Mind the gaps: how can food safety gaps be addressed in developing nations?

As global food systems integrate, to meet the demands of a growing global population, safe and healthy agriculture value-chains will be essential to maintaining public health worldwide. In many ways, the current global food production landscape is made up of “mice and men.” Meaning that the food sector within and across most countries includes both large-scale corporate agriculture production and varying degrees of small-scale agriculture production; the variation being the interpretation of small scale, which is highly dependent upon the country. This structure presents challenges for the creation of effective food safety systems in many countries, and can contribute to deficiencies in monitoring and control of foodborne hazards within agriculture value-chains. These deficiencies can lead to outbreaks of foodborne disease, impact customer acceptability, and lead to food waste and loss. Recent estimates by the World Health Organization (WHO) have determined that “the global burden of Foodborne Disease is comparable to those of the three major infectious diseases, HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis” (Havelaar et al., 2015). This has solidified presumptions and indications that unsafe food production has major impacts on global public health, human and country productivity, and development outcomes. Furthermore, these findings pose the question: What is the role of food safety in global agriculture value-chain development, and how can improvements to global food safety improve agriculture productivity worldwide? The answer to this question may lead to innovative approaches to global food systems that will assist in producing enough safe and nutritious food to feed the world. The purpose of this article is to explore key concepts per- taining to food safety and the development of effective, effi- cient, and equitable food safety systems on a global scale. As the authors, we recognize that there are numerous factors involved in the topic of global food safety systems and food security. Due to this complexity, we have chosen to focus on a few concepts that we view as holding the most potential for impact, as well as directly influencing food safety and public health outcomes. Furthermore, based upon the readership of this journal, the article will also highlight the role of animal production in global food safety, as well as in creating healthy agriculture value-chains and healthy people

Effects of Thawing Method on Palatability Traits, Quality Attributes, and Thawing Characteristics of Beef Steaks

While there are various studies investigating the effect of freezing on palatability characteristics, thawing has not received the same level of interest. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the effects of various thawing methods on beef palatability. Paired beef strip loins (n = 15 pairs) were obtained from a commercial processing facility for palatability evaluation, and 6 additional strip loins were collected for thawing characteristic data. The paired loins were sectioned into 6 sections of 4 steaks each, and each section assigned a thawing method. Thaw methods included thawing in the refrigerator, cold water, microwave, hot water, on the counter, and cooking from frozen. Steaks were aged a total of 21 d prior to freezing. Consumer sensory panelists (N = 120) found no differences (P > 0.05) among all thawing methods for each palatability characteristic. Within trained sensory panels (n = 8 panelists/session), thawing in the refrigerator and cold water were rated higher (P < 0.05) for overall tenderness than thawing in the microwave and cooking from frozen. Cooking steaks from frozen was rated higher (P < 0.05) for beef flavor intensity than all other thawing methods by trained sensory panelists. Steaks thawed in the microwave had the highest (P < 0.05) percentage of cook loss, followed by cooking from frozen, with all other methods being similar (P > 0.05). Similarly, steaks thawed in the microwave and in hot water had a higher (P < 0.05) thawing loss percentage than steaks thawed on the counter, in cold water, or in the refrigerator. These results indicate thawing method had minimal differences on overall beef palatability and objective quality measures. Therefore, consumers and foodservice establishments should use their preferred thaw method based on convenience, taking food safety and time into consideration

Labeling Terms and Production Claims Influence Consumers’ Palatability Perceptions of Ground Beef

The objective of this study was to evaluate consumers’ palatability ratings of ground beef from the same source when provided information about the labeling prior to evaluation. Chubs (n=15) from the same production lot and day of 80% lean/20% fat ground beef were procured and fabricated into 151.2 g patties. Pairs of patties from each chub were randomly assigned to one consumer panel session and to 1 of 8 different labeling terms: all natural, animal raised without added antibiotics (WA), animal raised without added hormones (WH), fresh never frozen (FNF), grass-fed, locally sourced, premium quality, USDA organic (ORG), and a blank sample (NONE). Consumers (N=105) evaluated each sample on 0-to-100-point line scales for tenderness, juiciness, flavor liking, texture liking, overall liking, and purchasing intent and also evaluated each palatability trait as either acceptable or unacceptable. Prior to sample evaluation, the consumers were provided additional labeling information about the ground beef. Consumers found no differences (P>0.05) among the samples with the different labeling terms for tenderness, juiciness, texture liking, overall liking, tenderness acceptability, flavor acceptability, and texture acceptability for all the treatments evaluated. For flavor liking, there was a larger increase (P<0.05) in ratings for samples labeled as grass-fed in comparison with WA, WH, and premium quality–labeled samples. There was a large increase (P<0.05) in the consumer ratings for overall liking when product was labeled as all natural, WA,WH, FNF, locally sourced, premium quality, and ORG. Additionally, there was a larger decrease (P<0.05) in the per-centage of samples rated as acceptable overall when labeled as WA in comparison with all other treatments. These results indicate that adding production claims that consumers are familiar with can improve their palatability perception

Impact of Disclosing Fat Content, Primal Source, and Price on Consumer Evaluation of Ground Beef

The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of providing information about the fat content, primal source,and price on consumers’ palatability ratings of ground beef from the same source. Ground beef chubs that were 80% lean/20% fat (n=15/panel type) were obtained, and 151.2 g patties were manufactured from the chubs. Chubs were assigned randomly to panels for 1 of 3 different panel types. The fat content panels had samples labeled as 90% lean/10% fat (90/10), 80% lean/20% fat (80/20), 73% lean/27% fat (73/27), lean, and extra lean. Price point samples were assigned to 1 of 5 different points: ultra-high, high, medium, low, and ultra-low. Primal panel samples were labeled as ground chuck, ground round, ground sirloin, and store ground. Each panel had one sample with no information given (NONE). Samples were evaluated by consumers (N=305), who were informed of the treatment prior to evaluation for tenderness, juiciness, flavor, texture, overall liking, and purchasing intent and rated each trait as acceptable or unacceptable. Labeling ground beef as 90/10, 80/20, and 73/27 resulted in increased (P<0.05) consumer ratings for tenderness, flavor, and overall liking. Informing consumers of the price of the product resulted in increases (P<0.05) for all palatability traits for samples labeled with ultra-high, high, medium,and ultra-low prices. Furthermore, attaching a primal blend label to the samples resulted in an increase (P<0.05) for all the palatability traits evaluated for all 4 primal blend types. Additionally, purchasing intent was increased (P<0.05) for samples when consumers were informed of the price and primal blend. Ultimately, providing consumers with information about the fat content, price, and primal blend type influences their perceived palatability of ground beef

Describing food safety perceptions among growers and vendors in Cambodian informal vegetable markets

Improving food safety often requires individuals or groups to adopt new food safety behaviors. Understanding individuals’ perceptions of food safety is an important step in creating programs that enable the adoption of such behaviors. To inform the design of food safety programs in Cambodia, this study measured perceptions of vegetable safety among vegetable growers (n = 69; Battambang, Siem Reap) and vendors (n = 31; Phnom Penh) involved in Cambodian informal vegetable markets using a quantitative questionnaire. The majority of respondents (≥ 62.7%, lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals at least 46.2%) across all groups (growers and vendors) were at least “moderately concerned” (scale: “extremely concerned,” “moderately concerned,” “slightly concerned,” “not concerned at all”) about the safety of vegetables sold in Cambodia. However, the mean estimated probability of respondents reporting that chemical contamination was of greater concern than microbial contamination was 84.9% [76.0, 90.9]%. Most respondents reported familiarity with the health effects of consuming chemically (71.4% [61.5, 79.6]%) or microbially (57.3% [47.2, 66.9]%) contaminated vegetables. However, less than half (between 7.3% and 48.4%) of all respondents provided a commonly recognized example of such health effects. Across all groups, respondents most frequently perceived contamination of vegetables as occurring primarily “at the farm” (≥ 76.7%, lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals at least 61.5%, and ≥ 39.3%, lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals at least 21.2%, respectively). Additionally, most respondents (≥ 51.6%, lower bounds of 95% confidence intervals at least 34.0%) perceived “vegetable farmers” as primarily responsible for preventing chemical contamination. Perceptions of responsibility for preventing microbial contamination varied across groups (p = 0.02). Of the vendors in Phnom Penh, growers in Battambang, and growers in Siem Reap involved in this research, 22.6%, 39.0%, and 53.6%, respectively, described at least one commonly accepted contamination prevention practice. These results suggest that food safety programs for each of the described groups should include efforts to increase participants’ understanding of the health impacts of consuming contaminated vegetables. However, specific emphasis should be placed on increasing awareness on the health impacts of consuming vegetables contaminated with microbial pathogens as respondents were generally less aware and concerned with microbial vs. chemical contamination of vegetables. Additionally, programs targeting vegetable growers could leverage growers’ sense of personal responsibility for both contamination and contamination prevention, while programs for vegetable vendors may need to emphasize the importance of vendors in ensuring vegetable safety

Palatability Traits of Sirloin Cap Steaks From Four USDA Quality Grades

Sirloin cap steaks from 4 different USDA quality grades were evaluated to determine the effect of marbling on eating experience. Top sirloin cap steaks (N = 60) of 4 different quality grades (Prime, Top Choice, Low Choice, and Select) were evaluated in the current study. Top sirloin butts were collected, and the biceps femoris was removed, trimmed, and sliced into twelve 2.54-cm-thick steaks. The steaks from each subprimal were aged for 28 d and designated for either trained sensory panels, consumer sensory panels, Warner-Bratzler shear force, or moisture and fat determination. The Prime steaks were rated the highest (P < 0.05) for overall liking and were higher (P < 0.05) for flavor liking than Low Choice and Select steaks within the consumer panels. However, all quality treatments were similar (P > 0.05) in juiciness and tenderness for the consumer panels. Additionally, a similar (P > 0.05) percentage of samples from each treatment were rated acceptable for tenderness, juiciness, flavor liking, and overall liking, with each trait having greater than 70% of samples rated acceptable. Also, Prime steaks were rated the highest (P < 0.05) for sustained juiciness and overall tenderness within the trained sensory panels. Similarly, Prime steaks were rated higher (P <0.05) for initial juiciness than the Low Choice and Select treatments but were similar (P > 0.05) to Top Choice. These results indicate that USDA quality grades impact the eating quality of sirloin cap steaks, especially within the Prime grade, and could provide an opportunity for refined marketing and added economic value for the cut

The Effects of Thawing Methods on Trained Sensory Evaluation of Beef Palatability Traits and Instrumental Measurements of Quality

Objective:Using beef strip loins steaks, evaluate six common thawing methods and assess the quality attributes through a trained panelist evaluation and an array of instrumental quality measures. Study Description:Paired Low Choice strip loins (n = 15) were collected from a beef packing facility. The paired loins were fabricated into 1-in steaks and blocked into six blocks of four steaks. Each block was assigned a different thawing method, and each steak within the block a test, then aged 21 days and frozen. Thaw methods consisted of the four USDA-approved thaw methods: refrigerator (REF), cold water (CW), microwave (MIC), cooking from frozen (COOK); and two methods commonly used by consumers: countertop (CT) and hot water (HW). Steaks assigned to REF were thawed in a refrigerator at 34–37°F for 24 hours prior to cooking. Steaks assigned to CW were thawed in individual containers of 34–37°F water for 24 hours prior to cooking. COOK steaks were cooked immediately upon removal from the freezer, while still in a frozen state. CT steaks were thawed at ambient temperature (68°F) for 5 hours. HW steaks were thawed in a sous vide machine set to 104°F for 20 minutes (± 2 minutes). MIC steaks were microwaved at 50% power for 3.5 minutes, flipped, and repeated in a retail microwave. Fifteen trained panels were performed, with eight panelists consuming six samples from the same loin. Each steak was cooked to a peak temperature of 160°F on clamshell style grills. Data were analyzed as a completely randomized block design. Results:As a whole, thawing method had a minimal impact on palatability There were no (P\u3e0.05) differences among thawing methods for initial juiciness, sustained juiciness, connective tissue, pressed juice percentage, L*(lightness), lipid oxidation, Warner-Bratzler shear force and slice shear force. For myofibrillar tenderness, COOK steaks were tougher (P\u3c0.05) than REF and CW. Also, MIC and COOK steaks were lower (P\u3c0.05) than CW and REF steaks for overall tenderness, while all other treat­ments were similar (P\u3e0.05). The COOK steaks were rated higher (P\u3c0.05) than all other treatments for beef flavor intensity. The MIC steaks had lower (P\u3c0.05) cooked a* (redness) and b* (yellowness) values than REF, HW, and CW steaks, while CT samples had higher (P\u3c0.05) values than COOK and MIC. The MIC steaks had the highest (P\u3c0.05) cook loss, followed by COOK (P\u3c0.05), with all other treatments being similar (MIC\u3eCOOK\u3eCT = HN = CW = REF). MIC and HW had a higher (P\u3c0.05) thaw loss than CW, CT, and REF (MIC = HW\u3eCW = CT = REF). Moreover, MIC, COOK, and HW steaks had a higher (P\u3c0.05) percent total moisture loss than REF, CW, and CT. This increase in total moisture loss and thaw loss could indicate a total economic loss of steaks thawed using these methods. Lastly, COOK steaks had higher (P\u3c0.05) cooked expressible moisture than CT, CW, and REF. The Bottom Line:Consumers and food service establishments may use whichever thawing method is the most economical and convenient for them, as thawing method has minimal impact eating quality, although food safety should be the upmost concern

Consumer Evaluation of Plant-Based Ground Beef Alternatives in Real-World Eating Scenarios

The objective of this study was to evaluate the palatability of 3 plant-based ground beef alternatives (GBA) in comparison to ground beef under real-world hamburger and taco scenarios. The 3 plant-based GBA alternatives used represented a modern GBA sold at retail (RGBA), a modern GBA sold in foodservice (FGBA), and a traditional soy-based GBA (TGBA). Additionally, 80% lean ground beef was evaluated. Consumers (N=240; n=120 per panel type) evaluated samples for juiciness, tenderness, texture, beef flavor, overall flavor, overall liking, purchase intent,and purchase price and rated traits as either acceptable or unacceptable. For hamburger panels, consumers were served samples on buns and were given the option to add cheese, lettuce, pickles, ketchup, and/or mustard. For taco panels, samples were seasoned with a taco seasoning blend and served on flour tortillas, with consumers given the option to add cheese, lettuce, and/or tomatoes. In both scenarios, ground beef was rated higher (P<0.05) by consumers for juiciness, texture liking, overall flavor liking, beef flavor liking, overall liking, purchase intent, and price willing to be paid than all 3 GBA but was rated similar (P>0.05) for tenderness to FGBA and RGBA. Additionally, a higher (P<0.05) percentage of ground beef samples were rated acceptable overall and for flavor characteristics than all 3 GBA. Few differences were found between FGBA and RGBA for any palatability characteristics evaluated. TGBA was rated lower (P<0.05) than all other treatments for all palatability traits for taco panels and was similar (P>0.05) to only RGBA for beef flavor and overall flavor liking within hamburger panels. These results indicate that GBA currently available to consumers do not have improved palatability characteristics when used as an ingredient in a taco or hamburger scenario

Evaluation of Fresh and Frozen Beef Strip Loins of Equal Aging Periods for Palatability Traits

Although studies evaluating freezing are prevalent, most have used varied postmortem aging times to facilitate study design. The lack of a comprehensive study evaluating equally aged fresh and frozen steaks prevents a true under-standing of the impact of freezing. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the eating quality and consumer perception differences between fresh and frozen beef steaks of 3 equal aging periods. Beef carcasses were selected from a processing plant on 2 kill dates 1 wk apart to allow for a 1-wk freezing period, fabricated, and aged for 21, 28, or 35 d. On the same day, all samples of equal aging periods were fed to consumer and trained sensory panelists, sheared for shear force, and powdered for lab assays. For consumer panels, the first 4 steaks were given with no additional information, whereas the last 4 steaks were served with the labels “previously frozen” or “fresh, never frozen.” The consumer panelists rated the frozen samples as more tender (P<0.05) than the fresh samples but found no other differences (P>0.05). Even when given additional information, the perception of quality was not impacted (P>0.05). Similarly, the trained panelists rated the frozen samples higher (P<0.05) than the fresh counterparts for overall tenderness, but the fresh samples scored higher (P<0.05) for initial and sustained juiciness. Supporting the sensory data, the frozen steaks had lower (P<0.05) shear force values regardless of the aging period. However, the fresh samples resulted in lower (P<0.05) purge and cook loss. Although some meat quality factors were impacted by freezing, the overall eating quality and perception of quality were not negatively impacted. Therefore, frozen meat should not be discounted due to the eating quality or perception of the quality of beef steaks

Evaluation of Thawing Curves of Beef Strip Loin Steaks Using Various Thawing Methods

Objective:The objective of this study was to evaluate and determine thaw rate and time of strip steaks thawed using methods that are recommended by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and those commonly used by consumers. Study Description:Strip steaks collected from a beef packing facility were randomly assigned a thaw method. Initially, steaks were vacuum packaged and then frozen at -40°F until thawed. Two thawing methods were USDA-approved: thawing in a refrigerator (REF) and in cold water (CW); while the other two methods evaluated are commonly used by consumers: thawing on the countertop (CT) and in hot water (HW). The thawing temperatures were: REF at 35.6–37.4°F in the refrigerator; CW maintained at 35.6–37.4°F in water; CT at 68°F; and HW at 104°F. Temperatures of the steaks were recorded every 30 minutes for CW and REF, every 10 minutes for CT, and every thirty seconds for HW to determine the thaw time and rate. Results:Thawing time differed (P\u3c0.05) among treatments in this study (HWP\u3c0.05) among treatments with a similar trend (HWP\u3c0.05) from REF until 5 hours prior to thaw point, at which point the temperatures were similar (P\u3e0.05) for the remaining thawing period. Moreover, REF steaks were warmer (P\u3c0.05) than CW steaks from 13 to 5 hours prior to thaw point. In the final 5 hours, CW and REF steaks were similar (P\u3e0.05) in temperature. Furthermore, among all treatments, CT steaks were the coldest(P\u3c0.05) from 5 to 2 hours prior to thaw point. However, in the final 2 hours, CT steaks were at similar (P\u3e0.05) temperatures as CW and REF. Due to the short period of thawing time and the observed rapid thawing rate, HW samples were the coldest (P\u3c0.05) in the final 10 minutes prior to thaw point. The Bottom Line:Of the four thaw methods utilized in this study, the safest methods are those approved by the USDA (CW and REF). Thawing meat on the countertop or in hot water may be efficient and convenient methods for consumers, but it is important to take the extra time to thaw meat properly for safety