A Global Public Good: The Linkage between Veterinary Medicine and the
Sanitary Management of Food Hygiene
-
Andrés
Cartín Rojas*
.
.
1.
Introduction
.
Currently,
pecuary sector accounts nearly 40% of global agricultural economy, providing
employment to a total laboral force of millions of people and sustaining food security
within a huge percentage to inhabitants with low income and purchasing power,
belonging to the most vulnerable social sectors [1]. There is an expectation
that in the next few decades, human population and food demand will increase
parallel. Thus, sanitary food hazards concomitantly will also rise. Under this
panorama, food industry has a social responsibility across the manufacturing
process to provide and generate safe food. Whereas, governments should
implement public policies aimed at control and prevent risk to consumer [2],
avoiding also commercial barriers closing are crucial in order to assure
fluency and maximization of international agricultural markets. National
Veterinary Authorities and Private Veterinary Services amalgamate and work
together to assure and guaranties the consecution of this common objectives.
Both entities conform the primary defensive line to audit, verify and validate
the fulfilment of reference guidelines ruled by the World Trade Organization
and the World Organization for Animal Health.
Veterinary
public health (VPH) is a holistic and multidisciplinary medical branch that
binds and represents a variety of biological, legal, environmental,
socioeconomic and cultural disciplines for the improvement of human life’s
quality at the poblational level. Consequently, VPH covers five different
thematic fields: 1) improving animal health and genetics to increase the
productivity and supply the growing demand for animal protein; 2) healthcare
management of food ensuring innocuity through all the stages of the agro productive
chain; 3) the surveillance, prevention and control of trans boundary animal
diseases and zoonoses; 4) development of nidality and ecology of diseases
studies for a better comprehension of epidemiological patterns in emerging
diseases; and 5) the developing of animal biomodels research for understanding
its counterpart on humans diseases [3]. Related to food security and safety,
VPH considered two fundamental premises within any health management system.
First, food security attempts free access and supply of safe and nutritious
food for the entire population through the promotion of manufacturing processes
with great economic importance along an agricultural value chain. Moreover, it
also prevents and controls certain diseases of economic and epidemiological
importance, ensuring that the general population could access food free of
chemical, physical and microbiological contaminants [4].
An
integrative approach about the mutual relationship between sanitary management
of food hygiene systems and veterinary public health will be covered in this
literature review paper, which clarify and widely encompass diverse topics,
such as the importance of alimentary legislation for a sustainable and adequate
access to nourishment as a fundamental human right, or the contribution that
veterinary medicine brings out to consolidate and toughen transparency,
optimization and objectivity on international trade of animal products.
.
2.
Veterinary Public Health and Food Innocuity: Its Importance to Manage Foodborne
Diseases
.
Food
innocuity is an element, which altogether with nutritional, physicochemical,
commercial and organoleptic characteristics integrates aliment’s quality.
Usually is contextualized as the warranty that aliment ingested, won’t
represent an authentic hazard to consumers. Thereby, a complete grasp of
sanitary food management programs only could be successful, if they base their
approach on risk prevention and control, which requires an active,
multidisciplinary and integrative commitment of all the political actors
involved along the entire food chain.
The main
burden of foodborne diseases (FBD) corresponds to microbiological pathogens
related to animal by-products, followed by the presence of drug’s residues and
metabolites frequently used in animal production, such as, antibiotics and antiparasitic
compounds. Considering that a broad range of foodborne diseases are actually
food zoonoses, obviously the goals of public and animal health overlaps, resulting
in a duality of the veterinary functions. As a result, there is a growing need
for public policies aimed to ensuring food safety worldwide, specially due to
an increasing number of food poisoning incidents that strongly hit the
international agricultural market (for example, the presence of dioxins in
shellfish products in the 90s [5], or the detection of high concentrations of
melanin in milk for infants from China a few years ago, etc.), and the
emergence of previously un- known diseases with a transmitted by the ingestion
of contaminated nourishment, such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy (BSE).
Food
safety is therefore, a complex concept that embraces not only public health
aspects, but also the general welfare of the population and access to
international markets; overlying an important socio-economic component as well.
Foodborne diseases generate a significant risk to consumer’s health. For
example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that every
year, approximately 48 million new cases of food- related illness, 9000 deaths,
128,000 hospitalizations and a total economic burden among 51.0 - 77.7 billion,
only in the United States [6]. Nowadays, there is an increasing perception
among US consumers that imported products of animal origin from foreigner
countries are the main aetiology of these FBD. Bacterial diseases (for example,
Campylobacteriosis, Salmonellosis, Clostridium perfringens infections, etc.) seem
to be the major microorganisms involved in foodborne diseases outbreaks [7].
The
economic and social impact from closing international supplies markets due to
an inefficient food inocuity management system may be monumental, generating a
concerning threat to developing countries economy’s which rely a great percentage
of their trade on agricultural products. Previously we have witnessed the
imposition of nontariff barriers to animal products by business partners who
argue the failure of basic food safety requirements, control and prevention,
guidelines and auditory protocols that should be conducted by qualified professionals
able to perform these tasks. Charges typically established within the functions
of veterinarians, managers quintessential of food safety and public health.
A fluid
international trade allows a dynamic factor of economic growth as a constant
source of output and employment [8]. However, an eventual commercial border
closures compromises the food security of its inhabitants, mainly social
sectors with lower purchasing power. For example, data from the United Nations
Organization for Food and Agriculture (FAO), shows that in Latin American
starvation affects 49 million people (8.3% of its total population) [9], where
a widespread amount of countries are primarily agricultural exporters, causing
that their economies need to be adjusted to the external forces of
international markets. The closure of non-tariff barriers, will force to
increase the importation of agricultural commodities, generating a huge impact
in terms of food security and nutrition, by uprising the standard price of
basic foodstuffs and mostly affecting poor people which have little access to
nutritious and safe food. Although it seems to be an economic problem, actually
it is a problem of Veterinary Public Health, aimed at meeting the bylaws of the
World Declaration on Food Security and the Action Plan of the World Food
Summit.
.
3.
International Organisms Related to Veterinary Public Health and the Sanitary
Management of Food Animal Products
.
Statutory
Veterinary Services in each country are governed through regulations issued by
the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE). In 1995, the Agreement on the
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPSA) of the World Trade
Organization (WTO) established the legal framework to regulate and normalize international
trade of food animal by-products. The SPS Agreement recognizes the OIE
regulations (SPSA Art. 3 on Harmonization and Annex A, paragraph 3-b), as the
worldwide general standard for sanitary measures relating to animal health,
food safety of animal products, animal welfare and zoosanitary prophylaxes
[10].
A large
number of countries that are OIE members, are themselves WTO signatories;
bearing engagement to meet several regulations issued under the SPSA and basing
their sanitary public policies on the OIE international standards and
scientific risk analysis (for more information refer to Title 2 of Terrestrial
and Aquatic OIE’s Codes). The Terrestrial and Aquatic OIE’s Codes, have the
primary objective of facilitating and promoting international food trade, while
offering recommendations to safeguard their inocuity. Both documents are indispensable
for the Veterinary Authorities, and all the stake- holders involved in
activities related to the manufacture, handling, transportation and
commercialization of animal by-products. By adopting OIE standards as the legal
basis for sanitary measures and executing it as an early alert biosecurity
system [11], countries have strong and meaningful guarantees for a trustworthy
commercial management of meat, dairy, poultry, apiarian and aquaculture
by-products.
Veterinarians
have an active and pivotal role in global food markets, participating as trade
negotiators under the auspices of General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT), which is also a jurisprudential framework of WTO [12]. In addition to
the normative above mentioned, the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), a joint
entity between FAO and WHO, have developed directives and principles related to
hazard control by improving food safety and assuring suitability of products
from non- animal origin. However, the CAC and the OIE have implemented
synergies, strategies and mechanisms to coordinate and integrate their
activities in the field of animal by-products security systems along the
manufacture and value chain, focused on maximizing productivity and securing
food safety to consumers. Some examples are [13]:
Code of
Hygienic Practice for Eggs and Egg Products (CAC/RCP 15-1976).
.
Code of
Practice for Fish and Fishery Products (CAC/ RCP 52-2003).
.
Code of
Hygienic Practice for Milk and Milk Products (CAC/RCP 57-2004).
.
Code of
Hygienic Practice for Meat (CAC/RCP 58- 2005).
.
Code of
Practice to Minimize and Contain Antimicrobial Resistance (CAC/RCP 61-2005).
.
Principles
Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification System (CAC/GL 20-1995).
.
Principles
for traceability/product tracing as a tool within a food inspection and
certification system (CAC/GL 60-2006).
.
Principles
for risk analysis for food safety for application by governments (CAC/GL
62-2007).
.
Guidelines
for the design, operation, assessment and accreditation of food import and
export inspection and certification systems (CAC/GL 26-2007).
.
Guidelines
for the validation of food safety control measures (CAC/GL 69-2008).
.
Guidelines
for the design and implementation of national regulatory food safety assurance
programs associated with the use of veterinary drugs in food producing animals
(CAC/GL 71-2009).
.
The SPS
Agreement grants governments the rights to restrict food trade for sanitary
purposes, assuring the restrictive measures implemented are based on scientific
principles. The National Veterinary Authorities (for example. APHIS in the US,
SAGARPA in Mexico, or SENASA in Costa Rica) have the primary function to
establishing, implementing and enforcing regulations stipulated by the OIE
guidelines in their territories, to ensure food hygiene to consumers and
offering a fair international trade.
Innocuity
food programs conducted by veterinary professionals are actually, inclusive
public policies that integrates and nurture a plurality of health and social
pro- grams by actively training all stakeholders involved in each of the
different phases of the food chain, especially in issues such as: 1) food
handling; 2) traceability; 3) good agricultural practices; 4) good
manufacturing practices; 5) organizational systems for control and management
food hygiene; 6) disclosure and education depending on local consumption habits;
7) the slaughter, manufacture, storage and transportation of meat, poultry and
dairy products; 8) zoonotic disease control in slaughter- houses; 9) inspection
of animal products for national consumption, as for export as well; 10) to
offers an comprehensive legal advice through consumption chain; 11) and the
development of risk analysis systems which establishes the Microbiological
Criteria (MC), the Safety food (FSO), the Appropriate Level of Protection
(ALOP) and Performance Objectives (PO), four relatively new concepts introduced
in the context of risk analysis that complement the operational management of
food safety, which the United Nations Organization for Food and Agriculture
(FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO) are fostering legislation with a
transversal view- point [14,15].
Nowadays
veterinary services worldwide, broadly uses and promote the implementation of
hazard analyses and critical control points (HACCP) to achieve preventive
management and control of food products (chapter 2.1 of the Terrestrial and Aquatic
OIE’s Code). The development of systems based on risk control and prevention, using
hazard assessment techniques is recommended on the chapter 6.1 of the
Terrestrial and Aquatic OIE’s Codes.
.
4.
Veterinary Public Health, Food Safety and International Trade
.
The
implementation of public health policies based on the OIE’s normative, has
leaded to change the traditional governance arrangement in terms sanitary
management systems, in order to be replaced by more sophisticated protocols
that involves a complete integration of all stake- holders implicated in the
processing food sector (commerce private organizations, livestock producers,
trans- forming industries, etc.) which have the primary responsibility of
guarantee food of enough quality and safety for consumers. As a result, the
main objective of veterinary services is to establish innocuity patterns to
regulate the manufacturing process and accomplish the suitability of final
products, by auditing and assurance that the procedures used by the private
food sector are reliable, have been validated and applied in accordance with
the relevant rules national’s legislation.
In this
context, the modern approach to the SPV is essential for better understanding
the new challenges that food production will face in the next few decades, by
playing a crucial and indispensable role in terms of food security. Currently,
there is an expected increase in global food demand by 2050 with an annual
growth rate of around 4% on animal by-products [16]. Studies on trends in
global livestock production, done by the United Nations Organization for Food
and Agriculture (FAO), estimated that developing countries will significantly
increase the demand for animal products. For example, there is the expectation
that beef and milk production, which in 2005 was 265 and 243 million tons
respectively, will be increased to 310 and 747 million tons by 2014 [17].
Subsequently to the increasing of food demand, the requirements and non-tariff
barriers to products will also expand; inducing that food hygiene and consumer
protection will be critical factors for accessing animal commodity markets
globally.
Currently
the American Continent is well positioned to accomplish the future food
demands, bearing real options of increasing production. Latin American nations
are worldwide in top of poultry and meat production, at third place in pork and
the second in milk yield, protruding some countries like Argentina, Brazil,
Chile, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Uruguay. In this sense, the current economic
trends around the markets globalization, the in- crease in human population
density and the subsequent increase on food demand, generates that the incoming
decades regulatory services will have plausible and real challenges, bringing
about that veterinary public and private professionals should nourish each
other to successfully fulfil and satisfy the general management expectations at
the food business sectors.
Contrastingly
and despite the increase in the demand on animal protein, demographic
projections, technological development and international trade of agricultural
products, socioeconomic screenings shows that access to food in the poorest
countries will deteriorate and aggravate. Therefore, public policies on animal
health and production must take into account production systems, vulnerable
social sectors and mechanisms to collect, store, process and distribute food.
Promoting a qualified sanitary management policy of food safety carried out by
the National Veterinary Authority, based on an adequate, robust and efficient
food traceability system, that en- gages all stakeholders in the manufacturing
process and its production stages which veterinary services has a continuous
regulatory control, is imperative. Thus, aliment accessibility and innocuity
will become an important responsibility for governments to guarantee the right
of every human being to an adequate level of living, health and wellbeing.
.
5.
Interrelationship and Interdependence of the National Veterinary Authority and
the Private Veterinary Services to Improve the Sanitary Management of Food Hygiene
.
The
World Animal Health Organization recognizes two types of veterinarians. The
National Veterinary Authority (NVA); qualified state professionals who have the
responsibility of supervising and monitoring the implementation of protective
measures for animal health and welfare, veterinary certification procedures, as
well as implementing another OIE’s standards and recommendations. In the other
hand, are the Private Veterinary Services (PVS), who accomplish delegated
functions by applying the guidelines established by the OIE, serving as an
extension of the NVA at the agro-industrial sector, and acting also under
surveillance, accreditation and the approval of state veterinarians.
In
addition, PVS should respect the fundamental principles and recommendations for
assessing the objectivity, transparency and compliance to the reglamentary
guidelines (more information, in the chapters 3.1, 3.2 of the Terrestrial and
Aquatic’s Code and the OIE’s Evaluation Tool of Performance for Veterinary Services).
The responsibilities and chain of command within the PVS should be clearly
defined and documented properly. In each country, the National Veterinary
Authority should establish and develop an appropriate institutional frame- work
for private professionals to follow and implement the necessary policies and
normatives, allocating sufficient financial and logistical resources to carry
out their tasks in a sustainable manner. The NVA should also collaborate with
other health and food agencies in the formulation and implementation of
sanitary policies and multidisciplinary food safety programs to improve a co-
ordinated and integrated risk communication.
Confidence
on VPS is an important a cornerstone element to assure international trade.
Veterinarians not only need to be able to detect and manage quickly and efficiently
diseases listed by the OIE, including those with great risk in terms of public
health, but also must provide effective guarantees on food inocuity through
veterinary certificates. Preserving trust between trading partners depends on
the ability of the VPS to fulfil these reglamentary functions. Ensuring
transparency in disease reports, to promote efficiency in sanitary food
management and reliability of veterinary certification is the key to provide
commercial partners the necessary guarantees required to strengthen
international food trade [18]. The Technical Forum of the Transboundary
Diseases of Veterinary Importance running by the American Institute for
Cooperation on Agriculture (IICA), held in San José, Costa Rica in 2007,
emphasized that globalization trends of pecuary input markets will demand in
the future, better and broader health certification systems. Consequently, NVA
and VPS should be proactive and efficient in order to embracing sanitary food
management systems by improving the interconnected relationship between stake-
holders on four key components: 1) technical capability; 2) the human and
financial resources; 3) interaction be- tween private and public sectors; and
4) access to inter- national agricultural markets [19].
Currently,
NVA due to increasing on budgetary restrictions worldwide have lost the ability
to absorb new normative activities, frequently delegating more responsibilities
to VPS. Thus, the natural global tendency is to rely and deputize on private
professionals to support and strengthen control and supervision of surveillance
pro- grams focused on priority diseases and establishing trade insurance
between countries. Hence, government and food industry should work together by
delegating the implementation of public health policies and technical
assistance on private veterinarians, for the standardization, control, audit
and coordination of hygiene food systems. Additionally, a dynamic mechanism of
fluid communication which private veterinarians reports to government relevant
epidemiological and innocuity incidents on a regular basis, should be also
executed [20]. The integration of private veterinarians in the national network
of health management is an essential step in the process of improving
veterinary service’s quality. Thereby, is imperative that countries looking for
new food international markets or are integrating important commercial blocks
(for example, EU, PARTA, SICA, MERCOSUR, AEC, etc.), adapt their legislation to
allow a progressive evolution of the official veterinary professionals in accordance
with current international tendencies [21,22].
A
reliable veterinary governance system must have independence, providing
hierarchization and durability of technical decisions by allowing the
management of long- term public health policies. Under this framework, veterinary
certificate is an important business tool, which affords trust between trading
partners in any commercial transaction at nationally, regionally and
internationally level. Thus, pyramidal structures between health professionals
are required to achieve a trustful veterinary certification level. In all
cases, the application of fundamental principles to ensure public health will
remain ultimately responsible for the National Veterinary Authority [23]. Accordingly,
administrative structures overseen by a single centralized authority which each
stakeholder shall participation in the development and implementation of public
policies are generated [24]. Thus, governments provide a network of competent,
independent logistically of ad hoc agents. In fact, the vast majority of first
world countries, encourage and promote the emergence of a private sector with
an institutional basis for the provision of a veterinary services more
consequential, objective, suitable, effective and transparent in terms to
ameliorate food safety and international trade of animal products [25].
6.
Accomplishing with Alimentary Regulations: From Theory into Practice
The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights establishes sustainable access to food
(Art. 5 and 25, subsection 1) [26]. Similarly, the United Nations Committee on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) proposes that food must be
healthy, devoid of toxic elements and pollutants, arguing that the right to an
adequate alimentation is realized when every person has access to a sufficient
quality and availability of nutrients to meet the individual requirements, free
from adverse substances and being acceptable within cultural traditions [27].
Additionally, the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human
Rights (Art. 12), determines that the purpose of eradicate malnutrition among
the States Par- ties, is to improve secure food methods of production, supply
and distribution, by promoting international cooperation and national policies
on food hygiene [28]. Under this premise, veterinary profession must be sup-
ported by an effective legislation, in order to fully develop these
transcendental assignments.
The
Global FAO/WHO Forums on Food Safety Regulatory Authorities inferred that an
effective food hygiene system consists of two main areas: 1) the responsibility
of producing safe aliment supplies; and 2) the government’s obligation to
foster that this obligation is carry out adequately. Although is a primary
responsibility of the alimentary industry to provide safe and suitable food by
using hygienic practices and controlling food hazards, governments must also
generate adequate safeguards to protect consumers [29] from FBD and guarantee
reliability on pecuary markets. Official control services should be in a good
position to enforce relevant regulations, with an organizational structure and
plausible sanitary food safety management systems [30]. Therefore, the main
task of the supervisory authorities (veterinary professionals) is to establish
innocuity guidelines and en- forcing an appropriate hygiene control system by
live- stock producers, processors and food traders [31], in accordance with the
social, economic, cultural, religious and political contexts of the country.
Thereupon,
alimentary legislation is an essential tool for strengthening sanitary
management of food hygiene [32]. In legal matters on health and nutrition, it
is important that normativity provides adequate safeguards to facilitate
ongoing communication between veterinarians and other government institutions,
contemplating a common scope. The regulatory framework must be translated into
concrete actions, which depends on cooperation with all stakeholders, including
the definition of roles and responsibilities, rights and obligations as well.
Furthermore, the applicability of theoretical conceptualizations and agro
economical concepts in trade and biosecurity of transboundary animal diseases,
such as zoning and compartmentalization, depends on an effective collaboration
between producers and veterinary services.
.
7. Conclusión
.
Sanitary
management of food hygiene programs requires a high level of interaction and
communication among stakeholders regarding to risk management, control and
prevention. Currently trends towards increasing food exportations, combined
with awareness by consumers, is necessary increasingly to ensure safety on food
traded. Additionally, alimentary legislation is a critical, essential and
pivotal infrastructural tool to outfit food safety sanitary programs, ensure
social accessibility and palliate poverty in all countries. Nowadays, in many
signatory nations of OIE’s standards, veterinary professionals (officials and
privates) are responsible for managing, developing and implementing integral,
pragmatic and tangible public health policies. Consequently, food industry is
going to profess more social responsibility on the in- coming decades,
necessitating that public and private regulatory veterinary authorities work
together, in order to assume functions of verification, audit and certification
across all the manufacturing and value chain.
.
* Department of Animal
Production, Faculty of Agronomy, School of Natural and Exact Sciences, State
Distance University (UNED), San José, Costa Rica.
.
Copyright © 2013 Andrés Cartín Rojas
.
REFERENCES
.
[1] S.
B. Cáceres, “The Roles of Veterinarians in Meeting the Challenges of Health and
Welfare of Livestock and Global Food Security,” Veterinary Research Forum, Vol.
3, No. 3, 2012, pp. 155-157.
[2] B.
J. Butain, “Emerging Challenges in Public Health Protection, Food Safety, and
Security: Veterinary Needs in the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service,”
Journal of Veterinary Medical Education, Vol. 31, No. 4, 2004, pp. 334-340.
doi:10.3138/jvme.31.4.334
[3] R. J. Romero and L. C. Villamil, “Servicios de Salud
Publica Veterinaria en Países en Desarrollo: Lineamientos para la
Reestructuración,” Revista de Salud Pública, Vol. 1, No. 1, 1999, pp. 29-42.
[4] L. C. Villamil and J. R. Romero, “Retos y Perspectivas
de la Salud Pública Veterinaria,” Revista de Salud Pública, Vol. 5, No. 2,
2003, pp. 109-122.
[5] C. E. Mercado, “Los Ámbitos Normativos, la Gestión de
la Calidad y la Inocuidad Alimentaria: Una Visión Integral,” Agroalimentaria,
Vol. 13, No. 24, 2007, pp. 119-131.
[6] R.
L. Scharff, “Economic Burden from Health Losses Due to Foodborne Illness in the
United States,” Journal of Food Protection, Vol. 75, No. 1, 2012, pp. 123-131.
doi:10.4315/0362-028X.JFP-11-058
[7] E.
Scallan, R. M. Hoekstra, F. J. Angulo, R. V. Tauxe, Widdowson, S. L. Roy, J. L.
Jones and P. M. Griffin, “Foodborne Illness Acquired in the United States—Major
Pathogens,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2011, pp. 7-15.
[8] J. Gonzáles, “Sistemas de Rastreabilidad Para
Productos de Origen Animal en Costa Rica,” Master Dissertation, Instituto en
Enseñanza e Investigación en Ciencias Agrícolas, México City, 2004.
[9] FAO, “Panorama de la Seguridad Alimentaria y Nutricional
en América Latina y el Caribe,” Subdivisión de Políticas y Apoyo en materia de
Publicaciones, Roma, 2012.
[10] G.
Brückner, C. Bruschke, S. Edwards and B. Vallat, “The OIE Network of Reference
Laboratories,” Journal of Wildlife Diseases, Vol. 43, Suppl. 3, 2007, pp. S60-
S63.
[11] J.
K. Waage and J. D. Munford, “Agricultural Biosecurity,” Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society Biological Sciences, Vol. 363, No. 1492,
2008, pp. 863- 876. doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2188
[12] C.
Brown, I. Carbajal and G. Wagner, “Preparing the Veterinary Profession for
Corporate and Trade Issues in the Americas: Proceedings of a Conference on
Synergism and Globalization, Santiago, Chile, 6-8 May 2001,” Journal of
Veterinary Medical Education, Vol. 28, No. 2, 2001, pp. 56-61.
doi:10.3138/jvme.28.2.56
[13] S.
A. Slorach, “Assuring Food Safety: The Complementary Tasks and Standards of the
World Organization for Animal Health and the Codex Alimentarius Commission,”
Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office International des Epizooties, Vol.
25, No. 2, 2006, pp. 813- 821.
[14] C.
de Swarte and R. A. Donker, “Towards an FSO/ALOP Based Food Safety Policy,”
Food Control, Vol. 16, No. 9, 2005, pp. 825-830.
doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2004.10.023
[15] E.
Carasco, A. Valero, F. Pérez-Rodríguez, R. M. García-Gimeno and G. Zurera,
“Food Safety Risk Management,” In: Savino, M., Ed., Risk Management in
Environment, Production and Economy, InTech Press, Zagreb, 2011, pp. 77- 102.
doi:10.5772/17757
[16] D.
M. Morens, G. Folkers and A. S. Fauci, “The Challenge of Emerging and
Re-Emerging Infectious Dis- eases,” Nature, Vol. 430, No. 6996, 2004, pp.
242-249. doi:10.1038/nature02759
[17] M. V. Terán and L. del Barrio, “Salud Pública
Veterinaria e Inocuidad de los Alimentos en América Latina y el Caribe,”
Proceedings of Global Feed & Food Congress, Sao Paulo, 2005, pp. 1-17.
[18] M. A. Larach, “El Acuerdo Sobre la Aplicación de
Medidas Sanitarias y Fitosanitarias: Contenido y Alcance Para América Latina y
el Caribe,” Naciones Unidas, Santiago de Chile, 2003.
[19] V. Arrúa, “Los Servicios Veterinarios Oficiales: Lecciones
Aprendidas en las Américas,” Memorias Foro Técnico del IICA: Enfermedades
Transfronterizas: Importancia de los Servicios Veterinarios, la Acción
Intersectorial y la Compensación, San José, 2007, pp. 11-22.
[20] S.
A. Moura, M. Bedoya, M. P. Agudelo, “Relations between Official and Private
Veterinary Services in Epidemiology and the Control of Contagious Diseases,”
Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office International des Epizooties, Vol.
23, No. 1, 2004, pp. 79-93.
[21] Y. L.
Brun, “Lignes Directrices de l’OIE (Organisation Mondiale de la Santé Animale)
en Màtiere d’Organisation des Services Vétérinaires et de Leurs Relations Avec
les Partenaires Privés, en Particulier Dans les Pays en Voie de de
Développment,” Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office International des
Epizooties, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2003, pp. 561-567.
[22] A.
Thiermann, “Adapting Veterinary Infrastructures to Meet the Challenges of
Globalisation and the Requirements of the World Trade Organization Agreement on
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures,” Revue Scientifique et Technique de
l’Office International des Epizooties, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2004, pp. 109-114.
[23] P.
P. Pastoret and D. Chaisemartin, “The Importance of Governance and Reliable
Veterinary Certification,” Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office
International des Epizooties, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2011, pp. 347-352.
[24] L.
Hallet, “Collaboration between Official Veterinarians, Private Veterinarians and
Livestock Producer Organisations,” Revue Scientifique et Technique de l’Office
Inter-national des Epizooties, Vol. 22, No. 2, 2003, pp. 523-532.
[25] Y.
L. Brun, “Mechanisms for Collaboration between Public and Private
Veterinarians: The Animal Health Accreditation Mandate,” Revue Scientifique et
Technique de l’Office International des Epizooties, Vol. 23, No. 1, 2004, pp.
69-77.
[26] ONU, “Declaración Universal de los Derechos Humanos,”
1948. http://www.un.org/es/documents/udhr/
[27] C. Golay, “Derecho a la Alimentación y Acceso a la
Justicia: Ejemplos a Nivel Nacional, Regional e Internacional,” Subdivisión de
Políticas y Apoyo en Materia de Publicación Electrónica de la División de
Comunicación de la FAO, Roma, 2009.
[28] OEA, “Protocolo Adicional a la Convención Americana
Sobre Derechos Humanos en Materia de Derechos económicos, Sociales y
Culturales, Conocido Como Protocolo de San Salvador,” 1988.
http://www.oas.org/juridico/spanish/tratados/a-52.html
[29] L. C. Castellanos, L. C. Villamil and J. R. Romero,
“Incorporación del Sistema de Análisis de Peligros y Puntos Críticos de Control
en la Legislación Alimentaria,” Agroalimentaria, Vol. 6, No. 3, 2004, pp.
289-301.
[30] FAO, “Establecimiento de Sistemas Eficaces de Inocuidad
de los Alimentos,” Actas Segundo Foro Mundial FAO/OMS de las Autoridades de
Reglamentación Sobre Inocuidad de los Alimentos, Bangkok, 2004, pp. 1-26.
[31] FAO, “Mejora de la Eficiencia y Transparencia en los
Sistemas de Inocuidad de los Alimentos: Compartir Experiencias,” Actas Primer
Foro Mundial FAO/OMS de las Autoridades de Reglamentación sobre Inocuidad de
los Alimentos, Marrakech, 2002, pp. 1-245.
[32] J.
Vapnek and M. Spreij, “Perspective and Guidelines on Food Legislation, with a
New Model Food Law,” Development Law Service FAO Legal Office, Rome, 2005
