Proposal for policy change to pasteurise all milk for drinking in United Kingdom

8/23/2019 Proposal for policy change to pasteurise all milk for drinking in United Kingdom

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/proposal-for-policy-change-to-pasteurise-all-milk-for-drinking-in-united-kingdom 1/12

Dr LIM SZE YIN 3097 WORDS

Proposal for policy change to pasteurise all milk for drinking in United

Kingdom

Prepared by

1. 009921

2. Dennis Loong Jun Lim, 010332

3. Mohd Afiq bin Mohd Asmadi, 009869

4. Asyraf bin Onn, 009669

Food Safety

(D224FS MY)



1

CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2

2. POTENTIAL ACTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….3

2.1 Limitation of action……………………………………………………………………………………………….3

2.2 Impact of the action………………………………………………………………………………………………5

3.0 RECOMMENDATION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………7

3.1 Choice I : Plant UHT System…………………………………………………………………………………..7

3.1.1 Risk and possible solution……………………………………………………………………….8

3.2 Choice II : Automatic Pasteurizer System………………………………………………………………8

3.1.1 Risk and possible solution……………………………………………………………………….9

4.0 CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………9

5.0 REFERENCES ………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………10



2

1. INTRODUCTION

Milk is a nutritious food produced by the mammary gland of mammals and it is an important

food source for human. Generally it is considered as a type of drink which confer benefits to

human health. 85% of milk produced worldwide is from cows (1) while the remaining 15% is

contributed by other livestock such as goats, sheep and horses.

Milk contains many components which are nutritious such as lipid protein salt, mineral,

vitamins, carbohydrates and many other contents. This component will provide energy,

essential and non – essential amino acid and ensure proper body function. For human most

especially infant, most beneficial type of milk would be human milk. Human milk could

reduce the risk of infants’ death, increase their intelligence and immunity. The a ntibodies

contain in the milk would provide passive immunity to the newborns to avoid whereas type

of infection (2). However human milk is not widely consumed even though there are milk

banks that collect human milk. This milk is mainly use for medical purpose especially for

infants.

As mention above milk is an important food that will provide whereas benefits and is widely

consumed. However the high nutrient content of the milk also makes it a very good medium

for bacteria growth. When raw milk is left at room temperature it will quickly become sour

due to the bacteria fermentation process. This milk spoilage is mainly carry out by lactate

acid bacteria such as Lactobacillussp. andStreptococcussp.which are harmless to human

body. However the milk could also be contaminated by harmful bacteria species such as

Staphylococcus aureus, Yersinia, Escherichia coli, Listeria, Salmonella and Campylobacter.These bacteria could lead to some severe or even deadly diseases such as tuberculosis and

diphtheria (3).

Nowadays milk is generally considered as of the safest food for human consumption due to

processes such as pasteurisation, microfiltration, creaming and homogenisation. However

this was not the case before the 19th century prior to pasteurisation invention. Hence the

unprocessed milk lead to the wide spread of tuberculosis. Western country such as United

Kingdom and United States had high milk-related food poisoning death rate. In the United

State alone 160 000 of cases happen yearly in a population of 90 million in the early 20th

century. It is estimated that 6 millions of people died from milk-related tuberculosis and 25

thousand people get typhoid fever every year due to milk consumption (4). Other types of

milk related diseases also include digestive system inflammation, cowpox, food and mouth

diseases and anthrax. Infants who have weaker immunity used to become the victims for milk

related diseased. It was found that breast feed infants had a death rate of 6.2% compared to

36% of those fed with unprocessed cows milks. In an experiment carry out in 1898, the

pasteurisation could reduce milk related children death from 44% to 16.5% within 7 years (5).

In the modern day due to wider use of pasteurisation, a study carried out from 1993 to 1997

found that only 0.2% of food-borne diseases were related to milk. During the period of study,milk did not cause any death (6).



3

2. POTENTIAL ACTION

Pasteurisation is a process where heat is applied to the milk for a period of time to eliminate

dangerous microorganisms but the milk still retains its original taste and nutrient (7). The aim

of the process is not to kill all the microorganisms but to greatly reduce their numbers.

Microorganisms died logarithmically when subjected to heat. This means we should use high

temperature and short time (HTST) method to process the milk. In the industry milk is forced

through a metal plates or pipes heated to 72°C for 15 seconds in a typical HTST procedure.

Another method of pasteurisation involved ultra-high temperature (UHT) where the milk is

subjected to 138°C for at least 2 seconds.

HTST could kill 99.999% of microorganism in milk (8). Most yeast or bacteria would be

completely destroyed but some heat resistance strain such as mycobacterium could survive.

Mycobacterium paratuberculosis could survive in UHT milk but the frequency is lower

compared to HTST milk. Generally the small dose of bacteria in properly pasteurised milk is

harmless except that the milk had undergone improper pasteurisation process where sub

pasteurisation heat is applied.

2.1 Limitation of action

Milk is pasteurized to kill harmful pathogens that can harm human. Through pasteurization,

99% of the harmful pathogen is killed. However, there are several cases of food

contamination related to pasteurized milk. An example of such case is an outbreak of

Staphylococcusaureus in pasteurized milk. The case happens in 1937 where a total of 29

cases reported from 11 different districts. Researchers found out that the reason for the

contamination is due to the personnel that used hand to handle the bottling and capping

process (John F. Hackler). There are many outbreaks that happened in United Kingdom (UK)

as well, as seen in table 3. The contamination mainly occurs not due to the pasteurization

process but due to other factors. The factors are the storage or the machine used are

contaminated, the personnel that handle the processes are not well trained, the bottles or

caps used are contaminated, the work place for the pasteurization is dirty, the pasteurization

process is not done correctly, the addition of raw milk into the pasteurized milk and many

other factors. In conclusion, the main reasons for the contamination of pasteurized milk

usually not due to pasteurization.



4

Table 1.0: General outbreaks of infectious intestinal disease linked to pasteurised milk and

cream in England and Wales from 1992 to 2009

The public and even scientists have different kind of reaction towards the pasteurized milk.

Some of them agree and some don’t. The main reason for the disagreement is that the

nutrient content of the milk will be degraded and become less. “Once milk has been

pasteurized it's more or less ‘dead’” a quote from an article by Dr Joseph Marcelo. An

example of the event for raw milk is better than pasteurized milk is when Dr Mercola claims

that “no death in 38 years from this raw food”. There are some professors that claimed rawmilk is best for human due to its nutrient content despite the cases of food poisoning that

has been happening throughout the years. A literature review done by Bill Marler JD also has

an opinion that raw milk is better than pasteurized milk. This is because valuable enzymes,

good immunological components, valuable proteins and beneficial bacteria are being

destroyed due to pasteurization process. The components are valuable in the sense that for

example beneficial bacteria such as Lactobacilli and Bifidus bacteria kills off bad bacteria in

stomach. Other than that, milk also contains immunological components such as leukocyte,

macrophages, neutrophils, immunoglobulin and also antibodies which can help human to

increase a person’s immunity. There are also claims that raw milk will lessen the effect of tooth decay in children. Other than that, raw milk will help in growth and contain higher



5

calcium than pasteurized milk. There are comments that the taste of the milk will differ due

to pasteurization. Due to these reasons, there are movements that are against pasteurized

milk. There are research been done for raw milk to be safe for human consumption which is

by having healthy cows with clean environment. These two factors were heavily emphasised

due to the fact that they are main reasons of contamination. If these factors are beingseriously done, raw milk can be distributed.

However, despite all the critiques and the movement against pasteurized milk, milk that has

been pasteurized is the main milk which has been distributed throughout UK. There are laws

that protect the distribution of milk whereby pasteurized milk are the only ones allowed to

be distributed. As for the public, the main concern forwarded was that they can live healthily

after drinking milk. These shows that the concern about consuming pasteurized milk are

among the intellectuals who know the benefits of raw milk.

2.2 Impact of the action

Milk pasteurisation can be seen as an ultimate alternative on preventing bacterial

contamination and in avoiding human infection due to milk consumption. With the benefits

and better long-term safety despite negligible loss of particular vitamins provided from this

method (17), there is no doubt that it should be carried out across the entire nation. Prompt

actions and rules must be amended in order to ensure critical cases which lead to fatal due to

raw milk consumption will show a significant reduction in near future. All farmers across UK

should be strictly advised to install suggested machineries to carry out a standard procedure

of milk pasteurization. This is essential to ensure that the pasteurisation methods are not

jeopardized by missing out one or two steps. Eventually, improper pasteurization conducted

may become a contributing factor for an outbreak of food-borne bacteria. Hence, the Food

Standards Agency (FSA) should suggest installation of pasteurization machines towards all

farmers and firms producing dairy products. However, one main concern is that the price,

installation and the conduction of machines may cost a small fortune to farmers and small

milking firms (16). Thus, FSA play a vital role to get a huge allocation of funding from the

government in order to ensure every firm has the access to pasteurisation technology andthus, making this campaign a success. The diagram below is a pasteurisation machine that we

have picked out of all the machines available out there due to the following extra advantages:

(PICK A MACHINE AND STATE ITS STRONG EXTRA CREDIT COMPARED TO OTHER

MACHINERIES)

A war between preferences in consuming raw milk and pasteurized milk has been going on

for many years now. Raw milk advocate and scientist, Dr Edward F. Group III stated that raw

milk contain enzymes which are really helpful in assisting digestion and calcium absorption



6

(25). However, these statements are merely vague and the claims on specific health benefits

offered by milk are being debated within the community of scientist. Another baseless

argument can also be seen in “The Safety of Raw versus Pasteurized Milk, The Untold Story of

Milk” in page 269 (20) where ultra-pasteurization is accused as the cause to lysozyme being

inactivated. Ironically, the medium chain fatty acids, a compound made from the sameelement as the former are inactivated in infant formula. With contradicting and lacking in

evidence arguments made by the advocates, it is loud and clear that pasteurisation will bring

no harm at any extent. It is admitted that milk that has undergo pasteurization may contain

minute amount of bacterial pathogens directly shed from infected mammary glands of

livestock, or from manure in post-harvest contamination or even from improperly storage

and chilling of milk (18). Thus, FSA must equip the citizen with clear information by educating

them; sole purpose of milk pasteurization is to reduce pathogens (19) and attain “logarithmic

reduction” (20), it is not sterilization which intended to kill all microorganisms (20). By

reducing the number of viable pathogens, disease and outbreak is unlikely to occur. The tablebelow shows a result finding by Dr Hugh Chester-Jones who compared analysis of nutrients in

100 gallon of milk before and after pasteurization.

Table 2. Comparative nutrient analyses of pre- and post-pasteurized waste milk (19).

Nutrient (%) Raw Pasteurized Pr > F

Fat, % of DM 35.4 31.2 P < 0.01

Fat, % 4.42 3.90 P < 0.01

Protein, % of DM 28.3 28.1 NS

Protein, % 3.54 3.51 NS

Lactose, % of DM 34.0 35.3 P < 0.05Lactose, % 4.25 4.42 P < 0.05

Energy1

GE2, Mcal/kg 6.22 5.86 P < 0.05

ME3, Mcal/kg 5.79 5.45 P < 0.05

NEm4, Mcal/kg 4.97 4.69 P < 0.01

NEg5, Mcal/kg 3.99 3.76 P < 0.011DM – Dry Matter2Calculated (NRC, 2001)3Gross Energy4Metabolizable Energy5Net Energy for Maintenance6Net Energy for Gain

The fact that pasteurization involves heating milk in high temperature whether it is ultra-high

temperature (UHT) or high temperature short time (HTST) mechanism is no alien to the mass

nowadays. In fact, the increase in awareness among citizen in leading a healthy lifestyle had

indirectly helped the importance of consuming pasteurized milk gained its own popularity.

However, the increase in awareness of milk pasteurization itself is not enough to avoid

disease outbreak caused by contaminated milk. Post-pasteurization condition of pasteurized



7

milks must also be deeply considered by milk consumers. Pasteurized milks are exposed to

room temperature immediately after pasteurisation and this continued during packaging,

delivery and shelving. It easily spoils in four hours duration if exposed to a temperature of

30°C (22). In the past few years, UK may have never experienced a rise in temperature up to

that figure. However, in this 21st

century itself, highest temperature ever recorded duringsummer was at 38.5°C and 32.9°C, both in England and Scotland respectively (23). This will

not worry farmers who are living in town and accessible to a chilling plant but huge concerns

will be brought up by farmers who are living in rural areas. Thus, effective ways to tackle

spoilage of pasteurized milks in such temperature if it ever repeats are stated below (23):

1. Carry out pasteurization of low temperature on farm by utilising a stove and a

thermometer.

2. Use low cost chlorine bleach which is made by using merely salt water and an electro-

chlorinator to clean transport containers and storage.3. Apply UV – C ionizing radiation for cold pasteurization of milk when milk collectors

and farmers meet to exchange milk (also known as ‘aggregation points’).

Last but not least is the curiosity brought by few concern citizens on the effectiveness of

pasteurization. Several questions that our team experts has been asked was, “with

standardised temperature at 72°C, can it actually kill all pathogens in less than 20 seconds?”

With professional ethics embedded within, we are not embarrassed to say that, no, standard

pasteurization whether UHT or LHST can’t kill all the bacteria present in the milk.

Mycobacterium paratuberculosis (MAP) for instance can easily survived the standard

pasteurisation protocol widely carried out by researchers (24). Thus, the holding time set in

current pasteurisation protocol was added 5 seconds more which makes a total of 25

seconds at 72°C milk pasteurisation (24). Completely inactivated MAP from the milk during

testing afterwards proved that a specific pasteurisation setting to get rid of certain bacteria is

achievable. Hence, with all the benefits that can be gained by pasteurization, it outweighs all

the claims made by campaigns promoted and made up studies funded by minorities who are

against milk pasteurization.

3.0 RECOMMENDATION

For the safety of the public we recommends pasteurization of raw milk. To do so, a proper

equipment is necessary to complete the chosen method.

3.1 Choice 1: UHT Plant System

For pasteurization through this method (26), a pasteurization machine or sterilization

equipment is compulsory. There are usually different type of equipment that use different

heat transfer method ether direct or indirect. Indirect method usually gives higher qualityproduct and efficiency compared to indirect (Refer Table 1.0). There is also a compact model



8

type L UHT machine which designed to be portable so that the machine can be transported

to desired location.

Table 3.0 : Different type of UHT plant shows different efficiency and quality of milk

produced.

Plant type Type I Type D Type P

Heat transfer Indirect Direct Indirect

Efficiency 90% Less than 90% Higher than 90%

Quality of milk

producedHigh

Not as high as Type I

and PHigh

The machinery consumed low energy and low maintenance cost which should beadvantageous for milk producer in terms of cost. Milk production should not be a problem as

this plant are be able to produce pasteurized milk in around 50-200 litre/hour continuously -

enough to supply daily requirement. Sterile tank is necessary if this methodology is applied

and the storage capacity is a producer choice ranging from 200 – 100, 000 litre of milk.

3.1.1 Risk and possible solution

This method requires a clean and closed plant to reduce the risk of contamination from

outdoors and ensure the processed milk is in aseptic condition. This situation forced the milk

producers to build the plant which consumed cost and space. Responsible agencies especially

banks should be able to provide them a loan to do so which will profit the banking industry.

Government could make the loan easier to be accessed by the applicants through a program

or agreement with the bank. The cost of the equipment ranged from £1,800.00 - £3000.00

(27) per set which is quite expensive for small producers in small town. But, it should be a

problem for big producers that have well established plant. To avoid cost problem for the

small producer, government might aid them by providing UHT centre in certain area and

charge them with reasonable price annually or monthly.

3.2 Choice 2: Automatic Pasteurizer System

This system probably is the best system available for milk pasteurization for small producers.

The heating temperature is up to 85oC but any temperature is available upon request to the

manufacturer. The system is able to pasteurize 5,000 – 50, 000 litre milk per hour (depends

on model). This system use lower running cost and even some manufacturer provide an

‘Energy Saving Mode’ option in their machine. It has compact design that use smaller space.

Price ranged from £860 – £66,000 depends on quality and capacity of the model. This option

provides more accessibility from the producer depending on their budget and cost.



9

3.2.1 Risk and possible solution

This system only provides basic pasteurization not UHT which most bacteria will be killed but

not the heat-labile microbes. This is the only unavoidable risk of using this system and yet,

the end product is still pasteurized milk. Using this system needs no government intervention

like the previous system as it provides affordable cost according to the needs of milk

producer which give more advantages to their side. Manufacturers are able to make profit

too.

4.0 CONCLUSION

An action to pasteurize the milk should decrease the potential of contamination of microbes

and reduce the risk of outbreak in this country. However, the action itself could not make

everyone happy. With the proper help from government or non-government agencies, this

should reduce the cost and other possible disadvantages that will be carried by affectedgroup. Through this help, we really hope that the action to pasteurize the milk is made

possible for the public safety.



10

5.0 REFERENCES

1. Gerosa and Skoet, 2012. "Milk availability – Trends in production and demand and

medium-term outlook". FAO, United Nations.

2. Persico, M.,Podoshin, L., Fradis, M., Golan, D., and Wellisch, G., 1983. "Recurrent

middle-ear infections in infants: The protective role of maternal breast feeding". Ear,

nose,&throatjournal 62 (6): 297 –304.

3. Smith, P. W., 1981. “Milk Pasteurization” Fact Sheet Number 57, U.S. Department of

Agriculture Research Service, Washington, D.C.

4. Eaglesham, A., Pueppke, S.S., and Hardy, W.E, 2001. National Agricultural

Biotechnology Council Report. National Agricultural Biotechnology Council. 70

5. Straus, L.G., 1917. Disease in Milk: The Remedy—Pasteurization; The Life Work of

Nathan Straus. New York: E.P. Dutton & Co.

6.

Steele, J.H., 2000. Commentary. History, trends, and extent of pasteurization. Journalof the American Veterinary Medical Association 217 : 173 –176.

7. Lewis, M, and Hepple, N., 2000. The Continuous Thermal Processing of Foods.

Pasteurization and UHT Sterilization. Caitherburg, MD: Aspen Publishers

8. Stabel, J. R.; Lambertz, A., 2004. "Efficacy of Pasteurization Conditions for the

Inactivation of Mycobacteriumavium subsp. paratuberculosis in Milk", JournalofFood

Protection 67 (12): 2719.

9. John F. Hackler, M.D. Outbreak of Staphylococcus Milk Poisoning in Pasteurized Milk,

Volume 29.

10. Healthriskstoconsumersassociatedwithunpasteurisedmilkandunpasteurisedcreamfordirecthumanconsumption. Food.gov.uk. 2010 [7 April 2013]. Available

from <http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/committee/acm1008rawmilk.pdf>

11. Fresh,unprocessed(raw)wholemilk:safety,healthandeconomicissues. Realmilk.com. 2009 [7 April 2013]. Available from

<http://www.realmilk.com/safety/fresh-unprocessed-raw-whole-milk/>

12. RawMilk:WhattheScientificLiteratureReallySays.Weston A. Prince Foundation.

2012 [7 April 2013 ]. Available from <http://www.realmilk.com/wp-

content/uploads/2012/11/ResponsetoMarlerListofStudies.pdf >

13. WhyYouShouldn'tDrinkPasteurizedMilk. Joseph Mercola. 2010 [7 April 2013].Available from <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/dairy-free-avoid-this-

pop_b_558447.html>

14. NoDeathsin38YearsFromThisRawFood--SoWhyisitCondemned?Mercola. 2012

[7 April 2013]. Available from

<http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/14/mark-mcafee-raw-

milk-update.aspx>

15. Abstractsontheeffectofpasteurizationonthenutritionalvalueofmilk. Realmilk.com.

2000 [7 April 2013]. Available from <http://www.realmilk.com/health/abstracts-on-

the-effect-of-pasteurization/>

http://www.fao.org/docrep/015/an450e/an450e00.pdf




http://naldc.nal.usda.gov/download/40448/PDF






http://www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/committee/acm1008rawmilk.pdf


http://www.realmilk.com/safety/fresh-unprocessed-raw-whole-milk/


http://www.realmilk.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/ResponsetoMarlerListofStudies.pdf



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-mercola/dairy-free-avoid-this-pop_b_558447.html


http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/01/14/mark-mcafee-raw-milk-update.aspx



http://www.realmilk.com/health/abstracts-on-the-effect-of-pasteurization/



















11

16. WhyYouDon'tWanttoDrinkPasteurizedMilk. Mercola.com. 2003 [26 March 2013].

Available from

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2003/03/26/pasteurized-milk-part-

one.aspx>

17. PasteurizationProcessesofOrganicValleyMilk.Organic Valley. 2013 [28 March2013]. Available from

<http://www.organicvalley.coop/products/milk/pasteurization/>

18. RON SCHMID. The Safety of Raw versus Pasteurized Milk. In: RON SCHMID. TheUntold

StoryofMilk.Warsaw: New Trends Publishing, 2003, pp. 263-324

19. Dr. Hugh Chester-Jones and Neil Broadwater.Pasteurization.Minnesota: University of

Minnesota Extension, 2009.

20. RON SCHMID. Pasteurize or Certify: Two Solutions To “The Milk Problem”. In: RON

SCHMID. TheUntoldStoryofMilk.Warsaw: New Trends Publishing, 2003, pp. 707-

177621. WhatisPasteurizationandHomogenization. Disabled World. 2012 [28 March 2013].

Available from <http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/publish/pasteurization-

homogenization.shtml>

22. Smith, P. W., (August 1981), “Milk Pasteurization” FactSheetNumber57 , U.S.

Department of Agriculture Research Service, Washington, D.C.

23. AverageTemperaturesinBritain. Mandy Barrow. 2010 [23 March 2013]. Available

from

<http://www.food.gov.uk/science/research/foodborneillness/microriskresearch/b01li

st/b01003/#.UWES3ZNTCSp>

24. Characterisationofthenon-linearthermalinactivationkineticsobservedforMycobacteriumparatuberculosisinmilk. Food Standards Agency. 2005 [25 March

2013]. Available from

<http://www.food.gov.uk/science/research/foodborneillness/microriskresearch/b01li

st/b01003/#.UWES3ZNTCSp>

25. Pasteurizedvs.RawMilk:WhichOneIsHealthierforYou&YourFamily? Global

Healing Center Natural Health &Organic Living. 2009 [27 March 2013]. Available from

<http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/raw-milk-vs-pasteurized-milk/>

26. Processtechnologyforasepticproducttreatment. Niroinc.com [3 April 2013].

Available from

<http://www.niroinc.com/html/gea_liquid_processing/pdfs/process_technology.pdf >

27. SuperHighTemperatureSterilizer . Alibaba.com [3 April 2013] Available from

<http://kaiqn.en.alibaba.com/>

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2003/03/26/pasteurized-milk-part-one.aspx



http://www.organicvalley.coop/products/milk/pasteurization/


http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/publish/pasteurization-homogenization.shtml


http://www.food.gov.uk/science/research/foodborneillness/microriskresearch/b01list/b01003/#.UWES3ZNTCSp






http://www.globalhealingcenter.com/natural-health/raw-milk-vs-pasteurized-milk/


http://www.niroinc.com/html/gea_liquid_processing/pdfs/process_technology.pdf


http://kaiqn.en.alibaba.com/














Proposal for policy change to pasteurise all milk for drinking in United Kingdom

Documents

Transcript of Proposal for policy change to pasteurise all milk for drinking in United Kingdom