Safety is the foundation of food quality. It’s critical that any laboratory, manufacturing plant, and production facility that handles food maintains the highest standard of safety and follows careful procedures to the letter. There’s no room for error; a single isolated shortcut can lead to disastrous results.

The USDA estimates that one in six Americans become sick from foodborne illness each year. Since New Year’s Eve 2023 alone, the agency’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) site’s Recalls and Public Health Alerts page has featured multiple cross-contamination incidents. The alerts warn consumers away from specific food products, with concerns such as “possible Salmonella contamination,” “possible E. coli contamination,” and “possible extraneous material contamination.”

Here are five safety steps that are absolute musts when it comes to preventing cross contamination and running a squeaky clean and safe laboratory.

1. Institute, Document, and Mandate Cleaning Procedures and Techniques

Everyone who steps foot in a lab space should be educated about agreed-upon safety procedures so they can be consistently followed. Methods must to be adhered to without fail; something that was “barely used” or “looks clean” is not acceptable.

• Prevent cross contamination by moving from high to low in a cleaning cycle, such as cleaning shelves above a workspace before the workspace itself.
• Avoid cleaning while testing is taking place.
• Keep equipment clean at all times, without exception. This means wiping down equipment after every use and scheduling regular deep cleaning as applicable.
• Establish and follow a cleaning checklist to prevent the risk of a missed or over-looked step. Checklists can also help keep others in the lab informed so there is no miscommunication.
• Know the risks of cross contamination and institute fail-safe cleaning methods. For example, pipettes are a leading cause of cross contamination within a lab setting. Best practice in equipment sanitation is to completely sterilize, not just clean, if possible. Sterilization can include disassembly and autoclaving for at least 20 minutes at 121ºC (252ºF). Each lab should have the procedures for the type of use and equipment outlined in detail.

2. Maintain Proper Air Circulation and Ventilation

Surfaces are not the only source of contaminants; the air within a closed room can harm employees and contaminate food or samples. Air handling in a food lab is not the same as air handling in a non–food-related commercial operation.

• Air handling in a food lab begins with a risk assessment to identify the unique risks within the building. For example, establishing positive air pressure zones is an important aspect of air flow design in a lab, but older buildings tend to have multiple exhaust fans, and exhaust fans create negative pressure zones.
• Hygienic design of air handling units (AHUs) and ducts is imperative to food safety. Employ an HVAC engineer to design a system with the appropriate number of air turns per hour to fit the facility and its operations.
• Standard ventilation filters could be blowing contaminants in the lab. The level of food micro-sensitivity will dictate the level of filter standards and the type of filter needed.
• Air sampling can help to determine if the air within a lab space has high levels of microbiological activity.

3. Maintain a Tidy Workspace

While this may sound as if it goes without saying, workspaces that aren’t carefully cleaned can harbor microorganisms, bacteria, and allergens. This can endanger employees within the lab and increase the risk of cross contamination.

• Labs should be organized so that expectations are crystal clear. A good rule to follow is the “5-S” process: sort, set in order, shine, standardize, and sustain.
• Dispose of expired products promptly and ensure that they don’t come into contact with lab equipment or samples.
• Use only designated cleaning tools, solutions, and products, and create timetables to regularly switch them out.
• Clean the lab area in the moment and/or at regular intervals throughout the day (whichever comes first).
• Mandate and provide gloves and other personal protective equipment for all personnel to protect against cross contamination and contain lab testing within smaller areas.
• Utilize designated disposal bins for different testing waste, keeping biohazard waste and chemicals separate from non-biohazard waste.
• Design storage with safety in mind. Designated safety cabinets help workspaces stay organized, but they can also increase safety levels in a lab.

4. Keep Equipment in Pristine Condition

Faulty equipment escalates multiple risk factors—namely, biohazard risk, food safety risk, and personal safety risk. Even if equipment is perfectly clean, it can leak or create other messes that contribute to an unsafe lab if it’s not in top condition.

• Document and communicate regular maintenance and inspection schedules. Equipment needs to be regularly tested and proactively inspected to verify its condition.
• Implement a robust system of checks and balances to ensure that maintenance activities are not isolated.
• Clean equipment according to the operator’s manual. For example, distilled water and specialized cleaning agents may be required to keep equipment operational and prevent corrosion.
• Keep equipment free of dust, dirt, grease, and of course bacteria to improve performance and increase safety.
• Focus on preventative maintenance to extend the life of equipment productivity.

5. Test, Test, and Re-Test Within Your Lab Setting

Even the cleanest facilities need to ensure that their cleaning procedures are effective.

• Perform regular environmental testing to check the lab environment.
• An environmental monitoring program (EMP) can determine whether or not an environment is sanitary and verify if pathogen controls are working.
• Utilize negative control plates when using microbiological samples to check for cross contamination.
• Enlist food safety partners to assess tests within the lab (additional checks/balances).

The Cleaning Supply Chain

As in the distribution supply chain, one weak link in a laboratory can affect the entire chain. A lab may have extensive protocols in place to keep equipment clean and fully operable, but if a new employee is unfamiliar with the equipment, the process can start to break down.

Training at All Levels

Food labs and production facilities can amp up the level of safety by seeking supply chain partners that offer training on the equipment they provide, including usage, maintenance, and cleaning. At the other end of the chain, a food distributor, wholesaler, or retailer needs training to continue the chain of safety.

A Culture of Safety

Another important aspect to be aware of in a supply chain partner is company culture. While this can be harder to discern at first glance, there are red flags that can indicate that an organization’s values may inadvertently affect the level of safety. For example, a focus on speed over all else may lead to shortcuts or hasty cleaning protocols that increase safety risk all the way across the chain.

Consumer Safety

Both contract and in-house labs help prevent contamination and foodborne illnesses. As time goes on, their role in analyzing and mediating safety issues at a larger scale is increasing. In other words, food labs are equipped with the tools and expertise to perform analytical and preventive work that can support the entire food system, not just its direct partners.

A Look to the Future

Labs that are efficient, productive, and clean enable vendors and suppliers to provide safe food to the growing populations of consumers across the globe. Impeccable cleaning protocols can protect public safety and also allow food companies to channel resources toward growth initiatives, rather than using those same resources to cover the damaging expenses of recalls. With safety as a foundation, food labs play a central role in the future of our food systems.

Kotecki is a technical sales manager for Nelson-Jameson. Reach her at k.kotecki@nelsonjameson.com.

The post Five Crucial Steps for Keeping Your Food Laboratory Clean appeared first on Food Quality & Safety.

U.S. consumers used a food delivery service over a one-month period, according to a 2023 report from DoorDash (doordash.com). “Meal kit services have grown in tandem with the overall trend toward food delivery and consumption at home,” says Paul Bradley, senior director of product marketing at TraceGains, a supply chain solutions company in Broomfield, Colo.

Social distancing measures initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the adoption of meal kit and food delivery services as consumers aimed to reduce their exposure to crowded places such as grocery stores and restaurants. After the pandemic, meal kits remained popular in light of busy lifestyles, a preference for convenience, and a desire for a wide range of recipes that cater to various dietary preferences and restrictions, says Rachel Fogle, PhD, associate professor of biological sciences, program lead for environmental science and sustainability, and director of aquaponics and hydroponics initiatives at Harrisburg University of Science and Technology in Harrisburg, Penn.

Meal kit and food delivery services also offer a convenient solution for many urban dwellers, especially in food deserts, considering transportation constraints and the proximity of grocery stores with healthy, fresh produce, Dr. Fogle says. Smartphones and mobile apps have simplified the process of ordering food and meal kits.

With the popularity of food delivery services and meal kits growing so quickly, however, food safety regulators have given little guidance regarding best practices for direct-to-consumer (DTC) or third-party delivery (TPD) services. In food delivery, this “last mile,” the means by which food is transported from a producer and packager to an actual consumer, presents unique challenges for maintaining food safety.

“Whether food is being carried by a delivery driver or conveyed by a package delivery service or other means, situations can arise in which food can be handled unsafely,” Bradley says. “In particular, concerns exist around perishable food items that must be held within safe temperature ranges, as many delivery methods don’t account for temperature verification and other traditional food safety process controls.”

Regarding meal kits, issues can surface when using non-traditional delivery channels such as mail or package delivery systems, which typically aren’t designed to provide the kinds of checks and controls required by safe food handling guidelines, Bradley says.

Greatest Safety Concerns

Due to limited regulations for DTC and TPD, as well as a lack of understanding of risks posed by these services, concerns have mounted. When food is placed in a box for shipment, it’s no longer under that establishment’s control, and delivery companies such as the U.S. Postal Service, UPS, FedEx, aren’t regulated by food safety agencies, says Donald W. Schaffner, PhD, distinguished professor, extension specialist, and current chair of the department of food science at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, N.J. Even if these companies do guarantee delivery times, they use unrefrigerated vehicles and therefore don’t have the capacity or ability to guarantee delivery temperatures.

Temperature control of perishable goods is a top concern, says Martin Bucknavage, MS, MBA, senior food safety extension specialist in the department of food science at Penn State University in University Park, because it can result in quality issues related to spoilage and contamination by organisms such as Listeria and Staphylococcus aureus, along with the spore-forming pathogens Clostridium botulinum, Clostridium perfringens, and Bacillus cereus.

Temperature abuse becomes problematic when a shipped product doesn’t get to a consumer in a timely fashion, which could occur to a shipment being mailed to the wrong address or a consumer not being present when a product is delivered. Even if coolants are used, in some cases they may not compensate for delivery delays, Bucknavage says.

“There may be sporadic cases of foodborne illnesses from food delivery services due to one-off bad actors, but with meal kit delivery, the possibility of large outbreaks exists,” says Mitzi D. Baum, MSc, CEO of Stop Foodborne Illness in Chicago. “Studies have shown that the ingredients in meal kits don’t always stay at a safe temperature. Harmful bacteria can grow quickly in meats and seafood if left sitting on a porch, and consumers may not realize it. Refrigerated items can only be left out at temperatures above 40°F for a maximum two hours, which includes transport time.”

Tampering with food during the delivery process is another concern, Dr. Schaffner says. The platform-to-consumer delivery method introduces increased opportunities for food tampering and contamination due to additional touchpoints in the delivery process. To address this concern, more restaurants have implemented tamper-evident closures; however, studies show that using tamper-evident seals might send the wrong message to consumers (Int J Hospital Manag. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhm.2022.103315). “When consumers see these seals, it might send a signal raising the possibility that tampering could occur,” he says.

Personal hygiene of the individuals preparing and handling the food, as well as those delivering the food, is another concern. Most states require all restaurant workers to have a food handler’s license; however, delivery companies don’t explicitly state on their websites that any kind of food handling experience or license is required, Baum says.

In fact, some reports have highlighted concerns regarding food safety knowledge and practices among food handlers and delivery workers (PLoS One. 18(10): e0293004). “Proper hygiene practices, including hand washing and sanitization, are essential to mitigate the risk of foodborne illness,” Dr. Fogle says.

Ensuring the cleanliness of delivery vehicles is yet another aspect to address because spills and food residue can cause contamination, Dr. Fogle says. Regular cleaning can reduce this risk.

“Clearly, many companies have mastered the home delivery channel—showing that it can be done safely with great success,” Bucknavage says. “But because of lower barriers to entering the delivered meal space, some providers of home delivery meals can fly under the radar, away from inspection or other oversight. It’s up to regulators to constantly search for these less-than-compliant operations.”

Ignorance can also play a role. Some start-up businesses that have a good meal kit idea simply may not know about state, federal, and local laws and how to meet their standards, says Benjamin Chapman, PhD, department head, professor, and food safety specialist in the department of agricultural and human sciences at North Carolina State University in Raleigh.

“Addressing these concerns mandates collaboration among meal kit companies, food delivery services, regulatory bodies, and consumers to establish and enforce strict standards and protocols for the safe handling, packaging, and delivery of food,” Dr. Fogle says.

Guidance Document Contains Best Practices

Although few regulations regarding DTC and TPD exist, in 2022 a Conference for Food Protection committee drafted a voluntary guidance document on best practices for food safety for these service lines. It includes advice pertaining to preventive controls, mechanisms to assess risk, recommendations for proper packaging, temperature controls, physical and chemical contamination controls, and allergen controls. The document was drafted by the Conference for Food Protection Direct to Consumer Delivery Committee, chaired by Dr. Schaffner. Committee members included representation from grocery stores, restaurants, food processors, delivery companies involved in these new delivery models, consumer and academic representatives, and state and local public health officials. Following is some insight on each practice.

Preventive controls. Food companies that include “last mile delivery,” whether DTC or TPD, should conduct thorough hazard analyses to identify potential food safety hazards at each stage of the delivery process, Dr. Fogle says. Regular verification activities, including inspections, testing, and recordkeeping, are essential to ensure the adequacy and effectiveness of preventive controls. It’s important to establish procedures for taking corrective action in response to deviations from established controls. Proper training of employees and delivery personnel are crucial for ensuring compliance with preventive control regulations and maintaining food safety standards.

Mechanisms to assess risk. Managing food safety risks requires leveraging both internal and external resources. Internal resources include self-assessment, flexibility, and response capabilities, Dr. Fogle says. Regular internal assessments—conducted through daily checklists, shift-based logs, internal reviews, and the use of third-party auditing firms for independent audits—enable companies to proactively identify and mitigate food safety risks.

Third-party auditing firms can conduct independent audits to ensure safe food practices. External experts offer impartiality during assessments, providing unbiased insights and recommendations to improve food safety practices, Dr. Fogle says. These professionals often possess specialized training in inspection techniques and root-cause investigations, facilitating thorough assessments of food safety risks. Additionally, external resources can supplement internal teams by aiding in program design, updating educational materials, and developing standard operating procedures, thereby strengthening overall food safety protocols.

Recommendations for proper packaging. Attention to each layer of packaging—outer packaging, coolant selection, and dunnage—is vital for ensuring food safety and quality during transit and delivery, Dr. Fogle says.

Outer packaging serves as insulation to maintain temperature control and prevent contamination. Companies must ensure its integrity, conduct crush tests, and provide handling instructions. Reusable packaging requires defined collection logistics and proper cleaning procedures.

Coolants, such as ice packs or dry ice, are chosen based on scientific principles and data, considering factors like transit time and temperature fluctuations. Dunnage fills voids, aids insulation, and protects contents during transportation. It shouldn’t insulate food from coolant and must maintain sanitary quality.

Temperature control. Perishable ingredients like meats, dairy, and certain vegetables must be stored at specific temperatures to prevent bacterial growth, Dr. Fogle says. During transportation, inadequate refrigeration or insulation can lead to excessive temperature fluctuation, risking food safety.

According to the guidance document, “A DTC delivery company should identify the temperature requirements throughout transport and delivery based on regulatory requirements as well as the company’s evaluation of its products, including their unique characteristics and uses … a company should account for all possible variables that may compromise temperature control. With respect to transportation and delivery, for example, some businesses conduct same day or overnight delivery and can control the longest possible delivery time (e.g., by restricting delivery ZIP codes). Companies with less control over delivery times should account for this variability.”

Physical and chemical contamination control. Materials used for packaging shouldn’t introduce contamination and should be stored in a way that maintains cleanliness. Measures should prevent leakage and cross-contamination, particularly for packages containing raw meats. Food delivery companies must be cautious when delivering non-food items alongside food items and acknowledge allergens as chemical hazards, Dr. Fogle says.

Allergen control. Providing mechanisms for consumers to identify allergies during ordering is essential. Precautions should ensure that unpackaged food items remain free from potential allergen contact throughout packaging and delivery, Dr. Fogle says. Resources such as the FDA model Food Code offer additional information on allergens and associated risks, including appendices on food allergen labeling and food allergens as food safety hazards.

More to Chew On

Additional guidance on transporting food safely can be found in FDA’s New Era of Smarter Food Safety blueprint, an initiative that focuses on leveraging technology, data analytics, and collaboration across the food industry to enhance food safety practices. This includes addressing challenges specific to meal kit and food delivery services, such as traceability, transportation, supply chain transparency, and real-time monitoring of temperature and sanitation, Dr. Chapman says.

A key component of New Era is FDA’s final rule on requirements for traceability, often referred to as FSMA 204, because it implements section 204(d) of FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). “The essence of FSMA 204, which becomes effective in 2026, is to enact strong requirements for both forward and backward traceability for certain food items, with a goal of enabling much faster outbreak response if a serious food safety event occurs,” Bradley says.

Alongside existing FDA and USDA guidance on recalls, this regulation establishes an expectation that meal kit and delivery services should maintain a trace-forward capability inclusive of last-mile consumer delivery. “Put simply, the job of meal kit providers doesn’t end when a product is handed off to a carrier or delivery driver, which has meaningful implications for record keeping and process management going forward,” Bradley says. “The industry will have some work to do in order to create the kind of transparent supply network required to meet it.”

Furthermore, the third of four core elements in the New Era blueprint, “New Business Models and Retail Modernization,” focuses on tech-enabled traceability and recognizes an evolution in the way food is produced and delivered to consumers. “FDA seeks to protect foods from contamination amid the expansion of e-commerce and other new business models,” says Sara Bratager, senior food safety and traceability scientist at the Institute of Food Technologists in Chicago.

To achieve this, FDA outlines several key initiatives in the blueprint, such as collaborating with regulatory partners, and educating delivery services and consumers on proper food handling practices, and promoting the adoption of technology to monitor risk factors and drive safe product innovation.

Shortly after the release of the New Era blueprint, FDA held a summit on e-commerce to gain insight into how foods are sold through business-to-consumer e-commerce models in the United States and worldwide. Continued efforts are illustrated through the Core Element 3 web page.

In October 2021, FDA convened an e-commerce summit. “It represented a snapshot of current understanding and best practices,” Dr. Schaffner says. “It’s still a useful resource for companies looking to quickly get up to speed with this area of the food system.”

“FDA is clearly aware of food safety issues with respect to these novel delivery mechanisms,” Dr. Schaffner continues. “But, to a certain extent, its hands are tied because they must operate under the current regulatory structure, which has some gaps with respect to these innovations.”

The Beef Industry Food Safety Council has also established best practices for DTC sales. “It’s recognized that risk is influenced by the type of product being considered and suggests that re-evaluating risk should occur each time a product profile changes,” Dr. Fogle says. “Expectations of packaging and distribution need to consider temperature control, allergens, and traceability.”

Thoughts on Proceeding

Looking ahead, Bratager has identified several areas to focus on to improve the safety of food delivered by DTC and TPD services. Existing regulations for registering food businesses often categorize e-commerce alongside traditional brick-and-mortar retail establishments. “While this classification may be suitable for some businesses, it fails to address the nuances of all e-commerce actors,” she says. “Operations such as meal kit fulfillment centers, which involve more handling and processing akin to manufacturing facilities, may fall through regulatory gaps,” she says.

Additionally, point-of-sale labeling requirements designed for in-store operations don’t adequately address the responsibility of online-to-consumer businesses to provide essential information to consumers at the point of sale, Bratager says. Clarification and guidance are needed to bridge these regulatory gaps and safeguard public health.

Furthermore, current foodborne illness tracking systems largely overlook business to consumer e-commerce categories, which limits the understanding of the risks posed by DTC and TPD services, Bratager says. For instance, the CDC’s National Outbreak Reporting System dashboard includes some restaurant settings but omits crucial categories such as “restaurant delivery” and “online grocery.” “Integrating these significant categories into foodborne illness reporting practices is essential for accurately assessing their risks and informing risk-based regulatory measures,” she concludes.

The post Food Safety During Food Delivery appeared first on Food Quality & Safety.

Imagine that disaster strikes on the production line just weeks before a candy company’s famous treats flood grocery store shelves. Poor process controlled to crystallized sugar being added during a stage that destroyed the batch. When alarms sounded hours later, thousands of candy boxes had already been filled with grainy goods. With their signature smoothness missing, the brand’s subpar candies became an embarrassing and costly mistake. Lacking control of operational processes can hinder product excellence and negatively affect brand reputation; however, inline, accurate, repeatable process monitoring can prevent quality and safety catastrophes from the earliest stages of transforming raw materials to putting on the finishing touches.

When every sugar crystal, drop of syrup, and piece of candy demands accurate process monitoring, the art of cane and beet sugar processing, syrup production and confectionery production meets the science of measurement accuracy.

Precise Control from End to End

Every process involved in sweet treat production requires careful process control and measurement accuracy. Accurate, repeatable measurement of raw and in-process liquids at multiple processing steps empowers producers and processors to optimize disparate processes for maximum quality and efficiency within facilities.

Creating sugar from raw materials. Processing harvested sugarcane and sugar beets creates edible sugar. After it is extracted, the juice or syrup is purified to remove any contaminants or solid particles. Heating the clarified liquid helps evaporate excess water, leaving behind a concentrated blend of flavors and sugars. From there, sugar crystals form and separate from the remaining liquid after the liquid sugar solution cools through manipulation of temperature, humidity, and movement.

Strict processing parameter adherence prevents process and product quality deviations. Monitoring Brix levels during raw materials processing ensures an accurate seeding point and optimal crystallization. Inline refractometers continuously monitor the liquid concentration to carefully control the cooked solution and crystallization process. Going beyond the target Brix level risks crystal conglomeration, which can result in wasted batches and costly reprocessing.

Syrups preparation. Syrup producers then blend the concentrated sugar solutions with various flavors and other ingredients to create syrups varying in taste, texture, and appearance. Melters utilize elevated temperatures to achieve the desired solubility, viscosity, and chemistry. Accurate, reliable liquid concentration measurements minimize cooking time and ensure even blending. Even better, the ability to precisely control Brix levels supports the uniformity of the syrup mixture, guaranteeing consistency in taste, texture, and appearance. Confectionery manufacturers then buy the ready-made sugar or syrups to develop their products.

Confectionery manufacturing. Sugar confectionery and chocolate filling makers purchase processed sugars or syrups to create their products. These sugary treats include candies, chocolate fillings, chewing gum, marshmallows, and other desserts rich in sugar and carbohydrates. To maintain a specific shape, texture, flavor, consistency, and overall quality, the sugar content in the products must be concentrated at a desired level through cooking and evaporation of water.

Inline process refractometers provide continuous, real-time information throughout the pipeline to help determine the end point and ensure consistent product quality. Ideal for confectionery manufacturing and candy filling manufacturing machinery, these retractable instruments eliminate the need for sampling, prevent process disruptions, and save valuable processing time; however, measuring liquid concentration and Brix during different applications to craft the perfect sweet treat comes with its share of difficulties. 

Inline, Continuous Measurement

Temperature, natural variations in the raw material-filled juice concentration and the sugar content of syrups and other confectioneries, and additional factors can impact the final product quality, thereby affecting customer satisfaction.

First, sugar processing involves multiple stages with varying temperature requirements exceeding 150°C. From melting to evaporation to refining, each process involves incredibly high heat, so refractometers must endure temperatures up to 150°C, or 300°F, for accurate functionality.

Figure 1. The final Brix of the mixture determines the flavor, consistency, and overall quality of the final product. Courtesy of Vaisala.

Sugar syrups, confections, and candy fillings often involve intricate mixtures of various ingredients, each contributing to the end product’s overall flavor profile, appearance, consistency, and more. Measuring the liquid concentration of syrups, sugar confections and chocolate fillings throughout blending and mixing processes can be difficult—and unreliable—with a handheld refractometer and manual sampling dependent on human error.

With inline process refractometers reliably measuring the liquid phase and Brix across each process in real time, from processing to syrup prep to confectionery and filling production, decision makers can realize numerous advantages and produce top-grade products.

Liquid Concentration

While sugar processing, syrup preparation and candy-making processes all pose technical hurdles, the benefits of proper liquid concentration and Brix measurement benefits are substantial.

Improved product quality and consistency. Accurate measurements drive the creation of confections with unparalleled quality and consistency. Confection makers can create products that reliably meet or exceed consumer expectations by ensuring consistency across batches. Preventing under- or overconcentration eliminates flavor disruptions, strange textures, or variable melt points.

Substantial cost savings. Without accurate Brix data, manufacturers might struggle to stay within recommended material levels, quickly running through resources to adjust the sweetness or flavor. Fine-tuning various processes based on accurate liquid concentration and Brix measurements enables manufacturers to reduce waste and extract the maximum value from their materials. Optimized process control translates into sizable cost and ingredient savings.

Fewer labor-intensive tasks. Bet­ween manually monitoring the crystallization, evaporation, extraction, blending, mixing and other confectionery production processes, as well as taking samples and making adjustments in the event of deviations, each step from raw material processing to confirming the final product quality can be arduous and time-consuming. Automated inline measurements reduce the need to collect samples, run tests, and control processes manually to account for divergence.

Peace of mind. Overall, Brix gives confectioners a window into multiple process parameters beyond enhancing quality and efficiency. Reliable inline Brix measurement also provides invaluable peace of mind. Avoiding intermittent manual sampling eliminates risks associated with human error and contamination. Tight instrumentation regulation, within limits, ensures that any variations or deviations are caught instantly before they impact the end product. Additionally, by avoiding taking manual samples from product during heating or melting, technicians are no longer exposed to burns. Germs and particles introduced through manual sampling are also avoided.

As sugar mills and refineries, syrup producers, and various confectionery and filling makers depend on the reliability of refractometry for liquid concentration measurements in myriad applications, advanced continuous, inline measurement and monitoring systems maximize production efficiency, product quality, and profits by decreasing discarded ingredients, failed batches, and repetitive manual steps.

Harness Innovation

Countless confectioners face catastrophic quality failures and losses stemming from poor process and quality control. Accuracy, repeatability, and safety unlocked by inline measurements are the keys to perfection in the world of candies and sweets.

Off-target concentration levels critically impact product quality, flavors, melt properties, and more. Inline process refractometers equip sugar processors, syrup preparers, and confection makers with a powerful tool to elevate their products, providing real-time, continuous monitoring of liquid concentration and allowing for instantaneous adjustments.

With inline refractometry, decision makers finally eradicate the crippling product quality issues and profit shortcomings rooted in poor concentration control. Precisely measuring edible sugar, sugar syrups, and confectionery creations at every stage translates directly into improved product quality and safety, reduced costs, and enhanced process control, all of which contributes to consumer delight, bite after bite.

Green is a regional sales manager at Vaisala, a provider of industrial measurement and instrumentation solutions for the food, beverage, and agriculture industries. He has a background in mechanical engineering and brings experience in instrumentation, sales, and product management. At Vaisala, he is primarily focused on measurement applications applied to food and beverage production.

Figure 1. The final Brix of the mixture determines the flavor, consistency, and overall quality of the final product.

Courtesy of Vaisala.

The post Quality Control in Confectionery Production appeared first on Food Quality & Safety.

One in five U.S. households adopted a pet during the COVID-19 pandemic, according to the most recent statistics from the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, highlighting the importance of safe food for dogs and cats as they become part of the family for companionship, protection, and comfort.

People increasingly want a balanced diet derived from safe, high quality ingredients for both their pets and human family members, and both types of foods are regulated by FDA. But, there are some key differences that make food quality and safety for pet food challenging says Austin Therrell, PhD, executive director of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), a Champaign, Ill.-based nonprofit that guides state, federal, and international feed regulators with ingredient definitions, labels, and laboratory standards, adding, “Complete and balanced pet food is comparable to baby formula for humans in many ways [in that] in most cases our pets rely on the same source of food every day to meet all their nutritional needs.”

He says that any nutrient imbalances in pet food can potentially cause deficiencies or toxicities that are food safety challenges. Therefore, he says, it’s important for regulators to ensure that ingredients used in commercial pet foods have gone through the appropriate reviews to confirm that they are safe for their intended use and diet because animals have different needs at different ages.

The nutritional needs of dogs and cats also differ. “With pets mainly eating one brand of pet food that is complete and balanced, it is essential [that] all the nutrition they require for their species and life state is maintained in the product in every single batch,” he says. “There have been several instances of recalls related to nutritional toxicities or deficiencies.”

At the federal level, section 210(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act defines food as articles intended for food or drink for man and other animals. There are similar definitions in title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations parts 117 and 507. Dr. Therrell says that, while regulations for food for humans and for other animals are closely related, there are some big differences in nutritional and labeling requirements due to the number of different types of animals.

Cross Contamination, Other Risks

Another safety risk is potential sickness, because more pets are living in homes and acting as part of the family, even sleeping with their owners. People may feed their pets at the same time they are preparing their own food, increasing the risk of cross contamination between the foods. Their close proximity as family members puts humans and their animals at risk if the pet food is contaminated, Dr. Therrell says.

If pet food were contaminated with a zoonotic pathogen such as Salmonella, humans handling the food or those who are exposed to pets that consumed it could get sick even if the pet is not showing symptoms of salmonellosis, he adds, noting that children are particularly at risk. “Regulators have to account for more transmission pathways of any contaminants or adulterants in pet food,” Dr. Therrell says. “The pet food industry has to consider many of the same risks that the human food industry does, if not more, because of the diversity of the animals consuming the products and the humans handling the products.”

Another difference between animal and human food is regulations for allergens, which do not apply to pet food. Food ingredients rarely cause allergic reactions in pets, says Marissa Herchler Cohen, PhD, area specialized agent for animal food safety at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, N.C. Allergens are also not typically a consideration in assessing exotic ingredients. They have to go through the same approval process at the FDA level with a food additive petition, be generally regarded as safe, or go through the AAFCO definition process, each of which shows the ingredient is proven to be safe for its intended use, she adds.

Imported ingredients are addressed through FSMA both in pet and human food using the Foreign Supplier Verification Program (FSVP). For countries with less stringent food safety rules than the United States, importers must evaluate their food safety system and ensure that it meets FSMA specifications. Imported ingredients from countries whose food safety systems are considered equal to or better than that in the U.S. require FSVP approval. Ways to comply with FSVP requirements include on-site audits of supplier facilities, documentation reviews, or product ingredient testing, depending on the nature of the facility, Dr. Cohen says.

Day to day, pet food producers must address different challenges depending on the type of food they are producing. Raw pet food manufacturers need to closely monitor temperature changes within their production to ensure that products do not thaw enough to create an environment where pathogens can thrive, she adds. Producers also must be careful about sourcing and storing ingredients to minimize the presence of pathogens.

Since the raw pet food industry has no kill step, there is potential for pathogens growth, Dr. Cohen says. Some raw food pet manufacturers are using methods such as high-pressure processing, a non-cooking method for destroying microorganisms that maintains the raw product. Consumers need to be made aware of the potential risks with feeding these diets and understand how to handle them safely, she adds.

States’ Roles in Labeling

Regulations for labeling pet food can be inconsistent from state to state, which is challenging for producers that ship their products to different states; they must meet the labeling requirements in each state in which their product sells. FSMA federal regulations for pet food remain the same regardless of the state where the manufacturing occurs.

Each state can adopt all, some, or none of the AAFCO recommendations for labeling. There are some rules, however, that dictate what can and cannot appear on a label. Misleading information or claims cannot appear on a label—for example, “human grade” or “human quality”—nor can drug claims that a food or ingredient has a medical benefit. “The terms ‘human grade’ or ‘human quality’ only refer to products that are ready to eat and produced under the Current Good Manufacturing Practice regulations enforced by the FDA,” says Dr. Cohen. They don’t apply to raw pet food, she adds, because it generally is not ready to eat. Also, once a pet food is mixed with an ingredient that is not considered edible by humans, the end product cannot be considered “human grade,” she says.

Dr. Therrell says there is a need for additional state feed laws. Some states accept the use of ingredients tentatively approved by AAFCO, while others require them to be “officially approved.” Other states accept ingredients that are “self-affirmed GRAS” because they have qualified staff to review data.

PURR Act Aims to Streamline Regulations

Congress introduced a new act to streamline the federal regulatory process for pet food on February 15, 2024. H.R. 7380, the Pet Food Uniform Regulatory Reform Act of 2024, or PURR Act, has been widely supported by pet food manufacturers and the industry group, the Pet Food Institute, in Washington, D.C. 

The act would prohibit state governments from directly or indirectly establishing or enforcing any authority on the marketing or labeling of pet food. It would place label and ingredient approvals in FDA hands. State agriculture departments still would oversee quality inspections and product registrations.

“We are supporting federal legislation that would replace the current inefficient patchwork approach between states and the federal government with consistent national standards that are predictable, clearly defined, and encourage innovation and speed to market,” Dana Brooks, president of the Pet Food Institute (PFI), said in a statement.

Pet food makers produce nearly 10 million tons of food annually, and outdated regulations have made it difficult for pet food manufacturers nationwide to invest in research and development for new and improved products, said Rep. Jake LaTurner (R-Kansas), in a statement in February 2024 when PFI announced its support of the legislation. Rep. LaTurner, along with Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), Sharice Davids (D-Kansas), Josh Harder (D-Calif.), and Steve Womack (R-Ark.), sponsored the bipartisan legislation.

AAFCO, however, has concerns about the current version of the legislation, saying it could have negative impacts on consumer protection and reduce pet food label transparency. “State feed programs are the first line of defense protecting consumers from misleading or mislabeled pet food products,” Dr. Therrell says. State regulators proactively inspect pet food labeling before products hit the market, he says, and ensure that marketing claims on the label are accurate and have scientific data to validate them. “Under the new PURR Act, this important layer of consumer protection would completely go away,” he adds.

He says there are ways to improve efficiency and bring more innovation to the market, but it needs to be done in a safe and transparent manner and requires states to remain involved.

The PURR Act also could impact more than dog and cat food producers, Dr. Cohen says. Because it is specific to food for those animals, the legislation could increase the regulatory burden for producers who make dog and cat food, as well as livestock feed or pet foods for rabbits, rodents, and other small animals. Those manufacturers would have to comply with different regulations, as would ingredient processors and suppliers to both the dog and cat food industries, as well as to producers of food for other animals.

“Though having uniform expectations for labeling and expedited ingredient approval is helpful to the industry as a whole, I think there are some unintended consequences that should be considered,” Dr. Cohen says. “There may be room for compromise.”

The post Food Safety Considerations for Pet Food appeared first on Food Quality & Safety.