EFSA refuses support for new pathogen fighter

Holes in the test data for new anti-microbial agent SAN-PEL mean it is impossible to tell how effective it will be when used on animal carcasses, says Europe's food safety watchdog, withholding its support.

The BIOHAZ panel of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) said it found several gaps in the testing done by the producer of SAN-PEL, a product claimed to kill pathogens on carcasses, eggs and offal.

The news strikes a blow to SAN-PEL's maker ChimiBa, which had said its product "removes 95 per cent of residues and undesirable germs on the surface of meat and processing by-products of all types of animals".

The European Commission asked EFSA to examine SAN-PEL using data submitted by Italian firm ChimiBa.

Among the problems found, EFSA said studies submitted did not show how effective SAN-PEL would be against the most important food pathogens, such as Campylobacter, E. coli and Salmonella.

It also found "the description of the studies and the experimental protocols were incomplete", and that "the experiments described were on a small scale and not adequate to demonstrate the efficacy of SAN-PEL under commercial conditions".

ChimiBa supplied only "limited data" on SAN-PEL's use on chicken, pigs, eggs and four edible offals, the EFSA panel added.

Its refusal to back the product sets up a potential row between the European Commission and Italian authorities.

The Italian Ministry of Health had already cleared SAN-PEL for use, and the company itself said the product met EU standards for decontamination products allowed for use on slaughtered animals.

SAN-PEL is composed of organic and inorganic ingredients, including sodium, sulphate, silicon, total phosphorus, alkylaryl sulphonates and total nitrogen.

EFSA re-iterated in its report anti-microbial agents, although potentially effective, did not generally eliminate pathogens completely.

"Decontamination should only be used as an additional measure to further reduce the load of pathogenic microorganisms and not as a substitute for normal good hygienic practices," it said, citing a 2003 European Commission opinion.