English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The current system of post-mortem inspection using the typical macroscopic inspection techniques is ineffective in identifying the most common foodborne illness risks, e.g. Salmonella or Campylobacter. Therefore, there is a need to adopt a more appropriate, risk-based approach to meat inspection. One specific example of modifying traditional inspection techniques to represent a more cost-effective approach to meat inspection is the allowance in EC Regulation 854/2004 for only visual inspection of pigs that have been reared under controlled housing conditions since weaning. However, the definition of controlled housing excludes outdoor pig production from visual-only meat inspection, and hence so far the UK has yet to introduce this method of meat inspection into abattoirs because of the associated complications of having a large outdoor pig herd. We have therefore conducted a qualitative risk assessment to assess the comparative risks to public and animal health from allowing visual-only inspection of both indoor and outdoor pigs. In order for visual-only inspection to be of higher risk than traditional meat inspection, the sensitivity of detection of a condition must significantly decrease for visual-only inspection. In addition, in order for outdoor pigs to pose a greater risk than indoor pigs, then the condition must be more prevalent in the former than the latter. From a large number of diseases/ conditions originally identified as worthy of investigation, only two (TB and endocarditis) were considered to be of public or animal health risk and would be less likely to be spotted through visual-only inspection. It was determined that prevalence of TB in outdoor pigs was higher than in indoor pigs; however, endocarditis prevalence was higher in indoor pigs than outdoor pigs. Despite higher rates of TB in outdoor pigs, there was no discernable risk to public or animal health from TB-infected pigs. It was therefore concluded that visual-only inspection of both indoor and outdoor pigs in the UK posed a negligible risk to public or animal health.

A risk assessment for visual only meat inspection of both indoor and outdoor pigs within the UK