Report on Staph Testing Methods and Results
Lab: Hill Labs
Staph Test Result: 140 cfu/g
Method Details:
Automated Most Probable Number
(MPN) count on TEMPO STA
Incubation at 35°C for 24-27
hours
Equipment: bioMérieux TEMPO
Detection Limit: <10 CFU/g
Specification as per Regulation:
<50 CFU/g
Lab: Analytica
Staph Test Result: Not
Detected/25g
Method Details:
Method: APHA 39.61
Detection Limit: Not Detected/25g
Specification as per Regulation:
<50 CFU/g
Differences in Methods
Sample ID |
Lab |
Staph
Test |
Method
Details |
Detection
Limit |
Specification
as per regulation |
KHL2241 |
Hill labs |
140 cfu/g |
Automated
MPN count on TEMPO STA, Incubated at 35°C for 1 |
<10
CFU/g |
<50
cfu/g |
KHL2241L |
Analytica |
Not Detected/25g |
APHA
39.61 method. |
ND/25g |
<50
cfu/g |
Detection Technique:
Hill Labs:
Uses an automated MPN count method with the TEMPO STA system by bioMérieux.
This is a quantitative method where results are given in colony-forming units
per gram (CFU/g).
Analytica:
Uses the APHA 39.61 method. This method typically involves culturing and is
often used for qualitative detection, resulting in a "not detected"
(ND) output if no bacteria are found in the tested sample volume (25g).
Detection Limit:
Hill Labs:
Can detect down to <10 CFU/g, providing a precise count if bacteria are
present.
Analytica:
Reports detection as "Not Detected" per 25 grams, meaning that if any
Staph is present below the detection threshold in that sample size, it will not
be detected.
Quantitative vs. Qualitative:
Hill Labs:
Provides a specific count (140 cfu/g) indicating the exact level of
contamination.
Analytica:
Provides a qualitative result, indicating presence or absence without
specifying the number.
Compliance with Regulations
According to New Zealand
regulations, the release criteria for Staph levels in the tested product are
set at <50 cfu/g.
Hill Labs
Result: 140 cfu/g, which exceeds the regulatory limit.
Analytica Result:
Not Detected/25g, which complies with the regulatory limit.
Summary and Recommendations
The method used by Hill Labs is
more sensitive and provides a quantitative measure of bacterial presence. Their result
indicates a level of contamination (140 cfu/g) that does not meet New Zealand’s
regulatory criteria (<50 cfu/g).
Analytica’s method, being qualitative, detected
no Staph in the 25g sample tested, thus complying with the regulations.
However, it may not detect low
levels of contamination that are above 50 cfu/g but spread out in a
larger volume.
Given the discrepancy in results,
it is advisable to:
·
Review the sampling procedures to ensure
consistency.
·
Consider retesting the samples using the same method for
both tests to ensure comparability.
·
If quantitative results are preferred for accuracy and compliance,
the method used by
Hill Labs could be considered more reliable.
****Note: Request
Hill Labs to provide a report indicating results of <50 CFU/g instead of
<10 CFU/g. For example, if the obtained value is around 22 CFU/g, please
amend the specification value as per regulations.
·
Ensuring consistency in testing methods and
understanding the sensitivity and specificity of each method will help in
making informed decisions about product safety and compliance with regulatory
standards.
Reviewed By
Honey Expert & Technical Consultant IANZ Technical
Expert BRCGS- Food quality
& Safety Expert Ex. IANZ Authorized
Representative Ex. Key Technical
Person for Manuka Health & King Honey
|