Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The entitled manuscript of "Food Defense: A Growing Challenge for the Global Food Industry" provides a comprehensive review of food defense measures in the context of theextra neutral alcohol industry. Please make the following corrections: 

-Please write the titles of Figures 1, 2 and 3 below the figures.

 

-In Table 2, instead of the article title, write: For example, Cavalheiro et al. 2017 [10]. Correct the others accordingly. So ,it will help to decrease similarity rate of manuscript. 

-Please add a section explaining how to reduce non-neutral alcohol in food production and consumption.

Author Response

Comments 1: Please write the titles of Figures 1, 2 and 3 below the figures.
Response: We agree with your comment, the titles were modified

Comments 2: In Table 2, instead of the article title, write: For example, Cavalheiro et al. 2017 [10]. Correct the others accordingly. So ,it will help to decrease similarity rate of manuscript.

Response: We agree with your comment, this was modified

Comments 3:  Please add a section explaining how to reduce non-neutral alcohol in food production and consumption.
Response: The main objective is not to reduce the use of extra neutral alcohol in food but to ensure that no intentional contamination occurs during production. Therefore, I believe including a section on this topic might be unnecessary. Furthermore, it is important to highlight that this type of alcohol is widely used in the production of foods such as cider, vinegar, alcoholic beverages, and even in biscuit manufacturing, playing a crucial role in preventing contamination in the final product.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

First of all, I congratulate the authors for this beautiful work. I believe that this review, which emphasizes the importance of food defense, will improve the quality of the work, especially by elaborating and elaborating on the HARPC (https://www.mdpi.com/2304-8158/10/9/2199) concept developed by the food industry against terrorist attacks and by answering the following questions. Also, the title seems too general for the subject.  While the content focuses on the alcohol industry, the headline talks about a general defense of food.

How are the food safety methods mentioned by the authors (HACCP, TACCP, VACCP, etc.) integrated in the production of extra neutral alcohol? What are the possible challenges of this integration?

Although there have been recommendations for the use of digital technologies (such as digital traceability and artificial intelligence), is there any way to further clarify their application? Under what conditions are they supposed to work better?

What are the long-term implications for food security of the food defence approach discussed in this paper? Could we talk about these effects in more detail?

Author Response

Thank you very much for your comments!

Comment 1: How are the food safety methods mentioned by the authors (HACCP, TACCP, VACCP, etc.) integrated in the production of extra neutral alcohol? What are the possible challenges of this integration?
Response: 

Food safety methods are integrated into the production of extra neutral alcohol through specific practices aimed at ensuring both product safety and integrity.

HACCP (Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points):
In extra neutral alcohol production, HACCP can be applied to identify specific hazards in the process, such as chemical contamination during distillation or storage. Critical control points (CCPs) include steps like temperature control during distillation, storage tank inspections, and regular laboratory analyses.
TACCP (Threat Assessment and Critical Control Points):
TACCP introduces a security perspective by identifying vulnerabilities to intentional contamination. In the extra neutral alcohol industry, this can include controlling access to production facilities, tracking raw materials, and monitoring employees and visitors to prevent malicious adulteration.

VACCP (Vulnerability Assessment and Critical Control Points):
VACCP focuses on protecting against fraud, such as the adulteration of alcohol with illegal substances or dilution for economic gain. In the context of extra neutral alcohol production, measures such as external audits, frequent chemical analyses, and batch traceability help mitigate these vulnerabilities.

I think the challenges are: 

Cost and Infrastructure: Simultaneous implementation of all three methods can require significant financial and technological resources.

Training:
Employee training to understand and apply these methodologies is crucial but may take considerable time and effort.

Stakeholder Collaboration:
Engagement from suppliers, transporters, and customers is necessary to ensure that safety systems are applied throughout the production chain.

Continuous Monitoring:
Ensuring the effectiveness of these methods requires frequent reviews and adaptation to changes in regulations and emerging threat

Comments 2: Although there have been recommendations for the use of digital technologies (such as digital traceability and artificial intelligence), is there any way to further clarify their application? Under what conditions are they supposed to work better?
Response: Digital technologies can be applied in various ways to the production of extra neutral alcohol, enhancing the ability to identify and respond to food safety threats.

Digital traceability can be used to monitor each batch of raw materials (such as hydrated alcohol) from the time it enters the factory until the final product is delivered to the customer. The use of QR codes, blockchain, and IoT sensors ensures detailed real-time traceability, reducing the risk of adulteration or loss of information.

Artificial intelligence (AI) systems can predict process failures based on historical data, detecting patterns that indicate contamination risks. AI can also be used in laboratory analyses to identify chemical irregularities more quickly, increasing quality control efficiency.

The ideal conditions for the application of these technologies include adequate infrastructure, which requires investments in equipment, connectivity, and data integration. Consistent and reliable data are crucial, as traceability and AI perform best with a constant flow of well-organized, high-quality information. Organizational culture plays a vital role, as employee acceptance and proper use of these technologies are fundamental. Additionally, specific regulations that mandate and oversee the use of traceability and AI drive their adoption within the industry.

Comment 3: What are the long-term implications for food security of the food defence approach discussed in this paper? Could we talk about these effects in more detail?
Response: The Food Defense approach has significant long-term implications for food safety. It strengthens consumer trust by ensuring product safety, which enhances the reputation of the extra-neutral alcohol industry and boosts its global competitiveness. Preventing intentional contamination, although rare, helps avoid public health crises and serious economic losses for the industry. As more countries adopt mandatory regulations, companies with established Food Defense measures will be better prepared to meet international demands. Additionally, the use of digital tools like AI and blockchain encourages continuous technological innovation, leading to greater efficiency and transparency in the production chain.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript explores the significant issue of food safety and security, specifically focusing on extra neutral alcohol, widely used in various food and beverage products. Food defense refers to the strategies designed to protect the food supply from intentional contamination or adulteration, which can result from various threats including terrorism, sabotage, or economic fraud. Considering the above, this topic is timely and relevant. However, significant revisions are necessary in the manuscript to fulfill the identified literature gap on this topic, as referenced in the abstract.

Minor corrections:

Line 2: It is crucial for the title and abstract of the manuscript to clearly reflect the main focus of the research. If the aim is to discuss food defense in a general context, then both the abstract and the manuscript's content should be consistent with that broader theme. Conversely, if the emphasis is on food defense specifically within the alcohol industry, this should be clearly stated in the title.

Line 4: Author numbering is unnecessary when all authors belong to the same institution.

Line 10: Expression in the first-person pronounces should be avoided.

Line 57: Please modify the figure descriptions to conform to the requirements outlined by the journal.

Line 59: Please check that the term "Own authorship" is in accordance with the journal's instructions.

Figure 2: The text in the figure is already described in the manuscript (lines 117-123). Please delete this part of the text or figure.

Line 154: Please align the table descriptions with the journal instructions. In addition, the table formats are not in accordance with the journal instructions.

Table 2: Is it necessary to include an article title when the reference, such as the author, and the subject of the articles are already provided? Additionally, the timeframe of the literature review for the data presented in this table should be indicated in the table's title.

Table 3: The information presented in this table is largely unclear. What is meant by “good, characteristic” in the third row? Please ensure that the decimal points are represented as dots. Additionally, please change Ph to pH and °c to °C. The content of the table should be in English; please correct terms such as “maximo”, “minimo”, “0.8076 a 0.8110”, etc. What does the hyphen (-) signify in the table? Furthermore, since a literature reference is provided for each property, what is the significance of the reference mentioned in the table description?

Line 243: 3-12 mg/L or “from 3 to 12 mg/L”

Line 247: Before the reference number, there should be an author(s) surname(s), for example: “Maitin [44] conducted a study…. “. Please correct this throughout the whole manuscript.

Line 256: of 95 to 96%

Lines 281-283: “spp.” should not be in the italic. Please revise this.

4.1. Could the title "Possible Contamination Methods" be incorrect? It might be advisable to consider renaming it to "Possible Contamination Pathways" or a comparable phrase.

Line 351: “As pointed out by [51], the ideal water contaminant should be a disease-causing agent...” Please revise this sentence to be clear.

Line 395: References [53, 54, 55] should be listed as [53-55].

Line 364: “Analyzing the chemistry, alcohol or ethanol…” Please revise this sentence.

Lines 371 and 372: Please correct degrees Celsius to °C.

Line 395: “such as the” should be deleted.

Reference number 1. (Wiśniewska et al.): The superscript “a” near the year should be deleted?

In addition to the minor corrections mentioned above, this manuscript requires a comprehensive revision. The title, abstract, keywords, and manuscript content are not harmonized, creating uncertainty about whether the focus is on the general knowledge gap in food defense or specifically on the alcohol industry. The section discussing food defense in the alcohol industry begins in Chapter 4.1, but it does not provide adequate information for an article of this type. It is crucial to elaborate on additional possible contamination pathways and the issue of food terrorism, including factors such as raw materials, packaging, supply chain vulnerabilities, and intentional contamination by employees or visitors. Furthermore, the monitoring methods and corrective actions should be addressed. In my opinion, the number of references provided is insufficient for a review article focused on this topic.

Author Response

Comments 1: 
Minor corrections

Line 2: It is crucial for the title and abstract of the manuscript to clearly reflect the main focus of the research. If the aim is to discuss food defense in a general context, then both the abstract and the manuscript's content should be consistent with that broader theme. Conversely, if the emphasis is on food defense specifically within the alcohol industry, this should be clearly stated in the title.

Line 4: Author numbering is unnecessary when all authors belong to the same institution.

Line 10: Expression in the first-person pronounces should be avoided.

Line 57: Please modify the figure descriptions to conform to the requirements outlined by the journal.

Line 59: Please check that the term "Own authorship" is in accordance with the journal's instructions.

Figure 2: The text in the figure is already described in the manuscript (lines 117-123). Please delete this part of the text or figure.

Line 154: Please align the table descriptions with the journal instructions. In addition, the table formats are not in accordance with the journal instructions.

Table 2: Is it necessary to include an article title when the reference, such as the author, and the subject of the articles are already provided? Additionally, the timeframe of the literature review for the data presented in this table should be indicated in the table's title.

Table 3: The information presented in this table is largely unclear. What is meant by “good, characteristic” in the third row? Please ensure that the decimal points are represented as dots. Additionally, please change Ph to pH and °c to °C. The content of the table should be in English; please correct terms such as “maximo”, “minimo”, “0.8076 a 0.8110”, etc. What does the hyphen (-) signify in the table? Furthermore, since a literature reference is provided for each property, what is the significance of the reference mentioned in the table description?

Line 243: 3-12 mg/L or “from 3 to 12 mg/L”

Line 247: Before the reference number, there should be an author(s) surname(s), for example: “Maitin [44] conducted a study…. “. Please correct this throughout the whole manuscript.

Line 256: of 95 to 96%

Lines 281-283: “spp.” should not be in the italic. Please revise this.

4.1. Could the title "Possible Contamination Methods" be incorrect? It might be advisable to consider renaming it to "Possible Contamination Pathways" or a comparable phrase.

Line 351: “As pointed out by [51], the ideal water contaminant should be a disease-causing agent...” Please revise this sentence to be clear.

Line 395: References [53, 54, 55] should be listed as [53-55].

Line 364: “Analyzing the chemistry, alcohol or ethanol…” Please revise this sentence.

Lines 371 and 372: Please correct degrees Celsius to °C.

Line 395: “such as the” should be deleted.

Reference number 1. (Wiśniewska et al.): The superscript “a” near the year should be deleted?

Response: Thank you for pointing this out. We agree with the comments, and all suggestions were carefully considered and incorporated into the revised version.

Comments 2: In addition to the minor corrections mentioned above, this manuscript requires a comprehensive revision. The title, abstract, keywords, and manuscript content are not harmonized, creating uncertainty about whether the focus is on the general knowledge gap in food defense or specifically on the alcohol industry. The section discussing food defense in the alcohol industry begins in Chapter 4.1, but it does not provide adequate information for an article of this type. It is crucial to elaborate on additional possible contamination pathways and the issue of food terrorism, including factors such as raw materials, packaging, supply chain vulnerabilities, and intentional contamination by employees or visitors. Furthermore, the monitoring methods and corrective actions should be addressed. In my opinion, the number of references provided is insufficient for a review article focused on this topic.

Response: 

Thank you for your comment. The article was developed precisely due to the scarcity of publications in the field, which directly reflects the limited number of references available. Nonetheless, we made sure to include all relevant and reliable sources to support our research.

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Although the HARPC applications I stated in my previous report are not mentioned, I think that the study will be sufficient in this form.

Author Response

Comments: Although the HARPC applications I stated in my previous report are not mentioned, I think that the study will be sufficient in this form.

Response: Sure, a paragraph about the HARPC system has been added to the article. Thank you very much for your contribution!

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript has undergone some minor adjustments; however, it still contains a number of spelling errors and untranslated terms (e.g. "to" in the table 3, etc.).

The title of Table 2 lacks a specified time frame, the significance of the hyphen in Table 3 has not been clarified, and the meaning of the reference in the title is not explained, particularly when separate references are provided for each property. Does this imply that the table is fully taken from that source?

Additionally, there are references in the text that lack the author's surname, particularly in line 417 for references (56) and (57), and reference number 1 remains uncorrected.

The manuscript does not address further potential contamination pathways or the issue of food terrorism, which includes factors such as raw materials, packaging, supply chain vulnerabilities, and intentional contamination by employees or visitors. Moreover, it does not discuss monitoring methods and corrective actions, nor does it provide an explanation for omitting this information. In my opinion, the quality of the paper would have been considerably improved if these aspects had been included suggesting that the manuscript should be expanded to encompass food defense considerations in the alcohol industry.

Nevertheless, it is noteworthy that the title of the paper has been revised, which is critical for accurately representing the content, and the updated version demonstrates some improvement, making it potentially acceptable after further revisions.

Author Response

Comments 1: The manuscript has undergone some minor adjustments; however, it still contains a number of spelling errors and untranslated terms (e.g. "to" in the table 3, etc.).

Response: The minor adjustments have been done 

Comments 2: The title of Table 2 lacks a specified time frame, the significance of the hyphen in Table 3 has not been clarified, and the meaning of the reference in the title is not explained, particularly when separate references are provided for each property. Does this imply that the table is fully taken from that source?
Response: The table 3 results are sourced from a specific website belonging to a company that produces these types of alcohol, and the data are based on standards cited for each property. The main objective of the table is to compare the values and highlight that the primary difference lies in the total acidity of the extra neutral alcohol.

Comments 3: Additionally, there are references in the text that lack the author's surname, particularly in line 417 for references (56) and (57), and reference number 1 remains uncorrected.
Response: The minor adjustments have been done 

Comments 4: The manuscript does not address further potential contamination pathways or the issue of food terrorism, which includes factors such as raw materials, packaging, supply chain vulnerabilities, and intentional contamination by employees or visitors. Moreover, it does not discuss monitoring methods and corrective actions, nor does it provide an explanation for omitting this information. In my opinion, the quality of the paper would have been considerably improved if these aspects had been included suggesting that the manuscript should be expanded to encompass food defense considerations in the alcohol industry.
Response: A new subtitle was created to address your comments. Thank you very much for your contribution!