As Safer Food Scores move into their fourth month of providing telephone advice to NAMB members, Managing Director, Melissa Thompson reports on how the service has been received.

‘Our environmental health consultants have been hand since November 2011 to answer food hygiene and health and safety queries on behalf of the NAMB. We are receiving an increasing amount of calls each month which vary considerably and a few which are really testing our knowledge!’

‘The majority have come as the result of an inspection. The Health and Safety Executive seem to be out in force focussing on occupational asthma and dermatitis and in particular the health surveillance aspects surrounding this area. We’ve had machine guarding enquiries and advised on RIDDOR reporting when it seemed that the customer was not telling the whole truth...’

‘The majority of queries so far, however, relate to food labelling and food safety. EHOs seem to have fallen out of love with the Food Standards Agency’s Safer Food Better Business Pack and are expecting bakers to produce a HACCP system much more robust and tailor-made to their operation. With more and more councils taking on the National Food Hygiene Rating Scheme, gaining a top score is proving an incentive to members wanting to improve their food hygiene standards and their relationship with their EHO.’

NAMB Regional Food Safety Seminars coming soon...

Members will be pleased to hear that the NAMB are holding regional food safety seminars which will cover the latest food safety developments and how they could affect your business.

The seminars start in Derby on Wednesday 25th April 2012 and will run from 10.00 am to 3.30 pm. They are suitable for wholesale and retail bakery owners, managers and supervisors.

NAMB members wishing to book should contact Karen@masterbakers.co.uk

A hotel owner has been fined and ordered to pay costs totalling £262,000 after being found guilty of not complying with fire safety laws.

Chumleigh Lodge Hotel, in Finchley, London, and its sole director, Michael Wilson, had denied 12 offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. The defendants were found guilty at Blackfriars Crown Court.

The offences date back to 18 May 2008 when a fire broke out at the hotel. The blaze had spread quickly from a first-floor guest bedroom, up a staircase to the floor above and along a corridor. Three people escaped from the fire, two by using the stairs and a third by climbing out of a second-floor window.

Following the fire, London Fire Brigade fire safety inspectors visited the hotel and raised a number of serious fire safety concerns, including defective fire doors, blocked escape routes and no smoke alarms in some of the hotel's bedrooms. Wilson was also unable to produce a suitable and sufficient fire risk assessment and had not provided staff with adequate fire safety training.

Chumleigh Lodge, as the corporate defendant, was fined £30,000 and individual defendant Wilson was fined £210,000. Together they were also ordered to pay prosecution costs of £50,000 and compensation of £2,000 to the guest who had to escape the fire through the second-floor window.

Employers or those responsible for a premises are required by law to carry out a fire risk assessment and act on its findings. The risk assessment should also identify actions which need to be taken - such as blocked fire exits, inadequate fire alarms and poor training for staff - in order to protect the building from fire. It must be kept under constant review and amended if any changes are made to the premises.

Please contact us if you would like a quote for us to carry out a fire risk assessment for you.

An online tool aimed at dispelling myths about food allergy and intolerance has been launched on the NHS Choices website, with the help of the Food Standards Agency.

The tool, developed in conjunction with FSA allergy experts, looks at common misconceptions about food allergies and intolerances and sorts the facts from fiction.

It tackles topics including:

• the differences between allergies and intolerances

• whether you can ‘outgrow’ allergies and intolerances

• the use of home-test kits

• whether allergies and intolerances can be cured

Click here to access the NHS food allergy on-line tool.

Click here to access the FSA food allergy on-line training tool

This follows on from the Food Allergy & Intolerance Awareness Week when the national charity Allergy UK looked to raise awareness not just of the physical effects of these conditions, but the social impact they have.

Worryingly nearly a quarter of UK adults (24%) view sufferers of food allergies and intolerances as 'fussy' or feel that they use their condition as an excuse not to eat something. Yet 45% of the UK population are estimated to be suffering from food intolerance and 2% of UK adults are diagnosed with a food allergy.

Despite the fact so many are affected, there is a distinct lack of information out there for sufferers and all too frequently the conditions are misunderstood. Simple activities like eating out, things that the general population take for granted, become a big headache for someone with food allergy or food intolerance.

Allergy UK has identified some of the key social consequences of living with either of these conditions to demonstrate the impact on people's lives:

Kiss of Death

Something as simple as a kiss can be a terrifying ordeal for an allergy sufferer. It doesn't have to be an amorous encounter, a straightforward greeting or kiss on the cheek can prompt a reaction if the person has been in contact with a trigger food. Gemma Morris, 27, SKY news presenter has such a severe nut allergy that she can even react to a quick peck on the lips from her boyfriend after he's eaten a chocolate bar.

Staying in is the new going out

Allergy UK research has shown that 77% of those with a food allergy or intolerance changed their attitude to eating out as a result of their condition and find it much more difficult now. Alice Murdock is 18 years old and for her eating out is something she can only dream of, having never eaten out in a restaurant. Even having lunch or a simple supper at a friend's house can cause problems. 70% of food allergy and intolerance sufferers said they feel like an inconvenience when eating at friend's houses, often because people don't understand their condition. For parents of children with allergies nearly a third (32%) find kids parties and eating out with the family stressful.

Making a quick getaway

When it comes to a much needed break from the stresses and strains of modern life, for food allergy sufferers there's no respite. Over half of allergy sufferers say their condition has restricted their holiday. Gemma Morris meticulously plans her holidays after a near fatal experience abroad due to her severe nut allergy. "I was on a ski trip to Austria, which turned into a life-threatening ordeal. I had eaten what I thought was 'safe' food in the hotel restaurant after the waiting staff assured me there were no nut derivatives in the dish. However, I went into anaphylactic shock in my hotel and spent 48 hours in a local hospital. "When I'm booking a holiday I always make sure there's a hospital within reach and would never go anywhere without my adrenalin pen. For me, it's a matter of life or death."

The stresses of shopping

Food allergy and intolerance has a big impact on food shopping. According to Allergy UK research 62% of sufferers said it changed the way they shop. Bunmi Sobowale, 30, founded an online food portal for those with food allergies and intolerances having spent four years trying to get a diagnosis for multiple food intolerances. In that time she temporarily lost her sight and the ability to walk. So sick of the long tiresome search for food she could safely eat, she now provides information to people on food they can eat locally and nationally.

Click here to access a poster that can be used to remind your team to take food allergies seriously.

Three accredited food safety standards for food suppliers have changed recently. We report on changes to the BRC (British Retail Consortium), IFS (International Featured Standards) and SALSA (Small and Local Supplier Approval) standards.

The BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 6

The BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 6 has been extensively revised in consultation with senior representatives from major retailers and food service companies, ensuring that it continues to meet the requirements of manufacturers and retailers.

The Standard was first introduced by the BRC in 1998 and now has almost 14,000 certificated sites in over 100 countries across the world. Issue 6 places increased emphasis on good manufacturing practice, including a change in the balance of the number and depth of requirements in favour of the implementation of good manufacturing systems within the factory and greater focus on standardising best practices for auditing the Standard.

Key changes for Issue 6 include:

„X Expanded sections on foreign body control, hygiene and housekeeping, and allergens

„X Introduction of a new voluntary 2 stage unannounced audit scheme

„X A reduced number of clauses to ensure each expresses a significant idea, this will contribute to consistency of grading as requirements are now of similar significance Issue 6 will come into effect in January 2012.

Issue 5 can no longer be used for audits.

IFS Food Standard Issue 6

IFS Food is a GFSI recognised standard for auditing food safety and quality of processes and products of food manufacturers. It concerns food processing companies or companies that pack loose food products. IFS Food applies when products are “processed” or when there is a hazard for product contamination during primary packing.

The IFS Food Standard is important for all food manufacturers, especially those producing private labels, because it contains many requirements related to specifications’ compliance. It supports production and marketing efforts for brand safety and quality.

IFS Food standard version 6 has been developed with full and active involvement of certification bodies, retailers, industry and food service companies from all over the world.

Key changes to Issue 6:

• A slightly revised scoring system will be implemented to better identify companies implementing best practices

• Clear rules for determining audit duration have been created, based on a pragmatic calculation tool, which will provide the minimum mandatory audit duration to be applied by all certification bodies,

• IFS Integrity Program, which was created in 2010 to monitor performance of certification bodies and of auditors,will be described in the new audit protocol,

• As IFS Food is not only a food safety but also a quality standard, version 6 will include more quality requirements (e.g. nutritional analyses, more requirements on weight control, more requirements on the quality/quantity of information provided on labelling, etc.),

• In order to comply with GFSI Guidance document version 6, food defence requirements will be introduced in IFS Food audit check-list. Exhaustive guidelines will also be developed in order to help companies implement those requirements, based on risk assessment and – most of all – on legislation of destination country.

• IFS auditors will be approved for products and technology scopes. Technology scopes are newly introduced to improve auditors’ expertise even more on products and processes.

Test audits have been performed during the summer of 2011 in different countries worldwide and in companies producing different kinds of products. IFS Food version 6 was published at the beginning of 2012 for a mandatory implementation in June 2012.

SALSA Standard Issue 3

The SALSA Standard and User Guide have been revised for the second time since its original launch in March 2007. Issue 3, which becomes effective on 31 January 2012, contains a number of minor changes to the wording of requirements in order to clarify their meaning or to help the reader understanding and interpret them correctly.

There is only one change of substance which you should be specifically aware of if you are about to audit or be audited and this is detailed below for convenience. All changes to wording are identifiable by italic font.

The changes to wording are all improvements to and not an extension of the standard. They have come about through a continuous feedback mechanism set up by SALSA with their Mentors and Auditors. Other refinements have originated through advice from the scheme’s Technical Advisory Committee, which is made up of experienced food industry food safety experts from IFST, BRC, BHA and NFU; and representatives from the scheme’s stakeholders such as ASDA, Sainsbury’s, Waitrose, 3663 etc.

The only change of substance relates to the traceability section and which the Sea Fish Industry Authority have helped to enhance to allow for provenance claims to be included where it is a requirement of a complimentary scheme such as the Responsible Fishing scheme and Assured Food Standards’ Red Tractor scheme. The requirement has been split into two parts. 2.4.1 is based on the requirement as found in Issue 2 and 2.4.2 is the new requirement applicable only in circumstances where provenance is linked to a complimentary scheme.

The FSA (Food Standards Agency) is routinely publishing the full list of those meat plants that, on the basis of their audit reports, are considered 'cause for concern'.

'Cause for concern’ is a process developed in response to Professor Pennington's report on the 2005 E.coli outbreak in Wales, which recommended that there needed to be improved management oversight of poorer performing meat plants. The process makes it clear which plants need to improve their standards to ensure risks to public health are kept to a minimum.

Tim Smith, Chief Executive of the FSA, said: 'Publication of the cause for concern list is our latest commitment to presenting our work in the public domain. We think it's important to highlight plants that continue to give us concern. Our staff work to ensure that meat is safe to eat and they continue to drive up standards. 148 meat plants have appeared on the list since it began in October 2009, and the number currently stands at eight. This demonstrates that plants can make improvements, and those on the list need to improve their performance, get themselves out of cause for concern, and then stay out.

‘If our inspectors decided that hygiene standards in a plant are so poor that public health could be at imminent risk, we would immediately stop that plant from operating. However, for those businesses that could improve quickly by following our advice, we hope that publication of this list will push them to raise their game and get off the list.'

The Agency categorises establishments as a cause for concern on the basis of an analysis of trends in a food business operator's compliance and, in particular, the most recent audit scores in relation to hygienic production, environmental hygiene and prerequisites, and HACCP. Cause for concern establishments typically score more than 45 in these areas (taking the worst score of up to three separate scores for hygienic production depending on the type of processes carried out). These establishments must put in place improvements to ensure required standards are met.

Click here for establishments currently identified as a cause for concern.

Police have begun an investigation into allegations that food served by Compass Group's B&I brand Eurest at a London crown court were spiked with urine.

The advocates' lounge in Snaresbrook Crown Court, which is operated by Eurest Services, was closed after police were contacted when judges and barristers complained the food smelled "a bit off". Urine traces were later found in soups, salads and sandwiches, according to the Evening Standard.

A Metropolitan Police spokesman said: "We were called at approximately 16:00 GMT on Tuesday 17 January and we are investigating an allegation of food contamination at a venue on Hollybush Hill.

"The investigation is with Redbridge Council. There have been no arrests, and inquiries continue."

A spokeswoman for Eurest said the matter was under investigation.

"Health and safety is our number-one operational priority; we have robust policies in place and take such matters extremely seriously," she added.

The EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) has concluded that current methods used to remove norovirus in shellfish are not an effective means of reducing contamination. 

Current control and purification measures used to remove virus in oysters are heat treatment, depuration (immersing shellfish in tanks of clean seawater) and relaying (moving shellfish from contaminated to clean areas). The EFSA determined that these are not effective and the most effective public health measures to protect consumers from exposure to norovirus in oysters are to produce oysters in areas which are not contaminated or to prevent contamination of mollusc production areas.

The Panel recommends establishing acceptable limits for the presence of virus in oysters that are harvested and placed on the market in the European Union. In addition, an EU-wide baseline survey on norovirus in oysters should be carried out to provide information on overall consumer exposure as well as the public health impact of control measures.

Norovirus, sometimes referred to in the media as the “winter vomiting bug”, is a major cause of acute gastroenteritis in Europe often causing diarrhoea and vomiting. The virus is transmitted through the consumption of food or water contaminated with faecal matter or more often through person-to-person contact or contact with infected surfaces. Bivalve molluscs such as oysters and scallops are a well documented source of infection as they can accumulate and concentrate virus particles. Oysters contaminated with norovirus pose a particular risk to human health as they are often consumed raw.

The EFSA concludes that norovirus is highly infectious and that the amount of the virus detected in oysters linked to human cases can vary greatly. Scientists highlight that norovirus is frequently detected in oysters in Europe which comply with existing EU control standards for bivalve molluscs. This is because they rely on tests for acceptable levels of bacteria and not viruses.

The Food Standards Agency’s public attitudes tracker now measures awareness of food hygiene rating schemes and concluded that food hygiene when eating out is what concerns people most about food safety. 

The tracker is used to gauge people’s opinions on a range of food-related topics. This year, given the recent rollout of hygiene rating schemes in eateries across the UK, three questions have been added to monitor people’s awareness of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme (used in England, Wales and Northern Ireland) and the Food Hygiene Information Scheme (used in Scotland).

The tracker found that 19% of respondents had seen or heard about initiatives or schemes concerning hygiene standards. When prompted, 21% of respondents said that they had seen or heard about the ‘Food Hygiene Rating scheme’ and 10% had seen or heard about the ‘Food Hygiene Information Scheme’.

The schemes help consumers choose where to eat out or shop for food by giving them information about the hygiene standards in restaurants, cafés, takeaways, hotels and food shops.

In February, a campaign will be rolled out across Wales to increase awareness of the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme. It will be using a range of channels to get the message out and encourage people to look for stickers and check out ratings on the website.

Please get in touch if you would like a copy of our Scores on the Doors Handbook or any of our other free food safety resources to help you achieve a top hygiene rating on your next EHO inspection.

Liu Jun, a Chinese chef working in Australia, thought death cap mushrooms were edible and killed himself and assistant Tsou Hsiang by cooking them in a stir fry.

Liu Jun, 38, a chef visiting from China, and his female kitchenhand, Tsou Hsiang, 52, died from liver failure at a hospital after eating death cap mushrooms on New Year's Eve at the Harmonie German Club in Canberra. A third person who shared the dinner with Liu and Tsou was discharged from hospital on Tuesday.

The two had used the mushrooms to make a stir fry in the kitchen of the club's Chinese bistro. The manager of the club, Mick Thamer, said the meal had not been offered to the public.

Mr Liu's friends believe he picked the poisonous mushrooms in Braddon on his way home from work, mistaking them for the edible straw mushrooms used in Asian cooking. They said he was obsessed with fresh food. He was also working to send money home to his Chinese wife and two children, a seven-year-old boy and a girl, 11.

A single death cap mushroom can kill an adult – they are among the most poisonous in the world.

We have some special offers on training courses in the coming months... EITHER 10% early bird discount if booked and paid for 6 weeks in advance OR book one place and get a second place at half price on these courses!

Three day Level 3 Award in Supervising Food Safety – suitable for team leaders and trainers wishing to teach the Level 2 Award.

Full Price - £340 Early Bird Price - £306 OR book one at £340 and the second at £170

Tuesday 7th - Thursday 9th February 2012 – Watford

Six day Level 4 Award in Managing Food Safety – suitable for managers, owners and trainers wishing to teach the Level 2 Award.

Full Price - £595 Early Bird Price - £535.50 Book one at £595 and the second at £297.50

Mon 12th – Fri 16th + 19th March 2012 (exam date)- Watford

Prices shown are inclusive of lunch, refreshments and exam fees but exclusive of VAT. Please contact us if you are interested in any of these courses.

Research published by the Food Standards Agency shows that in Wales only 6% of food businesses audited with a low rating of 0, 1 or 2 under the Food Hygiene Rating scheme are actually displaying the ratings in their premises, compared with 66% of those businesses which received a rating of 5. 

Non display of a rating sticker means consumers are unable to use the sticker to assess the food hygiene standards of the business as they enter the premises. However, where a business has decided to display its rating, then 77% of those were very easy to find when visited by a ‘mystery shopper’.

Steve Wearne, Director of the Food Standards Agency in Wales, commented, 'Since its launch just over a year ago, the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme has increased the availability of information to consumers on the hygiene standards of food businesses when they choose to eat out or shop for food. This research has revealed that even when they have a good rating, not all food businesses in Wales are choosing to display the information. As they enter the business, consumers currently don’t always have the information available to them to make an informed choice.'

The FSA is working with the Welsh Government on making mandatory the display of food hygiene ratings at food businesses in Wales. Restaurants and takeaways could face a maximum £1,000 fine if they fail to display their score under the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme, which was previously known as Scores on the Doors.

The scheme could come into force by 2014 if it is approved.

Please contact us for a copy of our Scores on the Doors Handbook which provides details of the schemes and how to achieve a top score. 

Plymouth residents recently learned about an E. coli O157:H7 outbreak that occurred in their city in August when nine people were infected by eating crabmeat.

The Plymouth Herald reported last summer's outbreak was unusual because it marked the first time that E. coli O157:H7 was associated with the consumption of crabmeat. It was also the first public disclosure about the nearly four-month-old outbreak that has been under investigation by environmental and health officials since it occurred.

Since August, there have been no reports of additional illnesses. Local environmental health officials and the Health Protection Agency (HPA) are focused an unapproved crab supplier. They apparently suspect a link between it and those who became ill.

"A wider investigation is still ongoing following on from the outbreak, so we are not in a position to give full details but we suspect a link to an unapproved crab supplier," said the South West HPA and the Plymouth City Council in a joint statement. "Environmental health officers from the council acted swiftly to identify crab meat as a possible source and removed all potentially affected crab meat from food establishments as a precautionary measure. The outbreak investigators also alerted food outlets in Plymouth about the importance of buying food or ingredients only from approved or registered suppliers.

The epidemiological investigation found a statistically significant associated between the illnesses and eating crabmeat away from home. E coli O157:H7, associated with faecal contamination by cattle or other ruminants, has in recent years been detected in all sorts of food products, including spinach, hazelnuts and strawberries.

A restaurant owner and one of his employees have had to pay a total of more than £20,000 after pleading guilty to numerous fire safety offences. 

Kamruz Zaman, of the Red Ginger restaurant in Bushey, Hertfordshire, pleaded guilty to seven offences and employee Adiel Choudhury pleaded guilty to eight offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 at Stevenage magistrates court on 1 December. Mr Zaman was fined £5,750 and Mr Choudhury £6,000 for the offences, and together with costs of £9,161 and victim surcharges, had to pay a total of £20,941.

The fire was started deliberately on the ground floor in the early hours of Friday 9 July 2010. An employee of the restaurant sleeping on the first floor was woken by the smell of smoke which had engulfed the premises, according to Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue Service. He had to escape by climbing up through a roof window, sliding down the roof and dropping to the ground. Fire crews wearing breathing apparatus entered the premises to search for other occupants and extinguish the fire. No one else was found despite numerous beds and mattresses found on the first floor. The crews also noticed that the fire alarm system was not working.

Among the offences Mr Choudhury pleaded guilty to were failing to carry out a fire risk assessment, and failure to provide emergency lighting for escape routes. Both defendants pleaded guilty to failing to provide appropriate fire-fighting equipment and detection and alarm systems, failure to appoint one or more competent persons, and a failure to provide safe emergency routes and exits. “Where breaches of fire legislation are considered so serious that there is a risk of death or serious injury to persons, we will consider prosecution,” said Hertfordshire’s chief fire officer, Roy Wilsher. “In this case members of the public and employees were put at risk and one employee was extremely fortunate to escape with his life.”

Contact us if you would like details of how Safer Food Scores Consultants can carry out your fire risk assessments for you.

The new Food Information Regulation (FIR), designed to make food labelling easier to understand for consumers, has been published by the European Union.

The regulation combines rules on general food and nutrition labelling into a single EU regulation. Transitional arrangements set out in the FIR mean that the bulk of the requirements will not apply until 2014, with nutrition labelling becoming mandatory in 2016.

The main points are:

• Country of origin – subject to further discussion, the introduction of mandatory origin information for most fresh and frozen meat. For example, it will be possible for 'Scotland', 'England', 'Wales' and 'Northern Ireland' to be used on food labels without mentioning 'UK' under new provenance rules. Also, the origin of main ingredients will have to be given if different from where the final product is made.

• Nutrition labelling will be required for most foods. Simplified information may be provided voluntarily on front of pack.

• Labelling clarity – a minimum font size has been set for all mandatory information on most food labels.

• Allergen information will have to be provided on all food (whether sold prepacked or loose). For prepacked foods, the allergens will have to be highlighted on the ingredient list.

• Drinks with high caffeine content will have to be additionally labelled as not recommended for children, or pregnant and breastfeeding women, with the actual caffeine content quoted.

• Meat and fish products that look like a cut, joint or slice and contain more than 5% added water will have to show this in the name of the food.

• The types of vegetable oil used in food, such as palm oil, must be stated.

The EU has also agreed:

• To make it easier for alcoholic drinks companies to voluntarily include calorie information on product labels.

• To enable voluntary provision of calorie information in out of home settings.

• To continue to permit selling by numbers – such as a dozen bread rolls or eggs.

Legislation to provide for the execution and enforcement of this regulation will be needed in each of the four countries of the UK, and the FSA will be working with Defra, the Department of Health and the Welsh Government on this.

The responsibility for the FIR varies across the UK. Following the Westminster Machinery of Government changes carried out in 2010, general food labelling policy responsibilities (where this is not related to food safety) in England have been transferred from FSA to Defra.

Responsibility for nutrition labelling policy has been transferred to the Department of Health.

In England, the FSA leads on food safety aspects of food labelling and continues its liaison with food authorities in relation to food labelling law enforcement.

In Scotland and Northern Ireland, the FSA have retained responsibility for all aspects of general food labelling and nutrition labelling policy, including liaison with food authorities.

In Wales, the FSA continues to lead on general food labelling policy and food labelling law enforcement, although responsibility for nutrition labelling policy is now with the Welsh Government.

Contact us if you would like details of our food labelling workshops which cover existing as well as proposed food labelling requirements  

Heston Blumenthal has hit back at a report claiming that many of the diners affected by the norovirus outbreak at the Fat Duck in 2009 could have been spared if the restaurant had acted sooner.

Blumenthal closed his iconic three-Michelin-starred restaurant for two weeks in February 2009 after hundreds of diners were struck down by norovirus, or winter vomiting bug. The Health Protection Agency (HPA) later released a report on its investigation into the outbreak, stating the official cause was contaminated shellfish. Blumenthal received £200,000 compensation from insurers for lost business over the period while environmental health officials investigated.

Now a new report, published online in the journal Epidemiology and Infection, said the Fat Duck norovirus outbreak was the biggest at a restaurant ever recorded and claimed that delays in telling public health officials might have contributed to the scale of the outbreak.

"The ongoing risk from dining at the restaurant may have been due to persistent contamination of the oyster supply alone or in combination with further spread via infected food handlers or the restaurant environment. Delayed notification of the outbreak to public health authorities may have contributed to outbreak size and duration," said the report.

However, a spokeswoman for the Fat Duck hit back at the report, insisting the restaurant was satisfied with the way it responded to the outbreak. "We strongly refute any accusations of wrongdoing," she said. "We co-operated with all parties fully and transparently and received a clean bill of health to reopen after a 10-day investigation. We also received full support by our insurers who found no fault in our practices following a report from a leading UK independent specialist."

She added: "There is still no guaranteed safety measure in place today to protect the general public with regards to shellfish and viral contamination. For this reason we still do not serve oysters or razor clams at the Fat Duck."

See below for our advice on serving raw oysters

How safe are UK oysters – SFS News August 2010