RESUMO
The European Commission asks scientific and technical assistance from EFSA to determine the impact of the revision of the Australian monitoring programme on its ability to detect microbiological contamination. Considering that, in 2010, the European Commission determined the current Australian monitoring programme to be equivalent to the EU requirements for microbiological monitoring further to an EFSA scientific assessment, the current and proposed programmes were described and the total number of alerts was compared using a probabilistic modelling approach. In the current programme, only beef and sheep carcasses are monitored using three-class moving window sampling plans, while in the proposed programme, carcass, bulk meat, primal and offal are monitored using four two-class sampling plans and Salmonella testing is excluded. The models revealed that the current programme provides a higher number of alerts for APC, while the proposed monitoring programme provides a higher number of alerts for E. coli. For APC and E. coli combined, the mean, 5th and 95th centiles of the uncertainty distribution of the total number of alerts in the current and the proposed monitoring programme are 201 [179, 227] and 172 [149, 194] for beef, and 199 [175, 222] and 2897 [2795, 3008] for sheep, respectively. For Salmonella, there are no alerts for the proposed programme since sampling is excluded while for the current programme, the estimated mean, 5th and 95th centiles of the uncertainty distribution of the number of alerts for a 5-year period were 143 [126, 144] for heifer/steer, 1.6 [0, 4] for cow/bull and 0 [0, 0] for lamb/sheep. Overall, for APC and E. coli, the estimated total number of alerts was similar (beef) or higher (sheep) for the proposed compared to the current programme. In contrast, Salmonella sampling is excluded from the proposed programme and thus cannot detect the number of current alerts.
RESUMO
Between 16 March and 14 June 2024, 42 highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) A(H5) virus detections were reported in domestic (15) and wild (27) birds across 13 countries in Europe. Although the overall number of detections in Europe has not been this low since the 2019-2020 epidemiological year, HPAI viruses continue to circulate at a very low level. Most detections in poultry were due to indirect contact with wild birds, but there was also secondary spread. Outside Europe, the HPAI situation intensified particularly in the USA, where a new A(H5N1) virus genotype (B3.13) has been identified in >130 dairy herds in 12 states. Infection in cattle appears to be centred on the udder, with milk from infected animals showing high viral loads and representing a new vehicle of transmission. Apart from cattle, HPAI viruses were identified in two other mammal species (alpaca and walrus) for the first time. Between 13 March and 20 June 2024, 14 new human cases with avian influenza virus infection were reported from Vietnam (one A(H5N1), one A(H9N2)), Australia (with travel history to India, one A(H5N1)), USA (three A(H5N1)), China (two A(H5N6), three A(H9N2), one A(H10N3)), India (one A(H9N2)), and Mexico (one fatal A(H5N2) case). The latter case was the first laboratory-confirmed human infection with avian influenza virus subtype A(H5N2). Most of the human cases had reported exposure to poultry, live poultry markets, or dairy cattle prior to avian influenza virus detection or onset of illness. Human infections with avian influenza viruses remain rare and no human-to-human transmission has been observed. The risk of infection with currently circulating avian A(H5) influenza viruses of clade 2.3.4.4b in Europe remains low for the general public in the EU/EEA. The risk of infection remains low-to-moderate for those occupationally or otherwise exposed to infected animals or contaminated environments.
RESUMO
Surveillance data published since 2010, although limited, showed that there is no evidence of zoonotic parasite infection in market quality Atlantic salmon, marine rainbow trout, gilthead seabream, turbot, meagre, Atlantic halibut, common carp and European catfish. No studies were found for greater amberjack, brown trout, African catfish, European eel and pikeperch. Anisakis pegreffii, A. simplex (s. s.) and Cryptocotyle lingua were found in European seabass, Atlantic bluefin tuna and/or cod, and Pseudamphistomum truncatum and Paracoenogonimus ovatus in tench, produced in open offshore cages or flow-through ponds or tanks. It is almost certain that fish produced in closed recirculating aquaculture systems (RAS) or flow-through facilities with filtered water intake and exclusively fed heat-treated feed are free of zoonotic parasites. Since the last EFSA opinion, the UV-press and artificial digestion methods have been developed into ISO standards to detect parasites in fish, while new UV-scanning, optical, molecular and OMICs technologies and methodologies have been developed for the detection, visualisation, isolation and/or identification of zoonotic parasites in fish. Freezing and heating continue to be the most efficient methods to kill parasites in fishery products. High-pressure processing may be suitable for some specific products. Pulsed electric field is a promising technology although further development is needed. Ultrasound treatments were not effective. Traditional dry salting of anchovies successfully inactivated Anisakis. Studies on other traditional processes - air-drying and double salting (brine salting plus dry salting) - suggest that anisakids are successfully inactivated, but more data covering these and other parasites in more fish species and products is required to determine if these processes are always effective. Marinade combinations with anchovies have not effectively inactivated anisakids. Natural products, essential oils and plant extracts, may kill parasites but safety and organoleptic data are lacking. Advanced processing techniques for intelligent gutting and trimming are being developed to remove parasites from fish.