Microbiological Safety of Food Advisory Committee on the

Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food

Annual Report 2006

© Crown copyrightPublished by Food Standards Agency

August 2007FSA/1191/0807

Advises the Food Standards Agency on the

Microbiological Safety of Food

ACMSF A3 COVER 27/8/07 11:35 AM Page 1


Further copies of this publication can be downloaded from:food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/committee/acmsfar07.pdf

Advisory Committee on theMicrobiological Safety of Food

Annual Report 2006



Contents

Subject Paragraph

Foreword

Introduction 1

Chapter 1: Administrative Matters 2 - 22

Membership 2 - 15

Appointments 2

Periods of appointment 3

Spread of expertise 4 - 5

Appointments in 2006 6

Retirements in 2006 7 - 8

Committee and Group meetings 9 - 14

Current membership and Declarations of Interests 15

Personal liability 16

Openness 17 - 21

Improving public access 17 - 18

Open meetings 19 - 21

Work of other advisory committees and 22cross-membership

Chapter 2: The Committee’s Work in 2006 23 - 81

Clostridium botulinum 23 - 29

Infant botulism 23 - 24

Botulism in cattle 25 - 29

Listeria 30 - 33

Hepatitis E 34 - 37

I

Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food: Annual Report 2006

Subject Paragraph

Avian Influenza 38

Toxoplasmosis and food 39 - 41

Safe cooking of burgers 42 - 44

Disinfection of knives 45 - 48

Fat and added sugar in foods 49 - 52

Vacuum packaged foods 53 - 56

Salmonella Contact Group 58

Epidemiology of Foodborne Infections Group 59 - 62

Surveillance 63 - 70

Survey of Salmonella and Campylobacter 63 - 66Contamination of whole, raw poultry on retailsale in Wales and Northern Ireland in 2005

Surveillance update 67 - 70

General papers 71 - 79

Scientific governance 71 - 72

Openness 73 - 76

Induction and appraisal 77 - 79

Freedom of Information 80

Information papers 81

Chapter 3: A Forward Look 82 - 93

Future work programme 82 - 89

Horizon scanning 90 - 93

Annex I Membership

Annex II Register of Members’ Interests

References


II

The Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food(ACMSF) was established in 1990 to provide the Government withindependent expert advice on the microbiological safety of food.

The Committee’s terms of reference are:

to assess the risk to humans from microorganisms which areused, or occur, in or on food, and to advise the Food StandardsAgency (FSA) on any matters relating to the microbiologicalsafety of food.

The various issues addressed by the Committee since its inceptionare detailed in this and previous Annual Reports1-14 and in a series ofsubject-specific reports.15-27

1


Foreword

1. I am pleased to present the 2006 Annual Report of the AdvisoryCommittee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (ACMSF).

2. In 2006, the ACMSF concluded its work to review the currentadvice on the safe cooking of burgers originally issued by the ChiefMedical Officer (CMO) in 1998. Its Ad Hoc Group met on twooccasions and considered documentary and oral evidence relating tothe epidemiology of E.coli O157 and other key pathogens, guidanceand cooking conditions for burgers in the UK, US and other countries,published scientific evidence, information from industry and amodelling approach to setting confidence limits. Key conclusions andrecommendations were that the CMO’s advice for safe cooking ofburgers should not change and, in line with current advice, shouldremain at 70ºC for 2 minutes or equivalent. The group also concludedthat use of lower time/temperature combinations should not be ruledout where producers were in a position to demonstrate that theywould be able to ensure consistently that the final product is safe andthat the process is under effective control. The ACMSF recommendedthat the Agency produced guidance on appropriate use of suchtime/temperature controls for industry and enforcement officers.ACMSF also recommended that FSA consider using a modellingapproach to set recommended time/temperatures based on requiredinactivation levels and limits of confidence. Lastly the ACMSFproposed that advice to consumers and caterers on cooking ofburgers should be reiterated. The conclusions and recommendationsfrom this report will be used to inform the future development ofACMSF advice to the Food Standards Agency.

3. The Committee also published two reports on botulism in 2006.In September, following a period of public consultation, theCommittee published its report on the potential health risk from infantbotulism associated with the consumption of chilled or frozen babyfoods. The conclusions and recommendations were highlighted in theACMSF Annual Report 2005. In December the ACMSF published itsreport on the potential risk to human health from cattle botulismassociated with the spreading of poultry litter on poultry land. Thisfollowed public consultation which took place earlier in the year. Thereport concluded that there was a low risk of transmission of botulismin cattle and that there should be no requirement to restrict movementof meat and milk from healthy animals from farms where there have


2

been clinically suspected cases of botulism in cattle. There shouldalso be no requirement to restrict the slaughter of healthy cattle fromherds where cases of confirmed or suspected botulism haveoccurred. However meat and milk from clinically affected animalsshould not enter the food chain since this might pose a risk toconsumers. The Committee also recommended that in the event ofthe emergence of new toxin types in cattle, surveillance should becarried out. Following publication of this report, and in line with itsrecommendations, the Committee was informed that the Agencywould be implementing a change to its advice and would no longerrequest voluntary restrictions for healthy cattle from farms wherecases of botulism were suspected.

4. Twice in 2006 the Committee considered the changing patternof human listeriosis in the elderly population in England and Wales.This followed the rise in non-pregnancy related listeriosis in the elderlysince 2000, which could not be explained by recognised outbreaks,and which was initially reported to ACMSF in 2005. Noting thecontinued increased incidence in England and Wales and a similarsituation emerging in Scotland, we reiterated the need for aninvestigative approach to identify changes in the pathogen, assessthe vulnerability of the target group and identify the vehicle ofexposure. We also considered mechanisms for provision of moreinformation about the biology of the organism and the observedchange in epidemiology. We agreed to revisit listeriosis in 2007.

5. Other potential risks to human health through food chainexposure pathways discussed by the Committee includedtoxoplasmosis and hepatitis E. Whilst recognising that there weremany gaps in the epidemiological and foodborne data available forhepatitis E, we agreed that ACMSF advice remained that pork and pigproducts should be cooked thoroughly. In June Members wereinformed that the Committee’s Working group on Avian Influenza hadreviewed the ACMSF’s risk assessment and concluded that there wasno new published scientific evidence to suggest a role for the foodchain in the transmission of Avian influenza to humans. TheCommittee also commented on a new approach for disinfectingabattoir tools, noting that whilst 82ºC was highlighted as the preferredstandard for disinfection of knives, more information was needed toassess what this delivered in terms of microbiological safety.

6. We also considered the microbiological risks associated withreduction of total fat, saturated fat and added sugar in someprocessed foods. We examined the likely compositional changes infoods subject to reformulation, product safety and stability. We alsoconsidered microbiological risks linked to products whose stability

3


was influenced by sugar and fat content. We reviewed use ofpredictive modelling to demonstrate effects of changes on wateractivity, pH and sucrose content on microbial growth. We concludedthat differences in the behaviour of individual organisms needed to beconsidered and identified difficulties associated with adopting a broadbrush approach to product reformulation. We also identified data gapsand highlighted the need for a risk/benefit analysis includingconsideration of public health benefits such as reductions in obesity.

7. In June we reviewed the current scientific evidence concerningvacuum and modified atmosphere packaged foods and the risk ofClostridium botulinum. We endorsed support for a 10-day shelf liferecommendation with guidance on vacuum packaging being revisedfrom less than or equal to 5 days to less than or equal to 10 days at8ºC. We also identified a need for summarised guidance to helpenforcers and industry highlighting that this should be brought to theattention of other Member States.

8. Our Working Group on surveillance has considered protocols forFSA surveys on Listeria in smoked fish, Salmonella in eggs used inthe catering industry and in non UK eggs on retail sale and red meat.The Group also commented on a draft survey report on Salmonella innon-UK eggs.

9. The Committee revisited its horizon scanning activities in 2006and short-listed priorities for horizon scanning topics which includedfood safety and processing, agriculture and food production,vulnerable groups, imported foods, biocides, noroviruses andschools. We agreed to focus our attention on vulnerable groups inlight of the recent trend in listeriosis in older people and establishedan Ad Hoc Group to progress this work.

10. The Committee’s drive to become publicly accessible hascontinued in 2006. All of our quarterly meetings continue to be opento the public with a public question and answer session featuring atthe end of each agenda. Aside from meetings, we are also accessiblevia our e-mail address and web pages. Indeed, our web pages areregularly updated for each meeting, and provide a useful source ofinformation about the Committee and its activities. During the year weused the web site to consult publicly on our Reports on botulism incattle and safe cooking of burgers. We received positive responses toboth Reports including comments on the consultation from a wide-range of interested parties, the views of which were carefullyconsidered by the Committee prior to finalising the Reports forpublication. In September we reviewed our current approach toopenness. Members were keen to remain as open as possible.


4

11. Looking to the future, the Committee will publish the outcomeof the work of its Ad Hoc Group on Vulnerable Groups and we willcontinue to monitor closely developments on the increase inlisteriosis. We will also report on new work to assess the potential riskto human health from botulism in sheep and goats and guidance forvacuum-packaged foods. In addition, we will review our work againstprinciples for presenting scientific advice including a best practiceagreement for Scientific Advisory Committees.

12. I am indebted to the members of the Committee and its Workingand Ad Hoc Groups without whose efforts the ACMSF could notoperate effectively, and to the many other individuals and organisationswho have helped the Committee with its work. I am also very gratefulfor the support of the Secretariat, whose efforts in ensuring the efficientand effective conduct of Committee business is invaluable.

Professor Sarah O’Brien

Chair

5


Introduction

1. This is the fifteenth Annual Report of the Advisory Committee onthe Microbiological Safety of Food (ACMSF). It covers the calendaryear 2006.


6

Chapter 1 : Administrative Matters

Membership

Appointments

2. Appointments to the ACMSF are made by the Food StandardsAgency (FSA), after consultation with United Kingdom HealthMinisters (i.e. the “Appropriate Authorities”) in compliance withParagraph 3(1) of Schedule 2 to the Food Standards Act 1999. TheAgency has resolved that appointments to the ACMSF should bemade in accordance with Nolan Principles28 and the guidance issuedby the Office of the Commissioner for Public Appointments (OCPA)29.The FSA is not bound to follow OCPA guidance, as this applies onlyto appointments made by Ministers. However, although ACMSFappointments are not made by Ministers, the Agency has decidedthat it would nevertheless be right to comply with OCPA guidance.

Periods of appointment

3. To ensure continuity, appointments to the ACMSF are staggered(usually for periods of 2, 3 or 4 years) so that only a proportion ofMembers falls to be appointed, re-appointed or retire each year.

Spread of expertise

4. A wide spectrum of skills and expertise is available to theACMSF through its Members. They are currently drawn fromcommercial catering, environmental health, food microbiology, foodprocessing, food research, food retailing, human epidemiology,medical microbiology, public health medicine, veterinary medicine,and virology. The Committee also has 2 lay/consumer Members.

5. Members are appointed on an individual basis, for their personalexpertise and experience, not to represent a particular interest group.

Appointments in 2006

6. Three Members were appointed to the ACMSF during 2006: Dr Richard Holliman, Dr Sally Millership and Mrs Jennifer Morris30. Dr Holliman provides the Committee with medical microbiologyexpertise. His period of appointment runs from 1 April 2006 until 31

7


March 2009. Dr Millership provides the Committee with public healthexpertise. Her period of appointment runs from 1 April 2006 to 31 March 2007. Mrs Morris provides the Committee withenvironmental health expertise. Her period of appointment runs for aperiod of 3 years from 1 April 2006 until 31 March 2009.

Retirements in 2006

7. Dr Kay Hadley and Dr Quentin Sandifer retired from theCommittee on 31 March 2006 after completing 5 years’ servicerespectively.

Mr Philip Mepham also retired on same date after completing 3 years’service.

8. The Chair expressed her gratitude to all the retiring Members fortheir contribution to the work of the ACMSF and wished them well forthe future.

Committee and Group meetings

9. The full Committee met 3 times in 2006 – on 8 June, 28September and 5 December. All three meetings were chaired byProfessor Sarah O’Brien. All full Committee meetings were open tomembers of the public.

10. The Ad Hoc Group on Infant Botulism (Chair: Professor O’Brien)considered the comments received in response to the publicconsultation on the draft report in early 2006. The Committeeapproved the publication of the report at the June 2006 meeting. TheAd Hoc Group on Botulism in Cattle (Chair: Professor Williams)considered the comments received in response to the publicconsultation on the draft report in September 2006. The Committeeapproved the publication of the report at the September meeting. TheAd Hoc Group on the Safe Cooking of Burgers (Chair: ProfessorWilliams) met twice. The Group presented its draft final report to theCommittee at the June 2006 meeting and the Committee agreed toissue the report for public consultation. The consultation on thisreport took place between July to October.

11. The Salmonella Contact Group (Chair: Professor Sarah O’Brien)met once in June to review risk assessment information relating to aSalmonella contamination of chocolate incident.


8

12. The Working Group on Avian Influenza (Chair: Dr David Brown)met once in March to review the Committee’s 2003 risk assessmenton avian influenza and to review import control measures for poultrymeat and eggs.

13. The Working Group on Surveillance (Chair: Professor TomHumphrey) met twice to consider the FSA’s surveillance techniquesand protocols, FSA surveys on eggs, red meat and Listeria. TheGroup also received a presentation from the FSA statisticians onsurvey organisation and sampling.

14. The Newly-Emerging Pathogens Group (Chair: Professor PaulHunter) reported limited activity via the message board as no majorthreats to the food supply had been identified in 2006.

Current membership and Declarations of Interests

15. Full details of the membership of the Committee and its Workingand Ad Hoc Groups are given in Annex I. A Register of Members’Interests is at Annex II. In addition to the interests notified to theSecretariat and recorded at Annex II, Members are required to declareany direct commercial interest in matters under discussion at eachmeeting, in accordance with the ACMSF’s Code of Practice (seeAnnex III of 2002 Annual Report11). Declarations made are recorded inthe minutes of each meeting.

Personal liability

16. In 1999, the Secretary of State for Health undertook toindemnify ACMSF Members against all liability in respect of anyaction or claim brought against them individually or collectively byreason of the performance of their duties as Members (Annual Report19998 paragraph 6 and Annex III). In 2002, the Secretariat asked theFSA to review this undertaking, given the fact that, since 2000, theACMSF had reported to the Food Standards Agency where previouslyit had reported to UK Health Ministers. In March 2004 the FoodStandards Agency gave a new undertaking of indemnification in itsname, which superseded the earlier undertaking given by theSecretary of State (see Annex IV of 2004 Annual Report13).

9


Openness

Improving public access

17. The ACMSF is committed to continuing to open up its work togreater public scrutiny. The agendas, minutes and papers (subject torare exceptions on grounds of commercial or other sensitivity) for theCommittee’s quarterly meetings are publicly available and are postedon the FSA website at:

http://www.food.gov.uk/science/ouradvisors/microbiogsafety

18. The Committee also has an e-mail address :[email protected]

Open meetings

19. Following the recommendations flowing from the FSA’s Reviewof Scientific Committees,31 the ACMSF decided that, from 2003onwards, all of its quarterly meetings should be held in public.

20. The June and September 2006 meetings of the Committee wereheld in Aviation House, the Food Standards Agency’s LondonHeadquarters. The December meeting was held in Trinity House,Tower Hill, London EC3.

21. All of these open meetings follow a common format. Time is setaside following the day’s business for members of the public andothers present to make statements and to ask questions about theACMSF’s work. The names of participants, the organisations theyrepresent, and details of any statements made, questions asked andthe Committee’s response, are recorded in the minutes of the meetingconcerned.

Work of the other advisory committees and cross-membership

22. The Secretariat provided Members with an annual report of thework of the other expert advisory committees advising the FoodStandards Agency32. Professor Gasson continued to serve as amember of the Advisory Committee on Novel Foods and Processes(ACNFP), thereby providing a first-hand link between the 2 committees.


10

Chapter 2 : The Committee’s Work in 2006

Clostridium botulinum

Infant botulism

23. Between January and April 2006 the Ad Hoc Group on infantbotulism considered the responses to the public consultation on thedraft report that took place in the last quarter of 2005. Commentsreceived in response to the consultation were very supportive of theReport’s focus and recommendations. Only a very small number ofeditorial amendments were required to the Report33.

24. In June, the Committee considered the revised report andapproved its submission to the FSA Chair for publication. It waspublished in September 200626. The Committee also published itsresponse to the public consultation on the FSA’s website34.

Botulism in cattle

25. The Ad Hoc Group on botulism consulted on its draft report onbotulism in cattle between January and April 2006. The Ad Hoc Groupconsidered the consultation responses and undertook work to revisethe report in light of the comments received35. Comments receivedwere supportive of the scientific review and the recommendations inthe report. Responses highlighting issues of scientific accuracy in thereport were addressed. The report concluded that there was a low riskof transmission of botulism from cattle and that there was norequirement to restrict movement of meat and milk from healthyanimals. However, the report highlighted that in the event of theemergence of new toxin types in cattle, surveillance should be carriedout. The Report also summarised measures to prevent outbreaks ofbotulism in animals, and management of outbreaks in the UK,including the availability of guidance to farmers. The Committeeagreed that paragraph 8.10 of the report should be more stronglyworded to recommend that the FSA worked closely with the poultryindustry to ensure good practice in litter management and disposal.The relationship between risk assessment and risk managementissues falling within the scope of the report was discussed.

11


26. The ACMSF approved the publication of the report inSeptember 2006. It also published its response to the publicconsultation on the FSA website36.

27. Following the approval to publish the report, in December, theFSA updated the Committee on action being taken to implement therecommendations in the report37. The FSA outlined the currentvoluntary restrictions in place for movement of meat or milk fromhealthy cattle for farms where there had been suspected cases ofbotulism. Key conclusions and recommendations in the report arisingfrom the work of the Ad Hoc Group on botulism in cattle weresummarised. Members were informed that, in line with therecommendations in the report, the FSA would be implementing achange to its advice and would no longer request voluntaryrestrictions for healthy cattle from farms where cases of botulism weresuspected. However it was stated that this would need to be reviewedif new evidence emerged that the botulism toxin types that affectedhumans were causing outbreaks in cattle. Members noted that theFSA would still be informed of cases of suspected botulism in cattleas there might be additional issues for consideration to ensureprotection of the food chain. This change of advice would becommunicated to stakeholders.

28. Members were informed that the FSA intended to seek theACMSF’s advice on the potential risk to human health from food chainissues linked to botulism or suspected botulism in sheep and goats.

29. The Committee supported the Agency’s approach toimplementing the ACMSF’s recommendations. Department forEnvironment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) assessor Mr Gayfordadded that Defra also welcomed the Committee’s report andexplained that Defra would be following up the recommendations andthat comments would be published on Defra’s web site. He informedMembers that samples being taken and sent for examination had onlyisolated toxin type D. Toxin types A, B, C and E had not beenidentified. A sample storage system was also currently being set upto support development and validation of new in vitro tests.

Listeria

30. In June the Health Protection Agency briefed the Committee onthe changing pattern of human listeriosis in the UK in 2005. InDecember HPA updated Members on data which covered the first 6months of 200638-39. The Committee was informed that the incidenceof listeriosis in England and Wales in 2005 remained higher than pre-2001 levels. An increased incidence of listeriosis was also reported in


12

Scotland, with presentation similar to that reported in England andWales. Additional data confirmed that the increase was notartefactual. The disease occurred predominantly in older patients withbacteraemia in the absence of CNS infection. No increase wasobserved in Northern Ireland.

31. Data from the first six months of 2006 indicated that illness inolder patients with bacteraemia still predominated. However it wasstressed that it was difficult to draw conclusions from this data due toreporting delays associated with passive surveillance. HPA outlinedwork in progress and resources required to investigate the changingepidemiology of listeriosis.

32. Members considered that case control studies were of limited usein investigating the epidemiology of listeriosis as patients were often tooill to be interviewed. Members reiterated concerns linked to adequateand flexible resourcing of epidemiological investigations carried out byHPA. Members noted that no significant progress had been made toestablish the reason for the increase in incidence in listeriosis over the12 month period since the change in epidemiology was first brought tothe attention of the Committee. Members also highlighted the need fora UK wide approach to investigation of listeriosis involving HPA CentreFor Infections and HPA regional units. The FSA assessor acknowledgedconcern about resources at HPA and informed the Committee that theFSA Board were being made aware of the ACMSF’s concerns and thatthis was being pursued with DH Ministers.

33. Members also reiterated the need for a three pronged investigativeapproach to identify changes in the pathogen, assess the vulnerability ofthe target group and identify vehicles of exposure. Members suggestedthat typing, whole genome analysis and examination of molecularisolates might provide more information about the functionality of theorganism and the observed change in epidemiology. Members agreed toreview listeriosis again in the UK in June 2007.

Hepatitis E

34. Dr David Brown updated Members twice (in June andDecember) on the risk to the food chain from Hepatitis E in pig meatproducts39-40. In June he outlined an enhanced surveillance study inwhich a questionnaire approach had also been used to try to identifyrisk factors. A case-control study had been carried out. He explainedthat the researchers had been unable to identify any specific riskfactors linked to Hepatitis E. He concluded that there was no newinformation to report to the Committee. Members were informed thatthe FSA had reviewed and changed its advice on cooking of pork

13


recommending that all pork and pig products should be cookedproperly in light of comments made at the December 2005 meeting.Current advice in the Safer Food Better Business Guidance would beupdated when the Guidance was reprinted. Advice for pregnantwomen on the Eatwell website did not require amendment.

35. In December, Dr Brown outlined UK epidemiologicalsurveillance studies carried out in 2003-5 and summarised thefindings of work to investigate risk factors for hepatitis E40. He alsooutlined new research on pigs and thermal stability of hepatitis E. Heconcluded that in the UK the route and associated risk factors foracquiring infection of hepatitis E had not been established and furtherstudies were needed. He added that the previous ACMSFrecommendations39 were still appropriate.

36. Members queried whether the percentage prevalence ofhepatitis E infection in the male population over 65 years hadchanged. Dr Brown explained that this was difficult to assess due toa lack of sero-prevalence data for the UK. He added that there werea high proportion of unknown case histories which reflecteddifficulties associated with obtaining this type of information.Members recognised that there was a lack of information available onhepatitis E survival in foods and identified a need to examine theprevalence of hepatitis E in pig products available in the UK.Epidemiological data was also limited in scope. Members discussedthe presented information on travel and non-travel associated cases.

37. The Committee concluded that there were many gaps in theepidemiological and foodborne data available for hepatitis E.Members agreed that ACMSF advice remained that pork and pigproducts should be cooked thoroughly.

Avian Influenza

38. Dr Brown reminded Members that the ACMSF carried out a riskassessment for avian influenza in 2003. This assessment concludedthat the risk of Avian Influenza from the food chain was low and thatthere was no evidence that the food chain was a route of infection.The assessment was reviewed in November 2005 in light of newinformation and the Committee concluded that there was noincreased risk of Avian Influenza, although Members sought moreinformation on control measures for poultry meat and eggs tradedwithin the EU or imported from third countries. The Committeeestablished a Working Group to examine control measures and keepa watching brief. This Group met in March 200641 and concluded that:


14

• There was no new published scientific evidence tosuggest that the food chain had a role in the acquisition ofAI in humans.

• Cooking precautions employed to avoid pathogens suchas Salmonella in U.K. should also be sufficient to avoidavian influenza.

• There were adequate control measures in place for poultrymeat and eggs traded within the EU or imported from thirdcountries. Surveillance of waterfowl is under review byDefra.

• There were adequate systems in place to protectconsumers from introduction of AI through the food chain.

Toxoplasmosis and food

39. In December the FSA briefed the Committee on toxoplasmosisand food42. Recent research carried out in the US and the Netherlandshad indicated that the disease burden due to toxoplasmosis might bemore significant than previously thought. Policy in the UK had tendedto focus on risks to pregnant women associated with cat faeces andnot foodborne risks. The FSA sought the views of the Committee on thesignificance of the disease and foodborne risks in the UK, and whetherfurther investigation and surveillance was warranted to obtain robustdata on UK prevalence and foodborne sources of toxoplasmosis.

40. Members considered that enhanced surveillance fortoxoplasmosis would not have a major impact due to under-recognition. However it was difficult to draw any firm conclusions dueto the limited amount of data available. Consideration would need tobe given to information on exposure from non food sources in orderto assess relative exposure from a food perspective. Examination ofsero-prevalence data from the US and the Netherlands and serologyto identify IgM responses might also be warranted.

41. The Committee requested that the HPA should be contacted topresent a more comprehensive overview of human toxoplasmosis inUK, US and the Netherlands in 2007.

Safe cooking of burgers

42. The Ad Hoc Group on safe cooking of burgers met twice in 2006to continue its work to examine whether the current advice on the safecooking of burgers issued by the Chief Medical Officer was stillappropriate43. The Group considered documentary and verbalevidence relating to the epidemiology of E.coli O157 and other key

15


pathogens, and guidance and cooking conditions for burgers used inthe UK, US and other countries. The Group also reviewed publishedscientific evidence and information submitted by a fast food chainand considered a modelling approach to setting confidence limits.Key recommendations arising from the report were that:

• The advice for safe cooking of burgers should remain at70ºC for 2 minutes or equivalent. Use of lowertime/temperature combinations could be consideredwhere producers demonstrate through a risk assessmentapproach that the final product is safe, and that theprocess is under effective control;

• A z-value of 6.0ºC should be used for time/temperatureequivalents for burgers, particularly below 65ºC;

• A modelling approach to set recommendedtime/temperatures based on required inactivation levelsand required limits of confidence should be considered;

• Advice to consumers and caterers on cooking of burgersshould be reiterated.

43. The Committee welcomed the report and registered theiragreement with the conclusions proposed by the Ad Hoc Group.Members reiterated that the current advice should remain at 70ºC for2 minutes or equivalent, noting that the original CMO’s advice wasproduced in response to outbreaks of E.coli O157, which hadsubsequently diminished. Members added that there might be atendency for individuals cooking burgers to undercut minimumcooking times. Therefore any reduction in the current time/temperaturerequirements might lead to an increase in the number of individualsusing less safe cooking practices. Members also supported therecommendation to reiterate cooking of burgers advice, noting thatsome UK gourmet burger restaurants offered consumers the option toconsume burgers which were rare (pink in the middle).

44. The ACMSF adopted the report and agreed that it should bepublished for public consultation. The consultation period took placebetween 18 July to 20 October 2006.

Disinfection of knives

45. In December the FSA briefed the Committee on disinfection ofknives44. Under the new EU Food Hygiene Regulations abattoirs wererequired to have facilities for disinfecting tools with hot water suppliedat not less than 82ºC, or an alternative system having an equivalenteffect. The FSA outlined the EU’s Scientific Committee’s opinion and


16

work to develop alternative methods carried out in Australia. TheCommittee’s views were sought on whether:

• a performance standard for knife sterilisation of a 3 logreduction in E.coli was appropriate provided that visiblecontamination was removed prior to immersion;

• a generic ‘approval’ was an acceptable approach; and

• what further industry data was required to supportalternative time/temperature and hygiene parameters inplace of water at 82ºC.

46. Members considered that, with regard to the proposed 3 logreduction, it was important to consider the impact of washing kniveson the end product. Members also queried the effectiveness of currentsterilisation practices and the impact of effective application of timeand temperature parameters on knives when used on a mechanicalline. The Committee discussed application of z values to developtime/temperatures equivalent to 82ºC (for 1 second), preferringapplication of a theoretical heat equivalent process. Memberssuggested that application of modelling work developed by theCommittee to assess the safe cooking of burgers could assistcalculation of lower time/temperature combinations capable ofdelivering equivalent lethality to that at 82ºC. More information wasalso needed on the current microbiological load on knives in order toassess the validity of the proposed 3 log reduction. The Committeewas opposed to the use of chemical disinfection. Some Membersexpressed concern over the proposed adoption of a generic approachas each area in the slaughter house presented different challenges.

47. The FSA confirmed that there were no microcriteria set for rawmeat for process control in slaughterhouses and agreed that the useof chemical disinfectants was unlikely to be appropriate in theslaughterhouse setting. Alternative approaches to knife sterilisationwould be considered on a case by case basis taking account of theoperator’s HACCP-based approach in each slaughterhouse.

48. ACMSF noted that whilst 82ºC was highlighted as the preferredstandard for disinfection of knives, more information was required toassess what this delivered in terms of microbiological safety. E.colimodelling work by the ACMSF to assess safe processing controls forcooking of burgers could be applied to develop time/temperatureequivalents at lower temperatures. A generic approach to disinfectionmight not be helpful due to the availability of different meat types andcuts, and variation in procedures used in cutting plants and at postmortem. Lastly the Committee was opposed to the use of chemicaldisinfectants.

17


Fat and added sugar reduction on foods

49. In September the FSA briefed the Committee on an Agencycommissioned review on the microbiological safety implications ofreductions of total fat, saturated fat and added sugar in some foods45.The results of the review would be used to inform the development ofthe FSA’s Strategy on saturated fats and energy.

50. Comments were sought from ACMSF on:

• The findings of the review in relation to the microbiologicalsafety and/or stability implications associated withreductions of total and saturated fat and sugar inprocessed foods;

• Whether the report provided sufficient evidence that thereis scope for such reductions without adversely affectingthe microbiological safety of these products; and

• Whether there were any other issues not highlighted in thereport that required consideration.

51. Dr Gail Betts (Campden and Chorleywood Food ResearchAssociation) presented a summary of the work carried out to reviewthe microbiological safety and/or stability implications associatedwith reductions of total and saturated fat and sugar in processedfoods. She summarised information on likely compositional changesin foods subject to reformulation and resulting effects on productsafety and stability. She also outlined microbiological risks linked toreformulation of some product groups including those whosemicrobiological stability was influenced by sugar (jams), fat (sausages)and both fats and sugar (cakes). Lastly, she reviewed the use ofpredictive models to demonstrate the effect of changes to wateractivity, sucrose content and pH on microbial growth.

52. The Committee welcomed the review, and in discussing themicrobiological impact on food safety from reduction of fat and addedsugars in foods the Committee considered that:

• Variation in the differences in behaviour of individualorganisms needed to be accounted for in the review;

• There were difficulties linked to adopting a broad brushapproach to product reformulation. Care was neededwhen interpreting the findings of the review asmicrobiological impact as a result of reformulation andresulting changes to water activity would vary fromproduct to product;


18

• Particular consideration needed to be given to small andmedium sized businesses and caterers and how theywould reformulate products safely through application ofappropriate controls. Members referred to similarcomments raised on previous discussions on themicrobiological impact of salt reduction in foods notingthat provision of technical support needed to beconsidered for these organisations;

• The review should include a search strategy for referencesused and explain why particular organisms were included;

• Gaps in the report needed to be addressed, includinginformation on novel sweeteners;

• Risk/benefit analysis information also warrantedconsideration, including consideration of public healthbenefits such as reductions in obesity. Application of aquantitative risk assessment could be considered as partof future work to assess risks from foodborne disease.

Vacuum-packaged and modified atmospherepackaged foods

53. In June, the FSA briefed the Committee on vacuum-packagedand modified atmosphere packaged foods46. In December 2004 theACMSF requested that the FSA commissioned an independent reviewof the current scientific evidence concerning vacuum and modifiedatmosphere packaged foods and the risk of Clostridium botulinum.This followed concerns raised in response to the FSA’s consultationon its guidance on the safety and shelf life of vacuum and modifiedatmosphere packed chilled foods regarding the proposed shelf lifelimitation of 5 days (based on 1995 ACMSF advice) for chilledproducts, and products stored above 5ºC where failure to supportgrowth of C. botulinum had not been established. This review, whichhad been carried out by the Institute of Food Research, had now beencompleted46. The full report of the review would be available in duecourse. ACMSF’s views were sought on whether to support the 10-day shelf life recommendation.

54. Professor Mike Peck (Institute of Food Research) presented anoverview of the work carried out to review the current scientificevidence concerning vacuum and modified atmosphere packagedfoods and the risk of Clostridium botulinum. He summarisedinformation on sales of chilled food, current guidance andrecommendations for commercial chilled foods, and recent incidenceof foodborne botulism in different countries including the UK. He also

19


outlined growth and toxin formation by non-proteolytic C.botulinum ator at less than 10ºC. Lastly, he described the effects of other factorsincluding unknown controlling factors, packing in air and re-packingof chilled food.

55. The Committee welcomed the review, and in particular,inclusion of epidemiology in the scope of the research. In discussingthe proposed recommendation to increase shelf life from 5 to 10 daysthe Committee noted that:

• FSA needed to consider risk management issues such ascosts/benefits and environmental impact of changes tothe guidance;

• Levels of C.botulinum inoculum used per pack forchallenge testing were higher than levels of toxin typicallyproduced by C.botulinum in foods (and referred toprevious ACMSF work on infant botulism);

• Epidemiology of C.botulinum over last 20 years showedthat there were no reported cases of botulism linked tochilled foods. However Members noted that botulism wasa difficult diagnosis to make and that under recognition ofmilder cases was possible.

• The 10-day shelf life recommendation for the UK wasalready quite restrictive and it was not applied in manyother countries.

56. The Committee endorsed the recommendation to support a 10-day shelf life recommendation with the vacuum packaged guidancedocument being revised from less than or equal to 5 days to less thanor equal to 10 days at 8 degrees C. The Committee also identified aneed for simple, summarised guidance to help enforcers and industryand agreed that a small group should be set up by the FoodStandards Agency to deliver this. In addition, this guidance should bebrought to the attention of other Member States via the EuropeanCommission.

Salmonella Contact Group

58. A Salmonella contact group was convened by the ACMSF at shortnotice in June to review risk assessment information relating to aSalmonella contamination of chocolate incident. The conclusionsfrom this meeting were published on the FSA website47.


20

Epidemiology of Foodborne Infections Group

59. The FSA updated the Committee on the outcome of the twoEpidemiology of Foodborne Infections Group meetings that tookplace in 2006. In June, Members received a synopsis of 2005epidemiological animal data for Salmonella and human data forseveral pathogens including Salmonella, VTEC O157, Campylobacterand listeriosis. A update on two FSA egg surveys on non-UK eggs inretail premises and UK eggs in catering premises was also provided.Findings from a Defra prevalence survey of Salmonella in laying flocksin the UK which formed part of a wider EU survey were alsooutlined39.

60. A range of Campylobacter items that had been considered by theGroup were summarised. These included a presentation on on-farmCampylobacter research by Professor Humphrey, updates on theNational Case Control Study, Co-ordinated Local Authority SentinelSurveillance of Pathogens (CLASSP), and a VLA Campylobactersurvey. The Group also discussed recent surveillance carried out underthe LACORS/HPA Food Liaison Group Co-ordinated MicrobiologicalSampling Programme. Lastly, Members were updated on a report onresearch on hepatitis E and the Agency’s survey of surveys.

61. In December, the FSA provided a review of animal and humandata for the first six months of 2006, and briefed Members on trendson VTEC O157 in England and Wales. Other issues considered by theGroup included a paper on the Co-ordinated Local Authority SentinelSurveillance of Pathogens (CLASSP) study which involvedsimultaneous collection of data on Salmonella and Campylobacterfrom poultry meat and humans. HPA also presented papers on trendsin the most common sub-types of non-travel-associated SalmonellaEnteritidis, Salmonella Typhimurium infection in England and Walesfrom 1991-2005 and an update on human listeriosis in the UK48.

62. Members welcomed the paper and noted that successfulcontrol measures had resulted in a decrease in animal carriage ofserovars that were common in humans, including SalmonellaTyphimurium.

Mr Gayford commented that, in general, the number of Salmonellareports had fallen. Professor Piddock informed Members that MLSTtyping for Salmonella was discussed at a recent conference inCanada. Members suggested that the function of typing schemesshould be defined and recognised that typing supported theimplementation of practical controls.

21


Surveillance

Survey of Salmonella and Campylobacter contamination of whole,raw poultry on retail sale in Wales and Northern Ireland in 2005

63. Dr Richard Meldrum (National Public Health Service, Wales)briefed the Committee on the findings of the 2005 survey of Salmonellaand Campylobacter in raw chicken in Wales and Northern Ireland49.

64. He provided an overview of the project including Salmonellaand Campylobacter contamination rates, results for samples takenfrom retailers and butchers, fresh and frozen samples, packaging,producers and a comparison of data from Wales and Northern Ireland.He explained that 2005 was the fourth complete year that rawchickens had been sampled in Wales, and the second complete yearof sampling in Northern Ireland. He also explained that unlike previousyears the methodology used to measure levels of Salmonella andCampylobacter was now identical to that used for the CLASSP studyin England. Results for the 877 samples taken between March-December 2005 indicated that the Campylobacter and Salmonellacontamination rates were consistent with those of previous years.

65. Members discussed the quality assurance between laboratoriesnoting that 25% of samples were randomly sent to referencelaboratories. All the laboratories involved in the survey were UKaccredited and followed EQA and IQC schemes. Membershighlighted the need to swap samples between laboratories in orderto be able to eliminate artefactual results and draw comparisonsbetween samples analysed by laboratories in Wales and NorthernIreland. The Committee queried the omission of data on antimicrobialresistance from this survey, noting that this information had beenincluded in previous years. Members also raised the need to includeadditional information on Salmonella serotyping and Campylobacterspeciation, for example Salmonella Typhimurium and SalmonellaEnteritidis. This information was considered important to poultryproducers. Members also recognised that that it would be difficult toincrease sample numbers, as Local Authorities were limited in termsof resources. However Members agreed that it would be helpful tocalculate the power of the study in retrospect to facilitate comparisonwith data collected in previous years.

66. ACMSF noted the following points for Dr Meldrum’sconsideration for future surveys:

• Inclusion of information on speciation of Salmonella andCampylobacter;


22

• Quantification of bacterial load;

• Determination of antibiotic resistance of isolates;

• Quality Assurance protocols to ensure comparability ofdata between laboratories in Wales and Northern Ireland;

• Carry out retrospective power calculations

Surveillance Update

67. The FSA updated the Committee on the FSA’s survey samplingprogrammes and the work of the Surveillance Working Group50. Workon current FSA surveys on eggs, raw red meat and Listeria spp inready to eat hot and cold smoked fish was summarised. Plans forfuture surveillance on Campylobacter and Salmonella in raw chickenand Listeria spp in cooked sliced meats and pâtés were outlined. TheFSA reported that the Working Group on Surveillance had consideredthe role of statisticians in survey development, retail market share andconsistency between laboratories. The Group also discussed theprotocol for the 2007 chicken survey and preliminary results for thenon-UK eggs survey.

68. Members discussed the role of broader surveillance in order toprovide assurance that food controls were in place. However, it wasrecognised that the FSA was not the only body which carried outsurveillance. Members noted that HPA undertook shopping basketand regionally based surveys. HPA also provided surveillance data tothe Epidemiology and Foodborne Infections Group, which reported tothe ACMSF every six months.

69. Members discussed linking up agricultural production surveyswith food surveillance. Mr Gayford commented that results from aDefra survey of layer flocks, which formed part of a wider EU survey,mirrored results in a survey of non-UK eggs.

70. Members were informed that all FSA surveillance results werelogged onto a national surveillance database for Local Authorities.

General Papers

Scientific Governance

71. The FSA briefed the Committee on scientific governance51.Members were informed that an independent review of the Agency(by The Rt Hon Baroness Dean) carried out in 2005 recommendedthat the Agency’s policy for basing decisions on scientific evidenceshould be maintained and developed further. The Agency had already

23


been examining its approach to scientific governance in consultationwith Advisory Committee Chairs. Part of this work had involveddevelopment of a science check list for use by Agency staff and aBest Practice Agreement for the Scientific Advisory Committees tomeet the Board’s expectations about how scientific evidence isgathered analysed and presented. The FSA confirmed that the BestPractice Agreement was intended for use in conjunction with theCode of Practice for Advisory Committees.

72. The Committee welcomed the document and identified thefollowing points for consideration:

• Further clarification was needed on the roles of ScientificAdvisory Committees with regard to separation of riskassessment and risk management issues (ACM/801,paragraph 21 refers). Members queried whether the rolesof such Committees included provision of advice on riskmanagement.

• Independence of Committees. The wording ‘whereverpossible’ and ‘kept to a minimum’ (ACM/801, paragraphs26 and 27 refer) needed defining in terms of the degree ofopenness expected. Members noted that it was importantto document when and why information was withheld.Members also agreed that it was important for theCommittee to remain as transparent as possible.

• Declaration of interests needed to be considered withinparagraph 4 of the document.

• Paragraph 18 required clarification. Members noted thatconsideration of benefits might not fall within the remit ofthe Committee.

• Avoid use of Latin phrases.

The ACMSF indicated that they supported the Best Practice Agreement.

Openness

73. Dr Foster (ACMSF Administrative Secretary) outlined theCommittee’s current approach to openness noting that since 2003 theCommittee had held all its quarterly meetings in public. She soughtMembers’ views on the success of this approach to date52.

74. Members exchanged a wide range of views. Concerns wereexpressed that the public session at the end of each meeting wasused as a forum for discussion of risk management issues asquestions were often directed at the FSA and not the ACMSF.


24

Openness and transparency was viewed as desirable, although it wasrecognised that this approach sometimes inhibited discussion. Thecurrent approach to openness was viewed as acceptable andMembers were keen to remain as open as possible.

75. Members discussed holding Ad Hoc and Working Groupmeetings in open session. Whilst desirable, it was recognised that thisapproach might constrain the type of scientific evidence currentlysubmitted to these Groups, particularly where information of acommercially sensitive nature or unpublished research was relevantto a particular issue. It was suggested that this type of informationcould be considered in a separate closed session.

76. The Committee expressed a wide range of views on this subjectand the balance was towards openness. The Chair and Secretariatagreed to prepare a paper on this issue for discussion at a futuremeeting.

Induction and appraisal

77. Dr Foster briefed the Committee on the current induction andappraisal arrangements for Members52. She explained thatinformation on the role and requirements of Committee members wasissued to applicants as part of the recruitment process. Informationabout the ACMSF and its procedures was also provided to newmembers prior to attendance at meetings. Media training was alsomade available to the ACMSF Chair as the key spokesperson for theCommittee. She added that as Members were appointed on the basisof their proven expertise and previous Committee experience, thesearrangements were conducted on an informal basis, and were in linewith those used by other FSA Committees.

78. Dr Foster summarised the informal appraisal process for theACMSF. She explained that the Chair assessed the overallperformance of Members in terms of their contribution at meetingsand sub-groups, outside meetings and attendance. On the basis ofthese views Members were re-appointed at staggered intervals.

79. Several new Members commented that they welcomed theinformation that they had received on joining the Committee, and thatit fully met their needs. Members confirmed that they were contentwith the current induction and appraisal arrangements.

Freedom of Information

80. During 2006 the ACMSF received two freedom of informationrequests regarding its work on safe cooking of burgers.

25


Information papers

81. The ACMSF is routinely provided with information papers ontopics which the Secretariat considers may be of interest to Members.This affords them the opportunity to identify particular issues fordiscussion at future meetings. Among the documents provided forinformation during 2006 were:

• Update on the E.coli O157 outbreak in South Wales(ACM/785a)

• Update on 2 E.coli O157 outbreaks in Scotland(ACM/785b)

• FSA Foodborne Disease Strategy: Trends in foodbornedisease (ACM/786)

• Update on Salmonella in non-UK eggs (ACM/787)

• MSFFG updated Salmonella report (ACM/788)

• EFSA advisory forum on risk assessment in Europe(ACM/789)

• Update on the E.coli O157 outbreak in South Wales(ACM/805)

• EC Co-ordinated Programme for the Official Control ofFoodstuffs report: Bacteriological safety of pre-packagedmixed salads from retail premises for Listeriamonocytogenes (ACM/806)

• European Food Safety Authority EMRISK project(ACM/807)

• European Food Safety Authority Opinion from BIOHAZPanel, 16 March 2006 (ACM/808)

• ACMSF Membership: pen portraits (ACM/809)

• Items of possible interest from the literature (ACM/810)

• Botulism testing paper (ACM/811)

• Changing Pattern of Human Listeriosis, England andWales, 2001-2004 (ACM/812)

• Review of the microbiological risks associated with fatand added sugar reduction in foods (ACM/821)

• Report on a survey of Salmonella contamination of non-UK eggs on retail sale (ACM/822)

• Foodborne Disease Strategy Board paper (ACM/823)

• ACMSF Annual Report 2005 (ACM/824)

• Update from other Advisory Committees (ACM/825)

• Items of possible interest from the literature (ACM/826)


26

Chapter 3 : A Forward Look

Future work programme

82. The Committee will keep itself informed, through its close linkswith the Food Standards Agency and the Health Protection Agency,of developing trends in relation to foodborne disease. A continuingtask will be to respond promptly with advice on the food safetyimplications of any issues, which may from time to time be referred tothe Committee by the FSA. The Committee will publish in hard copythe outcome of the work of its Ad Hoc Group on safe cooking ofburgers and will as a priority area continue to monitor closelydevelopments on the reported increase in listeriosis and in caseslinked to the elderly via its Ad Hoc group on Vulnerable Groups.

83. The Committee will report on new work to assess the potentialrisk to human health from botulism sheep and goats and itsconsideration of simplified guidance for vacuum-packaged foods.

84. The Committee will continue the work of the Ad Hoc Group onemerging pathogens and will consider extended spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producing E.coli in food.

85. The Committee, through its standing Surveillance WorkingGroup, will continue to provide advice as required in connection withthe Government’s microbiological food surveillance programme andany other surveillance relevant to foodborne disease. The Group willspecifically report on FSA surveys on Salmonella in catering eggs andListeria in smoked fish.

86. The Working Group on avian influenza will continue to keep awatching brief on developments.

87. The Committee will also revisit its previous work on foodborneviral infections.

88. The Committee will review its work against principles for presentingscientific advice including a best practice agreement for ScientificAdvisory Committees as part of its self assessment procedures.

89. The Committee will continue to keep itself informed ofGovernment horizon scanning activities and initiatives, and theirpotential impact on the ACMSF’s future work programme. TheCommittee will also prioritise areas for future horizon scanning activities.

27


Horizon scanning

90. The FSA briefed Members on the Agency’s horizon scanningprogramme and sought views on suitable horizon scanning topics forconsideration by the Committee53.

91. The Committee had completed work on previously identifiedpriorities and considered that it was timely to take stock and identifynew topics for discussion. Members revisited topics previouslyidentified for consideration in 2002 and suggested new or emergingmicrobiological hazards which might merit attention by theCommittee in the short to medium term.

92. At the December meeting Dr Foster outlined Members’ short-listed priorities for horizon scanning topics including any likelyemerging microbiological risks. These were:

Food safety/processing – impact of fresher productsand milder processing conditions; novel processingtechniques, bacterial stress responses and food safety;temperature control;

Agriculture/food production – changes in agricultureand food animal production, including growth promotersin poultry; use of terminal decontaminants; prevention ofbacterial contamination and colonisation;

Vulnerable groups – listeriosis in the elderly populationand children under 6 months (not weaned);

Imported foods – antibiotic resistance, ESBLs;

Biocides – review of kitchen and cleaning productscontaining biocides and whether they promote antibioticresistance in bacteria relevant to human health;

Noroviruses – including pigs and calves as potentialreservoir of noro and sapoviruses and the impact onpublic health; and

Schools – implications of the new standards for schoolmeals on food safety; loss of culinary skills in relation tothe National Curriculum on food technology.

Members considered that:

• Some of the prioritised areas focussed on research topicsrather than development of advice. Members werereminded that imported foods issues had recently beenconsidered by the Committee;


28

• Vulnerable Groups – in view of the recent trend inlisteriosis in older people, this topic warranted furtherexamination. Members suggested a presentation onchanges in food habits of the over 60 years age group andclarification of what is meant by ‘vulnerable’. Othersuggestions included setting up an Ad Hoc group toexplore issues linked to vulnerable groups;

• Schools – Members recognised that although changes innutritional practices in schools were an important issue,there was already a large amount of work in progress inthis area. Some of the issues raised also fell outside theremit of the Committee. Further clarification was neededon the questions posed for consideration;

• Agriculture/food production – a very broad and complexarea. Members noted that there were dramatic differencesin regional farming practices which might impactmicrobiologically on food safety.

• Probiotics – Members recognised that this was a growingmarket. However this issue was more appropriate forconsideration by SACN.

• Noroviruses – The Committee published a review ofnoroviruses in 1998. However Members agreed that itwould be worthwhile revisiting this report.

93. The Committee agreed to focus its attention on vulnerablegroups. Members agreed that consideration could be given toagricultural and farm practices at a later date. ACMSF Chair andSecretariat agreed to set up an Ad Hoc group to consider vulnerablegroups.

29


Ann

ex I:

Mem

ber

ship

of

the

Ad

viso

ry C

om

mitt

ee o

n th

e M

icro

bio

log

ical

Saf

ety

of

Fo

od

, its

Wo

rkin

g G

roup

s an

d it

s A

d H

oc

Gro

ups A

CM

SF

Sur

veill

ance

A

vian

Inf

luen

za

Wo

rkin

g G

roup

Wo

rkin

g G

roup

Pro

fess

or o

f H

ealth

Sci

ence

s &

Ep

idem

iolo

gy,

Hop

eC

linic

al A

cad

emic

Gro

up,

Uni

vers

ity o

f M

anch

este

r

Pro

fess

or S

J O

’Brie

n2

Hea

d,

Gas

troi

ntes

tinal

and

Zoo

nose

s S

ectio

n,H

ealth

Pro

tect

ion

Sco

tland

Pro

fess

or W

J R

eilly

1

Cha

irm

an

To r

evie

w t

he A

CM

SF’

s20

03 r

isk

asse

ssm

ent

onav

ian

influ

enza

incl

udin

gto

car

ry o

ut a

det

aile

dre

view

of

imp

ort

mea

s-ur

es r

equi

red

for

pou

ltry

mea

t an

d e

ggs,

and

to

keep

a w

atch

ing

brie

f on

dev

elop

men

ts

To f

acili

tate

the

pro

visi

onof

AC

MS

F ad

vice

to

gov-

ernm

ent

in c

onne

ctio

nw

ith it

s m

icro

bio

logi

cal

food

sur

veill

ance

pro

-gr

amm

e an

d o

ther

sur

veil-

lanc

e re

leva

nt t

o fo

od-

bor

ne d

isea

se, p

artic

ular

lyin

rel

atio

n to

the

des

ign,

met

hod

olog

y, s

amp

ling

and

sta

tistic

al a

spec

ts;

and

to

rep

ort

bac

k re

gu-

larly

to

the

AC

MS

F

To a

sses

s th

e ris

k to

hum

ans

from

mic

roor

gan-

ism

s w

hich

are

use

d o

roc

cur

in o

r on

foo

d a

ndto

ad

vise

the

Foo

dS

tand

ard

s A

genc

y on

any

m

atte

rs r

elat

ing

to t

hem

icro

bio

logi

cal s

afet

y of

food

Term

s of

ref

eren

ce


30

1 R

esig

ned

30

Janu

ary

2006

.

2A

ctin

g C

hair

from

31

Janu

ary

2006

.

31


AC

MS

FS

urve

illan

ce

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

W

ork

ing

Gro

upW

ork

ing

Gro

up

Sen

ior

Lect

urer

,D

epar

tmen

t of

Imm

unol

ogy

and

Bac

terio

logy

, U

nive

rsity

of G

lasg

ow.

Hon

orar

yC

onsu

ltant

in C

linic

alM

icro

bio

logy

, N

orth

Gla

sgow

Uni

vers

ityH

osp

itals

NH

S T

rust

,W

este

rn In

firm

ary,

Gla

sgow

Dr

K M

Had

ley4

Hea

d o

f Fo

od S

afet

yS

cien

ce D

ivis

ion,

Inst

itute

of F

ood

Res

earc

h

Pro

fess

or M

J G

asso

n

Chi

ef P

olic

y A

dvi

ser,

Whi

ch?

Ms

S D

avie

s M

BE

Bus

ines

s im

pro

vem

ent

&ca

terin

g co

nsul

tanc

yM

rs V

ivia

nne

Bul

ler

3D

irect

or,

Viru

s R

efer

ence

Dep

artm

ent,

HPA

Cen

tre

for

Infe

ctio

ns,

61 C

olin

dal

e A

venu

e,Lo

ndon

NW

9 5E

Q

Dr

D W

G B

row

n

Mic

rob

iolo

gica

l ris

kas

sess

or,

Uni

leve

r S

afet

y&

Env

ironm

enta

lA

ssur

ance

Cen

tre

Mr

J B

asse

tt

Mem

ber

s

3

Dr

Bro

wn

chai

rs t

he A

vian

Influ

enza

Wor

king

Gro

up

4 A

pp

oint

men

t en

ded

31

Mar

ch 2

006

AC

MS

FS

urve

illan

ce

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

W

ork

ing

Gro

upW

ork

ing

Gro

up

Ind

epen

den

tM

anag

emen

t C

onsu

ltant

(retir

ed E

nviro

nmen

tal

Hea

lth M

anag

er)

Mr

P M

epha

m7

Sen

ior

Vete

rinar

ian

&M

anag

ing

Dire

ctor

,P

oultr

y H

ealth

Ser

vice

s

Mr

P M

cMul

lin

Com

put

er c

onsu

ltant

Con

sum

er r

epre

sent

ativ

eM

s E

Lew

is

Hea

d o

f P

rod

uct

Saf

ety,

Sai

nsb

ury’

s S

uper

mar

kets

Mr

A K

yria

kid

es

Pro

fess

or o

f H

ealth

Pro

tect

ion,

Uni

vers

ity o

fE

ast

Ang

lia

Pro

fess

or P

R H

unte

r

6P

rofe

ssor

of

Vete

rinar

yZ

oono

tic B

acte

riolo

gy,

Uni

vers

ity o

f B

risto

l

Pro

fess

or T

J H

ump

hrey

Con

sulta

nt a

nd R

ead

er in

Clin

ical

Mic

rob

iolo

gy,

St

Geo

rge’

s H

osp

ital,

Lond

on

Dr

R E

Hol

liman

5


32

5

Ap

poi

nted

1 A

pril

200

66

Pro

fess

or H

ump

hrey

cha

irs t

he S

urve

illan

ce W

orki

ng G

roup

7 A

pp

oint

men

t en

ded

31

Mar

ch 2

006

33


AC

MS

FS

urve

illan

ce

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

W

ork

ing

Gro

upW

ork

ing

Gro

up

Pro

fess

or o

f M

icro

bio

logy

,D

ept.

of

Gen

etic

s,U

nive

rsity

of

Leic

este

r

Pro

fess

or P

Will

iam

s

Dire

ctor

of

Hea

lthIm

pro

vem

ent,

Ken

t an

dM

edw

ay S

trat

egic

Hea

lthA

utho

rity

Dr

Q D

San

dife

r10

Che

f an

d F

ood

Con

sulta

ntM

r R

Ree

s

Pro

fess

or o

f M

icro

bio

logy

,D

ivis

ion

of Im

mun

ity &

Infe

ctio

n, U

nive

rsity

of

Birm

ingh

am

Pro

fess

or L

J V

Pid

doc

k

Food

Saf

ety

Pol

icy

Offi

cer,

Cha

rter

ed In

stitu

teof

Env

ironm

enta

l Hea

lth

Mrs

J M

orris

9

Con

sulta

nt in

Com

mun

icab

le D

isea

seC

ontr

ol,

Ess

ex H

ealth

Pro

tect

ion

Uni

t an

dH

onor

ary

Con

sulta

nt in

Mic

rob

iolo

gy

Dr

S M

iller

ship

8

8

Ap

poi

nted

1 A

pril

200

69

Ap

poi

nted

1 A

pril

200

610

A

pp

oint

men

t en

ded

31

Mar

ch 2

006


34

AC

MS

FS

urve

illan

ce

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

W

ork

ing

Gro

upW

ork

ing

Gro

up

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Dr

J H

ilton

Dep

artm

ent

for

Env

ironm

ent,

Foo

d a

ndR

ural

Affa

irs

Mr

P G

ayfo

rd

Ass

esso

rs

Nat

iona

l Ins

titut

e fo

rB

iolo

gica

l Sta

ndar

ds

and

Con

trol

Dr

J W

ood

Res

pira

tory

Dis

ease

sD

epar

tmen

t, H

ealth

Pro

tect

ion

Age

ncy

Dr

N P

hin

Dire

ctor

, W

orld

Influ

enza

Cen

tre,

Nat

iona

l Ins

titut

efo

r M

edic

al R

esea

rch

Dr

A H

ay

Hea

d o

f A

vian

Viro

logy

,Ve

terin

ary

Lab

orat

orie

sA

genc

y

Dr

I Bro

wn

Con

sulta

nt (r

etire

d f

ood

ind

ustr

y)D

r C

Bel

l

Vete

rinar

y La

bor

ator

ies

Age

ncy

Dr

Den

nis

Ale

xand

er

Co

-op

ted

Mem

ber

s

35


AC

MS

FS

urve

illan

ce

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

W

ork

ing

Gro

upW

ork

ing

Gro

up

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Mr

A A

deo

ye

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Mrs

E A

Str

etto

n

Ad

min

istr

ativ

e

Sec

reta

riat

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Sci

enti

fic

Sec

reta

ryD

r P

E C

ook

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Ad

min

istr

ativ

e

Sec

reta

ryD

r L

Fost

er

Sec

reta

riat

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

(Wal

es)

Mrs

J W

hinn

ey

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

(Sco

tland

)D

r J

McE

lhin

ey

Nor

ther

n Ire

land

Dep

artm

ent

of A

gric

ultu

rean

d R

ural

Dev

elop

men

t

Dr

S N

eill

AC

MS

FS

urve

illan

ce

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

W

ork

ing

Gro

upW

ork

ing

Gro

up

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Mis

s J

Hig

gins

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Dr

C-H

Cha

n

Sci

enti

fic

Sec

reta

riat

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Mr

S R

ahm

an

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Mis

s S

But

ler


36

37


Ad

Ho

cG

roup

on:

New

ly-e

mer

gin

g

Infa

nt

Bo

tulis

m

Saf

e C

oo

king

of

pat

hog

ens

bo

tulis

min

Cat

tle

Bur

ger

s

12P

rofe

ssor

S J

O’B

rien

Mr

P M

epha

m

Mr

P M

cMul

lin

Ms

E L

ewis

Mr

A K

yria

kid

es

11P

rofe

ssor

P R

Hun

ter

Dr

K M

Had

ley

Ms

S D

avie

s M

BE

Dr

D W

G B

row

n

Mr

J B

asse

tt

Mem

ber

s

To r

evie

w t

he c

urre

ntad

vice

issu

ed b

y th

eC

hief

Med

ical

Offi

cer

in 1

998

on t

he s

afe

cook

ing

of b

urge

rsan

d t

o re

por

t b

ack

with

rec

omm

end

a-tio

ns t

o th

e A

CM

SF.

To c

onsi

der

the

pot

entia

l hum

anhe

alth

ris

k as

soci

at-

ed w

ith b

otul

ism

or

susp

ecte

d b

otul

ism

in c

attle

, p

artic

ular

lyin

rel

atio

n to

the

spre

adin

g of

pou

ltry

litte

r on

agr

icul

tura

lla

nd.

To r

epor

t b

ack

with

rec

omm

end

a-tio

ns t

o th

e A

CM

SF.

To c

onsi

der

the

pote

ntia

l hum

anhe

alth

ris

k as

soci

ated

with

the

con

sum

ptio

nof

chi

lled

or fr

ozen

,pu

réed

bab

y fo

ods,

part

icul

arly

in r

elat

ion

to C

lost

ridiu

m

botu

linum

and

infa

ntbo

tulis

m, t

o in

form

the

deve

lopm

ent

ofA

CM

SF

advi

ce t

o th

eFo

od S

tand

ards

Age

ncy.

To a

ssem

ble

info

r-m

atio

n on

the

cur

rent

situ

atio

n on

thi

sto

pic

in o

rder

to

dec

ide

whe

ther

the

reis

a p

oten

tial p

rob

-le

m in

rel

atio

n to

the

mic

ro-b

iolo

gica

lsa

fety

of

food

; an

dto

rec

omm

end

to

the

AC

MS

F w

heth

er t

heC

omm

ittee

nee

ds

toun

der

take

fur

ther

actio

n.

Term

s of

ref

eren

ce

11

Pro

fess

or H

unte

r ch

airs

the

Ad

Hoc

Gro

up o

n N

ewly

Em

ergi

ng P

atho

gens

12P

rofe

ssor

O’B

rien

chai

rs t

he A

d H

oc G

roup

on

Infa

nt B

otul

ism

Ad

Ho

cG

roup

on:

New

ly-e

mer

gin

g

Infa

nt

Bo

tulis

m

Saf

e C

oo

king

of

pat

hog

ens

bo

tulis

min

Cat

tle

Bur

ger

s

Dr

S K

enne

dy

Mr

P G

ayfo

rd

Dr

J H

ilton

Ass

esso

rs

Dire

ctor

, C

amp

den

&C

horle

ywoo

d F

ood

Res

earc

hA

ssoc

iatio

n

Dr

M S

trin

ger

Hea

d,

Food

Saf

ety

Mic

rob

iolo

gyS

ectio

n, In

stitu

te o

fFo

od R

esea

rch

Pro

fess

or M

W P

eck

Con

sulta

nt (r

etire

dfr

om H

PA)

Dr

M B

rett

Co

-op

ted

Mem

ber

s

13P

rofe

ssor

PH

Willi

ams

Pro

fess

or W

J R

eilly


38

13

Pro

fess

or W

illia

ms

chai

rs t

he A

d H

oc G

roup

on

the

Saf

e C

ooki

ng o

f B

urge

rs

39


Ad

Ho

cG

roup

on:

New

ly-e

mer

gin

g

Infa

nt

Bo

tulis

m

Saf

e C

oo

king

of

pat

hog

ens

bo

tulis

min

Cat

tle

Bur

ger

s

Dr

J A

ish

Mrs

O C

offe

y

Dr

P C

ook

Sci

enti

fic

Sec

reta

riat

Mis

s S

But

ler

Mr

A A

deo

ye

Mrs

E A

Str

etto

n

Ad

min

istr

ativ

eS

ecre

tari

at

Dr

L Fo

ster

Ad

min

istr

ativ

eS

ecre

tary

Sec

reta

riat


40

Co

ntac

t G

roup

on

Sal

mo

nella

Term

s of

Ref

eren

ceTh

is G

roup

was

con

vene

d o

nce

to r

evie

w r

isk

asse

ssm

ent

info

rmat

ion

rela

ting

to a

Sal

mon

ella

cont

amin

atio

n of

cho

cola

te in

cid

ent.

Mem

ber

s

Pro

f T

Hum

phr

ey

Pro

f P

Hun

ter

Mr

A K

yria

kid

es

Mrs

J M

orris

Pro

f S

O’B

rien

14

Sec

reta

riat

Dr

Lucy

Fos

ter

Dr

Pau

l Coo

k

Mr

J P

asco

e

14

Pro

f O

’Brie

n ch

aire

d t

he C

onta

ct G

roup

on

Sal

mon

ella

Ann

ex II

: Ad

viso

ry C

om

mitt

ee o

n th

e M

icro

bio

log

ical

Saf

ety

of

Fo

od

Reg

iste

r o

f M

emb

ers’

Inte

rest

s

Mem

ber

Per

sona

l int

eres

tsN

on-

per

sona

l int

eres

ts

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Non

eC

onsu

ltanc

y w

ork

Con

sulta

ncy

Pro

ject

-P

ublic

Sec

tor

Food

Pro

cure

men

tC

onsu

ltanc

y w

ork

Con

sulta

ncy

wor

k fo

rLo

cal A

utho

rity

mem

ber

s

Nut

meg

UK

Ltd

Nor

th E

ast

Land

Lin

ks

Loca

l Aut

horit

ies

and

Sch

ools

Ass

ocia

tion

of P

ublic

Ser

vice

Exc

elle

nce

Mrs

V B

ulle

r

HPA

ind

ustr

y-fu

nded

rese

arch

and

lab

orat

ory

inve

stig

atio

ns

Vario

usN

one

Dr

D W

G B

row

n

Em

plo

yee

Uni

leve

r p

lcM

r J

Bas

sett

Res

earc

h fu

ndin

g in

col

-la

bor

atio

n w

ith in

dus

tria

lp

artn

ers

Vario

usN

one

Pro

fess

or S

J O

’Brie

n

Hea

lth P

rote

ctio

nS

cotla

nd u

nder

take

s th

eco

-ord

inat

ion

of c

ontr

ac-

tual

wor

k on

the

sur

veil-

lanc

e of

foo

d o

n b

ehal

f of

the

FSA

.

No

com

mer

cial

co

mp

anie

s

FSA

Occ

asio

nal f

ee p

aid

wor

kO

ccas

iona

l fee

pai

d w

ork

Occ

asio

nal f

ee p

aid

wor

kan

d C

olla

bor

ator

on

gran

ts f

und

ed b

y D

EFR

A

Col

lab

orat

or o

n gr

ants

fund

ed b

y FS

A

No

com

mer

cial

co

mp

anie

s.U

nive

rsity

of

Gla

sgow

Uni

vers

ity C

olle

ge D

ublin

DE

FRA

FSA

Pro

fess

or W

J R

eilly

41


Mem

ber

Per

sona

l int

eres

tsN

on-

per

sona

l int

eres

ts

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Non

eN

one

Ms

E L

ewis

Non

eS

hare

hold

erE

mp

loye

e

Cha

irman

J S

ains

bur

y p

lcS

ains

bur

y’s

Sup

erm

arke

tsLt

d.

CC

FRA

Sci

entif

ic &

Tech

nica

l Com

mitt

ee

Mr

A K

yria

kid

es

Stu

dy

of A

ntib

iotic

Res

ista

nce

in F

ood

&W

ater

in F

ranc

e

Cha

mb

re S

ynd

ical

e d

esE

aux

Min

éral

es,

Par

isC

hair

of S

cien

ce A

dvi

sory

Com

mitt

ee,

Cha

ir of

Boa

rd o

f Dire

ctor

s

Med

ical

/Leg

al a

dvi

cere

gard

ing

Trav

el H

ealth

Sue

z In

tern

atio

nal P

aris

Inst

itute

for

Pub

lic H

ealth

& W

ater

Res

earc

h

Pro

fess

or P

R H

unte

r

Fund

ing

for

rese

arch

p

roje

cts

Vario

usA

d H

occo

nsut

ancy

wor

kB

ritis

h E

gg In

dus

try

Cou

ncil

Pro

fess

or T

J H

ump

hrey

Non

eM

edic

al L

egal

wor

k on

toxo

pla

smos

is a

nd h

osp

i-ta

l acq

uire

d in

fect

ion

Vario

usD

r R

E H

ollim

an

Non

eN

one

Dr

K M

Had

ley

IFR

Foo

d S

afet

y S

cien

ceD

ivis

ion

ind

ustr

y-fu

nded

rese

arch

pro

ject

s

Vario

usS

hare

hold

erN

ovac

taP

rofe

ssor

M J

Gas

son

Non

eE

mp

loye

eW

hich

? (fo

rmer

ly t

heC

onsu

mer

s’ A

ssoc

iatio

n)M

s S

Dav

ies

MB

E


42

Mem

ber

Per

sona

l int

eres

tsN

on-

per

sona

l int

eres

ts

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

IFR

Foo

d S

afet

y S

cien

ceD

ivis

ion

ind

ustr

y –

fund

ed r

esea

rch

pro

ject

s

Vario

usN

one

Pro

fess

or M

Pec

k

Ad

Ho

c G

roup

on

Infa

ntB

otu

lism

Non

eN

one

Dr

M B

rett

Ad

Ho

c G

roup

on

Bo

tulis

m in

Cat

tle

Non

eN

one

Pro

fess

or P

H W

illia

ms

Non

eN

one

Dr

Q D

San

dife

r

Non

eN

one

Mr

R R

ees

Fund

ing

for

rese

arch

p

roje

cts

Vario

usA

d H

occo

nsul

tanc

y w

ork

Non

eP

rofe

ssor

L J

V P

idd

ock

Non

eM

emb

er

Sha

reho

lder

Cha

rter

ed In

stitu

te o

fE

nviro

nmen

tal H

ealth

Whi

tbre

ad p

lc

Mrs

J M

orris

Non

eN

one

Dr

S M

iller

ship

Non

eD

irect

orP

hilip

Mep

ham

A

ssoc

iate

s Lt

dM

r P

Mep

ham

43


Mem

ber

Per

sona

l int

eres

tsN

on-

per

sona

l int

eres

ts

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Nam

e o

f co

mp

any

Nat

ure

of

inte

rest

Con

sulta

nt in

Mic

robi

olog

y

Pro

gram

me

Adv

iser

for

B11

VTE

C r

esea

rch

proj

ect

Com

pan

ies

in t

he f

ood

man

ufac

turin

g an

d

reta

iling

sec

tors

Food

Sta

ndar

ds

Age

ncy

Con

veno

r

Sha

reho

lder

The

Uni

ted

Kin

gdom

Ass

ocia

tion

ofM

icro

bio

logi

sts

–A

ccre

dita

tion

Mar

ks &

Sp

ence

r p

lc

Dr

C B

ell

Sur

veill

ance

Wo

rkin

gG

roup

Non

eN

one

Dr

J W

ood

Non

eN

one

Dr

N P

hin

Non

eN

one

Dr

A H

ay

Non

eN

one

Dr

I Bro

wn

Non

eN

one

Dr

Den

nis

Ale

xand

er

Avi

an I

nflu

enza

Wo

rkin

gG

roup

Dire

ctor

of

Food

Tech

nolo

gy a

t C

amp

den

and

Cho

rleyw

ood

Foo

dR

esea

rch

Ass

ocia

tion.

Ap

ortio

n of

the

RA’

s w

ork

is f

und

ed b

y th

e fo

od a

ndd

rink

ind

ustr

y

A r

ange

of

com

pan

ies

from

the

foo

d a

nd d

rink

ind

ustr

y

Dire

ctor

Cam

pd

en a

ndC

horle

ywoo

d F

ood

Res

earc

h A

ssoc

iatio

nTe

chno

logy

Ltd

Dr

M S

trin

ger


44

References

1. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1993).Report of Progress 1990-92. HMSO, London. ISBN 0-11-321664-5.

2. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1994).Annual Report 1993. HMSO, London. ISBN 0-11-321816-8.

3. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1995).Annual Report 1994. HMSO, London. ISBN 0-11-321921-0.

4. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. AnnualReport 1995. Department of Health, Wetherby. ISBN 1 85839 5763.

5. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1997).Annual Report 1996. Department of Health. ISBN 85839 7243.

6. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1998).Annual Report 1997. Department of Health.



9. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (2001).Annual Report 2000. Food Standards Agency. FSA/0012/0401.





14. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (2006).Annual Report 2005. Food Standards Agency. FSA/1099/1006

15. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1992).Report on Vacuum Packaging and Associated Processes. HMSO,London. ISBN 0-11-321558-4.

45


16. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1993).Report on Salmonella in Eggs. HMSO, London. ISBN 0-11-321568-1.

17. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1993).Interim Report on Campylobacter. HMSO, London. ISBN 0-11-321662-9.

18. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1995).Report on Verocytotoxin-Producing Escherichia coli. HMSO, London.ISBN 0-11-321909-1.

19. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1996).Report on Poultry Meat. HMSO, London. ISBN 0-11-321969-5.

20. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1998).Report on Foodborne Viral Infections. The Stationery Office, London.ISBN 0-11-322254-8.

21. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1999).Report on Microbial Antibiotic Resistance in Relation to Food Safety.The Stationery Office, London. ISBN 0-11-322283-1.

22. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (1999).Report on Microbial Antibiotic Resistance in Relation to Food Safety.Synopsis. The Stationery Office, London. ISBN 0-11-322295-5.

23. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food (2001).Second Report on Salmonella in Eggs. The Stationery Office,London. ISBN 0-11-322466-4.

24. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. Reporton Mycobacterium bovis. A review of the possible health risks toconsumers of meat from cattle with evidence of Mycobacteriumbovis infection. Food Standards Agency. January 2002.FSA/0400/2002.

25. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. SecondReport on Campylobacter. June 2005. Food Standards Agency.FSA/0964/0605.

26. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. Ad HocGroup on Infant Botulism. Report on Minimally Processed InfantWeaning Foods and the Risk of Infant Botulism. July 2006. FoodStandards Agency. FSA/1092/0706

27. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food. Ad HocGroup on Botulism in Cattle. Report on Botulism in Cattle.December 2006. Food Standards Agency. FSA/1112/1206.


46

28. Committee on Standards in Public Life (Nolan: First Report). May 1995.

29. The Commissioner for Public Appointments. Office of theCommissioner for Public Appointments. Code of Practice forMinisterial Appointments to Public Bodies. July 2001.

30. Food Standards Agency. Appointments to the Advisory Committeeon the Microbiological Safety of Food. Announced June 2006.http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2006/jun/acmsfnewmembers

31. Food Standards Agency. Report on the Review of ScientificCommittees. 2002. FSA/0567/0402.

32. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/770. Update on the work of the other Advisory Committees.

33. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/780. Report on minimally processed infant weaning foods andthe risk of infant botulism.

34. http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/consultationresponse/weaningresponse.pdf

35. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/800. Report on botulism in cattle.

36. http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/consultationresponse/cattlebotulismresp.pdf

37. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/816. Change in FSA advice on Botulism in Cattle.

38. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/814. Update on listeriosis in the United Kingdom, 2006.

39. Minutes of the fifty-ninth meeting of the Advisory Committee on theMicrobiological Safety of Food. ACM/MIN/59.

40. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/818. Risk assessment of the role of foodborne transmission ofhepatitis E in the UK. An update – November 2006.

41. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/783. Avian Influenza Risk Assessment – update June 2006.

42. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/815. Toxoplasmosis and food.

43. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/779. Ad Hoc Group on safe cooking of burgers – final report.Discussion paper.

47


44. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/817. Disinfection of knives.

45. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/798. Scientific review of the microbiological risks associatedwith reductions in fat and added sugar in foods.

46. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/777. Review of scientific evidence to support FSA consultationon vacuum-packaged and modified atmosphere packaged foods.

47. http://www.food.gov.uk/news/newsarchive/2006/aug/cadbury

48. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/819. Epidemiology of Foodborne Infections Group.

49. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/778. Update on poultry surveillance. Discussion Paper.

50. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/803. Surveillance update.

51. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/801. Developing a best practice agreement for the scientificadvisory committees.

52. Minutes of the sixtieth meeting of the Advisory Committee on theMicrobiological Safety of Food. ACM/MIN/60.

53. Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food.ACM/782. Horizon scanning.


48

Advisory Committee on the Microbiological Safety of Food

Annual Report 2006

© Crown copyrightPublished by Food Standards Agency

August 2007FSA/1191/0807




Date post:	08-Jan-2022
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Microbiological Safety of Food Advisory Committee on the

Documents