The 2008 Allergen Bureau conferences were held in February 2008, in Brisbane and Sydney. With an outstanding turn-out at both events, delegates were treated to a program full of diverse and interesting discussions. The following is a review of just some of the highlights. Further highlights will feature in the next issue of the Allergen Bureau eNews.

Allergen labelling from a consumer’s perspective was described by Christine Underwood of Nestle Australia, based on the consumer enquires received by the Nestle consumer information service.

Over 90% of allergen-related enquires relate to gluten, nuts and dairy. From the nature of the calls, it appears consumers are seeking a simple yes/no answer to the question ‘Does this food contain a particular allergen’. Without having an understanding of the complex food labelling laws, consumers are often confused by industry’s approach to allergen labelling, especially with regard to where and how the allergens must be declared.

Many calls relate to consumers not understanding ingredient names. For example, some believe cocoa butter is a dairy product, while others are not sure what carrageen is but suspect it may contain an allergen. Overall, it seems consumers continue to seek consistency in labelling, with bold allergen declarations, names of cereal sources, and ingredient names presented in plain english.

From a retailer’s perspective, the main objectives in allergen control are to decrease the risk of adverse reactions, provide a safe store environment, and meet customer expectations while containing business costs. These retailer insights were provided by Andrea Currie and Neil McSkimmings of Coles Group. Coles have over 700 supermarkets, with house-branded products supplied by more than 2500 suppliers. To manage the risks associated with such a diverse supplier base, Coles have implemented an Allergen Control Policy. According to this policy, all suppliers must employ HACCP-based allergy control procedures. Compliance with the policy is checked through supplier audits and testing. To assist in meeting the Coles Allergen Policy requirements, all suppliers receive a CD on allergen management.

In-store allergen management is also of key importance. Measures such as staff education, and removal of loose nut displays have been implemented. Food technologists working with the house-brand products must be trained in allergen management and use of VITAL tools labels.

Allergen management in school canteens is becoming an increasingly high profile area, and one that potentially affects many in the food industry. Aloysa Hourigan of Nutrition Australia and Amanda Lockeridge of the NSW Canteen Association provided their perspective of the issues.

One of the key messages from this session was that rather than banning nut-containing products or other foods containing allergens, schools are encouraged to manage each child’s allergy with individual health care plans developed in close consultation with the child’s parents, the school administration and the canteen manager. Such plans include identifying those canteen staff members (usually the catering manager) who have appropriate training and experience to serve a child with an allergy, and ensuring that person has a thorough understanding of the food labelling regulations. This can help in ensuring the necessary allergen information is retained when foods are transferred from outer packages, and in minimising the risk of allergen cross-contact during food preparation. All canteen managers should undertake allergen training and pass this knowledge on to their staff and any volunteers.

Another key consideration for schools canteens is to provide healthy, safe alternatives for children with food allergies. This factor has been incorporated into the NSW Healthy Canteen Strategy ‘Fresh Tastes @ School’.

Case studies of allergen control in the manufacturing environment were provided by Jasmine Lacis-Lee of Parmalat and Samantha Menere, HJ Langdon.

Parmalat’s Bendigo plant processes both milk and soy products on one site using shared equipment. Both products may be manufactured on the same day, so the production schedule must be flexible to allow for appropriate control measures to be implemented between product runs. Critical control points have been identified in those areas at greatest risk of introducing cross-contact between products, and these include pipe-work, valves and product filling heads. As part of Parmalat’s allergen management program, areas identified as ‘hard to clean’ are now cleaned by hand and separate storage areas have been introduced for dairy and soy raw materials.

All cleaning procedures are verified with Biotrace which measures protein residues; while this does not detect allergens specifically, it can provide an indication of whether any proteins remain after cleaning. All finished soy products are tested in-house for the presence of dairy using the ELISA method, and all batches must test negative before product is released from the site. While this has introduced a significant cost to the business, it has been deemed an essential part of the production process.

HJ Langdon primarily use scheduling to separate allergens, with the key allergens of concern being gluten, soy and peanuts. Products formulated to contain these allergens are identified for the plant operators to ensure they are aware and can apply appropriate controls.

Primary controls used by HJ Langdon include cleaning of machinery (using hot water and detergent), raw material segregation and testing each batch of incoming new raw material for gluten. HJ Langdon’s customers are provided with a certificate of analysis for each batch of product.

Robin Sherlock of FACTA Australia provided an overview of allergen analysis and its role in food production facilities. Allergen testing is most useful if it can be carried out in real-time. Methods that can be employed for this purpose include non-specific testing for protein residues, or specific testing to target the allergenic protein or other specific markers found in allergenic foods. Currently, the two main methods for specific testing are ELISA, which detects specific proteins and PCR, which detects DNA.

Testing can be useful as part of an allergen control program to differentiate between a real or perceived risk of an allergens presence. When testing, it is important to target the correct allergen and use a method that has been optimized according to the nature of food matrix being tested.

If it is not possible to measure the allergen of concern, either due to the test kit not being available, or having a ‘difficult’ product matrix, modeling can be applied. Modelling can involve the use of an alternative marker (such as another allergen that is used on site) or another substance that can be reliably tested. For example, there is currently no test available to detect the presence of pecan in a product, however if the product being manufactured also contains almond, an almond test kit could be used. If there is no detectable trace of almond, it could be assumed the cleaning procedures have also removed the traces of pecan. However, it is important to remember that while a process treatment may decrease the detectability of an allergen, the allergenic potential of the substance may remain.