Claims put on food package labels- True, false and in between!

How truthful are the facts presented on the labels in packaged foods? Before criticizing the food manufacturers for being non-transparent in their label declarations, one must check the veracity of labels on products that are already on the market shelves. The tendency to boost up the sales is universal and no one can fault the industry if they promote their products honestly and truthfully. The problem arises when label declarations are fudged by vague statements and wholly inaccurate facts. In India the FSSAI, sitting in their cozy offices at Delhi seems to be concentrating more on licensing all and sundry including the "under the tree" food sellers though it is not clear what they are going to do with all the paper works involved in documentation associated with such mass scale "licensing". Indian market place is a thriving field for fraudsters, adultrators, cheats and "addressless" vendors to make a fast buck at the expense of the benign citizen. There are thousands of products with wrong labels, boosted up claims, distorted facts and unknown nature of contents. Many products are not even complete leaving out some of the vital information required to be printed to help the consumer. A recent report from the US indicates that mislabeling is not that widespread as in India though there is also a tendency to suppress some facts. Here is a take on that report.    

"Many packaged food items such as cereals, infant food, chips and more contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Some companies label their products; some do not. Still, some say their products are "natural," which can mislead customers into thinking that the food is free from GMOs. About 64 percent of Americans understand the "natural" label to mean "no GMOs." There is no evidence to prove that the consumption of food with GMOs causes illness, but many countries require food producers to label their products if these contain modified ingredients. The U.S. does not, however, require GMO products to be labeled this way. "Foods that are frozen, made from concentrate or homogenized are all required to be labeled. Why shouldn't products containing GMOs also be labeled?" says Jean Halloran, director of Food Policy Initiatives. Consumer Reports examined the number of food items that contain GMOs. The product testing organization also wanted to know if people relied on the packaging of certain products that suggest no GMOs. The group looked at 80 different packaged food items that contained soy or corn, which are the two most genetically modified crops in the U.S. The GMO measurement process involved examining at least two product samples, each from a separate lot. Consumer Reports then compared the test results with the packaging to confirm if food producers provide correct information. For a food product to meet the requirements of non-GMO, it should not have over 0.9 percent of genetically enhanced soy or corn. Following the European Union's standards, any food item with more than 0.9 percent of GMO should be labeled to confirm the product has GMOs. The tests found items that did not mention GMO in the packaging contained a substantial amount of ingredients modified genetically. Almost all food products labeled "natural" also contained a substantial amount of GMOs. However, products labeled "Non-GMO" or "No-GMO" met the required standards of non-GMO foods. "Until GMO labeling becomes mandatory, consumers who want to avoid GMOs should look for 'organic' or 'Non-GMO Project Verified' labels," says Urvashi Rangan, executive director of Consumer Reports Food Safety and Sustainability. Rangan also believes that products that say they are "natural" mislead customers and should be excluded from packaging."

One of the major transgression in the US concerns the failure of the industry to declare the presence of GMO ingredients in packaged food products beyond the level prescribed by international agencies. But this is a controversial area which is still being debated though common sense tells that GMO food ingredients can never be called natural. While a substantial segment of the population definitely want to shun GMO products, they have been made helpless by the spinelessness of the food safety agency in that country to discipline its food industry!

There is an urgent need to overhaul the labeling system throughout the world to bring in some uniformity and facilitate global trade with no disputes regarding the product identity and permissible claims that can be printed on the label.

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

PURPLE TOMATOES-WILL THE CONSUMER ACCEPT IT?

Every consumer identifies red color with tomato and brighter the color, more appealing is the produce to most consumers. Can any consumer reconcile to a color other than red when it comes to tomatoes? Wine ripened tomatoes, though cost a little more, are much sought after because of the natural ripening process while still attached to the plant whereas ethylene ripened fruits are a pale shadow of naturally ripened tomato. There are also hybrid varieties that is firmer in texture and easily amenable to stand the rigors of transport over long distances but it appears they are incapable of ripening fully to the glorious red color. Industry is pulled between its desire to please the consumer on one hand and ground realities vis-a-vis handling, packing, storage, distribution and marketing on the other hand  that may entail significant losses through rotting. If the latest development in tomato breeding is any indication scientists are about to launch a new variety of tomato with a purple color and extraordinarily tough texture that can withstand long journeys with almost 100% more shelf life! The GM route adopted by the researchers to create this variety may be some what controversial but if their safety is proved beyond a shadow of doubt, it may be a win-win situation for both the consumer and the produce industry. Here is a take on this new development which will have significant impact on health of the population.

In research to be published in Current Biology, Martin and colleagues studied tomatoes enriched in anthocyanin, a natural pigment that confers high antioxidant capacity. The purple GM tomatoes have already been found to prolong the lives of cancer-prone mice and in the latest findings they also more double the normal shelf life of tomatoes from an average of 21 days to 48 days. "Post-harvest losses due to rotting are such a serious problem for growers and supermarkets that even an increased shelf life of one day would make an enormous difference to them," said Yang Zhang, lead author from the John Innes Centre. One way to improve shelf life is to pick tomatoes early when they are still green and induce them to ripen artificially with ethylene. However, this results in loss of flavour. Another method is to grow varieties that never fully ripen, but these also never develop a full flavour. In the current study, anthocyanins were found to slow down the over-ripening process that leads to rotting and softening, achieving a tomato with a long shelf life and full flavour. The purple tomatoes were also less susceptible to one of the most important post harvest diseases, grey mould caused by Botrytis cinerea.

Anthocyanins are well known antioxidants with far reaching health benefits and the new variety of purple tomato will go a long way to protect humans from diseases like cancer if the rat studies are duplicated in humans through clinical trials. Though the exact procedure in evolving this new variety has not been revealed, it is safe to assume that the same will be patented. One crucial question that will throw a spanner on the commercial success of purple tomato is whether the consumers will accept a GM product if there is transparency in labeling. Probably it may take some years before purple tomato starts adoring the dining table, at least in that GMO loving country, America!  

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