Food Safety in Latin America. Gerald Gutscher

Tamaño: px

Comenzar la demostración a partir de la página:

Download "Food Safety in Latin America. Gerald Gutscher"

1 Food Safety in Latin America Gerald Gutscher

2 Latin America Population: 580m (8,4%) Arable Land: 567m ha (37%) Freshwater Supply: km 3 (33%)

4 (soft) Commodity Giants

6 Food Supply Chain 1 loaf of bread MADE IN THE U.S.A. Wheat gluten from France, Poland, Russia, the Netherlands, or Australia Honey from China, Vietnam, Brazil, Uruguay, India, Canada, Mexico, or Argentina Calcium propionate from the Netherlands Guar gum from India Flour enrichments from China Beta-carotene from Switzerland Vitamin D3 from China Source: R. Brackett ; Managing Food Safety Practices (2009)

7 Food Supply Chain 200,000 food processing companies 900,000 restaurants (12m employees) 100m head of cattle Avg. distance farm-fork of 1lb of meat: 1,600km Agricultural Supply Chain -> U$ 1 trillion p.a. Source: P. Cheek (2006)

Avg. distance farm-fork of 1lb of meat: 1,600km

8 PLANT ORIGIN OTHER CROPS FOOD INDUSTRY Processing & Packaging Distribution & Retail PRODUCE SIMPLIFIED FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN OF A DEVELOPED COUNTRY Aquaculture Storage & Trading ANIMAL PROTEIN CONSUMER Feed & Flour Mills Restaurants

SUPPLY CHAIN OF A DEVELOPED COUNTRY Aquaculture Storage

9 Fuente: Consumer Attitudes to Food Standards_UK Report_2007_extract

10 Consumer Perception and Public Health Concern in Germany Source: Roehr et al (2005)

11 Food Safety in History Fuente: Griffith, C.J.; Food Safety: where from and where to?; British Food Journal, Vol. 108 No. 1; 2006; pp. 6-15

12 Food Safety Contaminants Mycotoxins Microbiological Allergens (claim!) Agrochemicals (Pest+Drugs) GMO Risk Chronic Toxicity Acute Toxicity Acute Toxicity Toxic &product attribute (organic) unknown Main Cause Climate/Environ. Environment Manufacturing Production Cultivation Predictability Low Low High High High Frequency of occurrence Medium High Low* Low High In Supply Chain Mainly primary production All over the supply chain Food Manufacturing Primary production Primary production Motive to Control Economic (Feed/Brand), Legislation Economic (Brand, Recall), Legislation To comply with a claim on the label Legislation or to comply with a claim (product attribute) to comply with a claim on the label, legislation Preventive Action hardly possible partially possible/unaccepted (irradiation) yes - thru effective ingredient management yes - no application of AC in question yes Traceable/Liability no partially yes yes yes Legislation partly yes unclear and partly partly partly ENVIRONMENTALLY INDUCED RISKS HUMAN INDUCED RISKS

Environment Manufacturing Production Cultivation Predictability Low Low High High High Frequency of occurrence Medium High Low* Low High In Supply Chain Mainly primary production All over the supply

13 PLANT ORIGIN OTHER CROPS FOOD INDUSTRY Processing & Packaging Distribution & Retail PRODUCE ALLERGENS Critical Points Aquaculture Storage & Trading ANIMAL PROTEIN CONSUMER Feed & Flour Mills Restaurants

14 gluten crustaceos huevos pescado maní Alergenos alimentarios Cualquier alimento puede provocar una reacción alérgica, pero los alérgenos más comunes (proteínas) son: nueces Leche y lactosa mostaza sésamos apio soja Dióxido de azufre, lupines sulfitos >10mg/kg moluscos Directivas de etiquetado para diferentes alergenos en USA, Canada, EU, Japon, Australia/Nueva Zelanda

y lactosa mostaza sésamos apio soja Dióxido de azufre, lupines sulfitos >10mg/kg moluscos

15 Regulaciones de Etiquetado Alergenos USA EU Canada Japon Australia/ Nueva Zelanda Huevo X X X X X Leche X X X X X Pescado X X X X Crustaceos X X X X Nueces X X X X Maní X X X X X Trigo X X X X X Soja X X X X Apio X Mostaza X Sulfitos >10 mg/kg X >10 mg/kg Sésamo X X X Alforfón X Moluscos X Lupines X

Nueces X X X X Maní X X X X X Trigo X X X X X Soja X X X X Apio X Mostaza

16 Regulaciones para Gluten Codex Standard para alimentos destinados a dietas especiales para personas con intolerancia al gluten (CODEX STAN ) Libre de Gluten Etiquetado: productos que no contienen trigo (i.e., todas las especies de Triticum, como ser durum, spelt, y kamut), centeno, cebada, avena o las variedades cruzadas, y el contenido de gluten no debe exceder los 20 mg/kg en total Contenido de gluten reducido, Dietas especiales etiquetado: Alimentos procesados en forma especial para reducir el contenido de gluten desde 20 hasta 100 mg/kg

de Gluten Etiquetado: productos que no contienen trigo (i.e., todas las especies de Triticum, como ser durum, spelt, y kamut), centeno,

17 Cómo llegan los alergenos a Receta (Ingredientes, pre-mezclas de ingredientes) Contaminación cruzada Almacenamiento de ingredientes Producción (pesaje, mezcla, linea de producción limpieza inadecuada) Carry over limpieza los productos? Personal Distribución irregular de los alergenos

Producción (pesaje, mezcla, linea de producción limpieza inadecuada)

18 Métodos Analíticos Comerciales para Alergenos Detección de Proteína o DNA ELISA AgraQuant Allergen Lateral flow assay (LFD) AgraStrip Allergen PCR RT-PCR ELISA PCR

19 Desafíos para el análisis de Alergenos No hay materiales de referencia disponibles No hay patrones de referencia disponibles La fortificación es muy dificil Spiking con extracto de proteína (que se detecta?) Spiking con alergeno (alimento) Spiking extracto Spiking muestra

fortificación es muy dificil Spiking con extracto de proteína (que

20 Desafíos para el análisis de Alergenos

21 Control de Alérgenos Incluye: Desarrollo del producto Proveedores de ingredientes Almacenamiento Identificación de puntos de contaminación cruzada Limpieza y Higiene Documentación Monitoramiento del producto terminado ATP Lateral flow PCR ELISA

22 Latin American Food Safety Survey June 2010 Respondents by Country Paraguay, 9 Uruguay, 8 USA, 1 Panama, 1 Peru, 4 online Nicaragua, 2 Argentina, 17 n=209 Mexico, 45 Brazil, 70 Guatemala, 4 14 countries Ecuador, 4 Costa Rica, 3 Colombia, 17 Chile, 24

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1 1 2 6 6 8 9 42 Respondents by Industry 8 14 20 Food Complex Feed Complex Research and Public Organisations 13 16 21 8 27 Services 7 Distribution

23 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Respondents by Industry Food Complex Feed Complex Research and Public Organisations Services 7 Distribution Certification & Auditing Brewery & Malting Dried Fruits, Nuts & Spicery Commodity Trader/Export Biotech & Food Safety Re-Seller/Distributor Petfood Flour Milling Consultancy Dairy Research Animal Husbandry Government Feed University Service Lab Food % 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

24 Respondents Profiles

Status Quo of Food Safety Testing Contaminants and Residues Tested % of all respondents n=209, multiple answers possible 100% 80% 79% 60% 63% 40% 36% 27% 20% 21% 19% 17% 0% Mycotoxins Microbiology

25 Status Quo of Food Safety Testing Contaminants and Residues Tested % of all respondents n=209, multiple answers possible 100% 80% 79% 60% 63% 40% 36% 27% 20% 21% 19% 17% 0% Mycotoxins Microbiology Pesticides Drug Residues Allergens GMO Melamine Contaminants and Residues Tested BRAZIL % of respondents, n=70, multiple answers possible Contaminants and Residues Tested FOOD COMPLEX % of respondents, n=62, multiple answers possible 100% 100% 80% 80% 80% 82% 76% 60% 51% 60% 53% 40% 20% 36% 23% 17% 13% 13% 40% 20% 40% 29% 19% 19% 0% 0% Mycotoxins Microbiology GMO Pesticides Drug Residues Melamine Allergens Microbiology Mycotoxins Pesticides Allergens Drug Residues GMO Melamine 25

26 RASFF Border Rejections

27 Diagnostic Technology Employed (chemical contaminants) 60% Technology Employed (n=209) 60% Technology in the Food Complex (n=62) 55% 50% 40% 39% 50% 48% 45% 30% 20% 10% 0% 18% 8% 40% 30% Technology in Feed Complex (n=48) 20% 60% 50% 48% 40% 10% 13% 8% 30% 20% 10% 0% 21% 8% 8% 0% ELISA Chromatography LFD Fluorometry 27

28 Outlook in Food Safety (chemical contaminants) Contaminants and residues to play a major role in the future of food safety. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% All (n=209) Food Complex (n=62) Feed Complex (n=48) Research Staff (n=44) QC & Lab Staff (n=105) 10% 0% Mycotoxins Pesticides Veterinary Drug Residues GMO Allergens Marine and Freshwater Biotoxins 28

29 Status-Quo vs. Outlook (chemical contaminants) Status-Quo vs. Outlook (n=209) 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Status-Quo Outlook 30% 20% 10% 0% Mycotoxins Pesticides Veterinary Drug Residues GMO Allergens 29

30 Romer Labs Check Sample Survey Interlaboratory Study Round CSS RLI-2 Aflatoxins in Maize Oct/Nov 2010 Latin America 109 participants 10 countries Argentina Brasil Chile Colombia Costa Rica 17 Guatemala Mexico Panama Paraguay Peru

31 Final Considerations Compliance with Export Food Safety Standards helps Food Safety in the exporting country. Ambivalent Realities Large Food Export Countries (e.g. Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay) Countries depended on imports (e.g. cradle of maize depends on US corn)

32 Balancing Food Security and Food Safety. A World Bank study has calculated that the European Union regulation on aflatoxins costs Africa $670 million each year in exports of cereals, dried fruit, and nuts. And what does it achieve? It may possibly save a life of one citizen of the European Union in every two years [ ] Surely a more reasonable balance can be found. KOFI ANNAN

33 Final Considerations

34 Gerald Gutscher

Documentos relacionados

Alergias Alimentarias: Desafíos y Diagnóstico. Gerald Gutscher

Alergias Alimentarias: Desafíos y Diagnóstico Gerald Gutscher Lo que es comida para algunos, es un amargo veneno para otros. ( quod aliis cibus est aliis fuat acre venenum Libro IV, linea 637) Titus Lucretius