Cargando…

Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?

Ante- and post-mortem inspections at abattoir were originally introduced to provide assurance that animal carcasses were fit for human consumption. However, findings at meat inspection can also represent a valuable source of information for animal health and welfare surveillance. Yet, before making...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Comin, Arianna, Jonasson, Anita, Rockström, Ulrika, Kautto, Arja Helena, Keeling, Linda, Nyman, Ann-Kristin, Lindberg, Ann, Frössling, Jenny
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10205995/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37234071
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1129891
_version_ 1785046130250219520
author Comin, Arianna
Jonasson, Anita
Rockström, Ulrika
Kautto, Arja Helena
Keeling, Linda
Nyman, Ann-Kristin
Lindberg, Ann
Frössling, Jenny
author_facet Comin, Arianna
Jonasson, Anita
Rockström, Ulrika
Kautto, Arja Helena
Keeling, Linda
Nyman, Ann-Kristin
Lindberg, Ann
Frössling, Jenny
author_sort Comin, Arianna
collection PubMed
description Ante- and post-mortem inspections at abattoir were originally introduced to provide assurance that animal carcasses were fit for human consumption. However, findings at meat inspection can also represent a valuable source of information for animal health and welfare surveillance. Yet, before making secondary use of meat inspection data, it is important to assess that the same post-mortem findings get registered in a consistent way among official meat inspectors across abattoirs, so that the results are as much independent as possible from the abattoir where the inspection is performed. The most frequent findings at official meat inspections of pigs and beef cattle in Sweden were evaluated by means of variance partitioning to quantify the amount of variation in the probabilities of these findings due to abattoir and farm levels. Seven years of data (2012–2018) from 19 abattoirs were included in the study. The results showed that there was a very low variation between abattoirs for presence of liver parasites and abscesses, moderately low variation for pneumonia and greatest variation for injuries and nonspecific findings (e.g., other lesions). This general pattern of variation was similar for both species and implies that some post-mortem findings are consistently detected and so are a valuable source of epidemiological information for surveillance purposes. However, for those findings associated with higher variation, calibration and training activities of meat inspection staff are necessary to enable correct conclusions about the occurrence of pathological findings and for producers to experience an equivalent likelihood of deduction in payment (independent of abattoir).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10205995
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-102059952023-05-25 Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance? Comin, Arianna Jonasson, Anita Rockström, Ulrika Kautto, Arja Helena Keeling, Linda Nyman, Ann-Kristin Lindberg, Ann Frössling, Jenny Front Vet Sci Veterinary Science Ante- and post-mortem inspections at abattoir were originally introduced to provide assurance that animal carcasses were fit for human consumption. However, findings at meat inspection can also represent a valuable source of information for animal health and welfare surveillance. Yet, before making secondary use of meat inspection data, it is important to assess that the same post-mortem findings get registered in a consistent way among official meat inspectors across abattoirs, so that the results are as much independent as possible from the abattoir where the inspection is performed. The most frequent findings at official meat inspections of pigs and beef cattle in Sweden were evaluated by means of variance partitioning to quantify the amount of variation in the probabilities of these findings due to abattoir and farm levels. Seven years of data (2012–2018) from 19 abattoirs were included in the study. The results showed that there was a very low variation between abattoirs for presence of liver parasites and abscesses, moderately low variation for pneumonia and greatest variation for injuries and nonspecific findings (e.g., other lesions). This general pattern of variation was similar for both species and implies that some post-mortem findings are consistently detected and so are a valuable source of epidemiological information for surveillance purposes. However, for those findings associated with higher variation, calibration and training activities of meat inspection staff are necessary to enable correct conclusions about the occurrence of pathological findings and for producers to experience an equivalent likelihood of deduction in payment (independent of abattoir). Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-05-10 /pmc/articles/PMC10205995/ /pubmed/37234071 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1129891 Text en Copyright © 2023 Comin, Jonasson, Rockström, Kautto, Keeling, Nyman, Lindberg and Frössling. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Veterinary Science
Comin, Arianna
Jonasson, Anita
Rockström, Ulrika
Kautto, Arja Helena
Keeling, Linda
Nyman, Ann-Kristin
Lindberg, Ann
Frössling, Jenny
Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
title Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
title_full Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
title_fullStr Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
title_full_unstemmed Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
title_short Can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
title_sort can we use meat inspection data for animal health and welfare surveillance?
topic Veterinary Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10205995/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37234071
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fvets.2023.1129891
work_keys_str_mv AT cominarianna canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT jonassonanita canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT rockstromulrika canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT kauttoarjahelena canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT keelinglinda canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT nymanannkristin canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT lindbergann canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance
AT frosslingjenny canweusemeatinspectiondataforanimalhealthandwelfaresurveillance