Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
HAV or rotavirus infection through a zoonotic route. Additionally, the noroviruses
have shown potential, albeit no confi rmed zoonotic route has been documented.
Surveillance for noroviruses in animals has revealed that they can harbor human
noroviruses (Mathijs et al.
2012
; Mattison et al.
2007
) and that without proper han-
dling of animals could lead to transmission of the virus to humans, particularly
farmers and food workers. Interestingly, Summa et al. (
2012
) have suggested that
pet dogs may also serve as a route for infection. While this may not pose a risk for
food processing, at the food handling level, where pets may be a part of a food ser-
vice complement, a potential risk could be implied.
6.5
Control Measures
The achievements of HACCP and GHP implementation have aided in the increase
of food safety but as seen earlier, there are gaps associated with these regulatory
protocols in terms of preventing virus contamination of foods and subsequent food-
borne infection. There have been a number of methods tested to inactivate viruses
in the food continuum with an emphasis on retail. While each has demonstrated its
potential to prevent infection of the consumer, there are still specifi c obstacles that
need to be addressed. Moreover, in certain cases, there is little current feasibility for
the incorporation of the methods at the retail stage; they are best used during prior
steps of the food continuum.
Hand hygiene
: The most effective and simplest means of controlling virus transmis-
sion is proper hand hygiene. In the context of food safety, the most effective means
involves the use of soap for a minimum of 20 s followed by rinsing with water (Todd
et al.
2010b
). The use of other hand hygiene products, such as alcohol-based
handrubs, may be effective against the majority of foodborne bacterial pathogens
but the active ingredient, ethanol, is known to be ineffective against HAV and has
limited effi cacy against the noroviruses (Liu et al.
2010
; Park et al.
2010
; Sattar
et al.
2011
). While there is validity to the incorporation of alcohol-based handrubs
in any food safety environment as a supplement to handwashing, these products
cannot supplant regular handwashing.
The use of hand hygiene practices in the food continuum has been investigated
(Michaels et al.
2004
; Todd et al.
2010a
,
b
) and there is an incorporation of hand
hygiene in HACCP and GHP guidelines. Yet the use of hand hygiene measures at
all stages of the food continuum continues to be an issue, particularly with compli-
ance (Hoelzl et al.
2013
; Strohbehn et al.
2004
; Todd et al.
2010a
). In 2008, for
example, Strohbehn et al. (
2008
) conducted an assessment of foodservice workers
in restaurants, childcare institutions, and facilities providing assisted living for the
elderly and schools. In comparison to the Food Code requirements of handwashing,
which ranged from 7 to 29 handwashing moments per hour, the results were disap-
pointing. In the context of providing RTE foods, this result suggests that there is a
signifi cant risk posed to the consumer. Similar results have been seen in other retail
markets such as butcheries, supermarkets, and delis (Tebbutt
2007
).
