Views of veterinarians and meat inspectors concerning the practical application of visual meat inspection on domestic pigs in Finland

Abstract

The post-mortem inspection of domestic pigs within the European Union was revised in 2014, primarily to include visual meat inspection of each carcase and offal. Palpations and incisions were removed from routine meat inspection procedures, as they are mostly used to detect pathological lesions caused by organisms irrelevant for public health, and instead can cause cross-contamination of carcases with foodborne pathogens. However, examination of all external surfaces of the carcase and organs, declaration of patho-physiological lesions as unfit for human consumption, and possibility for minimal handling of carcases and offals were held in place. In addition, the European Food Safety Authority suggested that palpation and incisions should be performed outside the slaughter line, but this was not incorporated in the revised legislation. We surveyed in 2014 the opinions of meat inspectors and veterinarians using an online questionnaire to determine what practical measures are required for the visual meat inspection procedure and when meat inspection staff consider additional palpations and incisions necessary. Based on the survey, turning the carcase and organs or technical arrangements such as mirrors were seen necessary to view all external surfaces. In addition, the pluck set cannot be trimmed on the side line. Local lesions, such as abscesses and lesions in the lymph nodes, signs of systemic infection and lymphoma, were the major lesions requiring additional post-mortem meat inspection procedures. Meat inspection personnel raised concerns on the poor quality of food chain information and export requirements demanding palpations and incisions. The efficient use of visual meat inspection requires legislation to better support the implementation and application of it, changes in the slaughter line layout and a possibility to classify incoming pig batches based on their risk.

Predictivity of Antemortem Findings on Postmortem Inspection in Italian Heavy Pigs Slaughterhouses

“…However, results from AMI can contribute to several aspects concerning pig health and welfare, as well suggest the actions that should be undertaken when certain conditions are met at the abattoir. In fact, although PMI in pigs is only visual in European slaughterhouses [ 10 ], unless differently specified by procedures required for exporting meat and meat products in non-EU countries [ 14 ], the official veterinarians (OVs) can decide regarding additional procedures such as palpation and incision of organs in cases of a suspected risk for public health, animal health, or animal welfare during the AMI [ 15 ]. Therefore, operations performed during AMI may help OVs in identifying the batches of pigs that are not suitable for visual-only inspection and that require more thorough inspection procedures [ 16 ].…”

Additional post-mortem inspection procedures and laboratory methods as supplements for visual meat inspection of finishing pigs in Europe—Use and variability

“…Export requirements were the respondents' main reason for not applying visual meat inspection. The question of export requirements has also been raised in previous studies on visual meat inspection (Alban et al 2021;Antunović et al 2021;Baekbo et al 2015;Laukkanen-Ninios et al 2020;Riess and Hoelzer 2020). The requirement to conduct traditional inspection on meat destined for export complicates logistics and trade and increases costs, but at the end boils down to whether business is possible or not.…”

“…Therefore, it might be assumed that visual meat inspection would be fairly established, and that meat inspection is performed in the same way in all EU Member States. However, there are reasons for differences, such as export requirements that limit the use of visual meat inspection in export-oriented slaughterhouses (Alban et al 2021;Laukkanen-Ninios et al 2020;Riess and Hoelzer 2020). Also, the use of risk-based approaches in meat inspection, which focuses on high-risk hazards and aims to enhance meat safety throughout the food chain (Blagojević et al 2021), affects how meat inspection is performed.…”

Adding value to food chain information: using data on pig welfare and antimicrobial use on-farm to predict meat inspection outcomes

“…However, batches of incoming pigs with a high frequency of health and welfare lesions are not fit for visual MI [ 3 , 4 ]. These pigs need closer attention from the meat inspector, and palpation and incision procedures are likely also required, which entails a reduction in line speed [ 5 ]. Furthermore, although these lesions are not normally associated with foodborne zoonotic agents [ 6 ], palpation and incision techniques increase the risk of microbial cross-contamination [ 6 – 9 ].…”