A qualitative risk assessment identified Campylobacter spp., Salmonella spp. and ESBL/AmpC gene-carrying bacteria as the most relevant biological hazards in the context of meat inspection of poultry. As none of these are detected by traditional visual meat inspection, establishing an integrated food safety assurance system, achievable through improved food chain information (FCI) and risk-based interventions, was proposed. This includes setting targets at carcass level and, when appropriate, flock level indicating what should be achieved for a given hazard. Elements of the system would be risk categorisation of flocks based on FCI and classification of abattoirs according to their capability to reduce carcass faecal contamination. It is proposed that post-mortem visual inspection is replaced by setting targets for the main hazards on the carcass, and by verification of the food business operator's hygiene management, using Process Hygiene Criteria. Chemical substances that might occur in poultry were ranked into four categories of potential concern based on pre-defined criteria. Dioxins, dioxin-like polychlorinated biphenyls, chloramphenicol, nitrofurans and nitroimidazoles were ranked as being of high potential concern. Chemical substances in poultry, however, are unlikely to pose an immediate or acute health risk for consumers. Sampling for chemical residues and contaminants should be based on the available FCI. Moreover, control programmes should be better integrated with feed controls and regularly updated to include new and emerging substances. Meat inspection is recognised as a valuable tool for surveillance and monitoring of specific animal health and welfare conditions. If visual post-mortem inspection is removed, other approaches should be applied to compensate for the associated loss of information on the occurrence of animal disease and welfare conditions. Extended use of FCI has the potential to compensate for some, but not all, of the information on animal health and welfare that would be lost if visual post-mortem inspection is removed. (C) European Food Safety Authority, 2012.

The risk posed by the possible use of dead-in-shell chicks for the production of processed petfood was assessed. According to current legislation two processing methods were considered i) treatment to a minimum Fc value of 3; and ii) treatment of at least 90 degrees C throughout the substance of the final product. A list of the possible pathogens potentially present in the material to be treated was compiled and the available literature data was used to assess the ability of the processing methods to inactivate the most resistant pathogens identified. The processing methods were assessed assuming that the heat treatments would be performed in a moist environment. Spores of Clostridium botulinum were identified as the most resistant hazard potentially present in the material to be processed. Circovirus and parvovirus, and Enterococcus faecium were considered respectively as the most resistant viruses and non-sporulating bacterium to heat treatment. Moreover, depending on storage conditions, the generation of bacterial toxins could be possible. Consequently, the processing methods considered were assessed against their ability to inactivate those hazards. The risk related to the use of dead-in-shell chicks, submitted to a conventional heat treatment to a minimum Fc value of 3 in a moist environment, for the production of canned petfood was considered negligible. No indication is given in the current regulation on the processing time and heating method needed for the treatment at 90 degrees C throughout the substance of the final product. A treatment lasting 18 seconds can assure a rapid destruction of the non-sporeforming bacteria identified as hazards. However, this treatment is not able to inactivate other relevant hazards such as bacterial spores, thermoresistant viruses and some toxins. The final risk posed by the agents that may survive this treatment additionally depends on several factors and cannot be considered to be negligible. (C) European Food Safety Authority, 2011

The risk that African Swine Fever virus (ASFV) remains endemic in the Trans Caucasian Countries (TCC) and the Russian Federation (RF) is moderate, while the risk of its spread in these regions is high. The resulting risk of introduction from these regions into the EU is moderate most likely through food waste. The risk of ASFV remaining endemic in wild boar and the consequent introduction into the EU was considered low in the TCC and moderate in the RF, mainly due to the higher population density in the RF and the connected wild boar populations to the EU from the RF. Within the EU, mainly domestic pigs in the free range (FR) and the limited biosecurity sector (LB) are likely to be exposed to ASFV via swill feeding, with low risk. Once infected, the risk of spread from the LB and FR sectors prior detection is high, mainly due to movement of pigs, people and vehicles and moderate from the High Biosecurity (HB) sector. The risk of endemicity in domestic pigs is considered negligible in HB and low in LB since the implementation of control measures are effective. The risk of endemicity in the FR sector is moderate due to wild boar contact, non-compliance with animal movement ban and difficult access to all individual pigs. The risk of ASFV becoming endemic in the wild boar population in the EU is moderate, in particular in areas with connected wild boar populations. Because of their long life, ticks of the O. erraticus complex can be important in maintaining local foci of ASFV, where pigs are kept under traditional systems. Ticks do not, play an active role in the geographical spread of the virus. Wild boar have never been found infested because they do not rest inside burrows potentially infested by ticks.

B. Wieland 1 , E. Albina 2 , S. Blome 3 , F. Boinas 4 , A. Botner 5 , S. Dhollander 6 , L. Dixon 7 , A. Estrada Pena 8 , M. Georgiev 6 , V. Guberti 9 , A. Mannelli 10 , C. Patta 11 , C. Potzsch 12 , M. Salman 13 , J.M. Sanchez-Vizcaino 14 , J.M. Sharp 15 , J. Tarres-Call 6 , F. Koenen 16 . 1 Veterinary Epidemiology and Public Health, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, North Mymms Hatfield, Herts, AL9 7TA. 2 CIRAD, UMR CMAEE, TA A-15/G, Campus International de Baillarguet, 34398 Montpellier Cedex5, France. 3 Friedrich-Loeffler-Institut, Bundesforschungsinstitut fur Tiergesundheit, Sudufer 10, D-17493 Greifswald Insel Riems. 4 Veterinary Faculty of Lisbon, Av Universidade Tecnica, 1300-477 Lisboa. 5 DTU Veterinaerinstituttet, Veterinaerinstituttet, Afdeling for Virologi, Danmarks Tekniske Universitet Lindholmm, 4771 Kalvehave. 6 Animal Health and Welfare Unit, European Food Safety Authority, Largo Natale Palli 5/A I, 43100 Parma. 7 Institute for Animal Health Pirbright, Ash Road, Pirbright, Woking, Surrey, GU24 0NF. 8 Department of Parasitology, Veterinary Faculty, University of Zaragoza, Miguel Servet 177, 50013. Zaragoza, Spain. 9 FAO – AGAH, C565 Via delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome (RM). 10 Dipartimento di Produzioni Animali, Epidemiologia ed Ecologia, Facolta di Medicina Veterinaria, Universita degli Studi di Torino Via Leonardo da Vinci, 44, 10095 Grugliasco (TORINO). 11 Dipartimento Sanita Animale, Istituto Zooprofilattico Sperimentale della Sardegna, Via Duca degli Abruzzi, n° 8, 07100 Sassari. 12 Fontanestr. 12, 16866 Tramnitz, Germany. 13 Campus Stop 1644, Animal Population Health Institute, College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO 80523-1644. 14 Catedratico de Sanidad Animal, Director del Laboratorio de Referencia de la OIE, Universidad Complutense Facultad de Veterinaria, Avda. Puerta de Hierro s/n, 28040 Madrid. 15 Veterinary Laboratories Agency, Lasswade Laboratory, Pentlands Science Park, Bush Loan, Penicuik, EH26 0PZ. 16 Veterinary and Agrochemical Research Centre, Groeselenberg 99, 1180 Ukkel , Belgium. *Corresponding author

Following a request from the European Food Safety Authority (self mandate) the Panels on Biological Hazards and Animal Health Animal Welfare were asked to issue a Scientific Opinion on the Review of the Community Summary Report on Trends and Sources of Zoonoses, Zoonotic Agents and Antimicrobial Resistance in the European Union in 2005In 2005, data were collected on a mandatory basis on the following 8 zoonotic agents: Salmonella, thermophilic Campylobacter, Listeria monocytogenes, verotoxigenic E. coli, Mycobacterium bovis, Brucella, Trichinella and Echinococcus. In addition, the mandatory reported data included antimicrobial resistance in Salmonella and Campylobacter isolates, food-borne outbreaks and susceptible animal populations. Based on the epidemiological situations in MS, data were also reported on other agents including Yersinia, rabies, Toxoplasma, Cysticerci, and the Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies (TSEs).An overall decrease of 9.5% in incidence of human cases of salmonellosis was seen compared to 2004. Some, mostly new MS, reported an increased incidence probably due to improved surveillance systems. Salmonella Enteritidis (52 %) and S. Typhimurium (9 %) continued to be the most commonly reported serotypes in human cases. In the current state of knowledge, all serovars of Salmonella should be regarded as a public health risk, with a higher incidence of salmonellosis being reported in young children (0-4 years). The results from the EU-wide baseline study in commercial large-scale laying hen holdings, as presented in the Report, are of particular relevance. The markedly higher prevalence of Salmonella contamination found in the baseline studies (30 %) compared to the mean prevalence from national reports (3%) demonstrates the importance for harmonized sampling and reporting procedures.Reliable data from feed production is lacking. However, the data available demonstrate that oil seeds, e.g. soy bean products, are a risk factor for the introduction of Salmonella into the feed chain. The isolation of S. Enteritidis, S. Typhimurium, S. Infantis and S. Agona in animal feed confirms that feed can also be a source of infection for these serovars.As in 2004, campylobacteriosis was the most frequently reported zoonotic disease in the EC, with a total number of cases of 197,363. The reported incidence increased by 7.8% compared to 2004, but there was no common trend within the MS. C. jejuni continues to be the most frequently isolated species, with C. coli accounting for less than 10% of all human isolates in only two MS.Campylobacter is the second most common causative agent of foodborne outbreaks in 2005, although the reported number of outbreaks decreased by 40% compared to 2004. Outbreak data suggest broiler meat and water as important sources, even though the source was not identified in 78% of all outbreaks. The data in the Zoonoses report indicate that Campylobacter control should be addressed as a high priority for food safety policy in Europe. Campylobacteriosis is a multi-source problem and other sources of exposure other than poultry should not be disregarded.A total of 1,439 human cases of listeriosis were reported in the EU by 23 Member States and 2 non-Member States. Overall, an incidence of 0.3 cases per 100 000 population (same level as the previous year) ranging from <= 0.1 to 0.9, was reported. The report does not provide information on the number of deaths. This is important information because normally the case fatality rate is high, but the morbidity is low. Data are not comparable between years and MS due to differences in sampling and testing schemes. On the current sampling procedures, a low prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes in foods was reported.Notably, the main group at risk for human listeriosis are the elderly (i.e. persons aged more than 65 years). Pregnant women remain at risk; however, they represent a minority of the cases reported.The situation regarding Verotoxigenic Escherichia coli (VTEC) infections in humans, food and live animals improved in 2005 compared with year 2004, with approximately 12 reported cases per million. However, for the 10 MS that reported each year from 2003 to 2005, there has been an increase of 12 to 16 reported cases per million. Children are at higher risk of severe EHEC-Campylobacter (9%). Amongst the Salmonella outbreaks, the most common serotypes were S. Enteritidis (36% of the outbreaks, 49% of the cases) and S. Typhimurium (3% of the outbreaks, 5% of the cases). Foodborne viruses (particularly norovirus and rotavirus) are an important cause of foodborne infection and are likely to be considerably under-diagnosed and underreported across MS.Key interventions to prevent infection should be focussed on the reduction of the incidence in raw materials and food producing animals of the most common reported agents i.e. Salmonella (particularly S. Enteritidis), Campylobacter and foodborne viruses. Since the most common settings are private homes and restaurants, control by education of food handlers (both professional and domestic) in the proper cooking and storage practices, as well as prevention of person to person transmission and cross-contamination, is likely to be the most effective public health preventative measures.In Member States, the risk of transmission of M. bovis from domestic animals to humans is very low. Human cases not declared as imported, and also in young persons, continue to be recorded in MS that are Officially Tuberculosis Free (OTF) for tuberculosis in cattle. Seven OTF MS reported human cases during the period 2001 to 2005.As recommended in the 2004 Report Non-OTF MS with lower percentages of OTF herds should strengthen their efforts to achieve OTF status and should make the achievement of OTF status a firm priority.The annual incidence of human brucellosis in some MS still remains higher than one case per 100,000 inhabitants and some countries experienced increases in human brucellosis incidence from 2004 to 2005.The overall occurrence of brucellosis among cattle in co-financed non-OBF MS decreased from 2004 to 2005. The proportion of sheep and goats flocks infected has increased slightly from 2004 to 2005 in two co-financed non-OBmF MS. For these countries, the increasing trend can be noted since 2003. The apparent lack of data collected does not allow consistent conclusions to be drawn on the contamination of food or allow an estimate to be made of the presence of Brucella spp. in cheese and other dairy products.A total of 2558 cases of sylvatic rabies and 32 cases of bat rabies were reported to the Commission in various animal species in 12 MS in 2005. Compared to 2004 this represents an increase of approximatelly 50%, as a result of cases reported in new MS, e.g. most cases occur in The Baltic states, Poland and Slovakia. Although rabies continues to pose a serious human health risk in areas with sylvatic rabies, no human cases of rabies originating from exposure to rabid animals within the EU were recorded in 2005. This is mainly due to a high level of awareness in endemic areas combined with efficient post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) after contact with rabid animals.The BSE epidemic has some unique features, in particular the long incubation period, the properties of the agent and the still unknown origin of this new zoonosis. It would therefore be more appropriate to give the evolution of the BSE epidemic in cattle based on the birth cohort of the BSE positive cases in addition to the number of cases in a given year to reflect the effect of the preventive and control measures.Regarding general conclusions and recommendations,Reliable data regarding the occurrence of zoonotic pathogens in feed production is lacking and the data provided cannot be regarded as representing national prevalence data.Appropriate actions such as those based on biosecurity principles should be taken to prevent the introduction of food-borne pathogens throughout the feed and food chain.The importance of the maintenance of good standards in accordance with GMP and GHP along the food and feed chain should continue to be emphasised at every stage of the chain.Risk Communication and education strategies should be used to prevent contamination of fresh vegetable produce at the production, processing and food-catering levels. Provision of user-friendly Information to consumers and in particular the elderly and immunocompromised is recommended.Improvements in hygienic practices and refrigeration during processing, especially in the case of RTE foods, should continue to be promoted.Following the Salmonella example, the extension of targeted harmonised base-line studies on the other zoonotic agents covered by the report should be encouraged where appropriate. A more complete and truer picture of the EU-wide status could then be achieved.The reporting of age specific incidences together with absolute numbers of cases is recommended.Where possible, data on the most important sequelae of food-borne zoonoses should be collected in order to obtain an estimate of the associated disease burden.Comparisons of data from 2004 and 2005 need to take into account the differences in the number of MS in the EU, so as to take account of the contribution of the new MS.The establishment of monitoring programmes that allow consideration of data on the overall burden of both outbreak and sporadic cases when setting priorities for further action at MS or Community level in respect of specific diseases is recommended.Efforts should be directed to addressing the generic requirement for producing truly comparable data from all MS.Clear definitions and classification of outbreaks should be developed further, and where there are differences in the characteristics of the surveillance systems, these should be addressed at Community level. Without this type of development it is not possible to adequately compare risks between MS.Networking between the Public Health and Animal Health sectors should be improved in order to further understanding of the transmission and epidemiology of foodborne pathogens.