FOOD LABELING-SUGAR CONTENT UNDER ATTACK

The front of the pack labeling regulations are supposed to help the consumers to understand better about many aspects of the contents inside including nutritive value. However due to practical reasons there is a limit as to how much information can be loaded on the labels and there are doubts regarding the effectiveness of the present regulations. In a country like India such declaration printed in English has very little value as majority of the population are English illiterate and the information provided probably does not serve the consumer community much. Still the current labeling practices do serve a purpose in documenting the nature of the product for quality and safety agencies to administer food laws. Having established beyond a shadow of doubt regarding the role played by sugar in progressively deteriorating health status of human beings in many countries, knowing the sugar content in a product helps the consumer to pick and choose those with least sugar levels among processed food products. One of the new proposals now being considered to improve the effectiveness of labeling involves declaration of "added sugar" in the product during processing. Whether this will serve any purpose or how added sugar can be distinguished from naturally present sugar are issues which require to be deliberated before implementing the same. Here is a take on this new rumblings in the food processing sector with a potential to polarize the stakeholders further in the coming months. 

The American Bakers Assn. objects to the plan, saying (among other things) that since added and natural sugars are chemically the same, to enforce the labels the FDA would have to be able to inspect companies' recipes and they don't have the authority to do that. At the FDA website, you can read about the FDA's proposal and view comments that have been submitted. The National Dairy Council says such labels could lead to consumer confusion and unintended consequences, such as people avoiding nutritious foods that have sugars added to make them more tasty. They note that you can already see how much sugar is in food from the info on food packages right now. The National Milk Producers Federation worries about consumer confusion too. The Sugar Assn. recommends the study is not done, for a variety of reasons: They say the effect of added sugar on obesity is overstated, the FDA wouldn't have the regulatory power to act on this info, and that "it is in the public interest that FDA maintain its focus on the prominence of calories, maintain its science-based positions regarding added sugars labeling, and not further confuse consumers by adding unwarranted information to the [Nutrition Facts Panel]." And so it goes on … the National Confectioners Assn.opposes the research, the American Beverage Assn. opposes it.......while......on the flip side, the American Heart Assn."strongly supports the inclusion of added sugars on the Nutrition Facts Label" and writes that "In addition to the AHA, the 2010 Dietary Guidelines, MyPlate.gov, and countless other sources of dietary guidance recommend that consumers limit consumption of added sugars. Yet this can be difficult to do because added sugars are not currently included on the Nutrition Facts label. While 'sugars' is listed, the Nutrition Facts label does not distinguish between naturally occurring sugars such as those found in fruit or milk, which are associated with other important components inherent to foods such as vitamins and minerals, and added sugars, which are not." The Center for Science in the Public Interest is for the study, The Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity at Yale University is for the study too. It is, of course, true that people can be misled if they overly focus on one particular facet of a food and that current labels on food packages are very good at helping us get confused that way. "Low-fat" items can contain just as many calories as higher-fat foods, and "organic" processed foods can be just as junky as any other kind, and just because Lucky Charms are made with whole grains, that does not make them a health food.

In a society where daily diet is made of processed foods as high as 70-80%, extent of sugar added by the industry during formulation may be critical and is controllable either voluntarily or by mandate. In such an environment declaration of added sugar can at least make the processor sensitive to the level of sugar incorporated and there is a possibility that voluntary reduction can be achieved. This is already happening with respect to salt and there is no reason it cannot happen with sugar too. It is not understandable as to why sugar needs to be added in high concentrations when many products can be still palatable at sugar levels of 10-15%. The current proposal to force the processors to declare the extent of sugar added can even set in motion competition among the processors to reduce added sugar as much as possible to gain consumer patronage. Technically it may be difficult to estimate in a finished product how much sugar has been added but as the processor knows the truth he can be forced to declare the same. While voluntary declaration of added sugar can be immediately enforced, monitory regime can be thought of later when reliable and simpler techniques are available for differentiating between natural and added sugar.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

NEW FOOD "ACT" IN INDIA-A FARCE OR TRUE INSTRUMENT OF JUSTICE?

Lot has been written and debated upon about the new Food Law of the country that was supposed to begin a new chapter in the history of India for protecting the citizen's right for having good quality and safe food. It took fifty years of constant and continuous pleas by the consumer right acivists, industry and food scientists to government of India to unify the safety enforcement regime in the light of hundreds of loopholes found in the erstwhile "Prevention Of Food Adulteration" (PFA) Act and more than a dozen scattered laws administered by various ministries. When the Laws were revised through the Food Safety and Standards Act in 2006 and a unified regime was sought to be put in place it raised hopes and vision of an India where the unbridled run of fraudsters and merchants of harm would be curtailed. Unfortunately, in spite of taking more than 5 years to come out with the appropriate frame work of rules under the Act, what came out was a disappointment of herculean magnitude. It is now contented that the evolution of the operating regime has been marked by lack of foresight, callousness, inaccuracies, discrepancies and contradictions and these issues are now being raised by the industry which is feeling the heat. Whether there is any truth in the stand taken by the industry remains to be seen. Here is a take on this development.  

"A delegation of the Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) met senior officials of Food Safety Authority of India on controversial Food Safety & Standard Act today at New Delhi. The CAIT while presenting a detailed memorandum to the Authority drew its attention towards various contradictions, discrepancies, ambiguity & disparity in the said Act and its Rules & Regulations. The CAIT also pointed out several contradictory provisions between the Act and Rules and Regulations. Beside CAIT National President B.C. Bhartia and Secretary General Mr. Praveen Khandelwal the Authority officials include it?s Director (Enforcement) Mr. S.S. Ghankrokta, Assistant Director (Enforcement) Mr. K. Madhavan among others. While challenging the merits of the Act and its Rules, the CAIT expressed utter dismay over provisions of taking license by several entities including religious places like Temple or Gurdwara etc, Transporters, Warehouse keepers, Landlords or by persons delivering Food & other items by mobile distribution vehicles and called for necessary clarifications from the Authority. The CAIT also drew the attention of the Authority over turn over limit of Rs. 12 lakh for the Cottage and Small Industries, which contravenes the definition of Cottage, and Small Industries under the SSI Act. The CAIT also said that many provisions of the Rules and Regulations are superseding the Act, which is a legal infirmity. The Rules and Regulations of FS&SA therefore needs a careful study and re-consideration-stressed the CAIT. The Authorities gave patient hearing to the delegation and assured that the intention of Law or Authority is never to put the food business operators in to any sort of difficulty. The issues raised by the CAIT will be given due consideration by the Authority and hoped that clarity will surely emerge in the next meeting which will be held shortly".

Of course while designing of any national system for application through out the country is bound to have unexpected operational problems, what is being contented is that these rules are totally impractical at the ground level. It is disturbing that these rules are being challenged in many judicial courts and with stay orders brought to nullify its operations, cases related to prosecution of food adulteration may come to a grinding halt leaving the field free for the food criminals to make money through their heinous activities. Probably there is case for creating a Food Safety Ministry under which all the erstwhile laws relating to food quality and safety can be brought together as the these laws have wide acceptance among the stake holders including the industry. Amendments can be made from time to time to improve the standards and safety practices and even if these are challenged the basic features of the system remain in tact.  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD IMPORTS-LOGICAL REFORMS

Who wants controls any way on what is going on uncontrolled or ill-controlled for ages? Naturally it is the human tendency to do things with as much secrecy as possible, especially when they are not done properly. The food industry world over are under a siege unable to convince the consumers regarding their sincerity and honesty and invariably controls and regulations need to be put in place to protect the welfare of the citizens. Latest "unhappiness" on the part of the food industry in India comes from a feeble attempt being made by the FSSAI, the apex body supposed to ensure consumer safety to tighten the labeling rules for imported foods to make them more transparent. Here is a take on this new irritant between the enforcers and the industry.

"As for FSSAI, going by its website, under the new norms, the body has specified for 'Date of Manufacture' to be given in date, month and year format on sticker in addition to the 'Date of Manufacture' in Julian format already present in the labels along with the rectifiable labelling requirements viz. name and address of the importer and vegetarian, non-vegetarian logo. As for batch number, the body specifies, "Consignments without prefix such as Lot number/ Lot/Code/Number Code/Batch Number/Batch or any other distinguishing prefix as per FSSR, 2011, shall be accepted subject to the condition that the authorised officer, FSSAI, will verify from the relevant documents from the manufacturer/exporter of the source country and satisfy himself that the numbers/alphabets combination of numbers/alphabets present in the labels are a valid batch number/lot number/code number of that particular consignment." While FSSAI has given three months time beginning December 15, 2011, for food importers to get the minor labelling defects rectified, food importers are not happy with the whole procedure".  

India has become a breeding ground for adulterated, sub-standard and unsafe foods with the state infrastructure for enforcing national standards for various foods in a pathetic condition. Recent revelations that many established "Made in India" brands of foods, being "Faked in China" are flooding the markets in many countries including in some of the border states within the country is shocking and humiliating, reflecting the "toothless" nature of Indian food laws. Added to this a survey of milk in Delhi market by the very same FSSAI which has shown that more than 70% of milk samples tested were sub-standard though it was not determined whether they were also unsafe. Imported foods from where ever they are coming must have regulatory standards on par with India made counterparts and the importers have no business to cringe on this issue. No self respecting government can shirk its responsibility to wards its citizens by diluting the standards to satisfy the industry.


V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE "SALTY "DILEMMA-SELF CONTROL VS MANDATORY REGULATION

Salt has been known to mankind for centuries and why it has become a villain in human foods during the last 5-6 decades must raise alarms all around. Probably one of the most logical reasons could be the increasing dependence of the population on manufactured industrial foods which are invariably "salted" very heavily for enhancing taste and acceptability, almost bordering on addiction. It is fairly well known that foods containing high levels of salt, sugar and fat are liked by most consumers and these "hyper" foods can be as addictive as cigarettes or opiates. If processed foods are the main culprit for the modern health crisis, what can be done to arrest the deteriorating situation? The most logical answer is to make the industry realize their "mistake" and reduce salt content in all foods by substantial amounts. But most democratic countries prefer the industry to exercise voluntary restraint in cutting down on salt without any pressure or force from the government. Unfortunately such an approach does not seem to be bringing any dramatic impact on the salt front as is being realized by many countries in the West. The recent finding that health benefits because of compulsory regulation of salt in processed foods can bring about 20 times more health benefits, as compared to voluntary restraint, may persuade many countries to restrict salts in packed foods through appropriate regulatory policy.

"However, in a press release, the BMJ reports that the study authors discovered that "the health benefits across the population could be 20 times greater if the government imposed mandatory limits… amounting to a reduction of 18% in ill health from cardiovascular disease." Reuters reports that the study also found that 94% of Australian men and 64% of women in the country eat more salt than is recommended. The news agency also cites an unnamed study which reported that 90% of all Americans consume too much salt as well. "When it's so excessive, it makes sense for the government to step in to take action," Cobiac told Reuters. "It's cost saving to the government in the longer term to reduce salt content in food." In an interview with BBC News, British Heart Foundation senior dietitian Victoria Taylor added, "We're making progress without the need for compulsory limits and as a result we've seen a reduction in salt intake… But as three quarters of the salt we eat is already in the food we buy, we need to build on this work and watch carefully to make sure the food industry doesn't slip back into old habits."

While the food industry can be easily regulated and forced to reduce salt levels in their products, what about the restaurant foods? With eating out becoming a regular family activity, especially amongst the middle income group, these foods can be equally dangerous as far as salt levels are concerned. Regulatory bodies must take up this issue and make the restaurants conform to guidelines regarding addition of salt in prepared foods. Voluntarily it is unlikely that the eateries will agree for any reduction because the most critical factor that attracts customers is the taste of food offered and unless there is an upper limit prescribed, no one will resist the temptation to use maximum levels of salt that can ensure best taste to their preparations. Of course the lobbyists for the industry and restaurants can be expected to continue to sing the "voluntary restraint" song for delaying any mandatory rules as much as possible.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

TIGHTENING REGULATIONS ON FOOD TRUCKS-IMPROVING CONSUMER SAFETY

Any venture during its infancy needs protection and consideration till grows to a level of reasonable strength and self reliance. This is true of the nascent mobile food vending movement taking roots in the US. Unlike in India where food safety consciousness is at a very low level, the US consumer is super sensitive to the dangers posed by ill managed food handling joints and this is reflected by the current efforts in bringing this food vending outlets into the main stream catering sector through safety standards and monitoring. Naturally there is some resistance to this move by the safety authorities because of added cost and logistical constraints but in the interest of consumer health, government cannot shirk its responsibility in this area of vital concern. According to present thinking of the authorities, food trucks that span the entire country have come of age and as an institution serving consumers they will have to be transparent in their activities which can be brought about by regular inspections, grading etc.

"The new policy would require about 6,000 catering trucks operating throughout the county to undergo three inspections a year: two graded inspections and one certification inspection. Depending on the outcome, the truck would have to display a placard with a grade of "A" (scoring above 90 percent in food safety and quality), "B" (scoring above 80 percent) or "C" (scoring above 70 percent). Any truck scoring below a C grade would be shut down. If the new policy is adopted Tuesday by the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, the trucks - known as "mobile food facilities" - would also have to disclose detailed route information so that county inspectors can easily find them for random checks. A manager of Royal Catering Co., which runs trucks in Torrance, San Pedro and elsewhere, said the new policy is unnecessary. "People think we just drive a truck somewhere and start selling food," said the manager, who didn't want her name used because she was not authorized to speak for the Lynwood-based company. "That is not the case. We undergo a number of Those in the industry say the policy appears to be another attempt to legislate the trucks out of business. Restaurant owners have long complained that the trucks steal business, block city streets and create other traffic hazards. Cities on The Hill recently enacted zoning laws that restrict how the trucks can operate: In Rancho Palos Verdes, they must move at least 500 feet every 10 minutes, and in Palos Verdes Estates, they must park within 250 feet of a restroom facility. The Los Angeles City Council began looking at new regulations for mobile food trucks in August of this year, due largely to complaints from area chambers of commerce. Most cities, including those in the South Bay, require certification and business license fees for these trucks, but defer to the county for health inspections of restaurants and other eating establishments. Currently, the county requires the trucks to be certified and inspected once a year. If county leaders adopt the new policy, cities must then pass conforming ordinances allowing health officials to inspect trucks that operate in their boundaries, Fielding said. As of now, the policy would only affect trucks and carts that operate in unincorporated areas, such as county areas near Harbor City and in Marina del Rey. It would go into effect within 30 days".

Of course the complaints regarding the functioning of food trucks were orchestrated by the organized business body probably because of business threats posed by food trucks to regular established caterers in many cities where they appear to be enjoying increased patronage from consumers. How ever, illogical restraints, difficult to comply with firman and harassment can sound the death knell for this nascent movement. All said and done, mobile street vending players do serve a useful role in meeting the needs of a substantial segment of the consumer community aspiring for new and diversified tasting foods at affordable cost and a balance needs to be struck between the need for consumer protection and the imperatives of a new emerging business with high growth potential.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

"NANO" FOODS-MANY UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

The onslaught of nano technology does not seem to have spared food industry also though the safety of this latest technology is still being debated. While antagonists are fiercely opposing it on many considerations, the protagonists are promoting it based on their perception that no evidence exists to show they are dangerous. As far as food is concerned, nano technology is touted to be useful in areas like detection of microbial contamination, special packing modes with built in anti-microbial functions, functionally improved packing materials, biodegradable packaging films, more effective pesticide application, enhanced nutrient delivery, development of new flavor compounds etc though these are all in the realm of futuristic possibilities. The credentials of nano technology become all the more uncertain because of the opaque nature of research programs being carried out by the private sector industry.

"Think you know just what you're eating when you get prepackaged and prepared foods? What you don't know may hurt you as more and more companies begin researching and using nanotechnology in their food products. While some applaud the efforts as ways to help reduce obesity and improve nutrition, others urge caution as nanoparticles may have some unknown and potentially deadly effects on the human body. While it's ultimately up to you whether or not you decide to eat nanofoods, here are some facts that will educate you on nanofood technology and may have you moving a little slower towards the latest food tech".

As nano technology deals with materials in the particle range of 1-100 nano meter (nm), there is natural apprehension that some of the particles can enter the human system through the oral route or by inhalation. The reported ill effect of nano silver particles on human brain is often cited as an example of the dangers posed by this emerging technology. There are also fears about the accumulating effect of nano particles in the environment with potential for causing severe impact on the ecosystem as a whole. As these particles have unlimited access to every nook and corner of the biological system once exposed, how and in what way they will impact on the health is a relevant issue of great concern. Added to this, nano particles used in coating of fruits can get transferred to the human by mere touch, a situation not acceptable in the market place. It is time that global agreements are reached governing the use of nano technology in food processing keeping in view all the concerns expressed by those doubting its safety.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOODS COOKED IN ALCOHOL-THE BAN REVISITED!

Serving food in a multi cuisine restaurant, especially in a country with cosmopolitan population can be nightmarish. Take for example India. There are many taboos and food habits that make the job of the Chef very difficult. Pork, onion, garlic, beef, cooking oil used, type of rice cooked etc can both attract as well as drive away customers depending on their food preferences. Same is true with foods served to different religious groups. While Muslims do not take Pork, Hindus detest beef. Similarly Halal and Kosher meats are essential for attracting some customers. Alcohol which is shunned by followers of Islam is used some times in cooking of some foods. Recently such foods being served in the Emirates have attracted the attention of regulatory agencies and guidelines have been issued when such foods are served.

"Khaled Sharif al Awadhi, director of Dubai municipality's food control department, said food containing alcohol could be served on condition it was segregated from other food and clearly labeled, The National reported. "We have found violations where hotels are not clearly stating alcohol content in their food," it quoted him as saying. Awadhi added that alcohol should be handled like other "non-halal products" such as pork".

The stipulation that alcohol comes under the non-halal food category may be a new approach that will insulate the followers of Islam from such undesirable items on the menu. It is a tribute to the progressive thinking of the rulers of Emirates that they do not blindly ban foods on one or the other consideration giving relative freedom to the multi faith community that contributes to the development of the region.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

A PLASTIC"LAW" FOR STAVING OF FUTURE DISASTER?

To days world is dominated by plastics made from petrochemicals and it is difficult to imagine a future without plastics around. Use of plastics is directly proportional to the affluence levels of nations and as can be expected, the US is the biggest producer and user of plastics in practically every thing which include food and beverage packing materials, water packing, electronics, building products, water piping and taps, furniture and furnishings, vehicles, planes, toys and medical devices. It is now realized that the world has to pay for its indiscriminate use of plastics as billions of tons of used plastics are floating around or lying in garbage dumps because only an insignificant portion of used plastics is recycled. Since it takes more than 700 years to be destroyed completely, the quantity of used plastics that will accumulate, is bound to increase manifold in the coming years. There may be some substance in the argument that there must be legal control of plastic manufacture, recycling, disposal and development of new plastics.

"Given the proven health threat posed by some plastics, the scattershot and weak regulation of the plastics industry, and the enormous environmental costs of plastics — the plastics industry accounts for 5 percent of the nation's consumption of petroleum and natural gas, and more than 1 trillion pounds of plastic wastes now sit in U.S. garbage dumps — the time has come to pass a comprehensive national plastics control law".

It is shocking that an average US citizen uses about 100 kg of plastics every year and the dependence on plastics there is so strong that a population of 300 million consume more than 30 billion bottles of packed water during an year!. What is galling is every developing country is following the "plastic" path, without realizing the damage it can do in the long run to their people and the environment. If such a trend goes on without being checked now, a day is not far off to see the entire world getting choked with plastics with no way out.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com