Food Act Report 2009/2010 - SA Health - SA.Gov.au
Food Act Report 2009/2010 - SA Health - SA.Gov.au Food Act Report 2009/2010 - SA Health - SA.Gov.au
Appendix 8A Survey to Measure the Microbiological Safety of RawEggs Available for Retail SaleAims and Scope of the InvestigationThe purpose of this survey was to identify the prevalence of salmonella in eggs available for retail sale in SouthAustralia. Products sampled included free range eggs, cage eggs and barn-laid eggs purchased from supermarkets,butchers, health food shops and fruit and vegetable retailers. Samples were analysed for Salmonella spp. The surveyis currently in its first year of a five-year sampling plan and SA Health will continue to sample and analyse themicrobiological quality of eggs periodically. From this information a trend analysis can be utilised to assess if theimplementation of the national Primary Production and Processing Standard for Eggs and Egg Products currentlyunder development has had a positive impact on the prevalence of Salmonella spp. in eggs available for sale inSouth Australia.The survey also checked compliance against labelling requirements set out in Part 1.2 of the Australia New ZealandFood Standard Code at the point of sale (the Code).Storage temperatures were also monitored and recorded at the point of sale to assess compliance withStandard 3.2.2 clause 6 of the Code.Background to the surveyChicken eggs are a common food and one of the most versatile ingredients used in cooking. A number of food borneoutbreaks across Australia has implicated eggs as a source of infection through epidemiological evidence.For the period of 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 there were a total of 626 cases of Salmonella infections reported toSA Health.Of the total 2251 cases of food borne illnesses reported to SA Health for the period of 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010,27.8% were due to Salmonella spp.Notifications of Salmonella in SA, July 2009 - June 2010Number of notifications9080706050403020100Jul-09Aug-09Sep-09Oct-09Nov-09Dec-09Jan-10Feb-10Mar-10Apr-10May-10Jun-10MonthFood Act Report Year ending 30 June 2010 page 70
Appendix 8Notifications of Campylobacter in SA, July 2009 - June 2010Number of notifications200180160140120100806040200Jul-09Aug-09Sep-09Oct-09Nov-09Dec-09Jan-10Feb-10Mar-10Apr-10May-10Jun-10OzFoodnet report- A Dyda July 2010MonthStandardsThe Food Act 2001 requires food businesses not to sell food that is unsafe or unsuitable for human consumption.Clause 4 of Standard 2.2.2 of the Code prohibits the sale of dirty or cracked eggs for human consumption.Additionally, Standard 1.6.2 of the Code sets out the requirements for processing of dirty or cracked eggs. Forinstance, dirty or cracked eggs must be pasteurised or undergo an equivalent treatment so that the egg productmeets the microbiological criteria specified in Standard 1.6.1 of the Code.FSANZ is developing a Primary Production and Processing Standard for Eggs and Egg Products (Proposal P301) toreduce the risk of food borne illness from contaminated eggs.Any new standard developed in this process will form part of Chapter 4 of the Code. It will be applicable to all Statesand Territories and conform to the principle of minimum effective regulation, where requirements will only be put inplace to the extent necessary to fulfil the stated goal.What foods were tested?A total of eighty samples of eggs (eighty x one dozen) were purchased periodically over the financial year, capturingdifferent brand and production types of eggs available for retail sale in South Australia.What did we test for?All samples were sent to the IMVS Food and Environmental Laboratory in Adelaide for analysis. Samples wereanalysed for Salmonella spp.For all samples, the external shell and contents were tested separately for Salmonella spp. contamination. Eggs wereexamined visually before being sent to the laboratory for testing. This was to confirm the absence of cracks and eggswith dirty marks (eg faecal material, feathers, dust, mud, blood and the contents of other eggs) other than naturalmarkings or printed marks. If any egg from a box of twelve was considered dirty or cracked, the laboratory was askedto test the egg separately from the intact eggs. Cracked eggs were examined for salmonella contamination of surfaceand content.page 71Food Act Report Year ending 30 June 2010
- 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 and 66: Appendix 7Notifications of Campylob
- Page 67 and 68: Appendix 7Discussion of ResultsEigh
- Page 69: Appendix 8Appendix VIIIFood Safety
- 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
Appendix 8Notifications of Campylobacter in <strong>SA</strong>, July <strong>2009</strong> - June <strong>2010</strong>Number of notifications2001801601401<strong>2010</strong>0806040200Jul-09Aug-09Sep-09Oct-09Nov-09Dec-09Jan-10Feb-10Mar-10Apr-10May-10Jun-10Oz<strong>Food</strong>net report- A Dyda July <strong>2010</strong>MonthStandardsThe <strong>Food</strong> <strong>Act</strong> 2001 requires food businesses not to sell food that is unsafe or unsuitable for human consumption.Cl<strong>au</strong>se 4 of Standard 2.2.2 of the Code prohibits the sale of dirty or cracked eggs for human consumption.Additionally, Standard 1.6.2 of the Code sets out the requirements for processing of dirty or cracked eggs. Forinstance, dirty or cracked eggs must be pasteurised or undergo an equivalent treatment so that the egg productmeets the microbiological criteria specified in Standard 1.6.1 of the Code.F<strong>SA</strong>NZ is developing a Primary Production and Processing Standard for Eggs and Egg Products (Proposal P301) toreduce the risk of food borne illness from contaminated eggs.Any new standard developed in this process will form part of Chapter 4 of the Code. It will be applicable to all Statesand Territories and conform to the principle of minimum effective regulation, where requirements will only be put inplace to the extent necessary to fulfil the stated goal.What foods were tested?A total of eighty samples of eggs (eighty x one dozen) were purchased periodically over the financial year, capturingdifferent brand and production types of eggs available for retail sale in South Australia.What did we test for?All samples were sent to the IMVS <strong>Food</strong> and Environmental Laboratory in Adelaide for analysis. Samples wereanalysed for Salmonella spp.For all samples, the external shell and contents were tested separately for Salmonella spp. contamination. Eggs wereexamined visually before being sent to the laboratory for testing. This was to confirm the absence of cracks and eggswith dirty marks (eg faecal material, feathers, dust, mud, blood and the contents of other eggs) other than naturalmarkings or printed marks. If any egg from a box of twelve was considered dirty or cracked, the laboratory was askedto test the egg separately from the intact eggs. Cracked eggs were examined for salmonella contamination of surfaceand content.page 71<strong>Food</strong> <strong>Act</strong> <strong>Report</strong> Year ending 30 June <strong>2010</strong>
Change language