Latest news with #FoodStandardsAustraliaNewZealand
West Australian
21-07-2025
- Health
- West Australian
Groundbreaking WA research behind major health wins for Aussies
In 1989, Professor Carol Bower and Fiona Stanley made a landmark discovery: taking folate in early pregnancy reduced the risk of neural tube defects – such as spina bifida. It didn't stop there. They followed up their findings with decades of dedicated campaigning in the hopes the whole community would benefit from the dietary supplementation. It worked. It is estimated about 4,000 Australian children have been saved from debilitating and deadly birth defects since they started advocating for their folate research. Furthermore, they pushed for government policy to address the health needs of everyone nationwide regardless of culture, age, education or choice of hospital system. In response to the continued advocacy work, in 2009 Food Standards Australia New Zealand introduced a national mandatory fortification of wheat flour for breadmaking, resulting in a 14.4 per cent national decline in neural tube defects (NTD) from 2011 – 2016, and a 68 per cent reduction in the Aboriginal population – with rates dropping from 2.43 cases per 1,000 births between 2007 and 2009, to 0.82 cases per 1,000 births between 2011 and 2016 – roughly the same rate observed in the non-Indigenous population. It was a huge success; one now recognised by the Public Health Association of Australia as among the country's top 10 public health achievements in two decades. Not only is it a testament to the arduous work researchers do every day, but what most people don't know is that this public milestone can be traced back to Perth, at The Kids Research Institute Australia. Today, the legacy continues as WA scientists work on major health concerns including RSV, kids' physical activity and allergies, taking their research and transforming it into policy and real-world change. After more than two decades of research, modelling and collaboration, an effective RSV immunisation program for all pregnant women and newborn babies was rolled out nationally in 2025. It is expected to keep 10,000 babies out of hospital each year. Head of the Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases based at The Kids Research Institue Australia Professor Chris Blyth said the launch effectively reduced life-threatening complications such as severe bronchiolitis and pneumonia in newborn babies. 'Our results show that RSV immunisation reduces the risk of being hospitalised with the virus by more than 80 per cent and has seen an overall 60 per cent reduction in hospital admissions – significantly reducing the number of babies becoming seriously unwell from RSV and lessening the pressure on our health system throughout the busy winter period,' Professor Blyth said. 'I am extremely pleased to see that our research has now translated into a nationwide immunisation program that will benefit so many Australian families,' he said. Play Active is a program being delivered in childcare centres across Australia to boost physical activity in young kids. Despite overwhelming evidence about the importance of physical movement in early childhood, Australia continues to receive a D-minus grade for physical activity levels among young kids – a rating that hasn't improved since 2015. To address this, The Kids Research Institute Australia developed Play Active in partnership with the early childhood education and care (ECEC) sector. Backed by more than a decade of research, the program provides practical tools and support to educators to embed active play into daily routines. Now in action in over 700 childcare centres, Play Active is set to benefit more than 80,000 children nationwide, helping change the course of Australia's physical activity crisis from the ground up. Head of The Kids Research Institute Australia's Child Physical Activity, Health and Development team Professor Hayley Christian AM said the early years were critical for promoting physical activity. 'Given young children spend a lot of time in childcare, there is a huge opportunity here to increase their physical activity levels, in particular energetic play that gets them huffing and puffing,' Professor Christian said. 'Nutrition, sleep and sun protection policies are required in national ECEC regulations but there is no guidance around how much physical activity, sedentary and screen time children should have while in care.' Since launching nationally last year, Play Active has registered 1000 educators and supported over 170 services to develop tailored active play policies, with research showing the program is delivering strong results. Families who introduce peanut butter and eggs to their baby's diet at around six months of age can significantly reduce the chances of them developing a life-threatening allergy, according to a new study published in the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology – In Practice. Findings from researchers at The Kids Research Institute Australia confirm the strength of the updated Australasian Society of Clinical Immunology and Allergy (ASCIA) Infant Feeding and Allergy Prevention Guidelines, giving parents confidence as they begin their feeding journey – even those with a family history of allergies. Head of the Nutrition in Early Life team at The Kids Associate Professor Debbie Palmer said prior to 2016 the advice to parents was very different, with common food allergens generally introduced when babies were closer to 12 months of age or older. It started with folate, but the epochal work continues – often unseen and under-recognised. Even more the reason to talk about it, understand it and support it. From protecting babies from life-threatening viruses like RSV to rolling out national physical activity guidelines in childcare centres, WA scientists continue to shape our health through their commitment to research and advocating for real world change. For more information, visit the website .
Sydney Morning Herald
30-06-2025
- Health
- Sydney Morning Herald
Contamination prompts recall of Coles peanut butter
Food Standards Australia New Zealand is urging people not to eat two varieties of peanut butter which have been found to be contaminated with the mycotoxin, Aflatoxin. The two varieties in question are Coles Smooth peanut butter and Coles Crunchy peanut butter, specifically those marked best before February 5, 2027. The supermarket giant has recalled both products, meaning people can return them for a full refund. People who eat food containing aflatoxin may become ill. Aflatoxins can occur in foods such as groundnuts, tree nuts, rice, figs and other dried foods, as a result of fungal contamination before and after harvest and can increase the risk of liver cancer.
The Age
30-06-2025
- Health
- The Age
Contamination prompts recall of Coles peanut butter
Food Standards Australia New Zealand is urging people not to eat two varieties of peanut butter which have been found to be contaminated with the mycotoxin, Aflatoxin. The two varieties in question are Coles Smooth peanut butter and Coles Crunchy peanut butter, specifically those marked best before February 5, 2027. The supermarket giant has recalled both products, meaning people can return them for a full refund. People who eat food containing aflatoxin may become ill. Aflatoxins can occur in foods such as groundnuts, tree nuts, rice, figs and other dried foods, as a result of fungal contamination before and after harvest and can increase the risk of liver cancer.
Time of India
29-05-2025
- Health
- Time of India
a2 Light Milk (2L) pulled out of WA supermarkets due to Listeria contamination concerns
Western Australian consumers are urgently advised to check their fridge after The a2 Milk Company (Australia) Pty Ltd issued the popular a2 Light Milk (2L) for recall because of concerns of Listeria monocytogenes contamination. The recall is only for products labeled with the "Use by 06/06 #41" date code, which have been sold only in WA at major supermarket retailers such as Woolworths, Aldi, and Coles. Consumers are advised strongly not to consume the impacted milk and return it to the store of purchase for a refund. Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has also highlighted the risk severity, saying: 'Listeria infection can lead to severe illness, especially among vulnerable groups. Anyone who has consumed this product and is concerned for their health should seek medical advice immediately.' by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like She Was The Dream Girl In The 80s, This Is Her Recently Undo The a2 Milk Company issued a statement saying sorry for the incident and guaranteeing customers that their products' safety and quality are always their top concern. 'We are working closely with health authorities to ensure all affected products are swiftly removed from shelves. Consumers' wellbeing is our utmost concern,' a spokesperson said. The a2 Milk Company, established in New Zealand in 2000, specializes in creating milk derived from cows that only produce the A2 protein naturally. The recall does not impact other a2 Milk brands. Live Events For more details, consumers can contact The a2 Milk Company (Australia) Pty Ltd or log onto the Food Standards Australia New Zealand website. If any person develops symptoms like fever, muscle pains, or gastrointestinal disturbances after consuming this product, they are advised to consult a doctor immediately. FAQs on Listeria What is Listeria monocytogenes? Listeria monocytogenes is a bacteria that can contaminate various environments and foods, leading to listeriosis, a potentially serious illness. It's found in soil, water, animals, and can even thrive under refrigeration. Transmission to humans primarily occurs through contaminated foods, especially ready-to-eat meats, unpasteurized dairy, and unwashed produce. What are the threats? Listeria monocytogenes can lead to severe illness, especially among pregnant women, unborn children, newborns, the elderly, and those with compromised immune systems. Yet even healthy people may become sick after eating contaminated foods.
The Guardian
03-04-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
BSE, tariffs and ‘wonderful people': what you need to know about US-Australia beef relations
Donald Trump did not impose any special penalties on Australia beyond a baseline 10% tariff on goods exported to the US. But Trump did single out the Australian beef industry in his speech preceding his tariffs announcement. 'Australia bans – and they're wonderful people – but they ban American beef,' the US president said. The US, Trump said, imported $3bn of Australian beef 'last year alone'. He then took aim at Australia's biosecurity rules restricting import of US beef. 'They won't take any of our beef. They don't want it because they don't want it to affect their farmers and, you know, I don't blame them, but we're doing the same thing right now, starting at midnight tonight.' Here's what you need to know about Australian rules governing beef imports. Australia introduced a ban on US beef imports in 2003, in response to an outbreak of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) or mad cow disease. It was technically lifted in 2019, subject to an ongoing biosecurity review that in practice means no imports of fresh beef. The sticking point is the US's reliance on live cattle imports from Canada and Mexico to bolster its national herd. The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, and the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, have both said they will not compromise on biosecurity to allow the US access to the Australian market. Any country seeking market access to import fresh beef products – which means chilled or frozen meat, not processed beef products – must undergo a BSE risk assessment, conducted by Food Standards Australia New Zealand. A risk assessment of the US published in 2015 granted it category 1 status, concluding that the US had 'comprehensive and well-established controls' to prevent BSE outbreaks in cattle and any contamination into the human food chain. Category 1 countries are able to import fresh and processed beef into Australia so long as they comply with other conditions. In 2017, Australia released the beef review, which assessed applications for market access from countries that had passed the BSE risk assessment, including the US. That review should have been the final step in allowing access to the Australian market – except it specified that the animal from which the beef was derived must have been 'continuously resident' in the approved country since birth. Sign up to receive Guardian Australia's fortnightly Rural Network email newsletter In January 2020, US officials clarified that their request included beef sourced from bovines legally imported into the US from Mexico and Canada. The US imported an average of 700,000 cattle, buffalo or bison from Canada each year between 2019 and 2023 and 1.2 million per year from Mexico over the same period. Australia responded that that amounted to a change of scope and would require a science-based assessment to ensure the biosecurity risk was no greater than for cattle born and wholly raised in the US. A draft report was released for public comment last year and the final report is yet to be released. Australian industry stakeholders raised concerns about the traceability of cattle born outside the US and argued that all beef imported to Australia should be subject to the same rigorous end-to-end traceability requirements as Australian producers. The US does have a national traceability system but it is widely agreed to be not as rigorous as the electronic traceability system in Australia. The Cattle Australia president, Dr Chris Parker, said the US effectively had access to the Australian market provided it can demonstrate its beef comes from cattle that have lived continuously in the US. 'These are the same conditions that the US imposes on Australian exporters – reciprocal arrangements are already in place,' he said in a statement on Wednesday. 'The US industry has not been able to meet these standards and now wish to include beef from cattle born in Mexico and Canada.' Parker, who is in Washington this week to lobby for Australian cattle interests, said US farmers were unable to meet the domestic demand and Australian farmers were filling the shortfall. 'Imposing tariffs on Australian beef disregards the mutually beneficial role of each country's supply chain, and the effects will be most acutely felt by American consumers and industry,' he said. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry told industry press Beef Central that import conditions into Australia were 'currently available for beef products sourced from cattle born, raised and slaughtered in the United States' but the US has not started trade under those terms. Sign up to The Rural Network Subscribe to Calla Wahlquist's fortnightly update on Australian rural and regional affairs after newsletter promotion In short, no. Australia produced 2.5m tonnes of beef last year, of which just over one-fifth was consumed onshore. Angus Gidley-Baird, a senior animal proteins analyst at Rabobank, said it is highly unlikely that US imports would ever constitute anything other than a very small, very specialised market. 'We are a very efficient producer here … We have got plenty of beef in Australia to satisfy the domestic market,' he said. Gidley-Baird said the beef exported to the US from Australia was 'largely complementary' to its domestic product: the US produces higher-fat, grain-fed beef and the vast cattle herds of northern Australia are lean, grass-fed beef. Those two products are mixed in US ground beef and hamburgers. 'It's not like we are displacing US product in that respect; it's that they are not producing it on their own,' he said. It is too early to say what the impact will be. Gidley-Baird said the blanket application of a 10% tariff means that Australia's competitive position remains unchanged. Brazil, the largest beef exporter to the US ahead of Australia, will also be subject to a 10% tariff. 'The question is which part of the supply chain will wear the costs,' Gidley-Baird said. 'With very strong demand and limited supply in the US for beef at the moment, you could argue that it will land on the consumer end.' The US cattle herd is at a 74-year low due to prolonged drought conditions. In 2024 the US imported 525,980 tonnes of Australian beef to fill the gap. Tariffs may bring opportunities for some sections of the industry, Gidley-Baird said. Australia competes against US beef producers in the high-end wagyu markets in China and Japan. Trump announced a 34% tariff on goods from China on top of an existing 20% levy and a 24% tariff on Japan, which may mean they look more towards Australian suppliers. The National Farmers' Federation (NFF) and Cattle Australia said they would look for diversification opportunities, particularly the resumption of talks over the EU fair trade agreement. The trade minister, Don Farrell, said he had a meeting scheduled with EU partners on Monday. The NFF president, David Jochinke, said the tariff announcement was a 'disappointing step backward for our nations and for the global economy'. Albanese told reporters in Melbourne that he spoke to the NFF and beef producers on Wednesday morning to offer support in a 'really difficult period for them', but added that 'in terms of the competitive position, it is maintained'. Sign up for the Rural Network email newsletter
