VITAL 3rd Annual Consortium Meeting National Veterinary Research Institute, Pulawy, Poland

1. WP7 Delivering impact Progress on verification of Codex AlimentariusCode of Good Practice for Control of Viruses in FoodsMateja Ambrožič and Peter Raspor VITAL 3rd Annual Consortium Meeting National Veterinary Research Institute, Pulawy, Poland 12th-14th April 2010

2. Agenda • About Codex Alimentarius • T7.1 Verification of the Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods • T7.1a Systems verification- methodology • T7.1a Systems verification- results • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Guidelines or COGP? • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Inconsistent terminology concept • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Personal hygiene • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Consumers • What was done so far • Conclusions

3. About Codex Alimentarius The Codex Alimentarius Commission, established by the FAO and WHO in the 1960s, has become the single most important international reference point for developments associated with food standards. The Codex Alimentarius is a collection of standards, codes of practice, guidelines and otherrecommendations. Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC)joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. (2006). Uderstanding the Codex Alimentrarius. Resource document: FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme

4. About Codex Alimentarius The 40thSession of the Codex Committee on Food Hygiene set in motion the first international work on a Code of Hygienic Practice for the Control of Viruses in Food, which is in this stage entitled PROPOSED DRAFT GUIDELINES ON THE APPLICATION OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF FOOD HYGIENE TO THE CONTROL OF VIRUSES IN FOOD AT STEP 3

5. About Codex Alimentarius-Proposed Draft (July, 2009) Section I: Objectives Section II: Scope, use and definition Section III: Primary production Section IV: Establishment: Design and facilities Section V: Control of operation Section VI: Establishment: Maintenance and sanitation Section VII: Establishment: Personal hygiene Section VIII: Transportation Section IX: Product Information and consumer awareness Section X:Training

6. About Codex Alimentarius-Proposed Draft (July, 2009) Annex 1: Hygienic practice by food handlers for control of HAV and NoV in ready to eats foods Annex 2: Annex to the control of HAV and NoV in bivalve molluscs Annex 3: Control of HAV and NoV in fresh produce

7. Agenda • About Codex Alimentarius • T7.1 Verification of the Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods • T7.1a Systems verification- methodology • T7.1a Systems verification- results • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Guidelines or COGP? • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Inconsistent terminology concept • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Personal hygiene • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Consumers • What was done so far • Conclusions

8. T7.1 Verification of the Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods Divided into 3 subtasks: • T7.1aSystems verification • T7.1bProcess verification • T7.1cOrganised consultation with Expert Holders

9. Agenda • About Codex Alimentarius • T7.1 Verification of the Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods • T7.1a Systems verification- methodology • T7.1a Systems verification- results • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Guidelines or COGP? • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Inconsistent terminology concept • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Personal hygiene • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Consumers • What was done so far • Conclusions

10. T7.1a Systems verification- methodology The study was performed in two parts: • The screeining and review of FDA Food Code 2009, Codex Alimentarius Recommended codes of good practices (CAC/RCP) and FSANZ Food Code as global most important recognised food safety practices in their working area. The rewiev was focused only on the integration of “viruses” in each code • The SWOT analysis of each section of Propesd Draft

11. T7.1a Systems verification- methodology The research method of qualitative SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) analysis was used to analyze the Codex Alimetarius Proposed draft: SWOT analysis is tool consisting of two parts: • An analysis of the internal strengths and weaknesses (any internal asset or a deficit, which enables or prevents the Proposed draft to effectively carry out its mission) • An analysis of external environment (any external circumstance or trend, which enables or prevents the Proposed draft's role and operations.

12. Agenda • About Codex Alimentarius • T7.1 Verification of the Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods • T7.1a Systems verification- methodology • T7.1a Systems verification- results • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Guidelines or COGP? • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Inconsistent terminology concept • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Personal hygiene • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Consumers • What was done so far • Conclusions

13. T7.1a Systems verification- results Critical comparison in the form of suggested augmentation/amendments to the Proposed Draft D7.2 Paper with suggested augmentation or amendments to the Proposed draft (Month 26)

14. T7.1a Systems verification- results Guidelines or COGP? Guidelines or Code of good practice?

15. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology concept These Guidelines are intended to control viruses from farm to fork in all kinds of foods, but only in conjunction with GHP as specified in other essential recommended CA COGP of older dates. Consistent terminology concept should be used

16. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • Proposed draft • Recommended International Code of Practice - General Principles of Food Hygiene (CAC/RCP 1-1969, Rev. 4-2003)

17. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • Codeof Hygienic Practicefor Fresh Fruitsand Vegetables (CAC/RCP 53-2003) • Coode of Hygienic Practicefor Precooked and Cooked Foods in Mass Catering(CAC/RCP 39-1993)

18. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • Food Code 2009 • FSANZ Food Code

19. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • Differentiation between expressions “food-borne viruses”, “enteric viruses” and “zoonotic viruses”

20. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • Abbreviations for listed viruses in definition section, although the abbreviations are used in the text

21. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • Differentiation between “potable water” “high quality water” and “safe growing water”, when referring to water?

22. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsInconsistent terminology • CAC as international reference point should form and uniform terminology in the filed.

23. T7.1a Systems verification- results • Proposed draft identifies production processes, describes requirements for hygienic and sanitary facilities, control of processing operation to control viral contamination, but there are gaps in control procedures regard to the limited procedures for routine detection of viruses. • Solution: strict personal hygiene Development and/or implementation of effective procedures (project VITAL) for respected food supply chain

24. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsPersonal hygiene Prevent food handlers to contaminate food due to poor GHP. Chapter “Employee health” in Food Code 2009 (FDA), describes strict responsibilities of the persons in charge and employees, restriction and exclusion in detail. This model is introducing the list of 5 most important pathogens (NoV, HAV, Salmonella typhi, Shigella species, Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes), which have high infectivity via contamination of food by infected handlers. The same model took over also Australian Code (FSANZ).

25. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsPersonal hygiene Proposed Draft: • Lack of strict control of personal hygiene practice • Duplication of facts from section to section

26. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsPersonal hygiene

27. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsPersonal hygiene • Duplication of requirements from section to section

28. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsPersonal hygiene • Duplication of general part and annexes (nothing new) General part Annex 1:Hygienic practice by food handlers for control of HAV and NOV in ready to eat foods

29. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsConsumers • Private households are responsible for 38% of all verified outbreaks and are the main settings of the verified outbreaks occurred in the EU(EFSA, The Community Summary Report on Trends and Sources of Zoonoses,Zoonotic Agents and food-borne outbreaks in the European Union in 2008.)

30. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsConsumers Outbreaks of food-borne illness occurring in private homes are less likely to be reported than those in commercial and public premises. EFSA. (2010). The Community Summary Report on Trends and Sources of Zoonoses,Zoonotic Agents and food-borne outbreaks in the European Union in 2008. The EFSA Journal, 1496 (288 pp).

31. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsConsumers These Guidelines provide advice to governments on a framework ...... with a view towards protecting the health of consumers and ensuring fair practices in food trade. But FOOD HANDLER = CONSUMER

32. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsConsumers In these days we are facing with: • Insufficient knowledge and awareness of food safety issues among food handlers • Insufficient informed consumers about food safety principles at home sufficient training + sufficient product information

33. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsConsumers • The activities in the Proposed draft are also aimed at the awareness of importance of education and training and GHP, but emphasis on acquisition of specific knowledge and skills with a look towards to the importance of refreshing trainings should be performed. • Collaboration with third party experts

34. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsConsumers • Public training courses can be organized also for consumers, because consumers have inadequate knowledge measuresneeded to prevent food-borne illness in the home • FightBAC campaign, Food Safe Partnership Campaign

35. Agenda • About Codex Alimentarius • T7.1 Verification of the Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods • T7.1a Systems verification- methodology • T7.1a Systems verification- results • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Guidelines or COGP? • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Inconsistent terminology concept • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Personal hygiene • T7.1a Systems verification- results: Consumers • What was done so far • Conclusions

36. What was done so far • SWOT anlysis of the Proposed Draf the proposed revised VITAL Description of Work was perfomed • Draft of the paper with suggested augmentation/amendments to the draft was also sent to VITAL coordinator

37. Conclusions Proposed draft should be further developed and clarified regarding procedures, methods and terminology. Is month 26 as D7.2 appropriate for suggesting augmentation/amendments to the Draft? NO, because analyzed version form July 2009 is in preliminary stage of its development and as such is not final document Because of that we can not accomplish D7.2 in month 26

38. Conclusions What we shall do? • In spite of fact that Codex Alimentarius “viral COGP” is not ready yet we have to start develop Guidance manuals, which has to be developed in month 39. • Codex Alimentarius “viral COGP” according to their plan will be published in July 2012 Codex Committee on Food Hygiene: Proposals for new work and/or revision of existing standards: code of hygienic practice for the control of viruses in foods (CX/FX 08/40/9), Sept. 2008

39. Conclusions What we shall do to reach D7.2 in time? • D7.2 Paper with suggested augmentation or amendments to the Proposed draft should be delivered in month 26 • It was delivered as final draft to coordinator in month 24 • Coordinator judgement is that this paper is premature since additional changes in “Codex Alimentarius Guidelines on the Application of General Principles of Food Hygiene to the Control of Viruses in Foods”can be expected. • Our proposal is that we publish it as it is since we can not wait until July 2012

40. Thanks/Hvala! CONTACTS: Professor Dr. Peter Raspor, DDr.H.C. Head of Chair of Biotechnology, Microbiology and Food Safety Mateja Ambrožič Chair of Biotechnology, Microbiology and Food Safety Biotechnical Faculty, University of Ljubljana Jamnikarjeva 101 1001 LJUBLJANA SLOVENIJA Tel.: +386 (0)1 423 11 61 Fax: +386 (0)1 256 57 82 http://www.bf.uni-lj.si/zivilstvo/o-oddelku/katedre-in-druge-org-enote/za-biotehnologijo-mikrobiologijo-in-varnost-zivil.html

41. T7.1a Systems verification- results Guidelines or COGP? Codes of good practice define the production, processing, manufacturing, transport and storage practices for individual foods or groups of foods that are considered essential to ensure the safety and suitability of foods for consumption in a uniform manner (CAC, 2006). Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC)joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. (2006). Uderstanding the Codex Alimentrarius. Resource document: FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.

42. T7.1a Systems verification- resultsGuidelines or COGP? Codex guidelines fall into principles that set out policy in certain key areas and guidelines for the interpretation of these principles or for the interpretation of the provisions of the Codex general standards (CAC, 2006). In the cases of food additives, contaminants, food hygiene and meat hygiene the basic principles governing the regulation of these matters are built into the relevant standards and codes of practice (CAC, 2006). Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC)joint FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme. (2006). Uderstanding the Codex Alimentrarius. Resource document: FAO/WHO Food Standards Programme.