in reasonably high numbers and Salmonella spp. in low numbers. The survey results for Salmonella andCampylobacter in chicken meat varied greatly between skin on and skinless style products. This indicates that there hasbeen a significant improvement in handling, hygiene and cross-contamination awareness along the supply chain.The most recent and relevant survey A Survey of retail chicken meat for Salmonella spp. and Campylobacter spp. inSA (2007 to 2008), showed that Salmonella spp. was found in 37.8% of retail chicken samples and Campylobacter wasfound in 90.1% of samples. The comparison of the survey results suggest that significant work has been undertakenby industry to reduce pathogens during poultry slaughtering operations. The efforts appear to have resulted in areduction in the incidence of pathogen detection at retail level.The results also provided a useful reference source for likely foods implicated in food borne illness reported toSA Health, but did not always provide conclusive proof of infection sources.This finding demonstrates the need for government agencies to continue sending safe food messages to consumersin relation to the safe handling and cooking of raw chicken meat.Follow up ActivitiesSA Health will continue to sample and analyse the microbiological quality of raw chicken periodically. A periodicalcurve will be developed as data is collected and this data can be used to determine seasonal differences inmicrobiological quality, as well as allow preventative action to be taken.ConclusionA total of 80 samples were tested for Campylobacter and Salmonella spp., and reviewed for general labellingcompliance. The results showed that 68.75% of the samples were positive for Campylobacter and 16.25% forSalmonella spp. The findings highlight the importance of handling and cooking poultry meat correctly in preventingfood borne illnesses.This survey indicated a high level of compliance with general labelling requirements as set out in the Code.page 67Food Act Report Year ending 30 June 2010
Page 1 and 2:
Food ActReportYear ending 30 June 2
Page 5:
Trans Fatty Acids in the Australia
Page 9 and 10:
Component 1: Surveillance and monit
Page 11 and 12:
Component 3: Food safety incidence
Page 13 and 14:
Administration of the Food Act 2001
Page 15 and 16: Roles and responsibilities of local
Page 17 and 18: Activities of Food Policy and Progr
Page 19 and 20: Department of Health Enforcement Ac
Page 21 and 22: Food Safety WeekFood Safety Week is
Page 23 and 24: Food Borne Disease Investigations i
Page 25 and 26: Cluster 1: Salmonella Typhimurium p
Page 27 and 28: Local government activities under t
Page 29 and 30: Orders/Notices Issued to Food Busin
Page 31 and 32: Eastern Health AuthorityThe food ha
Page 33 and 34: District Council Orroroo and Carrie
Page 35 and 36: Appendix 1Appendix IFood Safety Sur
Page 37 and 38: Appendix 1StandardsPart 1.2 of the
Page 39 and 40: Appendix 1ResultsTable to Clause 4P
Page 41 and 42: Appendix 1DiscussionOf the 50 diffe
Page 43 and 44: Appendix 2Appendix IIFood Safety Su
Page 45 and 46: Appendix 2ResultsMicrobiological Re
Page 47 and 48: Appendix 3Appendix IIIFood Safety S
Page 49 and 50: Appendix 3ResultsProduct TypeB. cer
Page 51 and 52: Appendix 4Appendix IVFood Safety Su
Page 53 and 54: Appendix 4ResultsVegetable TypeSamp
Page 55 and 56: Appendix 5Appendix VFood Safety Sur
Page 57 and 58: Appendix 5ResultsTable 1. Microbiol
Page 59 and 60: Appendix 6Appendix VIFood Safety Su
Page 61 and 62: Appendix 6ResultsNumber Type of Fis
Page 63 and 64: Appendix 7Appendix VIIFood Safety S
Page 65: Appendix 7Notifications of Campylob
Page 69 and 70: Appendix 8Appendix VIIIFood Safety
Page 71 and 72: Appendix 8Notifications of Campylob
Page 73 and 74: Appendix 8General Labelling Require
Page 75 and 76: Appendix 9Appendix IXFood Safety Su
Page 77 and 78: Appendix 9In addition to mandatory
Page 79 and 80: Appendix 9Sample Product Result3022
Page 81 and 82: Appendix 9ConclusionThis is the fir
Page 83 and 84: Appendix 10Appendix XFood Safety Su
Page 85 and 86: Appendix 10Table 1: Guideline level
Page 87 and 88: Appendix 10BusinessProductSPC(at 30
Page 89 and 90: Appendix 11Appendix XIFood Safety S
Page 91 and 92: Appendix 11StandardsThe Food Act 20
Page 93 and 94: Appendix 11Assessment of ResultsAll
Page 95: For more informationFood Policy and
show all

Food Act Report 2009/2010 - SA Health - SA.Gov.au

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?