This document discusses adapting novel food processing technologies to meat operations. It provides an overview of novel processing technologies such as high pressure processing, pulsed electric fields, UV light, and ohmic heating. It also discusses challenges in assessing the safety of these novel technologies, including ensuring microbial safety and evaluating potential chemical risks. Key knowledge gaps are identified regarding using novel technologies for meat processing and developing safety standards for foods processed using emerging methods.
2. Outline
Safety Risks of Modern Food Production
Review of Novel Processing Technologies
Technology Assessment and Gaps in Knowledge
FSWG’s Survey :
Food Safety and Novel Technologies
3. Safety Risks of
Modern Food Production
Products New Risks
Higher quality - Mild treatment Incomplete microbial inactivation
Extended product shelf-life Possible non respect of adequate
“Fresher” quality, storage conditions and expiration
RTE pre-cooked dates
Convenience Undercooking
Low salt, sugar, fat Overcooking
Globalization of food supply Generation of stress-resistant
organisms
Emerging pathogens
4. Food Technologies
Branch of food science and engineering which deals with the actual
production processes to make foods.
Traditional processing concepts
1. Application of thermal energy to 5. Novel or emerging
elevate product temperatures to technologies
achieve long term or extended
stability or preservation
2. Removal of thermal energy to
Contemporary technical
reduce product temperature and innovations which represent
extend shelf-life progressive developments within
3. Removal of water from products a field for competitive advantage
structure and thus achieving of
extended shelf-life
4. Packaging or the step required to
maintain product properties
achieved during processing
5. Future Processing Trends
Traditional
vs Novel Technologies
Technologies
Improvements in Designs and
Control. Redesign Novel Processes
Improved Manufacturing Transformation &
Performance Preservation
Improved Product Quality Improved Quality and Safety
Traditional Foods Novel Foods
6. The Novel Foods
• Non-traditional foods with • Definitions available
no history of safe use and
manufactured, prepared,
in 6 countries
preserved or packaged by
a process that has not
been previously applied to
that food
7. Key Drivers
Freshness & convenience & less preserved
Enhanced safety and extended shelf-Life
Heat labile functional ingredients
Engineering functional ingredients for
delivery of healthy foods
Lower carbon footprint
Reduce water volume used
Lower energy
Lower waste
Need for sound regulatory policy
U.S., Canada, EU
8. Novel Processing Options
Pressure - 6
Electromagnetic energy - 7
Electrical energy - 5
Sonication - 3
Chemical – 5
Plasma, magnetic field -2
Mechanical energy - 3
Total - more than 30 OPTIONS!
9. High Pressure
Hydrostatic Pre-Packed Foods 2000
(HHP) MPa
Hydrodynamic Raw Meats 100
(HDP) MPa
Hydrodynamic Beverages 300
Homogenization MPa
(HDH)
Pressure and CO2 Juices 100
MPa
Pressure Cycling Extraction 300
(HPC) MPa
Hyperbaric Fresh Produce 900
kPa
10. Novel Processing Technologies
Transform raw materials into food products
Preserve fabricated foods and raw ingredients during transportation,
retailing and consuming foods
Control safety at different points of supply chain
With Potential
Provide Safety attributes HIGHER than those of raw products
Maintain Health and Quality attributes at least EQUAL to raw products
Enhance Functional properties or create New Products
Provide Broader Sustainable and Environmentally friendly benefits
12. Technology Assessment
and
Fundamental Physical Methods
Technology Performance
Technology Readiness
Risk Assessment
Regulatory Status
Life Time Cycle
Cost Efficacy
13. NASA Assessment
9 - Ready for full-scale commercialization
8 - Economic feasibility and regulatory issues
Emerged addressed
Technology Development
7 - Economic feasibility demonstrated or
regulatory issues addressed (but not both)
6 – Systems available commercially
Emerging 5 - System or prototype demonstration in
relevant environment (pilot scale)
4 - Component validation in relevant
environment
3 - Analytical and experimental critical function
and/or characteristic proof of concept
Under 2 - Technology concept and/or application
formulated
development 1 - Basic principles observed and reported
14. Thermal Processing Technologies
Traditional Emerging
Under
Retorting Pressure + Heat (8) Development
Microwave dielectric (8)
Aseptic High frequency or RF (5-6)
Pasteurization Infrared (6-7) Conductive
Hot, Cold-Fill Ohmic (6-7) Heating
Sous vide
15. Non-thermal
Processing Technologies
Emerged Emerging Under
Irradiation (9) Development
Pulsed Electric Fields (6-7)
High Hydrostatic Cold Plasma (3-4)
Pressure (8-9) UV light (6)
Electrolyzed water (5)
Filtration (9) Pressure and CO2 (6)
Sonication (5)
Ozone (8-9) Low dose e-beams (5)
16. Technology Knowledge
Traditional/Thermal Novel
Established organism of public Target organisms of concerns and
health concern surrogates has to be determined
Understood destruction Detailed knowledge of microbial
kinetics/mathematics dose-response behavior
Knowledge of products heating in Complete representation of
given processing systems distribution of the lethal agent
Relationships between the Process uniformity
organism of public health concern Process monitoring &verification
and spoilage Process Equivalency (FSO)
Equivalent safety of different Chemical safety
processing systems express in
“Lethality” terms Risk assessment
17. What Understanding is Needed when
Establishing a Novel Process?
A B B
Process
Ingredients Product
B
z ard is Regulatory
Process Ha alys Acceptance
Design An V alid
ation
A
18. Challenges of Novel Processing
Safety Equivalence
O
O
O
Traditional Foods Vs Novel Foods
OH
• Nutritional, Allergenicity, Toxicological, Chemical
& =
Traditional Process Vs Novel Process
• Performance Objective, Food Safety Objective
• Validation, Verification, Monitoring
19. Safety of Novel Processes
Technology Microbial Risks Chemical Risks Other
HPP Incomplete Chemical reactions Spore inactivation
microbial at elevated
inactivation, temperature
recovery
PEF No spore Electrochemical Non homogeneity
inactivation reactions arcing
Metal transfer from
electrodes
UV light and pulsed Repair Photo oxidation Non-homogeneity
light reactions
Ohmic heating Survivors Metal transfer from under/over heating
electrodes
Microwaves Survivors Chemical reactions Non-homogeneity
Possible reduction
of power
20. Risk Assessment of Novel Foods
• Details of novel process
• Dietary Exposure
O
• History of organism O
O
• Nutritional considerations
– Dietary intakes OH
• Toxicology considerations
• Allergenicity considerations
• Chemical considerations
21. Microbiological Assessment
Product Food Chain
• Raw ingredients • Production
– Contamination – Local/Imported
• Semi-finished/
• Food Processing
– pH, Aw, composition, ToC
• Finished • Transportation
– Packaging/Storage
• Storage & Distribution
• Predictive modelling of – Food Services/Retail
growth/death/survival
• RTE
– Indigenous flora
– Shelf-life
– Safety in terms of target
• Consumption
pathogens of concern – Preparation
22. Chemical Hazards
Product Process
• Natural - Endogenous • Formed during food
toxicants processing
• Trypsin
• Mycotoxins Migration
from packaging
• Synthetic Biphenols
Produced, through Acrylamide
contamination of food Furans
material or processing
environment Lipid oxidation products
Maillard reaction
• Pesticide residues in fruits
and vegetables
• Heavy metals, nitrites
• Drug residues in foods of
animal origin
• Allergens
23. Global Regulations
Novel Foods No Definition
European Union USA
United Kingdom Japan
New Zealand India
Australia
Canada
China
24. USA
No definition can not be found
• US FDA considers food ingredients as novel that have not
been previously used
• New dietary compounds (NDI)
• As food additives under existing law, the principal law being
the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.
• The ‘Generally Recognised as Safe’ or GRAS concept is the
bench mark by which all foods, including novel foods, are
assessed.
• GRAS substances are: substances used before 1958
(excluding prior sanctioned food ingredients); and
substances for which there is scientific evidence of safety as
determined by competent experts and by published and
available safety information.
25. US Approvals of Novel Processes
• 2001, Code 21 CFR Part 179.39 was published to
improve the safety of fresh juice products: Source of UV
radiation (LPM at 254 nm) defined as a food additive
• 2004, USDA has approved High Hydrostatic Pressure as
an intervention method for Listeria contaminated pre-
packed ready-to-eat (RTE) meat products
• 2008, 73 FR 49593 The FDA published a final rule that
allows the use of irradiation for fresh iceberg lettuce and
fresh spinach
• 2009, the US FDA approved a petition for the commercial
use of Pressure Assisted Thermal Sterilization process
(PATS) for application in the production of LAF
2010, US FDA first time approved novel sterilization
processing using 915 MHz microwave energy (MATS) for
producing pre-packaged, LAF
26. Novel Food Decisions in Canada
• Use of High Hydrostatic Pressure for Processing Ready to Eat
(RTE) Meat-containing Entrees, Meat-containing Salads and Meat
Products (Maple Leaf, December 2006)
• Use of High Hydrostatic Pressure for the Control of L.
monocytogenes in Ready to Eat (RTE) Meats and Poultry (Santa-
Maria, Foods, October 2006)
• Use of the Rinse and Chill Process as a Slaughter Process
Technology (MPSC Inc. of St. Paul, MN , October 2006)
• Applesauce and Applesauce/Fruit Blends Treated by High
Hydrostatic Pressure (Orchard Inc., Franklin Centre, QC, in
November of 2004)
• Ultraviolet light treatment of apple juice/cider using the CiderSure
3500 (Moore Orchards, July 15, 2003 )
26
27. Why High Hydrostatic Pressure
Independent of product mass,
size and geometry
Minimizing treatment time and scale up
Inactivates all vegetative bacteria and spores
Destroys enzymes
Minimal impact on quality and nutrition
Commercially economical processes
Emerged as a post-lethality treatment
Emerging as
Harvesting treatment
Pre-treatment before cooking
Sterilization of Low Acid Foods
28. HIGH HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE
Preservation Transformation Value Added
Shelf-life Meat
Sterilization Pasteurization Seafood
extension Protein
PATS RTE RTE meats
LAF meals Raw meats
29. HHP process parameters
• Process Pressure
• Constant holding pressure
• >700 MPa – “sterilization”
• 200-600 MPa – “pasteurization”
• <300 MPa – raw meat treatment
• Process Temperature
• Final product temperature after pressurization
• Process hold time
• Time recorded between end of
• compression and start of decompression
30. Other parameters affecting HHP
Product Packaging
• pH, water activity • Type of packaging: vacuum or
• Composition: MAP
• Fat • Packaging and material
• Salt content influence the log reduction data
• Design and geometry
• Physiological state of
bacterial cells
• From exponential or stationary
growth phase
31. Raw Meat Processing
Ambient Temperature at Pressure < 350 MPa
Harvest Processing Fresh Meats
Hair/feather removal Shelf-life Extension
Loosens hair/feather follicles Stops post-mortem glycolysis
Eliminates scald tank Improves meat quality
Stabilizes pH >6.0
Improves color
Toenail removal Increases water-holding capacity
Loosens toenails from hoof Decreases shear force
Reduces fecal contamination Increases tenderness
32. Fundamental Mechanisms
• The modifications of meat structure are strongly
dependent on the time post-mortem
• Pre- or post-rigor when HPP is applied
• Pressurisation of pre-rigor meat usually results in a
– rapid pH decrease
– intense contraction
– phenomena depend on treatment time, meat
temperature and muscle type.
• Pressurization of post-rigor meat
– no contraction was induced,
– Extensive modifications in sarcomere structure
– Cheftel, Meat Science, 1997
– Sun and Holley, JFS, 2009
34. Product and Process conditions for
Establishment of HHP preservation
HPP pasteurization HPP sterilization
Product parameters
pH, aw 3.5 <pH<4.6; pH<3.5 pH>4.6; aw >0.86
Process parameters
Temperature, oC ≤ 45 > 100
Pressure, MPa ≤ 600 > 700
Target microorganisms
Pathogenic E. coli; Listeria; Salmonella C. botulinum spores
Bacillus cereus
Spoilage Lactic bacteria, yeasts, molds Geobacillus spp.
Storage Refrigerated conditions Ambient temperature
Packaging Hermetically sealed Hermetically sealed
flexible containers flexible containers
35. Microbial Safety and Functionality in
Reduced Sodium Chloride Foods
High sodium intake is a risk factor for hypertension, cardio vascular
and other diseases
The WHO has set a target for daily intake of 5g or less of salt (<2g
sodium)
Sodium intake
commercially processed foods (CPF) (77 %)
naturally occurring (12%),
addition at the table (6%) and added during cooking (5%)
NaCl is an important ingredient added to meats formulations
increases gelation, water holding capacity and fat retention.
decreases Aw
retards growth of spoilage and pathogenic microbes, Listeria
monocytogenes.
36. HHP for Low Sodium Products
Pre-treatment Post-lethality
• HHP may have beneficial • HHP is effective intervention
effects on meat product methods against Listeria and
quality other pathogenic bacteria
– Improves water holding
capacity and decreased
water losses
• Pressures: 500 up to 600 MPa
– Induce changes in protein
• Temperature: ambient
• Pressures: 50 up to 300 MPa
Refrigerated or Ambient
• Temperature: Refrigerated or
• Time: up to 3min
Ambient
• Time: up to 5 min
37. Commercial HHP systems
Vessel layout – horizontal
Automatic loading / unloading
• Wave 6000 / 55 L
• Wave 6000 / 135L
• Wave 6000 / 300T L
• Wave 6000 / 420 L
• Maximum pressure – 600 MPa
• Pressure Hold Time – 3 min
38. Commercial HHP systems
• Wide range of HHP
systems
– 100 L - 600
– 215 L - 600
– 350 L - 600
– 687 L - 300
• 7 contract services
facilities in US
39. Lab scale HP units
• Avure
Laboratory Scale Pressure Test The QFP-2L-700 high pressure unit
System Model PT-100
41. Vessel Technologies
Wire winding Autofrettage
Vessel is subjected to over-pressure
which locks plastic strain in an
internal core
Autofrettage pressure is selected
http://www.avure.com/company/quintus.asp according to plastic behaviour od
steel used (15-15PH)
http://www.freshertechusa.com/index.html
42. FresherTech
• Mono - Single Chamber
Systems
• Duo - Dual Chamber
Systems
• Quattro - Four Chamber
Systems
43. Multivac and Uhde
• Multivac for HHP
packaging lines
• Fully automated and
integrated production
lines
– Filling, loading and
unloading robots,
inspection, weighting
• Continuous production
flow
http://us.multivac.com/our-products/hpp-high-pressure-
preservation.html
44. HHP - What are PROS?
HHP is commercially available technology that solves
consumers' demands for safety, healthiness, clean label
and low sodium refrigerated foods
HHP solves the retailers' needs for fresh foods with long
shelf life
Capital and operating costs of HHP systems are now line
with the cost of chemical additives 2 to 8 cent per pound.
HHP allows processors to meet both retailer and consumer
demands while potentially selling clean label products at a
premium with the advantage of post package food
pathogen inactivation
45. What are Cons?
CONS
Batch process for pre-packed products
Cost is still can be an issue
Most popular applications – post-lethality treatment of
RTE meats, seafood
Process uniformities needs to be monitored
Application of HHP is limited :
to fresh meat and sea products due to resulting
discolouration
Fresh produce – texture
46. Why UV?
Effective against microbial and chemical hazards
Physical non-thermal method
Chemicals free
Cost effective
Energy efficient
38 39
Approved by Regulatory Agencies 33 33
25
23
EPA 16 17
14
US FDA (2001) 12
Health Canada (2003)
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
47. Ultraviolet UV light
Energy per photon:
UV-V UV-C UV-B UV-A
6.20 – 12.4 eV 4.43 – 12.4 eV 3.94 – 4.43 eV 3.10 – 3.94 eV
49. Development and Applications of UV sources
Food Regulatory Environment
UV source Applications Industry Approval impact
Implementation
Low Pressure Air Water Surfaces YES Mercury
Mercury (LPM) Surfaces Water US FDA (2000) Glass
Amalgam (LPA) Juices Health Canada
Since 1930 (2003)
Medium Pressure Water Water NO Mercury
Mercury (MPM) Glass
Eximer Medical – Packed Surfaces Glass
Blood Plasma Cost NO
Curing
Pulsed (PL) Curing Produce Glass
RTE Food YES
Surfaces, Dry
ingredients
Light Emitting Lightings
Diodes (LED) Air NO NO NO
50. Why LEDs will replace UV lamps?
UV Lamps: Wavelength are not UV Lamps: short life time,
optimized for applications mercury, glass
• LEDs: Emit single peak LEDs: Energy efficient, NO
Tunable mercury, long time, COST
LEDs are Building Blocks for Future UV systems
51. Guidelines For Choice of
UV source
1. Emission spectrum –
related to applications
2. Electrical and UV efficiency
3. Lifetime
4. Cost
5. Availability
6. Size
7. Shapes
52. Air, water
Non-food contact Pathogens
Safety surfaces
inactivation
Food contact
surfaces
Liquid foods and
beverages
Pasteurization
Preservation
Shelf-life extension
UV Whole and fresh
LIGHT cut produce
Vitamins
Functionality Antioxidants
Enhancement
Microbial
resistance
Toxins
Chemicals Patulin
Allergens
destruction Aflotoxins
Pesticides
53. UV on Food Plant
Air and water treatments OFFERS UV-PROTECTION
Non-food contact surfaces
Walls, ceilings, floors • Airborne
– Molds Spores, human
Food contact surfaces pathogens
Conveyor belts • Waterborne
Packaging materials – Viruses and Bacteria
Equipment surfaces spores
• Foodborne
Food surfaces – Bacteria, spores
RTE meats • Spoilage
Fresh produce – Yeast, molds, lactobacilli
54. Microbial Resistance to UV
Air Water Food
Fluids
Viruses Cryptosporidium Parasites
Bacteria Bacteria Bacteria
Yeasts Yeasts
Spores Spores Spores
Viruses Viruses
(Adenovirus)
Molds spores
RH, T,oC Turbidity pH, Aw
composition
57. UV for Poultry, Fish and
RTE products
Raw RTE
Continuous UV
• Poultry reduction of
Salmonella without affecting • Effective against Listeria on the
color or increasing rancidity of surface of frankfurters
the meat • Up to 2-log reduction at 4 J/cm2
• Chicken Breast Fillet - L. • No changes in colour
monocytogenes without
negatively affecting meat color Pulsed UV
• Raw Salmon Fillets - PL • Effective against Listeria on the
caused visual color and quality surfaces of steel coupons
changes due to T increase
• Up to 4 log reduction at 6 J/cm2
58. Challenges of UV surface
inactivation
Surface characteristics
Quality parameters
Duration of the treatment
Continuous UV vs
Pulsed Light
59. Decontamination of Surfaces
UVC Tumbling Machines by Reyco Systems
• Frozen
• Fresh
• RTES
• Products prior to bulk
storage: onions, potatoes,
fruits, grain
Heraeus, Blue Light Module
Claranor: Packaging,
Caps, Cups
61. Challenge
High UV
~ 2 log reduction UV overdosing
absorbance Low microbial
at UV fluence of can lead to
of liquid foods at reduction
190 mJ/cm2 sensory changes
253.7 nm
Solutions
Improve designs of UV systems
Efficient mixing: Turbulent flow
Dean, Taylor-Coutte Flows
Match UV source for the
application
Optimized UV dose
62. Commercial Applications
Processing Finished product
CIP water Bottled water
Packaging and product rinse Fruit juice and fruit
water concentrates
Isotonic and fortified drinks
Raw material application Iced tea
Wine
Dilution water Tetra-hopped beer
Sugar syrup Dairy
Brines
Liquid egg
63. UV units for Low UVT Liquids
Annular reactor “UltraDynamics” Thin film reactor “CiderSure”
L-NN L-N
Thin film mixers “Pure UV”/ “Iatros” Static Mixers – Dean Flow “Salcor”
Outlet
UV lamp
NL- Teflon tube
NL-
NN wound in
helix pattern NN
Inlet
65. Commercial UV Unit
Sure Pure Turbulator
Turbulent flow of the liquid over
the lamps ensures a foul-free,
self-cleaning system
Multiple-lamp system
Dosage of UV-C depends on
Product turbidity and UV absorbance
Initial microbiological load
Flow-rate
Desired log reduction
Flow rate 4 000 L.h-1
Retention time 0.608 s
Lamp life 5000+ hours
67. UV for Dairy Applications
• Raw ESL milk - up 25 day extension of
shelf-life
• Applied doses up to 1.5 kJ/l were
effective to reduce total viable counts,
psyhrophiles and coliforms up to 2, 3
and 4-log reductions
• E.coli O157:H7, Salmonella, Yersinia,
Staphylococcus, Listeria
monocytogenes and Campylobacter
jejuni – 5-log reduction at 1.3-1.7 kJ/l
• Microbiological efficacy is achieved
without any discernible denaturing of the
product`s consistency, color, flavor or
aroma
68. UV for Meat Applications
• Control of Listeria
• To reduce aging of beef
monocytogenes in recycled
carcases
chill brines
• Extension of retail
• Decontamination of poultry,
display of fresh beef
associated packaging and
packages in modified
contact surfaces
atmosphere
• Decontamination of poultry
carcasses
69. Savings Opportunities
Energy savings :
Steam, hot water
non-thermal nature of the process
Water :
Drinking water
Process water
CIP rinse water
Capital cost :
Transportation
Environmental impact
Reduced waste
70. Energy use
in processing of apple juice
E. coli Capacity Specific Energy
Processing conditions
strain (L/s) (kJ/kg)
HTST 71.6 °C x 6 s O157:H7 1.0 180.4
HPP 500 MPa x 40 °C x 180 s O157:H7 1.25 283.5
PEF 25 kV/cm x ~50 °C x 50 ATCC 0.670 137.2
μs* 11775
UV 1.56 kW x 25 °C x 89 s K-12 1.1 5.2
UF 0.02 μm, 1.474 kPa, 5 Pseudomo 1.0 0.028
L/m2.s nas
diminuta
71. Energy for Processing
Fluid product by Novel Technologies
UF
UV
Technology
PEF
HTST
HPP
0 100 200 300 400 500
Energy consumption (J/g)
72. Food Safety Working Group (CIGR)
Survey: Food Safety and Novel Technologies
• To analyze commercial applications of novel technologies and their
development level in different countries/continents
• To evaluate the role that novel food processing technologies and
innovations can play to address global food safety issues and
challenges
• To analyze knowledge level of novel technologies in different countries
and professional groups
• To analyze factors that slow down the development of novel
technologies
• 18 questions
• Completion rate: 44.33%
• 25 countries
73. Summary
Advances in science and engineering, progress in regulatory approvals make
Novel Processing Technologies (NPT) a viable option for commercialization in
foods preservation and transformation
Preservation NPT comprise two general categories:
(1) technologies suited for pasteurizing high-acid liquid products such as
HHP, PEF, US, UV and chemical processes, including gases
(2) technologies for processing shelf-stable foods, e.g., HPP combined with
temperature, MW and RF heating, ohmic heating, and irradiation
More sustainable NPT will lead to the production of processed products with
safety attributes higher than those of raw products
health and quality attributes at least equal to raw products
broader environmentally friendly benefits
potential saving opportunities in energy and water
Safety Quality Sustainability
74. Conclusion
• The scope of novel foods and novel ingredients
covered by the international regulations is broad and
diverse
• Safety evaluation is conducted on case-by-case
scenario
• Validation of novel processing technologies requires
new knowledge
• Education of food manufactures and regulators
75. Thank You !
Dr. Tatiana Koutchma
Contact info:
tnk08@live.com
AAFC
Guelph Food Research Center
93 Stone Road West
Guelph, ON, Canada