Farmers Views on the Implementation of On-Farm Emergency Slaughter for the Management of Acutely Injured Cattle in Ireland.

Four management options for acutely injured cattle in Ireland exist: treatment, unless cattle are severely injured; on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES); casualty slaughter (CS) if the animal is certified fit for transport; or euthanasia. OFES is designed to prevent transport of welfare-compromised cattle. An online survey of farmers in Ireland was carried out between April and July 2021 and focused on events during 2020. A theoretical framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity was used to explore farmers' perceptions. Responses from 94 farmers (49 dairy and 45 beef) were analysed; not all respondents answered all questions. Respondents indicated that the incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland is low. A majority reported not having an acutely injured animal for greater than 36 months. Most respondents had a positive attitude towards OFES for animal welfare reasons and were aware of relevant regulations and guidelines. Barriers to OFES included a lack of availability of OFES, and dairy farmers indicated that it had a similar financial impact as euthanasia. A parallel study with veterinarians indicated a higher incidence of acutely injured cattle in Ireland; the current results may be due to the demographic or the sensitivity of the topic. Nationwide electronic data capture on the cause of mortality could support improvements in the management of acutely injured cattle and enable surveillance of the proportion of these cattle undergoing OFES, euthanasia, or CS.

Management of acutely injured cattle by on farm emergency slaughter: Survey of veterinarian views.

Background: Fitness to transport is a key provision in animal welfare regulations in the European Union, and for the management of acutely injured cattle. Whilst treatment may be appropriate for some injuries, three common production outcomes for acutely injured cattle are; on farm emergency slaughter (OFES), casualty slaughter (CS) or euthanasia. The aims of this study were to evaluate the perceptions of veterinarians, working in Ireland, on the use of OFES for the management of acutely injured cattle and to evaluate the influence of capacity, willingness and opportunity on their ability to operate OFES. Methodology: Two online surveys of veterinarians working in Ireland, Private Veterinary Practitioners (PVPs) and Official Veterinarians (OVs), were conducted through QualtricsXM over a 7-week period between April and June of 2021. Quantitative and qualitative questions were developed and analyzed using the tripartite framework of capacity, willingness, and opportunity to collect relevant data about the management of acutely injured cattle and the provision of OFES in Ireland by veterinarians. Results: 43 OVs and 85 PVPs participated in the survey. OVs regulated on average 4.2 abattoirs, of which 21.6% accepted OFES. Participants reported 343 and 377 OFES and CS, respectively, in 2020. 62.4% PVPs had not certified cattle for OFES, or CS. Limb fracture accounted for 79% OFES, 34.5% CS and 47.9% euthanized acutely injured cattle. 63.3% OVs and 44% PVPs were not aware of abattoirs providing OFES within 100 km of their workplace. Lack of availability of OFES negatively associated with PVP knowledge of the procedure. Regulations and guidelines were the most common source of information on OFES for PVPs. Conclusion: Increasing the availability of OFES may help to improve the management of acutely injured cattle, especially those with limb fractures that are unfit for transport.

On Farm Emergency Slaughter and Emergency Killing of Acutely Injured Cattle: Analysis of Guidelines From Five Jurisdictions.

BACKGROUND: In July 2009, the Farm Animal Welfare Advisory Council (FAWAC) in the Republic of Ireland published Animal Welfare Guidelines for the Management of Acutely Injured Animals on Farm in support of a new Irish regulation designed to permit on-farm emergency slaughter (OFES) of cattle. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the FAWAC guidelines, to determine if they remain fit for purpose by comparing them with five guidelines on the management of acutely injured cattle from four jurisdictions purposively selected because of their relevance to OFES, and to represent geographical and organisational diversity; The United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and British Columbia/Canada. METHODOLOGY: Content and Thematic Analysis were used to compare the incidence and frequency of themes in the six guidelines using NVIVO 12. RESULTS: Humane killing and slaughter of animals and the prevention of unnecessary suffering at time of killing were emphasised in all guidelines. Thematic Analysis identified seven primary themes ("parent nodes"): animal welfare; decision tree; certification; legislation; stakeholders; transport and; veterinary ethics. Parent nodes encompassed 26 secondary themes ("child nodes") including casualty slaughter, on-farm emergency slaughter, euthanasia, unnecessary suffering, animal owner, private veterinary practitioner, official veterinarian and fitness for transport. Guidelines outlined stakeholders' roles in relation to all aspects of managing acutely injured cattle. Results showed similarities between FAWAC, the British Cattle Veterinary Association and the British Columbian/Canadian guidelines in relation to OFES as a method to address acutely injured cattle. OFES is not allowed in Australia or New Zealand as a method of managing acutely injured cattle. CONCLUSIONS: Animal welfare guidelines play a pivotal role in informing all stakeholders involved in the management of acutely injured cattle. Guidelines vary from prescriptive standard operating procedures on actions that should be undertaken for food safety reasons, to descriptive guidance upholding practicalities in relation to equipment and methods to be used in managing acutely injured cattle not meant for human consumption. The FAWAC guidelines remain substantially relevant today and consistent with other welfare guidelines published in the jurisdictions that formed part of the study. However, they need to be reviewed to align with current regulations.

Investigation of the potential for a simplified exposure tool in medical nutrition (SETIM) to minimise exposures to sweeteners in young patients aged 1-3 years with PKU and CMPA.

Children with phenylketonuria (PKU) and severe cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) consume prescribed, specially formulated, foods for special medical purposes (FSMPs) in addition to having restricted intake of normal foods. These vulnerable patients are exposed to artificial sweeteners from the consumption of a combination of both free and prescribed foods. Young patients with PKU and CMPA aged from 1 to 3 years have a higher risk of exceeding the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for sweeteners than age-matched healthy children. A probabilistic modelling approach has been adapted successfully to assess the exposure of young patients with PKU and CMPA to low-calorie sweeteners. To assist professionals in the screening and formulation of foods containing food additives for such patients, a simplified exposure method/tool has been developed. The tool is intended to ensure that total dietary exposure can be considered. The simplified tool is not intended to replace the probabilistic model but may be used as a screening tool to determine if further investigation on exposure is warranted. The aim of this study was to develop and validate this simplified exposure tool to support those currently used by healthcare professionals (HCPs) using data available from the probabilistic modelling of exposure in young children with PKU and CMPA. The probabilistic model does not allow for swift screening of exposure scenarios nor is the present EFSA Food Additive Intake Assessment Model (FAIM) fully suitable for application to medical foods. The simplified exposure tool in medical nutrition (SETIM) reported here is both reliable and consistent and provides additive usage levels which minimise regular exposure above the ADI in patients. In addition to the usefulness of SETIM for the medical nutrition industry, the tool has the potential to enhance the practice of evidence-based medical nutrition by official risk assessment bodies, registration authorities and healthcare professionals.

Predictive modelling of the exposure to steviol glycosides in Irish patients aged 1-3 years with phenylketonuria and cow's milk protein allergy.

Children with Phenylketonuria (PKU) and severe cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA) consume prescribed, specially formulated, foods for special medical purposes (FSMPs) as well as restricted amounts of normal foods. These patients are exposed to artificial sweeteners from the consumption of a combination of free and prescribed foods. Young patients with PKU and CMPA have a higher risk of exceeding acceptable daily intakes (ADI) for additives than age-matched healthy children. A predictive modelling approach has been adapted successfully to assess the additive exposure of young patients with PKU and CMPA to artificial sweeteners. Steviol glycosides (E960) are at various stages of regulatory approval for the various food categories in the EU but are not as yet permitted for use in products intended for young children. The aim of this study was to predict potential steviol glycoside exposure in young children with PKU and CMPA considering the potential for future provisions for the use of this sweetener. The recent introduction of steviol glycosides means that no exposure data are available for children with CMPA and PKU. Food consumption data were derived from the food consumption survey data of healthy young children in Ireland from the National Preschool and Nutrition Survey (NPNS, 2010-11). Specially formulated amino acid-based FSMPs are used to replace whole or milk protein foods and were included in the exposure model to replace restricted foods. The recommendations to ensure adequate protein intake in these patients were used to determine FSMP intake. Exposure assessment results indicated that the maximum permitted level (MPL) for FSMPs would warrant careful consideration to avoid exposures above the ADI. These data can be used to inform recommendations for the medical nutrition industry.

Longitudinal modelling of the exposure of young UK patients with PKU to acesulfame K and sucralose.

Artificial sweeteners are used in protein substitutes intended for the dietary management of inborn errors of metabolism (phenylketonuria, PKU) to improve the variety of medical foods available to patients and ensure dietary adherence to the prescribed course of dietary management. These patients can be exposed to artificial sweeteners from the combination of free and prescribed foods. Young children have a higher risk of exceeding acceptable daily intakes (ADI) for additives than adults, due to higher food intakes per kg body weight. Young patients with PKU aged 1-3 years can be exposed to higher levels of artificial sweeteners from these dual sources than normal healthy children and are at a higher risk of exceeding the ADI. Standard intake assessment methods are not adequate to assess the additive exposure of young patients with PKU. The aim of this study was to estimate the combination effect on the intake of artificial sweeteners and the impact of the introduction of new provisions for an artificial sweetener (sucralose, E955) on exposure of PKU patients using a validated probabilistic model. Food consumption data were derived from the food consumption survey data of healthy young children in the United Kingdom from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (NDNS, 1992-2012). Specially formulated protein substitutes as foods for special medical purposes (FSMPs) were included in the exposure model to replace restricted foods. Inclusion of these protein substitutes is based on recommendations to ensure adequate protein intake in these patients. Exposure assessment results indicated the availability of sucralose for use in FSMPs for PKU leads to changes in intakes in young patients. These data further support the viability of probabilistic modelling as a means to estimate food additive exposure in patients consuming medical nutrition products.

A cross-sectional observation on habitual non-alcoholic beverage consumption among adolescents from four Irish post-primary schools.

OBJECTIVE: No up-to-date data on the dietary intake of Irish adolescents are available. The aim of the present pilot study was to obtain and compare cross-sectional information on habitual adolescent beverage consumption between four distinct post-primary schools in the Republic of Ireland, in 2014-2015. DESIGN: A cross-sectional observation study. A beverage consumption questionnaire was used to obtain data on beverage intake and influences on consumption. SETTING: Four post-primary mixed-sex schools in Ireland representing the following school classifications were selected for the study: urban fee-paying, urban disadvantaged, rural fee-paying and rural disadvantaged. SUBJECTS: Students (n 761) aged 12-18 years. RESULTS: Data were analysed by Kruskal-Wallis (non-parametric) ANOVA to compare the distribution of beverage consumption across the schools. Water was the most highly consumed beverage among students from all four schools (median 1425 ml/d). Students from urban and rural disadvantaged schools reported a significantly higher volume of carbonated beverage intake than students from fee-paying schools. Students from an urban disadvantaged school also reported a significantly higher volume of carbonated beverage and energy drink intake compared with the other three schools. Students from an urban fee-paying school reported the highest consumption of water, while rural disadvantaged school students were the biggest consumers of tea and milk. CONCLUSIONS: Significant differences in beverage consumption (ml/d) were reported by adolescents from four schools in Ireland. Surveillance on current beverage consumption trends among adolescents is vital to guide policies and interventions, and for appropriate targeting of resources.

Probabilistic modelling to assess exposure to three artificial sweeteners of young Irish patients aged 1-3 years with PKU and CMPA.

The choice of suitable normal foods is limited for individuals with particular medical conditions, e.g., inborn errors of metabolism (phenylketonuria - PKU) or severe cow's milk protein allergy (CMPA). Patients may have dietary restrictions and exclusive or partial replacement of specific food groups with specially formulated products to meet particular nutrition requirements. Artificial sweeteners are used to improve the appearance and palatability of such food products to avoid food refusal and ensure dietary adherence. Young children have a higher risk of exceeding acceptable daily intakes for additives than adults due to higher food intakes kg-1 body weight. The Budget Method and EFSA's Food Additives Intake Model (FAIM) are not equipped to assess partial dietary replacement with special formulations as they are built on data from dietary surveys of consumers without special medical requirements impacting the diet. The aim of this study was to explore dietary exposure modelling as a means of estimating the intake of artificial sweeteners by young PKU and CMPA patients aged 1-3 years. An adapted validated probabilistic model (FACET) was used to assess patients' exposure to artificial sweeteners. Food consumption data were derived from the food consumption survey data of healthy young children in Ireland from the National Preschool and Nutrition Survey (NPNS, 2010-11). Specially formulated foods for special medical purposes were included in the exposure model to replace restricted foods. Inclusion was based on recommendations for adequate protein intake and dietary adherence data. Exposure assessment results indicated that young children with PKU and CMPA have higher relative average intakes of artificial sweeteners than healthy young children. The reliability and robustness of the model in the estimation of patient additive exposures was further investigated and provides the first exposure estimates for these special populations.

Analysis of the operation of on farm emergency slaughter of bovine animals in the Republic of Ireland.

BACKGROUND: On Farm Emergency Slaughter (OFES) is the slaughter outside the slaughterhouse, of an otherwise healthy animal, which has suffered an accident that, for welfare reasons, prevented its transport to a slaughterhouse. The procedure is designed to prevent the transport of welfare compromised animals, which may have veterinary certification to slaughterhouses for Casualty Slaughter (CS), and provides an alternative to the euthanasia and disposal of injured animals that are otherwise fit for human consumption. The aim of this study was to analyse the operation of OFES in the Republic of Ireland between 1st January 2011 and 31st December 2013. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Animal Identification and Movement electronic database of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. Two structured surveys were designed, one for Official Veterinarians (OVs) who work in slaughterhouses and the second for Private Veterinary Practitioners (PVPs) who work in food animal practice in the Republic of Ireland. Surveys were administered through SurveyMonkey. The total number of bovines slaughtered and the number that underwent OFES in Northern Ireland and the Netherlands were obtained from the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Safety Authority. RESULTS: OFES is neither widely available nor used in the Republic of Ireland. Results from the OV survey showed that Food Business Operators consider that facilitation of OFES would be detrimental to business. Data from the 5 slaughterhouses which offer OFES showed that acceptance criteria are not standardised. Results from the PVP survey showed that 77 % (n = 79) of PVPs were willing to certify animals for OFES. Fifty four percent (n = 49) were aware of slaughterhouses in their area that provided the service of OFES and 64 % (n = 57) stated a willingness to certify the transport of acutely injured animals to slaughterhouses for CS. Data from the Northern Ireland Department of Agriculture and Rural Development and the Netherlands Food and Consumer Safety Authority indicated a low level of uptake of OFES in the Republic of Ireland compared to Northern Ireland and the Netherlands. CONCLUSION: Based on results reported here, criteria for assessment of risk associated with accepting animals for OFES should be reconsidered. A review of the systems pertaining to OFES and its implementation should be undertaken, including the level and quality of training of all stakeholders, with a view to making OFES more widely available in the Republic of Ireland.

Microbial assessment of an upward and downward dehiding technique in a commercial beef processing plant.

Preventing microbial contamination during dehiding is challenging, and skinning methods are of critical importance for the hygienic status of beef carcasses. Two skinning methods are usually employed: upward hide pulling (UHP) and downward hide pulling (DHP). This study has compared the microbiological contamination of carcasses using both systems in a beef processing plant in the process of changing its dehiding method from UHP to DHP. 100 cm(2) areas from eight carcass sites (ham, chuck, rump, bung, flank, brisket, shin and neck) were sampled on 36 skinned carcasses dehided by each technique. Total viable counts (TVCs) and Enterobacteriaceae counts for each site were determined. No significant differences were observed in total (pooled-samples) carcass contamination regardless of the method used. However, significant differences (p<0.05) in TVCs were observed at the flank, shin, brisket and neck. These differences can be attributed to possible deficiencies in the implementation of the HACCP pre-requisite programmes, and are not necessarily associated with the skinning method per se.

Effects of slaughtering operations on carcass contamination in an Irish pork production plant.

BACKGROUND: Microbiological standards within pork slaughter processing plants in the European Union are currently governed by Commission Regulation (EC) 2073/2005, which describes detailed performance criteria at specific stages of the procedure (following carcass dressing and before chilling) for total viable counts (TVC), Enterobacteriaceae (EB) and Salmonella spp. In this study, 95 carcasses from an Irish pork slaughter plant were sampled by swabbing 100 cm2 of surface at three sites (belly, ham, jowl) to examine the effects of eight processing stages (stunning, bleeding, scalding, singeing, polishing, evisceration, final inspection and chilling) on contamination levels. RESULTS: TVC ranged from approximately 1.7-6.3 log cfu cm2 during sampling. There were significant reductions in TVC for all sites after scalding and singeing (p < 0.05), whilst there was a significant increase in counts after polishing and evisceration (p < 0.05) compared with preceding stages. EB counts indicated hygienic weak points in the examined slaughter plant leading to faecal (cross)-contamination, with elevated counts after stunning, bleeding and evisceration (p < 0.05), compared with final counts after chilling. CONCLUSIONS: Although the bacterial numbers reported in this study may reflect specific plant practices and temporal influences, results show that contamination can be introduced at various steps in the process and highlight the importance of monitoring locations other than those required by legislation within the process. Monitoring can be used to establish baseline levels for high-risk stages specific to each plant and to assess the effectiveness of additional interventions.

Estimation of the dietary intake of 13 priority additives in France, Italy, the UK and Ireland as part of the FACET project.

The aim of this study was to assess the dietary exposure of 13 priority additives in four European countries (France, Italy, the UK and Ireland) using the Flavourings, Additives and Contact Materials Exposure Task (FACET) software. The studied additives were benzoates (E210-213), nitrites (E249-250) and sulphites (E220-228), butylated hydroxytoluene (E321), polysorbates (E432-436), sucroses esters and sucroglycerides (E473-474), polyglycerol esters of fatty acids (E475), stearoyl-lactylates (E481-482), sorbitan esters (E493-494 and E491-495), phosphates (E338-343/E450-452), aspartame (E951) and acesulfame (E950). A conservative approach (based on individual consumption data combined with maximum permitted levels (Tier 2)) was compared with more refined estimates (using a fitted distribution of concentrations based on data provided by the food industry (Tier 3)). These calculations demonstrated that the estimated intake is below the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for nine of the studied additives. However, there was a potential theoretical exceedance of the ADI observed for four additives at Tier 3 for high consumers (97.5th percentile) among children: E220-228 in the UK and Ireland, E432-436 and E481-482 in Ireland, Italy and the UK, and E493-494 in all countries. The mean intake of E493-494 could potentially exceed the ADI for one age group of children (aged 1-4 years) in the UK. For adults, high consumers only in all countries had a potential intake higher than the ADI for E493-494 at Tier 3 (an additive mainly found in bakery wares). All other additives examined had an intake below the ADI. Further refined exposure assessments may be warranted to provide a more in-depth investigation for those additives that exceeded the ADIs in this paper. This refinement may be undertaken by the introduction of additive occurrence data, which take into account the actual presence of these additives in the different food groups.

Irish consumers' use and perception of nutrition and health claims.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate Irish consumers' use and understanding of and their belief in nutrition and health (NH) claims in the context of the European Union (EU) legislation (Regulation no. 1924/2006), which permits a number of NH claims on food products. DESIGN: An interview-assisted questionnaire was administered to consumers (n 400). Preference for three types of NH claims across six products was tested. Perception of NH claims was assessed across a further eight food products. Claims were categorised as content, structure-function and disease-risk factor reduction claims. SETTING: Six supermarkets in the Republic of Ireland. SUBJECTS: Four hundred adult Irish supermarket consumers. RESULTS: Older (P < 0·001), female (P < 0·01) consumers were more likely to seek NH claims. Structure-function and content claims were preferred across six products. Consumers' perception was associated with the health benefit claimed rather than with the strength of the claim itself. Preference for claim type and claim perception differed with gender, age and educational level. CONCLUSIONS: Irish consumers prefer content and simpler NH claims rather than more complex disease-risk factor reduction claims. The food industry may thus be better served using these types of claims. Although the reported levels of understanding were high, evidence of positivity bias and misinterpretation was found. Thus, with regard to Regulation 1924/2006, consumers need more information on both simpler and more complex claims. Public health messages should be targeted according to gender, age and educational level.