Summary – Food Safety and Zoonoses

• IPM Food Safety and Zoonoses – Delia Grace

  
  

  What does the new prominence of food safety and human health in the CG strategic research framework mean for ILRI?

  Health and food safety has never had higher ranking in the CG. We think this offers opportunities for ILRI. Apart from mycotoxins, no other center has any substantive capacity in food safety or human health. The FERG report out in October is going to say mycotoxins don’t matter that much for human health, but the microbes and pathogens we work on are of enormous importance. We think there should be two new flagships in phase 2: one on food safety and one on human health. We have solid epidemiological and laboratory capacity (although more is needed) but we need to leverage economic, policy and gender expertise.

   

  What are you doing for endemic disease?

  Endemic diseases are very important but don’t fit in the remit of FSZ – in fact we have been working on them because we recognize a “one health” approach which doesn’t artificially divide human and animal health. But ILRI is not well organised for One Health.

   

  …… and chickens?

  From the FSZ perspective, poultry are important because of their role in zoonotic disease –both endemic and emerging and generation of antimicrobial resistance. We think they may have a role in environmental enteropathy. There are advantages of working in a value chain, but not to the exclusion of more important risks and benefits. A broader L&F would be able to address poultry from the perspectives of resilience, nutrition and health externalities.

   

  You say 6.5 million people are getting from safer milk. Where do the figures come from?

  The 6.5 million consumers is based on a) surveys on the number of milk traders and the consumers they supply b) surveys on the number of traders who have been trained and certified c) evidence on the improvement of milk safety as a result of training. Five million are in Kenya and 1.5 million in Guwahti, the major milkshed in Assam, India. We are working this year to strengthen these impact assessments by additional field evaluations. We think this model has proven to be sustainable (projects ended 3-9 years ago but still delivering benefits) and scalable (6.5 million consumers reached) and we want to make a case for donors to invest more.

   

  Publish or perish: how can we get more time for writing?

  The commenters made helpful suggestions: For instance could one day per week be reserved for this? Or a more explicit recognition within the KRAs? Invest a lot in high quality research support staff? Cut down on meetings? I think If we really see evidence and influence as a key strategy which we invest in, track progress on, and reward good performance in, then the ILRI culture will change, and the papers will ‘write themselves’.

   

   

  IPM FSZ Milk and Fish Safety in Zambia – Mwansa Songe

   

  How do you get stakeholder inputs?

  We are in the process of forming a Food Safety Advisory Committee at national level, and at provincial level an innovation platform for each of the two products, which will allow for engagement even with different players along the value chain.

   

  Why milk and fish?

  Local along with community members identified fish and milk as high risk foods eaten in large quantities with poor preservation methods and hygiene. A field study of fish value chains highlighted dried fish as of particular concern. We have now performed microbiological sampling of fish from markets and fresh milk (sour milk to be done), to confirm this and guide future investigations (awaiting lab results).

   

  Is collective action an opportunity for dairy development?

  In Western Zambia there is lots of grass, lots of cattle yet dairy value chains are largely informal and productivity is low. Investments in facilities are needed but production needs to increase to justify these investments, yet there is no current access to sizeable markets to justify this investment. Looking at food safety and quality is one aspect, but whilst a holistic approach is ultimately required a sensible option may be to try to improve one aspect, such as basic cattle nutrition or health, which would potentiate the next steps, e.g. improved breeds, AI and milk yields, which could allow more investment in milk quality and supply chain infrastructure.

   

  What approach does AAS follow to assess food safety from production to consumption?

  The AAS uses participatory methods to conduct research. We will sample foods along the supply chain. We also collect info on storage and hygiene. Fish will follow a similar approach.

   

  Why did you identify sour milk as a problem? What pathogens could be present?

  Sour milk was identified is consumed in large quantities and we know relatively little about its safety – we do know it is less safe than boiled or pasteurized milk. We are screening fresh milk samples for: 1) Total Bacterial Count (TBC), 2) Faecal coliforms count, 3) Antibiotic resistant E. coli, 4) Salmonella spp., 5) Brucella spp., 6) Toxigenic E.coli, 7) Entertoxin producing Staph aureus, 8) bTB, 9) Campylobacter, 10) (Listeria may be added). We also hope to test for aflatoxins in fish.

   

  How about insecticide treated nets?

  With regard to insecticide-treated nets for controlling flies in the fish markets, it would be important to consider traditional perceptions of nets and colour. With malaria control this has proved to be a major constraint in some countries. After efficacy studies we intend to pilot this intervention to identify problems like this that were not anticipated. So far we have conducted a small survey (semi-structured interviews) to get an idea of traders’ and consumers’ perceptions on the use of nets-mixed views, but most of them seemed eager to try the intervention

   

  Useful suggestions: Contact the colleagues from ZimCLIFS in Harare. Exchange notes with Barbara Sv of FSZ team here in Addis who is leading a similar process.

   

  IPM FSZ – Food Safety and Ecohealth in Vietnam – Hung Nguyen

   

  How are you addressing gender in food safety and risk management?

  Women and men are involved differently in food safety. We see clearly role differentiation in slaughterhouses and selling pork in the markets between men and women. Men mainly work in pig slaughterhouses and women mainly sell pork. For food purchase and preparation, in most of the cases this is done by women. The consequence of the difference in occupational exposure might lead to different health risks and of course women play a role in managing risks for food safety.

   

  How do norms and social perceptions affect food selection and consumption?

  In one of the study sites in center of Vietnam, people prefer buying pork from less than 50kg pigs (they are not purchasing indigenous pigs, which are naturally small but rather small crops bred pigs of that could grow to 100 kg or more). This comes from the belief that small pigs were fed mainly with vegetables and food residues from households and therefore that meat is better than pork from bigger pigs that are believed to be fed with concentrate feed. This perception has some implications: pigs are sold quite early and pig keepers might not benefit from fast growth of pigs after 50kg thus reducing profits and pork availability. It might also affect meat quality. Another perception is that some of the pig organs are good for children and old people (heart, stomach, liver) and these can influence food selection and accessibility. Some highly risky food such as raw pig blood or fermented pork are also consumed in the country; again this consumption is influenced by beliefs and preferences.

   

  What is essential for future “best bets” for improving pork safety?

  We are conducting risk assessments which help identify the problems of food safety and potential solutions, but risk management needs to go beyond technical measures to reduce risk. Among others, the important role of education and training for farmers and self-policy through farmer organization, and cultural/perception (as mentioned above) need to be addressed.

   

  How does ecohealth provide a guiding framework to expand partnership with other programs?

  Whatever we call this approach – One Health, Ecohealth, integrative approach or other terms – the underlying idea is to break the silos to bring different disciplines to work together and to try to integrate different types of knowledge to address a common research questions without making every disciplines become generalist. In this sense Ecohealth can help to create new linkages between FSZ and other programs like LSE (environment), LGI (value chain) or bioscience (diagnostics) for instance.

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  0

  0

  Be the 1st to vote.

  Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)