Do farm audits improve milk quality?

Abstract

Milk quality is assessed using bulk milk analysis and by farm audits in the Netherlands. However, the extent of the effect that dairy farm audits have on milk quality is unknown. Data from over 13,000 audits performed on 12,855 dairy farms from February 2006 to April 2008 were merged with laboratory test results of 325,150 bulk milk samples collected 6 mo before and after the audit. A linear mixed model with the method of restricted maximum likelihood was conducted to study whether the total bacterial counts (TBC) of bulk milk were lower during the periods before and after the dairy farm audit. Results showed that TBC values were 2 to 6% lower (i.e., 0.010 to 0.026 log cfu/mL) for a period from 1.5 to at least 6 mo after an audit. Additionally, several variables were significantly associated with bulk milk TBC values: seasonality, total number of attention points (given if some checklist points were not appropriate), audit type, audit result, and the categories milking equipment maintenance, and utility room-tank maintenance. The TBC values increased with a higher level of attention points. Furthermore, the farms rejected based on the audit results had the highest average TBC values and the approved farms had the lowest values. If dairy farms had an overall negative audit assessment and consequently needed a re-audit in the following year, the TBC values of bulk milk were more likely to be higher. Auditing may provide dairy farmers the opportunity to receive advice about factors that influence bulk milk TBC values, for a period of at least 6 mo following the audit.

Regulation of Lipid Droplet Size in Mammary Epithelial Cells by Remodeling of Membrane Lipid Composition—A Potential Mechanism

“…Milk lipids are present in the form of milk fat globules (MFGs) that are secreted in a wide range of sizes, from 200 nm to over 15 μm, depending on the animal [1,2], genetic disposition [3], lactation stage [4], season [5] and diet [6,7]. The best established factor associated with MFG size is total fat content in the milk [8–10], suggesting a link between the metabolic and lipogenic capacity of mammary gland cells and MFG size.…”

“…Because MFG size is associated with its phospholipid composition [3,7,25,26] it is likely that the composition of membrane surrounding the intracellular lipid droplet during its formation and secretion has a role in determining the MFG diameter.…”

The Evolution and Cultural Framing of Food Safety Management Systems—Where From and Where Next?

“…Auditor fatigue will decrease the reliability of the verification activity and due to the rigid application and nonreflective use of a checklist can also drive “evaluation myopia.” This also may lead to an inability of the auditor to identify side effects or side impacts during the audit, that is, they have a linear rather than a holistic auditing approach (Manning, ; Manning & Soon, ; Manning, ; Martz, ). Even though checklist based auditing might be technically correct, there may be no incentive for the auditor to identify wider material weaknesses or deficiencies in the FSMS (Flores‐Miyamoto, Reij, & Velthuis, ). Indeed, the considerable resources employed in developing manuals, guidebooks, protocols, and checklists for audits are wasted when the contribution of such tools to audit efficiency and effectiveness is unclear (Läikkö‐Roto & Nevas, ; Leeuw, ).…”

Triangulation

“…This can result in an auditor only verifying the quality and food safety criteria that are specifically defined in the standard, thus unknown or emerging issues may well go unnoticed and unexamined (Manning, 2013;Manning and Soon, 2014). Flores-Miyamoto et al, (2014) argue that whilst checklist based auditing might be technically correct, myopia can occur if auditors use a checklist to prove they have undertaken the audit appropriately, but there may be no incentive for the auditor to identify wider material weaknesses or deficiencies in the QMS or FSMS. It is argued that there are considerable resources employed in the development and excessive use of manuals, guidebooks, protocols, and checklists for audits often when the contribution of such tools to audit efficiency and effectiveness is unclear (Leeuw, 2011;Läikkö-Roto and Nevas 2014).…”