higher level of disorders of the gut, including fibre digestion, or diarrhoea, and be more susceptible to diseases while also showing less response to veterinary treatments due to their weakened immune systems. Alltech suggest that the situation outlined by the results from


their latest harvest survey point towards more subtle symptoms, such as reduced feed intake and feed conversion rates as well as reduced immunity, rather than the acute responses often noticed when the animals consume high levels of mycotoxins. Mr Adams warned that these symptoms of chronic exposure at low levels may not be as easily observed, in contrast to the acute responses seen when animals consume high levels of mycotoxins. It was particularly important that farmers maintained a close watch on their livestock so that they can spot problems early and be ready to take remedial action if necessary.


A COMPLEX AND CHALLENGING TOPIC I suppose most people in the feed industry would agree that mycotoxins continue to remain a complex and challenging topic for the industry. To shed light on this area, Kemin has recently hosted a meeting with leading industry experts in the field of mycotoxin research and regulation to discuss emerging mycotoxins, the analytical challenges they pose and mycotoxins’ negative effects. According to the experts, one of the key challenges is to understand


the effects of several different mycotoxins acting together; one expert called for research effort to be focussed on the effects of mycotoxins at low levels, both individually and collectively. There were also problems with current detection methods in that they cannot identify ‘masked’ mycotoxins - mycotoxins linked to a sugar compound - which can account for between 40 per cent and 80 per cent of overall mycotoxin levels. Once in the animal’s digestive tract, these masked mycotoxins are broken down, thus releasing the active mycotoxin. Dr. Stefaan Van Dyck, Kemin Vice-President of Research and


Development reviewed one product aiming at improving mycotoxin control as regards both free and masked mycotoxins after the latter had been broken down in the digestive tract. The Kemin product reviewed, TOXFIN®


, a broad spectrum mycotoxin binder that uses carefully


selected activated clays, works by absorbing mycotoxins in the digestive tract and then excreting them into the faeces, thus creating a safeguard to health for both animals and final consumers. Dr Van Dyck said that scientific studies had shown that the product successfully eliminated the negative effects of mycotoxins and that Kemin was committed to providing effective solutions to help meet the increasing demand for high quality and safe fed. I was interested to note that a spokesman from the EU Directorate-


General for Health and Consumers (SANCO) in discussing European regulation as regards mycotoxins noted that some were regulated with a maximum permissible value in feed while some were regulated via guidance or an indicative value. Looking to the future, he expected to see additional mycotoxins appearing on the EU focus list. However, the experts all agreed that only through combined action from regulators, industry analysts, and business leaders could solutions be provided to curb an ever-increasing mycotoxin challenge.


PAGE 10 JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2014 FEED COMPOUNDER


COMPETITIVE CAMPYLOBACTER? I, together with those compounders involved in the salmonella scandal of a number of years ago – Edwina Currie, remember her – will have had long-buried memories brought to the surface by a recent report by Food Manufacture.Co.Uk, asking whether campylobacter could become ‘a competitive issue’. Campylobacter is not as well-known as salmonella but, speaking at


Food Manufacture’s food safety conference, the Food Standard Agency’s Chief Operating Officer Andrew Rhodes pointed out that about two-thirds of all chickens have campylobacter on them. It was the largest source of food borne disease and kills people every year; as a result it was starting to capture news headlines Top of Form Rhodes went on to say that campylobacter could become a


competitive issue as supermarkets which had managed to reduce the pathogen levels in their chicken took commercial advantage of this. He added that if somebody ‘does manage to get levels down considerably, then why wouldn’t they try to seek a commercial advantage’? But, he accepted, it would be a difficult marketing message to get


across to consumers. ‘My chicken is safer than your chicken, but my chicken is not 100 per cent safe would be a very hard sell,’ he said. However, that didn’t mean it wouldn’t happen and if somebody did find a way of reducing campylobacter significantly, there would be a competitive advantage to be made and differentiation be exploited and, he said, ‘I’d be amazed if it was not exploited.’ More seriously, Rhodes complained that general awareness about


contamination by campylobacter in chicken was low because of the industry’s reluctance to talk about it. But, he added, that could change. Rhodes said that nobody really wants to talk about the subject very much because some retailers and manufacturers were hitting campylobacter levels. But others did not want to talk about it in that it might encourage the subject to be a market differentiator. Rhodes argued that the fact that campylobacter was starting to


capture news headlines was good as it helped to draw attention to the size of the problem ‘because the sooner we tackle this, the safer we will be’. He said that while lots of other safety areas have been a competitive issue for a very long time, food hazards were ‘a bit of a taboo,’ He noted that quality was a competitive issue as were ethical issues such as environmental and working conditions –‘why shouldn’t food safety be a competitive issue as well?’ Rhodes added the difficulty with campylobacter was that people are


just struggling to get to grips with it. One manufacturer had said to the Food Standards Agency ‘if this turned chicken green, we would have fixed this a long time ago’. However, the British Retail Consortium’s Technical Director David Brackston disputed that food safety was a competitive issue within the food supply chain. He suggested that co- operation between retailers and the sharing of best practice would be far more effective in reducing campylobacter contamination of chicken. Brackston argued that when it came down to a lot of these food scares, there were industry initiatives to ensure that the whole industry was protected. When a scare happened with chicken or any other product,


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68