In this edition
Senator McLucas launches Food Safety Week
CEO’s message – the melamine food incident
FSANZ activity around nanotechnology
How the FSANZ Regulatory Analysis Unit works
Capacity building in APEC economies
Staff focus: Chief Scientist Dr Paul Brent
Mandatory iodine fortification now less than a year away
Introducing the new FSANZ Maori Reference Group
Lessons from the melamine contamination incident
Meet the FSANZ food recall coordinator
FSANZ staff awards
Senator McLucas launches Food Safety Week
Although most Australians think home-cooked food is safest, this is a false assumption because the home can be a very risky place. That was the message from Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Ageing, Senator Jan McLucas, when she launched Food Safety Week 2008 on 12 November at Parliament House.
About 20 per cent of food poisonings occur in the home and it is important that people get the appropriate message about how to handle food at home, Senator McLucas said. Central to the food safety message were two new television community service advertisements designed to ensure that consumers are aware of the food poisoning risks they face when preparing food at home.
Senator McLucas said the advertisements were developed by the Food Safety Information Council (FSIC) following a survey by Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) which found that 92 per cent of Australians were confident about food safety in their home.
‘This finding is not in line with the real risk of food poisoning - each year there are about one million cases of food poisoning due to poor food handling in the home,’ Senator McLucas said.
‘The first ad features a bloke who has accidentally made one of his footie-playing team-mates so sick from food poisoning at a BBQ that he couldn’t play in the final and their side lost. The other features a woman who has made someone ill by leaving a pavlova unrefrigerated at a family gathering for her father’s birthday. Both of these are scenarios we can all relate to.
‘Reducing the risk of food poisoning can be easily achieved by following FSIC’s advice about making sure food that won’t be cooked again, isn’t contaminated by juices from raw meat or chicken, that your hands and kitchen utensils are clean, and that your fridge is working at or below 5°C.’
The TV ads were funded by the NSW Food Authority, FSANZ, Queensland Health, Safe Food Production Queensland and the Victorian Department of Human Services, which are all long-term members of FSIC.
Food Safety Week also featured three new radio community service announcements, one of them by celebrated food writer Margaret Fulton, who has inspired so many Australians to try innovative recipes.
National Food Safety Week is the major activity of FSIC, Australia’s leading disseminator of consumer-targeted food safety information and this year it was celebrated between 10-16 November.
The theme of National Food Safety Week was Food Adventures – New Foods, New Techniques . It focussed on food safety in the context of the many new foods and cooking techniques that are becoming increasingly commonly used.
The week kicked off the FSIC’s summer campaign, which lasts until 31 January 2009. Food poisoning cases increase over the summer as bacteria are more likely to grow in warmer weather and people entertain family and friends more during this period.
You can see the TV ads at http://www.foodsafety.asn.au/publications/videonotinvited.cfm and http://www.foodsafety.asn.au/publications/videothegirlfriend.cfm .
The radio community service announcements (the last three are this year’s new announcements including one from Margaret Fulton) are at http://www.foodsafety.asn.au/publications/radiospots.cfm
Press the play button under each title.
CEO’s message – the melamine food incident
There are many players in the food regulatory system, involving all levels of government. Each has its own responsibilities and yet, through a matrix of inter-governmental agreements, a Ministerial Council and operational arrangements, the agencies involved collaborate to bring an additional strength to the system. Nowhere is this synergy more evident than during food emergencies. They need to be handled with speed, scientific credibility and in a nationally consistent manner to preserve public health and safety and prevent any damage to public confidence in the food supply.
In Australia, a National Food Incident Response Protocol outlines the responsibilities of State and Territory agencies, national agencies and FSANZ in the event of a food incident. It was activated earlier this year when unsafe cassava products appeared in the marketplace and again, in late September 2008, to address the detection of the chemical melamine in foods containing dairy ingredients from China. Melamine is used in the manufacture of plastics. About 290,000 children in China became sick with urinary ailments, including kidney stones , and six died, after milk was deliberately adulterated with melamine.
Reports of this food emergency initially focussed on the use of the adulterated milk in infant formula. Since then, melamine has been found in a number of food products that contain small amounts of dairy and soy ingredients from China.
Under the provisions of the Protocol, FSANZ and other agencies immediately began the process of identifying which food imports may have been affected by melamine adulteration in China, ranging from infant formula to biscuits, and other processed foods containing dairy and soy ingredients. This process fed into the discussions of a Melamine Incident Team, comprising representatives of all states and territories, the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service, the Departments of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and of Health and Ageing, and FSANZ.
AQIS quickly established that Australia does not import infant formula from China for quarantine reasons. Also, no Australian or New Zealand infant formula manufacturers use any ingredients from China. Alerted by regulatory agencies in Asia to the presence of melamine in other products, Australian enforcement agencies identified suspect products on sale and sent samples for testing.
By this time, FSANZ had been able to establish that a melamine level above 2.5 milligrams per kilogram is an indicator of adulteration of a food with the chemical. As melamine is a component of a wide range of plastics used in food related materials, lower levels of melamine can occur in food through contact with these materials. Our risk assessment showed that levels below 2.5mg/kg do not present any health or safety risks to consumers, though a lower level of 1mg/kg was set for infant formula. All Australian regulators accepted this conclusion – which was also adopted by most other countries, including China.
The melamine team met by teleconference on a daily and then less frequent basis as the incident progressed. The New Zealand Food Safety Authority provided some of the early melamine test results for White Rabbit Candy and, although New Zealand maintains its own food safety arrangements, staff at NZFSA made valuable contributions to the work of the team.
FSANZ received regular reports from Australian missions in Asia on the situation and, at all times, exchanged information with national counterparts in Europe, the United Kingdom, New Zealand, the United States, Canada, Singapore, Hong Kong and other Asian agencies.
At the time of writing, 11 products have been voluntarily withdrawn from sale in Australia, thanks to the speedy actions of importers and a manufacturer. Although the incident attracted enormous media attention, it does not appear to have shaken confidence in government ability to safeguard food.
Work on the melamine incident continues, though in consultation with the jurisdictions we have agreed to a stand-down and will shortly enter the debriefing phases of the incident. My brief description of events probably obscures the enormous resources that FSANZ and other agencies have had to devote to the incident. I think we can be well pleased with the result.
Steve McCutcheon
(See also FSANZ sails through its latest test)
FSANZ activity around nanotechnology
Food regulators around the world are watching the development of nanotechnology and considering the potential risks and benefits.
Within Australia and New Zealand, several government agencies, including FSANZ, are monitoring the emergence of commercial applications of nanotechnology. FSANZ’s focus is to consider the potential applications of nanotechnology in relation to food safety and regulation.
FSANZ has yet to receive any applications to amend the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code (the Code) to permit any foods developed using nanotechnology. If we do receive an application, existing standards in the Code - such as those for additives, processing aids, nutritive substances and novel foods - could be applied to carry out a premarket risk assessment to establish safety. If, after a comprehensive scientific assessment, we cannot determine a food to be safe, we will not approve it.
Recently, we reviewed the requirements for applications set out in theFSANZ Application Handbook. The handbook requires applicants wishing to amend the Code to furnish us with all information relevant to our assessment of the safety of the food. Now that nanotechnology is emerging as an issue for consumers, FSANZ has amended the Application Handbook to clarify further the circumstances in which we might require additional information about particle characteristics.
This information on particle characteristics will allow us to assess substances containing nanoscale particles and help us decide whether or not to make amendments to existing standards in the Code. Industry and all other stakeholders were given the opportunity to comment on the proposed amendments to the Application Handbook during a four week public consultation period, from 1 October to 29 October 2008.
On 11 July 2008, the Australian Government released the report, A Review of Possible Impacts of Nanotechnology on Australia’s Regulatory Framework (the Monash Report) http://www.innovation.gov.au/Section/Innovation/Documents/MonashReport2008.pdf . This independent report by Monash University was commissioned by the Australian Office of Nanotechnology and examines the adequacy of Australia’s regulatory framework in relation to nanotechnology.
FSANZ has considered the findings of the Monash Report and we believe we are well situated in relation to the future regulation of foods that may incorporate nanotechnology. We have the capacity to establish different permissions in the Code for different forms of particulate substances, where the scientific assessment establishes there is a valid basis to do so. Limits around weights, volumes, types of foods and technological function can be set in the Code.
The New Zealand Government Nanotechnology Regulatory sub-group held its first meeting in June 2008. The group was formed to share information, coordinate discussions and develop advice on environmental health and safety, the risks of nanotechnology, and regulatory approaches for managing the impacts of nanotechnologies. A FSANZ staff member participates in the group, which meets quarterly.
How the FSANZ Regulatory Analysis Unit works
FSANZ has a long history of using economic analysis to predict how changes to regulations in the Food Standards Code affect the economies of Australia and New Zealand.
In keeping with the commitment of the governments of Australia and New Zealand to increase the transparency and rigour of regulatory analysis, FSANZ established a Regulatory Analysis Unit (RAU) in 2007. RAU now has three full time economists; two in our Canberra office, and one in Wellington.
Economics is the science that deals with the production, allocation, and use of goods and services. A major subdivision of economics is microeconomics, which is the study of how the economic system affects one industry or parts of the economic system. Economists at FSANZ study how food standards affect consumers and the food industry.
Our economists work closely with other staff during the food standards development process to build evidence to make sure the economic effects of food standards are thoroughly considered.
FSANZ gained valuable information to aid our decision making from a survey RAU commissioned to estimate the costs of changing product labels to comply with proposed changes to the Food Standards Code (see the Spring 2008 edition of Food Standards News). This information enables us to answer questions such as: what costs could industry face if, for example, we require manufacturers to place a new mandatory warning statement on food labels?
RAU also considers the impact on consumers. While FSANZ was recently developing a standard to regulate nutrition, health and related claims, RAU commissioned a study to illustrate the potential health benefits to the community that could arise from consumers switching to healthier foods on the basis of health claims. We used the study’s findings to consider whether or not the proposal would have a positive effect on the health of consumers.
The study created models to see what would happen if foods were reformulated to decrease their sodium or saturated fat levels. One finding was that a 25 per cent reduction in sodium could decrease the incidence of strokes by 10 per cent and myocardial infarction by 12 per cent, and that this would represent a significant economic benefit to individuals and the community.
Regulations are important for the proper functioning of society and the economy. The Australian and New Zealand Governments’ challenge is to deliver regulations that effectively address problems and give maximum benefit to communities. They have rigorous requirements for considering the effects on the economy of new regulations.
Two agencies are responsible for making sure these requirements are met: the Office of Best Practice Regulation (OBPR) in Australia and the Ministry of Economic Development (MED) in New Zealand.
RAU is also responsible for ensuring FSANZ adopts the best practice principles set out by these agencies and consults them about our analysis of individual standards.
Capacity building in APEC economies
FSANZ continues to help emerging nations from member economies of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) to develop food safety laws, standards and enforcement systems.
In line with our ongoing commitment to APEC, our international section organised a capacity building project titled Developing Food Laws, Standards and Enforcement Systems and held it in Hanoi, Vietnam, in September 2008.
The AusAID funded project included participants from Vietnam, the Republic of the Philippines, Indonesia, Papua New Guinea and the People’s Republic of China. The objective was to develop the skills and knowledge of the delegates from these APEC member economies by developing a more robust approach to strengthening food safety standards and practices in the region.
The first phase of the training program involved an intensive five day training workshop covering the development, introduction and enforcement of food standards.
The second and current phase of the program requires participants to do a four to six month practical, in-country project that will encourage them to directly apply the knowledge learned in the workshop.
Experts in food law development and standards enforcement from both FSANZ and state and territory jurisdictions are providing technical support and mentoring during this phase of the program.
The third and final phase will be a follow-up workshop to be held in Vietnam in February 2009, when participants will present the outcomes of their project work.
At the APEC Ministerial meeting and the APEC Economic Leaders meeting, food safety was again recognised as a key priority area within the APEC region. The ministers and leaders strongly endorsed the work done by the forum.
Staff focus: Chief Scientist Dr Paul Brent
If you listen to radio or watch television regularly, the chances are you will have seen or heard FSANZ Chief Scientist, Dr Paul Brent, speaking to the media about the latest food issue.
While we have a number of highly qualified specialists in the agency, Dr Brent, with his broad and eclectic knowledge of food science, not to mention his affable personality, is particularly well suited to communicate his knowledge to the media.
Born in Newcastle, where he also attended university and obtained his BSc and PhD (in clinical pharmacology), Dr Brent grew up as a dedicated surfer and still feels he has some salt in his veins
‘Being in Canberra I do miss the surf, but now I very much enjoy gardening,’ he says.
He is also an avid reader of spy novels and fantasy stories, collects shirts, ties, cigars and wine, paints creatively and listens to a range of music from rhythm and blues, through ‘late night’ mood jazz, to Debussy.
Having developed his professional expertise in toxicology, behavioural psychopharmacology and brain research, Dr Brent moved on to research basic and clinical pharmacology, neuroscience and biochemistry at the University of Newcastle’s Faculty of Medicine.
He ventured into the Australian Public Service in 1997, joining the Therapeutic Goods Administration’s Chemical Products Assessment Section, Chemicals and Non-Prescription Drugs Branch in 1997 as a senior toxicologist.
Former FSANZ Chief Executive Officer, Graeme Peachey, head-hunted Dr Brent in 2000, offering him the challenge of managing FSANZ’s new genetic modification of foods analysis team.
‘In the team we had expertise that put us at the cutting edge of GM issues so we were able to influence what the rest of the world was doing, including Codex,’ says Dr Brent, who rates the leadership of this team as one of his great achievements with FSANZ.
Other achievements include helping to set up the APEC countries’ Food Safety Cooperation Forum and developing the role of FSANZ’s Product Safety Standards section, building up skills to deal with risk management of a wide range of standards issues, and taking a lead role in managing emerging chemical safety issues, such as mercury in fish and acrylamide.
Most recently, Dr Brent was invited by an international panel to join the Expert Committee for the Centre of Food Safety in Hong Kong, where he will help broaden and strengthen Hong Kong’s consultative framework on food safety issues.
In the few moments he has to himself - when not guiding the science at FSANZ and jetting around the world to speak at international food safety forums – Dr Brent enjoys cooking and dining on fine foods, particularly oysters, anything Italian and Spanish tapas.
Meanwhile, if you see a tall, well-built man riding around Canberra on an Aprilia scooter (with L plates), give him a wide berth; it will probably be Dr Brent out saving the world.
Mandatory iodine fortification now less than a year away
It has been a long and complex task, but by October 2009 Australia and New Zealand will have a food standard requiring the mandatory fortification of food with iodine.
The New Zealand-only standard was accepted by Food Ministers in March 2008 and will become enforceable in September 2009. The standard requires the replacement of non-iodised salt with iodised salt in bread. However, bread represented as organic is exempt, consistent with the mandatory folic acid fortification standard.
Meanwhile, FSANZ received confirmation that iodine deficiency is prevalent and severe enough to warrant intervention in Australia too, and that mandatory fortification is the most cost effective strategy to redress this. In response, FSANZ recommended that the New Zealand-only Standard be amended to also apply to Australia and become a joint standard.
The joint Australian and New Zealand standard was accepted by food ministers in October 2008 and will become enforceable in October 2009. New Zealand will still be required to introduce the New Zealand-only standard by September 2009.
The implementation dates for mandatory iodine fortification generally align with the mandatory folic acid fortification standards and provide industry with sufficient time to increase their production of iodised salt, and to change their food labels.
In considering mandatory fortification of food with iodine, FSANZ comprehensively assessed the potential health benefits and risks of increasing iodine intakes across the population. We also assessed the overall impact of mandatory fortification on consumers, industry and government enforcement agencies. Bread is particularly suitable as the vehicle for iodised salt because it is a food that is widely eaten in both Australia and New Zealand.
Replacing non-iodised salt with iodised salt in bread has the potential to address iodine deficiency across much of the Australian and New Zealand population, and prevent it from becoming more serious in the future.
FSANZ will liaise with other government and health agencies to disseminate key messages about iodine fortification, and with industry to help them implement the standard. As with the mandatory folic acid fortification standard, we will also work with government and state and territory jurisdictions on a national system for monitoring the effects of mandatory iodine fortification.
The use of iodised salt in bread should not impede public health initiatives to lower the salt content of bread in the future. If salt levels do decline, this will be assessed as part of the ongoing monitoring and adjustments to the mandatory fortification level can be made as needed.
Introducing the new FSANZ Maori Reference Group
FSANZ is pleased to announce the formation of a new Maori Reference Group. The group is known as Nga Kaitohutohu Kounga Kai, which means ‘the people able to guide others in food and nutrition from a Maori world view’.
The role of the New Zealand-based Kaitohutohu will be to provide advice to FSANZ on Maori culture and community processes with regard to:
- food standards issues of significance to Maori
- evaluating strategies to involve Maori in food standards issues
- strategies for effective communication with Maori
- relevant consultation activities.
The Kaitohutohu will work closely with FSANZ to identify food standards issues which may affect the Maori community in some way. Information concerning applications and proposals to amend the Code, that the group identifies as having significance to Maori, will then be distributed to Maori Network Database participants for their comment. The Kaitohutohu and Maori Network will thereby deliver a Maori perspective and incorporating Maori aspirations into standards development.
In July, the FSANZ Board confirmed the appointment of the new members to the Nga Kaitohutohu Kounga Kai. They are:
Hayden Potaka: Consumer representative of Whakapapa Nga Rauru. Hayden is with the Ministry of Maori Development – Te Puni Kokiri - and is currently a sitting member of the FSANZ Consumer Liaison Committee.
Mason Ngawhika: Nutritionist of the Te Arawa. Mason is a health promotion practitioner and is currently the Maori resource Co-coordinator Auckland Regional Public Health Service.
Ann Thompson: Public health representative of Ngati Kahungunu , Ann is a Health Protection Officer with Public Health South and has qualifications in applied science and environmental science. She has been with Public Health South for six years and has a lead role in food safety programs and food safety promotion
The former Maori Reference Group to FSANZ, the Kahui Kounga Kai, was originally established in 2000 to provide advice to ANZFA (former name for FSANZ) on Maori culture and community processes in relation to food standards issues.
However, given changes to the way in which FSANZ will be consulting with Maori stakeholders, the decision was made to disestablish the Kahui Kounga Kai at the end of 2007. FSANZ wishes to acknowledge the significant contribution from the members of the Kahui in supporting FSANZ consultation with Maori and providing a Maori perspective on FSANZ activities.
Lessons from the melamine contamination incident
Until 18 months ago, most people associated the word ‘melamine’ with plastic picnic cups and plates and tough benchtop coverings.
That association quickly soured after the international media began reporting in April 2007 that wheat gluten, wheat flour, rice protein and corn gluten imported from China, and used as an ingredient in pet food, appeared to be making animals sick in the United States. A number of animals subsequently died.
The common ingredient in these pet foods was the chemical melamine, a by-product of the plastics industry and one not approved for use in food. Melamine was added to food to raise apparent protein levels. It mimics protein in nutrition tests for milk and in products such as wheat gluten and chicken feed. But when ingested in large amounts, it can cause kidney stones or death in children and animals.
While FSANZ does not regulate pet food, the chance that some of the contaminated gluten might end up in the human food supply prompted precautionary dialogue between FSANZ, the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service (AQIS), New Zealand’s Food Safety Authority (NZFSA) and the Australian states and territories.
‘The realisation of the size of the problem meant that things became pretty hectic for us pretty quickly. We knew it was big, yet people were methodical and calm at the same time,’ said Chief Scientist Dr Paul Brent.
‘Even before surveillance and tests on high risk products revealed our sixth contaminated product withdrawl, we knew we were involved in one of the biggest food contamination incidents in the world. The up-side was that we had food safety agencies literally around the world working together and sharing information in a very impressive way.’
Reports from our international networks, including briefings from Australia’s embassies and High Commissions around the world, showed how other countries were discovering melamine in milk-based products. On 9 October, the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) circulated what the international community had agreed were acceptable safe limits for melamine contaminants (2.5 mg/kg) together with lists of products contaminated, lists of laboratories and analytical methods and what China was doing about the problem.
As expected, the media showed great interest in the running story and FSANZ Communication spokesperson Lydia Buchtmann was flat out fielding calls – up to 60 a day during the height of the incident - because she was not just speaking about FSANZ issues but those for all the states and territories as the central national media coordinator.
‘It was the biggest food safety incident I’ve had to deal with in my 11 years with FSANZ,’ Ms Buchtmann said.
‘We had to ensure everyone, from industry to consumer, received simply worded, consistent messages as quickly as possible – which meant taking enquiries from 6am till 10pm daily. We also took a considerable number of international media enquiries.’
In the end, all the planning and practice for such an event paid off. By the second week in November the number of actionable reports was dwindling. The situation was under control and at the FSANZ melamine incident team meeting on 10 November, all parties agreed to go into stand down mode, with the rider that the team could be back in action immediately in the event of any further incidents.
‘We really could get the incident team back together at a moment’s notice now,’ Ms Buchtmann said.
‘The key message we’ve taken from this is that the system works really well. The strength comes from embedding our communicators in with the incident team. We are shoulder to shoulder with the executive and scientists and know at any time exactly what is going on and, thanks to new media like our website, we can put out information immediately for people to see for themselves.’
Meet the FSANZ food recall coordinator
Australian and New Zealand government agencies constantly monitor our food supply to ensure it is safe, and that foods comply with standards for microbiological contaminants, pesticide residue limits and chemical contamination.
If these agencies identify any food as a risk to public health and safety it is recalled. FSANZ is the coordinating agency for all food recalls in Australia and we are about to publish the Sixth Edition of the Food Industry Recall Protocol, a guide to conducting a food recall and writing a food recall plan.
Recalls are different from withdrawls. Recalls are generally voluntary and are based on the fact that the food poses a risk to public health and safety. Withdrawls are not so much about safety as quality issues, such as if the food has an unusual colour or texture or is underweight.
Food manufacturers and consumers also do their bit by reporting foods that are unsafe, for whatever reason, to their local council or state/territory health department. Consumers often send their complaints directly to the food manufacturer, and the manufacturer then liaises with the st