IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v30y2010i5p853-865.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluation of Scenarios for Reducing Human Salmonellosis Through Household Consumption of Fresh Minced Pork Meat

Author

Listed:
  • Kaatje Bollaerts
  • Winy Messens
  • Marc Aerts
  • Jeroen Dewulf
  • Dominiek Maes
  • Koen Grijspeerdt
  • Yves Van der Stede

Abstract

Nontyphoidal salmonellosis is the second most frequently reported zoonotic disease in the European Union (EU) and is considered to be a major threat to human health worldwide. The most reported Salmonella serovar in the EU is S. Enteritidis, mainly associated with egg contamination, followed by S. Typhimurium, with the latter being the most predominant serovar isolated from pork. These findings suggest that reducing the Salmonella contamination in the pork production might be a good strategy to prevent and control human salmonellosis in the EU. Recently, a quantitative microbial risk assessment (QMRA) has been developed to assess the risks for human salmonellosis due to home consumption of fresh minced pork meat in Belgium.(1) The newly developed risk model is called the METZOON model. In the current study, the METZOON model was used to evaluate the effectiveness of different hypothetical Salmonella mitigation strategies implemented at different stages of the minced pork production and consumption chain by means of a scenario analysis. To efficiently evaluate the mitigation strategies, model results were obtained by running simulations using the randomized complete block design. The effectiveness of a mitigation strategy is expressed using point and interval estimates of the effect size for dependent observations, expressed as the standardized difference in population means. The results indicate that the most effective strategies are taken during the slaughter processes of polishing, evisceration, and chilling, and during postprocessing, whereas interventions in the primary production and at the beginning of the slaughter process seem to have only a limited effect. Improving consumer awareness is found to be effective as well.

Suggested Citation

  • Kaatje Bollaerts & Winy Messens & Marc Aerts & Jeroen Dewulf & Dominiek Maes & Koen Grijspeerdt & Yves Van der Stede, 2010. "Evaluation of Scenarios for Reducing Human Salmonellosis Through Household Consumption of Fresh Minced Pork Meat," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(5), pages 853-865, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:5:p:853-865
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01368.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01368.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01368.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kaatje Els Bollaerts & Winy Messens & Laurent Delhalle & Marc Aerts & Yves Van der Stede & Jeroen Dewulf & Sophie Quoilin & Dominiek Maes & Koen Mintiens & Koen Grijspeerdt, 2009. "Development of a Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment for Human Salmonellosis Through Household Consumption of Fresh Minced Pork Meat in Belgium," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 820-840, June.
    2. Kaatje Bollaerts & Marc Aerts & Stefaan Ribbens & Yves Van der Stede & Ides Boone & Koen Mintiens, 2008. "Identification of Salmonella high risk pig‐herds in Belgium by using semiparametric quantile regression," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 171(2), pages 449-464, April.
    3. Ides Boone & Yves Van der Stede & Kaatje Bollaerts & David Vose & Dominiek Maes & Jeroen Dewulf & Winy Messens & Georges Daube & Marc Aerts & Koen Mintiens, 2009. "NUSAP Method for Evaluating the Data Quality in a Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment Model for Salmonella in the Pork Production Chain," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(4), pages 502-517, April.
    4. Jeroen P. Van Der Sluijs & Matthieu Craye & Silvio Funtowicz & Penny Kloprogge & Jerry Ravetz & James Risbey, 2005. "Combining Quantitative and Qualitative Measures of Uncertainty in Model‐Based Environmental Assessment: The NUSAP System," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(2), pages 481-492, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ides Boone & Yves Van der Stede & Jeroen Dewulf & Winy Messens & Marc Aerts & Georges Daube & Koen Mintiens, 2010. "NUSAP: a method to evaluate the quality of assumptions in quantitative microbial risk assessment," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 337-352, April.
    2. Kaatje Els Bollaerts & Winy Messens & Laurent Delhalle & Marc Aerts & Yves Van der Stede & Jeroen Dewulf & Sophie Quoilin & Dominiek Maes & Koen Mintiens & Koen Grijspeerdt, 2009. "Development of a Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment for Human Salmonellosis Through Household Consumption of Fresh Minced Pork Meat in Belgium," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 820-840, June.
    3. Gregory Hill & Steven Kolmes & Michael Humphreys & Rebecca McLain & Eric T. Jones, 2019. "Using decision support tools in multistakeholder environmental planning: restorative justice and subbasin planning in the Columbia River Basin," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(2), pages 170-186, June.
    4. Clive L Spash, 2009. "Social Ecological Economics," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-08, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    5. Tasneem Bani-Mustafa & Nicola Pedroni & Enrico Zio & Dominique Vasseur & Francois Beaudouin, 2020. "A hierarchical tree-based decision-making approach for assessing the relative trustworthiness of risk assessment models," Journal of Risk and Reliability, , vol. 234(6), pages 748-763, December.
    6. Phillip M. Gurman & Tom Ross & Andreas Kiermeier, 2018. "Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment of Salmonellosis from the Consumption of Australian Pork: Minced Meat from Retail to Burgers Prepared and Consumed at Home," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2625-2645, December.
    7. Martijn Bouwknegt & Anne B. Knol & Jeroen P. van der Sluijs & Eric G. Evers, 2014. "Uncertainty of Population Risk Estimates for Pathogens Based on QMRA or Epidemiology: A Case Study of Campylobacter in the Netherlands," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 847-864, May.
    8. Failing, L. & Gregory, R. & Harstone, M., 2007. "Integrating science and local knowledge in environmental risk management: A decision-focused approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 47-60, October.
    9. Andrea Saltelli & Monica Fiore, 2020. "From sociology of quantification to ethics of quantification," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-8, December.
    10. Samuele Lo Piano & Lorenzo Benini, 2022. "A critical perspective on uncertainty appraisal and sensitivity analysis in life cycle assessment," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(3), pages 763-781, June.
    11. Clive L Spash & Heinz Schandl, 2009. "Growth, the Environment and Keynes: Reflections on Two Heterodox Schools of Thought," Socio-Economics and the Environment in Discussion (SEED) Working Paper Series 2009-01, CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.
    12. Daniel Scamman & Baltazar Solano-Rodríguez & Steve Pye & Lai Fong Chiu & Andrew Z. P. Smith & Tiziano Gallo Cassarino & Mark Barrett & Robert Lowe, 2020. "Heat Decarbonisation Modelling Approaches in the UK: An Energy System Architecture Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-28, April.
    13. Samuele Lo Piano, 2020. "Ethical principles in machine learning and artificial intelligence: cases from the field and possible ways forward," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, December.
    14. Emma L. Snary & Arno N. Swart & Robin R. L. Simons & Ana Rita Calado Domingues & Hakan Vigre & Eric G. Evers & Tine Hald & Andrew A. Hill, 2016. "A Quantitative Microbiological Risk Assessment for Salmonella in Pigs for the European Union," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(3), pages 437-449, March.
    15. Yangjunna Zhang & Annette M. O'Connor & Chong Wang & James S. Dickson & H. Scott Hurd & Bing Wang, 2019. "Interventions Targeting Deep Tissue Lymph Nodes May Not Effectively Reduce the Risk of Salmonellosis from Ground Pork Consumption: A Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(10), pages 2237-2258, October.
    16. Langdalen, Henrik & Abrahamsen, Eirik Bjorheim & Abrahamsen, HÃ¥kon Bjorheim, 2020. "A New Framework To Idenitfy And Assess Hidden Assumptions In The Background Knowledge Of A Risk Assessment," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    17. Anthony G. Patt & Elke U. Weber, 2014. "Perceptions and communication strategies for the many uncertainties relevant for climate policy," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(2), pages 219-232, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:30:y:2010:i:5:p:853-865. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.