agenda item 8 cx/fh 14/46/9 joint fao/who food … · [email protected]...

E Agenda Item 8 CX/FH 14/46/9

JOINT FAO/WHO FOOD STANDARDS PROGRAMME

CODEX COMMITTEE ON FOOD HYGIENE

Forty-sixth Session

Lima, Peru, 17 - 21 November 2014

PROPOSED DRAFT GUIDELINES ON THE APPLICATION OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF FOOD HYGIENE TO THE CONTROL OF FOODBORNE PARASITES

Prepared by the Electronic Working Group led by the Japan and co-chaired by Canada

Governments and interested international organizations are invited to submit comments on the attached Proposed Draft Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Foodborne Parasites at Step 3 (see Appendix II) and should do so in writing in conformity with the Uniform Procedure for the Elaboration of Codex Standards and Related Texts (see Procedural Manual of the Codex Alimentarius Commission) to: Ms Barbara McNiff, US Department of Agriculture, Food Safety and Inspection Service, US Codex Office, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250, USA, email [email protected] with a copy to: The Secretariat, Codex Alimentarius Commission, Joint WHO/FAO Food Standards Programme, FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy, by email [email protected] by 15 October 2014. Format for submitting comments: In order to facilitate the compilation of comments and prepare a more useful comments document, Members and Observers, which are not yet doing so, are requested to provide their comments in the format outlined in the Annex to this document.

Background

1. At the 45th Session of the Committee on Food Hygiene (Hanoi, Vietnam, November 2013), the Committee agreed to start new work on Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Foodborne Parasites. The Committee agreed to establish:

A physical working group, led by Japan and co-chaired by Canada, and working in English only, to discuss and prepare proposals for the structure and approach for the document, as well as for possible annexes (to be held in Japan in May/June 2014).

An electronic working group, led by Japan and co-chaired by Canada, and working in English only, to develop the proposed draft Guidelines based on the proposals of the physical working group for comments at Step 3.

A physical working group to meet immediately prior to the next Session, led by Japan and co-chaired by Canada and working in English, French and Spanish, to consider the comments submitted at Step 3 and prepare proposals for consideration by the next session.

2. Based on the decision of the 45th CCFH above, the physical Working Group (PWG), led by Japan and co-chaired by Canada, was held on 28-30 May, 2014 in Tokyo.

3. The draft document was further elaborated by the electronic Working Group (EWG), led by Japan and co-chaired by Canada.

Electronic Working Group

4. The EWG considered the draft document prepared by the PWG. A second draft was prepared with input from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, European Union, India, Japan, Norway, Thailand, the United States of America, Vietnam and OIE (World Organization for Animal Health). The revised draft is attached as Appendix II. The list of EWG members is attached as Appendix I.

mailto:[email protected]


CX/FH 14/46/9 2

5. The overall consensus was;

The draft guidelines should include the whole food chain.

It is important to make references to other Codex texts and OIE texts when this already exists, rather than duplicating the text.

Recommendations

6. The 46th Session of the Committee on Food Hygiene is invited to consider the Proposed Draft Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Foodborne Parasites in Appendix II.

7. The EWG recommends that the Committee consider the following list of issues, where the relevant draft text has been identified by being placed within square brackets:

7.1 In Section 2.3, some definitions need to be further considered.

7.2 The structure of the document (e.g., sub-division of Sections 3 based on food categories);

The following shows what is covered in each food category:

Meat: domestic food producing animal meat, poultry, bush meat, game meat, etc.

Milk and milk products: what foods should be covered in this category?

Fish and fishery products: fish, crustacean, bivalves, etc.

Fresh fruits and vegetable; same as the scope of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables .

Water: bottled water (excluding tap water, water used for food processing, etc.)

7.3 Should we further subdivide the 5 food categories in Section 3 in order to better reflect the differences within each food category and how to more specifically control various parasites? For example, with regards to hazards, fish and fishery products could take into account the differences between wild caught fish and farmed fish, saltwater, brackish water and freshwater species.

7.4 Should we specify which of the 24 major parasites ranked by the FAO/WHO expert meeting would be relevant for each food category, according to Table 2 in the FAO/WHO report?

7.5 In Section 3 Primary Production, “environmental hygiene” and “hygienic production” are difficult to differentiate and perhaps should be consolidated for this document.

7.6 Should the Guidance on fishborne parasites be located in the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products or in this document? Some members suggested that the Fish document already contains guidance on controlling fish parasites and that fish parasite guidance should be in one place. Therefore, we may need to consider where to fit new fish guidance into the Fish Code and make a recommendation to the Codex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products (CCFFP). The same question should be considered for the location of guidance on fruit and vegetable borne parasites, either in this document or in the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables.

7.7 Should we elaborate more in Section 3 Primary Production the section for Water, or are existing Codex guidelines sufficient for water at primary production?

7.8 In Section 5.2, should we provide scientifically justified parameters to inactivate certain parasites in this document? (the current draft contains some examples). If so, how should we present the information, e.g. table format?

7.9 Should we provide guidance for testing finished-products and/or incoming materials as a control measure?

7.10 Do we need specific guidance on hand washing facilities and toilets in the establishment, or does the General Principle of Food Hygiene adequately cover this issue, i.e. we would delete paras 65-69?

CX/FH 14/46/9 3

Appendix 1

List of Participants Chair

Jeffrey FARBER Director, Bureau of Microbial Hazards

Health Canada [email protected]

Co-Chair

Hajime TOYOFUKU Professor, Joint Faculty of Veterinary Medicine

Yamaguchi University [email protected]

Argentina

Argentina's Codex Contact Point

[email protected]

Australia

Australian Codex Contact Point [email protected] Brazil

Mrs Carolina Araujo Vieira [email protected]

Mrs Ligia Lindner Schreiner Regulation National Health Surveillance Specialist National Health Suveillance Agency- Anvisa [email protected] Ecuador

Monica Alexandra Quinatoa Osejos Food Analyst Ministry of Public Health [email protected] [email protected] Hungary

Marót Hibbey DVM Officer responsible for feed legislation Ministry of Agriculture [email protected] Eszter Kollár-Nagy DVM Veterinary officer Ministry of Agriculture, Hungary [email protected] India

Dr Sandhya Kabra Director (QA/PA) Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) [email protected] Dr Meenakshi Singh Scientist-IV Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) [email protected]

Dr Amit Sharma Joint Director Export Inspection Council (Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Government of India) [email protected] Japan

Mr Hiroshi UMEDA Assistant Director Inspection and Safety Division, Department of Food Safety Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare [email protected] Mrs Tomoko Matsuta-GOSHIMA Assistant Director Food Safety and Consumer Policy Division Food Safety and Consumer Affairs Bureau Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries [email protected]; [email protected] Republic of Korea

Lee, Soon Ho Deputy director Ministry of Food and Safety of Republic of Korea [email protected] Mexico

Ing. José Noé Lizárraga Camacho Director Ejecutivo de Dictamen Sanitario y Coordinador del Subcomité del Codex Alimentarius sobre Higiene de los Alimentos Comisión Federal para la Protección contra Riesgos Sanitarios (COFEPRIS) [email protected] Q.A. Pamela Suárez Brito Gerente de Asuntos Internacionales en Inocuidad Alimentaria Dirección Ejecutiva de Operación Internacional Comisión Federal para la Protección contra Riesgos Sanitarios (COFEPRIS) [email protected] Netherlands

Dr Gijs T.J.M. Theunissen Senior Policy Advisor, Coordinator Food Safety Nutrition, Health Protection and Prevention Department Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sport


















CX/FH 14/46/9 4

[email protected] Joke W. B. van der Giessen, DVM PhD Dipl. EVPC National Institute of Public Health and the Environment (RIVM) Laboratory for Zoonoses and Environmental Microbiology (LZO) Head NRL- Parasites [email protected] New Zealand

Mr Steve Hathaway Director, Science & Risk Assessment Ministry for Primary Industries New Zealand [email protected] [email protected] Norway

Ms. Kjersti Nilsen BARKBU Senior Adviser Norwegian Food Safety Authority [email protected] [email protected] Peru

Alicia Cecilia Decheco Egusquiza Docente Universitaria Universidad Nacional Del Callao [email protected] [email protected] Russia

Svetlana Sheveleva Head of the Laboratory (Institute of Nutrition RAS) [email protected] [email protected] Maxim Bobkov Regulatory and scientific expert Nestec SA [email protected] Cedric Gerard Scientist Nestec SA [email protected] Spain

Julián García Baena Head of Section on the Sub Directorate General of Fishery Economy Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Environment [email protected] [email protected] Thailand

Ms. Virachnee Lohachoompol Standards Officer National Bureau of Agricultural Commodity and Food Standards (ACFS), Ministry of Agriculture and Cooperatives [email protected] [email protected]

UK

Dr Paul CooK Head of Microbiological Risk Assessment [email protected] USA

Jenny Scott Senior Advisor Office of Food Safety FDA CFSAN [email protected] Kerry L. Dearfield, Ph. D. Scientific Advisor for Risk Assessment USDA/FSIS/OPHS [email protected] H. Ray Gamble, ph.D. Director, Fellowships Office National Academy of Sciences [email protected] Mr Clarke BEAUDRY Consumer Safety Officer Division of Seafood Safety Food and Drug Administration [email protected] Vietnam

Mrs Nguyen Thi Minh Ha Vietnam Codex Office, Vietnam Food administration [email protected] Pro. Dinh Thi Thanh Mai Haiphong University of Medicine and Pharmacy [email protected] Pro. Vu Van Thai Haiphong University of Medicine and Pharmacy [email protected] Pro. Dang Van Chinh Institute of Public Health [email protected] Mrs Nguyen Thi Hong Ministry of Industry and Trade [email protected] EU

Mr Kris De Smet European Commission [email protected] [email protected] FAO

Iddya Karunasagar Fisheries and Aquaculture Department [email protected] [email protected] IFU

Ms. Dianne NURY International Federation of Fruit Juice Producers (IFU) [email protected] [email protected]

































CX/FH 14/46/9 5

OIE

Dr Gillian MYLREA Deputy Head, International Trade Department World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) [email protected] IADSA

Yi Fan JIANG (Ms) Advisor, Regulatory Affairs The International Alliance of Dietary / Food Supplement Associations (IADSA) [email protected] [email protected]




CX/FH 14/46/9 6

Appendix II

PROPOSED DRAFT GUIDELINES ON THE APPLICATION OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF FOOD HYGIENE TO THE CONTROL OF FOODBORNE PARASITES

(at Step 3)

INTRODUCTION

SECTION 1- OBJECTIVES

SECTION 2 - SCOPE, USE AND DEFINITION

2.1 SCOPE

2.2 USE

2.3 DEFINITIONS

SECTION 3 - PRIMARY PRODUCTION

3.1 MEAT

3.2 MILK AND MILK PRODUCTS

3.3 FISH AND FISHERY PRODUCTS

3.4 FRESH FRUIT AND VEGETABLES

3.5 WATER FOR DIRECT HUMAN CONSUMPTION

SECTION 4 - ESTABLISHMENT: DESIGN AND FACILITIES

4.2 PREMISES AND ROOMS

4.3 EQUIPMENT

4.4 FACILITIES

SECTION 5 - CONTROL OF OPERATION

5.1 CONTROL OF FOOD HAZARDS

5.2 KEY ASPECTS OF HYGIENE CONTROL SYSTEMS

5.3 INCOMING RAW MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS

5.4 PACKAGING

5.5 WATER

5.7 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS

SECTION 6 – ESTABLISHMENT: MAINTENANCE AND SANITATION

6.3 PEST CONTROL SYSTEM

SECTION 7 – ESTABLISHMENT: PERSONAL HYGIENE

SECTION 9 – PRODUCT INFORMATION AND CONSUMER AWARENESS

9.4 CONSUMER EDUCATION

SECTION 10 – TRAINING

10.2 TRAINING PROGRAMMES

10.3 INSTRUCTION AND SUPERVISION

CX/FH 14/46/9 7

INTRODUCTION

1. Foodborne parasites are a major public health burden worldwide, particularly in developing countries and in populations that traditionally consume raw and undercooked food dishes. It is estimated that over 2 billion people are currently infected by foodborne parasites. The joint FAO/WHO report on Multicriteria-Based Ranking for Risk Management of Foodborne Parasites lists 24 parasites (genera and/or families of parasites of public health concern (e.g., Taenia solium, Echinococcus granulosus, Echinococcus multilocularis, Toxoplasma gondii, Cryptosporidium spp., Entamoeba histolytica, Trichinella spiralis, Opisthorchiidae). This ranking was achieved using expert elicitation, published data, and multiple weighted criteria analyses. The ranking indicates that the foodborne parasites of the greatest concern from a public health perspective are not limited to a single parasite group or a food vehicle, but span a number of different parasites, sources and food vehicles. It is important to understand the transmission routes, tissue cysts and environmental conditions required for the survival of parasites to understand which control measures may be effective.

2. Foodborne parasites can be transmitted to humans by ingestion of fresh or processed foods that have been contaminated with infective stages of parasites (e.g. cysts, oocysts, ova, larvae). Human infection can occur through the consumption of an infective stage in raw, undercooked or poorly processed meat and offal from domesticated animals, wild game, and fish. Human infection can also occur from ingestion of infective oocysts/eggs on foods such as fresh fruit and vegetables resulting from animal or human faecal contamination.

3. Control of foodborne parasites can be achieved through the prevention of contamination of fresh and processed foods with infective stages, the prevention of infection of farmed food animals, (e.g. livestock, poultry, fish) with infective stages, the inactivation of parasites from foods during processing, or the detection and removal of infected food animals from the food chain. The most important food production phase for the control of many parasitic diseases is primary production. However, control measures during post-harvest are also of considerable importance. During the parasite hazard analysis, producers should consider how the product will be further processed, prepared and consumed in order to determine appropriate parasite controls. Education and awareness-raising are important components of the control of food parasitic diseases and, in many cases, may be the only feasible option available.

4. The first step of foodborne parasite risk management should be identifying any relevant parasite hazard(s) to the region and raw food materials. Epidemiological data collection and environmental parasite surveys could be effective in idenfying hazards and informing risk management strategies. The details of the epidemiology and life cycle of each parasite play an essential role in the identification, prevention and control of the risks associated with that parasite. Surveillance for parasitic diseases is complicated by the often prolonged incubation periods, sub-clinical nature, and unrecognized chronic sequelae and lack of easily available diagonostic procedures. The spread of foodborne parasitic diseases is affected by changes in human behaviour, demographics, environment, climate, land use and trade, among other drivers. Some examples worth mentioning are the globalization of food trade which offers new opportunities for dissemination and variations in food preferences and consumption patterns, such as the expected global increase of meat consumption in developing countries over the next 20 years, the increasing tendency to eat meat, fish and seafood raw, undercooked, smoked, pickled or dried, or the demand for exotic foods such as bush meat or wild game. The composition and levels of parasitic species in the raw materials used for food can be affected by climate changes and other environmental factors.

SECTION 1 - OBJECTIVES

5. The primary purpose of these guidelines is to provide guidance on preventing, inactivating, or minimizing the presence of foodborne parasites that present a public health risk. The guidelines provide advice to governments on a framework for the control of foodborne parasites in foods, with a view towards protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in food trade. The guidelines also provide information that will be of interest to the food industry, consumers and other interested parties.

6. The Annex for the [draft] guidelines on Trichinella spp. (Annex I) and the Annex for Taenia saginata (Annex II) are supplements to this code.

CX/FH 14/46/9 8

SECTION 2 - SCOPE, USE AND DEFINITION

2.1 SCOPE

7. These guidelines are applicable to all foods from primary production through consumption, for the control of foodborne parasites. They should complement controls in place for any other pathogens.

8. Control measures should be proportionate to the risk. Countries in which specific parasites are endemic should take special measures to reduce the identified risk to an acceptable level.

9. The Section 3 (Primary Production) is subdivided into four food categories, i) Meat, ii) Milk and milk products, iii) Fish and fishery products, iv) Fresh fruits and vegetables, and v) Water. The scopes of these categories are the same as the

Meat: Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005)

Milk and Milk products: Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004)

Fish and Fishery products: Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003)

Fresh Fruit and Vegetables: Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003)

Water: Code of Hygienic Practice for Collecting, Processing and Marketing of Natural Mineral Waters (CAC/RCP 33-1985) and the Code of Hygienic Practice for Bottled/Packaged Drinking Waters (Other than Natural Mineral Waters) (CAC/RCP 48-2001).

2.2 USE

10. These guidelines follow the format of the General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969) and should be used in conjunction with it and other relevant codes of Practice such as the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003), the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003), the Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005), the Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004), the Code of Hygienic Practice for Collecting, Processing and Marketing of Natural Mineral Waters (CAC/RCP 33-1985) and the Code of Hygienic Practice for Bottled/Packaged Drinking Waters (Other than Natural Mineral Waters) (CAC/RCP 48-2001). The OIE develops standards for the prevention, detection and control of some foodborne parasites at the primary production stage. Therefore, these guidelines should also be used in conjunction with relevant chapters of the OIE Codes and Manuals and other OIE/FAO guide to Good Farming Practices for Animal Production Food Safety. Other technical reports provided by FAO/WHO may also be relevant.

11. Provision of flexibility in application of the Guidelines is an important attribute. They are primarily intended for use by government risk managers and industry in the design and implementation of food control systems.

2.3 DEFINITIONS

12. Definitions relevant to these guidelines include:

Fish1

Aquaculture 1

Feed2

Fish farm 1

Fresh fruit and vegetable – fresh fruit and vegetables that have been peeled, cut or otherwise physically altered from their original form but remain in the fresh state and particularly those that are intended to be consumed raw.

[Curing – Method of preserving, drying, salting, pickling or smoking a piece of meat or fish which enhances shelf life by avoiding spoilage

Or

1 Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003)

2 Codes of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CAC/RCP 54-2004)

CX/FH 14/46/9 9

any of various food preservation and flavoring processes, especially of meat or fish, by the addition of a combination of salt, nitrates, nitrite or sugar. Many curing processes also involve smoking, the process of flavoring, or cooking. The use of food dehydration was the earliest form of food curing]

Cyst – developmental stages in the life cycle of some protozoan parasites, containing trophozoites (e.g. Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia duodenalis,); may also refer to tissue cysts of Toxoplasma gondii, sarcocysts of Sarcocystis spp., or in some helminthic parasites such as hydatid cysts of Echinococcus spp.

Egg – Infective stage of a helminthic parasite containing the embryo

[Foodborne Parasite – a parasite acquired from food and is a living organism which receives nourishment and shelter from another organism where it lives

Or

A parasite acquired from food—e.g., Giardia lamblia, Entamoeba histolytica, Cryptosporidium parvum, Cyclospora cayetanensis, Anisakis spp. and related worms, Diphyllobothrium spp., Nanophyetus spp., Eustrongylides spp., Acanthamoeba and free-living amoebae, Ascaris lumbricoides, Trichuris trichiura

Or

Any parasite that can be transmitted by the consumption of contaminated food. These parasites are transmitted by the ingestion of transmission stages in the environment (eggs, cysts, metacercariae, trypomastigotes, oocysts, etc.) that have contaminated a food product.]

[Host (definitive/final, intermediate, paratenic)

In the life cycle, the parasite must get nutrition from specific animals during its parasitic stage, and such animals are called hosts. Among them, animals parasitized by adults are called final hosts, and those by larvae are called intermediate hosts. When two intermediate hosts are needed for the life cycle, they are designated as the first and second intermediate hosts. In some cases, there may be another host between the (second) intermediate host and final host, which is called paratenic host that is not essential for the development of the parasite, but nonetheless plays a role in the for successful completion of the life cycle.

Or

・Host: An organism which harbours the parasite.

・Definitive Host: The definitive host is the host which harbours the adult stage of the parasite or

where the parasite utilises the sexual method of reproduction

・Intermediate Host: The Intermediate Host is the host which harbours the larval stages of the

parasite.

・Paratenic/ Transport Host: A host where the parasite remains viable without further development

Or

The definitive or final host is a host in which the parasite attains its sexual maturity. This is most often the vertebrate host, e.g., humans, dogs and cats are final hosts for Heterophyes heterophyes (intestinal fluke).

The intermediate host is a host that provides the parasite with a temporary environment for completion of immature stages of its life cycle, but one in which only the asexual or immature stages of the parasite occur. Some parasites need more than one intermediate host to complete their life cycle. So intermediate hosts may be:

- first intermediate host, in which the early larval stages are formed, e.g., Pirenella conica snail is the 1st intermediate host for H. heterophyes.

- second intermediate host, which harbor the later developmental or larval stages, e.g. Fish (Mugil, Tilapia) is the 2nd intermediate host for H. heterophyes]

[Life cycle – One cycle of the developmental process of a parasite, e.g. egg – larva – adult – egg cycle in helminthes

Or

CX/FH 14/46/9 10

the cycle represented by parasites which passes through various stages. The parasite may pass its life cycle in one and the same host or it may change its host

Or

The whole life history of an organism, usually depicted through a series of developmental stages (e.g., from zygote into a mature form where another zygote can be produced) in which an organism goes through.]

Metacercariae – (sing. metacercaria) – encysted infectious larval stage of trematodes; found in the tissues of intermediate hosts (e.g. Clonorchis sinensis) or attached to aquatic vegetation (e.g. Fasciola hepatica)

Oocyst – the infective developmental stage of coccidian parasites, produced through the sexual stage of the life cycle.

[Parasitic stage – infective stages of the parasites to humans and animals, such as eggs, oocysts and cysts and larvae.

Or

Physical stage where parasite is present in the host.]

SECTION 3 - PRIMARY PRODUCTION

13. It is necessary to consider the life cycle of the parasites that could be present in the environment. Assessment of environmental conditions is particularly important, because subsequent control steps during production may not be adequate to reduce or eliminate contamination.

14. Control of parasites during primary production could be critical, because subsequent control steps during production may not be adequate to reduce or eliminate contamination for certain parasite-food combinations. Potential sources of parasitic contamination of the environment should be identified prior to production activities. Sources of parasitic contamination of food at the primary production site include water, soil, manure (not properly treated), sludge or fertilizers contaminated by faeces of human and domestic or wild animals, or proximity to other activities which could result in run-off or flooding with contaminated water. In addition to the above, dead animals, including fish and birds, may be sources of parasitic infection for food-producing animals.

[3.1 Meat

15. The typical meat-transmitted foodborne parasites include, but are not limited to, cysticercosis and E. granulosus in cattle, and Taenia solium, Trichinella spiralis, and Toxoplasma gondii that pigs can maintain.

3.1.1 Environmental hygiene

16. Refer to the Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CAC/RCP 54-2004), Section 5.5. Hygiene of the Primary Production Environment of the Code of Hygienic Practice for meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005), and Chapter 8.4, 8.5 and 8.14 of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (2014).

17. Many animals present in the environment for production of food producing animals can be infected with foodborne parasites. The faeces of domestic and wild animals, as well as human faeces, may contain parasite that are infective to domestic farm animals. Parasites may also be transmited to domestic animals or other animal hosts when these animals eat animal tissues infected with parasite. Domestic animals (e.g. dogs and cats) and wild animals (e.g. foxes and rodents) should be excluded from production and handling areas to the extent possible. Good practices include management of waste, such as preventing raw meat and/or offal from being eaten by domestic or wild animals. Raw meat and/or offal of animals and fish should not be fed to domestic dogs and cats. Canids and felids should be prevented from accessing dead food-producing animals, and aborted fetuses. Populations of semi-domesticated or stray/feral dogs and cats in close vicinity of the farm should be controlled. The risk associated with the introduction of organic material (e.g. faecal and other material that may contain oocysts, cysts or eggs) in the production environment should also be addressed.

18. Fully enclosed animal housing systems, or other systems that prevent intrusions of potentially contaminated small animals or unauthorized humans can be effective in controlling foodborne parasite hazards in meat.

CX/FH 14/46/9 11

19. Wild game meat may contain parasites that infect humans. The environment of wild game meat, and open range domesticated animals cannot be controlled, requiring measures to be taken at a later stage in the food chain.

20. Pigs raised in confinement housing with effective rodent control systems and good general farm hygiene have a very low risk of exposure to Trichinella.

3.1.2 Hygienic production of food sources

21. Refer to the Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CAC/RCP 54-2004), Section 5. Primary production of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005), and Chapter 6.3., 6.4. 8.4, 8.5 and 8.14. of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (2014). For the prevention and control of taeniosis and cycticercosis, refer to WHO/FAO/OIE Guidelines for the surveillance, prevention and control of taeniosis/cysticercosis.

22. Sources of infection of food-producing animals with parasites during primary production include contamination of feed with infective stages, deliberate or inadvertent feeding of animal tissues or whole carcasses infected with parasites, and the use of drinking water contaminated with faecal material containing infective stages of parasites.

23. Feed for food-producing animals should be manufactured and stored in such a manner to avoid parasite contamination. Food sources should conform to existing Codes of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CAC/RCP 54-2004).

24. Primary producers should protect stored feed from rodents and other animals. All dead animals, especially rodents, should immediately be removed from feed storage and food-producing animal production areas.

25. Primary producers should not feed raw food waste to food-producing animals.

26. Primary producers should have knowledge of the source of drinking water for food-producing animals, and as appropriate, seek guidance on water quality to minimize the potential for parasitic contamination.

3.1.3 Handling, storage and transport

27. Refer to Chapter 7.2., 7.3., 7.4. and 7.5. of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (2014).

3.1.4 Cleaning, maintenance and personnel hygiene at primary production

28. Refer to Section 11. Personal Hygiene of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005), Chapter 4.13. of the OIE Code (General recommendations on disinfection and disinsectisation), Section 2.5 Sanitary facilities, Section 2.10 Personal hygiene and Section 2.11 Cleaning /disinfection standard of the FAO Slaughterhouse cleaning and sanitation (ISBN 92-5-102296-8).

3.1.5 Monitoring and surveillance at primary production

29. Refer to Chapter 1.4. of the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code (2014). Surveillance and monitoring of foodborne parasites in animals and in potential parasite source species could be effective in developing risk management strategies. Monitoring and surveillance at primary production can be useful as tools in the control of parasites and for better effectiveness, should begin at the pre-harvest stage. For example, the ability to trace back infected animals at the abattoir, may allow identification of ‘high risk’ animal population or regions and help allocate and target resources for control. In addition, monitoring and surveillance programs can identify potentially emerging trends and risks for regional incursion (e.g. emerging and re-emerging parasites caused by regional development, for example, land development).

3.2 Milk and milk products

30. Unpasteurized milk has been associated with outbreaks of toxoplasmosis and cryptosporidiosis. Outbreaks of toxoplasmosis have been associated with the consumption of unpasteurized goat and camel milk. Tachyzoites of Toxoplasma in infected animals may be excreted in the milk resulting in milk-borne infection. Contamination of unpasteuized milk with Cryptosporidium may result from unsanitary milking conditions, such as when the udders are not properly cleaned.

CX/FH 14/46/9 12


31. Refer to section 3.1 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004).

32. Cats should be excluded from grazing and production areas used for dairy herds (e.g., cows, goats, sheep and camels) because Felidae are the primary hosts for Toxoplasma gondii and faeces from contaminated cats contain environmental cysts that contaminate fields and other feeding areas.


33. Refer to the Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CAC/RCP 54-2004) and section 3.2 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004).


34. Refer to section 3.3 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004).


35. Refer to section 6 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004).

3.3 Fish and fishery products

36. During the parasite hazard analysis, producers should consider how the product will be further processed, prepared and consumed in order to determine appropriate parasite controls.


37. Refer to the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003) and Chapters 4.6. and 4.7. of the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code (2014).

38. Wild fish may contain parasites that infect humans. The environment of wild fish cannot be controlled, requiring measures to be taken at a later stage of the food chain. Surveillance and monitoring could be effective in developing risk management strategies.

39 . A few fish species appear to have a few or no parasites in the edible portion and are generally considered safe to eat raw without a parasite control (e.g. certain large wild tuna species). Some aquaculture methods may help to reduce or eliminate certain parasites, for example, ocean pen-reared salmon that are raised on commercial pelleted feed do not contain the levels of Anisakis observed in wild salmon.

40. Many animals present in the aquaculture pond can be infected with foodborne parasites. Animal and human faeces may contain parasite eggs that enter water and develop into larval stages that subsequently infect farmed fish. Animals should be excluded from aquaculture ponds for farmed fish to the extent possible. The roles of dogs and cats in the transmission of certain parasites should also be considered. For example, good practices include not feeding raw meat/offal of fish to dogs and cats, preventing fish-eating mammals from accessing fish ponds and controlling the population of semi-domesticated or stray/feral dogs and cats in close vicinity of fish farms.

41. Particular attention should be given to animals that serve as intermediate hosts in the life cycle of fishborne parasites. For example, in the case of aquaculture, the exclusion of snails, an intermediate hosts for fishborne trematodes, from fish farm areas, helps interrupt trematode life cycles in fish ponds.


42. Refer to the Code of Practice on Good Animal Feeding (CAC/RCP 54-2004), Section 3. Prerequisite Programme and Section 6. Aquaculture Production of the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003), and Chapter 4.7 of the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code (2014).

43. The source of water used for aquaculture fish farming can be a risk factor for parasitic infections. The larval stages of certain trematodes, which may be present in fish farm water, can penetrate fish skin and infect fish tissues. Domestic and wild animals, as well as human faecal contamination of fish farm water, may transmit parasites and continue the life cycles of parasites. Aquaculture primary

CX/FH 14/46/9 13

producers should seek appropriate guidance on water quality to minimize the potential for parasitic contamination.

44. Using raw fish as feed is likely to introduce a risk of parasitic infection. Infection with parasites might take place in the hatchery, or fingerlings collected from the wild may contain parasites. When producing fish that may contain parasites of public health concern, the farmer should consider whether the hazard will be controlled at a later processing step, or during final preparation for consumption.


45. Refer to Section 6.3.5 Holding and transportation and Section 6.3.6 Storage and transportation of live fish of the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003), and Chapters 5.5, 7.2 and 7.3. of the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code (2013).

46. Eviscerating fish during harvest is helpful to prevent parasite migration from the viscera into the meat after harvest.


47. Refer to Section 3 Prerequisite Programme of the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003).

3.3.5 Monitoring and Surveillance

48. Refer to the Chapter 1.4. of the OIE Aquatic Animal Health Code (2014). Monitoring and surveillance can be useful as tools to assess the effectiveness of the control of parasites and, for better effectiveness, may need to begin at the pre-harvest stage. For example, the ability to trace back infected fish to a specified stage of production, may allow identification of ‘high risk’ fish populations or regions and help allocate and target resources for control. Monitoring and surveillance programs can identify potentially emerging trends and risks for regional incursion (e.g. emerging and re-emerging parasites caused by regional development, for example, dams).

3.4 Fresh fruits and vegetables

49. Some parasites, e.g. Ascaris, Cryptosporidium, Cyclospora, and Giardia are transmitted through the faecal and oral route from both animals and humans, and may also be transmitted by contaminated water and soil during primary production of fresh produce.

50. There is a likelihood that certain fruits and vegetables will be consumed raw without a cooking or freezing step to kill parasites. In this case, parasite control during primary production is the only option.


51. Refer to section 3.1 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003).

52. Areas for cultivation of fresh produce, particular for raw consumption, need to be assessed in terms of their susceptibility to faecal contamination, whether from run-off from wild animals, farm animals, domestic animals and/or humans, as well as the measures needed to manage any identified risks.


53. Refer to section 3.2 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003), Annex II on Sprout Production, Annex III on Fresh Leafy Vegetables, Annex IV on Melons and Annex V on Berries.

54. Monitoring and surveillance can be useful as tools to assess the effectiveness of the control of parasites. Where appropriate, the use of natural fertilizers, particularly on fresh produce, should be monitored closely and managed to minimize the potential for contamination with parasites. Parasite eggs and cysts can survive for years in the environment, and can be highly resistant to environmental changes, for example Ascaris eggs can remain viable in anaerobically digested sewage sludge.

55. Water used to grow aquatic plants, such as watercress, should be assessed for the possible presence of Fasciola hepatica, a liver fluke that encysts on water plants.

CX/FH 14/46/9 14

56. Slugs and snails associated with fresh fruits and vegetables may be a source of Angiostrongylus cantonensis (rat lungworm).

57. Storms or other natural disasters may cause contamination of crops with flood water carrying the parasite eggs and oocysts from animal or human faeces. After such events, produce should be evaluated for risk of contamination and where there is a risk, proper disposition of the produce should be made.


58. Refer to section 3.3 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003).


59. Refer to section 3.2.3 and 3.4 of the Code of Hygienic Practice for Fresh Fruits and Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003).

60. Farm workers may be from endemic areas and homes with poor sanitary facilities/practices. Workers may be contaminated with parasites without feeling ill or showing any symptoms. In order to minimize the opportunity for contamination of the production environment with parasitic stages from human faeces, installation, training and use of the on-farm sanitary facilities should be established, e.g., fuctional latrines in the field, and an adequate means of hygienically washing and drying hands. Waste from sanitary facilities should be hygienically disposed.

3.5 Water for direct human consumption

61. Refer to the Code of Hygienic Practice for Collecting, Processing and Marketing of Natural Mineral Waters (CAC/RCP 33-1985) and the Code of Hygienic Practice for Bottled/Packaged Drinking Waters (Other than Natural Mineral Waters) (CAC/RCP 48-2001).]

[3.5.1 Environmental hygiene]

[3.5.2 Hygienic production of food sources]

[3.5.3 Handling, storage and transport]

[3.5.4 Cleaning, maintenance and personnel hygiene at primary production]

SECTION 4 - ESTABLISHMENT: DESIGN AND FACILITIES

4.2 PREMISES AND ROOMS

4.2.1 Design and layout

62. The facility should be designed to exclude animals that may deposit faeces that contain parasite stages. Insects, such as flies, can transport parasite stages from faeces to food and should be excluded. The layout should minimize the introduction of soil that may contain parasite stages from the outside environment.

4.3 EQUIPMENT

[4.3.2 Testing and inspection

63. Refer to the Code of Hygienic Practice for Meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005)]

4.4 FACILITIES

4.4.4 Personnel hygiene facilities and toilets

4.4.4.1 Changing facilities and toilets

64. Hygienic and sanitary facilities should be available so that an appropriate and acceptable degree of personal hygiene can be maintained.

[65. Harvest and production may be subject to a seasonal influx of workers to meet the needs of producers and may vary for different products. An inherent danger at the farm and production level is an under-supply of suitable toilet and hand washing facilities to meet this influx. Food business operators should ensure that suitable facilities are provided, are readily accessible and meet appropriate hygienic standards.]

[66. Hygienic and sanitary facilities should:

CX/FH 14/46/9 15

- be located in proximity to the production area;

- be located in areas adjacent to the processing area, but without direct access to it;

- be in sufficient numbers to accommodate personnel;

- be of appropriate design to ensure hygienic removal of wastes;

- be designed so that there is no seepage into underground water or entrance into the agricultural fields;

- have an adequate means for washing and drying hands;

- be maintained under sanitary conditions and good repair;

- be appropriately cleaned; and

- be separate for guests and personnel of the establishment, when feasible.]

[4.4.4.2 Hand washing facilities

67. Refer to Section 8.8 Facilities and Equipment for Personal Hygiene of the Code of Hygienic Practice for meat (CAC/RCP 58-2005)

68. Hand washing facilities should be supplied with clean water and a disinfectant such as soap. Where possible, hand washing facilities should have non-hand operable taps and single-use towels to help prevent the re-contamination of clean hands. Hand washing and drying instructions should be visibly present for all users of these facilities.

69. Hand washing and drying facilities should be suitably located in food preparation or production areas to ensure food handlers have ready access to them. There should be hand washing facilities within close proximity to the toilets and positioned so that the personnel must pass by them before returning to the food handling area.]

SECTION 5 - CONTROL OF OPERATION

70. Where applicable, processing operations should have processes in place to remove, inactivate or [reduce] parasites in food where applicable. Monitoring of incoming product may be used to verify that control measures used at primary production are adequate.

71. Various processes have been shown to control parasites in selected food items, but the conditions needed to inactivate parasites are subject to substantial variability depending on the parasites, the food matrix and the location of parasites in the food matrix. Specific processing steps and processing combinations should be subject to rigorous validation to ensure consumer protection. For additional information on validation, refer to the Guidelines for the Validation of Food Safety Control Measures (CAC/GL 69-2008). Potential control measures include freezing, cooking, salting, drying, high pressure processing and irradiation. Specific processing steps and processing combinations to control parasites should be used in accordance with guidance from competent authorities. Newer technologies or combinations of technologies are being developed for inactivating parasites. Prior to implementation in the food production chain, anti-parasitic treatments should be validated for the specific parasite/food combination. Methodologies that distinguish between infectious and non-infectious material should be utilized in order to ensure that the treatments are effective. Some treatments might be subject to prior approval by the relevant competent authority.

5.1 CONTROL OF FOOD HAZARDS

72. Control of foodborne parasites in food will typically require a stringent application of hygiene control systems, which could be referred to as, e.g., Good Hygienic Practices (GHPs) and sanitation standard operation procedures (SSOPs). These prerequisite programs, together with validated interventions to address specific parasites of concern, e.g., as part of a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP)-based system, provide a framework for the control of foodborne parasites.

73. Control measures used for parasites should be monitored to ensure their continuing effectiveness.

CX/FH 14/46/9 16

5.2 KEY ASPECTS OF HYGIENE CONTROL SYSTEMS

5.2.1 Time and temperature control

74. Temperature treatments (freezing and heating) that will result in the reduction/elimination of viable parasites are the most commonly used, preventative control measures. Such treatments should be done in accordance with validated parameters, as described in relevant guidelines and other scientific literature.

5.2.1.1. Freezing

75. Many parasite in food are susceptible to freezing. However, specific time/temperature combinations are required to inactivate parasites by freezing, and these are also dependent on the food type.

76. For fish and fishery products intended for raw consumption, refer to Annex 1 of the Code of Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/RCP 52-2003). Where freezing is required to kill parasites in cold smoked fish and smoke-flavoured fish, refer to Annex 1 of the Standard for Smoked Fish, Smoke-flavoured Fish and Smoke-dried Fish (CODEX STAN 311-2013).

[77. The following are examples of time/temperature combinations to inactivate parasites:

Echinococcus eggs are not susceptible to freezing (exception: when core temperature of food is minus 80°C for 48 h or -70°C for 4 days) (from FAO/WHO expert meeting report).

Freezing at -70°C is enough to render Cryptosporidium oocysts non-infective. Over a 7-dayperiod, infectivity declined but viable oocysts remained from batches at -15 and -20°C (Fayer and Nerad, 1996, Cite in the D. Dawson. International Journal of Food Microbiology 103 (2005) 207– 227)

Cysts of Giardia inactivateat -18°C after 1 h (Mahbubani et al., 1991, cited in the D. Dawson. International Journal of Food Microbiology 103 (2005) 207– 227)

At -18°C for 24 h Cyclospora oocysts could not be induced to sporulate (Sterling and Ortega, 1999).

Freezing at a temperature of -28°C for 32 h was found to be effective in killing metacercariae of Opisthorchis felineus. (WHO 1995, Technical Report Series 849, Control of Foodborne Trematode Infection )

For T. saginata,temperatures of -10°C for no less than 10 days has been recommended (WHO 1995. Food Technologies and Public Health.

www.who.int/entity/foodsafety/publications/fs_management/en/foodtech.pdf]

5.2.1.2. Heat treatment

78. Parasites can be inactivated by adequate heat treatment of foods and water. [The following are examples of time/temperature combinations to inactivate parasites:

60°C for 1 min isneeded to kill the anisakid larvae.

Giardia:

Heating at 71.7°C for 15 s will destroy sufficient numbers of cysts (WHO 2004)

Cryptosporidium:

No infectivity of oocysts treated at 71.7°C for 5, 10 and 15 s in either water or milk; caused a reduction of at least 3 logs (Harp et al., 1996).

Heating to 64.2°C for 2 min reduced infectivity to 0% in water or buffer (Fayer, 1994)

Cyclospora:

After heating at 60°C for 1 h, oocysts could not be induced to sporulate (Sterling and Ortega, 1999)

Metacercariae of Opisthorchis viverrini : 50°C/5 hour, 70°C/30min, 80°C/5 min for inactivation (ref 29 in the WHO, Technical Report Series 849, Control of Foodborne Trematode Infection (1995 )

Trichinella Control (from CDC)

• For whole cuts of meat (excluding poultry and wild game): Cook to at least 63°C for 3 min.

CX/FH 14/46/9 17

• For ground meat (including wild game, excluding poultry): Cook to at least 71°C; ground meats do not require a holding time.

• For all wild game (whole cuts and ground): Cook to at least 71° C.

• For all poultry (whole cuts and ground): Cook to at least 74°C, and for whole poultry allow the meat to rest* for 3 min.

T. spiralis has been shown to be inactivatedin 47 min at 52°C, in 6 min at 55°C and in less than a minute at 60°C. These times and temperatures apply only when the product reaches and maintains temperatures evenly distributed throughout the meat. (27: Kotula A.W., Murrell K.D., Acosta-Stein L., Lamb L. & Douglass L. (1983). - Trichinella spiralis: effect of high temperature on infectivity in pork. Expl Parasitai, 56, 15-19.)

For Taenia solium (cysticercosis), heating to a temperature of 56°C will inactivate cysticerci in beef (1, 25). This temperature is considerably lower than that required for processing or home cooking to protect against trichinae. Thus processing by heating should render meat safe from infection with T. solium cysticerci. (1,25)

For T.gondii, data show that T. gondii is inactivated in 336 s at 49°C, in 44 second at 55°C, and in 6 seconds at 61°C (11). These times and temperatures apply only when the product reaches and maintains temperatures which are distributed evenly throughout the meat. The temperatures reported to be necessary to eliminate T. gondii are lower than those required for T. spiralis. Thus methods prescribed for the inactivation of trichinae are also effective for the inactivation of Toxoplasma. The use of microwaves is not effective in inactivatingToxoplasma, probably as a result of uneven heating, as described for trichinae (32).

References:

1. Allen R.W. (1947). - The thermal death point of cysticerci of Taenia saginata.J. Parasitol., 33, 331-338.

11. Dubey J.P., Rotula A.W., Sharar A., Andrews CD. & Lindsay D.S. (1990). - Effect of high temperature on infectivity of Toxoplasma gondii tissue cysts in pork. J. Parasitai, 76, 201-204.

25. Hird D.W. & Pullen M.M. (1979). - Tapeworms, meat and man: a brief review and update of cysticercosis caused by Taenia saginata and Taenia solium. J. Food Protec, 42 (1), 58-64

32. Lunden A. & Uggia A. (1992). - Infectivity of Toxoplasma gondii in mutton following curing, smoking, freezing or microwave cooking. Int. J. Parasitol., 15, 357-363.

All cited in the D. Dawson. International Journal of Food Microbiology 103 (2005) 207– 227]

5.2.2 Other process steps

5.2.2.1. Curing (salting):

79. Methods for preparation of fish such as salting, curing, marinating, pickling, and smoking at 40°C, which are generally effectivefor other food-borne pathogens, are not sufficient for Anisakis.

[80. The following are some examples of conditions needed to inactivate parasite by curing:

Metacercariae of Opisthorchis viverrini :

0.9%: 10 days, 10%: 3.6 h, 20%:12 h, 30%: 1 h

Metacercariae of Opisthorchis in fish: 13.6% 24 h

(ref 29 in the WHO, Technical Report Series 849, Control of Foodborne Trematode Infection (1995))]

5.2.2.2. Acidity

[81. The following are some examples of conditions needed to inactivate parasites by acid:

Metacercariae of Opisthorchis viverrini : commercial vinager (4%): 1 h, acetic acid (4%) and

lactic acid (4％）：1.5 h, citric acid (4%): 1 h]

5.2.2.3. pH

[82. The following are some examples to inactivate parasite by pH:

CX/FH 14/46/9 18

Cryptosporidium: Low pH in carbonated drinks; oocysts lose >85% viability at either 4°C or 22°C in orange juice at pH 3.9, or in carbonated beer or cola both at pH 3.9 (Friedman et al., 1997).

Malic, citric and tartaric acids have been found to reduce infectivity by up to 88% (Kniel et al.,2003). Ethanol and low water activity also reduce infectivity (Dawson et al., 2004).]

5.2.2.4. Irradiation

[83. Irradiation serves as another possible measure for parasite control. UV radiation, as a method for inactivating Cryptosporidium in apple cider, is currently being investigated. Preliminary results demonstrate a 5-log10 reduction in oocyst viability (Hanes, 2001). Whereas UV radiation has the potential to serve as an efficient method for inactivation of Cryptosproridium for even small producers, its economic feasibility has yet to be determined. Low dose UV radiation (0.10-0.25 kGy) is sufficient to inactivate metacercariae of Clonorchis sinensis, Opisthorchis viverrini, and Paragonimus westermani in fish and crab without affecting the flavor, taste and texture of the food. (WHO 1995, Technical Report Series 849, Control of Foodborne Trematode Infection)

84. Ionizing irradiation is effective in controlling helminths such as Opisthorchis viverrini, Anisakis simplex, Clonorchis sinensis, and Paragonimus westermani (Venugopal et al., 1999). For the control of Trichinella spiralis-infected pork, FDA approved the use of irradiation at an absorbed dose of 0.3 kGy- 1.0 kGy (FDA, 1985). While ionizing irradiation is useful for inactivation of a number of parasites, it does not uniformly inactivate all parasites to the same degree; a considerable range in the log reduction has been reported (Enigk et al., 1975). Also, inactivation of parasites may require a range of doses because the effectiveness of the process is dependent on the parasite, the stage of the parasite that has contaminated the food matrix, and the types and characteristics of the food matrix itself (Farkas, 1998). Hence, many parameters must be examined before irradiation will become practical for a particular product. Another factor is some consumers’ concern about ingesting irradiated food. This has mitigated against the use of irradiation on food products.

85. For Cryptosporidium, UV doses of 2.5 and 5.8 mJ/ cm2 enable inactivation credits of 1-log10

(90% inactivation) and 2-log 10 (99% inactivation), respectively. Other study demonstrated that 90% and 99% nactivation with UV dosages of 2.8 mJ/ cm

2 and 5.7 mJ/ cm

2 , respectively (Paul A. Rochelle

et al., 2005).]

5.2.2.5. Drying

[Cryptosporidium: Desiccation affects oocysts’ viability dramatically: 95% died within 4 h at room temperature (Deng and Cliver, 1999). In another study, 10

6 oocysts died within 4 h when

dried in air at 18–22 C (Robertson et al., 1992).]

5.2.4 Microbiological cross-contamination

86. When a similar product is sold for two different intended uses, i.e., for raw consumption and for cooking, and only the product intended for raw consumption receives a parasite kill step, care should be taken to keep the different in-process products clearly labelled and separated throughout processing and packaging. (e.g., salmon frozen for raw consumption separated from salmon sold fresh, never-frozen).

5.3 Incoming raw materials requirements

87. When the risk from parasites has been controlled in incoming products, documentation should be provided to demonstrate that the appropriate testing, and treatment (e.g., specific time and temperature that the product has been frozen) has been done, or that controls at primary production have been verified (e.g., audits and/or testing pigs with respect to Trichinella) and that the product has been produced in an acceptable risk environment.

5.4 PACKAGING

88. It should be noted that vacuum packaging does not alter the viability of parasites in food.

5.5 WATER

89. Some parasites are resistant to common water disinfection techniques. For example, some parasitic oocysts and/or eggs (e.g., Cryptosporidium oocysts) are extremely resistant to common water disinfection techniques such as chlorine. For these parasites, alternative methods such as UV light, ozone and filtration (e.g., specific size pore filter [1μm] ) may be used as a means of inactivating or removing parasites from water.

CX/FH 14/46/9 19

5.7 DOCUMENTATION AND RECORDS

90. Documentation related to validation and verification activities regarding the control measures used for parasites should be kept.

SECTION 6 – ESTABLISHMENT: MAINTENANCE AND SANITATION

6.3 Pest control systems

91. Animals and insects may contaminate processed foods with parasites. For example, infected insects and waste products from infected opossums are known to contaminate fruit juices with Trypanosoma cruzi.

92. Animals and insects may contaminate processed food (e.g., houseflies may transmit parasites from faeces of animals and humans to food) or biologically (e.g., through the parasite stage in the insect, for example, T. cruzi in the reduviid bug) with parasites. Transmission by insects is becoming increasingly recognized.

SECTION 7 – ESTABLISHMENT: PERSONAL HYGIENE

93. Proper personal hygiene such as hand-washing practices should be used to prevent faecal-oral transmission of parasites. This is particularly important for the control of T. solium which cause the severe diseases, neurocysticercosis.

SECTION 9 – PRODUCT INFORMATION AND CONSUMER AWARENESS

9.4 CONSUMER EDUCATION

94. Education and consumer awareness is as an important component of food-borne parasite control and in some cases may be the only feasible option available. Education should be directed to everyone throughout the food chain from farm and abattoir workers to consumers and retail food handlers, and should address everything from good animal husbandry practices to hygiene and sanitation measures.

95. There may also be a need to address specific high-risk population groups. For consumers, especially those who are pregnant or immunocompromised (e.g., individuals with HIV/AIDS), advice on the preparation and consumption of high-risk foods such as fresh produce, adequate cooking of meat and fish prior to consumption and the importance of hygiene, e.g., hand-washing, is critical.

96. It is important for consumers to recognize the potential risks of foodborne parasitic diseases related to the consumption of raw and undercooked meat, live, raw, [inadequately frozen and marinated,] and undercooked fish and shellfish, as well as raw and undercooked produce. More stringent guidance is needed for people in high-risk groups (e.g., Toxoplasma gondii in pregnant women and immunocompromised groups, Cryptosporidium in children and older adults).

SECTION 10 – TRAINING

97. Those workers engaged in food production, processing, preparation or serving should be trained and/or instructed in the control of foodborne parasites to a level appropriate to the operations they are to perform.

10.2 TRAINING PROGRAMMES

98. Training programmes should contain information on the following, as appropriate to those being trained:

The potential for food to be a vehicle of transmission of foodborne parasites if contaminated.

The potential sources and routes of transmission of foodborne parasites.

The potential for persistence of parasites in/on contaminated foods and food production settings.

The importance of on-farm sanitation and hygiene in interrupting the life cycle of parasites and minimizing the opportunity for faecal-oral transmission.

The need to comply with good animal husbandry practices relatedto hygiene and sanitation measures.

CX/FH 14/46/9 20

The role of domestic and wild animals in the transmission of certain parasites and the importance of compliance with good practices.

Proper hand washing practices and the importance of strict compliance with hand washing instructions at all times, particularly after being in contact with faecal matter. It is advisable to educate each new starting employee in the proper practices to be used for hand-washing.

The importance of adequate cooking to eliminate potential parasite risks.

10.3 INSTRUCTION AND SUPERVISION

99. Training and instructions should be given to all new personnel on the infectivity, transmission and management of foodborne parasites. Incorporation of these instructions into the National Codes of Hygienic Practice is recommended.

100. Inspectors or other relevant authorities who inspect fields, post-harvest processing plants, and eating facilities, should also be provided with the above training as articulated in paragraph 98.

CX/FH 14/46/9 21

Annex

GENERAL GUIDANCE FOR THE PROVISION OF COMMENTS

In order to facilitate the compilation and prepare a more useful comments’ document, Members and Observers, which are not yet doing so, are requested to provide their comments under the following headings:

(i) General Comments

(ii) Specific Comments

Specific comments should include a reference to the relevant section and/or paragraph of the document that the comments refer to.

When changes are proposed to specific paragraphs, Members and Observers are requested to provide their proposal for amendments accompanied by the related rationale. New texts should be presented in underlined/bold font and deletion in strikethrough font.

In order to facilitate the work of the Secretariats to compile comments, Members and Observers are requested to refrain from using colour font/shading as documents are printed in black and white and from using track change mode, which might be lost when comments are copied / pasted into a consolidated document.

In order to reduce the translation work and save paper, Members and Observers are requested not to reproduce the complete document but only those parts of the texts for which any change and/or amendments is proposed.

agenda item 8 cx/fh 14/46/9 joint fao/who food … · [email protected]...

Documents