howgate (phowgate@rsc.co.uk)
Wed, 2 Feb 2000 19:49:39 -0000
John
What evidence do you have that chlorine, as used in a fish processing plant
in the concentrations likely to be used in a fish processing plant,
produces 'questionable by-products'? Would the risks to consumers from
these questionable products be more than the risks to health of the factory
personnel of using ozone in the plants?
Peter Howgate
----------
> From: John French <frenchpe@concentric.net>
> To: michaelg@ij.co.za
> Cc: 'seafood@ucdavis.edu'
> Subject: Re: Using Ozone for Sanitation
> Date: 02 February 2000 08:17
>
> Michael:
> Ozone is an excellent sanitizer which has a higher oxidizing potential
than chlorine, and produces fewer questionable by-products upon reacting
with suspended organic materials. The problem, if you want to call it that,
is that it has a shorter half life and
> what little residual there is is more difficult to test for than
chlorine. In other words, most food technologists in the United States
recognize ozone's positive attributes but the necessary regulations have
been slow to develop.
> John French
> PEGASUS ENTERPRISES
>
> Michael Graz wrote:
>
> > Dear Seafoods Listers
> >
> > There is a trend in South Africa for meat and chicken processors to use
ozone in their water and their chill rooms. Has this ever been done in the
fishing industry? Will ozone have a positive effect on fish quality? May
ozone be used in the fishing industry?
> >
> > Your comments will be gladly appreciated.
> >
> > Sincerely
> >
> > Michael Graz
> >
> > Michael Graz Ph.D. Pr.Sci.Nat.
> > Divisional Quality Assurance Manager
> > I&J Seafoods
> > Cape Town
> > Tel: +27 21 440 7955
> > Fax: +27 21 447 4883
> > Mobile: +27 82 652 2079
> >
> > This message is sent in confidence for the attention of the addressee
only. Unauthorised recipients are requested to preserve this
confidentiality and are requested to delete the message forthwith.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed Feb 02 2000 - 12:16:19 PST