Literature DB >> 9160530

Meat safety consequences of implementing visual postmortem meat inspection procedures in Danish slaughter pigs.

J Mousing1, J Kyrval, T K Jensen, B Aalbaek, J Buttenschøn, B Svensmark, P Willeberg.   

Abstract

The consequences of a change from a traditional meat inspection procedure, including manual handling, palpation and incision, to an entirely visual postmortem meat inspection procedure in Danish slaughter pigs were assessed by a comparative study of the two methods in 183,383 slaughter pigs. Out of 58 lesion codes (selected with a prevalence > or = 5.5 x 10(-5)), 26 (45 per cent) were assessed either as merely aesthetic or as the healed stage of an earlier lesion and nine (15 per cent) as active, but local processes, occurring only in non-edible tissue. Five lesion codes (9 per cent) were assessed as active, non-abscessal processes occurring in edible tissue, caused by swine-specific pathogens and 10 (17 per cent) were abscessal or pyaemic lesions occurring in edible tissue. Seven lesion codes (12 per cent) may be associated with consumer health hazards (two frequently and five rarely), and one with occupational health hazards. It was estimated that per 1000 carcases, an additional 2.5 with abscessal or pyaemic lesions (in edible tissue) containing Staphylococcus aureus, 4 x 10(-4) containing ochratoxin, 0.2 with arthritis due to Erysipelothrix rhusiopathiae, 0.1 with caseous lymphadenitis, 0.7 faecally contaminated with Salmonella species, and 3.4 faecally contaminated with Yersinia enterocolitica would remain undetected as a result of changing from the traditional to the visual inspection procedure. Two valuable reasons for implementing a visual control system are the potential for decreased cross-contamination (no handling, cutting and incision) and reduced inspection costs. The resources released as a result may be reallocated to hygiene and surveillance programmes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9160530     DOI: 10.1136/vr.140.18.472

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vet Rec        ISSN: 0042-4900            Impact factor:   2.695


  3 in total

1.  Swine health impact on carcass contamination and human foodborne risk.

Authors:  H Scott Hurd; Jean Brudvig; James Dickson; Jovan Mirceta; Miroslava Polovinski; Neal Matthews; Ronald Griffith
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2008 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.792

2.  Good animal welfare makes economic sense: potential of pig abattoir meat inspection as a welfare surveillance tool.

Authors:  Sarah Harley; Simon More; Laura Boyle; Niamh O' Connell; Alison Hanlon
Journal:  Ir Vet J       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 2.146

3.  Development and test of a visual-only meat inspection system for heavy pigs in Northern Italy.

Authors:  Sergio Ghidini; Emanuela Zanardi; Pierluigi Aldo Di Ciccio; Silvio Borrello; Giancarlo Belluzi; Sarah Guizzardi; Adriana Ianieri
Journal:  BMC Vet Res       Date:  2018-01-05       Impact factor: 2.741

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.