Download
1 / 32
E N D
3. US Food Safety System Tradition - precaution and science-based risk analyses
Regulatory process - open and transparent manner
Previous focus - chemical hazards
Recent focus - microbial pathogens and comprehensive farm-to-table approach
4. Foodborne Illness: The Situation in US
5. Each year an estimated 76 million cases
1 in four Americans gets a foodborne illness each year
1 in 1000 Americans is hospitalized each year
$6.5 billion in medical and other costs
6. Globalization of food supply
Pathogens introduced to new areas
Travel
Change in microorganisms
Change in human population
Change in lifestyle Why is Foodborne Illness Emerging?
7. Vulnerability of Our Food Supply The food supply comprises thousands of classes of foods, domestic and imported
Ever-more centralized production and processing with wide distribution
Unintentional foodborne outbreaks have happened over large, dispersed, geographical areas
This delays recognition of the
outbreak and complicates
identification of the source
10. Who is most susceptible to foodborne illness?
11. Initiatives PulseNet - CDC’s national computer network of public health laboratories rapidly identify foodborne illness
FoodNet - surveillance “sites” across the US for foodborne diseases and related epidemiologic studies
Fight BAC! - public awareness program backed by coalition of industry, producer, and consumer groups
12. The chain of production from farm to table:
A generic prevention scenario
13. The chain of production from farm to table:
A generic prevention scenario
14. Public Health Breakthroughs Pasteurization of Milk
Immunizations
Chlorination of water supply
Food Irradiation?
15. Intervention strategies used by the beef processing industry to control E. coli O157:H7 Lactic Acid Carcass Wash
Steam Vacuum
Hand Trimming to remove fecal contamination
Acidified Sodium Chlorite Spray
Steam Pasteurization
16. E. coli O157:H7 Organisms Remaining after Application of Intervention Technology (initial cell population 1,000,000 cells/gram)
17. Antimicrobial Intervention Strategies All current antimicrobial intervention strategies reduce the level of pathogenic microorganisms in ground beef.
Irradiation reduces pathogenic microorganisms by 99.99 to 99.999%.
Only “cooking” completely destroys all pathogenic microorganisms.
18. What can Food Irradiation Do?
19. Shelf-life extension of Strawberries
20. What can Food Irradiation not Do?
21. Concerns Expressed by Anti-Irradiation Groups
Misuse to avoid plant sanitation
Environmental safety of irradiation facilities
22. Terry Stokes, CEO National Cattlemen’s Beef Association May 29, 2003 “Irradiation complements, but does not replace proper food handling and cooking practices, and the numerous testing and safeguard measures already in place.”
23. What Current Uses are Approved in US?
24. What Current Uses are Approved in Canada?
25. What Current Uses are Approved in EU?
26. Impact of Food Irradiation
33. US Regulation on Labeling Inclusion of the radura symbol
Labels:
“treated with radiation”
“treated by irradiation”
“irradiated for food safety”
These must be printed on the package, unless the word “irradiated” is part of the product name
Marketers can also now petition the FDA to use label “electronically pasteurized” for e-beam irradiated foods
34. Consumer Acceptance and Marketing of Irradiated Foods
35. Market Status Not yet a major factor in today’s food processing environment – but slowly growing
Spices and herbs – largest area of application
Ground beef – fastest mover
36. Data: Samples and Locations Randomly selected walk-in shoppers at the entrance (total of 474 shoppers)
Use irradiated or non-irradiated ground beef and money as experimental tools
At 13 HEB grocery stores in Texas, namely,
Austin (3 stores, 119 shoppers)
San Antonio (3 stores, 111 shoppers)
Houston (4 stores, 139 shoppers) and
Waco (3 stores, 115 shoppers)
37. Methodology On actual survey, asked consumers sequentially on
Their willingness to buy before and after learning information about food irradiation
Their self-perception whether they would belong to one of the four consumer segments
Their willingness to pay (WTP) for the irradiated ground beef
38. Information General statement about food irradiation excerpted from United States General Accounting Office (GAO), Washington, D.C.
“Food irradiation is the process of exposing food to controlled levels of ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is a type of energy similar to radio and television waves, microwaves, and infrared radiation. The high energy produced allows it to penetrate deeply into food, killing microorganisms without significantly raising the food’s temperature.“
39. Willingness To Pay Experiment Each respondent was given a pound of non-irradiated ground beef and some money as a gift for survey participation
Each respondent was asked his/her willingness to exchange a pound of non-irradiated ground beef and the money “for” a pound of irradiated ground beef.
If the respondent accepted the bid, the WTP value is recorded as first bid value
If the respondent rejected the bid, he/she was asked again to exchange “a pound of non-irradiated ground beef and a half value (second bid) of the money” for a pound of irradiated ground beef. If the answer was “Yes” the second bid value is recorded as WTP, otherwise, the WTP is assumed to be lower than the second bid value.
42. Average # of Times of Consuming Ground Beef per week
43. Percentage of buying ground beef when go grocery shopping
44. Experienced getting ill from food poisoning Need percent break down from Experience and Buying decision versus the others.
Also, percent break down from Experience and types of customer profileNeed percent break down from Experience and Buying decision versus the others.
Also, percent break down from Experience and types of customer profile
45. Comparison on reasons to food poisoning
47. Radura Symbol Perception
52. Prior Knowledge of Food Irradiation
53. Consumer Segments (before giving information on nature of irradiation) Out of 100 %: strong buyer is accounted for 8.51 %….etc.Out of 100 %: strong buyer is accounted for 8.51 %….etc.
54. Consumer Segments (after giving information on nature of irradiation) Out of 100 % after learning information 1, 28.13 % of the total samples are in strong buyer group (increasing from 8.51 %)Out of 100 % after learning information 1, 28.13 % of the total samples are in strong buyer group (increasing from 8.51 %)
55. Buying Decision: Irradiated Ground Beef (after giving information on nature of irradiation) Before providing the information : 49.17 % of the samples will buy irradiated ground beef
After providing the information 1 and 2 : 88.75 % of the samples will buy irradiated ground beefBefore providing the information : 49.17 % of the samples will buy irradiated ground beef
After providing the information 1 and 2 : 88.75 % of the samples will buy irradiated ground beef
56. Willingness to Pay Experiment on first bid values Out of 100 % of samples who are offered with 10 cents bid. 97.3 % accept the offer but 2.70 % reject the offer
Out of 100 % of samples who are offered with 40 cents bid. 72.22 % accept the offer but 27.78 % reject the offer. Out of 100 % of samples who are offered with 10 cents bid. 97.3 % accept the offer but 2.70 % reject the offer
Out of 100 % of samples who are offered with 40 cents bid. 72.22 % accept the offer but 27.78 % reject the offer.
57. Willingness to Pay Experiment on second bid values Out of 100 % of the samples who are offered with 20 cents: 66.67 % accept, but 33.33 % reject 20 cents offer.Out of 100 % of the samples who are offered with 20 cents: 66.67 % accept, but 33.33 % reject 20 cents offer.
58. WTP bid values after trying the product, in percentage Out of 100 % of samples who are offer 10 cents, 81.82 % say yes for the bid value after trying the irradiated ground beef. But 18.18 % of them say no.Out of 100 % of samples who are offer 10 cents, 81.82 % say yes for the bid value after trying the irradiated ground beef. But 18.18 % of them say no.
59. Would you buy irradiated ready to eat food?
60. Would you buy irradiated ground beef containing antioxidant?
61. In Summary The results clearly indicate that information about food irradiation leads to favorable changes in consumers’ perceptions and buying decisions
Consumers are willing to pay for reducing risk of food-borne illness
62. Irradiated Mangoes
63. Procedures Consumer surveys were conducted in field/grocery stores in the late winter/early spring of 2006
Irradiated mangoes were used as product of interest
Participants were provided a brief information sheet about mangoes with additional food irradiation information provided during the field experiment
64. Objective of Research Assess the effect of different types of information on consumers’ willingness to pay for irradiated mangoes
Why?
Presence of anti-irradiation groups in the US that disseminate negative information about food irradiation to the public
So it is important to know how to counter the negative (mostly not based on science) information from consumer activist groups
65. Types of Information (Treatments) Positive – Information about the benefits of food irradiation (source: GAO)
Negative – Consequential information about food irradiation (source: Public Citizen)
Mixed – Both forms of information presented (order of presentation alternated)
68. WTP Means and Change by Treatment
69. Acceptance as Measured by Trust Trust measured independent of WTP appears to follow the same pattern as WTP
Increases with Positive information
Decreases with Negative Information
Alone and with Positive
Differences (Post – Pre) are all statistically significant
Positive p = .002
Negative p = .0000
Mixed p = .0098
70. Summary Positive information
Overall, Positive information was observed to significantly increase WTP
Negative information
Decreases WTP but still positive (not negative)
Regardless of whether presented alone or Mixed with Positive
71. Significant Implication Information about nature and benefits of food irradiation can significantly increase consumers’ willingness to purchase and pay more for irradiated foods!
However, due to the weight attached by consumers to negative information vis-ŕ-vis positive information, there is a tremendous need for a concerted effort to continuously educate consumers about the nature and benefits of food irradiation
72. Minnesota Model for Educating Consumers and Marketing Irradiated Ground Beef Minnesota Beef Council led the way
Education and lots of free samples
series of trade shows at state fairs, major meetings and restaurant shows
series of press releases and media information widely distributed throughout Minnesota have created a model now accepted by other states
educational workshops, issues management and partnerships with public agencies, ground beef manufacturers, retailers and restaurateurs
State beef councils, cattle organizations and others are using the Minnesota Model to inform consumers, beef producers and marketers about the advantages and benefits of irradiated ground beef
73. Hawaii Pride: Marketing of Irradiated Fruits Lots of free samples
Pushing fruit quality with posters, recipes, taste testing, and the strategic use of media coverage
Formed relationships with retailers on the mainland US
Since then, the sale of Hawaii Pride’s irradiated fruit has dramatically increased. In supermarket chains such as Albertson’s, Kroger and Safeway, operating in Minneapolis, Phoenix and Atlanta, sales have increased from 400% to, in some cases, 1,000%
74. Market Trials in US
Irradiated ground beef patties are available at an estimated 7,000 supermarkets and by mail order and home delivery.
75. Schwan’s Distribution: National through home delivery.
All of the non-cooked ground beef products that Schwan’s marketed are irradiated and have been since the summer of 2000.
79. Omaha Steaks Distribution: National through mail order. Omaha Steaks offers a variety of “Gourmet Burgers,” all of which are irradiated.
All ground beef marketed by Omaha Steaks has been irradiated since mid 2000.
80. Huisken Meats In May 2000, introduced irradiated ground beef in 84 Minnesota stores.
Today - offers two irradiated ground beef products; 90 percent lean and regular ground beef.
Huisken BeSure irradiated patties are available in an estimated 2000 stores in some 20 states.
81. Colorado Boxed Beef Began marketing “New Horizon” brand irradiated ground beef in mid-2000.
New Horizon irradiated patties are available through Publix (700 stores) in the Southeast and Topp’s (300 stores) in the mid-Atlantic region.
82. Ellison Meats Ellison Meats, based in Pipestone, MN, produces two types of irradiated ground beef patties for Simek’s of St. Paul Park, MN. Simek’s irradiated patties are available at retail through Cub Foods 65 supermarkets in Minnesota and Wisconsin and at Super America’s 400 convenience stores. All ground beef marketed by Simek’s is irradiated
83. Wegman’s Rochester, NY-based Wegman’s began marketing irradiated ground beef in 2001.
Wegman’s now offers Huisken irradiated ground beef frozen patties in all stores in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Virginia
85. Results of these Market Trials Informed consumers like and will buy irradiated foods
Reasons:
safety from food poisoning bacteria
increased shelf life
product quality
To date, no single test market of irradiated foods has been unfavorable when the consumer has been provided information about food irradiation.
86. Results of these Market Trials The volume of irradiated food being marketed has increased significantly in recent years, but the full-market penetration is still small and growth potential is high
The number of supermarkets that offer irradiated meat products has increased in just three years from 84 to more than 7,000 from approximately 50 retail chains
Nearly 2,000 restaurants including those belonging to a major fast food chain, are serving irradiated meat
87. Trade Developments In October 2002, the USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) approved the irradiation of fruits and vegetables via regulation entitled, “Irradiation Phytosanitary Treatment of Imported Fruits and Vegetables
APHIS described the regulation as the allowance for irradiation to be used as an alternative to current quarantine treatments
The treatments combat 11 types of exotic fruit flies and the mango seed weevil
Foreign facilities exporting to the U.S. will operate under compliance agreements with their National Plant Protection Organizations (NPPO)
88. International Trade Developments NPPO will sign a work plan with the USDA that cites the legal authority each country has to allow irradiation as a quarantine treatment for imported fruit and vegetables, the type and level of monitoring that each country will require of the other country's irradiation treatments, and other conditions that must be established
USDA regulation stipulates that foreign irradiation treatments must be conducted under a pre-clearance plan that specifies the level of direct USDA oversight of the foreign irradiation treatment
The Phytosanitary Issues Management Staff of APHIS are responsible for negotiating the phytosanitary conditions for entry, including irradiation treatment, with prospective trading partners
Several countries including Brazil, Chile, Mexico, South Africa and Thailand are preparing to export irradiated fruit to the U.S.
India started exporting irradiated mangoes to US
