BIOFILMS-A SERIOUS CHALLENGE TO SANITATION SCIENTISTS

Man has been striving ever since his advent on this planet to keep the harmful microorganisms at bay and this endeavor is still continuing even to day. An array of technology to destroy pathogenic microorganisms is available for the industry that has been able to ensure safety of foods manufacture by them to a reaosnable extent. Traditional technologies like salt steeping, sugar infusion, sun drying, fermentation etc are supplemented by modern ones involving high temperature treatment, water removal at controlled temperatures, low and very low temperature preservation, high pressure processing, aseptic packing, vacuum packing etc. Still there is nothing absolutely safe in the light of continuous modification in the behavior of microbes to overcome all the hurdles created by man. Latest finding that bacteria  like Listeria and others can form highly impenetrable biofilms within which they survive under severely adverse environmental conditions is startling to say the least. Here is a commentary on this new phenomenon which will keep the industry on its toes when it comes to ensuring food safety.

"The slimy film that forms in damp areas, typically around drains and in trunk lines, is known as biofilm. Harboring pathogens such as Listeria, Salmonella and E. coli, biofilm creates a protective environment for illness-causing microorganisms to thrive.Eliminating biofilm and the pathogens it breeds has proven to be difficult for the food processing and retail sanitation industry. It tends to persist in damp areas and is resistant to traditional cleaners and sanitizers. Typical drain cleaners such as enzymatic cleaners, drain openers, and hard surface sanitizers don't have EPA approval to remove biofilm and are ineffective against the pathogens found in it." 

If claims by some of the manufacturers of sanitation aids are to be believed, specially formulated preparations are required which can only penetrate biofilms and destroy the bacteria residing within. As most of these products are patented and branded, very little is known regarding the scientific basis of such claims. Most difficult task in a food processing facility is to access remote nooks and crevices where there may be dampness, ideal for harboring biofilm clusters and which can infect the food during contact with the surface when processing is going on. Still efficient preparations containing active chlorine does a decent job with minimum risk of contamination. If biofilms pose real danger to the food processing sector as being claimed, it is time that safety authorities revisit the range of sanitizing agents approved and include more efficient ones for tackling dangers posed by the biofilms of pathogenic bacteria.    

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

ELECTROLYZED WATER -A NEW SANITIZING AGENT-

Sanitizing food handling areas is assuming more and more importance against the background of increasing bacterial food poisoning episodes occurring in many parts of the world. Good old chlorine is considered the industry standard for sanitization and is widely used by the potable water industry with telling effect. However handling chlorine is fraught with some risks and any alternative should be welcome to the industry. it is against such a background that the new sanitizing agent electrolyzed water (EW) was developed as a green alternative. From the following accounts it is clear that this product may eventually replace chlorine gas as the industry standard, the only limitation being the capital cost and recurring expenses in producing electrolyzed water.

"The process works by passing a low-voltage electrical current through salt water, which separates the water's sodium and chloride ions. The sodium ions are then exposed to a negative electrical charge, which creates sodium hydroxide, commonly known as lye. The chloride ions are exposed to a positive electrical charge, which turns chloride into hypochlorous acid - the active sanitizing ingredient in bleach. The solutions are then stored in two 55-gallon tanks where employees can fill up spray bottles without having to worry about mixing or spilling the product, Fitzgerald said. In the past six months, Massachusetts-based Lynnfield Green Technologies has sold 10 devices, which have been shipped to schools and companies that use the solutions to clean everything from cafeterias to semi-trailer trucks, according to the company's cofounder, Patrick Lucci. Lucci helped enhance the technology while working at Electrolyzer Corp., a Woburn-based start-up, in 2006. In 2009, Ecolab Inc. purchased Electrolyzer Corp. without bringing the technology to market. Lucci, eager to keep the idea alive, started Lynnfield and partnered with PathoSans, a subsidiary of Spraying Systems, a global manufacturer of industrial spray products, to sell PathoSans's version of the device. The solutions are being used throughout the Endicott House, in guestrooms, conference rooms, and the kitchen. Executive chef Eddie Cerrato, one of 50 staff members at the conference center, said he uses the hypochlorous acid cleaner to sanitize everything from meat thermometers to Endicott's freight elevator. "Bleach used to be the disinfectant in every kitchen but it eats into plastic,'' Cerrato said. "This solution is idiot-proof.'' He said rashes and skin problems from working with chemicals have since disappeared. Yen-Con Hung, who studies electrolyzed water's effect on food safety at the University of Georgia's Department of Food Science and Technology, said the water "has a good cleaning effect,'' if it is used according to the direction. "For cutting boards, sodium hydroxide is effective in removing fat and protein,'' Hung said.But Rebecca Sutton, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, said many consumers expect green cleaning products to be evaluated and approved by certification companies such as EcoLogo or Green Seal".

Sodium hypochlorite solution in which nascent chlorine is entrapped, is already in use by many and is a house hold beach with considerable popularity. In what way EW is superior is not clear. Standard hypochlorite solutions with 1-12% dilution are already available in the market though presence of alkali in these preparations are known to weaken textile fibers on prolonged contact. EW is not a panacea as being claimed because it is not very stable losing its potency in a few hours of storage. Probably installing an electrolyzer in one's own premises may provide the convenience in producing EW as when necessary for immediate use.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD PLANT DISINFECTION-THE OZONE 'ROUTE'

Ozone, the triatomic allotrope of oxygen is one of the most destructive oxidative agents known and has many industrial uses. Its importance to food and beverage industry is increasingly being realized and ozone is the most widely accepted water disinfectant to day. The high oxidative power of Ozone ensures that all contaminating microbes are decimated, making the product safe for consumption. Compared to Chlorine, the well established disinfectant used currently in most public protected water supplies, Ozone does not produce the dangerous organochlorine compounds or leave any residues due its decomposition to oxygen. Added to this, Ozone can also remove higher levels of Manganese, make cyanide less toxic and decompose urea present in water..

"Middleton said that an added benefit of using ozone in the food and drink processing sector is that it is environmentally friendly, with any residual ozone decomposing to oxygen. In terms of vapourised hydrogen peroxide, she added, it is also rapidly broken down to water vapour and oxygen, and thus leaves no problematic residues.She said that these whole room disinfection techniques can be used daily or part of the periodic cleaning and disinfection procedures that occur monthly – it depends on the output of the processor involved or the level of decontamination required.She said the methods might also only be employed when decontaminating an area after a pathogen contamination incident".

Unlike Chlorine, Ozone needs to be generated on site and generators of different capacity are readily available, compact in size. Where ever power is easily available or cheap, Ozone is the preferred choice as a disinfectant. Ozone has bad as well as good credentials when it comes to human health. Its presence in the upper atmosphere saves man from the dangers of UV exposure from the Sun while as a pollutant near earth's surface it is a health hazard. As Ozone at concentration as low as 0.2-0.3 ppm can achieve disinfection, its use is not considered a hazard for users.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/

http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

"COLD WAR" ERA REVISITED-RUSSIA VS AMERICA TRADE FEUD

The on going Chicken 'war' between Russia and the US makes an interesting reading. The Chicken export to Russia from the US valued at about $ 800 million is in jeopardy after the objection raised by the former to the use of Chlorine for sanitization. While the US maintains that use of immersion cooling with 30-40 ppm available chlorine is a permitted protocol for destroying pathogenic bacteria, no less a person than the Prime Minister of Russia declared that such chickens cannot enter his country. Whether this is the politics of the old "Cold War" era being revisited or there is a genuine technical problem, one does not know.

According to some US Senators "while the Russian government's varied justifications centered on sanitary measures, analyses or guidelines of international agencies such as the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) or the Codex Alimentarius do not support Russia's conclusions. As such, attempts to manage the flow of imports raises questions regarding Russia's willingness and readiness to become a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO)".

If the US can impose its quality and safety standards on other countries exporting food materials for American consumers, Russia also may be justified in taking the stand that Chlorine treated chicken is not acceptable to it.There are many alternate technology options to the US avoiding Chlorine and if it has to maintain its exports of Chicken to Russia it has to meet the buyer's requirements. It will be interesting to watch the development and see who is going to blink first in this ridiculous trade war!.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com