Meat Safety

Fung, Daniel Y. C.; Kastner, Justin; Kastner, Curtis L.; Vanier, Martha; Hajmeer, Maha N.; Phebus, Randall K.; Smith, J. Scott; Penner, Karen P.; Marsden, James L.

doi:10.1201/9780203908082.ch8

Cited by 5 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The eradication of E. coli O157:H7 on farms and in feedlots is near impossible (Fung et al. 2001; Hancock et al.…”

Section: Beef Cattle Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2001); however, much research has been done to develop preventative measures on the farm to decrease the prevalence of the bacteria in healthy cattle (CDC 2004). Two such approaches have been proposed: competitive exclusion and vaccination (Buchanan and Doyle 1997; Fung et al. 2001).…”

Section: Beef Cattle Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Holding pens, slaughter and dressing processes, carcass skinning and evisceration have all been identified as points of entry for bacterial contamination (USDA 1993). Contamination is also possible from walls, floors, air, personnel, knives and protective garments (Fung et al. 2001).…”

Section: Beef Cattle Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the efficacy of water spray depends heavily on the parameters at which it is applied. Contact time, water pressure, water temperature and the type of equipment used for application can all affect the success of water sprays (Fung et al. 2001).…”

Section: Decontamination Of Beef Carcassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hot water washing is affected by the same parameters as cold water sprays (i.e., contact time, temperature, pressure, etc.). Cold water sprays still have some applications in the meat processing plant for the removal of debris from the hide of the animal, although there is a limited effect on the microbial safety of the product (Fung et al. 2001).…”

Section: Decontamination Of Beef Carcassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

PREVENTION AND DECONTAMINATION OF ESCHERICHIA COLI O157:H7 ON RAW BEEF CARCASSES IN COMMERCIAL BEEF ABATTOIRS

Edwards

Fung

2006

Rapid Methods Automation Mic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There are an estimated 76 million cases of foodborne illnesses in the U.S.A. every year, resulting in $5–17 billion in economic and productivity losses annually. Over 5000 deaths a year are caused by foodborne illnesses, one‐third of which can be attributed to meat and poultry products. Over the last 10 years, efforts have been made to ensure better meat safety and to control Escherichia coli O157:H7 contamination in beef carcasses and products. The classification of E. coli O157:H7 as an adulterant in raw beef products has prompted the investigation into better processing aids and intervention strategies to ensure meat safety. The vast majority of slaughter contamination originates from contact with fecally soiled hides during the dehiding process. There are many decontamination methods available to beef processors, and others are being investigated for their efficacy at inactivating pathogens. These include hide‐on decontamination, knife trimming, steam vacuuming, spray chilling and washing, lactoferricin B, steam pasteurization and irradiation. Organic acid spray washes remain to be among the most popular methods for beef carcass decontamination. However, acid tolerance may eventually render these sanitizers ineffective against E. coli O157:H7. Research shows that hide‐on decontamination may be better suited for preventing carcass contamination from soiled hides. Cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) has had great success in laboratory and pilot plant studies for reducing contamination to carcasses during dehiding. Although CPC is not approved for use inside beef processing plants, its success in the laboratory and in the poultry industry provides the potential for its approval for application for beef. The overall reductions of any given decontamination method must be weighed against the cost of the method. Cost/benefit analysis shows that multihurdle methods of decontamination may be the most cost‐effective methods when compared to using a single intervention to achieve the same level of reductions. Irradiation, which has the highest inactivation rate of E. coli O157:H7 (5.2 log cfu/cm2), also incurs the highest costs in operation and installation fees. Therefore, using knife trimming in combination with another decontamination method is the most cost‐effective method at achieving food safety.

show abstract

“…The eradication of E. coli O157:H7 on farms and in feedlots is near impossible (Fung et al. 2001; Hancock et al.…”

Section: Beef Cattle Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Beef Cattle Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Beef Cattle Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Decontamination Of Beef Carcassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Decontamination Of Beef Carcassesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

PREVENTION AND DECONTAMINATION OF ESCHERICHIA COLI O157:H7 ON RAW BEEF CARCASSES IN COMMERCIAL BEEF ABATTOIRS

Edwards

Fung

2006

Rapid Methods Automation Mic

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

At-Line Methods for Controlling Microbial Growth and Spoilage in Meat Processing Abattoirs

Fung

Edwards²,

Crozier-Dodson³

Meat Biotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intervention Technologies for Ensuring Microbiological Safety of Meat: Current and Future Trends

Chen¹,

Ren²,

Seow³

et al. 2012

Comp Rev Food Sci Food Safe

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article reviews current and future techniques that are applied in the meat industry to ensure product safety. Consumer demand for high-quality food and raised economic standards have triggered the development of emergent technologies to replace traditional well-established preservation processes. Some promising nonthermal and thermal technologies, such as chemical and biological interventions, high hydrostatic pressure (HHP), irradiation, active packaging, natural antimicrobials and microwave, radiofrequency, and steam pasteurization, are under consideration for the preservation of meat products. All these alternative technologies are designed to be mild, energy-conserving, environmentally friendly, and maintaining natural appearance and flavor, while eliminating pathogens and spoilage microorganisms. Their combination, as in the hurdle theory, may improve their effectiveness for decontamination. The objective of this article is to reflect on the possibilities and especially the limitations of the previously mentioned technologies.

show abstract

Meat Safety

Cited by 5 publications

References 15 publications

PREVENTION AND DECONTAMINATION OF ESCHERICHIA COLI O157:H7 ON RAW BEEF CARCASSES IN COMMERCIAL BEEF ABATTOIRS

PREVENTION AND DECONTAMINATION OF ESCHERICHIA COLI O157:H7 ON RAW BEEF CARCASSES IN COMMERCIAL BEEF ABATTOIRS

At-Line Methods for Controlling Microbial Growth and Spoilage in Meat Processing Abattoirs

Intervention Technologies for Ensuring Microbiological Safety of Meat: Current and Future Trends

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About