News

World Food Safety Day shines a spotlight on science

On 7 June, the World Health Organization (WHO) held its annual World Food Safety Day, highlighting the role scientific research and innovation play in supporting consumers’ health.

The WHO recognises that underpinning food production with scientific knowledge and expertise is vital to lowering illness, reducing costs, and saving lives.

Through research, scientists actively contribute to a deeper understanding of the risks posed by food contaminants to human health. These contaminants impose significant health burdens and economic costs, including medical treatments, child development, lost productivity, market losses, and export restrictions.

Therefore, the WHO asserts that science provides credible evidence that policymakers, food companies and consumers can rely on to make informed decisions about food safety.

Common viruses can wreak havoc

Numerous viruses exist within the food and beverage (F&B) industry, impacting food safety. The most common viruses of concern in the sector are norovirus, hepatitis A, and hepatitis E.

Norovirus is one of the leading causes of foodborne illness globally and is highly contagious, with symptoms including nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and abdominal pain. It spreads through surfaces and direct person-to-person contact.

“It is highly transmissible so that any outbreak can have a big ripple effect on a community or setting,” Matthew Moore, associate professor in the Department of Food Science at the University of Massachusetts, told Ingredients Network.

The hepatitis A virus is also a notable foodborne pathogen affecting humans.

“Human noroviruses are estimated to be the leading cause of foodborne illnesses in the US and globally due to several properties they have that make them difficult to control,” said Moore.

Hepatitis symptoms can include headache, nausea, vomiting, abdominal pain, and jaundice. These viruses are all non-enveloped ribonucleic acid (RNA) viruses and are primarily transmitted via the faecal (and vomitus)-oral route, through ingestion of contaminated food or water, or through person-to-person contact. They are often linked to contaminated fresh and frozen produce, as well as shellfish.

However, hepatitis E is also associated with zoonotic transmission from some animals, including pigs. Infections can occur via the consumption of contaminated meat products.

“Their resilience and ability to persist in the environment make them particularly challenging to control in food production settings,” Annette Sansom, section lead, emerging microbiology, Campden BRI Group, told Ingredients Network.

Some viruses can have an adverse effect on livestock, particularly on food production.

“The recent jump of some of these viruses to cattle and other mammals is a concerning development that we need to continue to monitor,” Moore said.

Bacteriophages are viruses that infect bacteria. “These can be devastating in certain contexts, like in foods that require bacterial fermentation, as the viruses kill the bacteria that make the product,” he added.

For example, significant caution is given to sanitation, especially in a yoghurt production plant, because outside phages from the environment might kill the lactic acid bacteria required to produce the yoghurt.

However, not all viruses are considered bad, he explained, saying: “Then, there are instances where viruses can be used for good.”

In certain applications, products containing a cocktail of phages that target pathogenic and/or spoilage bacteria can be used in products such as poultry processing.

Discovering the infectious nature of viruses

A significant challenge in virus detection is determining whether a detected virus is infectious. Current virus detection methods, such as RT-qPCR (quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction), only identify the presence of viral RNA, which may persist even if the virus is no longer capable of causing an infection.

“Unfortunately for the viruses of concern, there are no readily available culturing methods, which could allow for infectivity testing,” said Sansom.

Additionally, virus recovery rates from complex food matrices can be low, and there is a lack of standardised detection protocols across different food types. Therefore, often, it is the same food types that undergo testing.

“These limitations can hinder efforts to monitor and control viral contamination, as well as assess the actual risk posed by detected viruses and validate the effectiveness of control measures,” Sansom added.

Research has been under way at Campden BRI to evaluate the effectiveness of viricidal treatments for food and the food production environment. This includes studying virus persistence on surfaces and in food, as well as testing decontamination strategies such as heat, UV-C, fogging, and washing with biocides.

There is also growing interest in alternative detection technologies, such as RT-LAMP, which offers rapid, isothermal amplification of genetic material, and digital droplet PCR (ddPCR), which allows for precise quantification without the need for calibration curves.

With improved virus recovery from foods, next-generation sequencing can provide detailed genetic profiling. Immunoassays, such as ELISA and lateral flow assays, can detect viral proteins.

Biosensor-based methods could also potentially enable real-time detection through bioreceptor and transducer systems.

“Overall, effective methods are available for detecting food-relevant viruses in food, water, and the environment, as well as for verifying the efficacy of virus control strategies,” said Sansom.