Food Safety (D224FS MY)

Dr LIM SZE YIN

3097 WORDS

Proposal for policy change to pasteurise all milk for drinking in United Kingdom
Prepared by 1. 2. 3. 4. 009921 Dennis Loong Jun Lim, 010332 Mohd Afiq bin Mohd Asmadi, 009869 Asyraf bin Onn, 009669

CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION..2 2. POTENTIAL ACTION.3 2.1 Limitation of action.3 2.2 Impact of the action5 3.0 RECOMMENDATION7 3.1 Choice I : Plant UHT System..7 3.1.1 Risk and possible solution.8 3.2 Choice II : Automatic Pasteurizer System8 3.1.1 Risk and possible solution.9 4.0 CONCLUSION9 5.0 REFERENCES ..10

1. INTRODUCTION Milk is a nutritious food produced by the mammary gland of mammals and it is an important food source for human. Generally it is considered as a type of drink which confer benefits to human health. 85% of milk produced worldwide is from cows (1) while the remaining 15% is contributed by other livestock such as goats, sheep and horses. Milk contains many components which are nutritious such as lipid protein salt, mineral, vitamins, carbohydrates and many other contents. This component will provide energy, essential and non essential amino acid and ensure proper body function. For human most especially infant, most beneficial type of milk would be human milk. Human milk could reduce the risk of infants death, increase their intelligence and immunity. The antibodies contain in the milk would provide passive immunity to the newborns to avoid whereas type of infection (2). However human milk is not widely consumed even though there are milk banks that collect human milk. This milk is mainly use for medical purpose especially for infants. As mention above milk is an important food that will provide whereas benefits and is widely consumed. However the high nutrient content of the milk also makes it a very good medium for bacteria growth. When raw milk is left at room temperature it will quickly become sour due to the bacteria fermentation process. This milk spoilage is mainly carry out by lactate acid bacteria such as Lactobacillus sp. and Streptococcus sp. which are harmless to human body. However the milk could also be contaminated by harmful bacteria species such as Staphylococcus aureus, Yersinia, Escherichia coli, Listeria, Salmonella and Campylobacter. These bacteria could lead to some severe or even deadly diseases such as tuberculosis and diphtheria (3). Nowadays milk is generally considered as of the safest food for human consumption due to processes such as pasteurisation, microfiltration, creaming and homogenisation. However this was not the case before the 19th century prior to pasteurisation invention. Hence the unprocessed milk lead to the wide spread of tuberculosis. Western country such as United Kingdom and United States had high milk-related food poisoning death rate. In the United State alone 160 000 of cases happen yearly in a population of 90 million in the early 20th century. It is estimated that 6 millions of people died from milk-related tuberculosis and 25 thousand people get typhoid fever every year due to milk consumption (4). Other types of milk related diseases also include digestive system inflammation, cowpox, food and mouth diseases and anthrax. Infants who have weaker immunity used to become the victims for milk related diseased. It was found that breast feed infants had a death rate of 6.2% compared to 36% of those fed with unprocessed cows milks. In an experiment carry out in 1898, the pasteurisation could reduce milk related children death from 44% to 16.5% within 7 years (5). In the modern day due to wider use of pasteurisation, a study carried out from 1993 to 1997 found that only 0.2% of food-borne diseases were related to milk. During the period of study, milk did not cause any death (6).
2

2. POTENTIAL ACTION Pasteurisation is a process where heat is applied to the milk for a period of time to eliminate dangerous microorganisms but the milk still retains its original taste and nutrient (7). The aim of the process is not to kill all the microorganisms but to greatly reduce their numbers. Microorganisms died logarithmically when subjected to heat. This means we should use high temperature and short time (HTST) method to process the milk. In the industry milk is forced through a metal plates or pipes heated to 72C for 15 seconds in a typical HTST procedure. Another method of pasteurisation involved ultra-high temperature (UHT) where the milk is subjected to 138C for at least 2 seconds. HTST could kill 99.999% of microorganism in milk (8). Most yeast or bacteria would be completely destroyed but some heat resistance strain such as mycobacterium could survive. Mycobacterium paratuberculosis could survive in UHT milk but the frequency is lower compared to HTST milk. Generally the small dose of bacteria in properly pasteurised milk is harmless except that the milk had undergone improper pasteurisation process where sub pasteurisation heat is applied.

2.1 Limitation of action Milk is pasteurized to kill harmful pathogens that can harm human. Through pasteurization, 99% of the harmful pathogen is killed. However, there are several cases of food contamination related to pasteurized milk. An example of such case is an outbreak of Staphylococcus aureus in pasteurized milk. The case happens in 1937 where a total of 29 cases reported from 11 different districts. Researchers found out that the reason for the contamination is due to the personnel that used hand to handle the bottling and capping process (John F. Hackler). There are many outbreaks that happened in United Kingdom (UK) as well, as seen in table 3. The contamination mainly occurs not due to the pasteurization process but due to other factors. The factors are the storage or the machine used are contaminated, the personnel that handle the processes are not well trained, the bottles or caps used are contaminated, the work place for the pasteurization is dirty, the pasteurization process is not done correctly, the addition of raw milk into the pasteurized milk and many other factors. In conclusion, the main reasons for the contamination of pasteurized milk usually not due to pasteurization.

Table 1.0: General outbreaks of infectious intestinal disease linked to pasteurised milk and cream in England and Wales from 1992 to 2009

The public and even scientists have different kind of reaction towards the pasteurized milk. Some of them agree and some dont. The main reason for the disagreement is that the nutrient content of the milk will be degraded and become less. Once milk has been pasteurized it's more or less dead a quote from an article by Dr Joseph Marcelo. An example of the event for raw milk is better than pasteurized milk is when Dr Mercola claims that no death in 38 years from this raw food. There are some professors that claimed raw milk is best for human due to its nutrient content despite the cases of food poisoning that has been happening throughout the years. A literature review done by Bill Marler JD also has an opinion that raw milk is better than pasteurized milk. This is because valuable enzymes, good immunological components, valuable proteins and beneficial bacteria are being destroyed due to pasteurization process. The components are valuable in the sense that for example beneficial bacteria such as Lactobacilli and Bifidus bacteria kills off bad bacteria in stomach. Other than that, milk also contains immunological components such as leukocyte, macrophages, neutrophils, immunoglobulin and also antibodies which can help human to increase a persons immunity. There are also claims that raw milk will lessen the effect of tooth decay in children. Other than that, raw milk will help in growth and contain higher
4

calcium than pasteurized milk. There are comments that the taste of the milk will differ due to pasteurization. Due to these reasons, there are movements that are against pasteurized milk. There are research been done for raw milk to be safe for human consumption which is by having healthy cows with clean environment. These two factors were heavily emphasised due to the fact that they are main reasons of contamination. If these factors are being seriously done, raw milk can be distributed. However, despite all the critiques and the movement against pasteurized milk, milk that has been pasteurized is the main milk which has been distributed throughout UK. There are laws that protect the distribution of milk whereby pasteurized milk are the only ones allowed to be distributed. As for the public, the main concern forwarded was that they can live healthily after drinking milk. These shows that the concern about consuming pasteurized milk are among the intellectuals who know the benefits of raw milk.

2.2 Impact of the action Milk pasteurisation can be seen as an ultimate alternative on preventing bacterial contamination and in avoiding human infection due to milk consumption. With the benefits and better long-term safety despite negligible loss of particular vitamins provided from this method (17), there is no doubt that it should be carried out across the entire nation. Prompt actions and rules must be amended in order to ensure critical cases which lead to fatal due to raw milk consumption will show a significant reduction in near future. All farmers across UK should be strictly advised to install suggested machineries to carry out a standard procedure of milk pasteurization. This is essential to ensure that the pasteurisation methods are not jeopardized by missing out one or two steps. Eventually, improper pasteurization conducted may become a contributing factor for an outbreak of food-borne bacteria. Hence, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) should suggest installation of pasteurization machines towards all farmers and firms producing dairy products. However, one main concern is that the price, installation and the conduction of machines may cost a small fortune to farmers and small milking firms (16). Thus, FSA play a vital role to get a huge allocation of funding from the government in order to ensure every firm has the access to pasteurisation technology and thus, making this campaign a success. The diagram below is a pasteurisation machine that we have picked out of all the machines available out there due to the following extra advantages:

(PICK A MACHINE AND STATE ITS STRONG EXTRA CREDIT COMPARED TO OTHER MACHINERIES) A war between preferences in consuming raw milk and pasteurized milk has been going on for many years now. Raw milk advocate and scientist, Dr Edward F. Group III stated that raw milk contain enzymes which are really helpful in assisting digestion and calcium absorption
5

(25). However, these statements are merely vague and the claims on specific health benefits offered by milk are being debated within the community of scientist. Another baseless argument can also be seen in The Safety of Raw versus Pasteurized Milk, The Untold Story of Milk in page 269 (20) where ultra-pasteurization is accused as the cause to lysozyme being inactivated. Ironically, the medium chain fatty acids, a compound made from the same element as the former are inactivated in infant formula. With contradicting and lacking in evidence arguments made by the advocates, it is loud and clear that pasteurisation will bring no harm at any extent. It is admitted that milk that has undergo pasteurization may contain minute amount of bacterial pathogens directly shed from infected mammary glands of livestock, or from manure in post-harvest contamination or even from improperly storage and chilling of milk (18). Thus, FSA must equip the citizen with clear information by educating them; sole purpose of milk pasteurization is to reduce pathogens (19) and attain logarithmic reduction (20), it is not sterilization which intended to kill all microorganisms (20). By reducing the number of viable pathogens, disease and outbreak is unlikely to occur. The table below shows a result finding by Dr Hugh Chester-Jones who compared analysis of nutrients in 100 gallon of milk before and after pasteurization.
Table 2. Comparative nutrient analyses of pre- and post-pasteurized waste milk (19). Nutrient (%) Raw Pasteurized Pr > F Fat, % of DM 35.4 31.2 P < 0.01 Fat, % 4.42 3.90 P < 0.01 Protein, % of DM 28.3 28.1 NS Protein, % 3.54 3.51 NS Lactose, % of DM 34.0 35.3 P < 0.05 Lactose, % 4.25 4.42 P < 0.05 Energy1 GE2, Mcal/kg ME3, Mcal/kg NEm4, Mcal/kg NEg5, Mcal/kg
1DM 2Calculated

6.22 5.79 4.97 3.99

5.86 5.45 4.69 3.76

P < 0.05 P < 0.05 P < 0.01 P < 0.01

Dry Matter (NRC, 2001) 3Gross Energy 4Metabolizable Energy 5Net Energy for Maintenance 6Net Energy for Gain The fact that pasteurization involves heating milk in high temperature whether it is ultra-high temperature (UHT) or high temperature short time (HTST) mechanism is no alien to the mass nowadays. In fact, the increase in awareness among citizen in leading a healthy lifestyle had indirectly helped the importance of consuming pasteurized milk gained its own popularity. However, the increase in awareness of milk pasteurization itself is not enough to avoid disease outbreak caused by contaminated milk. Post-pasteurization condition of pasteurized
6

milks must also be deeply considered by milk consumers. Pasteurized milks are exposed to room temperature immediately after pasteurisation and this continued during packaging, delivery and shelving. It easily spoils in four hours duration if exposed to a temperature of 30C (22). In the past few years, UK may have never experienced a rise in temperature up to that figure. However, in this 21st century itself, highest temperature ever recorded during summer was at 38.5C and 32.9C, both in England and Scotland respectively (23). This will not worry farmers who are living in town and accessible to a chilling plant but huge concerns will be brought up by farmers who are living in rural areas. Thus, effective ways to tackle spoilage of pasteurized milks in such temperature if it ever repeats are stated below (23): 1. Carry out pasteurization of low temperature on farm by utilising a stove and a thermometer. 2. Use low cost chlorine bleach which is made by using merely salt water and an electrochlorinator to clean transport containers and storage. 3. Apply UV C ionizing radiation for cold pasteurization of milk when milk collectors and farmers meet to exchange milk (also known as aggregation points). Last but not least is the curiosity brought by few concern citizens on the effectiveness of pasteurization. Several questions that our team experts has been asked was, with standardised temperature at 72C, can it actually kill all pathogens in less than 20 seconds? With professional ethics embedded within, we are not embarrassed to say that, no, standard pasteurization whether UHT or LHST cant kill all the bacteria present in the milk. Mycobacterium paratuberculosis (MAP) for instance can easily survived the standard pasteurisation protocol widely carried out by researchers (24). Thus, the holding time set in current pasteurisation protocol was added 5 seconds more which makes a total of 25 seconds at 72C milk pasteurisation (24). Completely inactivated MAP from the milk during testing afterwards proved that a specific pasteurisation setting to get rid of certain bacteria is achievable. Hence, with all the benefits that can be gained by pasteurization, it outweighs all the claims made by campaigns promoted and made up studies funded by minorities who are against milk pasteurization.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION For the safety of the public we recommends pasteurization of raw milk. To do so, a proper equipment is necessary to complete the chosen method. 3.1 Choice 1: UHT Plant System For pasteurization through this method (26), a pasteurization machine or sterilization equipment is compulsory. There are usually different type of equipment that use different heat transfer method ether direct or indirect. Indirect method usually gives higher quality product and efficiency compared to indirect (Refer Table 1.0). There is also a compact model
7

type L UHT machine which designed to be portable so that the machine can be transported to desired location. Table 3.0 : Different type of UHT plant shows different efficiency and quality of milk produced. Plant type Heat transfer Efficiency Quality of produced Type I Indirect 90% milk High Type D Type P Direct Indirect Less than 90% Higher than 90% Not as high as Type I High and P

The machinery consumed low energy and low maintenance cost which should be advantageous for milk producer in terms of cost. Milk production should not be a problem as this plant are be able to produce pasteurized milk in around 50-200 litre/hour continuously enough to supply daily requirement. Sterile tank is necessary if this methodology is applied and the storage capacity is a producer choice ranging from 200 100, 000 litre of milk. 3.1.1 Risk and possible solution This method requires a clean and closed plant to reduce the risk of contamination from outdoors and ensure the processed milk is in aseptic condition. This situation forced the milk producers to build the plant which consumed cost and space. Responsible agencies especially banks should be able to provide them a loan to do so which will profit the banking industry. Government could make the loan easier to be accessed by the applicants through a program or agreement with the bank. The cost of the equipment ranged from 1,800.00 - 3000.00 (27) per set which is quite expensive for small producers in small town. But, it should be a problem for big producers that have well established plant. To avoid cost problem for the small producer, government might aid them by providing UHT centre in certain area and charge them with reasonable price annually or monthly. 3.2 Choice 2: Automatic Pasteurizer System This system probably is the best system available for milk pasteurization for small producers. The heating temperature is up to 85oC but any temperature is available upon request to the manufacturer. The system is able to pasteurize 5,000 50, 000 litre milk per hour (depends on model). This system use lower running cost and even some manufacturer provide an Energy Saving Mode option in their machine. It has compact design that use smaller space. Price ranged from 860 66,000 depends on quality and capacity of the model. This option provides more accessibility from the producer depending on their budget and cost.

3.2.1 Risk and possible solution This system only provides basic pasteurization not UHT which most bacteria will be killed but not the heat-labile microbes. This is the only unavoidable risk of using this system and yet, the end product is still pasteurized milk. Using this system needs no government intervention like the previous system as it provides affordable cost according to the needs of milk producer which give more advantages to their side. Manufacturers are able to make profit too. 4.0 CONCLUSION An action to pasteurize the milk should decrease the potential of contamination of microbes and reduce the risk of outbreak in this country. However, the action itself could not make everyone happy. With the proper help from government or non-government agencies, this should reduce the cost and other possible disadvantages that will be carried by affected group. Through this help, we really hope that the action to pasteurize the milk is made possible for the public safety.

5.0 REFERENCES 1. Gerosa and Skoet, 2012. "Milk availability Trends in production and demand and medium-term outlook". FAO, United Nations. 2. Persico, M.,Podoshin, L., Fradis, M., Golan, D., and Wellisch, G., 1983. "Recurrent middle-ear infections in infants: The protective role of maternal breast feeding". Ear, nose, & throat journal 62 (6): 297304. 3. Smith, P. W., 1981. Milk Pasteurization Fact Sheet Number 57, U.S. Department of Agriculture Research Service, Washington, D.C. 4. Eaglesham, A., Pueppke, S.S., and Hardy, W.E, 2001. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council Report. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council. 70 5. Straus, L.G., 1917. Disease in Milk: The RemedyPasteurization; The Life Work of Nathan Straus. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co. 6. Steele, J.H., 2000. Commentary. History, trends, and extent of pasteurization. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 217 : 173176. 7. Lewis, M, and Hepple, N., 2000. The Continuous Thermal Processing of Foods. Pasteurization and UHT Sterilization. Caitherburg, MD: Aspen Publishers 8. Stabel, J. R.; Lambertz, A., 2004. "Efficacy of Pasteurization Conditions for the Inactivation of Mycobacterium avium subsp. paratuberculosis in Milk", Journal of Food Protection 67 (12): 2719. 9. John F. Hackler, M.D. Outbreak of Staphylococcus Milk Poisoning in Pasteurized Milk, Volume 29. 10. Health risks to consumers associated with unpasteurised milk and unpasteurised cream for direct human consumption. Food.gov.uk. 2010 [7 April 2013]. Available from <http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/committee/acm1008rawmilk.pdf> 11. Fresh, unprocessed (raw) whole milk: safety, health and economic issues. Realmilk.com. 2009 [7 April 2013]. Available from <http://www.realmilk.com/safety/fresh-unprocessed-raw-whole-milk/> 12. Raw Milk: What the Scientific Literature Really Says. Weston A. Prince Foundation. 2012 [7 April 2013 ]. Available from <http://www.realmilk.com/wpcontent/uploads/2012/11/ResponsetoMarlerListofStudies.pdf> 13. Why You Shouldn't Drink Pasteurized Milk. Joseph Mercola. 2010 [7 April 2013]. Available from <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/dairy-free-avoid-thispop_b_558447.html> 14. No Deaths in 38 Years From This Raw Food -- So Why is it Condemned? Mercola. 2012 [7 April 2013]. Available from <http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/14/mark-mcafee-rawmilk-update.aspx> 15. Abstracts on the effect of pasteurization on the nutritional value of milk. Realmilk.com. 2000 [7 April 2013]. Available from <http://www.realmilk.com/health/abstracts-onthe-effect-of-pasteurization/>
10

16. Why You Don't Want to Drink Pasteurized Milk. Mercola.com. 2003 [26 March 2013]. Available from http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2003/03/26/pasteurized-milk-partone.aspx> 17. Pasteurization Processes of Organic Valley Milk. Organic Valley. 2013 [28 March 2013]. Available from <http://www.organicvalley.coop/products/milk/pasteurization/> 18. RON SCHMID. The Safety of Raw versus Pasteurized Milk. In: RON SCHMID. The Untold Story of Milk. Warsaw: New Trends Publishing, 2003, pp. 263-324 19. Dr. Hugh Chester-Jones and Neil Broadwater.Pasteurization. Minnesota: University of Minnesota Extension, 2009. 20. RON SCHMID. Pasteurize or Certify: Two Solutions To The Milk Problem. In: RON SCHMID. The Untold Story of Milk. Warsaw: New Trends Publishing, 2003, pp. 7071776 21. What is Pasteurization and Homogenization. Disabled World. 2012 [28 March 2013]. Available from <http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/publish/pasteurizationhomogenization.shtml> 22. Smith, P. W., (August 1981), Milk Pasteurization Fact Sheet Number 57, U.S. Department of Agriculture Research Service, Washington, D.C. 23. Average Temperatures in Britain. Mandy Barrow. 2010 [23 March 2013]. Available from <http://www.food.gov.uk/science/research/foodborneillness/microriskresearch/b01li st/b01003/#.UWES3ZNTCSp> 24. Characterisation of the non-linear thermal inactivation kinetics observed for Mycobacterium paratuberculosis in milk. Food Standards Agency. 2005 [25 March 2013]. Available from <http://www.food.gov.uk/science/research/foodborneillness/microriskresearch/b01li st/b01003/#.UWES3ZNTCSp> 25. Pasteurized vs. Raw Milk: Which One Is Healthier for You & Your Family? Global Healing Center Natural Health &Organic Living. 2009 [27 March 2013]. Available from <http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/raw-milk-vs-pasteurized-milk/> 26. Process technology for aseptic product treatment. Niroinc.com [3 April 2013]. Available from <http://www.niroinc.com/html/gea_liquid_processing/pdfs/process_technology.pdf> 27. Super High Temperature Sterilizer. Alibaba.com [3 April 2013] Available from <http://kaiqn.en.alibaba.com/>

11