Publikationsdatenbank

Food chain information:
results of a Europe-wide online-survey on the status quo and improvements for broilers, pigs, and bovines (2022)

Art

Vortrag

Autoren

Li, Ting-Ting (WE 8)

Langforth, Susann (WE 8)

Nesbakken, Truls

Langkabel, Nina (WE 8)

Meemken, Diana (WE 8)

Kongress

2nd RIBMINS scientific conference : “towards the future of meat safety assurance”

Cordoba (Spain), 07. – 08.04.2022

Quelle

2nd RIBMINS scientific conference : "towards the future of meat safety assurance" : 7-8 April 2022 - Córdoba + online : book of abstracts — Editors: Boris Antunovic, Elena Carrasco Jiménez, Claudia Guldimann, Sophia Johler, Brigitte Sperner & Bojan Blagojevic (Hrsg.)

Córdoba, 2022 — S. 17

Sprache

Englisch

Verweise

URL (Volltext): https://ribmins.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Final-RIBMINS-Proceedings-2022.pdf

Kontakt

Institut für Lebensmittelsicherheit und -hygiene

Königsweg 69
14163 Berlin
+49 30 838 62551 / 52790
lebensmittelhygiene@vetmed.fu-berlin.de / fleischhygiene@vetmed.fu-berlin.de

Abstract / Zusammenfassung

With the help of Food Chain Information (FCI) according to Regulation (EC) No 853/2004, risk categorization and analysis of farms can be conducted as part of the risk-based meat inspection to protect human health. The EU regulation, however, does not specify in detail which data should be collected. As a result, there are country-specific/abattoir-specific implementations. It therefore appears that the information content throughout Europe is heterogeneous. To evaluate the current situation of FCI, an online survey was conducted as part of the COST Action (CA18105) project RIBMINS (Risk-based meat inspection and integrated meat safety assurance) by members of Working Group 2. Questionnaires were disseminated among the 33 participating countries to determine the status quo and potential improvements on FCI for broilers, pigs, and bovines (Nov.-Dec. 2020). In total, 32 participants from 14 different countries responded to the broiler-questionnaire, 51 participants from 17 countries to the pig-questionnaire, and 58 participants from 18 countries to that for bovines. The results regarding the information content of the FCI showed clear differences between
the three species, particularly with regard to herd health. Only about 50.0% of the respondents, both for pigs and bovines, indicated that they would have access to data regarding treatments with a withdrawal period > 0 days. This means, more than half of the respondents said that they would not receive these treatment data, which are mandatory by EU regulation. For broilers, at least 84.4% received this information. Data from previous ante-
mortem (a.m.) and post-mortem (p.m.) inspections of animals from the same producer is also an obligatory part of FCI. Overall, only 64.5% of respondents had access to a.m. data and 69.5% to p.m. data. 57.4% of all respondents assessed FCI as helpful for decision-making regarding food safety. The majority of respondents that assessed FCI as helpful worked in the broiler sector (75.0%), followed by the pig sector (56.9%), and the bovine sector (48.2%). Accordingly, almost half of the participants appear dissatisfied with the FCI currently available. The proposed improvements to the FCI show species-overlapping agreements for indicators on mortality, treatment data, data from the private veterinarian, and clean livestock policy. Additionally, some proposals were species-specific, like pregnancy data for bovines and multi-serological results for pigs. In conclusion, FCI is lacking important information on herd health for an adequate risk categorization and therefore needs improvement and standardization. It should be specified with more detailed information as well as predefined consequences.