Day 107 - 24 Mar 95 - Page 58


     
     1        birds are put into crates for transport and this is known
     2        to be a mechanism where salmonella can increase and be
     3        spread from bird to bird.  So if you took less than
     4        1 per cent of your birds actually in the broiler shed and
     5        then put them in lorry 30,000 birds at a time in crates,
     6        and transported them to the slaughterhouse, let us call it
     7        the slaughterhouse to avoid the use of processing, took it
     8        to the slaughterhouse, you might then find a higher
     9        proportion of live birds as they came out of the crates.
    10        Then the next stage is they go through the various
    11        procedures, you will get an increase.
    12
    13   Q.   I do not know whether actually stunning and neck cutting
    14        makes any difference, it probably does not, but then there
    15        is a scalding where if the temperature is too low in the
    16        water there may be contamination in the scalding tank, and
    17        then there is evisceration where there may be spillage and
    18        so on and so forth.  So you would expect a higher
    19        burden ----
    20        A.  Yes.
    21
    22   Q.   --- at the point of dismemberment before deboning and what
    23        I call processing, mixing of different carcasses?
    24        A.  Yes, the burden increases. The proportion of birds now
    25        contaminated is increasing.
    26
    27   Q.   Yes.  So as we can get this right out of the way once and
    28        for all, I think you said to his Lordship this morning
    29        something which you hinted at yesterday, if you start with
    30        a contamination of X number ----
    31        A.  Yes.
    32
    33   Q.   --- of bacteria on a single bird and that is spread by
    34        contamination, absent conditions for proliferation, in
    35        effect what you are achieving is a dilution?
    36        A.  You do get a dilution effect, yes.
    37
    38   Q.   Anyhow, as compared with E.coli, will you or will you not
    39        agree that the burden of salmonella on a finished chicken
    40        product is likely to be a good deal higher than the burden
    41        of E.coli 0157 in a finished beef product?
    42        A.  Yes, I would accept that.
    43
    44   Q.   Would you also agree that since E.coli 0157 poisoning is
    45        apt to produce symptoms which are considerably more serious
    46        as a rule, than those of salmonellosis, it is probable that
    47        the degree of under-reporting for E.coli 0157 incidents is
    48        much less than it is in the case of salmonellosis?
    49        A.  I do not know that to be true.
    50 
    51   Q.   No, I am asking whether you do not think it is probable 
    52        right? 
    53        A.  I do not have enough information to assess --
    54        I seriously do not have enough information to assess.
    55        I can see several scenarios, one of which would be in
    56        accord with your hypothesis.  I can see another scenario
    57        which said otherwise.
    58
    59   Q.   Let me ask my question in a different way.  You say 35,000
    60        identifiable cases of salmonellosis annually in this

Prev Next Index