Search

The Meat Factory Cell (MFC) concept differs from conventional abattoirs by partly working in cell stations instead of production lines. It combines and merges elements of today's separate processes and disciplines, namely “slaughter” and “meat primal cutting”, and “disassembles” the carcass from outside-in where limbs, neck, back and loin are removed before internal organs. The aim of this work is to qualitatively assess future meat inspection and hygiene of pork carcasses in the MFC. A holistic assessment of the carcass parts is needed to interpret the significance of findings on separate parts. The MFC offers some opportunities for targeted inspection with cutting edge diagnostic technology. Improved hygiene is expected from the MFC concept due to the fact that limbs, neck and loin are removed first and are not subject to faecal contamination from intestinal content. The MFC provides opportunities for customized chilling regime for different parts, targeted decontamination or pathogen killing processing, which should contribute to safer meat products and less energy consumption. We expect that the MFC approach will potentially fulfill the principles of Codex alimentarius and will improve public health compared to conventional slaughter and meat inspection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The traditional meat inspection system is often found to be inefficient. Meat inspection in European countries is in a phase of modernisation to reflect improvements in livestock health and advances in understanding meat safety. The key point of progress is to replace the traditional meat inspection with risk-based meat inspection, including the elements of a meat safety assurance system (MSAS). Modernisation of meat inspection was launched by the European Food Safety Authority's (EFSA) opinions and recommendations in the period 2011–2013 and consequent amendments to the EU meat inspection legislation in the period 2014–2019. For this study, the EU-funded RIBMINS COST Action conducted a comprehensive survey using an in-depth questionnaire to estimate the level of implementation of new risk-based meat inspection systems in Europe, stakeholders' confidence in the new systems and the main identified obstacles. The implementation of new meat inspection systems is still ongoing, as they have been fully implemented in just 61%, 42% and 38% of the surveyed countries in the pig, bovine, and poultry sectors, respectively. The main identified obstacles are existing trade agreements with 3rd countries, costs of implementation, inadequate food chain information and resistance from meat inspectors. Improvement of all components of the current meat inspection systems is a prerequisite for further modernisation. • European meat inspection systems are approximately halfway to modernising. • Implementation of new meat inspection systems is often lagging the legislation. • Main obstacles are trade requirements, costs and inadequate food chain information. • Overall, the stakeholders are more confident in the new than in traditional systems. • Reduced or equal workload characterizes new meat inspection systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The traditional meat safety system has significantly contributed to public health protection throughout the last century. However, it has been recognised that this system suffers many flaws – the main being its limited ability to control the currently most important meat-borne hazards. The European Food Safety Authority evaluated meat inspection in the public health context, prioritised meat-borne hazards and proposed a generic framework for a new, risk-based meat safety assurance system. The proposed system aims to combine a range of preventive and control measures, applied at farms and abattoirs and integrated longitudinally, where official meat inspection is incorporated with producers' food safety management systems into a coherent whole. The modernisation process has recently started as a direct result of changes to relevant legislation in the European Union. Many challenges have been experienced while many opportunities are foreseen. More focus on targeted and risk-based inspection along the supply chain as well as use of new technologies may be a cost-effective and feasible way forward. Practical implementation of the system is expected to be a slow and careful process followed by thorough development, fine-tuning, and testing of practical feasibility and general impacts. Further progress that will lead to the full implementation is dependent on intensive research to fill knowledge gaps, enhance education and training and foster close collaboration of all the new system's stakeholders. • The traditional meat safety system is currently being modernised in Europe. • Evolution toward risk-based meat safety assurance system must be a careful process. • There are numerous drivers for the transition to the new system. • Challenges are already experienced and opportunities are foreseen. • Successful implementation requires collaboration of all stakeholders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The overall objectives of meat inspection are to contribute to food safety, animal welfare, and animal health. In the European Union (EU), there is a request for a modernised meat inspection system that addresses these objectives in a more valid, feasible and cost-effective way than does the traditional system. One part of the modernisation deals with the coding system to register meat inspection findings. Although unified standards are set at the EU level for judgement criteria regarding fitness of meat for consumption, different national systems are in force. The question is the extent of the differences and whether there is a basis for harmonisation. To investigate this, information was gathered about the code systems in Denmark, Finland, Germany, Italy, Norway, Portugal and Spain. Moreover, meat inspection data covering pigs slaughtered in 2019 were collected. A comparison of the number of codes available, the terminology and the frequencies of the findings registered was undertaken. Codes with a similar meaning were grouped. Hereby, two lists were compiled showing the most common codes leading to total and to partial condemnation. Substantial variations in the percentage of condemned pigs and in the terms used were identified, and possible reasons behind this are discussed. Moreover, a strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats (SWOT)-like analysis was applied to the coding systems. Finally, the reasons for unfitness of meat given in the EU Food Inspection Regulation 2019/627 were compared to the national code lists. The results show the systems in force varied substantially, and each system had its advantages and disadvantages. The diverse terminology observed made it a challenge to compare data between countries. Development of harmonised terminology for meat inspection findings is suggested, enabling comparison of data between abattoirs, regions, and countries, while respecting the national epidemiological situation, the local food safety culture, and the trade agreements in force. • Pig meat inspection code systems and data in seven European countries were compared. • The results show that the systems vary substantially. • The condemnation percentage of pigs varied from 0.11% to 0.51%. • The diverse terminology disables an easy comparison of pig meat inspection data. • Harmonised terminology may lead to fewer unnecessary condemnations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]