139 | How to Mistake-Proof Your Food System | Toxic Ingredient Update | Grave Salmon |

Plus: Weird motivation for food tampering incidents

This is The Rotten Apple, an inside view of food integrity for professionals, policy-makers and purveyors. Subscribe for weekly insights, latest news and emerging trends in food safety, food authenticity and sustainable supply chains.

• Mistake proofing in food systems;

• Food Safety News and Resources (mad cow is back?!)

• Tara flour declared ‘unapproved’, but not ‘unsafe’ by the US FDA 🤔;

• Why one man put lettuce down his pants;

• A very brief history of gravlax;

• The best crab joke in the universe;

• Food fraud news, emerging issues and recent incidents

🎧 Listen 🎧

Hi,

How are you? Welcome to this week’s issue of The Rotten Apple. If you’re new here, I’m Karen and I spend my weeks scanning thousands of food safety and supply chain articles to bring you the most relevant news, emerging issues and information from around the globe.

This week’s main article is a deep dive into mistake proofing and how it can be used in food manufacturing. It includes an interesting perspective on front-line-worker-related weaknesses in HACCP systems.

I’ve also got follow-ups on past stories, including tara flour, the ingredient linked to hundreds of mystery illnesses from plant-based meal toppers in 2022 and surprising insights into the mind of a food tampering perpetrator.

Plus, the winning 🦀 crab joke is revealed!

Enjoy,

Karen

P.S. A big thank you to 👏👏 Tara 👏👏 who upgraded her subscription last week. Tara says “You share amazing content and keep things interesting. Thank you for all you do.” Paying subscribers like Tara make this newsletter possible. Thank you Tara.

---

Mistake Proofing in Food Manufacturing

Human error is an inevitable part of any system that involves people. Regardless of how stringent the regulations, how well-maintained the machinery, or how highly trained the workers, something will go wrong at some point. When this happens in food manufacturing, food safety outcomes can be affected and the consequences can be catastrophic.

So how do we mistake-proof our food manufacturing systems to minimise errors?

Mistake proofing, or poka-yoke (a Japanese word meaning 'error-proofing'), is a trusted method for reducing or eliminating errors. Since its inception, it's come to be a popular method for error detection and correction across numerous industries, including the electrical appliance and automotive industries.

We should not confuse poka-yoke with other error proofing techniques, however. Six Sigma, for example, employs a broader methodology, seeking to reduce defects and variability in processes using statistical tools. Meanwhile, HACCP focuses only on food safety, by identifying and controlling potential hazards that could harm consumers.

Unlike other error detection systems, mistake proofing in food manufacturing aims to identify and eliminate the potential sources of errors and mistakes. Rather than trying to detect every single error that occurs, it works back up the food manufacturing system to find how and why errors occur. Once identified, the system can be altered to prevent the errors.

Where can mistake proofing be used in food systems?

Mistake proofing works best when applied to the following situations:

• Manufacturing steps that rely heavily on the worker's attention, skill, or experience, such as hand-finishing of patisserie/bakery items.

• Processes where errors will impact the safety or quality of the finished product, such as CCP (critical control point) monitoring tasks.

• Situations where there is high worker turnover, necessitating constant training, or a high proportion of inexperienced workers, such as in a seasonal fruit packing house.

• Steps where products or processes are transferred between workers, such as WIP picked up by the next shift.

• Processing or production steps where a minor error could easily lead to a major problem later in the process, such as the weighing of critical ingredients like dough raising agents.

• Situations where the consequences of an error would be expensive, dangerous, or insurmountable, such as a task where water overspray could contact a large container of liquid chocolate.

• Processing steps where errors or failures occur frequently, such as a manual carton-filling operation with multiple products put in one carton in a certain pattern.

How to develop a mistake proofing system

A mistake proofing system is designed to make it impossible, or at least very difficult, for mistakes to occur. Here's how to develop one:

Step 1.          Review Existing Procedures. Analyze production flow charts, standard operating procedures (SOPs), and other documents, observe production systems in action and talk to floor personnel to identify areas of weakness.

Step 2.          Identify and Prioritize Errors. Evaluate each step in the food manufacturing process to identify potential human errors, both historical and theoretical. Use tools like Failure Mode Effects Analysis (FMEA) to assign priorities.

Step 3.          Determine the Root Cause. Fundamental to mistake proofing is the identification of the underlying cause. Sometimes, these may be single-point errors, such as a mistake in the written SOP or a mistake repeated by just one person. However, be vigilant for systems errors, where multiple points of failure converge.

Step 4.          Develop Solutions. Either eliminate the step, substitute it for another process that is less error-prone, modify the step to make the task easier to accomplish without mistakes or enhance error detection systems at the step.

Solutions should include controls and alerts. Controls include inspection processes, such as multiple checks by different personnel or automated sensor systems such as optical sensors.

Alerts, such as bells, buzzers or lights inform operators when errors have occurred. They should be set up to require confirmations on human-machine interfaces to indicate that the process can continue. For example, if a metal detector detects metal, alarms are activated and the machine should stop.

The best solutions result in the simplification and standardisation of tasks, equipment and processes, because these make tasks easier for workers, reducing the chance of errors.

Examples of mistake proofing systems in food manufacturing

How does mistake proofing in food manufacturing work in practice? Here are three real-world examples:

1. Colour Coding Systems: Prevent cross-contamination in food processing by using different coloured tools and containers for allergen-containing ingredients to prevent contamination errors.

2. Automated Monitoring Systems: Regulate critical conditions like temperature, pH, and humidity in real-time, with automatic adjustments and alerts to maintain food safety standards and minimize human error. Similar systems are also used for weight checking on a calibrated scale.

3. RFID Tracking: Uses radio frequency identification for detailed tracking of food products through the supply chain, improving inventory management and enabling quick response to recall by accurately tracing product history.

Fun fact

The term poka-yoke was initially known as baka-yoke or idiot-proofing. Considering this a little harsh, the term was changed. The phrase is derived from poka o yokeru, which means avoiding an unthinkably bad move – like metal or glass in your food.

Like many of Japan's most ingenious concepts, it was developed by Shingeo Shingo in the 1960s to reduce human error in industrial processes. He noticed that factory workers would often forget to add a spring under one of the switch buttons in a product. He implemented a two-step process, which guaranteed that workers would notice if they had failed to add the spring. The concept of poka-yoke was born.

Perspectives from the (food safety) trenches

A contributor to an online food safety forum recently suggested that worker compliance with food safety critical SOPs should be built into HACCP systems, the same way we currently consider the likelihood of food safety hazards.

Shouldn’t we, they suggested, also consider the likelihood of a worker not performing tasks correctly when we do a hazard analysis?

It’s an interesting idea! A CCP-related task that isn’t carried out correctly is a food safety disaster waiting to happen.

For example, in the forum contributor’s workplace, a food safety critical task was allergen cleaning, and the risk of non-compliance was high. They said they preferred not to rely on training and checking people, deciding it was better to eliminate the opportunity for mistakes in allergen cleaning altogether, and they ultimately removed all allergens from their products and processes. That’s mistake proofing in action.

Read the whole conversation here: Is HACCP broken? - IFSQN

Takeaways for food professionals

Mistake proofing can help food manufacturers make food more efficiently with less waste by reducing errors that would otherwise lead to increased downtime and expensive re-working or destruction of food and ingredients.

Here are three key takeaways:

• Mistake proofing works best when achieved by simplifying processes and standardising equipment, which makes it easier for front-line workers to perform tasks correctly.

• Technologies like automated monitoring and RFID tracking can remove opportunities for human error, thereby enhancing accuracy and compliance.

• Regularly review processes to identify inefficiencies and errors, talking with workers to foster a culture of feedback and continuous improvement.

Further reading

🍏  Lean Factories - Poka-Yoke Examples in Manufacturing & Daily Life

🍏   Learn Lean Sigma - Poka-Yoke: Mistake and Error Proofing

🍏   Poka-Yoke Complete Guide 2021

🍏   ResearchGate - Using Poka-Yoke Techniques for Early Defect Detection

---

Food Safety News and Resources

My weekly news and resources roundup is an expertly curated selection of food safety news from around the globe, plus links to free webinars and guidance documents: no ads, no sponsored content, only resources that I believe will be genuinely helpful for you.

This week’s weird (💀 deadly) outbreak: botulism linked to commercially prepared mayonnaise + BSE is back in Britain😯!

Click the preview below to access it.

---

Throwback Thursday Monday

Tara flour – the regulatory wheels have turned

I’m sharing this news because it shows that food regulators will take action when new ingredients turn out to be unsafe.

It’s a follow-up to the series of stories I wrote about the mystery illnesses which affected at least 400 consumers in 2022 and which were ultimately linked to the presence of a novel ingredient, tara flour, in a lentil-based meal topper.

The tara flour was included in the recipe by its creators as an allergen-free source of plant-based protein. The regulatory status was assumed to be Generally Recognized As Safe (or GRAS) however the ingredient proved to be anything but safe, with victims requiring hospitalisation and some undergoing surgery.

Last week, the US FDA effectively banned the problematic ingredient. It released a statement declaring that tara flour does not meet the  Generally Recognized As Safe (or GRAS) standard and is an unapproved food additive.

Lawyer speak prevailed in the FDA statement, which asserted the FDA had found no evidence that tara flour caused the illnesses.  Instead, the FDA said the brand owner, Daily Harvest, had identified the tara flour as problematic, saying Daily Harvest had conducted “their own root cause analysis, during which they identified tara flour as a possible contributor to the illnesses”.

Despite declaring tara flour an “unapproved food additive” in its statement, the FDA refused to say it is unsafe, instead stating that it has no established history of safe use, nor enough available safety data. 

The FDA also left the door open for other food manufacturers that might wish to use tara flour as an ingredient, saying they should consult with the FDA.

“Manufacturers who are considering using tara flour as an ingredient in food are responsible for ensuring that its use is safe and lawful and are encouraged to consult with the FDA.” US FDA Statement on tara flour, 15 May 2024

… Which seems contradictory given their memorandum dated 10th April declares it an unsafe food additive and therefore unlawful to use in food.

Takeaway for food professionals

• When formulating products with unusual ingredients, do not rely on the seller for safety assurances.  Make your own independent enquiries. 

🍏🍏🍏 Thank you to Steven Gendel for alerting me to this news.  Steve is running a workshop on GRAS evaluation in Chicago (USA) in July and is also available to assist professionals who can’t make it to the workshop 🍏🍏🍏

A ‘bodily fluids in food’ story with an unexpected motive!

In last week’s food safety news roundup, I reported that a 21 year old man had been charged over the contamination of food with ‘bodily fluids’, which occurred during a one month period while he was working at a restaurant. 

More details have since been revealed.  It turns out the man had an unusual motive for contaminating the food, something he did approximately 20 times.

Usually such acts are perpetrated out of frustration with an employer or diners. Not so for this man.

Instead, he told police, he was urinating in food, pressing food items against his penis and buttocks, putting lettuce down his pants and touching food with his feet so he could capture the crimes on video for the entertainment of an online audience.  The videos had titles including “pissing in the serving sauce again,” “Pissing on restaurant desert [sic],” and “Love making people taste my sweaty balls and toes.” 

He told police that men on dating apps and fetish sites had encouraged him to carry out the acts, even making special requests.  He also admitted that the first occurrence of contamination was done because he did not enjoy the job, but that further acts continued after being encouraged by his audience, even though he was enjoying the job more by that time.

The crimes came to light after the FBI received a tipoff from a concerned viewer and checked IP addresses linked to the videos, leading to a phone number belonging to the accused man.  Detectives matched video footage of sauces with those from the restaurant and with the accused’s shoes.

Main source: Police update customer reporting for Hereford House food contamination (yahoo.com)

Gravlax and Nasjonaldagen

Following on from the Salmonella story in Issue 136, which featured gravlax, a lovely reader from Norway wrote to me this week to tell me about the history and origins of gravlax, a Norwegian salmon dish. She explained that the word gravlax is a combination of the Norweigan words for dig (‘grave’) and salmon (‘laks’). Gravlax (gravlaks in Norweigan) was originally prepared by salting the salmon then burying it in the sand above the high tide line for curing… literally “buried salmon”.

It’s eaten with strawberries and champagne to celebrate Norway’s national day Nasjonaldagen, which was on 17th May, just a few days ago.

Happy Nasjonaldagen, Kristine! 🥂

---

The Best Crab Joke in the Universe (Just for Fun)

Last month we 🐚 shell-ebrated International Crab Day and I revealed that a competition to find the best crab joke in the world was in progress.

The winner has been announced and I’m delighted to share it with you (Drumroll please)….

Man walks into a restaurant with a crab under his arm and says ‘Do you make crab cakes’? Manager answers ‘Yes, we do’. ‘Good’ says the man ‘Because it’s his birthday’.

🦀🦀🦀

---

Below for paying subscribers: Food fraud news, horizon scanning and incident reports

📌 Food Fraud News 📌

In this week’s food fraud news:

📌 An insider report of fraud in peppers;
📌 Pharmaceutical drugs in mood-enhancing food supplements;
📌 Peanuts, almonds;
📌 Facility raided over plastic containers.