Download PDF, 1522 kB - Evira

SALMONELLA CONTROL AND 

OCCURENCE OF SALMONELLA 

FROM 1995 TO 2004 

Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira 

Julkaisuja 4/2006

Salmonella control and occurence of Salmonella from 1995 to 2004 

Eviran julkaisuja 4/2006 

Salmonella control and 

occurence of Salmonella 

from 1995 to 2004 

Helsinki 2006


Kuvailulehti 

Julkaisija Elintarviketurvallisuusvirasto Evira 

Tekijät Huttunen Anna, Johansson Tuula, Kostamo Pirkko, Kuronen Henry, Laaksonen 

Terhi, Laihonen Mari, Lievonen Satu, Myllyniemi Anna-Liisa, Niskanen Taina, 

Ranta Jukka, Rosengren Heidi, Siitonen Anja, Tuominen Pirkko, Varimo Kaija 

ja Varjonen Mika 

Julkaisun nimi 

Tiivistelmä 

Salmonellavalvonta ja salmonellan esiintyminen 1995 - 2004 

Salmonellaa esiintyy Suomessa tuotantoeläimissä hyvin vähän. Euroopan 

unioniin liittymisen yhteydessä vuonna 1995 Suomelle hyväksyttiin kansallinen 

salmonellavalvontaohjelma. Sen tuottama näyttö maan hyvästä tautitilanteesta 

mahdollistaa erityistakuut, eli oikeudet vaatia maahantuotavalta sian-, naudan- ja 

siipikarjanlihalta sekä kananmunilta salmonellatutkimuksia. Ohjelman tavoitteena 

on pitää salmonellan esiintyminen tuotantoeläimissä ja niistä saaduissa elintarvikkeissa 

alle 1 % tasolla vuosittain. 

Salmonellavalvonnan kohteena olevien tuotantoeläimien määrissä tapahtui 

muutoksia ohjelman ensimmäisen 10 vuoden aikana. Siipikarjanlihan tuotanto 

lisääntyi 104 %, sianlihan 19 % ja naudanlihan tuotanto laski noin 3 %. Salmonellaa 

tutkitaan siipikarjassa ensisijaisesti elävien lintujen ulostenäytteistä. Nautojen ja 

sikojen salmonellaseuranta perustuu pääasiassa teurastamonäytteenottoon sekä 

tiloilla tapahtuvaan näytteenottoon, kun epäillään salmonellatartuntaa. 

Kanojen vanhempais- ja isovanhempaispolvissa ei todettu vuosina 1995 - 2004 

salmonellaa. Tuotantopolven kasvattamoissa positiivisten parvien määrä oli 

yhtä vuotta lukuun ottamatta alle 0,6 % ja tuotantopolven kanaloissa alle 0,2 %. 

Broilerin- ja kalkkunan vanhempais- ja isovanhempaispolven parvista on löytynyt 

salmonellaa enimmillään vain 0,5 % parvista. Tuotantopolvessa on todettu 

salmonellaa alle 1,0 % lukuun ottamatta vuosia 1995 ja 1999. 

Naudoista otettiin teurastamoissa ja leikkaamoissa lähes 90 000 imusolmuke-, 

pintasively- ja leikkaamonäytettä. Positiivisia näytteistä oli alle 0,2 %. Vastaavat 

määrät sioilla olivat noin 155 000 ja 0,1 %. 

Valvontaohjelman ulkopuolella on tutkittu salmonellan esiintymistä myös rehuissa 

sekä lemmikkieläinten ruuissa. Salmonellan esiintyminen tuotantoeläinten 

rehuissa on ollut harvinaista huolimatta siitä, että rehuihin käytettävissä kasviperäisissä 

tuontiraaka-aineissa (esim. öljykasvirouheet) on esiintynyt viime 

vuosina yhä enenevässä määrin salmonellaa (5 - 16 % tuontieristä). Toimijoiden 

omavalvonta ja viranomaisvalvonta ovat löytäneet tehokkaat menettelyt salmonellan 

leviämisen estämiseksi rehutehtaiden prosesseihin ja sitä kautta rehuissa 

eläintiloille. Valtakunnalliset ja paikalliset tutkimukset ovat osoittaneet, että myös 

vähittäismyynnin elintarvikkeissa salmonellan esiintyminen on erittäin harvinaista. 

Tehtyjen riskinarviointien perusteella valvontaohjelmalla on kuluttajia suojaava 

vaikutus. Broilerin- ja kananmunien kohdalla vaikutus on suuri, naudan- ja sianlihan 

kohdalla vähäisempi. 

Väestössä raportoitiin 1990-luvun loppupuolella noin 3000 salmonellatapausta 

vuosittain. Vuosina 2000 - 2004 on tapausmäärä ollut alle 2500. Tapauksista 

on 14 - 34 % ollut kotimaassa saatuja tartuntoja, loput tartunnat ovat liittyneet 

matkailuun. Salmonellan aiheuttamia ruokamyrkytysepidemioita on raportoitu 

vuosittain 1 - 8.


Asiasanat Salmonella, eläintaudit, elintarviketurvallisuus, antibioottiresistenssi, valvontaohjelmat 

Julkaisusarjan nimi 

ja numero 

Julkaisun teema ISSN 1796-4369 ISBN 952-5662-06-3 

ISBN (pdf) 952-5662-07-1 

Sivuja 94 Kieli Suomi 

Luottamuksellisuus Julkinen Hinta 10,10 euroa 

Julkaisun myynti/jakaja Evira, puh. 02077 2003, fax 02077 24350 

www.evira.fi 

Julkaisun kustantaja Evira Elintarvikehygienia 

Painopaikka ja -aika 

Muut tiedot 

Eviran julkaisuja 4/2006 

Edita Prima, Helsinki 2006 

E-julkaisu: www.evira.fi 

Julkaisun ulkoasu Teija Pesonen, Evira


Beskrivning 

Utgivare Livsmedelsäkerhetsverket Evira 

Författare Huttunen Anna, Johansson Tuula, Kostamo Pirkko, Kuronen Henry, Laaksonen 


Ranta Jukka, Rosengren Heidi, Siitonen Anja, Tuominen Pirkko, Varimo Kaija ja 

Varjonen Mika 

Verkets titel Salmonellakontroll och förekomst av Salmonella 1995 – 2004 

Resumé 

Salmonella uppträder sällan bland produktionsdjur i Finland. I samband med 

anslutningen till Europeiska unionen år 1995 beviljades Finland ett nationellt program 

för salmonellakontroll. De belägg för landets utmärkta smittosituation som 

programmet framför gör att ytterligare garantier är möjliga, dvs. rätten att kräva 

att ägg, samt kött från svin, nötdjur och fjäderfä ska analyseras för Salmonella. 

Målet för programmet är att hålla förekomsten av Salmonella hos produktionsdjur 

och i livsmedel av dessa under nivån 1 % årligen. 

Under programmets första årtionde inträffade det förändringar i antalet produktionsdjur 

som var underkastade salmonellakontrollen. Produktionen av fjäderfä 

ökade med 104 %, den av griskött med 19 % och nötköttsproduktionen minskade 

med ca 3 %. För fjäderfä analyserades förekomsten av Salmonella huvudsakligen 

ur exkrementer från levande fåglar. För nötdjur och svin bygger övervakningen 

på prover från slakterier samt lantgårdar där det misstänks förekomst av Salmonella. 

Under perioden 1995 till 2004 upptäcktes ingen Salmonella bland föräldra- och 

farföräldergenerationer av hönsdjur. Bland produktionsgenerationer på uppfödningsanläggningar 

var antalet positiva flockar under 0,6 %, ett år undantaget, 

medan antalet för köttproduktionsflockar låg under 0,2 %. Bland föräldra- och 

farföräldergenerationer upptäcktes Salmonella endast bland högst 0,5 % av 

flockarna. För produktionsflockar upptäcktes Salmonella bland 1,0 %, utom åren 

1995 och 1999. 

Nästan 90 000 prover av lymfkörtlar, kroppsytor och från styckningsprov togs i 

slakterier och styckningsanläggningar. Färre än 0,2 % av proverna var positiva. 

För svin var motsvarande siffror ca 155 000 och 0,1 %. 

Utom kontrollprogrammet undersöktes även förekomsten av Salmonella i foder 

samt i mat för keldjur. Förekomsten av Salmonella i foder avsett för produktionsdjur 

har varit sällsynt fastän det under senare år allt oftare har konstaterats Salmonella 

i sådant råmaterial av vegetabiliskt ursprung (t.ex. krossade oljeväxter) som 

används i produktionen av foder (5 - 16 % importerade partier). Företagarnas 

egenkontroll och myndighetstillsynen har funnit effektiva tillvägagångssätt för att 

hindra Salmonella från att spridas till processer i foderfabrikerna och därifrån med 

fodret till djurgårdar. Nationella och lokala undersökningar har visat att Salmonella 

förekommer högst sällan i livsmedel i minutförsäljning. Verkställda riskbedömningar 

visar att effekterna av kontrollprogrammet skyddar konsumenterna. För broiler 

och ägg är effekten väsentlig, för nötkött och griskött mindre utpräglad. 

I slutet av 1990 talet rapporterades ca 3000 fall av Salmonella årligen bland befolkningen. 

Åren 2000 till 2004 har antalet fall legat under 2500. Mellan 14 och 

34 % av fallen har varit smittor som man har fått i hemlandet medan resten har 

samband med resor. Årligen rapporterades 1 - 8 epidemier av Salmonella som 

hade orsakats av matförgiftningar.

Sökord 

Publikationsseriens 

namn och nummer 

Edita Prima, Helsingfors 2006 


Salmonella, djursjukdomar, livsmedelssäkerhet, antibiotik resistens, finsk Salmonella 

kontroll program 

Evira Publikationer 4/2006 

Publikationens tema ISSN 1796-4369 ISBN 952-5662-06-3 

ISBN (pdf) 952-5662-07-1 

Antal sidor 94 Språk Finska 

Konfidentialitet Offentlig handling Pris 10,10 euro 

Publikationen säljs 

Förläggare 

Tryckeri och tryckningstid 

Livsmedelssäkerhetsverket Evira, tel. 02077 2003, fax 02077 24350; 

www.evira.fi 

Evira, Enheten för livsmedelshygien 

Övriga uppgifter E-publikation (beskrivning): www.evira.fi, och www.mmm.fi 

Publikationens ombrytning Teija Pesonen, Evira


Description 

Publisher Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira 

Authors 

Title Salmonella control and occurence of Salmonella from 1995 to 2004 in 

Finland 

Abstract 

Huttunen Anna, Johansson Tuula, Kostamo Pirkko, Kuronen Henry, Laaksonen 


Ranta Jukka, Rosengren Heidi, Siitonen Anja, Tuominen Pirkko, Varimo Kaija 

ja Varjonen Mika 

Salmonella rarely appears among production animals in Finland. In connection 

with joining the European Union in 1995, Finland established a national Salmonella 

control programme. Evidence of the country’s excellent disease situation 

produced by this programme makes additional guarantees possible, i.e., the right 

to demand that imported eggs and the meat of pigs, cattle and poultry are analyzed 

for Salmonella. The objective of the programme is to keep the occurrence 

of Salmonella in production animals and foodstuffs originating from these below 

the level of 1% annually. 

During the first decade of the programme, variations became apparent in the 

number of production animals covered by the Salmonella control. The production 

of poultry increased by 104%, that of pork by 19% and beef production declined 

by about 3%. For poultry, the prevalence of Salmonella is primarily determined 

from the faeces of living birds. Among cattle and swine, monitoring of Salmonella 

is based on samples from slaughterhouses and those collected at farms when 

Salmonella infection is suspected. 

During the period from 1995 to 2004, no Salmonella was detected among the parent 

and grandparent flocks of hens. Except for one year, the proportion of positive 

rearing flocks of laying hens was below 0.6%, while the respective figure for egg 

production flocks was below 0.2 %. Among parent and grandparent generations 

of broilers and turkeys, Salmonella was only found among a maximum of 0.5% 

of the flocks. For meat production flocks, Salmonella was found less than 1.0%, 

except in 1995 and 1999. 

Close to 90 000 lymph node samples, surface-swabs and meat samples were 

taken in slaughterhouses and cutting plants. Less than 0.2% of the tested samples 

were positive for Salmonella. Corresponding figures among swine were approximately 

155 000 and 0.1%. 

Beyond the control programme, the occurrence of Salmonella was also examined 

in feedstuffs and pet-animal feeds. The occurrence of Salmonella in feeds 

intended for food production animals has been rare, irrespective of the fact that 

raw materials of vegetable origin (e.g. crushed oil plant seeds) that are used in 

the production of feedstuffs have increasingly displayed Salmonella (5 to 16% of 

import batches) in later years. Self-checking by operators and control by authorities 

have been found efficient in preventing Salmonella from spreading to processes 

in feed factories and from there in feedstuffs to animal farms. National and local 

investigations have shown the occurrence of Salmonella in foodstuffs in retail 

sale to be extremely rare. Risk assessments performed demonstrate that in effect 

the control programme protects consumers. For broilers and eggs the effects are 

substantial, while for beef and pork they are less clear. 

At the end of the 1990s, some 3000 cases of Salmonella were reported annually 

among the population. From 2000 to 2004, the number of cases was less than 

2500. From 14 to 34% of the cases were infections acquired in the home country, 

while the rest were associated with travelling. From one to eight food borne 

outbreaks caused by Salmonella were reported annually.

Key words 

Name and number of 

series of publications 

Distributor 

Printed in 

Other information 

Layout Teija Pesonen, Evira 


Salmonella, animal diseases, food safety, antimicrobial resistace, finnish Salmonella 

control programme 

Evira Publications 4/2006 

Theme ISSN 1796-4369 ISBN 952-5662-06-3 

ISBN (pdf) 952-5662-07-1 

Pages 94 Language Finnish 

Confidentiality Public Price 10,10 euro 

Puiblisher Evira, Food Hygiene Unit 

Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira, Tel. +358 2077 5003, 

Fax +358 2077 24350, www.evira.fi 

Edita Prima, Helsinki 2006 

E-publication: www.evira.fi and www.mmm.fi


Contents 

1 iNTrODUCTiON 11 

2 NATiONAL Salmonella CONTrOL PrOgrAMMe 12 

2.1 Legislation 12 

2.2 Sampling and control 13 

2.3 Production structure 16 

2.4 Programme results 1995 – 2004 / Poultry 23 

2.5 Programme results 1995 – 2004 / Cattle and pigs 30 

3 eVALUATiON OF The Salmonella CONTrOL PrOgrAMMe 40 

3.1 Background 40 

3.2 risk assessment of Salmonella in Finland 40 

3.3 remarks on the Salmonella risk assesment 43 

3.4 evaluating the Finnish Salmonella Control Programme 44 

3.5 economic aspect of the Salmonella Control in Finland 44 

3.6 Literature related to the project for assessing Salmonella risks 45 

4 Salmonella CONTrOL OF FeeDSTUFFS 47 

4.1 Legislation 47 

4.2 Sampling 47 

4.3 results in 1995 to 2004 48 

4.4 Deliberation 49 

5 OCCUreNCe OF Salmonella iN reTAiL FOOD iN 1995 TO 2004 50 

5.1 Occurence of Salmonella in raw meat 50 

5.2 Occurence of Salmonella in other food 52 

5.3 Occurence of Salmonella in local food-control samples 53 

6 ADDiTiONAL gUArANTeeS AND CONTrOL iN The iNTerNAL MArKeT 55 

6.1 Addirional guarantees regarding Salmonella 55 

6.2 internal market control of foods of animal origin 55 

7 OTher Salmonella iNVeSTigATiONS 1995 – 2004 57 

7.1 Typing of isolates other than those from the National 

Salmonella Control Programme 57 

7.2 Discussion 58 

8 DOMeSTiC Salmonella OUTBreAKS 1995 – 2004 60 

8.1 Descriptions of example outbreaks 61 

9 hUMAN Salmonella FiNDiNgS iN 1995 – 2004 63 

9.1 Surveillance of infections 63 

9.2 Prevalence of infections 63 

9.3 Domestic infections 64 

9.4 infections acquired abroad 66 

10 ANTiMiCrOBiAL reSiSTANCe OF Salmonella STRAINS 67 

10.1 Background 67 

10.2 Production animals and domestic foodstuffs 67 

10.3 Salmonellas strains isolated from humans 68 

10.4 Literature 69 

APPeNDiCeS

APPENDICES 

1. Salmonella Typhimurium phagetypes isolated from cattle, pigs and poultry 

samples in 1995-2004 

2. Salmonella analysis of domestic feed in 1995 - 2004. Number of official 

control samples 

3. Salmonella analysis of imported feedstuffs (3rd countries and EU imports) 

in 1995 - 2004. Number of official control samples 

4. Serotypes isolated from feed samples in 1995 - 2004. Samples of domestic 

manufactures 

5. Serotypes isolated from feed samples in 1995 - 2004. Imported feed samples 

(excepting pet animal feeds) 

6. Salmonella analysis of pet animal feeds in 1995 - 2004. Number of official 

control samples 

7. Serotypes isolated from pet feed samples in 1995 - 2004 

8. Feedstuffs contaminated by Salmonella in 1995 - 2004. Domestic manufacture 

9. Feedstuffs contaminated by Salmonella in 1995 - 2004. Imported feeds (3rd 

countries and EU imports) 

10. Pet feeds contaminated by Salmonella in 1995 - 2004. 

11. Serotypes isolated from animals other than those included in the control 

programme in 1997 - 2000 

12. Salmonella Typhimurium phagetypes in animals other than those included 

in the control programme animals in 1996 - 2004 

13. Salmonella Enteritidis phagetypes in animals other than included in the 

control programme in 1995 - 2004 

14. Serotypes found in imported food in 1997 - 2004 

15. Salmonella Typhimurium phagetypes in imported food in 1996 - 2004. Salmonella 

Enteritidis phagetype in imported food in 1996 - 2004 

16. Outbreaks caused by various Salmonella types (A) and number of persons 

becoming ill in these epidemics (B) in 1995 - 2004 

17. Descriptions of Salmonella outbreaks in 2000 - 2004 

18. International standards and legislational 

Salmonella control and occurence of Salmonella from 1995 to 2004


0

1 introduction 

Terhi Laaksonen, Senior Veterinary Officer, Ministry of Agriculture and 

Forestry, MMM 

Food borne infections caused by Salmonella bacteria continuously present a 

significant economic and national health problem throughout the world. By international 

estimates, the situation in Finland is particularly good. The country has 

invested in preventing Salmonella among production animals, and subsequently 

in feeds, and for decades the occurrence of Salmonella in foods of animal origin 

has been low. 

The National Salmonella Control Programme covers poultry, pigs and cattle, 

and meat and eggs from these. This programme has been in effect since 1995 

and reached 10 years of age in 2004. Salmonella legislation by the European 

Union has developed significantly in recent years. Current efforts are aimed at 

revising the national control programme in accordance with requirements of new 

EC legislation. This publication is a compilation of results obtained during the 

decade the programme has been in operation. Besides celebrating the ten-year 

span of the programme, the purpose of the publication also is to bring together 

accumulated experiences as a basis for assessing the programme, which is 

required for its improvement. 

Salmonella prevention requires co-operation among several fields. Actions are 

necessary in areas involving the control and research of health care, food production, 

feedstuff production and veterinary medicine. In addition to surveying 

the Salmonella control programme, the authors of the publication also wish to 

account for other activities pertaining to Salmonella prevention and thus produce 

a more comprehensive overall picture. 

In Finland, Salmonella prevention has been found cost-efficient. Prevention demands 

ample resources, though. The authors of this publication particularly wish 

to express their gratitude to all municipal veterinarians, inspection veterinarians, 

feed and food supervisors, laboratory personnel, health-care workers, food-chain 

operators and all the other parties in the field, whose daily work efforts have made 

efficient Salmonella prevention possible. 



2 National Salmonella control programme 

Senior Veterinary Officer Terhi Laaksonen, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, veterinarian Henry Kuronen, 

senior officer Anna Huttunen, senior officer Mika Varjonen, senior food control officer Mari Laihonen, 

Evira 

2.1 Legislation 

The Finnish National Salmonella Control Programme has been applied since 1995. 

This programme was approved by decision 94/968/EC of the EU Commission 

and covers poultry, swine and cattle, and meat and eggs from these. The control 

programme has the objective of protecting consumers against Salmonella infections 

spread by foods of animal origin. The aim of the continuous programme is 

to keep the occurrence of Salmonella in production animals and food originating 

from these below 1%. 

Under the control programme, the occurence of Salmonella at production farms, 

hatcheries, slaughterhouses and meat cutting facilities is regularly examined. 

Continuous control is applied to detect occurrences of Salmonella in advance in 

foodstuffs of animal origin appearing on markets and for consumption. Detection 

of Salmonella will always invoke legal actions to prevent the spread of diseases 

and to clarify the origin of contaminations. The programme covers all the various 

Salmonella serotypes, and actions required are always same regardless of which 

serotype of Salmonella is detected. 

Requirements on the control of Salmonella in cattle and swine have been issued 

in Decision 23/EEO/1995 by the Veterinary and Food Department at the Ministry 

of Agriculture and Forestry. Requirements on poultry were issued in decisions 

19/EEO/1995, 20/EEO/1995 and 21/EEO/1995. These decisions were amended 

in 2001 and then they were replaced by Decrees 23/EEO/2001 (on the control of 

Salmonella in broilers and turkeys) and 24/EEO/2001 (on the control of Salmonella 

in hens) by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Requiremets on controlling 

Salmonella in slaughterhouses and cutting plants were issued by the Ministry of 

Agriculture and Forestry in decision 8/EEO/1995. The decision was replaced in 

2001 by Decree 20/EEO/2001 of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. 

Throughout the time it has been in effect, the National Salmonella Control Programme 

has largely remained unchanged. Modifications effected to the requirements 

have mainly involved the fine-tuning of details to make them more efficient 

in practice. Planning for the reformulating of the control programme began in 

2005. A basis for changing the programme was to comply with requirements in 

the new EU Regulation 2160/2003 on zoonotic agents, but the primary objective 

for the renewal was to make the programme still more functional. For poultry, the 

new control programme is planned to begin from 2007 and for cattle and swine 

a few years later.

2.2 Sampling and control 

2.2.1 Poultry 

Salmonella control of poultry is primarily based on analysis of faecal samples 

from live birds. Laying hens, broilers and turkeys are included in the control 

programme for live birds. Samples are taken in all production phases from 

grandparent, parent and production generation flocks at rearing and production 

Reading 

stage 

Laying 

stage 

Reading 

stage 

Sampling 

time 

Sampling 

time 

4 weeks before 

slaughtering 

Sampling 

location 

Day-old chicks Production farm 

Sampling 

location 

1 Samples are pooled into six composite samples 

Sample 

Sample 

Production farm Faecal sample (60 x 1 g) 1 


Bed paper or swab sample 

from 10 transport boxes 1 

At age of 4 weeks Production farm Faecal sample (60 x 1 g) 2 


starting laying 

Every 2 weeks Hatcheries 


Bed paper from 5 hatching 

boxes or meconium sample 

of 250 chicks 1 

Every 8 weeks Production farm Faecal sample (60 x 1 g) 2 

1 Samples are pooled into one composite sample 

2 Broilers and turkeys: samples are pooled into six composite samples, 

hens: samples combined into one common sample. 

Reading 

stage 

Laying 

stage 

Sampling 

time 


start of laying stage 

3 times during laying 

period 

Sampling 

location 

1 Samples are pooled into one composite sample 

Sample 



Production farms and 

hatcheries 

Table 1. Basic sampling from 

grandparent and parent flocks; 

hens, broiler and turkey 

Table 2. Basic sampling from the 

production flocks of laying hens 

Table 3. Basic sampling from 

production flocks of broilers and 

turkeys


Slaughterhouse and 

cutting plants 

Table 4. Sampling of poultry meat 

in cutting plants 

holdings as well as hatcheries. Basic sampling from poultry flocks is presented 

in Tables 1, 2 and 3. 

Basic sampling is the producer’s responsibility. In addition to flock sampling 

as shown in the tables, basic sampling also includes production-environment 

sampling in hatcheries as required by their self-control plans. Samples taken by 

producers at production farms are replaced by official sampling once per year, for 

which the control authority is responsible. Official sampling in hatcheries occurs 

at eight-week intervals. 

Municipal veterinarians appointed as responsible veterinarians function as supervisors 

of production farms and hatcheries. In addition to taking official samples, 

during control visits the responsible veterinarian inspects data collected at the 

farm on sampling and on results from laboratory analyses, as well as the hygiene 

of production conditions at that farm. Furthermore, the veterinarian gives necessary 

advice on preventing Salmonella contamination and on good production 

hygiene. 

Besides basic sampling, the control programme covers additional sampling in 

cases where Salmonella contamination has been detected or is suspected. The 

municipal veterinarian issues restrictive orders for production holdings where 

Salmonella has been detected. Transfer of birds and products from such holdings 

is restricted by these orders. In cases of Salmonella, the provincial veterinarian 

always also directs an epidemiological investigation to clarify the origin and 

distribution of the infection. 

Meat of Salmonella-positive flocks must not be delivered to the market untreated. 

The meat must be directed to an establishment approved for manufacturing of 

heated meat products. In addition, eggs produced by positive flocks must be 

used in the manufacturing of heated egg products. If infection by certain invasive 

serotypes (S. Enteritidis, S. Typhmurium, S. Infantis, S. Bertha, and S. Thompson) 

has been detected from a flock, eggs from it must be destroyed. After the 

elimination of a positive flock, no new flock may be brought to the same facilities 

before the farm has been thoroughly washed and disinfected and environmental 

samples taken from the building. 

The control programme does not cover Salmonella analysis of poultry flocks in 

slaughterhouses. Sampling from neck skins of slaughtered broilers is a regular 

practice in many countries. In Finland, neck skin sampling has not been considered 

necessary, as the occurrence of Salmonella is low and flocks are examined prior 

to slaughtering. Results from Salmonella analysis of flocks must be delivered to 

the slaughterhouse and the inspection veterinarian before the flock is slaughtered. 

Positive flocks are the last to be slaughtered during a day, after which the 

Production capacity kg / week Sampling frequency 

> 100 000 Once a day 

20 000 - 100 000 Once a week 

< 20 000 Once a month 

< 5 000 Twice a year

slaughterhouse facilities are cleaned and disinfected. Slaughterhouses must also 

take care that meat from positive flocks is kept separate from other meat and 

directed to heat processing. 

The occurence of Salmonella in poultry meat is rearly monitored at cutting plants. 

The primary purpose of sampling at cutting plants is to monitor the effects of 

flock analysis, i.e., whether positive flocks are successfully eliminated from the 

production chain of fresh poultry meat prior to slaughter. Sampling at cutting 

plants covers broiler, turkey and hen meat in addition to the meat of duck, goose 

and guinea fowl. Cutting plants must include in self-control sampling of meat 

from poultry groups they are processing. The sampling frequency depends on 

the production capacity of the cutting plants (Table 4). Crushed meat from the 

production line, e.g., cutting tables, is taken as samples. 

2.2.2 Cattle and swine 

Monitoring of Salmonella in cattle and swine is based on sampling in slaughterhouses. 

Lymph node and carcass surface-swab samples are annually taken 

from 3 000 cattle, fattening pigs and sows in slaughterhouses. The National Food 

Agency annually prepares sampling plans in which the annual sample amounts 

are distributed among the different slaughterhouses in proportion to their slaughter 

volumes in the previous year. Slaughterhouses are to include sampling in their 

self-control plan. Sampling in slaughterhouses must be carried out at random 

and be distributed evenly over the entire year. The official veterinarian checks 

that sampling is being carried out. 

For each carcass being analyzed, at least five lymph nodes are collected from 

the ileocaecal region. Lymph nodes from one carcass are examined as one 

sample. Swab samples are taken by swabbing a total area of about 1 400 cm² 

on the carcass. Cattle carcasses have two swabbing areas while those of swine 

have three. 

In addition to sampling in slaughterhouses, samples of meat from cattle, fattening 

pigs and sows are examined in cutting plants for the presence of Salmonella. 

Sampling in cutting plants follows the same principles as that in cutting plants 

for chickens. In addition, sampling frequency is similar to that in cutting plants 

for chickens (Table 4). 

If sampling of lymph nodes reveals Salmonella, the municipal veterinarian is 

to examine the herd from where the slaughter animal came. If Salmonella is 

found in samples from a carcass surface or the cutting plant, the plant must take 

measures to clarify the origin of the contamination, increase sampling and also 

include environmental samples in the sampling. In addition, facilities and tools 

must carefully be washed and disinfected. 

This control programme does not similarly include the periodical control of all cattle 

and pig holdings as in the poultry programme. Samples are taken at holdings if 

the presence of Salmonella is suspected, i.e., if lymph node samples taken from 

a farm’s slaughter animal have shown Salmonella, or if Salmonella is suspected 

due to clinical symptoms or pathological-anatomical discoveries. Farm animals 

are also to be examined if a person participating in taking care of the animals has 

been diagnosed with Salmonella infection. In suspect situations, the municipal 

veterinarian is always responsible for sampling. 


Slaughterhouses and 

cutting facilities 

Cattle and pig farms


2.3 Production structure 

The control programme includes occasional basic sampling even when no Salmonella 

is suspected. Breeding pig holdings included in the health control programme 

are to be annually examined for Salmonella. In addition, cattle holdings, of 

which bull calves are sent to artificial insemination stations, shall be examined for 

Salmonella before the calves are transferred. In addition to the samples included 

in the control programme for these, the industry annually collects a significant 

volume of self-control samples. 

In sampling at holdings, individual and composite faecal samples are taken of 

the animals, the number of which depends on the size of the cattle herd and 

whether analysis is performed because of suspicion or for some other reason. If 

Salmonella is found, the municipal veterinarian issues restrictive orders for the 

holding. Animals must not then be delivered from the holding to anywhere other 

than slaughterhouses, whereby meat originating from these slaughter animals 

must be heated. If the case is a dairy farm, milk must not be transferred from the 

farm to anywhere other than a dairy for preparation as pasteurized products. To 

eliminate Salmonella contamination from the farm, a specific eradication plan is laid 

out. The farm is released from restrictions when the faecal samples of the farm’s 

animals have tested negative in Salmonella analysis at two-month intervals. 

2.2.3 Analysis of samples and data collection 

Samples taken as part of the Salmonella Control Programme are analyzed in laboratories 

approved by either the National Veterinary and Food Research Institute 

of Finland, EELA (animal samples), or the National Food Agency (samples from 

slaughterhouses and cutting facilities). There are about 50 laboratories in all, most 

of which are municipal food laboratories or laboratories at the slaughterhouses. 

Accepted methods of analysis are ISO 6579:2002 (previously, ISO 6579:1993) 

and NMKL No. 71:1999. In 1999, pre-enrichment not previously used was included 

in analyses of faecal samples. 

EELA has functioned as national reference laboratory. Other laboratories must 

send Salmonella strains they have isolated to EELA for confirmation and characterisation 

of the serotype. Classification of phage type is carried out by the enteric 

bacteria laboratory at the National Public Health Institute. 

2.3.1 Poultry meat production 

From 1995 to 2004, the number of poultry farms in Finland declined by 73% (TIKE 

2006). In 2004, Finland had 2041 poultry farms. (TIKE, 2006). A few suppliers 

provided chicks of grandparent and parent poultry generations to Finland. 

The number of holdings of parent generations of broilers remained almost the 

same from 1995 to 2004, when there were 45 altogether. In 2004 there were seven 

holdings of parent generations of turkeys. The number of holdings of parent 

generations of hens has declined since 1995, from about twenty to fourteen in 

2004 (Evira, 2006). In 2004, among breeding holdings, 45 produced parent generations 

of broilers, about 210 produced broilers and 27 produced laying hens 

(Finland’s Poultry Association and Finland’s Broiler Association, each at website: 

www.siipi.net) 

The number of incubated chickens increased between 1995 and 2004. Most incubation 

was of broiler chicks. Their incubation volume grew by 16.6% between 

1997 and 2004. Among incubated poultries, the volume of incubated turkeys grew

Year 

Broilers Turkeys Chickens Total 

1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 

1995 3474 

1996 3359 

1997 46820 3367 

1998 49200 498 3147 54843 

1999 45998 741 2977 51715 

2000 52374 878 3238 58490 

2001 53499 1472 3186 60158 

2002 53486 1634 3039 60161 

2003 54509 1841 3233 61586 

2004 54612 1938 3138 61692 

Poultry Association; number of incubations (1995 - 1.9.1997) 

EELA; number of incubations (1.9.1997 - 28.2.2001) 

National Food Agency; number of incubations (1.3.2001 - 2004) 

relatively the most, by 289.2% between 1998 and 2004. The number of incubated 

laying hens decreased in the control period by 9.7% (Table 5). 

There were 6 to 7 poultry slaughterhouses in operation in 1995 and their number 

stayed the same until 2004. There were about 30 low-capacity poultry slaughterhouses 

in 1995 and they numbered 22 in 2004. 

In 2004, there were 74 cutting plants and 159 small-scale cutting plants. The 

number of cutting plants as well as small-scale cutting plants is estimated to have 

slightly decreased since 1995 (Evira, 2006). 

From 1995 to 2004, poultry meat represented the third largest percentage (14%) 

of meat produced in Finland. In 1995 to 2004, an average of 62.2 million kilograms 

of poultry meat was produced annually in Finland. 

Most poultry meat produced in Finland in 1995 to 2004 consisted of broilers and 

turkeys. Meat production also involved products of ducks, mallards, ostriches, 

emus and geese, but breeding these was small-scale (Table 6). 

Broilers represented 90% of poultry production. In 1995, 38.2 million kilograms 

broiler were produced, and by 2004 production had grown to 71.4 million kilograms. 

Proportionally, the production of turkey meat grew most compared to 

other poultry. In 1995, 1.1 million kilograms turkey meat were produced, which 

increased to 14.2 million kilograms in 2004 (Table 7). 

Compared to meat of broiler and turkey, the use of hen meat in Finland was minor. 

Its production fell from 3.3 million kilograms produced in 1995 to about one third 

of this by 2004 (Tike, 2005). 

In 1995 to 2004, domestic production of poultry meat significantly increased its 

proportion in Finnish meat production (104%). The greatest growth appeared in 

turkey production (1218%), while broiler production also grew significantly (85%). 

Slaughters of laying hens decreased by one third from 1995 to 2004. In 1995 

to 2004, as production became more efficient, the number of slaughterhouses, 

slaughter sites and cutting facilities decreased, even though production volumes 

increased. In 2004, the production of meat of ducks, mallards, ostriches, emus 

and geese was still very small-scale. 


Table 5. Incubated poultry in 

Finland 1995 - 2000


Table 6. Number of poultries in 

Finland 1995- 2004 

Year 

Laying 

hens 1 Chicks 2 roosters 1 Broiler 

mothers 3 Broilers Turkeys 

Table 7. Production and slaughters of 

poultry in Finland 1995 - 2004 

Other 

poultry 

Totally 

1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 

1995 4178,8 1482,3 25,2 239,8 4276,4 80,0 75,2 10357,7 

1996 4183,5 1245,6 24,6 278,6 4052,4 

1997 4151,5 1287,8 32,0 299,2 4911,1 111,6 33,4 10826,6 

1998 3801,8 1184,7 29,5 347,1 5507,2 144,8 34,5 11049,6 

1999 3361,3 1025,3 17,2 382,4 5998,2 210,0 39,2 11033,6 

2000 3110,0 914,4 17,6 363,5 7917,9 214,5 31,6 12569,5 

2001 3201,7 1043,0 12,4 393,9 5412,1 455,4 35,1 10553,6 

2002 3212,5 772,3 9,4 401,6 5766,3 530,5 41,4 10733,9 

2003 3016,2 930,9 10,1 346,0 6050,3 603,4 40,2 10997,0 

2004 3069,2 911,6 10,4 287,4 5573,2 535,3 18,1 10405,2 

MMMTike; Annual book of farm statistics 2005. Number poultry by region 1.4.2004 and total country 1990- 2004. 

TIKE 2006. 

1 In 1995 to 2004 at least 20 weeks. 

2 In 1995 to 2004 less than 20 weeks 

3 At least 18 weeks 

In 1995- 2003, number of poultry 1.5. 

Year 

Broiler 

production 

1, 2, 3 

Turkey 

production 

4, 5 

Broiler 

slaughters 

6, 7, 8 

Turkey 

slaughters 

7, 8 

Chickens and 

roosters 

slaughters 

7, 8 

Total 

farm 

slaughters 

10, 11 

mil.kg/year mil.kg/year 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 1000 hds 

1995 38,2 1,1 

1996 44,1 1,2 37743,3 2981,1 

1997 47,6 1,4 42149 2721,6 10,8 

1998 56,1 2,5 43747,1 2443,7 8,8 

1999 59,6 3,9 46522,5 1287,1 5,2 

2000 56,3 5,6 43593,7 749,9 1321,2 10,7 

2001 64,2 8,6 49671,6 1164,9 1433,1 8 

2002 68,2 12,2 51872,3 1521,2 990,5 14,2 

2003 68 14,3 50431,8 1761,1 457,6 2,6 

2004 70,5 14,5 51712 1708,5 981,7 6,3 

1 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2000. Amounts of poultry, lamb and horsemeat slaughtered in slaughterhouses (1996). Tike 2000. 

Includes broilers and broiler mothers. 

2 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2001. Amounts of poultry, lamb and horsemeat slaughtered in slaughterhouses (1996-2000). 

Tike 2000 

3 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2006. Slaughters of poultry, lambs and horses (2001- 2004). Tike 2006. 

4 

Poultry Association; Poultry production in Finland 1995- 2005 (vuodet 1995- 1999). Http://www.siipi.net/broileri/index. 

html. Checked 8.4.2006. 

5 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2006. Slaughters of poultry, lambs and horses (2001- 2004). Tike 2006. 

6 

Broiler slaughters in 1995 

7 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2001. Amonts of pigs, poultry, lambs and horses slaughtered in slaughterhouses (1996-2000). 

Tike 2006. 

8 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2006. Slaughters of poultry, lambs and horses (2001- 2004). Tike 2006. Includes broilers and 

broiler mothers 

9 Farm slaughters 1995-1996 

10 Tike; Annual book of farm statistics 2004. Number of slaughtered animals1997-2003. (slaughtered af farms)(1997- 

2003). Tike 2005. 

11 Tike; Annual book of farm statistics 2005. Number of slaughtered animals 1998- 2004. (2004). Tike 2006.

2.3.2 egg production 

In 1995 to 2004, egg production could be practised in Finland in cage or barn 

holdings. There were 4,2 million laying hens in Finland in 1995. By 2004, the 

number of laying hens dropped by 27 %. At the same time, egg production fell 

by 19.4 %. In 1995, egg production amounted to 74.7 million kilograms, while 

production in 2004 had dropped to 60.2 million kilograms. Egg consumption was 

60.5 million kilograms in 1995 and 50.6 million kilograms in 2004. A reduction by 

16 % appeared in consumption (Food Facts, 2005). 

Eggs exports dropped by 24 %. In 1995, exports amounted to 14 million kilograms, 

while exports in 2004 were 10.6 million kilograms. For eggs, the degree 

of self-sufficiency remained positive throughout 1995 to 2004. Data showing egg 

production in 1995 - 2004 are presented in Table 8. 

In 1995, there were 65 egg-packing centres, while in 2004 their number had 

increased to 149 packing centres (Table 8). The number of packing centers particularly 

increased at farmsteads. Consumption of eggs dropped in Finland (16.4 

%), which also decreased the number of packaged eggs (6.6 %). 

In 2004, included in the egg production chain were 2 importers of grandparentgeneration 

chicks and 12 holdings of parent generations (www.siipi.net/Poultry 

Association). During the period from 1995 to 2004, a considerable reduction 

occured in the numbers of breeding holdings and egg production holdings. There 

were about 60 breeding holdings in 2004, and about 1100 egg-producing holdings 

(TIKE 2006). 

Although egg production dropped during the control period by 19 %, in 2004, the 

degree of self-sufficiency was still 120 %. In 1995, the exported proportion (18.5 

%) of total production reached a maximum. This volume was lowest in 2002 (8.6 

%) (Table 8). 

Year 

holdings 

1 

Packing 

2, 3 plants 

Production 

5, 6, 7 

mil. kg/year 

To packing 

4, 5 plant 

mil. kg/year 


Self- 

sufficiency 

% 

export 

8, 9 

mil. kg/year 

1995 7092 65 74,7 61 124 13,8 

1996 129 70,8 57 125 14,1 

1997 164 66,7 56 124 12,9 

1998 168 63,9 52 120 6,9 

1999 160 58,9 47 115 

2000 160 59 47 114 6,4 

2001 155 56,5 54,6 113 7,1 

2002 157 54,7 52,9 110 4,7 

2003 1725 148 56,2 54,9 116 8,8 

2004 1145 149 60,2 56,5 120 10,4 

1 

Tike; Holdings register (2004). (1145 holdings in total, of which 745 were pen holdings, 336 floor holdings and 46 

biodynamic holdings.) 

2 

EELA; Packing plant register (1995-2001). 

3 

National Food Agency; Packing plant register (2001 - 2004). 

4 

EELA; Number egg delivered to packing plants (1995 - 2000) 

5 

Tike; Egg production and incubation in 2001 - 2004. Tike 2006. Amounts received by packing plants, does not 

include direct sale nor own use. 

6 

Tike; Annual book of farm statistics 2004 (1995 - 2003). TIKE 2005. 

7 

Poultry Association / Gallup Food Facts (2004). Http://www.siipi.net/broileri/index.html 

8 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2000. Eggs and incubation in 1995 - 1999. Tike 2000. Period 1995 - 1999 includes egg 

mass. 

9 

Tike; Tietokappa 3/2006. Export of meat and eggs in 2004. Tike 2006. The period 2000 - 2004 includes egg mass 

converted to eggs with shell. 

Table 8. Structure 

of egg production in 

Finland 1995 - 2004


Pigs 

2.3.2.1 Literature 

National Food Agency; Register of meat-sector plants. 

National Food Agency; Register of packing plants, 2001- 2004. 

National Food Agency; Register of small-scale meat-sector plants. 

National Food Agency; Poultry incubation statistics, 1997- 2004. 

National Food Agency; Registered grandparent and parent generation poultry 

plants in Finland 1997- 2004. 

National Food Agency; Slaughterhouse register, xx - 2004. 

Gallup Food Facts; Poultry production volumes in Finland, 1995 - 2004. 

Tike; Egg production structure. Farm research in 1995- 2000. 

Tike; Egg production structure. Packing plant statistics and farm register, 1995- 

2000. 

Tike; Poultry volumes in Finland in 1995 - 1990. Integrated Administration and 

Control System (IACS) in 1995 - 1990, 

Tike; Poultry volumes in Finland in 2000 - 2004. Integrated Administration and 

Control Sys-tem (IACS) in 2000- 2003. 

Tike; Poultry volumes in Finland in 1995 - 2004. Separate statistical survey of 

farms not applying for supports. 

Tike; Structure of egg exports in 1995 - 2004. 

Poultry Association; Poultry hatchery registers for 1995 - 1997. 

2.3.3 Production of pork and beef 

In 1995 to 2004, the average annual meat production was about 340 million 

kilograms in Finland. Total meat production in 1995 was 306 million kilograms 

(with hot-weight reduction). By 2004, production had increased by 19 % to 377 

million kilograms. Meat production in Finland was distributed in 2004 such that 

pork production represented 53 % and beef 27 %, while chicken production came 

third (20 %). Production of sheep and horsemeat was very low. When combined, 

they represented about 3 % of Finnish meat production in 2004. Table 9 shows 

the amounts of meat production in 1995 to 2004. 

Finland had about 25 slaughterhouses for red meat in 1995, and 6 - 7 slaughterhouses 

for poultry. The low-capacity slaughterhouses for red meat numbered 

about 100 and those for poultry about 30. They declined in number by 2004, at 

which time there were 18 slaughterhouses for red meat and 7 for poultry. The 

slaughter sites for red meat numbered 74 and those for poultry 22. In 2004, there 

were 74 cutting plants and 159 small-scale cutting plants (Evira, 2006). 

The number of pigs other than sows dropped somewhat from 1995 to 2004. In 

1995, there were about 1.4 million pigs in Finland, while in 2004 they numbered 

about 1.36 millions. The number of hogs (≥ 50 kg) dropped the most in relative 

terms, by 28 %. From 1995 to 2004 the number of pigs (20 to 50 kg) and piglets 

(< 20 kg) dropped by 4.8 to 4.9 %, while the number of sows (≥ 50 kg) grew by 

8.6 % and the number of fattening pigs (≥ 50 kg) decreased somewhat, by 2.1 

%. The numbers of pigs is shown per annum in Table 10. 

About 168 million kilograms of pork were produced in Finland in 1995. Production 

had increased about 19 % by 2004. The number heads of pigs slaughtered in 

slaughterhouses grew from 1997 to 2004 by about 8 % (Table 11). 

0

Year 

The number of bovine animals decreased in Finland by 16 % from 1995 to 2004. 

The reduction in the numbers was greatest for calves (22 %) and dairy cows (19 

%), while the number of heifers dropped by 8 %. The number of bulls remained 

almost the same. Mother cows increased in number by 5 %. Table 12 shows the 

numbers of cattle in Finland from 1995 to 2004. 

On the average, 93 million kilograms of beef were annually produced in Finland. 

The proportion dropped by 2.8 % from 1995 to 2004. The number of cattle 

slaughtered in slaughterhouses dropped by about 20 % from 1997 to 2004 

(Table 11). 

Pigs 

1, 2 

mil. kg/yr 

Cattle 

1, 3 

mil. kg/yr 

Veal 

1, 4 

mil. kg/vr 

Poultry 

1, 5 

milj. kg/yr 

Lamb and 

1, 6 mutton 

mil. kg/yr 


horse 

1, 6 

mil. kg/yr 

Total 

mil. kg/yr 

1995 167,6 96 0,16 42,6 1,57 0,43 308,36 

1996 171,8 96,4 0,19 49,4 1,35 0,47 319,61 

1997 179,7 99,2 0,4 52,7 1,27 0,4 333,67 

1998 184,5 93,5 0,28 61,1 1,18 0,48 341,04 

1999 181,6 90,2 0,24 66,1 0,91 0,41 339,46 

2000 172,8 91,2 0,27 64,4 0,75 0,39 329,81 

2001 173,7 89,6 0,21 75,7 0,67 0,36 340,24 

2002 184,2 90,6 0,12 82,6 0,64 0,31 358,47 

2003 193,2 95,7 0,11 83,7 0,59 0,19 373,49 

2004 198,1 91,2 0,11 87 0,65 0,09 377,15 

Year 

hogs 

≥ 50 kg 

1000 hds 

Sows 

≥ 50 kg 

1000 hds 

Fattening 

pigs 

≥ 50 kg 

1000 hds 

Pigs 

20- 50 kg 

1000 hds 

Piglets 

< 20 kg 

1000 hds 

Pigs total 

1000 kpl 

1995 6,5 161,1 450,8 306,1 475,7 1400,2 

1996 6,6 179,8 444,7 308,8 455,5 1395,4 

1997 7,1 185,2 470,4 366,7 437,6 1467,0 

1998 7,8 186,5 420,6 357,4 428,7 1401,0 

1999 5,8 180,2 431,1 296,9 437,3 1351,3 

2000 6,0 184,0 404,9 289,2 411,7 1295,8 

2001 5,4 163,6 391,2 291,6 408,9 1260,7 

2002 5,3 172,2 404,8 296,0 436,7 1315,0 

2003 5,0 178,1 444,0 297,1 450,7 1374,9 

2004 4,7 175,0 441,2 291,3 452,4 1364,6 

MMMTike; Annual book of farm statistics 2004. 

The number of pigs by region and for the whole country, 1.5 1990-2004. TIKE 2005. 

Measured weight was live weight. 

Cattle 

Table 9. Production and slaughter 

of meat in Finland 1995 - 2004 

Table 10. Number of pigs in 

Finland 1995 - 2004


Table 11. Production and slaughter 

of beef and pork in Finland 

1995 - 2004 

Table 12. Number of bovine 

animals in Finland 

1995 - 2004 

Year 

Year 

1, 2 Beef 

mil. kg/year 

1, 2 Pork 

mil. kg/year 

Total beef animals 

3, 4 

in slaughterhouses 

1000 hds 

3, 5 Pigs 

in slaughterhouses 

1000 hds 

1995 96,01 167,55 

1996 96,36 171,82 

1997 99,21 179,67 397,8 2181,5 

1998 93,48 184,52 376,8 2194,3 

1999 90,24 181,86 361,1 2169,7 

2000 91,16 172,79 355,1 2045,7 

2001 89,56 173,7 339,1 2036,3 

2002 90,61 184,24 330,6 2142,6 

2003 95,71 193,22 335,7 2289,6 

2004 93,3 198,5 318,5 2351,2 

1 MMMTIKE: Slaughterhouse statistics and farm research 1995-1999, 

2 MMMTIKE: Slaughterhouse statistics 2000 - 2004. (incl. animals slaughtered in slauthterhouses, 

not slaughters at farms) 

3 MMMTike; Agricultural statistics yearbook 2004. Number of slaughtered animals 1997- 

2003. TIKE 2004. 

4 Tike; Tietokappa 3/2006. Cattle slaughters (hds) in 2004. Tike 2006. Year 2004 includes 

cattle slaughtered in slaughterhouses, not slaughters at farms. 

5 Tike; Tietokappa 3/2006. Pig slaughters in 2004. Tike 2006. Year 2004 includes pigs 

slaughtered in slaughterhouses, not slaughters at farms. 

Milk cows 

1000 hds 

Mother 

cows 

1000 hds 

Bulls over 

1 yr 

1000 hds 

heifers 

1000 hds 

Calves below 

1 yr 

1000 hds 

Nautaeläimet 

yhteensä 

1000 hds 

1995 398,5 29,2 109,3 188,9 422,0 1147,9 

1996 392,2 31,1 114,7 201,1 406,5 1145,6 

1997 390,9 32,4 120,5 196,8 401,8 1142,4 

1998 383,1 30,6 114,8 190,3 398,3 1117,1 

1999 372,4 29,6 118,1 187,5 379,2 1086,8 

2000 364,1 27,8 114,9 185,0 364,8 1056,7 

2001 354,8 27,2 111,3 181,7 362,3 1037,4 

2002 347,8 28,1 115,3 180,0 354,2 1025,4 

2003 333,9 28,1 115,5 178,5 344,1 1000,2 

2004 324,4 30,8 110,5 173,0 330,4 969,1 

1 MMMTike Annual book of farm statistics 2004. Number of bovine animals by region and total 

country in 1984 - 2003. TIKE 2005. (Data for 1995 - 2003). 

2 MMMTike; Farm register 2005. Number of domestic animals 1.5.2004 (Data for 2004).

2.4 Programme results 1995 – 2004 / Poultry 

2.4.1 Laying hen production line 

Salmonella was found at egg producing parent and grandparent holdings in 1995 

to 2004 only once in 2004 (Table 13). 

Salmonella was only isolated from 1- 6 flocks annually among flocks of production-generation 

laying hens in 1995 to 2000 and 2004, and none at all in 2001 to 

2003. For production-generation rearing facilities, Salmonella was found during 

four years; 1995, 1997, 2003 and 2004 (Table 14). 

Altogether seven serotypes were identified from laying hens (Table 15). Salmonella 

Typhimurium was the most common serotype and DT 1 the most common 

phage type (Appendix 1). The serotype Salmonella Enteritidis, transferred through 

products containing raw eggs and thus presenting a greater health risk to people, 

was found during two years (1995 and 1999, Table 15) and their phage types 

were DT 1 and DT 4. As for the occurrence in 1995, eggs from a holding with 

Enteritidis DT 1 caused two epidemics among people. 

Poltry production 

holdings 

Rearing period 

Production 

period 

Year 

Total no. 

of flocks 

tested * 

No. of 

positive 

flocks 

Breeding flocks of Gallus gallus 


% positive 

flocks 

No. of 

positive 

holdings 

1996 544 0 0 0 

1997 441 0 0 0 

1998 303 0 0 0 

1999 227 0 0 0 

2000 318 0 0 0 

2001 290 0 0 0 

2002 221 0 0 0 

2003 98 0 0 0 

2004 102 0 0 0 

1996 106 0 0 0 

1997 62 0 0 0 

1998 203 0 0 0 

1999 36 0 0 0 

2000 145 0 0 0 

2001 144 0 0 0 

2002 262 0 0 0 

2003 74 0 0 0 

2004 67 1 1,5 1 

* Flocks are examined every second months at the holding. The same flock repeatedly 

may appear in the numbers. 

Table 13. Breeding flocks of 

Gallus gallus egg production line 

- sampling at holdings


Table 14. National Salmonella 

Control Programme 1995-2004: 

Gallus gallus laying hen flocks 




Poultry 

production 

holdings 


Production period 

Year 

Total no. 

of flocks 

tested* 

No. of 

positive 

flocks 


% positive 

flocks 

No. of 

positive 

holdings 

1995 220 1 0,5 1 

1996 262 0 0 0 

1997 331 1 0,3 1 

1998 198 0 0 0 

1999 113 0 0 0 

2000 104 0 0 0 

2001 77 0 0 0 

2002 281 0 0 0 

2003 175 1 0,6 1 

2004 168 0 0 0 

1995 2935 5 0,17 5 

1996 3742 4 0,11 4 

1997 4942 1 0,02 1 

1998 3440 1 0,03 1 

1999 2443 6 0,2 4 

2000 2118 1 0,05 1 

2001 1728 0 0 0 

2002 1883 0 0 0 

2003 1974 0 0 0 

2004 1967 1 0,05 1 

* Flocks are examined thrice during the laying period. The same flock repeatedly may 

appear in the numbers. 

Serovar Salmonella positive flocks 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Laying hen flocks 

rearing period 

Infantis 1 1) 

Typhimurium 1 1 1 

Production 

period 

Corvallis 1 1 

Enteritidis 1 2 

Infantis 1 1) 2 

Mbandaka 1 1 

Oranienburg 1 

Tennessee 1 

Typhimurium 1 1 1 2 1 1 

Total 6 4 2 1 6 1 0 0 1 2 

1) Same farm

2.4.2 Meat-producing line (poultry and broilers) 

Salmonella was very rarely found in broiler and turkey breeding flocks in 1996 

to 2004 (Table 16). 

At one rearing holding for broiler parents, several serotypes were isolated in 1999. 

In 2002, Infantis contamination was detected at 2 parent-rearing holdings, while 

in 2004, Tennessee was isolated from a sample of day-old chicks at one parentrearing 

holding (Table 17). At broiler-breeding holdings for the production period 

during 1996 - 2004, only one Infantis contamination was observed in 1996. 

At one turkey parent-rearing holding, Enteritidis DT 4 contamination was found 

in 1997, which had possibly come to the holding with foreign breeding eggs. 

Contamination was also found at two contact holdings of this rearing holding. 

Even in turkey breeding holdings for the production period, Salmonella was only 

isolated in 2002 (one Agona flock) and 2003 (three Typhimurium DT1 flocks). 

The flocks testing positive in 2003 were at the same farm and at the same time 

and the contamination was traced through production environment samples from 

the hatchery. At one of the farms that had obtained chicks from this hatchery, 

Typhimurium DT1 infection was found. 

In day-old chicks samples from hatcheries of fattening broilers and turkeys during 

1996 to 2004, Salmonella was found in three years from 1997 to 1999 (Table 18). A 

hatchery-originated contamination occurred in 1999, which caused rising numbers 

of positive broiler fattening flocks in 1999 compared to previous years. 

Poultry 

production 

holdings 


Production period 

Year 

Total no. 

of flocks 

tested* 

No. of 

positive 

flocks 

% positive 

flocks 

Breeding flocks of Gallus gallus and turkey 


No. of 

positive 

holdings 

1996 340 0 0 0 

1997 211 1 1) 0,5 1 

1998 960 0 0 0 

1999 547 1 0,18 1 

2000 319 0 0 0 

2001 309 0 0 0 

2002 410 2 0,5 1 

2003 308 0 0 0 

2004 291 1 0,3 1 

1996 1212 1 0,08 1 

1997 1268 0 0 0 

1998 1253 0 0 0 

1999 1171 0 0 0 

2000 984 0 0 0 

2001 1036 0 0 0 

2002 3256 1 1) 0,03 1 

2003 1001 3 1) 0,3 1 

2004 994 0 0 0 

1) Turkey flock 

* Flocks are examined every second month at the holding. The same flock may appear 

repeatedly in the numbers. 



Breeding flocks of Gallus gallus, 

meat production line and turkey 

- sampling at holdings



Control Programme: Breeding 

flocks of Gallus gallus meat 

production line and turkeys 



Hatcheries 

Serovar Salmonella positive flocks 

rearing 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Breeding flocks 

Bardo 1 1) 

Brandenburg 1 1) 

Enteritidis 1 

Infantis 2 

Newport 1 1 

Tennessee 1 

egg production 

Agona 1 

Infantis 1 

Typhimurium 3 2) 

Total 1 1 0 1 1) 0 0 3 3 2) 1 

1) Three different serotypes at the same broiler breeding rearing farm 

2) In three turkey breeding flocks at the same farm at the same fime 

Samples Year 

Samples from day- 

old chicks of laying 

hens 

Samples from dayold 

chicks of broilers 

and turkeys 

No. of 

samples 

No. of positive 

samples 

% positive 

1996 266 0 0 

1997 235 0 0 

1998 129 0 0 

1999 92 0 0 

2000 86 0 0 

2001 91 0 0 

2002 95 0 0 

2003 76 0 0 

2004 70 0 0 

1996 1504 0 0 

1997 1373 13 0,9 

1998 1113 2 0,2 

1999 996 5 0,5 

2000 1274 0 0 

2001 2040 0 0 

2002 1998 0 0 

2003 1697 0 0 

2004 2087 0 0

Poultry producing holdings Year 

Meat production flocks, 

broiler 

Meat production flocks, 

turkey 

Näytteitä kpl / No of samples 

5000 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

Total no. 

of flocks 


flocks 


% positive 

1995 2112 80 3,8 

1996 2568 23 0,9 

1997 2951 21 0,7 

1998 2846 20 0,7 

1999 2939 64 2,2 

2000 2669 26 1 

2001 2954 17 0,6 

2002 3157 11 0,3 

2003 3287 5 0,15 

2004 3132 5 0,16 

1995 238 0 0 

1996 225 0 0 

1997 95 2 2,1 

1998 252 0 0 

1999 160 2 1,2 

2000 251 4 1,6 

2001 312 2 0,6 

2002 555 3 0,5 

2003 1055 6 0,6 

2004 989 1 0,1 

Siipikarja / Poultry 1995-2004 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Teurastettu parvia / flocks slaughtered 

% positiivisia parvia / % positive flocks 

3,5 

3 

2,5 

2 

1,5 

1 

0,5 

0 

% positiivisia / % positive 


Control Programme 1995 - 2004: 

Meat production flocks of broilers 

and turkey 

Figure 1. National Salmonella 

Control Programme: Prevalence 

of Salmonella in broiler and 

turkey flocks in 1995 to 2004



Control Programme: Salmonella 

serovars isolated from broiler 

flocks in 1996-2004 


Control Progremme: Salmonella 

serovars isolated from turkey 

flocks in 1996-2004 



Enteritidis phage types isolated 

from cattle, swine and poultry in 

1995-2004 

Serovar No. of Salmonella positive flocks 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Anatum 4 5 2 2 1 

Bardo 1 1 

Infantis 10 9 15 56 14 5 3 2 

Isangi 4 1 

Livingstone 5 5* 7 7 4 1 2 

Montevideo 1 2 2 

Salmonella ssp. 2 2 1 1 

Stockholm 1 

Tennessee 2 2 2 1 1 1 

Thompson 3 1 1 

Typhimurium 1 

Total 23 21 20 64 26 17 11 5 5 

* S. Infantis also isolated from one broiler flock 

Serovar No. of Salmonella positive flocks 

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Agona 2 

Enteritidis 2 1 1 

Infantis 1 1 

Mbandaka 1 

Montevideo 1 

Tennessee 1 

Typhimurium 2 1 5 1 

Total 0 2 0 2 4 2 3 6 1 

Phage type 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

1 1 1) 1 6) 

4 1 1) 3 1) 3 7) 1 1) 2 6) 1 7) 1 4) 1 7) 

8 2 1) 1 1) 1 3) 1 1) 

14B 1 1) 

20 1 4) 

33 1 1) 

34 1 2) 

NST 1 2) 2 4) 2 4) 1 5) 1 5) 

NT 1 4) 

Total 7 1 7 0 4 2 4 4 2 1 

1) Cattle herds, faecal samples 

2) Cattle, lymph node, carcass swab or meat sample 

3) Swine herds, faecal samples 

4) Sow, lymph node, carcass swab or meat sample 

5) Fattening pig, lymph node, carcass swab or meat sample 

6) Egg production line (all) 

7) Turkeys (all)

The percentages of Salmonella-positive fattening flocks of broilers and turkeys are 

shown in Figure 1, and total numbers in Table 19. In 1995, the overall proportion 

of positive flocks was in excess of 3 %. After that, their combined proportion 

remained well below 1 %, except for a rise in 1999 (2.1 %). Besides contamination 

originating in broiler hatcheries, the increase in 1999 was also affected by the 

inclusion of pre-enrichment in the analysis of samples. After 1999, the proportion 

constantly declined and was only 0.15 % in 2004. 

Serotypes isolated fattening flocks of broilers and turkeys are shown in Tables 20. 

and 21. Around 10 serotypes were identified in broilers and seven in turkeys. The 

most common serotype in broilers during 1996 - 2004 was Infantis, but Livingstone 

has been most frequently isolated serotype since 2001. Typhimurium was 

isolated from only one fattening flock in 2001 (DT 1) and Enteritidis did not at all 

occur in broilers from 1996 to 2004. The most common serotype among turkeys 

has been Typhimurium, and Enteritidis was isolated from turkeys in three years. 

Enteritidis strains were of phage type DT 4 (Table 22), and the most common 

phage type of Typhimurium strains was DT 1 (Appendix 1). 

The percentages of Salmonella-positive samples of poultry meat are shown in Figure 

2. In 1995, they represented 9.4 %; since 1998, the proportion constantly has 

been below 0.8 %, and from 2000 onwards, 0.2 % or less. Not even the increase 

in the number of positive fattening flocks in 1999 raised the number of positive 

meat samples, Hence, it can be deducted that more efficient cultivation methods 

have prevented Salmonella-contaminated meat from reaching consumption. 


1200 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

2.4.3 Discussion 

Siipikarja / Poultry 1995-2004 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Siipikarjan liha / poultry meat 

Salmonella control of poultry is primarily based on the control of production 

farms and prevention of Salmonella infection. Controlling primary production and 

regular sampling is particularly important poultry, as Salmonella infections are 

not generally as evident as diseases in animals. Faecal samples from broilers, 

turkeys and laying hens are analyzed in all stages of production, and hatcheries 

are also regularly examined for Salmonella. Thus, the objective is to detect Salmonella 

infections in the early stages before broilers and turkeys are slaughtered 

or prior to laying eggs. This efficiently lessens the probability of eggs or meat 

contaminated by Salmonella reaching consumption. In addition, meat samples 

taken from the production line are regularly examined in cutting plants. 


10 

9 

8 

7 

6 

5 

4 

3 

2 

1 

0 

% positiivisia lihanäytteitä / % positive meat samples 



Control Programme: Occurence 

of Salmonella in poltry samples in 

1995 - 2004


Most Finnish broiler farms use a voluntary CE processing (competitive exclusion) 

method in which three-day-old chicks are fed with a product made of normal intestinal 

bacterial flora from adult birds. The treatment has been seen to prevent the 

implantation of Salmonella bacteria in chick intestines and to increase resistance 

against them. The method has been successfully used in Finland since the 1970s 

to prevent Salmonella in poultry. 

For poultry, the Salmonella situation was already relatively good when the national 

control programme took effect in 1995. By regular sampling at all stages 

and through preventive actions, the occurrence of Salmonella has continuously 

decreased. When detecting contamination, effort is always placed into tracing 

the source of contamination and preventing it from spreading in birds in the production 

chain and to food originating from these. Preventive actions include the 

destruction or heating of eggs, the use of meat from Salmonella-contaminated 

flocks only in heat-treated products, and disinfection of production farms. The 

functionality of the programme has also been monitored, and the efficiency of the 

control programme was improved for poultry in 2001. In 1999, pre-enrichment 

was added to the procedure for analyzing samples of Salmonella, whereby is 

possible to detect ever smaller quantities of bacteria. 

The Salmonella control programme is aimed at keeping the percentage of positive 

Salmonella samples below 1 % in all sampling categories. For poultry, this 

goal was satisfactorily achieved during the programme, except for exceeding the 

limit in 1999 for in broiler tattening flocks (2.2 %). Internationally, even this level 

is very low. 

From the results of the control programme, one may thus deduce that the above 

risk management activities efficiently prevent the spread of Salmonella infections 

and that Salmonella-positive food reaches consumers. 

2.5 Programme results 1995 – 2004 / Cattle and pigs 

2.5.1 Cattle and beef 

As a rule, Salmonella infections was detected due to clinical suspicions, more 

efficient monitoring, and findings from slaughterhouses. In addition from cattle 

were examined when bulls were sold to artificial insemination stations, and Salmonella 

analysis was mostly also required in connection with other animal trade, 

particularly at the end of the period covered by this report. These analyses have 

also revealed Salmonella-positive cattle while the control programme has been 

in effect. 

The results of the national Salmonella control for cattle in slaughterhouses are 

shown in Table 23. 

The results of the national Salmonella control for cattle in cutting facilities are 

shown in Table 24, and percentages of Salmonella-positive meat samples in 

Figure 3. In 1995, this percentage was about 0.6 %. Since 1998, as a rule, the 

percentage has been 0.1 % or less except, for slight increases in 2001 to 2002. 

Before 1995, Salmonella infections occurred relatively seldom among cattle (Fig. 

4). The year 1995 was the peak year for Salmonella infections, when it was isolated 

from 287 herds. In the period from 1995 to 1996 an S. Infantis outbreak carried 

by contaminated feed spread among cattle in Finland. Since 1996, the number 

of infections has been decreasing. In 2000, less Salmonella was found among 

cattle than ever in the 1990s; in 2002 to 2004, fewer than ten of Salmonella-posi- 

0

Year 

Cattle 

Lymph node samples Carcass surface swabs 

Total no. 

of 

samples 

No. of 

positive 

samples 

% positive 

samples 

Total no. 

of samples 


No. of 

positive 

samples 

% positive 

samples 

1995 2728 23 0,8 3209 24 0,8 

1996 2550 6 0,2 2781 15 0,5 

1997 3116 2 0,1 3131 7 0,2 

1998 3189 10 0,31 3227 7 0,22 

1999 3104 5 0,16 3100 3 0,1 

2000 3025 1 0,03 3154 3 0,1 

2001 3189 10 0,30 3535 12 0,3 

2002 3141 2 0,06 3146 1 0,03 

2003 3141 2 0,06 3406 2 0,06 

2004 3058 6 0,20 3251 0 0 

Year 

No. of crushed meat 

samples 

Beef 

No. of positive samples 

% positive samples 

1995 2329 15 0,64 

1996 3001 4 0,13 

1997 3189 5 0,16 

1998 3016 2 0,07 

1999 3035 3 0,1 

2000 2600 2 0,1 

2001 2050 4 0,2 

2002 1948 7 0,4 

2003 2404 2 0,08 

2004 2485 1 0,04 

Näytteitä kpl/No of 

samples 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

Naudat / Cattle 1995-2004 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Leikkaamo: lihanäytteet / Cutting plant: meat samples 


0,7 

0,6 

0,5 

0,4 

0,3 

0,2 

0,1 

0 



control progremme 1995-2004: 

Salmonella samples from slaughterhouses 

and low capacity 

slaughterhouses, cattle. 


Control Progremme 1995-2004: 

Salmonella samples from cutting 

plants, beef. 


Control Programme: Occurence 

of Salmonella in beef samples in 

1995 – 2004


Figure 4. Salmonella-positive 

cattle herds in 1993 – 2004 


Control Programme: 

Salmonella serovars isolated 

from cattle herds in 1995- 

2004 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

Serovar 

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Salmonellapositiiviset karjat yhteensä/total no. of positive herds 

Infantis 

Typhimurium 

Muut serotyypit/other serotypes 

No. of Salmonella positive herds 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Abony 1 1 2) 

Agona 7 4 7 2 1 1 

Altona 1 

Anatum 1 2) 

Bovismorbificans 1 2) 1 

Brandenburg 1 1 1 

Bredeney 1 2 1) 

Chailey 1 

Enteritidis 3 1 3 1) 1 2 1 

Gatuni 1 

Hadar 1 

Havana 1 

Infantis 243 125 60 43 3) 18 5 3) 2 1 5) 2 

Kentucky 1 1 1 5) 

Konstanz 1 1 1 1 2 

Mbandaka 1 1 1 

Panama 1 

Poona 1 8 6 2 

Reading 1 1 

Rubislaw 1 

Saintpaul 1 

Schwarzengrund 1 

S. ssp. IIIb (50:z10:z) 1 

Stanley 1 

Takoradi 1 

Tennessee 1 1 1 1 

Typhimurium 24 15 14 10 1) 8 4 5 6 2 5 

Salmonella ssp. 2 44 1 6 5 4) 

Total no. of positive 

herds 

287 196 97 69 31 14 11 95 7 7 

1) S. Infantis also isolated from one herd 

2) Salmonella sp. also isolated from the same herd 

3) Salmonella sp. also isolated from two herds 

4) S. Infantis also isolated from four herds 

5) S. Infantis and S. Kentucky isolated from the same herd

tive herds were found annually. In 1995 to 2004, about thirty different serotypes 

were found altogether among cattle (Table 25). The most common serotype in 

1995 to 2000 was Infantis and after 2001, Typhimurium. Even of these, only 2 

to 6 were annually found among cattle in 2001 to 2004. Typhimurium was found 

in 2004 at two calf-rearing units and at one beef farm. Previously, Salmonellapositive 

cattle had as a rule been at dairy farms, but Salmonella infections had 

also earlier been found in beef cattle at individual combined farms. 

The percentages of Salmonella-positive cattle lymph node samples from 1995 

to 2004 are illustrated in Figure 5. In 1995, during the initial year of the control 

programme, this percentage was 0.8 %, after which it decreased to remain below 

0.35 %. 

For 1995 to 2004, the percentages of Salmonella-positive swab samples from 

cattle carcasses are presented in Figure 6. The percentage in 1995 for this sample 

group was 0.7 %, but since 1999 it has as a rule been 0.1 % or less. 



3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

0 

Naudat / Cattle 1995-2004 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Teurastamo: imusolmuke / Slaughterhouse: lymph nodes 

% positiivisia imusolmukkeita / % positive lymph nodes 

Naudat / Cattle1995-2004 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Teurastamo: ruhon pintasively / Slaughterhouse: carcass surface swabs 

% positiivisia pintasivelyjä / % positive surface swabs 


0,9 

0,8 

0,7 

0,6 

0,5 

0,4 

0,3 

0,2 

0,1 

0 

0,8 

0,7 

0,6 

0,5 

0,4 

0,3 

0,2 

0,1 

0 




Control Programme: Lymph node 

samples from cattle in 1995-2004 


Control Programme: Cattle carcass-surface 

swabs in 1995-2004




serovars isolated from beef 

In samples from cattle at slaughterhouses and cutting facilities, Typhimurium was 

the most common serotype in 1999 to 2004 and Infantis in 1997 to 1998 (Table 

26). Altogether, around ten serotypes were recorded. 

Results of S. Typhimurium phage types among cattle are shown in Appendix 

1. During 1995 to 2004, 14 phage types were recorded. DT 1 has by far been 

the most common phage type, DT 68 the next most frequent. After 1997, no 

S.Typhimurium phage type DT 104, resistant to many antibiotics and a importat 

cause for disease among people abroad, has been found among cattle. Phage 

types DT 40, DT 41 and DT u277, which are typical for wild birds, have appeared 

as individual infections along the years. 

At the end of 1996, the serotype S. Poona was found at one farm, when it had 

spread to people via raw milk directly sold from the farm. In 1997, seven additional 

Poona herds were found; they also caused a few people to become ill. Previously 

S. Poona serotype had been isolated in Finland a fur farms, and it has annually 

been isolated from fur-animal feedstuffs. Unripened cheese made from raw milk 

from one farm in 1999 apparently directly or indirectly caused four Typhimurium 

DT 1 epidemics in August-September. 

In 2004, in a faeces sample from one farm sending bulls to an artificial insemination 

station, Salmonella ssp. IIIb (= subsp. diarizonae) was detected. Previously, 

no other subspecies than enterica strains have been isolated from cattle faeces 

in Finland, and as a rule, isolations of subspecies diarizonae have been from 

poikilothermic animals (lizards, snakes, turtles). From the results, one cannot 

determine the incidence of Salmonella infections among cattle; sampling was 

not carried out randomly, but selectively based on suspicions. One may assume, 

however, that number of Salmonella-positive herds has been few in proportion to 

the total number of herds (on average about 30 000 hds, the number constantly 

decreasing). 

Serovar 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Agona 1 3) 

Enteritidis 1 1) 

Heidelberg 1 3) 

Indiana 4 1) 

Infantis 5 2) 1 3) 6 1) 6 2) 

Kentucky 1 3) 

1 3) 1 1) 3 2) 3 2) 1 2) 

Konstanz 2 1) 1 1) 

Poona 1 1) 1 3) 1 1) 

Typhimurium 1 1) 1 3) 1 3) 3 1) 1 3) 3 2) 1 3) 71) 9 2) 

Salmonella ssp. 2 2) 1 3) 1 2) 1 3) 

ns 

23 1) 24 2) 

15 3) 

6 1) 

15 2) 

4 3) 

1 1) 

Total 62 25 14 19 11 6 26 10 6 7 

ns = no statistics 

1) Lymph node sample 

2) Carcass surface swabs 

3) Crushed meat samples 

4 3) 

2 1) 

1 2) 

7 3) 

2 1) 

1 2) 

2 3) 

5 1) 

1 3)

2.5.2 Pigs and pork 

Faecal samples are examined based on clinical suspicion and discoveries at 

slaughterhouses, as well as samples from hogs being sold to artificial insemination 

stations, and from swine farms included in health control. In 1995 to 2004, 

Salmonella infections in swine herds were particularly rare (Table 27). 

Results for the national Salmonella control of pigs in cutting plants are presented 

in Table 28, and the percentages of Salmonella-positive meat samples in Figure 

7. In 1995, the percentage was about 0.4 %, but since 1996 it has generally been 

0.05 % or less. In 1996, 2000 to 2001 and 2004, no positive meat samples at 

all were recorded. 


Serovar 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Abony 1 3) 

Agona 1 3) 

Brandenburg 

1 1) 1 2) 

1 3) 

3 6)A) 

Cerro 1 6) 

Derby 1 3) 

Eastbourne 1 1) 

Enteritidis 1 6) 1 1) 2 1) 1 1) 2 2) 1 5) 1 4) 

Hadar 2 1) 

Hvittingfoss 1 1) 

Infantis 46) 11) 12) 23) 15) 15) 13) 14) 16) 16) 22) 16) ,A) 11) 14) Kentucky 15) Konstanz 11) 11) Litchfield 11) Livingstone 11) 11) Muenster 11) Poona 11) Tennessee 13) 21) 11) Typhimurium 26 11 16 33 15 21) 12) 43) 23) 11) 32) 21) 12) 23) Salmonella ssp. 16) 22) 23) 13) 15) 15) ns 

9 1) 4 2) 

10 3) 4 4) 

10 5) 

8 1) 6 2) 

5 3) 5 4) 1 3) 1 2) 2 4) 

not typed 1 1) 

2 1) 

1 1) 2 3) 

1 5) 1 6) 

Total 44 25 16 13 13 6 9 14 16 A 9 

ns = not statistics 

1) Lymph node samples, sow 

2) Carcass surface swabs, sow 

3) Lymph node sample, fattening pig 

4) Carcass surface swabs, fattening pig 

5) Crushed meat samples 

6) Faecal sample from positive swine herds 

A) S. Brandenburg and Infantis were isolated from faecal samples from one swine herd 

B) Faecal samples were already positive in November 2003 



serovars isolated from swine. 

6) B) 1 

3 1)




samples from cutting plants, pork 

Year 

No. of crushed 

meat samples 

Pork 


samples 


1995 2695 10 0,37 

1996 3358 0 0 

1997 3741 1 0,03 

1998 4427 2 0,05 

1999 3502 1 0,03 

2000 3472 0 0 

2001 2605 0 0 

2002 1840 2 0,1 

2003 2826 2 0,07 

2004 3092 0 0 

The percentages of Salmonella-positive lymph-node samples from sows and 

fattening pigs in 1995 to 2004 are illustrated in Figure 8. This percentage has 

constantly been 0.3 % or less, and 0.15 % or less since 1997. 

The percentages Salmonella-positive carcass-swab samples from sows and fattening 

pigs in 1995 to 2004 are shown in Figure 9. This percentage has constatly 

been 0.1 % or less, except for 1996, when it was still only 0.2 %. No positive 

swab samples were recorded from fattening pigs in 2000 to 2003. 

The most common serotype during 1995 to 2004 in samples from slaughterhouses 

and cutting plants for pigs was Typhimurium, while the next most common 

were Infantis and Enteritidis (Table 27). Altogether, 18 different serotypes were 

detected. 

The phage type results for S. Typhimurium in pigs are presented in Appendix 1. 

In 1995 to 2004, around ten phage types were confirmed, DT1 being the most 

common. Multi-resistant phage type DT 104 was isolated from just one lymph 

node sample in 2004. 

No Salmonella-positive faecal samples at all were found in 1998 from 2001 to 

2002. Most infections were recorded in 1995; when there were seven positive 

pig farms. In addition, at one farm with positive faeces (S. Infantis) in 1999, S. 

Enteritidis was found in another herd while an autopsy was being performed on 

a piglet, but no Salmonella was detected in samples of faeces from that herd. At 

one cattle farm in 2000, S. Infantis infections were found in both cattle and pigs. 

These pigs were not covered by the health control programme for pigs. In 2003, 

S. Brandenburg was isolated in faeces from three and S. Typhimurium DT1 from 

one swine herd not included in the health control programme. Two of the farms 

with S. Brandenburg had mutual activities, and Infantis was also found at one of 

them. Generally, the infected swine farms were quickly cleaned from contamination, 

but Salmonella was isolated from faeces from the farm with Typhimurium 

almost throughout 2003. The farm that tested positive in 2004 (Brandenburg) had 

already been found positive in November 2003. In 1995 to 2004, from all samples 

of faeces from pigs, five different serotypes were isolated (Table 27). 

The results from the National Salmonella Control Programme for sows and fattening 

pigs in slaughterhouses are presented in Table 29.

Näytteitä kpl / No of 

samples 


samples 


samples 

5000 

4500 

4000 

3500 

3000 

2500 

2000 

1500 

1000 

500 

7000 

6000 

5000 

4000 

3000 

2000 

1000 

0 

0 

6800 

6600 

6400 

6200 

6000 

5800 

5600 

5400 

5200 

emakot ja lihasiat / 

Sows and fattening pigs 1995-2004 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Leikkaamo: lihanäytteet / Cutting plant: meat samples 




1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Teurastamo: imusolmuke / Slaughterhouse: lymph nodes 

% positiivisia imusolmukkeita / % positive lymph nodes 



1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 


0,4 

0,35 

0,3 

0,25 

0,2 

0,15 

0,1 

0,05 

0 

0,35 

0,3 

0,25 

0,2 

0,15 

0,1 

0,05 

0 

0,25 

0,15 

0,05 

Teurastamo: ruhon pintasively / Slaughterhouse: carcass surface swabs 

% positiivisia pintasivelyjä / % positive surface swabs 

0,2 

0,1 

0 





Control Programme: Meat samples 

from sows and fattening pigs 

in 1995 – 2004 


Control Programme: Lymph node 

samples from sows and fattening 

pigs in 1995 - 2004 


Control Programme: Carcasssurface 

swab samples from 

sows and fattening pigs in 1995




samples from slaughterhouses 

and low capacity slaughterhouses, 

pigs. 

Origin of 

the 

sample 

Sows 

Fattening 

pigs 

Year 

Lymph node samples Carcass surface swabs 

Total no. 

of 

samples 

No. of 

positive 

samples 

% 

positive 

samples 

Total no. 

of 

samples 

No. of 

positive 

samples 

% 

positive 

samples 

1995 2725 9 0,3 2867 4 0,1 

1996 2627 8 0,3 2711 6 0,2 

1997 3165 4 0,1 3137 3 0,1 

1998 3070 3 0,1 3041 1 0,03 

1999 2984 4 0,13 2968 1 0,03 

2000 3120 2 0,06 3123 0 0 

2001 3181 6 0,19 3177 3 0,1 

2002 2952 4 0,14 2963 5 0,17 

2003 2962 6 0,20 2963 1 0,03 

2004 3304 6 0,18 3201 0 0 

1995 2792 10 0,30 2995 4 0,1 

1996 2683 5 0,20 2964 5 0,2 

1997 3209 6 0,20 3196 0 0 

1998 3247 5 0,16 3224 2 0,06 

1999 3143 5 0,15 3187 1 0,03 

2000 3242 3 0,09 3264 0 0 

2001 3223 0 0,00 3272 0 0 

2002 3210 3 0,09 3297 0 0 

2003 3300 3 0,09 3223 0 0 

2.5.3 Discussion 

Subsequent to the Infantis outbreak among cattle in 1995 and the consequent 

more efficient survey, the number of Salmonella-positive herds peaked in that 

year. Since 1996, their number each year has decreased, and in 2000 it dropped 

for the first time below the level at the beginning of the 1990s. In 2002 to 2004, 

Salmonella was annually isolated at fewer than ten farms. For cattle and pigs, 

the level of Salmonella findings in all sample groups positively met the objective 

of less than 1 % set by the National Salmonella Control Programme. 

Eliminating common infection sources is extremely important in preventing the 

spread of Salmonella outbreaks. The S. Infantis outbreak demonstrated how 

Salmonella might rapidly spread over wide areas via fodder. Disinfection of the 

factory distributing the contaminated feed was essential for getting that outbreak 

under control. In preventing the spread of the outbreak on the local level, the 

use of efficient farm-specific preventive actions absolutely was and is important. 

Salmonella may spread further from one farm to another while having no common 

source of infection, for example, through people and tools, and via animals being 

sold. Particularly in densely populated areas, wild birds and rodents may also 

transfer infections. Knowledge of these risks and careful prevention and compliance 

with protective actions at farms reduces the spread of infections. During 

the Infantis outbreak and afterwards, particularly due to advisory work on the local 

level and action subsequently taken, the number of Salmonella infections has 

continuously decreased over the years. Preventive actions against Salmonella 

also prevent the access of other contagious diseases to farms and their spread; 

hence, multiple advantages are achieved. 

While reviewing the statistics on infections among cattle, it appears that infections

y serotypes S. Infantis and particularly S. Agona prevailed among certain cattle 

for years. Serotype S. Enteritidis was only isolated in individual cases over the 

years, but even this has had a tendency to remain within a herd for a long. After 

becoming infected by S. Typhimurium, cattle are generally cleaned of infection 

within a few months. No multi-resistant strains of Typhimurium DT 104 were 

isolated at cattle farms after 1997. Infection with Typhimurium DT 41, typical 

for wild birds and particularly seagulls, did not appear to very easily spread to 

cattle; generally, this has no longer been isolated from repeated samples, and 

disinfection of infection with Typhimurium DT 41 appears to rapidly take effect. 

A large proportion of other individual serotypes have also rapidly disappeared 

and have often only been isolated once. Serotype Poona, causing human infection 

via raw milk in 1996 to 1997, has repeatedly been isolated from fur-animal 

feedstuffs. Cattle or pig farms may be located in the vicinity of fur farms or be 

run by the same owner, and the risk of spread of disease must then be taken 

into account at these at farms. 

The expanding unit sizes among cattle farms, as well as increasiang frequency 

of freestall dairy barns and three-stage rearing units in meat production have 

presented new challenges in the prevention of Salmonella. Animals moving 

freely in freestall barns run a greater risk of becoming infected under disease 

conditions and their disinfection may then be more difficult than for cows in tie 

stall barns. Hence, disease prevention must receive particular attention. 

Calves may arrive at calf-rearing units from 30 to 40 farms. Isolating the original 

source of Salmonella infection is then laborious, expensive and often impossible. 

Disinfection of these farms is also demanding because of the risk of repeated 

infection if no separate facilities are available where decontaminated animals 

can be transferred to. Even then, while samples are being analyzed for Salmonella, 

disinfected animals may become re-infected before being transferred to a 

separate place when the results are ready. In addition, the planning of sampling 

requires a great deal of thought when the number of individuals is large. 

While the National Salmonella Control Programme has been in effect, Salmonella 

has only been isolated in swine as individual cases. However, Salmonella has 

more often been detected in lymph nodes from pigs than in faecal samples from 

farms. Lymph nodes have also carried out three times the number of serotypes 

in relation to faecal samples. Generally, as pigs excrete little Salmonella in their 

faeces, finding infections in live animals is very difficult, and analysis of faeces 

will not always reveal infections. Analysis of lymph nodes is therefore more efficient 

than faecal sampels for controlling Salmonella infections in pigs. In EU 

countries, where infection is abundant, survey research and efforts to reduce 

occurrences are applying analysis of meat fluids through serological methods 

carried out at slaughterhouses. Although these are considered cost-efficient methods 

for screening, serotype data are necessary for epidemiological monitoring 

and hence, to that end, bacteriological isolations are necessary. 

As pig-producing units are also increasing in size, quantifying the number of 

animals to be extended increasingly demands evaluation to reveal subliclinical 

infections, particularly because of the poor secretion in faeces. Symptomless 

infections in holdings of hundreds of sows may quickly spread infection to several 

fattening units. This has so far been avoided, and preventive actions are 

of essential importance. Through efficient cleaning and disinfecting actions, the 

few Salmonella-positive herds have mostly been cleaned relatively rapidly. In 

locations where infection has prevailed for longer, deficiencies in the implementation 

of the disinfection plan have been observed. 



3 evaluation of the Salmonella Control 

Programme 

Researcher Satu Lievonen, researcher Heidi Rosengren, mathematician Jukka Ranta, researcher Pirkko 

Tuominen, Evira 

3.1 Background 

The current Salmonella prevelence and risk caused to Finnish consumers through 

animal-derived foods related to the Finnish Salmonella Control Programme were 

quantitatively assessed in order to present the current Salmonella situation in 

Finland. The need to evaluate the situation in a format comparable with other 

coutries arose from the commercial policy carried out both internationally and in 

the European Union. 

Efforts to achieve global free trade led to the establishment of the World Trade 

Organisation (WTO) and the Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 

(the so-called SPS Agreement) (SPS 1994). Acoording to the SPS Agreement, 

every member has the right to protect human, animal or plant life or health within 

its territory, but only if the measures adopted are not applied ”in a manner which 

would constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination between 

Members where the same conditions prevail or a disguised restriction on international 

trade”. Furthermore, the measures applied have to be based on scientific 

principles and cannot be maintained without sufficient scientific evidence. 

The SPS Agreement also provides that the evidence about the justification of the 

measurements is based on an assessment of the risks to human, animal or plant 

life or health. Since Finland entered the EU and WTO in 1995, the requirement 

triggered the need to evaluate the Finnish Salmonella Control Programme and 

to assess the risk caused to the Finnish consumers by the foods associated with 

the control programme. 

3.2 risk assessment of Salmonella in Finland 

As consequence of international developments, the Ministry of Agriculture and 

Forestry commissioned the National Veterinary and Food Research Institute of 

Finland, EELA (since 1.5.2006 the Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira) in 1998, 

to carry out a risk assessment on Salmonella in the broiler, egg, beef and pork 

production chains. In addition, evaluation was required of the efficiency of the Finnish 

Salmonella Control Programme, and the special guarantees (until 1.1.2006 

’additional guarantee’) that were granted Finland on entrering the EU. At EELA, 

the scientific risk assessment was concentrated in a research unit established 

in 2001 for risk assessment. 

Risk assessments conducted at EELA on Salmonella have been carried out in 

accordance with the principles approved by the Codex Alimentarius Commission 

(CAC/GL-30 1999). They were quantitatively assessed, as the goal was to assess 

the risk along production chains with quantified uncertainty. Probabilistic methods 

with a Bayesian approach were exploited in order to reach both of the goals with 

0

the same simulation models. The information used in the assessments was based 

on that collected from official statistics and on data from different authorities and 

agencies, scientific literature and the expertise of those representing industry. 

The statistics mainly concerned the situation in 1999 (except those concerning 

egg production that were mostly based on the data for 2001). Risk assessments 

cover all Salmonella serovars, as does the control programme. 

As an approach to the assessments, the Salmonella prevalences along the production 

chains in a given year were assessed, and the results was considered 

as the default Salmonella situation in Finland. The default was then compared 

with scenarios in which 1. the risk management actions would be partially or 

completely removed; 2. the occurrence of Salmonella would significantly increase 

or 3. imports from countries where Salmonella is more common than in Finland 

would increase. The risk assessment on Salmonella in broiler, egg and pork 

production have been completed (Maijala and Ranta 2003, Ranta et. al. 2004, 

Lievonen et. al. 2006). Assessment of broiler production has also been utilized 

in the evaluation of economic implacts. 

3.2.1 Salmonella risk in Finnish broiler production 

Risk assessment was based on the control programme’s results in 1999, when 

the occurence of Salmonella in broilers was at its highest since launching the 

programme. The situation in 1999 was compared with hypothetical situations in 

which the control programme’s risk management actions would not be in use, 

and/or Salmonella would be found in one grandparent generation flock or in five 

parent generation flocks. Furthermore, using a model characterising consumption, 

a situation was examined in which half of the broiler meat consumed in Finland 

would be replaced by meat having a projected Salmonella presence of 20 to 40 

%. 

In 1999, the control programme detected Salmonella in 64 broiler flocks. In that 

year, there were altogether 2939 flocks. As estimated by the simulation model, 

Salmonella occurred on the average in 91 flocks, i.e., the actual prevalence was 

0.9 to 5.8 % (95 % credible interval). Irrespective of the Salmonella situation, 

efficient risk management tools for protecting consumers proved to be the elimination 

of Salmonella-positive breeder flocks from production and the heating of 

meat originating from positive broiler flocks. If Salmonella-positive breeder flocks 

were not removed from production, the prevalence of Salmonella would rise to 

1.3 to 17.4 % in broiler flocks. Then, the number of people infected by Salmonella 

originating from broiler meat would increase by the same percentage, i.e., an 

average approximate increase of 1.6-fold. If Salmonella-positive breeder flocks 

were removed from production, but meat of Salmonella-positive broiler flock was 

not heated, the number of human infections would increase 4.1-fold (95 % range 

2.9- to 5.4-fold). If neither risk-management action were in use, the number of 

infections among humans would increase 5.6-fold (95 % range 3.8- to 9.0-fold). 

By deductions, the risk management actions included in the control programme 

would still be more efficient at protecting consumers in situations where the 

presence of Salmonella among breeder flocks would increase in relation to the 

situation in 1999. 

According to this risk assessment, the additional Salmonella guarantees for 

Finland regarding broilers have effects that protect consumers. The assessment 

determined that if half the broiler meat consumed in Finland were replaced by meat 

having a 20 to 40 % presence of Salmonella, the number of Salmonella-infected 

people would display a 33- to 93-fold increase. The assessment concluded that 

the mandatory actions as employed in the National Control Programme, such 



as eliminating Salmonella-positive breeder flocks from production and heat processing 

meat from positive broiler flocks, significantly reduce domestic human 

cases of Salmonella. The combining of actions targeted at different stages in 

the production chain is more efficient than the effects of such actions applied 

separately. The preventive effect would be even more significant if Salmonella 

appearance in production chains was more frequent than today. 

3.2.2 Salmonella risk in Finnish pork production 

The risk assessment on Salmonella in pork production covered chain from slaughter 

animals up to the consumer. According to the results, Salmonella prevalence 

of the slaughtered fattening pigs was 0.6 % (mean, 95 %, credible interval [0.2 

%, 1.3 %]). The special guarantees covered only by 1 % of all pork consumed 

in Finland. According to the assessment, Salmonella contaminated 0.3 % - 2.7 

% of pork (with 95 % credibility) and pork-derived (computational) food portions 

leaving the industry for consumption. (Ranta et al. 2005) 

Pork and pork-derived foods available in Finland were estimated to cause at most 

about 4.5 % of the totall number (less than 3000) of human Salmonella cases 

registered in 1999. Domestically produced pork and pork-derived products were 

estimated to have caused about 55 %, whereas the share of the imported pork 

and pork-derived products was about 45 % of all the Salmonella cases acquired 

from pork. 

Based on the risk assessment, the occurrence of Salmonella in primary production 

had a clear effect on the consumer risk. Even though domestic pork was estimated 

to cause over half of the human Salmonella cases due to pork, the influence of 

imported pork and pork-derived foods was assessed as being larger. The ability 

of the special guarantees (Commission Decision 95/161/EC) to protect consumers 

against Salmonella in pork and pork-derived products is limited in a situation similar 

to that of the assessment year, because the guarantees only target a small 

proportion of imports (11 %) and consumption (0.9 %). In the scenario with import 

increasing and/or with import countries changing, the significance of the special 

guarantees will possibly increase 

3.2.3 Salmonella risk in Finnish beef production 

The risk assessment of beef production covered the chain from live animals up 

to the consumer. If revealed that the true Salmonella prevalence among live bovine 

animals (mean 0.2 %, 95 % credible interval [0.2 %, 0.4 %]) and slaughter 

animals (mean 0.2 %, 95 % credible interval [0.1 %, 0.4 %]) was clearly below 

the 1 % target level (Ranta et al. 2005). The true Salmonella prevalence among 

cattle herds was assessed at almost 1 %. (mean 0.9 %; 95 % credible interval 

[0.5 %, 1.4 %]). 

The true prevalence of Salmonella in imported beef and beef-derived foods was 

assessed as being minor (mean 0.7 %, 95 % credible interval [0.5 %, 1.0 %]) 

(Tuominen et al. 2006). Without applying the special guarantees, the prevalence 

would clearly have been greater (95 % credible interval [0.9 %, 1.6 %], mean 

1.2 %). However, as the guarantees concerned only a part of imports, those not 

included decidedly affects the occurrence of Salmonella. The total amount of fresh 

beef and beef-derived products imported in 1999 was assessed to cover about 

13 % of consumption, and beef imported under special guarantees about 3 %. 

Changes in the percentage of imports and/or that of imports from countries with 

greater Salmonella prevalence also directly affect the presence of Salmonella in 

foods available in Finland and the consumer risk via them.

According to preliminary calculations, the magnitude of the risk caused by the 

beef and beef-derived foods available in Finland is of the same magnitude as 

that caused by pork and pork-derived foods. 

3.2.4 Salmonella risk in Finnish egg production 

The risk assessment evaluating egg production assessed the probability of 

Salmonella appearinwag in primary production, starting from imported grandparent-generation 

chicks and ending in eggs being for sale. This analysis assessed 

how often hens having caught Salmonella infection lay eggs containing Salmonella 

and how these eggs are distributed among households, industrial kitchens 

and the food industry for use by these, and the probability of a dish containing 

Salmonella-contaminated raw or soft-cooked eggs being prepared. Finally, the 

number of cases in Finland caused by eggs containing Salmonella was assessed, 

according to the situation of 2001. 

Based on the risk assessment, Salmonella appears on average among 0.3 % 

of industrial egg-producing flocks annually. According to the model, production 

flocks with Salmonella contamination would have produced from 0 to 7400 eggs 

containing Salmonella in 2001 (95 % credible interval), the mean value being 

1800 contaminated eggs annually, i.e., about two contaminated eggs for each one 

million eggs produced. This level is particularly low by international standards. 

According to the model, an average of 3 % of the domestic human Salmonella 

infections reported in 2001 (390 cases) would have been transmitted by eggs. 

Using the model, the protective effects on consumers was assessed for risk 

management actions included in the control programme, which were mandatory 

the removal of Salmonella-positive flocks, and special guarantees concerning 

imported eggs. The elimination of positive flocks proved an efficient means of risk 

management, also offering consumers significant protection when prevalence 

of Salmonella in the egg production chain is rare. With Salmonella occurrence 

increasing, the protective effect was found to be increasingly pronounced. The 

special guarantees for imported eggs were also found to have significant protective 

effects on consumer health. When 30 % egg consumption was replaced by 

eggs in which the Salmonella occurrence was 0.06, 0.5 or 1 %, the numbers of 

Salmonella infections transmitted by eggs increased 70 to 1000 -fold. 

3.3 remarks on the Salmonella risk assessment 

According to the above-described risk assessments, the true Salmonella prevalence 

remained on average below the target level for the national control 

programme of 1 % in all assessed food production chain (i.e. egg, broiler, meat, 

pork and beef production). 

The risk management were also applied to assess the influence of some of 

the risk management options. Not all risk management measures associated 

with the Finnish Salmonella control programme could be assessed because 

of a lack of data suitable for quantitative assessment. Measures that had to be 

ignored included restrictive regulations imposed on farms, sanitation measures 

carried out in cow-pens, and additional sampling and sanitation to carried out in 

slaughterhouses and meat cutting plants. They have all been applied in order 

to limit the spread of Salmonella after a positive Salmonella detection, but were 

not included in the assessment. 



The interventions associated with the broiler and egg control programs (such 

as heat-treatment of broiler meat and elimination of the flocks with detected 

Salmonella) protect the consumers effectively from the risks caused by broiler 

meat and eggs in production chains. However, there are no similar interventions 

in the control programme concerning pork and beef production. Therefore, the 

sole risk management option for pork and beef production modelled was special 

guarantees acquired as a consequence of the control programme. 

Eggs, broiler meat, pork and beef were assessed to cause only part of all the 

endemic food-borne Salmonella cases. However, the estimation of the total risk of 

food-borne Salmonella also requires information on and research into the impact 

of other sources, such as vegetable foods. Therefore, it would be necessary to 

further investigate the factors causing human cases, and create a common model 

that combines all the sources of cantamination for human Salmonella cases. 

This presents a future challenge in the development of scientific risk-assessment 

methods that will presumably evolve towards assessing increasingly complex 

food chains and exploiting fragmental information through novel computational 

methods that integrate system analysis, modern biostatistics and modelling. Here, 

we have only made a start, albeit a good one. 

Calculations have primary been based on the production, consumtion and 

morbidity data from 1999, but the results are applicable as long as the basic 

situation mostly remains the same. If the current situation or the structure of the 

production changes, the risk assessment may be repeated using existing models 

or by altering them. Experience from conducting risk assessments of production 

chains as well as their results might also be uset to prepare and develop other 

control programmes. 

3.4 evaluating the Finnish Salmonella Control Programme 

Changes to EC’s legislation on zoonotic agents and its regulation on microbial 

criteria (2160/2003/EC, 1003/2005/EC, 2073/2005/EC) made it necessary to 

amend Finland’s National Salmonella Control Programme. Therefore, the Ministry 

of Agriculture and Forestry commissioned EELA to carry out a qualitative and 

partly quantitative evaluation of how sampling by the current national Salmonella 

control programme corresponds to the requirements of the regulation on microbial 

criteria. Investigations are carried out for beef, pork and chicken. The evaluation 

will be completed in 2007. 

3.5 economic aspects of the Salmonella control in Finland 

Economics were taken into account when evaluating the efficiency of the Finnish 

Salmonella control programme concerning broiler production (Maijala and Peltola 

2000, Peltola et. al. 2001, Kangas et. al. 2003, Kangas et al. in press). In 

collaboration, EELA and MTT Agrifood Research Finland assessed the costs-ofillness 

concerning Salmonella in the broiler production chain. The results of the 

Salmonella risk assessment were utilized and the costs of the broiler programme 

were compared with the public health costs. In addition to the studies, the Finnish 

Salmonella control programme was compared with the Zoonosis directive 

92/117/EC. The willingness of consumers to pay for Salmonella control was also 

researched.

The Finnish broiler programme for Salmonella control was assessed to cost annually 

less than 1,000,000 euros (€ 990,400) or 0.02 euros per kilogram of broiler 

meat. One prevented loss of human life equals the annual costs of FSCP, according 

to the assessment. The estimated relative share of control costs was 38 % 

for primary production, 60 % for the food industry and 2 % for the government. 

The Salmonella control according to Zoonosis directive 92/117/EC would have 

had seven times higher costs. The public health costs according to the directive 

would have been up to 33 times higher. The survey carried out revealed that 

consumers were prepared to pay about 70 euros extra annually to preserve the 

Salmonella control programme and its advanteges. It was therefore concluded 

that consumers felt that the national control program is important. 

3.6 Literature related to the project for assessing 

Salmonella risks 

• Kangas, S. Lyytikäinen, T. Peltola, J. ranta, J. Maijala, r. 2003. Economic 

impacts of the Finnish Salmonella control programme for broilers. EELA publications 

02/2003. 

• Lievonen, S. ranta, J. Maijala, r. 2006. Salmonella in Egg production in 

Finland - a quantitative risk assessment. EELA publications 04/2006. 

• Maijala, r. 2000. Zoonoosien riskinarviointi. Finnish Veterinary Journal 

2000/106/pp.143-145 

• Maijala, r. Peltola, J. 2000. Elintarviketurvallisuuden talous Suomessa – esimerkkinä 

Kansallinen Salmonella-valvontaohjelma. Agrifood Research Finland 

(MTT). Reports 13/2000. 

• Maijala, r. ranta, J. 2002. A probabilistic transmission model of Salmonella 

in the primary broiler production chain. Risk Analysis 22(1):47-58. 

• Maijala, r. ranta, J. 2003. Salmonella in Broiler production in Finland - a 

quantitative risk assessment. EELA publications 04/2003. 

• Maijala, r. ranta, J. Seuna, e. Peltola, J. 2005a. The efficiency of the Finnish 

Salmonella Control Programme. Food Control 16. pp. 669-675. 

• Maijala, r. ranta, J. Seuna, e. Pelkonen, S. Johansson, T. 2005b A quantitative 

risk assessment of the public health impact of the Finnish Salmonella control 

program for broilers. International Journal of Food Microbiology 102:21-35. 

• Peltola, J. Aakkula, J. Maijala, r. Siikamäki, J. 2001. Valuation of Economic 

Benefits from the Finnish Salmonella control program. Agrifood Research esearch 

Finland (MTT). Reports 30/2001. 

• ranta, J. Tuominen, P. Maijala, r. 2005. Estimation of true Salmonella prevaprevalence jointly in cattle herd and animal populations using Bayesian hierarchical 

modeling. Risk Analysis 25(1):1-37. 

• ranta, J. Tuominen, P. rautiainen, e. Maijala, r. 2004. Salmonella in Pork 

Production in Finland – a quantitative risk assessment. EELA publications 

03/2004. 

• Tuominen, P. ranta, J. Maijala, r. 2005. Salmonella in Cattle production in 

Finland - a quantitative risk assessment. (Luonnos) 

• Tuominen, P. ranta, J. Maijala, r. 2006. Salmonella almonella risk in imported fresh 

beef, beef preparations, and beef products. J. Food Prot. 69(8): 1814-1822. 



3.5.1 international standards and legislation 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

SPS. Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. 

World trade organistation . 15. 4 1994. www.wto.org 

CAC/gL-30. CAC Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological 

Risk Assessment, 1999. Codex Alimentarius. http://www.codexalimentarius. 

net 

Commission Decision 94/968/eC of 28 December 1994 approving the operational 

programme for the control of Salmonella in certain live animals and 

animal products presented by Finland. OJ No. L 371, 31/12/1994 s. 36–37. 

Suomenk. Erityispainos Alue 3 Nide 64 s. 252. 

Commission Decision 95/161/eC of 21 April 1995 establishing additional 

guarantees regarding Salmonella for consignments to Finland and Sweden of 

laying hens. OJ No. L 105, 09/05/1995 pp. 44-46. 

Commission regulation (eC) No. 1688/2005 of 14 October 2005 implementing 

Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as 

regards special guarantees concerning Salmonella for consignments to Finland 

and Sweden of certain meat and eggs. OJ. L 271, 15/10/2005 pp. 17-28. 

Commission regulation (eC) No. 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on microbiological 

criteria for foodstuffs. OJ. L 338, 22/12/2005 pp. 1-25. 

Commission regulation (eC) No. 1003/2005 of 30 June 2005 implementing 

Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 as regards a Community target for the reduction 

of the prevalence of certain Salmonella serotypes in breeding flocks of Gallus 

gallus and amending Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003. OJ. L 170, 1/7/2005 pp. 

12–17. 

Council directive 92/117/eeC of 17 December 1992 concerning measures for 

protection against specified zoonoses and specified zoonotic agents in animals 

and products of animal origin in order to prevent outbreaks of food-borne infections 

and intoxications. OJ No. L 062, 15/03/1993 pp. 0038–0048. Suomenk. 

Erityispainos Alue 3 Nide 48 s. 183. 

Council directive 94/65/eC of 14 December 1994 laying down the requirements 

for the production and placing on the market of minced meat and meat 

preparations. OJ No. L 127, 29/04/1998 pp. 34. 

regulation (eC) No 2160/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council 

of 17 November 2003 on the control of Salmonella and other specified foodborne 

zoonotic agents. OJ. L 325, 12/12/2003 pp. 1–15.

4 Salmonella control of feedstuffs 

Kaija Varimo, director, Evira 

4.1 Legislation 

For over forty years already, inspections have been carried out in Finland for 

Salmonella in feedstuffs according to the Feed Act. In 1995 - 2004, both the 

Feed Act and the Animal Diseases Act were applied to imports of feeds of animal 

origin and to the production and control of certain feeds of animal origin. Hygiene 

requirements for feedstuffs has been complemented by national legislation 

more extensively than by EU regulations, e.g., regarding feedstuffs of vegetable 

origin. Official inspection has controlled each batch of imported raw materials of 

vegetable origin presenting Salmonella risks. The EU regulation on by-products 

of animal origin applied since 2003 has covered the handling, use and control of 

by-products being forwarded for use in feedstuffs as well as other purposes. 

Annually, 1.20 - 1.49 million tons of feed mixtures has been produced in Finland. 

This trend in production amounts has been slowly growing. Raw materials carefully 

controlled for Salmonella by authorities as also partly by operational parties 

create prerequisites for the manufacture of products of good hygienic quality. 

Feed manufacturers have self-control systems based on the HACCP principle 

to eliminate pathogens from feed-manufacturing processes. Authorities control 

the production of raw materials as well as compound feeds by taking samples 

of final products, and by controlling the company’s self-control. Manufacturers 

themselves take samples of the processes and in the production facilities in 

accordance with self-control plans that have been verified by the authorities. As 

feed mixtures are generally delivered as bulk feeds directly to farms, the Salmonella 

risks must already be eliminated in raw materials before manufacturing and 

from all the stages of manufacture. Final products are inspected for Salmonella 

by random sampling. However, the authority will always increase the frequency 

of manufacturing control when hygiene problems occur. 

The authority sets marketing prohibitions for feed batches contaminated by 

Salmonella. If the owners of the raw material of feedstuffs choose to process 

the feed to destroy Salmonella (heating or acidation), they must apply to the 

authority for a permit for the procedure. If after processing and repeated analysis 

for Salmonella, the batch is found clean, it is released for use as feedstuff. If feed 

mixtures are found to contain Salmonella they are not processed but destroyed, 

and the factory’s contaminated manufacturing line is closed down for disinfection. 

The cause of contamination is investigated, the feeds are traced to farms and 

markets, and if necessary, the facilities are disinfected from Salmonella under 

supervision by municipal veterinarians. 

4.2 Sampling 

The Finnish Food Safety Authority Evira regularly inspects manufacturers of 

feedstuffs, feed mixtures and feed additives. Samples are taken of feed products 

imported, being produced and in markets for analysis in accordance with annual 

control plans. Evira has authorized and trained about one hundred part-time 

samplers who collect samples for official control. The frequency of sampling and 

analysis is decided by the respective Salmonella risks as estimated for each 

feed product. Risks are assessed based on long-term control results, the type 

of feed product and manner of transport. When estimating the requirements and 



4.3 results in 1995 to 2004 

frequency of sampling the origin of the product is also accounted for, and when 

necessary, the reliability of the manufacturer’s self-control. Eliminating risks in 

the initial stages of the feed chain has made possible to carry out only random 

sampling for analysis of feed mixtures. 

When importing from third countries to Finland, feedstuffs of both animal and 

vegetable origin are inspected as official inspections of imported lots. For imports 

from the EU, the importer performs voluntary inspections as self-control from 

each imported lot of animal origin before its used in compound feed production. 

Each lot of raw materials of vegetable origin presenting Salmonella risks are also 

inspected by the authority. 

The sampling frequency in Salmonella analysis is a 1 kg sample/50,000 kg feed 

for raw materials and a randomly sampled 1 kg sample of feed mixtures/0.5 – 1 

mil. kg of total products manufactured. The final sample comprises 20 to 40 partial 

samples combined. Smaller samples are taken of concentrated products, 250 g 

of pre-mixtures and 20 to 30 g of vitamins. 

Sampling is as representative as possible. Samples are taken of raw materials 

from their bulk cargoes while being unloaded, either from crab batches or by 

collecting samples using automatic samplers. The whole feed cargo is rejected 

if Salmonella is found in some of the samples. 

The method for analysing Salmonella is modified ISO 6579:2002. Analysis 

methods used in official control have been accredited in accordance with the 

standard ISO 17025. 

Results from analysing Salmonella in samples taken of domestic feedstuffs are 

presented in Appendix 2, and those for samples of imported feed in Appendix 3. 

For samples of domestic manufacture taken in 1995 to 2004, 0.2 % of samples 

of feeds of vegetable as well as animal origin have been Salmonella positive. 

Serotypes found in feed samples have been S. Agona, S. Livingstone, S. Muenster 

and S. Tennessee (Appendix 4). For domestic feed mixtures for food production 

animals, the percentage of Salmonella-positive samples has been below 0.1 %. 

S. Infantis found in feed mixtures caused an epidemic in 1995 among milk cattle. 

Since then, no Salmonella case caused by feedstuffs has been recorded in food 

production farms. Positive samples found in 1998 to 2004 in feeds mixed to be 

used for other production animals were in dry-feed mixtures for fur animals. 

Among the samples of imported feed, 0.8 % of samples of feeds of vegetable 

origin have been Salmonella positive, and 0.6 % of those of animal origin. The 

serotypes found in imported feeds are listed in Appendix 5. The most common 

serotype found has been S. Senftenberg in sunflower seeds, and S. Tennessee, 

S. ssp as well as S. Mbandakaka in crushed oil plant seeds and concentrates. 

The most common serotype during the same period in cereal grains and products 

and by-products originating from these was S. Livingstone. No distinct serotype 

commonly appearing in feedstuffs of animal origin can be named. 

For pet animal feeds, samples for Salmonella analysis have been taken as samples 

of domestic manufacture, as import samples, as well as market control samples 

(Appendix 6). Samples taken in the first half of the survey period (1995 - 1999), 

of teethers and dried pig ears mainly intended for dogs, were about 10 - 20 % 

Salmonella positive. In the final years of the survey period, the percentage of 

positive sample has varied from 2 % to 8 %. The most commonly found serotypes 

have been S. Havana, S. Montevideo and S. Ohio, of which the prevalence of

the latter two was concentrated in the first years of the survey period (Appendix 

7). However, S. Havana was found in all the years of the period. 

For feedstuffs of vegetable as well as animal origin, the proportion of Salmonellacontaminated 

feed as a percentage of the total volumes of domestic feed produce 

has remained below 0.1 % and for feed mixtures considerably lower than this 

(Appendix 8). In Appendices 9 and 10, the same matter is reviewed for imported 

feeds, albeit so that the relative percentage of Salmonella-contaminated feed has 

been calculated on imported amounts targeted by control inspections. 

4.4 Deliberation 

Strict control of imported feedstuffs, i.e., of raw materials imported from third 

as well as EU countries for use in feedstuffs, has been found the most efficient 

means to restrict the spread of Salmonella to factories and farms. Official control 

by national legislation can be targeted on each batch of the raw materials 

of vegetable origin that carry Salmonella risks. Liabilities included in legislation 

concerning compensation for damages as a consequece of Salmonella in feeds 

have, for their part, promoted the desire of importers and feed manufacturers to 

develop their activities. The feed industry has also developed self-control systems 

to eliminate Salmonella hazards from feed chains. Later in the 90s, a requirement 

for self-control systems was added to the national legislation. It has become a 

rare incident to find Salmonella in feed-factory processes. 

The latest Salmonella epidemic involving feedstuffs for animals in food production 

occurred in 1995, when over one hundred farms were contaminated by 

feed mixtures containing Salmonella from one feed factory, but after successful 

decontamination procedures the farms were disinfected from Salmonella. 

The self-control systems established by factories, and their self-control laboratories, 

found about half of all the Salmonella-contaminated control samples, which 

were regularly taken either by the authorities or through voluntary self-control. 

The number of self-control systems among manufacturers of production-animal 

feed increased in 1995 to cover almost all manufacturers, and these systems 

were further developed in 1996 to 1999. 

Most Salmonella found in 1995 to 2004 were from raw materials, from which 

they can be eliminated by heating prior to use in feed mixtures and pet-animal 

products for the market. Therefore, these have not been found to cause Salmonella 

problems in the food chain. 



5 Occurence of Salmonella in retail food in 

1995 to 2004 

Tuula Johansson, Head of Food Microbiology Team, Evira 

5.1 Occurence of Salmonella in raw meat 

Salmonella investigations of retail food have mainly been focused on raw meat, 

but in later years the survays have increasingly been focused on other foods as 

well, to get data for risk assessment. Salmonella control of raw meat has for decades 

been targeted at broiler carcasses, because it is known that Salmonella can 

very easily colonize broiler chicks. Professor Esko Nurmi started investigations 

as early as the 1970s. At that time, he developed a competitive exclusion method 

to prevent colonization of broiler chicks by Salmonella. This so-called ’Nurmi concept’ 

is still being used in broiler production, not only in Finland but also abroad, 

and its use has supported the maintenance of of the good Salmonella situation 

in broiler meat. Broiler meat in retail sale has regularly been investigated yearly, 

at least since 1989. In later years, control has also been targeted at pork and, 

for example at kebab meat. These results could have been used in assessment 

of the efficiency of the National Salmonella Control Programme. 

5.1.1 investigations 

Salmonella investigations of poultry meat were performed by the National Veterinary 

and Food Research Institute (EELA) until 1999 and since then in co-operation 

between the National Food Agency (NFA), EELA and local food control 

authorities and laboratories, as surveys of the national control programme, or as 

co-ordinated programmes for the official control of foodstuffs recommended by 

European commission. 

In 1995 - 1998, the investigations were targeted at fresh broiler cuts and EELA 

collected the samples from retail stores in Helsinki and its surroundings. Samples 

originated from the three largest domestic broiler slaughterhouses. Since 1999, 

local food control authorities have taken samples. Thus control authorities could 

have utilized the analysis results for control actions without delay, if necessary. For 

surveys in 1999 and 2000 raw poultry and pork from retail stores were sampled, 

and in 2004, poultry from retail stores and restaurants. The origin of meat was 

asked in connection of sampling. A survey of Salmonella besides E. coli O157 

in kebab-meat was carried out in 2001, after Dutch kebab meat transmitted an 

outbreak caused by E. coli O157 in Finland. Municipal food control authorities 

collected the samples from restaurants and meat establishments in May-July, 

and these were analyzed by EELA. 

Poultry and pork samples were rinsed in pre-enrichment broth (225 – 250 ml), 

and rinsing liquid (100 ml) was analyzed as described by the method No. 71 of 

the Nordic Committee of Food Analysis (NMKL). In the Kebab-meat survey the 

sample size was 25 g. 

0

5.1.2 results and discussion 

From 1995 to 1998, Salmonella was annually detected in 0.9 to 3.0 % of domestic 

fresh broiler cuts at retail level (n=315) (Table 1). From 1999 to 2004, Salmonella 

was not detected in any of the poultry samples analyzed (n = 449). The ocuurence 

has decreased compared to that of the respective studies in 1989 - 1994, when 

Salmonella was detected in approximately 10 % of raw broiler cuts. Our as such 

good Salmonella situation further improved after implementation of the National 

Salmonella Control Programme in beginning of May,1995 and still further after 

the change of the analysis method of the control programme in 1999 in a way 

that faecal samples were pre-enriched and sample size was increased from a 

loopful (1 μl) to 1g. This probably received domestic Salmonella-positive poultry 

from entering retail sale in 1999 to 2004. 

Number of samples annually analysed in the surveys of poultry meat at retail level 

have been low (90 to 161 samples), but survey have been repeated regularly 

over several years, which improves reliability of the results. In fact, the analysis 

method and sample size of these studies have also been changed during years, 

which may have contributed to the fact that less or no Salmonella has been 

detected in survays of recent years compared to those of previous ones. In the 

investigations of 1993 to 1998, the methods and sample sizes were the same 

from year to year. By contrast, in 1999 to 2000, the sample amount rinsed in 

pre-enrichment broth was 250 g instead of the previous 500 g, which reduced 

the sensitivity of the method. Moreover, in previous years (1989 - 1992), when 

Salmonella was more frequently detected, samples were examined using MPN 

(most probable number) techique, the sensitivity of which is greater than for 

methods used in the investigations of 1993 to 2004. 

Salmonella was not detected in any of the raw pork samples (n = 338) analyzed 

Poultry Pork Kebab meat 

Year Analysed Positive Analysed Positive Analysed Positive 

N n % N n N n 

1995 101 1) 1 8) 1 - - - - 

1996 100 1) 3 9) 3 - - - - 

1998 114 1) 1 0,9 - - - - 

1999 158 2) 0 0 171 4) 0 - - 

2000 161 3) 0 0 167 5 0 - - 

2001 - - - - - 220 6) 0 

2004 130 7) 0 0 - - - - 

Origin of meat: 

1) domestic fresh broiler meat 

2) 147 of the samples domestic, 11 originated from other EU member states 

3) 160 of the domestic, 1 from other EU member states and 1 from third coutries 

4) 170 of the domestic,1 from other EU memeber states 

5) 165 of the domestic, 2 from other EU member states 

6) 112 ot the domestic, 16 from other EU member states, for 92 samples no data on 

country of origin 

7) 125 of the domestic, 5 from other EU member states; 104 broilers and 26 turkey 

8) Salmonella Infantis 

9) Salmonella Isangi 


Poultry 

Table 30. Occurence of Salmonella 

in raw meat in 1995 - 2004.


Pork 

Kebab meat 

in 1999 to 2000 (Table 1). The samples were of domestic origin, except for three. 

Few data exists about the oocurence of Salmonella in pork at retail level, and 

thus these investigations provided important information on the Salmonella risks 

of pork to consumers. 

For the kebab study a total of 220 meat samples were collected from 206 restaurants 

and 9 meat establishments in 72 municipalities. Of these, 209 were either 

raw minced meat intended for preparing of kebab meat or raw kebab meat (raw 

meat product). Type of meat was either beef (n=130), pork-beef (n=10) , pork (n=4), 

beef-lamb (n=1) or lamb-turkey (n=1). Of 14 samples, the data about the type of 

meat was lacking. 16 of the samples originated from other EU member states. 

Country of origin was not given in the sampling certificate of 92 samples. 

In this study, no Salmonella was detected in the samples (n = 220) (Table 1). 

Previously, in spring 2001, during the investigation associated with the EHEC 

epidemic, raw kebab meat from three Dutch manufacturers was examined for 

Salmonella in addition to E. coli O157. In total, 40 sub-samples were analyzed. 

Two batches revealed Salmonella bacteria. In one batch 6 out of 15, and in 

another bach 1 out of 20 sub-samples were detected to be positive. In the most 

contaminated lot 3 serotypes were found: Salmonella Manhattan (4 sub-samples), 

Salmonella Lexington (1 sub-sample) and Salmonella Kottbus (1 sub-sample). 

In the less contaminated lot Salmonella Manhattan was detected. The levels of 

Salmonella were enumerated by analyzing several combinations 5 sub-samples 

using MPN technique (5 x 25 g, 5 x 5 g and 5 x 1 g). The most contaminated 

batch revealed Salmonella contents of 0.02 and 0.04 MPN/g, and the less contaminated 

one a cont of 0.03 MPN/g. Besides the serotypes mentioned above, 

Salmonella Bredeney was detected in the most contaminated batch in the enumeration 

procedure. 

5.2 Occurence of Salmonella in other food 


Cheese 

In addition to meat, Salmonella investigations have targeted to cheeses, vegetables, 

shellfish and mussels as well as spices. The surveys have been performed 

either by NFA and/or EELA, and since 2002, in co-operation between NFA, EELA, 

local control authorities and laboratories, primarily as surveys of co-ordinated 

programmes for the official control of foodstuffs recommended by European 

commission, but also as surveys of the national control programmes. Samples 

have been analyzed using the methods of NMKL 71, ISO 6579 or VIDAS SLM. 

In 1996, 40 traditional Finnish cottage cheeses were examined. Samples were 

collected from minor cheese manufacturers or from retail outlets in the region 

of Kemijärvi. In addition, 24 domestic un-ripened cheeses and 20 blue cheeses 

from Helsinki metropolitan area and the region around Turku were examined, 4 

of which were domestic and the remaining 16 from other EU member states. In 

1998, 58 un-ripened cheese samples were examined from 51 cheese manufacturers. 

This investigation covered 2/3 of our minor cheese manufacturies. In the 

survey of co-ordinated EU programme in 2004, a total of 90 sub-samples of soft 

and semi-hard cheeses made of raw milk were taken from 18 production batches 

at manufacturing locations. From retail outlets and sites of first destination, 60 

sub-samples were collected from 30 production batches. Samples were collected 

in 26 municipalities and were examined by eight local food laboratories in various 

parts of Finland.

In the EU survey carried out in 2002, packaged, peeled and cut vegetables (n=25), 

packaged sprouts (n=7) and non-pasteurized fruit juices (n=1) were examined. 

The samples (n=33) originated from 13 production plants and from 3 retail stores 

in southern and eastern Finland. 

Cooked crustacean and molluscan shellfish were the targets of EU investigations 

in 2003. Samples (n = 119) were collected at sites of first destination and from 

retail stores in the Helsinki metropolitan area. Samples were taken of shrimps, 

lobsters, blue mussels, river crayfish, jumbo shrimps, octopus and green-lipped 

mussels originating in 17 countries. 15 samples were fresh and 104 frozen. 5 

samples came from retail outlets and the rest were sold packaged. 

The EU survey of spices was carried out in the counties of southern and western 

Finland in June-August 2004. A total of 110 samples were taken of 22 spice lots 

originating from eight import companies and four retail stores. Various peppers, 

paprikas, herb spices and ginger, turmeric and cinnamon were sampled. The 

samples were analyzed by three local food control laboratories. 

In 2004, for a strawberry survey included in the national food control programme 

samples (n = 142) were collected from 29 farms in the counties of western and 

central Finland in June-August. The samples were taken 2 - 5 times from the 

same farm. Three of the farms were organic. The samples were analyzed at three 

local food control laboratories. 

5.2.2 results and discussion 

No Salmonella was detected in any of the samples of the other foods. 

Even raw milk cheeses were not contaminated, because Salmonella situation 

in cattle in Finland is very good. Salmonella originating from animal faeces may 

enter milk, if milking hygiene is deficient. If cheese is made of raw milk and manufacturing 

process does not include heat treatment to kill pathogens, Salmonella 

can survive in the cheese and may cause food poisonings. Therefore, products 

made of pasteurized milk are safer than those of raw milk. However, even the 

former may become post-contaminated when manufacturing hygiene is poor. 

Strawberries attract birds and other wild animals and may thus be contaminated 

by Salmonella possibly appearing in faeces. The soil may also be a source of 

contamination. In addition, watering by contaminated surface water may transfer 

to strawberries bacteria such as Salmonella that cause diseases. Salmonella 

has reported to survive on the surface of strawberries long enough to be able to 

pose risk to consumers. 


Since 1998, data has been collected on Salmonella analyses carried out by local 

laboratories as official control focused on pathogenic bacteria. Altogether, 32 to 

36 laboratories have annually responded to these inquiries made by NFA and 

EELA. The service areas of these laboratories comprise on the average 75 % 

of the Finnish population. Inquiries has concerned samples collected from retail 

sale as well as from food industry. The inquiry does not differentiate between 

samples taken of domestic and foreign products. In 1998 to 2002 and 2004, the 


Packaged, peeled and cut 

vegetables, fruit juices 

and sprouts 

Cooked crustacean and 

molluscan shellfish 

Spices 

Strawberries 

5.3 Occurence of Salmonella in local food-control samples


Table 31. Occurence of Salmonella 

in samples reported by 

local food control in 1998 to 2002 

and 2004. 

investigations primarily targeted at raw meat and meat products (n ≈ 1200 - 2000), 

milk products (n ≈ 300 - 1000), vegetables and vegetable product (n ≈ 500 - 700) 

and ice cream and desserts (n ≈ 300 - 600). From the other food categories, 300 

or fewer samples have been taken annually. 

Samples were taken as part of contnuing official control, but occasionally these 

also included sampling because of food poisoning or other reasons caused suspicions 

of contamination. In addition, analysis results of samples of local surveys, 

locally-executed national surveys, and co-ordinated programmes for the official 

control of foodstuffs recommended by European commission were also included. 

As sampling was not randomized, the results are only indicative. 

5.3.2 results 

From 1998 to 2002 and 2004, an annual total of about 3200 to 4500 samples 

was investigated, of which only 0.2 to 0.7 % were detected to be Salmonella-positive. 

Salmonella has annually been detected in meat and meat products, while 

less often or never in other food groups (Table 2). Food categories, in which no 

Salmonella was detected during the research period were: certain vegetable fats 

and oils; egg and egg products; fish and fish products; nuts, nut products and 

crackers; soups, consommés and sauces, icecream and desserts; juices, drinks, 

mineral water and packaged water; and unspecified products. In 2002, chocolate 

samples collected from retail sale and detected to be Salmonella-positive were 

associated with multi-state outbreak mediated by German chocolate. 

esults of official control of pathogenic bacteria by local authorities also show 

that Salmonella rarely appear in food in Finland. 

Food group / Food Year Analyzed Positive 

Meat and meat products 

1998-2002, 

2004 

n % 

1147-1956 0,4-1,6 

Vegetable and vegetable products 1998 671 0,2 

1999 458 0,4 

Cocoa, cocoa products, 

coffee and tea 

1998 43* 14,0* 

Milk and milk products 1999 1017 0,1 

Ready-made food 1999 205 0,5 

Cereals and bakery products 2000 169 2,4 

Herbs and spices 2000 23 4,3 

2004 110 0,9 

Sweets, honey and sugar 2002 63** 6,3** 

1) No Salmonella was detected in samples of other food categories included in 

the survey. 

* herb tea 

** chocolate

6 Additional guarantees and 

control in the internal market 

Pirkko Kostamo, Senior officer, Evira 

6.1 Additional guarantees regarding Salmonella 

Due to its particularly good Salmonella situation nationally, Finland was granted 

additional guarantees concerning Salmonella for reasons of public health when 

joining the EU. A condition for additional guarantees was that a national Salmonella 

control programme was to be established. Regarding food, the additional 

guarantees cover the sale of fresh meats of cattle, pigs and poultry, and eggs 

aimed for consumption. Additional guarantees means that meat consignments 

are to be examined for Salmonella prior to delivery to Finland, and that analysis 

results must be negative. Similarly, before delivery of eggs, the hen flock producing 

the eggs must be examined for Salmonella. Additional guarantees do 

not concern beef and pork or eggs that are intended for preparation of heated 

products. For live animals, the additional guarantees cover poultry flocks for 

delivery to Finland. 

In Finland, foods of animal origin delivered from other EU member states are 

controlled at first destination, meaning the food premises in Finland that first 

receive food of animal origin. The sites of first destinations are as part of their 

self-checking required to inspect consignments received and take samples of the 

consignments for laboratory analysis. This self-checking also ensures that the 

additional guarantees are implemented for Salmonella. Municipal food control 

authorities supervise first destinations, except for those operating in connection 

with slaughterhouses, which are supervised by the government’s inspection 

veterinarians. 

Salmonella has repeatedly been found in meat consignments covered by special 

guarantees. However, no complete statistics are available on the occurrence of 

Salmonella in meat delivered to Finland. According to reports on rejections by 

authorities to the National Food Agency, an annually average of 10 consignments 

of meat have been disqualified because of Salmonella. Salmonella has 

only randomly been found in beef and pork consignments, but more frequently 

in poultry meat consignments. 

The City of Vantaa carried out a control survey in 2000 that examined 37 meat 

consignments from the internal-market trade. Salmonella was found in half the 

poultry meat consignments analyzed. In 2003, the National Food Agency organized 

a control survey in which about 300 imported consignments of meat and meat 

preparations were examined. For each consignments analyzed, only two samples 

were taken. Salmonella was found in 11 of the consingnments analyzed. 


6.2 internal market control of food of animal origin


It is difficult to assess the effects of imported meat on illness in people. According 

to information in the register on contagious diseases, the number of Salmonella 

infections acquired domestically among the population has not increased since 

Finland joined the EU. In individual cases of infection, however, rare types of Salmonella 

bacteria have been observed that have not previously been found among 

the population. These cases may have been caused by imported food. So far, 

only one foodbourne outbreak has been traced to imported meat. This outbreak 

was caused by broiler meat of Brazilian origin served in restaurants in 2004.


7 Other Salmonella investigations 1995 – 

2004 

Vetenarian Henry Kuronen, Evira 

7.1 Typing of isolates other than those from the National Salmonella 

Control Programme 

During 1995 to 2004, the National Veterinary and Food Research Institute (EELA) 

annually confirmed and serotyped about 400 to 1000 strains not included in the 

Salmonella control programme. In 2000 to 2004, this number was about 400 

to 550 annually. Hence, the number of isolated strains has decreased, as also 

among samples from production animals. 

In Appendix 11 presents the serotype distribution samples from animals not included 

in the control programme during 1997 to 2004. These strains were isolated 

from samples taken of wild animals, pet animals, zoo animals, and production 

animals other than species covered by the control programme. About 50 to 100 

of these strains have been confirmed annually, among which about 60 different 

serotypes have been identified. Clearly, the most isolated serotype has been 

Typhimurium, followed by Enteritidis. Almost a third of the strains belonged to other 

subspecies than Salmonella enterica subsp. enterica (subsp. salamae, subsp. 

arizonae, subsp. diarizonae and subsp. houtenae) in 2001 to 2004. Almost all of 

these strains were isolated from turtles, snakes or lizards. 

About twenty Typhimurium phage types were confirmed, and most common 

among these have been DT1, DT40 and DT41 (Appendix 12). The latter two are 

typically from wild animals, particularly, phage types of strains isolated from birds, 

and DT1 has also been the most common phage type in animals covered by the 

control programme. The multi-resistant DT104 phage type was only found twice, 

both times from dogs in 1996 and 2002. There have been around ten different 

Enteritidis phage types, the most common among these being DT20 (Appendix 

13). Almost all DT20 strains were isolated from hedgehogs. 

In 1997 to 1999, about 60 to 90 strains were isolated from foodstuffs annually, 

and about 25 to 70 strains in 2000 to 2004. These contained samples of domestic 

as well as foreign origin and were sampled by both food business operators and 

authorities. Appendix 14 shows the serotype distribution confirmed by EELA for 

imported foodstuffs. From these, about 60 different serotypes were isolated, some 

30 of which have not been found in the National Control Programme samples. 

The most common serotype in these samples has been Typhimurium, followed 

by Enteritidis and Hadar. Notably, at the end of the period, little Salmonella was 

isolated in domestic foodstuffs samples and their serotype distribution was similar 

to that of strains isolated from production animals. 

In imported food, fifteen Typhimurium phage types and four Enteritidis phage 

types were identified (Appendix 15). Among Typhimurium phage types, the most 

common were multi-resistant DT104 (7 cases) and DT12 (6 cases). Almost all 

Enteritidis strains were of phage type DT4.


7.2 Discussion 

In addition to samples from animals and foodstuffs not included in the control 

programme, EELA has annually confirmed about 250 - 700 strains isolated 

from other samples. This group includes various environmental samples and 

individual feed samples and, as a rule, they are sampled by business operators. 

Environmental samples include surface swabs, drain and wastewater samples 

from slaughterhouses and cutting plants, samples from controlling the effect of 

disinfection at production farms, surface swab samples from feed-producing 

plants, and samples and compost samples from wastewater-purifying plants. The 

monitoring of Salmonella in fodders is not required of EELA, but strains appear 

annually for confirmation, primarily as samples from feedstuffs of fur animals and 

individual pet-animal titbits. The identified serotypes have mostly been falimiar from 

samples of the control programme. The most unusual serotypes in this sample 

group that EELA received for confirmation were mainly taken from wastewaterpurifying 

plants and composts. 

Because of the good Salmonella situation in Finland, Salmonella isolated from 

foodstuff samples mostly have their originate from imported foodstuffs. The positive 

samples have been detected through monitoring by authorities (e.g. at sites of first 

arrival and through suspicion of food poisoning) and by food business operators. 

Most of the strains isolated from these foodstuffs are by their serotype such that 

they do not appear in domestic samples. The monitoring and proper processing 

of imported foodstuffs and raw materials play a significant role in preventing the 

spread of Salmonella in Finland. 

Salmonella infections intermittently appear among animals other than those 

covered by the Salmonella control programme, for example, when investigating 

the cause of an animal’s illness or death, or when there is some other reason to 

suspect Salmonella contamination. Hence, EELA’s statistics do not present the 

occurrence of contamination among these animal species. However, analysis of 

samples provides the necessary background information on, for example, hazards 

caused by various pets. It is already long been known that reptiles in general are 

particularly symptomless Salmonella carriers. The danger of acquiring an infection 

is particularly great when small children are in close contact with animals or 

handle basins with live animals in water, not being sufficiently cautious. 

Contamination by wild animals is also a possible risk to production animals. However, 

often the source of contamination cannot be demonstrated with sufficient 

confidence, and the wild animals may have caught the contamination from faeces 

of production animal. In this case, this cause-effect relationship is impossible 

to verify by examining wild animals after the onset of an epidemic. The rarest 

serotypes are usually isolated from wild animals, which have been provided for 

examination from the environs of cities and waste dumps. 

Among environmental samples, serotypes isolated at slaughterhouses, cutting 

plants and production farms are mostly the same as those found in control programme 

samples. By contrast, most samples arriving from wastewater-purifying 

plants and composts are serotypes appearing rarely in the Salmonella control 

programme. It is reasonably probable that such serotypes are from human contaminations 

with an origin in some other country. 

Occasionally, in monitoring associated with feedstuffs, pet titbits imported from 

abroad have been found to contain contaminated batches. These present a 

potential hazard to animals, although efforts are made to prevent contaminated

atches from entering markets. Infections distributed via pets are generally limited 

to epidemics in specific families, but may become serious when acquired 

by children. 

Foodstuffs of vegetable origin have increasingly been observed to be sources of 

Salmonella epidemics among people. Here, the contamination of the environment 

and wild animals plays a major role. Therefore, it is worthwhile to monitor the 

Salmonella situation in the environment and among wild animals. On account 

of Finland’s excellent Salmonella situation, the risk for contamination of the environment 

is less marked than in countries, where factory farming of production 

animals and abundant Salmonella infections cause widespread contamination 

of the environment. 



8 Domestic Salmonella outbreaks 1995 – 

2004 

Taina Niskanen, Senior officer, Evira 

Figure 10. Reported foodborne 

Salmonella outbreaks according 

to the food source in 1995 - 2004 

# / % 

In the last decade, a total of 47 food- or waterborne Salmonella outbreaks were 

reported to the National Food Poisoning Register maintained by the National 

Food Agency (NFA), during which almost 2000 persons (Appendix 16) became 

ill. Generally, Salmonella outbreaks are food-borne, but in 2000 and 2003, waterborne 

outbreaks were also reported. In 2003, two persons became ill after 

drinking water from a stream and in 2000 about 300 vacationers became ill in 

one week after consuming tap water from community water supply that had been 

contaminated by wastewater leakage. In addition to Salmonella, calicivirus was 

also found in the drinking water, and Campylobacter upsalieniensis was isolated 

from the patients with long-term symptoms. 

The number of Salmonella outbreaks reported annually has varied from one to 

eight (Appendix 16). In 1998 and 2003, only one food- or waterborne outbreaks 

was registered, while in 1999 eight outbreaks were reported, being the largest 

number of Salmonella outbreaks in a year. In 1995 there were seven, and in 1996 

and 2000 six domestic outbreaks in each year. These epidemics have generally 

been medium or minor in extent. In the last five years, more minor outbreaks 

(fewer than 10 persons ill) have been reported in the 1990s, when the extent of 

the outbreaks was clearly greater. During the decade there were totally six major 

outbreaks (more than 100 persons ill altogether), altogether, five of which were 

reported from 1995 to 1999. Sources of infections have included eggs, alfalfa 

sprouts grown industrially, brochette piglets served at grill parties, and unripened 

cheese made of non-pasteurized milk. Only one major Salmonella outbreak has 

been reported in the 2000s. This was the above-mentioned waterbourne outbreak 

due to contamination of drinking water at a ski centre in 2000. 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Meat and meat 

products 

Milk and milk 

products 

0 

Egg and egg 

products 

Vegetables Water 

Total %

The most significant vehicle in Salmonella outbreaks is meat and meat products 

(26 %), but contaminated fresh vegetables (11 %) served without prior heating 

may also present a significant risk. Eggs have caused one outbreak in the last 

decade. In 1995, contamination was transferred via eggs from a domestic producer. 

Since then, eggs have not caused any Salmonella outbreaks. Milk or milk 

products have altogether caused three outbreaks (Figure 1). In 1998, the use of 

non-pasteurized milk taken directly from a farm in cheese preparation caused an 

outbreak originating from the domestic raw materials; in other two cases, imported 

food was the cause of outbreaks. Significant causes of Salmonella outbreaks also 

include infected kitchen workers and participation in the preparation of food in 

combination with poor hand hygiene. Most Salmonella outbreaks are associated 

with eating in restaurants (Figure 2). 

7 % 

5 % 

7 % 

5 % 

12 % 

5 % 

5 % 

24 % 

30 % 

8.1 Descriptions of example outbreaks 

8.1.1 Salmonella outbreaks from german chocolate 

in Finland and elsewhere in europe 

At the end of 2001 and beginning of 2002, S. Oranienburg made about 300 

people ill in various parts of Europe via chocolate of the brand Chateau. Besides 

Finland, illnesses associated with the chocolate were reported in at least Sweden, 

Holland, Germany, Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Canada and Australia. In all cases, 

the manufacturers of the contaminated chocolate batches proved to be the same 

German factory. The contaminated chocolate was also for sale in Finland. Two 

chocolate batches were found Salmonella-positive and the same Salmonella 

type was isolated from both the chocolate and patients. The Salmonella content 

of the chocolate analyzed in Finland was rather small, but enough to also make 

several persons ill here. Nine persons were reported to have acquired infection 

with S. Oranienburg in Finland via the chocolate. The contaminated chocolate 

batches were withdrawn from the market and several reports on them were filed 

to the EU Commission. 


Restaurant 

Other 

Home 

Multiple places 

Edu. Institution 

Daycare 

Hosp./home for elderly 

Staffs canteen 

Catering 

Figure 11. Foodborne Salmonella 

outbreaks according to the place 

of consumption in 1995 - 2004


8.1.2 Salmonella outbreak via mung beans in 

eastern Finland 

In October, 2002, S. Abony caused an outbreak through mung beans sprouts 

in northern Savonia. Salmonella infections were acquired by 13 persons, two 

of whom were food workers. These employees had no symptoms. Interview 

surveys revealed that all who caught the infection had eaten mung bean sprouts 

produced by the same sprout-making plant. This plant had delivered the sprouts 

to school canteens and other eateries. The sprout seeds were from China. Their 

colour was found anomalous and sprouting was weak. No Salmonella bacteria, 

however, could be isolated from remaining seeds of sprouts. Based on the exposure 

data the sprouts were probably the cause of infections. Sprouts caused 

several Salmonella outbreaks in Finland in the 1990s and the beginning of the 

2000s. A previous outbreak transferred by sprouts had been reported in 2000. 

Altogether, seven persons became ill when alfalfa sprouts sprouted in a course 

centre caused an outbreak among participants in the course. Five persons were 

taken to hospital for treatment. A person suffering from symptoms of stomach 

illness had taken part in preparing the sprouts. 

8.1.3 A multi-resistant Salmonella caused two 

outbreaks in 2004 

In Oulu in September 2004, four people were found to be infected by Salmonella 

within a short period. Symptoms by the infected persons included fever, stomach 

pain and diarrhoea. The cause of infections was found to be antibiotic-resistant S. 

Enteriditis DT4 (Nal-R), which is rare in Finland, and which was probably of foreign 

origin. None of the patients had recently travelled abroad. In the days before becoming 

ill, though, they had all eaten in the same local restaurant. While carrying 

out an inspection, several hygienic deficiencies in food processing and kitchen 

facilities were identified in the restaurant. Brazilian frozen broilers had been used 

by the restaurant. The broilers were thawed, cut and marinated in the restaurant. 

The same antibiotics-resistant S. Enteriditis DT 4 (Nal-R) -type was isolated from 

the marinated broiler and from the patients. Personnel in the restaurant had no 

symptoms and no Salmonella was isolated from kitchen employees. The cause of 

the outbreak was contaminated Brazilian broiler meat and deficiencies in kitchen 

hygiene during handling. It is also possible that cross-contamination via other 

food occurred, e.g., salads or food served without prior heating. No separate tools 

were used when handling raw broiler meat, and facilities for washing hands were 

deficient, making it possible for bacteria to spread via tools or hands. 

During a wedding party arranged in in Lapinlahti in January, one third of 80 

persons participating in the dinner fell ill with stomach diseases. Food served 

at the wedding party had been prepared by a catering service. S. Typhimurium 

var. Copenhagen DT 104 (ACSSuT-R), which is multi-resistant to antibiotics 

not normally appearing in Finland, was isolated from the patients. An interview 

survey performed could not clearly reveal any particular food served as being a 

cause of the infections. Food samples analyzed were also negative. However, 

not all of the food being served was available for analysis. Faecal samples of the 

employees at the catering service were negative for Salmonella. These samples 

were taken almost one and a half month after the outbreak. A farm housewife 

had participated in preparing the food and she had had symptoms of stomach 

disease while preparing the food. However, the original source of the Salmonella 

infections remained unknown. 

Additional descriptions of outbreaks are given in Appendix 17.

9 human Salmonella findings 

in 1995 – 2004 

Arja Siitonen, research professor, KTL 

9.1 Surveilance of infections 

The exact identification and typing of Salmonella strains forms the basis for 

their epidemiological surveillance and for tracing the infections tehy cause. Two 

species of Salmonella are known, Salmonella enterica and Salmonella bongori. 

Salmonella enterica can be divided into six subspecies (enterica, salamae, 

arizonae, diarizonae, houtenae and indica) and further into some 2500 different 

serotypes. In addition, many serotypes of the ssp. enterica can be divided into 

tens of phage types by applying an internationally-standardized phage typing 

method. In Finland, phage typing is applied to the serotypes Salmonella Enteritidis, 

Typhimurium and Paratyphi B. In addition, molecular genetic DNA fingerprint 

analysis was recently standardized among nine EU countries, including Finland. 

This can be applied to all salmonellae, and by the beginning of 2006 a ”fingerprint 

bank” was established at the National Public Health Institute (KTL) that contains 

the genetic fingerprints of about 3000 Salmonella strains isolated from humans. 

This bank is continuously being updated. 

Since the 1960s, clinical microbiological laboratories have sent Salmonella strains 

isolated from humans to the Enteric Bacteria Laboratory at KTL for verification 

and more precise epidemiological typing and characterisation. Along with each 

strain, data are also sent on possible trips abroad of the patient prior to the 

person becoming ill. If these data are not available, such trips are asked about 

separately. Since 1994, the laboratory have also had the obligation to report human 

Salmonella findings to the National Infectious Diseases egister maintained 

by the Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology at KTL. Thus, KTL has 

data that cover about forty years on the epidemiology of Salmonella infections 

of domestic as well as foreing origin. These data were significant for granting 

Finland additional Salmonella guarantees when the country joined the EU. They 

are also a major benefit to the Finnish National Salmonella Control Programme. 

In addition, surveilance of the large spectrum of imported types has provided 

the possibility to influence the improvment of food hygiene in tourist locations 

favoured by Finns, in co-operation with authorities in these countries. 

9.2 Prevalence of infections 

At the turn of the 1980s and 1990s, almost 8 000 Salmonella cases were annually 

reported in Finland. Over 80 % of these were infections acquired abroad. However, 

by the middle of the 1990’s, in conjunction with the economic depression, 

the number of Finns travelling abroad on holiday dropped by almost 70 % and 

at the same time the number of detected Salmonella cases decreased by almost 

50 %. Even though travelling abroad has subsequently revived, the number of 

human Salmonella infections has dropped further. Nevertheless, at the end of 

the 1990s, there were about 3 000 cases annually, but from 2002 to 2004 the 

annual number of cases clearly have remained below 2 500. 



9.3 Domestic infections 

During the previous decade, the incidence of salmonellosis among the population 

varied in 1995 to 1999 from 54 to 65 cases per 100 000 inhabitants/year and 

in 2000 to 2004 from 44 to 53 cases/100 000 inhabitants/year. This reduction is 

apparent in the numbers of both domestic and foreign cases. Until 2001, most 

foreign cases were associated with travelling to Spain, but subsequently most 

have clearly been acquired in Thailand (358 to 406 cases/year). The number of 

infections originating in Bulgaria, Egypt and Brazil has in recent years also increased. 

By contrast, the numbers of those associated with Estonia, Tunisia and 

Morocco have decreased. 

Of the approximately 2 500 known serotypes, about 100 different serotypes are 

annually identified in Finland in infections from abroad, but less than 50 serotypes 

in domestic infections. An overall majority of all the salmonellae found belong to 

Salmonella enterica ssp. enterica, which is also the most common subspecies 

found in production animals. Salmonellae of other subspecies even normally 

occur in cold-blooded animals, and these are also annually found in human 

infections. Of all the Salmonella infections detected in 1995 to 2004, about 75 

% annually were caused by only 10 serotypes and among these only two, Salmonella 

Typhimurium and Salmonella Enteritidis, caused most infections both 

domestically and abroad. 

Depending on the number of epidemics, the percentage of domestically acquired 

infections varied from 18 % to 34 % in 1995 to 1999, and 14 % to 18 % in 2000 

to 2004. However, it shoud be noted that the percentages of domestic infections 

could be significantly greater than estimated above. Namely, Finns are frequent 

travellers to neighbouring areas and to holiday resorts in the south. Thus, some of 

the domestic infections might have been misclassified as foreign ones. Indications 

of this have been gathered when tracing domestic, clearly confined outbreaks. 

On the other hand, such infections where the cause is a type of Salmonella 

previously never encountered, such as in domestic production animals, may be 

misclassified as domestic ones. 

The number and cause of epidemics also affected which sero- or phage types 

each year were included among the most common types (Figure 1). However, 

Salmonella Typhimurium was the most common and Salmonella Enteritidis the 

next most common serotype in all other years except in 1995, then the Enteritidis 

cases exceeded the Typhimurium cases (38 % of all domestic infections). That 

year, Enteritidis phagetype PT1 caused several infections clusters. In all of these, 

the vehicle was eggs produced by a farm in Turku. As far as is known, domestic 

eggs have not transferred any Salmonella infections since then, and there should 

also be no permanent reservoir of Salmonella Enteritidis in domestic cattle. 

Salmonella Typhimurium, particularly its phage type DT1 is Finland’s traditional 

endemic sero-/phage type. The percentage of all Typhimurium infections for all 

domestic salmonelloses varied annually from 28 % (in 1995) to 64 % (in 1997), 

and for foreign salmonelloses from 5 % (1995) to 10 % (2004). In the 1990s, 

there were still an average of 350 Typhimurium cases/year, but in the 2000s 

only less than half that (on the average 160 Typhimurium cases/yr). In all other 

years except in 1997 phage type DT1 was the most common domestic Typhimurium 

phage type. In 1997, however, the cases caused by phage type DT124 

(160 cases) exceeded in number those caused by DT1 (140 cases). In the same 

year there were almost as many DT12 cases (110). The phage type DT124 and 

DT12 are ”foreign” for Finland; the infections that year were, however, related to 

domestic outbreaks. Previously, Typhimurium phage type DT104 was associated 

with infections acquired while travelling abroad. However, the infections caused

in the 2000s by this multi-resistant phage type were domestically acquired in 

several years. 

Salmonella Infantis, in addition to Typhimurium, is the other traditional endemic 

serotype. The number of cases it has caused, however, decreased significantly 

in the 1990s. In 1995 to 1999 an average of 33 cases/yr were found, while in 

2000 to 2004 8 cases/yr on the average were reported. 

In 1995 to 1998, an annual average of less than 10 domestic cases caused by 

Salmonella Agona were recorded. However, in 1999 there were 85 cases. The 

number has subsequently dropped, but from 2000 to 2004 the average remained 

around 25 cases per year. 

Salmonella serotypes Stanley, Panama and Muenchen (all found in 1995), Poona 

(1996), Hadar (1997), Newport (1997 and 1998), Saintpaul (1998) and Hvittingfoss 

(2002) randomly caused at least 20 domestic infections. 

2004 

2003 

2002 

2001 

2000 

1999 

1998 

1997 

1996 

1995 

2004 

2003 

2002 

2001 

2000 

1999 

1998 

1997 

1996 

1995 

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 


Agona 

Enteritidis 

Hvittingfoss 

Infantis 

Newport 

Panama 

Poona 

Saintpaul 

Stanley 

Typhimurium 

Others 

Agona 

Braenderup 

Corvallis 

Enteritidis 

Hadar 

Infantis 

Newport 

Stanley 

Typhimurium 

Virchow 

Others 

Figure 12. The most common 

Salmonella serotypes found in 

domestic infections in 1995 to 

2004: The five most common 

types each year, and also their 

numbers in other years. 

Figure 13. The most common 

Salmonella serotypes in foreign 

infections in 1995 to 2004: The 

five most common types each 

year, and also their numbers in 

other years.


9.4 infections acquired abroad 

A major part of salmonelloses found in Finland have been associated with travelling 

abroad: on the average 76 % of all cases in 1995 to 1999 and 85 % in 2000 

to 2004. The five most common serotypes of all cases associated with travelling 

abroad varied between years (Figure 2). In all these years, however, the three 

most common serotypes were Salmonella Enteritidis (average about 1000 foreign 

cases/yr), Salmonella Typhimurium (average 150 cases/yr) and Salmonella Virchow 

(average 80 cases/yr). 

The percentage of Salmonella Enteritidis infections among all the foreign infections 

varied from 41 % (2004) to 54 % (2002) throughout the decade. Among Salmonella 

Enteritidis phage types only two, PT4 (181 - 385 cases detected) and PT1 (131 

- 229), each year caused the majority of Enteritidis infections. These phage types 

are known to be able to infect the ovaries of laying hens (they are so-called egg 

invasive types), wherein Salmonella enter the eggs and may thus easily spread, 

e.g. via products containing raw eggs. Infections caused by both these phage 

types were usually associated with several countries. Infections by Enteritidis 

PT4 in particular were acquired in Spain and other Mediterranean countries, but 

also in Central Europe. Infections by Enteritidis PT1 often associated with trips 

to the Baltic countries and Russia. Besides phage types PT1 and PT4, and only 

in 2001, PT14b caused over 100 infections, most of which were associated with 

travelling to Greece. 

Various Salmonella Typhimurium phage types and Salmonella Virchov were found 

in infections caught in several different countries. During eight years (1996 to 2003) 

Salmonella Hadar and in five (1999 and 2001 to 2004) Salmonella Stanley was 

included among the five most common foreign serotypes (Figure 2). Infections by 

Salmonella Hadar in particularly were acquired in Mediterranean countries and 

those by Salmonella Stanley in Thailand.

10 Antimicrobial resistance of 

Salmonella strains 


Research professor Anja Siitonen, KTL and veterinarian Anna-Liisa Myllyniemi, Evira 

10.1 Background 

Antimicrobial resistance, i.e., resistance to antimicrobials, is one of the most 

serious problem of the medical and veterinary sciences. Resistance has increased 

during recent years and has become more versatile, rapidly increasing 

morbidity and mortality in humans and animals, and associated health-care costs. 

The greatest danger to human health is posed by increasing resistance among 

zoonootic bacteria such as Salmonella. 

10.2 Production animals and domestic foodstuffs 

10.2.1 Monitoring of antimicrobial resistance 

among Salmonella 

Systematic antimicrobial sensitivity testing of Salmonella isolated from animals 

has been carried out in Finland since 1983. In association with the National 

Salmonella Control Programme, at least one isolate from each positive farm 

has been tested. The antimicrobial sensitivity of Salmonella collected through 

self-control has also intermittently tested. 

In connection with the FINRES-Vet programme starting in 2002, surveillance of 

the resistance of other groups of bacteria also became regular. The programme 

monitors the antimicrobial resistance of zoonotic bacteria of importance to human 

healt, and the resistance of so-called indicator bacteria and certain animal 

pathogenes. Included in the FINRES-Vet programme are Salmonella isolated 

from domestic foodstuffs, cattle, pigs and poultry. In some years, the antimicrobial 

susceptibility of Salmonella isolated from pet animals has also been tested. 

Objectives of the programme are to monitor the antimicrobial resistance of bacteria, 

analyze trends in the prevalence of resistance prevalence, and to monitor 

the emergence of new resistant clones and phenotypes. The programme also 

monitors the consumption of antimicrobials and feed additives. 

Prior to 2002, a disk diffusion method was used in the susceptibility testing of 

Salmonella, and since 2002 a broth dilution method has been applied. In 2002, 

epidemiological cut-off values were taken into use: the so-called wild population, 

i.e., sensitive, bacteria do not possess mutational or acquired resistance 

mechanisms. By contrast, a micro-organism is defined as non-wild type (NWT) 

for a species by the presence of an acquired or mutational resistance mechanism 

to the drug in question.


Using these cut-off values it is possible to quickly to observe whether any bacterial 

population is developing resistance to some antimicrobial. The FINRES- 

Vet programme applies cut-off values established among the Nordic countries. 

Since 2002, the following antimicrobials have been included in the resistance 

monitoring: ampicillin, ceftiofur, chloramphenicol, florfenicol, nalidixic acid, enrofloxacin, 

gentamicin, neomycin, streptomycin, oxitetracyclin, sulfamethoxazole 

and trimethoprim. 

10.2.2 Antimicrobial resistance among Salmonella 

As Salmonella infection is only rarely found among production animal, only a 

small number of isolates are entered for susceptibility testing. Generally, isolates 

tested are very sensitive, no resistance whatsoever being found in some years. 

In 1995 - 2004, the number of resistant isolates from animals was around 10 %, 

or noticeably less. For example, in 2003 no resistance at all was found for antimicrobials 

included in the test panel, and in 2004, resistance in strains isolated 

from production animals was found only in multi-resistant S. Typhimurium DT 104 

from one pig. S. Typhimurium DT 104 was detected in Finland at two cattle farms 

in 1995. Since then, multi-resistant bacteria have only randomly been detected. 

Salmonella isolates resistant to fluoroquinolones have also been encountered. In 

addition, Salmonellae isolated from domestic foodstuffs have been susceptible 

to antimicrobials tested. 

The favourable resistance situation is due to prudent use of antimicrobials. 

Antimicrobials are not used in Finland to treat Salmonella infections in animals. 

Only Veterinarians may prescribe antimicrobial for animals. Recommendations 

for using antimicrobial agents in the treatment of the most significant infectious 

diseases in animals have been published. 

10.3 Salmonella strains isolated from humans 

Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance of Salmonella strains provides the possibility 

to detect epidemiological changes in the distribution of sensitive and resistant 

strains isolated from infections acquired domestically and also abroad. Since 1995, 

the MIC (minimum inhibitory concentration) of 100 successive domestic and 100 

successive foreign Salmonella strains isolated from sporadic human infections has 

annually been determined for several antimicrobials. However, ”epidemiological” 

susceptibility testing of all Salmonella strains using the disk diffusion method only 

started in 2000 and involves the use of 12 antimicrobials (ampicillin, chloramphenicol, 

streptomycin, sulphonamide, tetracycline, trimethoprim, ciprophloxacin, 

gentamycin, nalidixic acid, cephotaxim, mecillinam and imipenem [Amp, Chl, Str, 

Sul, Tet, Tmp, Cip, Gen, Nal, Ftx, Mec, Imp]). In addition, for the strains resistant 

to nalidixic acid, MIC determination for ciprophloxacin is carried out. 

Between the years 2000 and 2004 the sensitivity of about 10 600 strains was 

tested. The percentage of multi-resistant strains has remained relatively constant 

during these years: resistance to at least three drugs has been about 16 % and 

that to at least four about 10 %. An average of 24 % of foreign strains and 9 % of 

the domestic strains were resistant to Nal. However, among foreign Nal-resistant 

strains, the percentage of those strains whose sensitivity to ciprophloxacin had 

decreased (MIC ≥ 0.125 mg/L), had increased significantly between 2000 (51 

%) and 2004 (83 %). 

Resistance to Nal acid was common among Salmonella Enteritidis strains. On 

the other hand, the occurrence of resistance depended on the country in which 

the infection had been acquired, and thus also on the phage type; certain phage 

types are often associated with infections in particular countries. Thus, for instance,

Enteritidis PT1 infections caught in Spain were generally caused by Nal-R strains, 

while in Greece by Nal-S-strains. However, PT4 strains acquired in Spain were 

often Nal-S, while those from Bulgaria, for instance, were Nal-R. 

Endemic Salmonella Typhimurium DT1, Salmonella Infantis and Salmonella 

Agona strains have generally been sensitive to all antimicrobials tested. By 

contrast, foreign Infantis and Agona strains showed resistance to one or several 

drugs. However, Salmonella Typhimurium DT104, was almost always resistant 

to many antimicrobials, irrespective of its origin (domestic or foreign). Multi-resistance 

is especially typical for this phage type, and the typical resistance profile 

is AmpChlStrSulTet. 

10.4 Literature 

• FINRES-Vet 2002-2003, Finnish Veterinary Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring 

and Consumption of Antimicrobial Agents. National Veterinary and Food 

Research Institute (EELA), Helsinki, Finland. ISSN 1458-6878. 

• FINRES-Vet 2004, Finnish Veterinary Antimicrobial Resistance Monitoring and 

Consumption of Antimicrobial Agents. National Veterinary and Food Research 

Institute (EELA), Helsinki, Finland. ISSN 1458-6878. The report is available 

at www.evira.fi. 

• Hakanen A.J., Kotilainen P., Pitkänen S., Huikko S., Siitonen A., Huovinen 

P. eduction in fluoroquinolone susceptibility among non-typhoidal strains of 

Salmonella enterica isolated from Finnish patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 

2006;57(3):569-572. 

• Hakanen A, Lindgren M, Huovinen P, Jalava J, Siitonen A, Kotilainen P. New 

quinolene resistance phenomenon in Salmonella enterica: nalidixic acid-susceptible 

isolates with reduced fluoroquinolene susceptibility. J Clin Microbiol 

2005;43:11:5775-5778. 

• Hakanen A, Siitonen A, Kotilainen P, Huovinen P. Increasing fluoroquinolone 

resistance in Salmonella serotypes in Finland during 1995-1997. J Antimicr 

Chemother 1999;43:145-148. 

• Hakanen A, Siitonen A, Kotilainen P, Huovinen P. Increasing fluoroquinolone 

resistance and multiresistance in Salmonella isolates of foreign origin in Finland. 

Clin Microbiol Infect 1999:5;S3:302. 

• Kotilainen P, Pitkänen S, Siitonen A, Huovinen P, Hakanen A. In vitro activities 

of 11 fluoroquinolenes against 816 non-typhoidal strains of Salmonella enterica 

isolated from Finnish patients with special reference to reduced ciprofloxacin 

susceptibility. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2005 Sep 5;4:12. 

• 

Lukinmaa S, Nakari U-M, Liimatainen A, Siitonen A. Genomic diversity within 

phage types of Salmonella enterica ssp. enterica serotypes Enteritidis and 

Typhimurium. Foodborne Pathogens & Disease 2006;3:97-105. 


Faagityypit / 

phagetype 

National Salmonella Control Programme 

Salmonella Typhimurium phagetypes isolated from cattle, swine and poultry samples in 1995 - 2004 

APPENDIX 1 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

1 18 1 1 3 

8 1 2 5 1 6 8 1 2 2 1 3 1 4 

2 6 7 1 3 5 1 6 4 1 2 2 2 4 3 5 

2 6 2 7 2 1 1 5 

2 1 1 4 1 8 

2 1 2 4 2 1 1 3 1 4 1 5 

7 7 5 1 

1 var 1 4 

9 1 1 

12 1 1 3 5 

35 1 5 

40 1 1 

1 1 2 4 1 6 

1 4 1 7 

41 1 1 

1 1 

1 2 

1 5 

1 1 1 2 1 7 

1 5 

1 4 

41 var 1 2 

1 6 

1 6 

68 1 1 

1 1 

2 1 

4 1 

72 1 1 

104 2 1 

1 1 

2 1 

1 4 

120 1 1 1 2 1 5 

124 1 1 1 5 

135 1 1 

2 1 

1 1 

1 2 

135 var 16 2 

195 1 5 

NST 1 1 1 2 

1 1 

1 1 

2 2 

9 2 1 4 

5 2 1 5 1 7 

4 2 1 6 

NT 1 5 

1 1 1 5 

1 2 

U277 2 1 

1 5 

Total 24 23 20 16 23 9 29 21 21 15 

1) = cattle herds, faecal samples 

2) = cattle, lymph node, carcass swab or meat sample 

3) = swine herds, faecal samples 

4) = sow, lymph node, carcass swab or meat sample 

5) = fattening pig, lymph node, carcass swab or meat sample 

6) = egg production line (all) 

7) = turkeys (all) 

8) =meat production line (all), broilers

Feedstuff 

Oil plant seeds and 

products of these 

Other feeds of vegetable 

origin 

Feeds of vegetable 

origin, total 

Number of samples analyzed (pcs) 

Positive samples (pcs) 


Salmonella analysis of domestic feedstuffs in 1995 - 2004 

Number of official control samples. 

APPENDIX 2 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 - 2004 

327 238 217 252 212 187 186 190 234 237 2 280 

0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 

0 0,4 0 0,4 0 0 0 0 0 0,8 0,2 

32 19 26 4 41 43 41 41 43 50 340 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

359 257 243 256 253 230 227 231 277 287 2 620 

0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 

0 0,4 0 0,4 0 0 0 0 0 0,7 0,2 

Milk products 15 39 34 40 28 4 13 27 30 47 277 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Meat and meat-bone 

468 432 400 336 357 405 183 97 97 117 2 892 

powder 

0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 

0 0,5 0,3 0,6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,2 

Other feeds of animal 

0 4 0 40 14 14 6 1 14 9 102 

origin 

0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 

0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 

Feeds of animal origin, 

483 475 434 416 399 423 202 125 141 173 3 271 

total 

0 2 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 

0 0,4 0,2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,2 

Feed mixtures for 

1 136 1 070 952 796 802 714 830 1 123 1 213 1 038 9 674 

production animals* 

1 2 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 9 

Feedstuffs 

Seeds of grains and products and byproducts 

of these 

Oil plant seeds and by-products of 

these (except sunflower seeds) 

Sunflower seeds (for feeding birds 

outdoors) 

Sugar and starch indurstry products 

Salmonella analysis of imported feedstuffs (3rd countries and EU import) in 1995 - 2004 

Number of official control samples 




APPENDIX 3 (1/2) 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 -2004 

94 174 828 987 626 800 511 1 054 576 346 5 996 

0 1 0 1 0 0 10 3 1 0 16 

0 0,6 0 0,1 0 0 2 0,3 0,2 0 0,3 

851 1 071 1 443 1 771 3 012 2 975 3 333 5 511 4 464 5 479 29 910 

0 2 9 3 2 5 2 118 29 118 288 

0 0,2 0,6 0,2

Feedstuffs 

Salmonella analysis of imported feedstuffs (3rd countries and EU import) in 1995 - 2004 






1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 -2004 

Fish powder 

740 782 610 356 43 92 51 81 101 37 2 893 

1 1 1 6 0 0 0 1 0 0 10 

0,1 0,1 0,2 1,7 0 0 0 1,2 0 0 0,3 

Feed fish and fish refuse 1 4 16 4 0 

15 17 36 4 2 99 

0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 

0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 1 

Meat and meat-bone powder 465 371 444 406 15 6 0 0 

0 

0 1 707 

0 5 7 4 0 0 16 

0 1,3 1,6 1 0 0 1 

Other feed of animal origin 96 216 178 24 14 6 0 

1 1 1 537 

0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 

0 0,5 1,1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0,6 

Feed of animal origin, total 

1 302 1 373 1 248 790 72 119 68 118 106 40 5 236 

1 7 10 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 30 

Feedstuff 

Serotypes isolated from feed sample in 1995 - 2004 

Samples from domestic manufacturing 

APPENDIX 4 

Number of samples, from where isolated 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 

Meat and meat-bone powder 

S. Agona 1 1 

S. Livingstone 2 2 4 

S. Muenster 1 1 

S. Agona 1 

Turnip rape conc. 

1 2 

S. Tennessee 1 1 

Feed-mixtures for production animals 

S. Agona 1 1 

S. Infantis 6 6 

S. Livingstone 1 1 

S. Mbandaga 1 1 

S. Typhimurium 2 2 

Feed for fur animals 

S. Agona 1 1 2 

S. Havana 1 1 

S. Infantis 1 1 2 

S. Poona 1 1 

S. Tennessee 1 1

Feedstuff 

Serotypes isolated from feedstuff samples in 1995 - 2004 

Samples of imported feedstuffs (except for pet animals feeds) 



1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 

Sunflower seeds 

S. Agona 1 1 1 2 5 

S. Anatum 2 2 

S. Braenderup 1 1 

S. Brandenburg 1 1 

S. Cubana 2 2 

S. Derby 1 1 

S. Enteritidis 2 1 1 1 5 

S. Give 1 3 4 

S. Havana 1 1 


S. Jerusalem 1 1 

S. Kottbus 1 1 

S. Lexington 1 1 

S. Lille 1 1 


S. London 1 1 

S. Montevideo 2 2 1 1 1 7 

S. Muenster 1 1 

S. Ohio 1 1 

S. Oranienburg 8 8 

S. Senftenberg 2 1 1 1 1 6 2 2 16 

S. ssp. 1 1 2 

S. Szentes 1 1 

S. Taksony 1 1 



Oil vegetables crushed and conc., etc. 

S. Agona 1 1 

S. Altona 1 1 

S. Amsterdam 1 1 

S. California 4 4 

S. Cubana 2 2 2 2 1 9 

S. Lexington 1 1 

S. Mbandaka 2 6 12 33 53 

S. Meleagridis 1 1 

S. Rissen 1 1 2 

S. Sambre 13 13 

S. Senftenberg 2 2 

S. ssp. 56 15 22 93 

S. Tennessee 4 44 12 45 105 


S. Urbana 1 1 

S. Wien 1 1

Feedstuff 

Serotypes isolated from feedstuff samples in 1995 - 2004 

Samples of imported feedstuffs (except for pet animals feeds) 



1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 

Seeds of grains and products and by-products of these 

S. Agona 1 1 


S. Kottbus 1 1 

S. Muenchen 1 1 


S. Typhimurium 1 1 2 


S. Adeleide 1 1 

S. Anatum 1 1 

S. Cerro 1 1 


S. Kentucky 1 1 

S. Liverpool 1 1 


S. Montevideo 1 1 

S. Senftenberg 1 1 


Fish powder 

S. Agona 1 1 

S. Anatum 1 1 

S. Liverpool 1 1 

S. Montevideo 1 2 3 

S. Schwarzengrund 1 1 

S. Tilburg 1 1 

Other feedstuffs of animal origin 

S. Anatum 1 1 


S. Isangi 1 1 

S. Orion 1 1 


Feed mixtures for production animals 

S. Taksony 1 1

Feedstuff 




Salmonella analysis of pet animal feed in 1995 - 2004 


APPENDIX 6 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 -2004 

Control samples of domestic manufacturing 

Pet animal feeds (all) 77 94 34 69 70 55 33 47 32 33 544 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

Import and market control samples 1) : 

Pet animal feeds (except 

85 173 111 162 53 59 21 46 46 56 812 

teethers) 

8 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 16 

9,4 1,2 1,8 0 0 0 0 0 6,5 1,8 2 

Pet animal teeethers and pig ears 1 252 284 100 63 117 91 144 217 202 192 2 662 

118 58 17 9 12 7 4 13 3 11 252 

9,4 20,4 17 14,3 10,3 7,7 2,8 6 1,5 5,7 9,5 

Pet animals feeds and teethers, 

1 337 457 211 225 170 150 165 263 248 248 3 474 

total 

126 60 19 9 12 7 4 13 6 12 268 

9,4 13,1 9 4 7,1 4,7 2,4 4,9 2,4 4,8 7,7 

1) Market control samples include both imported products and domestic products

Pet animal serotypes isolated from feedstuff samples in 1995 - 2004 

APPENDIX 7 

Feedstuff 

1995 1996 1997 


1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 

S. Abony 1 1 

S. Agona 1 1 2 

S. Anatum 2 1 3 

S. Augustenborg 1 1 

S. Braenderup 1 1 

S. Brunei 1 1 2 

S. Cerro 7 11 1 19 

S. Derby 1 1 1 2 4 9 

S. Dublin 1 1 

S. Enteritidis 1 1 

S. Give 1 1 

S. Goldcost 2 2 

S. Hadar 1 1 

S. Havana 43 31 2 4 2 2 2 2 1 2 91 

S. Indiana 1 1 

S. Infantis 6 1 4 1 12 

S. Kedougou 1 1 2 

S. Lexington 1 1 2 

S. Livingstone 1 1 1 3 

S. London 1 1 2 4 

S. Manhattan 1 1 

S. Montevideo 29 7 1 1 1 2 41 

S. München 1 1 

S. Ohio 27 6 3 1 37 

S. Orion 13 10 2 2 1 2 30 

S. Panama 1 1 

S. Rissen 4 1 5 

S. Sagona 1 1 

S. Schwarzengrund 5 5 

S. Senftenberg 2 1 3 

S. Ssp. 1 1 1 3 

S. Stanley 1 1 

S. Tennessee 1 1 1 3 

S. Thompson 1 2 3 

S. Typhimurium 1 7 1 1 2 1 3 2 4 22 

S. Weltevreden 10 2 12 

S. Westhampton 1 1 

S. Worthington 1 1

Feedstuff 

Oil plant seeds and 

products and byproducts 

of these 

Feeds of plant 

origin, total 

Manufacturing of domestic feedstuffs, mil. kg 

Contaminated feedstuffs, mil. kg 

Contaminated feedstuffs, % 

Salmonella contaminated feestuffs in 1995 - 2004 

Domestic manufacturing 

APPENDIX 8 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 - 2004 

208,069 210,144 223,804 212,124 216,856 229,457 219,52 225,008 206,79 191,973 2 143,745 

0,288 0,962 1,349 2,599 

0,1 0,5 0,7 0,1 

397,328 463,428 510,528 528,106 504,082 543,208 438,436 490,035 452,099 485,22 4 812,470 

0,288 0,962 1,349 2,599 

Feedstuff 

Seeds of grains and products and byproducts 

of these 

Oil plant seeds and by-products of 

these (except sunflower seeds) 

Sunflower seeds (for feeding birds 

outdoors) 

Sugar and starch industry products 

One-cell whites 

Grass and hay powder 

Other feed of vegetable origin 

Salmonella contaminated feedstuffs in 1995 - 2004 

Imported feedstuffs 1) 

(3rd countries and EU import) 

Imported feed volumes, mil. kg 1) 




1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 - 2004 

7,07 12,64 47,08 55,96 74,74 75,2 39,4 72,45 39,54 22,21 446,29 

1,01 6,38 0,8 8,19 

2,8 8,8 2 1,8 

38,59 50,32 65 82,83 142,37 157,96 158,22 248,12 257,98 216,69 1 418,08 

3,67 9,73 1,8 2 6,1 3,65 41,79 8,9 48,02 125,66 

7,3 15 2,2 1,4 3,9 2,3 16,8 3,5 22,1 8,9 

9,31 4,11 5,49 3,18 7,28 2,06 6,74 8,39 11,52 0,45 58,53 

0,27 0,06 0,11 0,14 0,82 0,11 0,47 0,25 0,18 2,41 

2,9 1,5 2 4,4 11,3 5,4 7 3 1,6 4,1 

20,16 14,3 8,94 24,16 38,03 34,76 28,47 33,75 25,79 49,16 277,52 

0 0,03 0,03 

Feedstuff 

Feeds of plant origin, total 

Fish powder 

Feed fish and fish refuse 


Other feed of animal origin 

Feeds of animal origin, total 

Feed mixtures for production 

animals 

1) Imported volumes submitted to control inspections 

Salmonella contaminated feedstuffs in 1995 - 2004 

Imported feedstuffs 1) 

(3rd countries and EU import) 

Imported feed volumes, mil. kg 1) 




1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 - 2004 

80,38 83,19 127,98 166,21 272,14 272,13 237,56 367,22 337,4 289,62 2 233,83 

0,27 3,73 9,84 1,97 2,82 6,21 4,13 48,42 9,88 48,02 136,29 

0,3 4,5 7,7 1,2 1 2,3 1,7 13,2 2,9 16,6 6,1 

31,4 34,24 31,9 20,08 10,66 9,39 12,29 12,95 13,02 10,33 186,26 

0,02 1,32 0,3 3,68 6,35 11,67 

0,1 3,9 0,9 18,3 49 6,3 

1,1 1,03 5,34 0,51 - 0,26 1,98 1,97 0,09 0,06 12,34 

0,03 0,03 

5,9 0,2 

16,84 10,97 13,68 12,93 6,54 0,79 - - - - 61,75 

0,12 0,28 0,73 1,13 

1,1 2 5,6 1,8 

4,67 6,03 5,94 0,58 1,49 - 0,02 0,03 0,02 0,09 18,87 

0,06 0,05 0,1 

1,2 0,8 0,6 

54,01 52,27 55,86 34,1 18,68 10,44 14,29 14,95 13,13 10,48 279,22 

0,08 1,45 0,62 4,44 6,35 12,94 

0,1 2,8 1,1 13 42,5 4,6 

0,8 0,44 

0,3 3,32 3,37 0,35 0,27 0,21 0,28 1,2 

10,54 

0 

0

Feedstuff 

Feed volume, mil. kg 1) 



Salmonella contaminated pet animal feeds in 1995 - 2004 

APPENDIX 10 

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 1995 -2004 

Domestic 

manufacturing 

Pet animal feeds (all) 

Imported 

22,52 21,656 27,483 23,814 22,442 10,692 7,98 7,872 7,742 7,29 159,491 

0 

0 

1) 

Pet animal feeds (all) 1,14 1,11 0,95 0,36 0,003 - - 0 - 0,01 3,57 

0,05 0,02 0,01 0,01 0,8 

4,2 1,9 0,5 2,8 2,4 

1) Imported volumes submitted to control inspections (3rd countries and EU import).

Serotypes isolated from animals other than those included in 

the National Salmonella Control program 1997 - 2000 


Serovar 1997 1998 1999 2000 Total 

Abony 1 14 

1 

Agona 1 13 1 19 

1 28 

1 13 6 35 

10 

Agoueve 1 14 

1 

Ahuza 1 14 

1 

Alger 1 14 

1 

Banana 1 16 

1 

Bardo 1 14 

1 5 

1 19 

3 

Bredeney 1 21 

1 16 

2 

Cerro 1 21 

1 

Enteritidis 1 2 6 38 

1 13 1 26 16 38 

2 13 1 16 7 38 

1 38 

36 

Finkenwerder 1 14 

1 

Give 1 16 

1 

Hadar 1 16 

1 

Hillingdon 1 13 

1 

Hvittingfoss 1 21 

1 

Indiana 1 22 

1 

Infantis 1 14 1 16 1 26 

1 32 1 41 

1 4 1 15 

7 

Montevideo 1 21 

1 

Muenchen 1 14 

1 21 

2 

Newport 1 21 

2 19 

3 

Oslo 2 21 

2 

Paratyphi B var. Java 1 26 

1 

Poona 1 21 

1 13 

2 

Saintpaul 1 19 

1 

Salmonella ssp. I 2 14 1 38 

1 12 1 13 2 14 1 21 

1 33 

1 14 2 15 1 21 

2 13 2 14 1 19 1 47 

19 

S. ssp.II = salamae 1 14 1 19 1 21 

3 14 1 21 

5 14 

12 

S. ssp.III 4 19 

1 19 

5 

S. ssp.IIIa = arizonae 1 21 

1 1 3 19 

5 

S. ssp.IIIb = diarizonae 1 19 

2 19 

3 

S. ssp.IV = houtenae 1 14 2 21 

1 21 

1 14 2 21 

1 

7 

5 1 11 1 12 1 15 3 16 

2 

Typhimurium 

11 1 13 1 15 2 16 10 22 

1 23 1 26 2 38 1 40 

1 9 1 11 1 15 5 16 7 22 

1 24 9 38 1 41 

8 22 1 24 6 26 1 29 2 33 

2 38 1 40 

1 15 1 16 3 22 2 33 

8 35 1 39 2 47 

93 

Virchow 1 21 

1 

Total 54 57 63 53 227 

1 duck; 2 ferret; 3 goose; 4 horse; 5 mouse; 6 mouse, zoo; 7 howk owl, zoo; 8 lynx; 9 hen, not production; 10 rabbit; 11 

pigeon; 12 fox, natural; 13 fox, ranched; 14 turtle; 15 cat; 16 dog; 17 great spotted woodpecker; 18 ermine; 19 snake; 

20 pet hedgehog; 21 lizard; 22 seagull; 23 guinea pig; 24 mountain hare/brown hare; 25 mink; 26 other bird; 27 

peregrine; 28 badger; 29 artic fox; 30 aquirrel; 31 parrot; 32 reideer; 33 bullfinch; 34 ptarmigan, zoo; 35 rat; 36 longeared 

owl; 37 otter, ranched; 38 hedgehog; 39 mallard; 40 raccoon; 41 lamb; 42 great git; 43 swift; 44 undulate; 45 

redpoll; 46 sparrow; 47 greenfinch; 48 siskin; 49 boar

Serotypes isolated from animals other than those included in 

the National Salmonella Control Program 2000 - 2004 


Serovar 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total 

Abony 1 16 1 

Agona 1 16 1 

Anatum 1 19 1 

Bardo 1 22 

1 14 2 

Bonn 1 14 1 

Braenderup 1 14 2 22 3 

Brandenburg 1 19 

1 22 2 

Bredeney 1 15 1 

Derby 1 22 1 


5 13 4 38 

1 7 1 20 2 38 

1 18 1 19 11 38 33 

Florida 1 19 1 

Fluntern 1 21 1 

Gaminara 1 21 1 

Halle 1 14 1 

Hessarek 1 8 1 

Hvittingfoss 1 19 1 

Infantis 1 13 

1 16 1 25 3 

Jangwani 1 19 1 

Kisarawe 1 21 1 

Konstanz 1 13 

1 12 2 

Korkeasaari 1 21 1 

Kottbus 1 14 1 

Lexington 1 19 1 

London 1 21 1 

Madelia 1 21 1 

Manhattan 1 21 1 

Montevideo 1 21 1 22 2 

Muenster 1 16 1 

Newport 4 19 1 22 

2 19 7 

Newyork 1 21 1 

Nima 1 21 1 

Oranienburg 1 19 1 

Panama 1 19 1 


1 19 2 

Patience 2 14 2 

Poona 1 13 1 21 2 25 

3 13 

1 13 8 

Sandiego 1 21 1 

Schwarzengrund 1 19 1 

Salmonella ssp. I 3 14 5 19 1 21 

1 14 1 18 

1 14 1 18 1 19 14 

S. ssp.II = salamae 1 14 2 19 

2 14 1 19 

2 14 3 21 

5 14 1 19 1 20 3 21 21 

S. ssp.IIIa = arizonae 1 10 3 19 

9 19 1 21 

6 19 1 31 

6 19 27 

S. ssp.IIIb = diarizonae 1 19 1 21 

1 6 1 14 7 19 3 21 

6 19 1 21 

7 19 1 21 29 

S. ssp.IV = houtenae 1 19 3 21 

1 19 1 21 

2 21 8 

Tennessee 1 14 1 

Typhimurium 

22 4 1 13 3 15 3 16 1 17 24 22 

2 27 1 36 2 38 2 40 1 43 1 44 2 45 

6 4 1 9 5 13 1 16 8 22 2 25 

2 30 1 33 1 37 1 38 1 42 

1 13 2 22 1 24 

2 33 1 34 1 48 

4 3 1 4 1 9 4 15 3 16 3 22 2 24 

9 33 6 38 3 45 2 46 1 47 141 

Virchow 1 16 1 

Total 103 89 48 95 335 

1 duck; 2 ferret; 3 goose; 4 horse; 5 mouse; 6 mouse, zoo; 7 howk owl, zoo; 8 lynx; 9 hen, not production; 10 rabbit; 11 

pigeon; 12 fox, natural; 13 fox, ranched; 14 turtle; 15 cat; 16 dog; 17 great spotted woodpecker; 18 ermine; 19 snake; 20 

pet hedgehog; 21 lizard; 22 seagull; 23 guinea pig; 24 mountain hare/brown hare; 25 mink; 26 other bird; 27 peregrine; 28 

badger; 29 artic fox; 30 aquirrel; 31 parrot; 32 reideer; 33 bullfinch; 34 ptarmigan, zoo; 35 rat; 36 long-eared owl; 37 otter, 

ranched; 38 hedgehog; 39 mallard; 40 raccoon; 41 lamb; 42 great git; 43 swift; 44 undulate; 45 redpoll; 46 sparrow; 47 

greenfinch; 48 siskin; 49 boar

APPENDIX 12 

Phagetype 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

5 

1 

13 1 16 3 38 

2 40 

1 4 1 22 1 23 

2 38 1 40 

3 16 6 38 

1 5 1 24 2 38 

4 4 2 15 1 16 

1 38 

4 4 1 9 1 13 

2 25 1 30 1 42 

2 1 11 

8 1 16 

12 1 16 

12 var 1 16 

21 var 1 16 

35 2 13 

36 1 44 

40 1 33 

1 15 1 41 

4 26 3 33 

2 33 2 47 

1 15 1 16 1 36 

41 2 11 9 22 1 26 

3 22 

1 11 1 13 5 22 

1 29 

2 22 

22 22 2 27 

2 40 

41 var 1 13 4 22 

1 13 

1 22 

1 22 

66 1 16 

72 1 38 

104 1 16 

110 1 17 

120 1 3 1 9 

1 16 1 22 

135 1 13 

135 var 1 13 

195 8 35 

U277 1 13 1 38 

NST 1 15 1 16 

S . Typhimurium phagetypes, animals other than those included in 

the National Salmonella Control Program 1996 - 2004 

2 38 

1 26 

3 22 1 40 

1 15 

1 22 1 39 

1 38 1 43 2 45 

1 33 

7 22 1 38 

1 16 

1 37 

1 13 

1 22 1 33 1 34 

1 48 

1 22 

1 9 1 16 4 38 

1 4 3 15 1 16 

2 24 6 33 3 45 

2 46 1 47 

2 3 3 22 

1 15 1 16 3 33 

NT 1 13 1 16 1 40 

1 16 

2 22 1 24 

1 22 

Total 26 22 26 27 18 45 23 6 37 

1 duck; 2 ferret; 3 goose; 4 horse; 5 mouse; 6 mouse, zoo; 7 howk owl, zoo; 8 lynx; 9 hen, not production; 10 rabbit; 

11 pigeon; 12 fox, natural; 13 fox, ranched; 14 turtle; 15 cat; 16 dog; 17 great spotted woodpecker; 18 ermine; 19 

snake; 20 pet hedgehog; 21 lizard; 22 seagull; 23 guinea pig; 24 mountain hare/brown hare; 25 mink; 26 other bird; 

27 peregrine; 28 badger; 29 artic fox; 30 aquirrel; 31 parrot; 32 reideer; 33 bullfinch; 34 ptarmigan, zoo; 35 rat; 36 

long-eared owl; 37 otter, ranched; 38 hedgehog; 39 mallard; 40 raccoon; 41 lamb; 42 great git; 43 swift; 44 

undulate; 45 redpoll; 46 sparrow; 47 greenfinch; 48 siskin; 49 boar 

2 38

APPENDIX 13 

Phagetype 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

1 1 38 

4 1 49 

1 2 

1 7 

1 18 

6 1 16 

8 1 15 

1 19 

20 3 38 

3 38 

1 26 13 38 

7 38 

5 38 

4 38 

1 38 

11 38 

20a 1 38 

1 38 

33 2 13 

NST 1 5 1 38 

1 13 

2 13 

1 38 

1 38 

1 20 1 38 

NT 1 5 

Total 4 7 5 15 9 1 6 6 4 13 

See explanations Appendix 12 

S . Enteritidis phagetypes, animals other than those included in 

the National Salmonella Control Program 1995 - 2004

Salmonella isolates from imported foodstuffs 1997 - 2004 


Serovar 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Agona 1 45 

2 9 

1 25 

Amsterdam 1 40 

Anatum 3 17 

1 16 3 45 

1 35 

Bardo 1 30 

1 40 

1 11 

Blockley 1 11 

Braenderup 1 9 

Brandenburg 1 38 

1 28 

Bredeney 1 27 

1 27 

2 34 

Charity 1 40 

Chincol 1 40 

Derby 1 54 

1 38 1 39 1 42 

1 49 1 53 

1 26 

Dessau 1 45 

1 36 4 51 

Dublin 3 47 

1 23 1 44 1 47 

1 42 

2 44 

Emek 1 11 

1 11 


1 7 1 11 

1 11 

4 11 1 32 

4 11 

3 11 

Fischerkietz 1 29 

Gaminara 2 45 

Give 1 11 

Goldcoast 2 51 

Haardt 1 11 

1 11 3 12 

14 11 

Hadar 1 27 

1 2 1 7 1 11 1 11 2 27 1 56 

1 30 

1 27 

1 3 5 11 

6 11 

Haifa 1 37 

Heidelberg 2 9 

Hvittingfoss 1 40 

1 40 

Indiana 4 2 

1 27 

Infantis 1 9 

1 2 

1 1 

9 24 

Isangi 2 40 

Istanbul 1 27 

1 11 

Kentucky 1 11 

Kottbus 1 27 

1 59 

1 27 

Krefeld 1 54 

Lexington 1 33 

Livingstone 1 50 

London 4 21 

1 43 

1 17 

Manhattan 5 33 

Mbandaka 2 6 

Montevideo 1 2 

Muenchen 1 19 

Muenster 1 20 

1 40 

Newlands 1 54 

1 11 

5 6 1 10 3 11 

1 40

Salmonella isolates from imported foodstuffs 1997 - 2004 


Serovar 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

Newport 1 20 

2 27 

4 11 3 16 1 26 

1 48 

2 11 1 41 

Ohio 1 45 

Oranienburg 4 58 

Orion 3 57 

Panama 1 19 


1 11 

2 11 1 34 

1 11 

Potsdam 1 48 

Rubislaw 1 40 

Saintpaul 1 27 1 30 

1 30 

1 2 

1 16 1 40 

1 25 1 30 

1 25 1 27 

Saphra 1 40 

Schwarzengrund 1 11 1 40 

Senftenberg 3 40 

S. ssp. I 1 43 2 45 

S. ssp.IIIb=diarizonae 1 17 

1 28 

Telhashomer 1 18 

Thompson 2 5 1 6 

Typhimurium 1 4 1 40 4 52 1 14 1 26 2 52 

1 2 1 15 1 20 

1 49 1 50 1 52 

1 22 1 49 1 51 

1 52 3 57 

1 43 3 51 1 53 

4 27 1 43 6 51 

1 11 

2 11 

1 52 1 55 

Virchow 1 11 

2 11 

2 11 3 31 1 40 

Weltevreden 1 40 

Total 27 26 23 35 68 28 57 24 

1 duck meat, Holland; 2 duck meat, France; 3 duck meat, Thailand; 4 duck meat, foreign; 5 broiler, Argentina; 6 

broiler, Brazil; 7 broiler, Spain; 8 broiler, Great Britain; 9 broiler, France; 10 broiler, Germany; 11 broiler, Thailand; 

12 broiler foreign; 13 broiler, USA; 14 food, Great Britain; 15 food, foreign; 16 horsemeat, Argentina; 17 

horsemeat, Brazil; 18 horsemeat, Poland; 19 horsemeat, Uruguay; 20 horsemeat, USA; 21 minced meat, Holland, 

22 minced meat, Germany; 23 hamburger, Danish-Finnish; 24 sponge cake, Denmark; 25 turkey, Brazil; 26 

turkey, Great Britain; 27 turkey, France; 28 turkey, Germany; 29 turkey, Denmark; 30 turkey, foreign; 31 turkey, 

Hungary; 32 kebab meat, Great Britain; 33 kebab meat, unspecified; 34 kebab meat, Germany; 35 kangaroo fillet, 

Australia; 36 ham pepper snack, foreign; 37 dried mint, Egypt; 38 meat, Germany; 39 meat, Denmark; 40 spices; 

41 minimaize, Thailand; 42 beef, Belgium; 43 beef, Holland; 44 beef, Ireland; 45 beef, Paraguay; 46 beef 

Germany; 47 beef, Denmark; 48 frog's leg, Indonesia; 49 pork, Belgium; 50 pork, Holland; 51 pork, Germany; 52 

pork, Denmark; 53 pork, foreign; 54 mussels, Thailand; 

55 Tapas salami, Spain; 56 wild duck meat, Holland; 57 wild duck meat, Great Britain; 58 chocolate, Germany; 59 

pheasant meat, foreign

S . Typhimurium phagetypes, imported foodstuffs 1996-2004 

APPENDIX 15 

Phagetype 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

8 1 4 

1 2 

3 57 

12 2 52 

1 49 

1 22 1 51 

1 53 

15A 1 52 

17 1 52 

104 1 15 

1 26 

1 20 1 43 1 46 

1 51 

1 43 

104B 1 43 

1 51 

108 1 50 

1 52 

120 1 8 

1 14 

1 51 

135 1 52 

185 1 51 

195 1 49 

U277 1 51 

U302 1 15 

1 27 

NST 1 40 

1 9 

1 52 

NT 1 55 

Total 3 4 4 8 7 4 0 5 2 

See explanations Appendix 14 

S. Enteritidis phagetypes, imported foodstuffs 1996-2004 

Phagetype 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 

1 1 11 

4 1 8 

1 11 

1 7 1 11 

1 11 

2 11 1 32 

2 11 

1 11 

5 6 1 10 

6 1 11 

3 11 

21 1 11 

Total 1 1 2 0 1 3 3 3 9 

See explanations Appendix 14

Epidemics caused by various Salmonella types (A) and 

number of ill persons in these epidemics (B) in 1995 - 2004 

APPENDIX 16 

Salmonella type 

1995 

Salmonella type 

1996 

A B A B 

Salmonella Enteriditis 3 287 Salmonella Enteriditis 2 31 

Salmonella Typhimurium 2 51 Salmonella Typhimurium 3 34 

Salmonella Stanley 1 114 Salmonella Poona 1 20 

Salmonella Panama 1 20 

Total 7 472 6 85 

1997 1998 

A B A B 


Salmonella Hadar 1 25 

Salmonella Newport 1 100 

Total 4 385 1 32 

1999 2000 

A B A B 

Salmonella Enteriditis 1 7 

Salmonella Enteriditis 1 5 Salmonella Typhimurium 3 39 

Salmonella Typhimurium 6 244 Salmonella Ohio 1 300 

Salmonella Agona 1 63 Salmonella Saitpaul 1 12 

Total 8 312 6 358 

2001 2002 

A B A B 

Salmonella Enteriditis 1 20 Salmonella Enteriditis 1 60 


Salmonella Dublin 1 11 Salmonella Abony 1 13 

Salmonella Seftenberg 1 3 Salmonella Oranienburg 1 9 

Total 4 64 6 138 

2003 2004 

A B A B 

Salmonella Potsdam 1 2 Salmonella Enteriditis 2 30 

Salmonella Typhimurium 1 25 

Salmonella Agona 1 19 

Total 1 2 4 74

Descriptions of Salmonella epidemics 2000 - 2004 


Year Sero-/phagetype Ill 

(estimate) 

Disease carrier / other notes 

2000 Typhimurium var. Copenhagen FT NST 20 Disease associated with dinner in a restaurant. The same Salmonella type was found 

from two symptomless personnel in the kitchen. 

Saintpaul 12 Infections at family party via food served. Salmonella carrier had taken part in the 

preparation of food. 

Typhimurium FT1 8 Smoked meat bought at a summer event and stored for long at room temperature caused 

disease at a family party. Altogether, 1200 kg of the meat had been sold, but no other 

illnesses were reported. 

Enteriditis FT1 7 Alfalfa sprouts grown at a course centre caused an epidemic among course participants. 

Five persons were taken to hospital for treatment. A person having stomach symptoms 

had participated in preparing the sprouts. 

Typhimurium FT1 11 Illnesses in several locations. All the ill had eaten at the same hotel. 

Ohio 300 

During the Christmas season at a slalom centre, they had to start using an extra water 

supply of the municipality. Water from this water supply was contaminated by wastewater 

leaking from a broken wastewater line. About 300 vacationers fell ill in one week after 

drinking contaminated utility water. In addition to Salmonella, calicivirus, and 

Campylobacter upsaliensis were found in ill with long-term symptoms and in the water. 

2001 Dublin 11 Illness associated with eating at a pizzeria. 

Seftenberg 3 Eating at a hamburger restaurant. The same type of Salmonella was also isolated from 

one kitchen worker without symptoms. 

Typhimurium FT1 30 Associated with a wedding dinner at a restaurant. 

Enteriditis FT9 20 Infection apparently caught during a trip to Latvia. Yoghurt dessert was the suspected 

source of infection. 

2002 Abony 13 Brown mung bean sprouts. The seeds were from China. Outbreak in Northern Savonia. 

Oranienburg 9 Contaminated German chocolate caused an outbreak in several countries. In addition to 

Finland, Salmonella was isolated from the chocolate in Germany and Sweden. At least 

300 people in Europe fell ill.

Descriptions of Salmonella epidemics 2000 - 2004 


Year Sero-/phagetype Sick 

(estimate) 

Disease carrier / other notes 

Typhimurium FT1, FT9 47 Infection associated with eating in a work-place canteen in Helsinki. Epidemiological 

analysis found a significant association between eating food containing Lebanese 

sesame mass (Halva) and being ill. Two Salmonella phage types were isolated. No 

Salmonella was isolated from food samples. 

Typhimurium FT120 4 Eating in a work-place canteen. The same type of Salmonella was also found in a kitchen 

worker lacking symptoms. 

Typhimurium FT104 5 Illness associated with eating in a kebab restaurant 

Enteriditis FT4 44 Eating at a restaurant in Latvia suspected being the source of infection. 

16 Secondary infections 

2003 Potsdam 2 Illness associated with drinking water from a stream by a nature trail. 

2004 Agona 19 Food served at a housewarming party. Food was prepared at home. The source of 

infection could not be found. 

Typhimurium var. Copenhagen 

25 A wedding dinner arranged by catering service. Of 85 persons exposed, 25 became ill 

FT104 (ACSSuT-R), 

from whom multi-resistant foreign type of Salmonella was isolated. No food or catering 

multi-resistant, rare in Finland 

service employees was available for sampling. One person taking part in preparing food 

has symptoms of stomach illness at the time of preparation. 

Enteriditis FT13 var. 

rare phagetype 

26 Food prepared by catering service and served at a wedding. From epidemiological 

analysis, a significant connection was found between eating macaroni salad and being ill. 

The same type of Salmonella was isolated from one employee at the company who had 

no symptoms. The employee had participated in preparing the salad. 

Enteriditis FT4 (Nal-R) 

4 In a restaurant where broilers originatinated from Brazil were cut, marinated and 

multi-resistant, rare in Finland 

frozen.Multi-resistant foreign-type Salmonella were isolated from the broiler meat, and 

also from the persons being ill. Several deficiencies were apparent in the restaurant’s 

hygiene and self-control.

International standards and legislation 

APPENDIX 18 

SPS. Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures. World 

trade organisation. 15. 4 1994. www.wto.org 

CAC/GL-30. CAC Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Microbiological Risk 

Assessment, 1999. Codex Alimentarius. http://www.codexalimentarius.net. 

Commission Decision 94/968/EC of 28 December 1994 approving the operational 

programme for the control of Salmonella in certain live animals and animal 

products presented by Finland. OJ No. L 371, 31/12/1994 s. 36–37. Suomenk. 

Erityispainos Alue 3 Nide 64 s. 252. 

Commission Decision 95/161/EC of 21 April 1995 establishing additional 

guarantees regarding Salmonella for consignments to Finland and Sweden of 

laying hens. OJ No. L 105, 09/05/1995 pp. 44-46. 

Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1688/2005 of 14 October 2005 implementing 

Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council as 

regards special guarantees concerning Salmonella for consignments to Finland 

and Sweden of certain meat and eggs. OJ. L 271, 15/10/2005 pp. 17-28. 

Commission Regulation (EC) No. 2073/2005 of 15 November 2005 on 

microbiological criteria for foodstuffs. OJ. L 338, 22/12/2005 pp. 1-25. 

Commission Regulation (EC) No. 1003/2005 of 30 June 2005 implementing 

Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 as regards a Community target for the reduction of 

the prevalence of certain Salmonella serotypes in breeding flocks of Gallus gallus 

and amending Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003. OJ. L 170, 1/7/2005 pp. 12–17. 

Council directive 92/117/EEC of 17 December 1992 concerning measures for 

protection against specified zoonoses and specified zoonotic agents in animals and 

products of animal origin in order to prevent outbreaks of food-borne infections and 

intoxications. OJ No. L 062, 15/03/1993 pp. 0038–0048. Suomenk. Erityispainos 

Alue 3 Nide 48 s. 183.

APPENDIX 18 

Council directive 94/65/EC of 14 December 1994 laying down the requirements 

for the production and placing on the market of minced meat and meat 

preparations. OJ No. L 127, 29/04/1998 pp. 34 

Regulation (EC) No 2160/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council 

of 17 November 2003 on the control of Salmonella and other specified food-borne 

zoonotic agents. OJ. L 325, 12/12/2003 pp. 1–15.

Download PDF, 1522 kB - Evira

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?