Animal source food: hazards don’t always translate into risks

www.csrs.ch 1

Animal source food: hazards don’t always translate into risks

Bassirou Bonfoh, CSRS

Outline

1. Context2. Risk Analysis & Animal Source Food3. Case studies4. New approaches5. Conclusions/ take-home message

www.csrs.ch 2

Importance of ASFASF (fish, meat, milk, eggs, game, insects, etc.) is a vital component of diets and livelihoods of people across sub-Saharan Africa but source of risks

www.csrs.ch 3

Nutrition & Health: proteins and micronutrients for children, nutritional valueEconomy: ASF Source of income through market, contributes highly to the GDP of most pastoral countries (ex. Niger, Mali etc…) Diseases: ASF controversal source of endemic and emerging zoonoses

Taking ASF safety to informal sector• Informal sector matters

• 39% of national DGP• 80% of food sold in informal markets• Accessible & affordable price• Many actors vs producers and consumers income, jobs

• Unregulated & non-transparent• Perception that products are bad norms?• No immediate arms ALOP• Asymmetric information

Informal sector is considered as the base of the African economy but it may compromise food safety

www.csrs.ch 4

Characteristics of informal sector• Variability and relativity

• Complexity cross over formal market• Equity livelihoods of small producers/ women• Lack of data reporting on risk • Uncertainty risk analysis

New approaches are needed for risk analysis

www.csrs.ch 5

History and approaches: Long term-Finance

www.csrs.ch 6

Healthy Milk for the Sahel (SDC/SNSF)

Safe Food Fair Food (GIZ/BMZ)/ Afrique One (WT)

RA frameworks

RA framework of the Codex Alimentarius Commission RA framework of the World Health Organisationwww.csrs.ch 7

PRA framework

Participation!•Equity•Transdisciplinarity•Cost-benefit analysis•Cost-Effectiveness analysis

www.csrs.ch 8

Criticism of RA• Ideas refutable on technical grounds:-

• Risk analysis is quantitative and reductionist• People legitimate concerns• Information emerging are meaningless or invalid• Conspiracy of agro-business

• Lack of trust in authorities and systematic exclusion of stakeholders from decision making and power

• Command and control• Stakeholders engagement in risk analysis• 1970s participatory methods and transdisciplinary research

• Effective• Less costly• More ethical and equitable• Vested interests and incentive

www.csrs.ch 9

1er cas: Mali/ Côte d’Ivoire

Pasteurisation ou saisie du lait contaminé

www.csrs.ch 10

•E. coli O157:H7 •S. aureus • L.monocytogenes• Salmonella spp• Enterococcus spp

Hazard assessment: e.g. Milk

• How many people felt sick after consuming this milk?• What do the results mean for a producer or a consumer?• How many cases were reported at the health centres?• Where is the responsibility?

www.csrs.ch 12

25%75% >107 ufc/ml 6,4%30%

Brucellosis Mastitis Adulteration Bacterial count Antibiotic residues

Milk quality

Preservation

Processing

www.csrs.ch -Bonfoh/ Master GIRISS/ Uni Liège Mars 2017 13

Source of contamination

Log10 des moyennes des charges des contaminants microbiens des échantillons de l’environnement

Water and washing, desinfection


Hazard dynamics: e.g. milk in Abidjan

Average (ufc/mL)Cow milk (udder)

Pooled milk

(collector)

Milk sold (market)

Coliforms 8,7.103 3,2.105 9,9.105

E. coli 5,5.102 1,5.103 1,0.105

S. aureus 2,1.103 7,1.103 1,7.104

Streptococcus 6,7.102 3,1.103 3,1.104

www.csrs.ch 15

Causalité

16

Périodicité

Exposure to consumption of contaminated milk


Scenario of risk mitigation• Reduction of contaminated milk ingestion [ Pif = Pcc * P>N ]• Two scenario:

• Discard contaminated milk to reduce P>N by 20%, 10% à 5%.• Sensistization on heating (pasteurisation) milk to reduce Pcc by 20%, 10% to

5%.

• Monte Carlo simulation on Model Risk 3.0 with calculated reduction rate (Pi – Pif )


Consumption and exposure• Pcc: proportion of people consuming raw milk (not heated) is 51,6% (IC 90%:

45,7 - 57,4%) • Qty: 28% consum daily with an average 0.5 litres/day/person.• NA : Number of local milk consumer in Abidjan is estimated at 2’180 people• Qmi : Quanty of local milk distributed in Abidjan daily 1’090 Litres


Gastro-enteritis

Initial event

Contaminated containersP: 1 3.2%

Purchase of milk not compliant with quality standards P: 58.1%

Consumption of raw milkP:51.6%

Sensitive consumer (YOPI)

Consumption of heated milk P:48.4%

Milk contaminated on farmP:31.1%

Milk contaminated during sale by the vendor P: 76.4%

Milk contaminated by the milker

Contaminated milk P: 6.43%

Contaminated udder

P: 4.9%

Contaminated environment

P: 4.4%

Infected cow

Cross contamination

Event

and

or

Contaminated waterP:4.4%

Milker handP:7.2%

Bacterial growth

Purchase of good quality milkP: 41.9%

Risk of gastro-enteritis in Abidjan• 12,8% (25/188) have been ill and 261 consumers/day are susceptible to contract

gastro-enteritis after consuming milk

www.csrs.ch 22

5.0% 90.0% 5.0%5.0% 90.0% 5.0%

0.561 0.883

0.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.01.1

0.00.51.01.52.02.53.03.54.04.5

Probability of milk contaminated with bacteriaComparison with Beta(14,5)

Stochastic / Concentration total

Minimum 0.3190Maximum 0.9683Mean 0.7368Std Dev 0.0985Values 5000

Theoretical

Minimum 0.0000Maximum 1.0000Mean 0.7368Std Dev 0.0985

Financial impact• Quantity of milk contaminated by at least one pathogen (E. coli,

S. aureus et Enterococcus) is: • 801.0 Litres (90% IC : 619.3 – 956.7). GHP reduce Total counts from

1,6x107 to 4,8x105 ufc/ml • Total milk to be discarded due to poor quality (standards) is:

• 624.6 litres (90% IC: 424,6 – 778) • Total loss if poor quality milk is discarded:

• 819 CHF per day (90% IC: 562– 1’009) 41.5 Euro/household/day

www.csrs.ch 23

Compliance factors

www.csrs.ch 24

2e cas: EthiopieStaphylocoques et fermentation du lait

www.csrs.ch 25

Risk assessment of staphylococcal poisoning due to consumption ofinformally-marketed milk and home-made yoghurt in Debre Zeit, Ethiopia Makita K, et al. (2012) Int. J. Food Microbiol. 153: 135-141.

• Hazard• Staphylococcus aureus enterotoxin (SE)• Produced by S. aureus when the concentration in milk exceeds 106.5 CFU/ml• 100-200ng of SE can cause illness (nausea, vomiting, diarrhea)• Low pH (4.9) stops growth of S. aureus – competition with traditional

fermentation! www.csrs.ch -Bonfoh/ Master GIRISS/ Uni Liège Mars 2017 26

Dairy value chain- RRA and interviews

• Exposure assessment


Contamination rate - a survey

Isolation of S aureus

Boiling before sales

Milk collection center (n=5x5: 25)

18(70.4%)

0

Dairy farm(n=170)

74(43.6%)

0

Example:

Boil milk before consumption

Percentage

Dairy farming households (n=170)

116 68.2

Consumers (n=25) 16 64.0

Risk mitigation by boiling-Interviews



Storage of raw milk before consumptionRisk mitigation by fermentation

Storage 　 Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 TotalRoom 9 8 29 4 50Refrigerator 0 4 0 0 4Total 　 9 12 29 4 54

Length of raw milk storage (the numbers of respondents)-Interviews with dairy households consuming raw milk-

Ergo (traditional fermented milk)



Risk of staphylococcal food poisoning(@Risk, 10000 iterations)

• Each of them are uncertainty distributions

• The variety of uncertainty distributions shows variability

• Variability in this case is the growth speed of S. aureus

20.0 (90%CI: 13.9 – 26.9) per 1000 people

Risk characterization


Effect of traditional milk fermentation(Removal of stop of growth from the model)

20.0 (90%CI: 13.9 – 26.9) per 1000 people

315.8 (90%CI: 224.3 – 422.9) per 1000 people

Traditional fermentation reduces the risk by 93.7%



Sensitivity Tornado

-0.5 0

0.5 1

1.5 2

2.5

p / 1 to 2days G13

Cont rate B24

Boiling C24

p / Day 0 F13

1960 / Cont rate B11

1960 / Cont rate B16

p / 3 to 4 days H13

1960 / Boiling C16

1960 / Boiling C11

109/291 (Arcuri 2010

Temperature D10

N0 D4

Mean of Incidence rate

Sensitivity analysis

Prob. SA has SE genes

Prob. farmers boil

Prob. consumers boil

Contamination, farm

Store milk 3,4 days

Contamination, centre

Consume on day 0Prob. centres boil

Contamination, farm

Store milk 1,2 days

Temperature

Initial bacteria population

*Highly sensitive parameters

- Training for hygienic milking- Separation of cows with mastitis- Temperature control



Fermentation

www.csrs.ch 33

Valeur ajoutée et impacts

www.csrs.ch 34

Risk perception Probability of risk occurence Severness of risk Experience with that given risk

Coping perception Possibilities of action Effectiveness of action Cost/effort of action (revenu)

Action• Reactive• Preventive• Selective

food

No Action• Denial• Wishful thinking• Fatalism

Consumption habitsSpiritualEthicalMoral

ConfessionalConvictionTolerance

Risk conscienciousness Trust Compensation Cost of quality

Inte

ntio

n of

act

ion

Acc

ess

to li

velih

oods

ass

ets

Ext

erna

l hin

derin

g ba

rrie

rs

Wel

l inf

orm

ed c

onsu

mm

ers

Com

mun

icat

ion

on

haza

rds,

miti

gatio

n op

tions

and

out

com

es in

a

give

n so

cio-

cultu

ral a

nd e

cono

mic

l con

text

Théorie de la motivation

Modèle de production laitière (LDPS2, FAO)

www.csrs.ch 36

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

An 0 An 1 An 2 An 3 An 4 An 5 An 6 An 7 An 8 An 9 An 10

Milk prod (Tons) Amélioration Fert. à 59% Réduction mortalité de 8% à 5%Amélioration laitière de 235 à 470 kg/ lact Amélioration Fert. À 59% et lait à 470 kg Amélioration Fert. 59%, lait 470 et mort. 5%

Added value: e.g. Kassela milk belt (Mali)

www.csrs.ch 37

Parameters 2005 2015 Units

Total milk collected 1’500 7’000 Litre/day

Collecting sites 1 17 sites

Livestock owners membership 35 776 households

Animal supplemented feed 50 1’000 tons

Selling points 1 53 sites

Jobs created 50 2’000 people

Gross revenue 50’000 1’760’000 Euros

Double standards principles• Production for the market vs production for

consumption• Perception on quality/safety varies from culture

to culture• Boiling milk disrupts social order• Boiling milk destroy nutritional properties• No clear cut dichotomy or binary opposition between :

good, bad, safe… that change value based on motivations of stakeholders

• Quality depends on the beliefs and worldview, and the definition of good hygiene practice requires consideration of the motivations of actors and incentives (health, income…) they receive in doing so.

www.csrs.ch 38

Participation, gender and culture Traditional milk production system in West Africa:

oMilk as a product of high cultural value in Africa: nutritional, curative and symbolic values

o Traditional milk product management as women’s tasks : nutrition of children and household incomes

Commoditisation of the dairy sector leads to a degenderisation of dairy value chain:

• High commercial value associated to improvement of milk quality

• Establishment of small dairy plants generally run by men• Management of dairy production captured by men• Threats to the nutritional status of children (milk

replacement in the diet)

www.csrs.ch 39

Participation, gender and culture Dairy production captured by the market to the

detriment of children suffering from malnutrition

Ownership transfer from women to men increases the magnitude of hazards and related risks

Involvement of women is guarantee of food safety and security

www.csrs.ch 40

Participation, gender and culture• Negotiation and participation

• Negotiation within the households for the share of benefits from dairy products

• Involvement of women in new dairy system to keep traditional know-how for risks management

• Involvement in the process of standard set up and decision making

• Being well-informed on risks not only contributes to public health but also prevents financial losses

www.csrs.ch 41

Conclusions1. Informal markets are, and will continue to be in the near

future, the major source of perishable foods. In those markets, hazards are not always important if risks can be managed through endogenous methods.

2. Standards do not always match quality; food from the informal sector (not fitting with standards and regulations) is very often safe for human consumption due to local management systems

3. Local cultures (indigenous knowledge and know-how) are important to consider in the risk analysis process

4. Decisions are based on both financial and health risks, incentivised intervention could improve the safety and public health rather than regulation enforcement alone

www.csrs.ch 42

Safe food, Fair food (BMZ/ILRI)Proof of concept and capacity development onparticipatory risk analysis(2008 – 2012)

Ethiopia• Staphylococcus aureus in milk

Kenya• E. coli on cattle carcasses in abattoirs• E. coli in beef value chain• Brucella in milk• Microbiological quality of milk

Mozambique• Prerequisites for HACCP in small scale poultry production

Côte d’Ivoire• Several pathogens in milk• Inhibition of pathogens by Bifidobacterium in milk• Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in fish

Mali• Brucella in milk• Perception of food safety

South Africa• S. aureus in dried beef product• Food safety in tribal rituals• Impala game meat

Ghana• Listeria monocytogenes in milk

Tanzania• S. aureus in milk• Campylobacter in roast beef


Take-home message• Incentives could improve public health in food

sector• Inter- and transdisciplinary research

• Linking lab, field and policy• Communicatiom social sciences and natural sciences

• Sustainability is linked to stakeholders’ capacity-building

• New curricula for the next generation of Risk Analysts• PRA modules in African Universities

www.csrs.ch 44

www.csrs.ch

Acknowledgements

2 mai 2023 45

Presentations & Public Speaking

Animal source food: hazards don’t always translate into risks