The test is not sophisticated and technically incubation in Laural
Sulphate Broth first followed by a transfer should be done. But at
the risk of a few false positives, we can use a method that doesn't
require a microbiologist. Anyone with a little technical expertise
can do it. Perhaps more importantly, the micro - information turn
around time is fast, easy to understand and simple to track over
the long term.
My concern is the phrase - does not require a microbiologist.
Why not use a proper microbiologist? Is this common practice in North =
America?
In the UK and Europe, laboratories use accredited methods, facilities and=
trained qualified staff and
the laboratory results are credible. The AOAC International is promoting=
similar systems. Apart
from the health and safety aspects of culturing potential pathogens in =
a factory environment with
unqualified staff, thus compromising the safety of the products, are unqu=
alified personnel used in
other operations, such as finance (an unqualified accountant), transporta=
tion (unlicensed drivers)
etc., or is it only for microbiology?
At the Washington HACCP conference in 1996, a representative from Saunder=
s' company gave
one of the best papers. If the practice of avoiding the use of microbio=
logists is common in the
company, then their whole HACCP falls apart. There are proper and accred=
ited methods for
microbiological testing which give rapid results but only when used prope=
rly by a qualified person.
Donald Gibson
Biodon International