Prosperity, thy name is "nemesis"-Great food inflicted health crisis staring us!

Umpteen number of treatise emphasize the uncomfortable truth that an average a denizen, living in any part of the globe with high income, consumes a diet that is drastically different from that consumed 50 years ago. The catch here is that the quality of the diet has taken a beating with more and refined foods, low quality carbohydrates, less and less of fibers, fruits and vegetables, more of fats of lower quality, predominating the food that is consumed day in day out. The result is there for every one to see. Diseases like obesity, CVD, blood pressure, diabetes, kidney ailments, liver problems, cancer etc have become common and billions of dollars are being spent to treat them, the only beneficiary being the drug industry. Here is a telling commentary on this vicious situation in a super rich country like the US which is revealing.

"Today, novelty dominates American food. Those yellow arches are now golden arches and we are now a nation addicted to sugar, fat and drive-through windows. Food is mere fuel, and we eat more of it in our family car than at our family table. For proof, look how we — you and me — have changed our food patterns in the last 40 or so years.
• In 1960, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture data, we spent 26 cents of our food dollar on restaurant meals; in 2013 it was 50 percent.
• In 1950, the standard soft-drink bottle contained 6.5 ounces; in 1960 it grew to 12 ounces and, in the 1990s, 20 ounces became the norm.
• In 1970, according to numbers in a 2011 article published by Grist, the U.S. "churned out 2,168 calories per day per person, 402 of which came from added sugar and 410 from added fat ... or, combined, about 37 percent of the total."
• In 2008, the U.S. produced 2,673 calories per day person (" ... powerful evidence that [America's] cheap food policy ... succeeded ... ") of which "added fats and sugars [grew] to 459 and 641 calories, respectively, a 35 percent jump over the 1970 level ... "
• In 2013, according to Harvard University, Americans spent "an estimated $190 billion treating obesity-related health conditions."
• Also, in 2013, U.S. organic sales (which USDA does not track) totaled an estimated $35.1 billion, an 11.5 percent increase from 2012 but still only 18.4 percent of the amount spent we spent to treat obesity-related health problems that year. 

What's it all mean, fellow foodies? According to that brief survey, most of us ate less sugar and less fat when we ate more fresh, local food at home 40 or 50 years ago than what we buy and eat (mostly) in town today. Also, most of us were skinnier and healthier (as were our parents in comparison to us today) and all of us had more neighbors and more "community" — local banks, medical care, grocery and clothing stores and the like — than almost any of us have anywhere in rural America today. In short, we had it very, very good — despite Grandma pushing the pickle beets and lima beans every chance she got. Little wonder, then, that a new food culture, a foodie culture, is taking root across the U.S. now."

Though the above study, analyzing the hard data is considered reliable, there is no cogent answer as to what can be done to redeem the world from the curse of bad food and distorted food culture which are slowly but surely making the quality of life progressively deteriorating. While many blame the industry for this sorry situation, some blame will have be apportioned to the government regulatory agencies who have allowed this situation to develop by shirking their bounden responsibility to protect the lives of the citizens. Where does the consumer come in this complex scenario? Of course it is the weak will power and weakness for tasty foods abandoning the health concerns (similar to tobacco and alcohol) on the part of the consumer that is driving this insane rush towards health catastrophe staring at them! Unless consumers, regulatory agencies, health experts and the food business get together to deal with the crisis, this sordid "death dance" will continue unabated!

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com

http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

A food policy worthy for the archives!-India's food woes

Recent clashes between India and rest of the world at the Bali meeting of WTO helped us to get an insight into the problems India has been facing in the food front because of lack of objective changes in the country's food policy during the last 5 decades. According to many impartial observers the stand of India in the above meeting was not rational and it does not recognize its own deficiencies vis-a-vis policies and practices involved in food production, procurement, storage, distribution and price subsidization. It is a late realization that our existing policies need to be moth balled because they are out of sync with what is happening else where in the world, that a revamp was considered by the new government at Delhi. The panel vested with this responsibility did a commendable job within a short period of time. India's "committee culture" which has the incredulous capacity to delay taking decisions in any field, did not come in the way of completing the report in record time and  the recommendations made by them deserve speedy implementation with high priority. Here is a take on this report which provides interesting reading.

"The report makes five sensible and practical suggestions. First, get the FCI out of the business of procurement in grain-surplus states like Punjab, Haryana, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh and Odisha, and shift its focus to eastern Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, Assam and West Bengal. The FCI can purchase grain above its NFSA needs from surplus states, but the actual purchasing should be handled by the states themselves. Getting the FCI out of direct procurement is a good idea and it's not clear why pushing it into procurement in the eastern states is desirable. It would be better to build procurement capacity in eastern states and help fuel another green revolution. Second, the report pushes for a national warehousing system under a PPP model to reduce wasteful storage and transport costs. Farmers can deposit their produce at these warehouses and receive up to 80 per cent of the MSP value of this produce from banks — and then sell it later at market prices. This will be a major improvement as it would reduce storage costs and wastage. Third, the panel suggests that state bonuses be the responsibility of the states and levies be made uniform at 3 per cent. This would help avoid the costs of huge bonuses paid by the states and financed by the levies they charge the FCI to procure from their farmers. Fourth, the panel moots shifting to cash payments for inputs like fertilisers and rationalising the price of urea so that the NPK mix, which has been distorted by urea pricing, is reversed. Smuggling to neighbouring countries and other distortions caused by urea pricing would also be removed. Huge productive investments in the fertiliser sector are needed but have been held back by the absurd pricing system, which has made India even more dependent on fertiliser imports. Fifth, the panel suggests amending the NFSA and reducing the subsidised population to 40 per cent instead of the current 67 per cent. It also suggests BPL consumers get more subsidised grain — 7 kg vs 5 kg — but that the issue price be linked to MSPs, except for the very poor. Further, in cities that have a population of more than one million, fair price shops should be replaced by DBTs. If implemented, these recommendations would provide more food for the poorest population, reduce FCI costs, bring private trade back into the system and give poor urban consumers greater choice in their food basket. It will hurt labour unions that are gaming the FCI system and states that use bonuses as a political handout, which they get the Centre to pay for through levies. This would hugely reduce the massive leakages and corruption in the food chain. If India can implement these reforms in the coming years, it would also avoid unnecessary battles at the WTO. It's time to begin reforming a system that may have served us well 50 years ago but is now benefiting a few at a huge cost."

Subsidy is not a bad word when it comes to upliftment of poor people from their poverty ridden life but when such subsidies are doled out mindlessly as a part of the vote bank politics, it becomes a scandal bordering on crime and shame. It is beyond any body's comprehension as to why government must subsidize well to do citizens even for buying a cooking gas cylinder or for that matter why should subsidized food grains be given under the APL card system to people who have sufficient income to buy the same from the open market? One of the most brilliant suggestions coming from the above panel is to reduce the population coverage under the NFSA from 67% to 40% saving enormously on the total outgo on this count. Similarly the country should have a reliable data base on its citizens vis-a-vis income details, in stead the politicians trying to conduct surveys on caste and religion! To start with, all government employees, those owning a mobile phone, two wheelers, four wheelers, houses, paying IT regularly, registered business men, air travelers, higher class train travelers, etc must be taken out of the list of people eligible for receiving government subsidy. Whether the present government has the courage to do it is another matter. Unless this is done, we as a nation is going to be left behind in the global race to attain economic strength and status.

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

NEW FOOD PROCESSING POLICY-KARNATAKA WANTS TO BE THE PIONEER!

Every politician loves the media because their utterances, however non-nonsensical they may be, have some news value for mass circulated news papers. The monotonous regularity with which policy announcements are made by ministers only to be forgotten soon, is like writing in water. If 10% of the pronouncements by the cabinet minister at the Center in charge of food processing industry during the last 6 years had come true, Indian food industry should have been in "Cloud Nine" to day surpassing China and the US. In reality look where the country is in global food trade, being not able to garner even 1% of the world exports! Here comes a profound declaration by one of the Ministers in Karnataka who seems to be blissfully unaware of what is happening elsewhere in the country!

"Karnataka will become the first state in India to have a separate policy for the food processing industries, according to state Minister for Large and Medium Scale Industries Murugesh Nirani. 'We had success in IT (information technology) and BT (biotechnology). Now, we are focusing on FT or food technology,' Nirani told the media here Friday after a meeting with Union Minister for Food Processing Industries Subodh Kant Sahay. 'We are creating a new department for food technology and have appointed a senior IAS officer for this department,' he added. The minister said that the state would frame a new industrial policy for the food processing sector before June this year, when the state would host a global investors' meet".

While Karnataka has impressive credentials in the IT sector, claiming exalted status in BT industry may at best be a boast not sustained by facts. One Biocon at Bangalore or a Lalchand Biotech at Mysore does not make an imposing industry and the state has a long way to go to establish as a force to reckon with in the BT area. As for the so called new initiative in creating a "Department of Food Technology with a senior IAS officer", one can only pity the level of comprehension the Minister has regarding food industry development. Way back in late eighties when the MFPI was formed, GOI wanted all states to set up dedicated ministries for food industry and it is unfortunate that Karnataka is taking more than two decades even for "considering" such a step. What can one expect from such politicians in charge of food industry development who are ignorant of the fundamentals of the subject?

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

FOOD POLICY COUNCIL-NEED FOR CONSUMER EDUCATION

Food is a multi-disciplinary subject and it is difficult for any single specialist to comprehend the inter disciplinary dynamics that play a part in the development of food processing industry. While consumers depend more or less on the government to protect their interests in terms of safety and quality of products that are manufactured and marketed, industry focuses more on the viability of its investments, some time compromising on consumer interests. Here is where a well orchestrated and sound policy frame work will help. All countries should have a distinct mechanism for evolving and fine tuning the national food policies taking into consideration interests of all stake holders.

"Utah is one of only 20 states with a Food Policy Council, which seeks to educate and inform the public and policy makers about nutrition, but it does not have a state-level policy for improving the availability of stores that offer healthy foods".

In India GOI has not yet thought of such a council and it is time to make a move in that direction. True there is MFPI, the nodal ministry for food industry but it is more an administrative set up obsessed with spending targets and incentive programs. Any food policy council should have members from different sectors like agriculture, food, health, manufacturing, finance, legal, marketing, commerce, retailing and social welfare. Probably the Planning Commission could the ideal nodal agency for such a broad based council.

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