Search

Withdrawal periods are used to avoid animals being delivered to slaughter before the concentration of the antimicrobial has declined to values below the maximum residue limit (MRL). This paper characterises the withdrawal periods in force for oxytetracycline 100 mg/ml for intramuscular use in pigs. We investigated the variation in duration of the withdrawal period between 68 oxytetracycline products from 29 countries in- and outside the European Union. More specifically, we tested whether there is a regional difference, a difference between major and minor pig meat exporting countries, whether the product is long-acting or not, and whether year of market authorisation correlated with the withdrawal period. The results showed a large variation in duration of the withdrawal periods, ranging from 5 to 40 days. Variation was observed both between and within countries. Moreover, major exporting countries were associated with a longer withdrawal period than minor exporting countries (P = 0.00099). There were no regional differences, and the year of market authorisation had no impact, but long-acting products had a shorter withdrawal period than short-acting products (P = 0.048). The variation in withdrawal periods observed questions the utility of using compliance with the withdrawal period as a means of assessing whether the meat is safe for consumption. This is particularly relevant when a pig producer unintentionally delivers pigs for slaughter before the withdrawal period has expired and, aware of this, informs the abattoir. The findings call for further harmonisation in determining the withdrawal periods for all veterinary medicinal products (VMP). Until this happens, if animals are prematurely sent to slaughter, we suggest that the concentration of the VMP at the time of slaughter is calculated and compared with the MRL to determine meat safety., Withdrawal periods are used to avoid animals being delivered to slaughter before the concentration of the antimicrobial has declined to values below the maximum residue limit (MRL). This paper characterises the withdrawal periods in force for oxytetracycline 100 mg/ml for intramuscular use in pigs. We investigated the variation in duration of the withdrawal period between 68 oxytetracycline products from 29 countries in- and outside the European Union. More specifically, we tested whether there is a regional difference, a difference between major and minor pig meat exporting countries, whether the product is long-acting or not, and whether year of market authorisation correlated with the withdrawal period. The results showed a large variation in duration of the withdrawal periods, ranging from 5 to 40 days. Variation was observed both between and within countries. Moreover, major exporting countries were associated with a longer withdrawal period than minor exporting countries (P = 0.00099). There were no regional differences, and the year of market authorisation had no impact, but long-acting products had a shorter withdrawal period than short-acting products (P = 0.048). The variation in withdrawal periods observed questions the utility of using compliance with the withdrawal period as a means of assessing whether the meat is safe for consumption. This is particularly relevant when a pig producer unintentionally delivers pigs for slaughter before the withdrawal period has expired and, aware of this, informs the abattoir. The findings call for further harmonisation in determining the withdrawal periods for all veterinary medicinal products (VMP). Until this happens, if animals are prematurely sent to slaughter, we suggest that the concentration of the VMP at the time of slaughter is calculated and compared with the MRL to determine meat safety.

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 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.