There is a general understanding that sugar is not good when consumed at high levels and that too regularly. Many people are not sure what can be construed as "high level" and even nutrition pundits are not unanimous on this issue. For many food industry players such an awareness and the existing ambiguity seem to be providing a "tailor made" opportunity to re-position their existing portfolios rich in sugar by reducing the same marginally. Here is a typical case of a food giant, with products marketed in 130 countries around the world making a grand stand statement on its sugar reduction policy.
"General Mills (GIS), the maker of super-sweet cereals like Trix and Lucky Charms, has announced plans to reduce sugar in ten of its cereals that are most aggressively aimed at children. It's a good and important move — some of these products are among the sugariest in the industry. But though General Mills is touting the move as good news for health-conscious consumers, the truth is that even with the cuts, these products will hardly qualify as good-for-you. The goal is to cut back to a maximum of 11 grams per serving, but the goal only applies to certain products, and the company hasn't specified when it will meet these targets".
A voluntary declaration like this is always welcome if there is a time frame for achieving the target. Bringing down the sugar content into single digit level can be significant provided other sweeteners, not considered sugar, are not added to make the product highly attractive to children. Such a trend where industry voluntarily imposes self-restraint mus be emulated by all the manufacturers of major brands of foods containing high amounts of sugar, salt and fat.
V.H.POTTY
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com
No comments:
Post a Comment