Salute the leader-The long journey of "Parle G"

Glucose biscuit is a unique product in the Indian market and there cannot be a cheaper "ready to eat" product more affordable than this in any market any where in the world. Whether one analyzes the cost based on energy, protein or any other parameter, glucose biscuit still comes out with flying colors compared to other food products. Who is responsible for making glucose biscuit so enormously popular in this country? Universally the answer is Parle Biscuits of Mumbai! The illustrious Chauhan family of Mumbai will always be remembered by Indians affectionately and respectfully with nostalgia as some of the major products like glucose biscuits, fruiti drink, Thumsup cola, Bisleri water, were all the creation of members of this family which served the country for more than 8 and a half decades. If Indians should be proud of our feats in food sector, which were threatened with extinction by a spate of "muscly" multinational food companies, we have to thank families like Chauhans, Aggarwalls (Haldiram), Bhujiawalas, etc . No wonder that these foreign companies are trying either to buy them out or imitate them to push them out of the market! It speaks enormously of their resilience and survival abilities that even 3rd and 4th generation successors are giving the MNCs a run for their money. Here is a commentary on the evolution of Parle G the most important icon of Indian food industry and its dominance of bakery products sector.      

"There is a spot where the warm aroma of fresh baking catches hold of anyone travelling in a Mumbai local train enroute Andheri and further north. A result of the busy ovens at the first factory of Parle Products baking a batch of the world's largest biscuit brand, Parle G. The company makes 400 million of those a day. Parle Products was established in 1929 to manufacture confectionery such as boiled sweets, after the promoter family, the Chauhans, bought a decrepit factory. Parle G was born as Parle Gluco a decade later, even as the bugle for World War II was sounded. Parle had to manufacture military-grade biscuits for British soldiers right after, but ensured that it could manufacture the nutritional Parle G for the common masses. Parle G, as we know it today, has grown to be bigger than any other biscuit brand in the world by carrying forward the same positioning from the thirties, perfected over the years with a resourceful knack for scale and self-sufficiency. Launched as an affordable source of nourishment (it underlined the calories in a pack at one time) to counter expensive, imported biscuits in the British Raj such as Jacob's (cream cracker of United Biscuits) and those of erstwhile large biscuit maker, Huntly & Palmers. Britannia, then based out of Calcutta (Kolkata now), was strong in the east, while Glaxo glucose biscuit, also imported, ruled over the south. Kamal Kapadia, who worked at Parle for 32 years and left as CEO, Bengaluru project, in 2004, says, "There were many local manufacturers in the early years, mostly cottage industries. Biscuits then would first mean glucose biscuits." Kapadia recalls that in 1960, Britannia launched its first glucose biscuit brand, Glucose D, later endorsed by Amjad Khan's Sholay avatar, Gabbar Singh in the 1970s. It was then that Parle Gluco started feeling the heat, even smaller players would imitate the pack and carry the suffix of 'glucose' in their names. People, especially who were not literate would just ask for glucose biscuits.  Munawar Syed, who worked on the Parle account from the seventies till the nineties, at Everest (now director at Triton), says, "People were confused by similar brand names. Glucose became generic. We did advertise the differences but then, took a call to change the name and ride more on Parle." In 1982, Parle Gluco was repackaged as Parle G. The company had earlier tried to battle knock-offs by imprinting the plump little girl (an illustration by Everest) on its packs, in the mid-seventies. It clicked with Parle G's target audience, kids and their mothers. Kapadia says Parle always believed in branding: "I still remember Parle G's taglines such as 'Often imitated, never equalled'". Parle was among the first advertisers to paint Mumbai's train compartments with Parle Gluco ads when the Indian Railways allowed it. It was the belief in branding that also made Parle G's makers self-reliant, build scale and maintain pricing. Kapadia says, "It wanted to sell biscuits in consumer-friendly packs, rather than leave them loose in jars." Parle resorted to importing and patenting its own packing machinery as early as the fifties. Praveen Kulkarni, general manager, marketing, and with the company since mid-90s, says, "Parle G, till the 1980s commanded over 95 per cent. The glucose market was 60-70 per cent of the overall market." Glucose is now 22 per cent of Rs 24,000 crore and Parle G is around 80 per cent of it, reaching 6 million outlets."

If there is a single product that a poor man in this country can buy it is Glucose biscuit which can be considered a complete food. To day every street corner shop through out the length and breadth of the country sells smaller packs of these biscuits at Rs 2, Rs 3, and Rs 5. Whether it is eaten as a quick bite or as a one time food during the day, glucose biscuit fills the role! Remarkably even MNC companies which are fighting for dominance in the market are just the followers and it will remain as one till the foreseeable future!  Talk about the price front and Parle has fulfilled its role as a counterbalance to the MNCs from escalating the price unreasonably as the latter is known to do when they achieve strangle hold on the market by virtue of their dominance. Glucose biscuit is one food product, which always held its price line in spite of inflationary pressure over the years. Imagine a kilo of glucose biscuit costs less than Rs 80 while the breakfast cereals being marketed by the MNCs cost beyond Rs 400 per kilo! Indian citizen must be grateful to Desi stalwarts like Parle for making this country an affordable one, especially for the poor and lower middle class people!

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

"DRINKING STRAW"-WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ITS SAFETY?

Drinking beverages like soda and fruit juices is considered more convenient if a straw is used to such out the contents from the bottle directly or from a glass full of it. But rarely any one gives any thought to the safety of these straws offered in different places, especially in small juice or soda joints most of which use straws of indifferent quality. There are no standards for straws in many countries and under such an environment it is easy for many to indulge in production of straws of low quality and make a fast buck in the process. World over it is estimated that about a billion straws are manufactured for drinking liquid products and imagine the trash value of these disposable material which are littered all around in towns and cities with no strict environmental discipline. Straws which used to be made of paper a few years ago are ow made mostly from polypropylene plastics or polystyrene material with no biodegradable credentials. Besides these "tubes" can pose serious health dangers if the quality of raw material and ingredients used are not of food grade as it is reported from China recently. Here is a take on this little known area of food industry.  

"According to food experts, some straws could contain hazardous materials that can dissolve into drinks. Long term use can cause harm to the digestive system, premature sexual development, infertility or even cancer. An investigation team led by Lou Zhongping, who helped draft the standards on drinking straws, began inspections of wholesale stores in Shanghai's Yu Garden in early July and concluded only 10 percent of straws were qualified. Inspections 

also revealed forged quality safety logos. "In wholesale stores, we found the logo was hard to read and could be erased easily," said Lou,who is also president of the largest manufacturer of drinking straws worldwide, Soton DailyNecessities. Despite a request on July 3 by the market watchdog requiring that stores remove the straws from their shelves, a vendor said that the

straws are still being sold. Most of the quality safety logos are counterfeit, headded, showing a bag full of colorful drinking straws."Many beverage and milk tea stores as well as schools buy straws regularly, and we sell hundreds of packs every month," said the vendor, who only wanted

to be identified as Chen. In a beverage shop named Guoxiang in the Jing'an district, a manager surnamed Yang said he purchases straws from markets in YuGarden, and has never been aware of the safety concerns. Insiders said thick straws, such as those used for bubble tea, 

tend to be more at risk because they use more materials and are more expensive to make. "The price of a qualified straw is around 0.1 yuan ($0.016), which is double or even triple the price of a substandard one," said Han Ying, business department manager of Shanghai Guanxuan, a company that makes household products. "There is no threshold for producing inferior drinking straws asit's easy to attain recycled plastics, and anyone could start 

a business with several machines at home," she added. There are five straw producers in Zhejiang province's Yiwu, an international trade hub that produces at least 90 percent of the straws in the Chinese market, but the number of unlicensed producers in the country is more than 200, insiders said. The health supervision department in Changsha, Central China's Hunan province, issued a warning in May that some drinking straws might contain toxic substances after the findings of Lou's investigation".

The basic question raised by some health pundits is whether there is any need for using a straw at all in the instance? A very relevant issue. The Straw apologists contend that use of this contraption avoids contact of the sugary beverage with the teeth to a significant extent lessening the possibility of dental decay but there is very little evidence to support this argument. After all to get the full pleasure of drinking a beverage it is necessary that the liquid is moved around the mouth for the palate to sense the taste and flavor and even if a straw is used most will keep it in the oral cavity at least for a few seconds before gulping. Use of straw is also claimed to be helpful in avoiding contact of the mouth with the glass or cup which may be dirty or unhygienic. But it is silly to imagine that the contents in a dirty glass would be clean! All said and done it is time that strict safety standards are put in place for drinking straws immediately to protect the unwary consumers.  

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

BIOFUELS-THE DARK SIDE!

Fossil fuels appear to be entering its last phase if the current pace of its exploitation continues unabated to satisfy the energy needs of wealthy countries as well emerging economies. With no satisfactory alternate options available to replace non-renewable resources of energy so far, world is heading for an uncertain future. Of course there are many renewable sources being tried out including solar, wave, windmill, geothermal etc  with none of them coming any where near the petroleum fuels in terms of cost and performance. The Biofuels with so much promise till recently, might not be a solution as most sources from which they are derived also happen to be food resources consumed by millions of people and large diversion of these food materials tend to distort the food situation adversely affecting food security in the world. One of the food materials now being used as biodiesel, especially in Europe is based on spent vegetable oils coming from industry engaged in frying of foods. If recent reports are to be believed the demand for used palm oil is so high, the price commanded by this product is higher than that of virgin oil! What a paradox! Here is a expose on this ironical situation that is prevalent in countries like the UK.    

"But research carried out for Chatham House says that reaching the 5% level means that UK motorists will have to pay an extra £460m a year because of the higher cost of fuel at the pump and from filling up more often as biofuels have a lower energy content.The report say that if the UK is to meet its obligations to EU energy targets the cost to motorists is likely to rise to £1.3bn per annum by 2020. "It is hard to find any good news," Rob Bailey, senior research fellow at Chatham House, told BBC News. "Biofuels increase costs and they are a very expensive way to reduce carbon emissions," he said. The EU biofuel mandates are also having hugely distorting effects in the marketplace. Because used cooking oil is regarded as one of the most sustainable types of biodiesel, the price for it has risen rapidly. Rob Bailey says that towards the end of 2012 it was more expensive than refined palm oil. "It creates a financial incentive to buy refined palm oil, cook a chip in it to turn it into used cooking oil and then sell it at profit," "It is crazy but the incentives are there." 

What a ridiculous situation where biofuels are becoming more expensive than fossil fuels! Whatever advantage biofuels have, the ground reality does not give any optimism that they will become an effective substitute to the fossil fuels in future. Another worrying factor is whether use of biofuels will have any impact on the carbon emission which is being blamed for global warming. Probably world will realize sooner than later that biofuels from plant sources may never be feasible and man will have to fall back on microrganisms for production of fuels of future with low cost and practically no adverse effect on the food front. Research has already achieved adequate breakthrough in this area and it is a question of time before giant vertical bioreactors start producing single cell biomass from which fuel oil can be extracted using known processes.       

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

FLOUR MILLING INDUSTRY-SEEKING LOWER COST WHEAT

Any industry will always try to maximize its profits through many honest way and it is to be admitted that input material invariably forms a sizable component in the end product price. This is no exception to flour milling industry also which uses wheat as its raw material. Unlike Chakkis, modern Roller Flour Mills process the wheat into consumer products like Suji and Maida while Bran and Germ are by products. With slow disappearance of Chakkis in many parts of the country, big flour mills have entered into the Atta market with their own brands and to day branded Atta costs any where from Rs 35-40 per kg while the raw wheat sells at Rs 18-20 per kg. Naturally the industry can be expected to have comfortable margins in the manufacture of Atta, Maida and Suji. However the stand being taken by the flour milling industry that they are all incurring heavy losses is some what puzzling. Recent GOI modification of wheat pricing with uniform prices across the country seems to have gladdened the hearts of the millers probably because their profitability is bound to go up under the new policy. Here is a take on this issue.

"Roller flour mills in the northern region are gearing up to step up capacity utilisation after the Central government revisited its decision on the price of wheat under the open market sales scheme to provide a level playing field to flour mills across India. Flour mills in the north — particularly in the states of Punjab, Haryana, Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh — had been keeping their capacities idle, as wheat in the producing states was available to them at a higher price than in the consuming states, making business unviable. Under the latest guidelines, wheat prices (per quintal) in the producing states have been fixed at Rs 1,403 in Uttar Pradesh, Rs 1,417 in Madhya Pradesh, Rs 1,446 in Haryana and Rs 1,484 in Punjab. In the consuming states, the price of wheat will now be the price in the state from where it is imported, plus freight charges. Earlier, freight charges and state taxes in the consuming states were subsidised, making wheat dearer in the producing states. The president of the Madhya Pradesh Roller Flour Millers Association, Sunil Aggarwal, said, "About 50 per cent of India's flour mills are located in the producing states, as it makes business sense. The state has close to 50 flour mills with an installed capacity of 200 tonnes per mill per month. All of them were running at 30-40 per cent capacity. This will now increase substantially." Adi Narayan Gupta of the Roller Flour Millers Association of Uttar Pradesh said wheat is available in Delhi at Rs 1,328 per quintal and in Uttar Pradesh at Rs 1,403. The state has over 140 flour mills and all are battling for survival. The new price has created a favourable climate for mills in Uttar Pradesh, which can now sell in Delhi. Taxes are the highest in Punjab and Haryana. These taxes come in the form of VAT (value-added tax), mandi fee, arhtiya commission, labour charges, handling charges and rural development fund. The taxes are close to 15.5 per cent in Punjab and 13.5 per cent in Haryana. In Uttar Pradesh and Madhya Pradesh, they are slightly lower than in Haryana, but small flour millers were finding it difficult to compete with millers in other states in the wake of differentiation in wheat prices. The Food Corporation of India pays these taxes to the state on procurement of wheat over and above minimum support price of wheat, which is Rs 1,285 per quintal. The president of the Roller Flour Millers Association of Punjab, Naresh Ghai, said wheat products (wheat flour and refined wheat flour or maida) were coming from other states (Rajasthan, Delhi, Chandigarh), and this would now get discouraged. Wheat is sold to millers through the open market sales scheme. Punjab's millers did not participate in the tenders for wheat under the scheme, as the prices were unviable for them (the neighbouring states were offering wheat to their millers at lower rates). Now they will have better access to wheat at a viable price, Ghai said. Millers in Haryana are hopeful, as they expect sales to double now. Close to two dozen mills have shut down in the past few months due to the Centre's unfavourable policy, said C P Gupta, the president of Roller Flour Millers Association of Haryana. "Of 65 mills only 40 were functional and had been operating at 15-20 per cent of capacity. The amendment in the policy will help us revive operations."The country has a buffer stock of wheat, and there are no supply constraints. Consistency in government policy, millers said, was imperative for the growth of small and medium flour mills".

It is alleged, probably with some justification that wheat that is siphoned off from the leaky PDS often ends up in flour mills and that may be the reason why the mills were working at lower capacity to just process the quantities received through back channels. Other wise it is difficult to understand why these mils are still working at all incurring losses! Normal economic sense tells that lower the margin higher should be the volume of production through higher capacity utilization. Good days can be expected for the industry in the coming days under the new policy! The recent announcement by the Prime Minister about rolling out the government's newly discovered Direct Cash Transfer alternative to PDS may still upset the apple cart of this industry.

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

COST OF IGNORING A TECHNOLOGY-THE CANADIANS ARE PAYING FOR IT

What type of logic it is that what is good for Americans is not good for Canadians? That seems to be essence of the continued refusal or obfuscation on the part of Canadian safety authorities to allow irradiation process for sterilization of ground meat products. Ionizing radiation generated under controlled conditions is directed to the foods to be sterilized in a closed atmosphere for varying duration, the time and dosage varying from product to product. Damage to the DNA of the pathogenic organisms is beyond repair making them incapable of multiplication, eventually leading to their death. In spite of significant consumer perception that irradiated food will emit harmful radiation affecting their health, persistent consumer education has enabled the industry to process over half a million tons of food products every year using irradiation technology. Almost 50 countries have permitted food irradiation with all international agencies including FAO and WHO certifying the safety and efficacy of food irradiation process. If this is so why should the Canadian government is prevaricating on this issue? Here is a report on this issue coming from Canada.

"Why has the Canadian government not approved the irradiation of ground beef to allow consumers the choice of buying regular or irradiated ground beef?In March 1998 the Canadian Cattlemen's Association (CCA) submitted a petition to Health Canada and according to a 2000 press release it was very optimistic that approval would happen in a timely fashion. This was a reasonable expectation by the Association because in 1997 on the basis of extensive scientific studies and the expert opinions in the United States, Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the irradiation of red meat for the control of food borne pathogens. The Department of Agriculture (USDA) which is responsible for ensuring that meat products are safe, wholesome and properly labelled published its ruling in 1999. "Today Americans are consuming about 18 million pounds of irradiated red meat per year, and experiencing a rapidly growing demand to over 35 million pounds of fresh irradiated produce", according to Ron Eustice the former Executive Director of the Minnesota Beef Council. In fact for years, pioneering companies Omaha Steaks, Schwan's and Wegmans are proud to offer their customers a choice with the added food safety benefit that irradiation offers to already great-tasting beef products and hamburgers. Meanwhile in Canada we wait, denied the choice that American consumers have. Why? In the Canadian Report of the Independent Investigator into the Listeriosis Outbreak (July 2009) where 22 lives were lost, it noted "Irradiation has been proven to be the single most effective method of eradicating bacteria and it does not alter appearance, taste or texture of foods.". Yet it also stated that "Despite its many advantages, this proven technique is unlikely to be adopted by food processors without a major consumer education program." The Consumers Association of Canada commissioned a study to take the pulse on the subject of food irradiation early in 2012. While irradiation is relatively unknown in Canada, Angus Reid Public Opinion found, when Canadians polled in the survey were given a brief explanation of the process, most said they would support having irradiated food at the grocery store as a choice. The problem is that as few as 10 highly infectious E. coli O157:H7 microscopic germs can sicken and, perhaps, kill you. The manufacturing facility may be as clean as a surgical suite, and the government inspected company can take extensive samples— yet we are missing a kill step for the pathogens. So, where is the irradiated beef? Without the Canadian government approval, irradiation technology, which could have prevented economic harm to the food industry and could have prevented illness and death, cannot be used!"

The American policy of permitting the use of Irradiation Technology but insisting on declaration of the same on the label, probably, will be a via solution for this Catch 22 situation. World over use of irradiation technology must be encouraged because of its immense potential to prevent food losses and food poisoning episodes due to newly emerging virulent spoilage vectors. After all world has seen billions of dollars of investment in evolving and safety clearance of hundreds of irradiated products during the last 6 decades and this effort should not go waste by a continued mindset of resistance to the universal deployment of this clean technology. That will, to some extent, give salvation to the souls of all those who perished from the first atomic bomb dropped in Japan during World War II, thereby demonstrating the will of the mankind to use atomic energy only for peaceful uses that benefit it.

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

DEVELOPMENT AT WHAT COST? NEED FOR INTROSPECTION

Every nation aspires to be in the fore front of development vying for a place in the comity of nations with pride and honor. But the routes they choose may be different depending on the policies and practices of the ruling class which controls their destiny. Common sense tells that an agriculturally predominant country must use the strength of its farm sector to base its development while those with weak agri cultural base have to go for industrialization on a massive scale. Some countries have both these strengths and therefore have options to concentrate on either of them or both. Take for example the case of India which was a predominantly agricultural country till a few years ago and the shift in priority occurred after the economic liberalization starting in early nineteen nineties. Progressively agriculture is being sidelined and industrial and service sectors are getting more priority attention at the hands of successive governments during the past two decades. While industrial development has a place in national development policies, what is being ignored is the cost at which these developments are achieved. World wide environmental degradation is occurring on a massive scale putting the very survival of this planet in peril and one of the causes has been reckless industrialization without any environmental impact analysis. Here is a classic case from India where once revered and adored water bodies are being systematically destroyed in the name of development under the very nose of the government which has no time to see the indiscriminate destruction all around!  

"Methane gas is bubbling up from the black-coloured stew, and the water smells horrible. The holy river Yamuna, once teeming with life, is practically dead, yet a homeless man is rinsing his mouth with the noxious liquid. Under a nearby bridge, scavengers on a self-made raft are fishing out votive offerings that drivers throw from their cars to Yamuna, which is worshipped by Hindus as a goddess. But it is people and politics that are choking Yamuna to death, and ecologists are warning of a looming environmental catastrophe as World Water Day approaches on March 22. The river, New Delhi's lifeline, is reputed to be India's most polluted as well as one of the most toxic waterways worldwide. The Yamuna provides an example of Indian government policies that are focused on economic growth, often at the cost of the environment. In the meantime, the river is dying a slow yet unpublicized death, partly because it has mostly vanished from public sight behind concrete after the river was moved. A highway now runs along the old riverbed. Access to the river is possible at only a few points and glimpses of it can be gained only from road or subway bridges. Vimlendu K Jha, executive director of the environmental organization Swechha, estimates that 60 per cent of New Delhi's 14 million people have never seen the river."How can you save the Yamuna if nobody ever sees it?" he asks. The river is indeed rather beautiful -- before it reaches New Delhi and is polluted with raw sewage and toxic waste".

Every Indian must hang his head in shame listening to the sad story of the Taj Mahal "kissing" Yamuna river which has its origin in the sacred Himalayas. Millions of rupees are "wasted" in the name of rejuvenating rivers like Ganges and Yamuna while the quality of water in these rivers is progressively deteriorating to the extent they can be safely called dead rivers! There is a high profile minister calling himself "Environmental Minister" in the UPA cabinet with great conviction about what he says but with very little power to do any thing substantial at the ground level. The importance of water, qualitatively and quantitatively, cannot be under estimated and if such a policy continues disaster will be waiting to happen which the people of this once great country may have to face with terrible consequences!


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

SOLAR ELECTRICITY-POLICY INCENTIVES AND INEQUITIES!

Abundance of unlimited solar energy beckons this world to utilize the same in place of that generated by the unsustainable fossil fuel and undependable hydroelectric sources. If so why is that the growth of solar energy industry has not taken off in a big way? The answer is simple-the investment and per unit generation cost which appear to be unaffordable to most users as of now. However there are signs that this sector will garner explosive growth in the coming years if supportive policies by the governments in countries where solar energy is available plenty are tuned to attract more and more power users to go for solar system. Chinese solar energy industry is already supplying low cost solar power equipment world wide and new invest policies combined with fiscal incentives will further ensure a fast paced growth globally. But with such a positive outlook, there are also logistical problems arising out of unanticipated contingencies under different ground conditions which are highlighted in a report below emanating from California in the US.  

"When the sun is shining, the solar panels on his Fresno condominium produce more than enough power for his needs, and the local utility is required to buy the excess power from him at full retail prices. Those credits mostly offset his purchases from the electric company during cloudy days and at night. Mr. Burman says the credit system, known as net metering, is a "very nice benefit" for him. But it's not such a good deal for his utility, Pacific Gas and Electric. As he and tens of thousands of other residential and commercial customers switch to solar in California, the utilities not only lose valuable customers that help support the costs of the power grid but also have to pay them for the power they generate. Ultimately, the utilities say, the combination will lead to higher rate increases for everyone left on the traditional electric system. "Low-income customers can't put on solar panels — let's be blunt," said David K. Owens, executive vice president of the Edison Electric Institute, which represents utilities. "So why should a low-income customer have their rates go up for the benefit of someone who puts on a solar panel and wants to be credited the retail rate?"

The power utilities in the US run mostly by private companies cannot cope up with a system where their profitability is eroded and this is precisely what is happening there. The purchase clause under which they are forced to buy surplus power from home owners with installed solar power facilities at retail market rate, combined with a surplus power situation is making the situation some what dicey. While home owners are winners all the way, the conventional power generators are faced with the prospect of financial imbalance in their balance sheet compelling them to raise electricity tariff across the board, the impact of which those will be felt by those using conventional power from rid in the form of higher power bills. Probably the present policy incentives may need a revisit in the light of such contradictions.  


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

ORGANIC FOODS-ARE THEY REALLY SUPERIOR?

Though organic foods are gaining popularity across the world, the real reason for a paradigm shift in the consumer perception of normal foods marketed to day may not be based on reasons which are being touted by the organic food industry. There appears to be a grouse on the part of the general food industry that consumer is being hijacked by the protagonists of organic foods through unsustainable claims like superior nutrition and other benefits. Here is a commentary on this perceived feelings of food industry in general about the situation prevailing to day in world markets.

As consumers we are increasingly disconnected from how our food is produced and supplied. New ideas and belief systems related to food are exploiting this disconnect and nowhere is this more true than organic food. In his new book, Organic Production and Food Quality: A Down to Earth Analysis Professor Robert Blair uses the latest scientific research to separate the truth from unproven beliefs. 'Organic Production and Food Quality' is the first comprehensive book on how organic production methods influence the standard of our foods, while comparing this to the perceptions of consumers and the demands of the global food industry. Based on the latest scientific findings and the results of food monitoring programs in North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand Blair explores issues consumers raise about organic food including quality, safety and "healthfulness" compared to conventional food. "The internet is rife with unsubstantiated claims from the organic industry, and the media tends to have a negative impact on consumer perceptions about food," said Blair. "Thanks to food scares such as BSE or the controversy over GM foods more and more consumers began buying organic food. This resulted in a radical shift in food retailing, the expansion of the organic industry and the supply of organic foods at farmers' markets, supermarkets and specialty stores." In contrast the recent announcement by the UK Food Standards Agency that organic foods are nutritionally similar to conventional foods may reverse consumer perceptions, as will the higher cost of organic food when budgets are tight. Blair agrees with the conclusions of the UK FSA, as does an important sector of the European organic industry.

It has to be admitted that organic foods possibly can never be nutritionally superior except in a technical sense because the way the organic crops are raised is founded on the philosophy that they should be safer for the consumer as synthetic chemicals are rarely permitted for increasing production or protecting them. It is not that conventional agriculture cannot deploy the same techniques used by organic food farmers but the cost is bound to rise making the products much more costly. Let the organic food industry restrict its promotional efforts to focus on safety rather than nutrition. This is a fair way of clearing the confusion that prevails among consumers.

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