>
>The HACCP approach lends itself reasonably well to risk reduction in
> >relation to all of the non-microbial contaminants and pollutants you
> >mentioned above. Strictly speaking, however, HACCP focuses on microbial
> >contamination.
> I couldn't quite follow who was writing what about HACCP, but the above
statement stood out above all others in being misleading. HACCP is concerned
with ALL hazards associated with foods. Chemical, Physical and Microbiological.
It does not focus on microbial contamination if properly assessed and applied.
True, microbial hazards are usually the most numerous and most dangerous, but
every possible hazard should be addressed in a good HACCP plan. There are
"decision trees" and flow charts that help the HACCP plan preparers to decide
whether a possible point of contamination is likely to constitute a hazzard and
should be addressed or ignored or somewhere in between.
> Second, it is my understanding that the concept of HACCP was developed by
Pillsbury in the late 1950's in response to NASA's need for absolutely safe
meals for astronauts (food poisoning in a small capsule would be rather
disasterous). It evolved separately from ISO9000, at least in the early years.
Dr. Gravani could probably fill you in on any other details you might like to
have.
My own view is that, even if the need for strict implementation of HACCP
procedures may be greater in large processing operations with global sourcing
of inputs, the principles of HACCP should be applied to small-scale food
processing (what could be worse for this sector of the industry than people
getting sick or dying from its products). Whether the very SAME requirements or
certain onerous (especially for a small firm) aspects of the bureaucratic red
tape that I would agree would be important for large operations are necessary
(or even desirable) for smaller operations, is something that needs to be
looked at closely. Small-scale food processors are a highly diverse lot, with
most producing high-quality and very safe food and some, like Bart Hall noted
in an earlier posting, clearly should not be in business.
Gil
****************************************************************************
Gil Gillespie voice: 607-255-1675
Department of Rural Sociology & fax: 607-254-2896
Division of Nutritional Sciences e-mail: gwg2@cornell.edu
340 Warren Hall
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853-7801
USA
Many people say that "language by nature lies," but I've never agreed
with that. Language is a tool. It can be used to clarify or to confuse,
to build collaboration or to enhance control. Clarity, honesty,
frankness, and integrity are gifts of the soul, and not all people
choose to unwrap them. And some, alas, are trained from the cradle
to use it to manipulate, rather than to witness. Those who use it to
witness, these days, are often ridiculed (unscientific, impressionistic,
emotional, undocumented, subjective), while master manipulators are
held up as exemplars. --Michele Gale-Sinex, 09/20/1999
****************************************************************************
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail