Relating Practicum Project to the Core Public Health Disciplines, Capstone Project Example

Introduction

This practicum project relating the core public health disciplines is concerned with food inspectors’ responsibility for public safety. In executing their role on many occasions they are forced to discard contaminated food products and this can be a great disadvantage of many restaurants. Food temperature control is one of the most frequent violations food currently.As such, this document explains outcomes of three experiments conducted to explore the feasibility of substituting ballistic gel in the place of chicken breast food items in co mpliance to food temperature regulations. Ballistic gel isrelatively cheap and easy to access. However, its cooling characteristics must be investigated further in relation to specific food items.

In each experiment the ratio of chicken breast weight to ballistic gel was altered and several data samples were taken to analyze and compare the cooling properties of both chicken breast and ballistic gel. It was discovered that an understanding of the most appropriate ratio, along with time frame were important in determining the degree of adjustments occurring in each food product. Adequate data collection procedures as well as accumulation of relevant data were essential for statistically validating the outcomes of these experiments. The proposition was thatballistic gel could be a great substitute for the chicken food item as irt relates to compliance with temperature codes.

Comparison of the Behavior of the Temperature

Characteristics of Ballistic Gel to Actual Food Items.

Epidemiological comparison

Epidemiology in public health and health related sciences is concerned with occurrence of a disease or situation. From a professional stand point it is identifying and classifying incidences or prevalence of the condition identified. In this report it is comparing the behavior of temperature characteristics with ballistic gel and food items. The food item identified for comparison inthese experiments ischicken breast.

It was discovered that temperature incidences varied immensely between the ballistic gel and chicken breast. For example, in experiment (1) ballisticgel and chicken portions weighing 10ozs each were used. Temperatures were recorded every 15 minutes. In summarizing the outcome initially, the ballistic gel cooling rate was lower than the chicken breast. A furtherincidence ratio difference of 3 -1 degrees average cooling rate between ballistic gel and chicken breast portions was observed. The ballistic gel cooling rate ultimatelyaligned to the chicken breast portions during the first 300 minutes of the comparative experiment, whichshowed the most significant changes.

The final cooling average incidence displayed on table 3 is ballistic gel 29.16 and chicken breast 29.95. This shows a degree difference of negative. 78 degreesprevalence rate between the ballistic gel and chickenbreasts. Epidemiologically, this may appear negligible. However, for public health food safety purposes this is significant enough to report a temperature inconsistency and render food inappropriate for human consumption due to temperature violations.

In the second experiment different portions of gel and chicken breast were used. Being breast 8 (gel) and 10 (breast) ounces respectively.  Temperatures were taken every 30 minutes instead of 15 in experiment 1 and consistent portions of 10 ounces. The epidemiological findings revealed that there was a sameness incidence between the two portions compared after the first 200 minutes. Further recordings showed an incidence difference between gel and breast after 372 and 2052. The gel temperature remained constant at 34.70 degrees while the chicken breast portions kept fluctuating at a rate of positive and negative one (1) degree. Significant changes were realized after 372 minutes in the ballistic gel sample while the chicken breasts took 612 minutes.  There was a 240 minutes incidence difference, which of great epidemiological importance. A 1. 41 average degree difference between ballistic gel cooling time and chicken breast

More significant epidemiological data was observed in experiment 3. The ballisticgelsample weight was increased 4 ounces. Chicken breast samples were increased to 4 ounces. As in experiment 2 temperatures were evaluated every 30 minutes. Interestingly, after 1,351 minutes there were no significant differences between the ballistic gel samples and chicken breasts. The incidence temperature averages were recorded as 31.37 F for chicken breast and 30. 59 ballistic gel samples. Epidemiologically this means that the chicken temperatures in this experiment (3) had a higher average initial cooling rate than the ballistic gel samples.

However, the quantity of chicken breasts being compared with ballistic gel could have influenced the outcome. The portions contained marked weight differences 4 ounces (ballistic gel) and 10 ounces (chicken breasts). Further, when more temperature evaluations were conductedthe ballistic gel portions began to maintain constant temperatures after 312 whereas the chicken breast took 571 minutes to arrive at a constant and maintained it for 1,471 minutes. The ballistic gel portions remained constant until after 1,321.

When the hold time is calculated for both samples it shows that the ballistic gel sutained the average temperature for 1, 009 minutes and the chicken breasts 900 minutes. Consequently, even though the chicken average temperature rate was higher than the ballistic gel in this experiment (3) the holding temperature time for the ballistic gel samples was longer.

The epidemiological significance here is for food inspectors to develop a vivid understanding of the factors, which influence temperature maintenance in food items. While there is enough evidence from these three experiments to prove the relevance of ballistic gel replacement for chicken breasts in food safety practices, food inspectors must take into co0nsieration the relativity of portions.  It could be concluded that weight discrepancies in food item portions influence temperature maintenance. This must be considered when making violation decisions.

Environmental health comparison

With regards to the environmental health implications of these results it must be understood that ballistic gel or gelatin as it is scientifically classified is not an actual food item. Restaurants cannot replace the sale of chicken breast with ballistic gelatin. Environmentally, it is not applicable. Ballistic gel is an experimental productused as a substitute for muscle tissue. Chicken breast is a muscle tissue eaten by lovers of chicken and is a highly commercialized product.

Therefore, the environmental health significance of these results pertains mainly towards the temperature retaining properties of ballistic gel as against chicken breast. Certainly these results prove that a food item with ballistic gel properties has a longer temperature hold period and keeps it at a higher degree. It is highly suggestive that food items, which contain similar or identical physical characteristics as ballistic gel would yield similar results.

Since the two items compared were chicken breasts and ballistic gel, further experiment is mandatory before these findings are published to the public health environment.  More importantly, suggestions of pork, beef and lamb comparisons with chicken could be incorporated  in arriving at more valid conclusions of the most appropriatecooling temperatures for food items. This confirms environmental health and safety regarding meat products.

Policy and Health management comparison

There was no peculiar health policy management implications revealed during the comparison experimentation. In experiment 2, initially, there were no distinct differences between ballistic gel and chicken breast temperature samples.  Management during the experimentation process was identical. The only differences were the portions utilized. Besides, ballistic gel cannot replace chicken breast as a food product. Therefore, food policy and health management ought to focus on advising restaurants regarding the most appropriate temperatures for both food preparation as well as storage.This is to avoid temperature discrepancies.

Currently, according to the food policy  regulations minimum internal temperature  for poultry products including chicken breasts is165 F. There are no regulations regarding how to monitor coolingtemperatures rates in meat. When restaurants cook their meatthe temperatures obviously are taken up with heat. As such, this experiment would not alter the internal minimum temperature regulation.

Social behavior science comparison.

Social behavior science is concerned with nter-relationships and how they affect society. This experiment in itself did not describe any behavior related to the behavior sciences as it pertains to the samples utilized. However, from a public health perspective since the study revealed a significant applicability of the ballistic gel mixture to temperature control the findings couldbe used as a information regarding cooling techniquePublic health inspectors do not usually visit restaurants to test the cooling rates of meat because the policy pertains to minimum internal temperature.

However, there are established food danger zones.  Food-borne bacteria grown in these danger zones. Consequently, food safety agencies, in the United States of America known as the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) classify a danger zone temperature as ‘4–5 to 60 °C (39–41 to 140 °F). Potentially dangerous foods are portions stored below this temperature. As such, food inspectors are mandated to destroy food stored below this temperature due to the potential of  foodbourne bacteria contamination (Forsythe, 2010).  The cooling yemperatures tendered in this experiment could be considered danger zone if taken from a behavior s science/public health perspective. Food temperatures of 30F cooling degree average, is acceptable. It is advised that refrigerated food be cooled and maintained at 40F degrees.

Conclusion

It is the contention of this researcher that except for a few anomalies the cooling rate for all specimens was almost identical. It also is apparent from the data that there exists an optimal window of opportunity to sample the temperature of the ballistic gel. After an initial time frame and before a final time frame the data collected will give false positives.

The epidemiological significance, environmental health impacts, policy management and social behavior science influence of these findings was fully discussed in the foregoing document. However, more data must be gathered to statistically analyze the cooling properties of the ballistic gel along with other food items. Of interest are the standard error rate, standard deviation and confidence intervals. The best time range to sample the temperature of the ballistic gel is still left undiscovered.

References

Forsythe, S. (2010). The Microbiology of Safe Food. Blackwell Publishing