Control of Foodborne Viruses at Retail

Tetro, Jason A.

doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-1550-7_6

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 180 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Unfortunately, the last few decades have been characterized by many environmental, urbanistic,and socioeconomic changes causing severe disorders to the natural ecosystems. Consequently, the causality viruses and outbreaks associated with foodborne illness became obvious as reported by many studies, and therefore becoming an emerging problem representing a significant threat to global public health requiring a surveillance platform for the early recognition of food related threats (FAO, 2004; Koopmans & Duizer, 2004; Lipkin, 2013; Tetro, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In the landscape of SARS‐CoV‐2 and fresh fruits and vegetables: The fake and hidden transmission risks

Benkeblia

2021

Journal of Food Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

From the first notification reporting to the WHO a cluster of coronavirus in Wuhan City (China), over 114 million cases of SARS‐CoV‐2 have been confirmed, with more than 2,530,000 deaths, and over 400,000 new cases and 10,000 deaths daily. Numerous viruses are susceptible to contaminate crops during growth, harvesting, handling, marketing and minimally processing, and these steps share one common factor which is human. Different studies showed that viruses might persist on different crops for periods of 2 to 14 days under different conditions such as refrigeration, household and freezing. Little is known on SARS‐CoV‐2, but preliminary studies showed that this virus might survive 24 hr on cardboard and 72 hr on plastic, materials used in fruits and vegetables packaging. Based on preliminary data, there is no evidence of food or food packaging being associated with transmission of SARS‐CoV‐2. Certainly, to date there is no scientific evidence that SARS‐CoV‐2 might be transmitted by a contact with, or the ingestion of contaminated fresh or minimally processed fruits and vegetables. However, this risk even though being considered improbable, it cannot be “ completely and definitely ” discarded or ignored, particularly where the virus is spreading in the word. Some agencies indicated that in case some commodities and handlers are contaminated among the multiple people involved from the farm to the table, a cross‐contamination may occur, and the risk of the contamination of food, food contact materials, and packaging from infected but asymptomatic workers should not be discarded even though considered “ Very Low = meaning very rare but cannot be excluded .”

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In the landscape of SARS‐CoV‐2 and fresh fruits and vegetables: The fake and hidden transmission risks

Benkeblia

2021

Journal of Food Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There were fewer relations between foodborne viruses and chicken in the viral metagenomic research on chicken (Zhang et al, 2014). However, since the 2019 SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there has been an ever-growing list of emerging viral pathogens that could threaten the food supply (Tetro, 2014;Ceylan et al, 2020). These include well-known foodborne viruses such as norovirus (NoV), adenovirus (AdV), sapovirus (SapoV), astrovirus, hepatitis A virus (HAV), hepatitis E virus (HEV), rotavirus, and avian influenza, as well as the less well-known aichivirus (Tetro, 2014).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Foodborne viruses were transmitted to humans primarily through the consumption of contaminated food or water (Tetro, 2014). Common symptoms of foodborne viruses are fever, vomiting, diarrhea, and headache (Pal and Ayele, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most foodborne diseases are under-reported or not reported at all, leaving many gaps in our understanding of how viruses affect food (Tetro, 2014). In this study, the foodborne viruses (NoV, AdV, SapoV, astrovirus, HAV, HEV, rotavirus, and aichivirus) and IAV prevalence from poultry processing plants to commercial markets (local and online) were studied through multilateral cooperation according to the food distribution channels.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prevalence of foodborne viruses and influenza A virus from poultry processing plants to retailed chickens

Yeo

Song

Hossain

et al. 2023

Front. Sustain. Food Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionFoodborne viruses are a serious concern in public health. This study investigated the prevalence of eight foodborne viruses norovirus (NoV), adenovirus (AdV), sapovirus (SapoV), astrovirus, hepatitis A virus (HAV), hepatitis E virus (HEV), rotavirus, aichivirus, and influenza A virus (IAV).Material and methodA total of 316 chicken samples were collected from three poultry processing plants to commercial markets (local and online). RT-qPCR- and PCR-positive amplicons obtained from monitoring were confirmed by sequence analysis.ResultsFoodborne viruses and IAV were not found in poultry processing plants. Of the 100 chickens purchased from the local and online markets, 19 (19.0%) AdV and 2 (2.0%) SapoV were detected. NoV, astrovirus, HAV, HEV, rotavirus, aichivirus, and IAV were not detected in the retailed chickens. Phylogenetic analysis identified 18 human AdV-41, one porcine AdV, and two SapoV-GI.1. It was the first case of the discovery of the SapoV gene in chicken. The average contamination level of detected AdV was 2.4 log DNA copies/g, but there were cases where the highest level was 5.35 log DNA copies/g.DiscussionThis study highlights the importance of chicken's contribution to the transmission of AdV with the possibility of annual variability with emerging symptoms. The prevention of AdV contamination in the food chain from slaughterhouses to retail markets should be monitored and controlled in further study.

show abstract