Environmental Public Health Journal 2019 | BCIT Institutional Repository

Environmental Public Health Journal 2019

Efficacy of hand washing beeswax food wrap in household use
Background: Over the years, many reusable products have been invented to replace single-use disposable items to reduce waste. One of such products is the reusable beeswax food wrap, which aims to replace plastic film wraps to store food. According to manufacturer instructions, the beeswax wrap can only be washed with cold water and detergent. This presents the question whether the beeswax wrap can be effectively cleaned, as continuous reuse may present cross contamination issues. This study examines if manufacturer instructions is effective in cleaning the beeswax wrap. Methods: ATP analysis was used to determine the level of cleanliness on the beeswax wrap between the pre-intervention and post-intervention treatments. Pre-intervention samples are the new beeswax wraps. Post- intervention samples are wraps that have been contaminated with avocado, washed, and dried. ATP counts (RLU) were measured with Hygiena SystemSURE Plus ATP monitoring system. Paired T-Test was done on NCSS to analyze the results. Results: The mean of the pre-intervention group was measured at 8 RLU, which is considered clean under the Hygiena standard. The mean for the post-intervention group was measured at 67 RLU, which is considered a fail on cleanliness under the Hygiena standard. This shows that the manufacturer instructions on washing the beeswax wrap does not effectively clean the beeswax wrap. Statistical analysis show p-value is 0.000, therefore one can conclude there is a statistically significance difference in the mean ATP count between pre-intervention and post-intervention beeswax wrap samples. Conclusion: Results show that some food residue remained on the wrap after washing. This means manufacturer instructions cannot effectively clean beeswax wrap. Therefore, it is recommended that manufactures should put a label on their packaging to let their customers know that the wrap can’t be thoroughly cleaned, and certain foods should be avoided for its use. During its use, the wraps should be labeled for the specific category of food it is used for. BCCDC can also use this result to add into the reusable container guideline., Peer reviewed, Peer-reviewed article, Published, Project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Technology in Environmental Health, British Columbia Institute of Technology, 2019., Food wrap, Beeswax wrap, Cross contamination, Dishwashing, Food safety
Evaluating the effects of using plastic, silicone, and glass on time of sous vide cooking of gravy
Background: Sous vide cooking is popular method of cooking involving a water bath with immersion circulator or a steam convection oven. This process is also known as low-temperature long-time method (LTLT), where food is held at a lower temperature over extended time for cooking (1). Plastic is the more commonly used medium with sous vide cooking. Glass and silicone are an environmentally alternative to plastic, since they are reusable mediums. These alternative mediums have not been studied and may affect the time to reach pasteurization. The purpose of this experiment is to determine how plastic, silicone, and glass influence time in sous vide cooking of gravy to 56.5°C. Methods: Four of each medium: plastic, silicone, and glass containing 500 mL of gravy with SmartButton data loggers at 4°C were introduced into a 56.5 °C water bath for 150 minutes. The data loggers recorded the temperature at one minute intervals. The data was used to run a One-Way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) to analyze if there were any statistically significant differences between the three mediums and time, and a Scheffe’s test to compare the mean time of each of the mediums. Results: There was a difference in time of sous vide cooking for gravy at 56.5°C between the mediums: plastic, glass, silicone. The p-value was 0.00, therefore rejecting Ho and accepting there is a difference in time of sous vide cooking gravy at 56.5°C between the different mediums: plastic, glass, silicone. Comparing the mediums among each other, it showed that there was a difference between glass and silicone, glass and plastic and no significant difference between plastic and silicone medium. Conclusion: The results indicate that there is a statistically significant difference in time that it took for gravy to reach 56.5°C between the mediums: plastic, silicone, and glass. The mean time for each medium to reach 56.5°C differed; 65 minutes for plastic, 68 minutes for silicone, and 129 minutes for glass. This shows that a more environmentally friendly alternative to plastic sous vide pouches can be used. Silicone pouches show to be the best alternative, least compromising of the come-up and pasteurization time. If sous vide users opt to use glass, the come-up time almost doubles in time., Peer reviewed, Peer-reviewed article, Published, Project submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Bachelor of Technology in Environmental Health, British Columbia Institute of Technology, 2019., Public health, Sous vide, Gravy, Silicone, Glass, Plastic, SmartButton