IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v14y2017i4p420-d95792.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessment of the Occupational Health and Food Safety Risks Associated with the Traditional Slaughter and Consumption of Goats in Gauteng, South Africa

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel N. Qekwana

    (Section Veterinary Public Health, Department of Paraclinical Sciences, Faculty of Veterinary Science, University of Pretoria, Private Bag X04, Onderstepoort, Pretoria 0110, South Africa)

  • Cheryl M. E. McCrindle

    (School of Health Systems and Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Pretoria, Pretoria 0001, South Africa)

  • James W. Oguttu

    (Department of Agriculture and Animal Health, College of Agriculture and Environmental Science, University of South Africa, Christiaan de Wet Rd. & Pioneer Avenue, Florida Park, Roodepoort 1710, Gauteng, South Africa)

  • Delia Grace

    (ILRI-Kenya, Nairobi 00100, Kenya)

Abstract

Background: This study assessed the occupational health and food safety risks associated with the traditional slaughter of goats and the consumption of such meat in Tshwane, South Africa. Methods: A convenience sample of 105 respondents agreed to be interviewed using structured questionnaires. Results: A high proportion (62.64%) of practitioners admitted to not wearing protective clothing during slaughter. Slaughtering was mainly carried out by males (99%) with experience (62.2%). Forty-four percent of practitioners only changed the clothes they wore while slaughtering when they got home. During the actual slaughter, up to seven people may be involved. The majority (58.9%) of slaughters occurred early in the morning and none of the goats were stunned first. In 77.5% of cases, the health status of the persons who performed the slaughtering was not known. The majority (57.3%) of the slaughters were performed on a corrugated iron roof sheet (zinc plate). In 83.3% of the cases, the carcass was hung up to facilitate bleeding, flaying, and evisceration. Meat inspection was not practiced by any of the respondents. Throughout the slaughter process, the majority used the same knife (84.3) and 84.7% only cleaned the knife when it became soiled. A total of 52.0% of the respondents processed the carcass and cooked the meat immediately. The majority (80.0%) consumed the meat within 30 min of cooking. Conclusions: Men are at a higher risk of occupational health hazards associated with traditional slaughter, which can be transferred to their households. Unhygienic methods of processing and the lack of any form of post-mortem examination increase the risk of food-borne illness following the consumption of such meat.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel N. Qekwana & Cheryl M. E. McCrindle & James W. Oguttu & Delia Grace, 2017. "Assessment of the Occupational Health and Food Safety Risks Associated with the Traditional Slaughter and Consumption of Goats in Gauteng, South Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-10, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:4:p:420-:d:95792
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/4/420/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/14/4/420/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Bridget Jabulile Siluma & Ephraim Tsietsi Kgatla & Bono Nethathe & Shonisani Eugenia Ramashia, 2023. "Evaluation of Meat Safety Practices and Hygiene among Different Butcheries and Supermarkets in Vhembe District, Limpopo Province, South Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-16, January.
    2. Ishmael Festus Jaja & Ezekiel Green & Voster Muchenje, 2018. "Aerobic Mesophilic, Coliform, Escherichia coli , and Staphylococcus aureus Counts of Raw Meat from the Formal and Informal Meat Sectors in South Africa," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-13, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:14:y:2017:i:4:p:420-:d:95792. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.