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

NEW GENERATION NON-NUTRITIVE SWEETENERS-WHAT IS THE FATE OF SUGAR?

The non-nutritive sweetener market can never be the same after the run away success of Stevia sugars which are to day marketed as a natural low calorie/ no calorie sweetener globally. The dominance of synthetic sweeteners like Aspartame till the arrival of Stevia offered no choice to consumers with diabetes or those wanting to cut down on calories in their diet but Stevia changed all that and to day it is overwhelmingly being accepted by the consumer with least reservation. Probably attraction to every thing that is natural by the present day consumer society is pulling in more and players intent to develop sweeteners like Stevia. Recent arrival of Monk fruit sugar being made popular among low calories adherents is another attempt to tap this rich market. Like Stevia which has complex steviosides that contribute to sweetness, Monk fruit contains migrosides which have 300 times the sweetening power compared to sucrose. Hot on the heels are others like sweeteners made from the fruits of Oubli grown in West Africa. Here is a take on this emerging development which may have far reaching future implications in the low calorie sweetener market. 

Hot on the heels of the stevia and monk fruit revolution is asweetener derived from the West African fruit of the climbing plant Oubli, Pentadiplandra brazzeana Baillon. Oubli has been long recognized by natives of the Gabon Republic, a sovereign state on the west coast of Central Africa, and Cameroon for its sweetness. The sweet compound is called brazzein, and is an extracellular protein found in the pulp surrounding the seeds of the berry. First isolated as an enzyme by researchers at the University of Wisconsin in 1994, the super-sweet protein is now expressed in bacteria in order to lower the cost of production and eliminate the need for farming. After sequencing the DNA that codes for brazzein, researchers could use bacteria as little cellular factories that churn out the highly sweet protein. The newly formulated final product will be marketed under the name Cweet by Natur Research Ingredients, Los Angeles. Boasting a sweetening power 1,000 times that of sucrose, Cweet is promoted as a natural, easily dissolved and heat-stable sweetener that leaves no aftertaste. Stability at high temperatures makes the sweetener appropriate for baked applications as well as beverages. Since it's a protein, it weighs in at 4 calories per gram, but with a 1,000:1 replacement value for sucrose, it is essentially zero calories. 

How far this sweetener will compete with established non-sugar sweeteners is is matter of speculation right now though it does have the potential to become a significant player provided the plant is taken up for cultivation in an organized way. The economics also can pose challenge and the ultimate commercial viability will very much depend on the consumer cost. Though the process of extracting the sweet fraction is rather simple as it is concentrated in the pulp portion that surrounds the berry, still as it becomes popular questions regarding the safety of the product for long term use in humans are bound to be raised. The biggest advantage is that it is the most intense sweetener known so far with a 1 to 1000 sweetness ratio compared to sucrose though it cannot be categorized as a zero calorie sweetener in the strict sense as it does yield about calories per gm but as the quantity required to impart required sweetness in food products is so minuscule that it will not contribute any significant calories to the products. It is necessary that the quest for unveiling many such low calorie sweeteners from natural sources with as high sweetness intensity as possible be continued since sugar cane cultivation is increasingly becoming unsustainable and the population requiring sugarless products for managing obesity and diabetes is expanding rapidly.  

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

MEAT PRODUCTS AND ANTIBIOTICS-THE LABELING GAME!

Increased emergence of bugs resistant to some of the commonly used antibiotics for treatment of serious diseases in human beings is a cause for alarm globally. While part of the problem can be attributed to the indiscriminate prescription by physicians of all hues and colors to treat any and every fever with strongest antibiotics available in the market, meat industry has to bear the major burden for such a situation because of large scale use (or mis-use?) of antibiotics in raising meat animals. It is scandalous that more than 80% of the antibiotics produced in the US goes for feeding meat animals, under the pretext that meat so produced will be safer from pathogens like Salmonella, virulent E.coli and others. However a reality check shows that antibiotics are used to improve the production economics as the animals grow faster using less and less feed inputs. The hapless consumer, in spite of his yearnings to consume antibiotic free meat products does not have ready access to such products because most of the meat produced comes from farms which liberally use antibiotics in their day to day operations. Here is a take on this vexatious issue that seems to be caught between the powerful meat lobby and aggressive consumer activists organizations.  

"Currently, there is no labeling standards for drug free meat products, but until there is, the researchers say, foods labeled "organic" are, by definition, required to be antibiotic-free. In addition, they say consumers can generally rely on labels that explicitly say "no antibiotics," but should be wary of terms like "natural," "antibiotic-free," "no antibiotic residues" and "no antibiotic growth promotants," as these terms can be misleading. But a coalition of agricultural advocacy organizations – including the American Meat Institute, the National Cattleman's Beef Association, the National Chicken Council, the National Pork Producers Council and the National Turkey Federation -  do not agree that there is a problem. "The research is clear that the contribution of using antibiotics in food-animal production to the human burden of antibiotic resistance is quite small, if it exists at all," the coalition said in a letter to Congress in June".

It is a shame that the government in the world's most powerful country, viz the US is unable to come to the rescue of its citizens through restraining policies that will discourage the meat industry from using antibiotics recklessly. Adding insult to injury, the powerful meat lobby does not concede the point that its large scale use of antibiotics is responsible for the drug resistance encountered in may pathogen infections, in spite of massive scientific evidence to the contrary! What prevents the US authorities in insisting on compulsory labeling of antibiotic treated meat is indeed baffling, the only charitable interpretation being its vulnerability to the lobbying power of the meat industry. Though consumers have an alternative in organic meats, the fact that they cost heavily compared to normal meat excludes many of them with limited income from patronizing such expensive products. Access to safe food is a fundamental human right and no government can shirk its responsibility in ensuring the same, no matter how powerful the food industry may be!    

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

TURBULENCE IN NON-CALORIE SWEETENER MARKET-WHO WILL BE THE WINNER?

Non-calorie sweetener market is considered to be a promising one with many major food players jumping into the band wagon to get a part of the pie. But there is little clarity regarding the likely winner in a fiercely competitive market though Stevia seems to be emerging as a favorite candidate to win the race. It is not that others are giving up so easily if serious questions regarding the advantages of Stevia, being hurled at this rapidly growing sweetener market are any indications. Most serious handicap for Stevia is that it has to undergo major extraction process with alcohol to obtain purer fractions with least after taste, thereby marring its claim to be natural. Here is an interesting compilation on the current situation vis -a- vis non-calories sweeteners market.

FoodNavigator-USA.com did a special edition "Where next for natural sweeteners?" Special editions are collections of previously published articles on topics of interest to this newsletter's food industry readers. Why do this? The holy grail of food technology is to find a no-calorie sweetener that tastes as good as sugar, has no bitter aftertaste, and can be marketed as "natural" because it's extracted from plants. Examples:Stevia extracted from leaves, Monk fruit sweetener. As with high fructose corn syrup, not everyone considers these sweeteners to be natural since they have to go through chemical processing steps. Stevia is extracted from leaves with ethanol. Whether this process can be considered natural is currentlyunder debate in Europe. Some European regulators prefer "extracted from a plant source." Here are some of the articles. For the complete collection, click here.

Monk fruit sweetener firm: 'We hear daily that people are looking for alternatives to stevia'

It might not have garnered as much publicity as stevia, but monk fruit (luo han guo) "has found a niche within the all-natural market but will hit mass market sooner than stevia in this space", according to one leading supplier... Read

Tate & Lyle: Monk fruit sweetener attracting most interest in dairy and beverages

Dairy and beverages are proving the most popular application areas for monk fruit sweetener Purefruit, says Tate & Lyle... Read

Different processes, lower cost, better taste: Is stevia still on track for mainstream success? Taste issues and high cost repeatedly have been raised as possible obstacles to widespread acceptance of stevia-derived sweeteners, but one of the many new suppliers entering the market claims that these are no longer the hurdles they once were... Read

Steviol glycosides are not 'all-natural', says new class action lawsuitA class action lawsuit filed in California this week argues that steviol glycosides should not be considered natural, owing to the "chemical processing" sometimes used to extract them from the stevia leaf... Read

Stevia buyers beware: There are some 'awful' extracts out there...

While traders "jumping in and out of the stevia marketplace" are disrupting prices and standards by peddling some "awful" extracts, high-quality stevia suppliers in it for the long-haul will ultimately prosper, according to one leading player... Read

Stevia in snacks and baked goods - stealth, competition, and potential

While stevia is beginning to take off in a number of baked goods and snack categories in the US, Asian and South American markets, some other emerging 'natural' sweeteners look ready to take it on in the segment, claims Datamonitor... Read

Naturally-positioned sweeteners to lead market growth: Report

The US alternative sweeteners market will grow by 3.3% a year to reach about $1.4bn in 2015 - and naturally positioned sweeteners like stevia and agave nectar will lead the way, claims a new report from market research organization Freedonia... Read

No matter which of the above candidates win the competition, one thing is certain- the fact that there is no going back on "natural" non-calorie sweeteners as far as the industry is concerned because of the huge market volume waiting to be tapped in the coming years. The pace at which new low calorie food products are being launched bears testimony to the demand that is emerging for such type of products among the consumers. For Diabetics and weight watchers including obese people, low calorie or sugar free food offer a life line which food industry is justified in exploiting.

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

HOW NATURAL IS NATURAL? A NEW DILEMMA!

With the consumers disenchanted with the processed foods that dominate the market, food industry seems to be changing its strategy to retain the customer base through new labeling tricks. Every one likes everything that is natural. Right? Here is where the industry finds solace and a new approach in marketing is emerging. It is the fear of the unknown that drives people to natural foods and this is also the basis on which organic food industry is flourishing to day. If the FDA of the US is to be relied upon a food can be called natural if no added color, flavor or synthetic substances but whether such a simplistic view can satisfy the aspirations of the consumer vis-a-vis the term natural. A critical question that begs an answer is what if a natural food undergoes modern day processing when some additives like thickeners, sugar, salt, etc are added? If a natural juice is to be produced what one has to do is just squeezing the edible portion of the fruit to get the juice but to get uniformity of the product, derived from fruits of different sweetness, color and flavor, industry is forced to add certain ingredients, mostly natural substances which does not affect the original quality in any way. While this may be perfectly in order what is being objected to is to use the word "natural" on the label. Why not blend juices of different lots to make the final product really natural with minimum quality variation. In the US where there is a powerful legal lobby, such a situation provides an opportunity to haul the industry to the courts for mislabeling. Here is a take on this subject which provides an interesting insight into the working of food industry in that country.    

"In approximately 20 lawsuits, the first one filed in New Jersey, lawyers claim the company adds chemically engineered "flavor packs" to its juice, making it taste the same year-round. On Thursday, lawyers will come together in Washington to argue before a panel of judges about where the lawsuits should be heard as a group. Tropicana declined to comment but said in a statement that it is committed to full compliance with labeling laws and to producing "great-tasting 100 percent orange juice." The orange juice lawsuits are just the latest disputes over "all natural" claims. Over the past several years, a number of major national brands have been attacked for what consumers have called deceptive labeling. Tostidos, SunChips, Snapple and Ben & Jerry's ice cream have all faced similar attacks. The lawsuits have become common enough that the Grocery Manufacturers Association, which represents more than 300 food and beverage makers, had a panel that discussed the topic as part of a conference in February. Lawyers representing food and beverage companies have told their clients to be wary. Part of the problem, lawyers agree, is that consumers are looking for healthier products, and companies have responded by creating and branding their products as "all natural." The Food and Drug Administration, the agency that oversees packaged food labeling in the United States, has no definition of what counts as "natural." As long as a food labeled "natural" doesn't contain added color, artificial flavor or synthetic substances, the agency doesn't object. That's not enough guidance, some lawyers said. "The whole natural issue is a mess," said Michael Jacobson, the executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a Washington-based food safety and advocacy group that helped get the makers of 7UP and Capri Sun to stop making natural claims about their products. Jacobson and others say the FDA's lack of guidance has left lingering questions. One question has been whether a product with high fructose corn syrup, which is made by processing corn but does not occur naturally, can be labeled natural. That was the issue in a 2007 lawsuit over Snapple drinks. Snapple has said it no longer uses high fructose corn syrup in products marked "all natural," and a New York judge ultimately ruled in Snapple's favor and closed the case last year, but other lawsuits are still questioning the use of the term".

Labeling on front of the package is an important means of informing the consumer about the nature of the contents inside the sealed pack which is a constitutional right of every citizen under freedom of information provision. Consumer reposes so much confidence on the government of the land to protect their rights and violation of this trust ought to be frowned upon. If the industry is allowed to get away with breaking this trust, hauling them before the judiciary is a perfectly valid action. On the other hand allowing the legal attorneys to entice the consumer to go to court to extract fat compensation on silly score also cannot be justified. In the present case one is not sure whether using the term natural on juices without adding water or other unnecessary additives is such a crime deserving judicial intervention. Industry must also introspect as to the need to use the term indiscriminately as long as the product conforms to the standards laid down in the statute books. what the regulators can do is to tighten the standards without giving any scope for misinterpretation by the industry.

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

THE "NATURAL" MANTRA-A CRITIC'S ADVICE FOR GOOD HEALTH

What is the right formula to maintain a reasonably decent health for many ordinary citizens who are caught between the "deep sea and the devil" when it comes to choose the right food? Is too much dependence on products churned out by the process industry really bad? Are processed foods addictive? These are some of the issues that bother the common man in his day to day fight to stave of diseases and health disorders. Here is a list of suggestions by a concerned critic who finds fault with many food industry products in the market and one may take it or leave it! 

"The Pringles saying "once you pop you can't stop" couldn't be more factual. In fact, these foods are made to be habit forming! With their high fructose corn syrup, sugar and chemicals who could resist them? And as for diet coke, don't even get me started. I once cut out all sodas and lost 20 pounds—and my weight gain was mostly attributed to diet coke. Diet coke is proven to increase caloric intake….it signals your body to crave more carbs than you really need! It's truly the Devil's drink. If you're a constant consumer of these detrimental foods…don't feel bad! You're not the only one. Everyone has the propensity to become addicted, but everyone also has the capability to break the vicious cycle. I did. I went seven months without sugar/bread/dairy and felt like a million bucks. Eating healthy doesn't have to be boring and it doesn't have to be expensive. I am here as a testament to say that I felt better than ever on this healthy lifestyle change and spent less. Did you know that these chemically enhanced foods can really break down your immunity? If you're not getting the healthy fruits, veggies, and protein you need you're not only going to be lacking in key "happy" chemicals (aka, dopamine, serotonin, etc…), but you'll also probably suffer from a weakened immune system! I am not supporting you radically switch your entire diet to organic, (because I know some organic foods are no different than regular ones) however; there is something to be said about buying organic fruits and veggies if you're going to eat their skin. I challenge you to try organic celery up against their pesticide alternative and tell me if you don't taste a difference. The lack of chemicals is refreshing. The pesticides are a huge reason why many people don't want to eat their veggies! The taste is noticeable when comparing. The positives for healthy eating outweigh the negatives. Webmd.com says that foods rich in antioxidants can really stave off colds and other illnesses that could plague you down the road. You can get your Beta-carotene and other carotenoids from foods such as: Apricots, asparagus, beets, broccoli, cantaloupe, carrots, corn, green peppers, kale, mangoes, turnip and collard greens, nectarines, peaches, pink grapefruit, pumpkin, squash, spinach, sweet potato, tangerines, tomatoes, and watermelon. Your Vitamin C from: Berries, broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cantaloupe, cauliflower, grapefruit, honeydew, kale, kiwi, mangoes, nectarines, orange, papaya, red, green or yellow peppers, snow peas, sweet potato, strawberries, and tomatoes. And your Vitamin E from: Broccoli, carrots, chard, mustard and turnip greens, mangoes, nuts, papaya, pumpkin, red peppers, spinach, and sunflower seeds. Webmd goes on to talk about other foods you can find that provide the same immunity boosting power: Zinc: Found in oysters, red meat, poultry, beans, nuts, seafood, whole grains, fortified cereals, and dairy products. Selenium: Found in Brazil nuts, tuna, beef, poultry and fortified breads, and other grain products. My recommendation is that if you have a hankering for sweets or starchy foods try alternative ways to satiate those cravings. Here are some of my top replacement foods/sweeteners and drinks that kick my sweet tooth in the bud:"

One thing must be understood by every consumer when it comes to food selection and that is the compulsion of modern life in depending on factory processed products. But restricting the intake of such foods and opting for more healthy home cooked foods can always pay rich dividend in terms of good health. The expert recommendation that basing the diet on as many diverse foods as possible reflects the fact that mutual supplementation from different food components in a diet guarantees freedom from health related crisis in life. The new MyPlate icon of the US government says the same in a graphic mode for easy understanding

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

NEW PRODUCT LAUNCHES-SHIFTING PRIORITIES

It is vital for the food industry to monitor the changing consumer perceptions regarding attributes they expect from newer food products and accordingly develop such products to assure of a better chance of success. With huge expenditure incurred for R & D by the organized food industry, new products must reasonably assure fair returns once launched in the market. Consumer perceptions may differ from country to country and there are well recognized tools that can gauge the newer trends. The report for European and American markets which are based on scientific surveys indicate that consumers do respond to newer information in health, nutrition and food fields and expect the industry also change its product portfolio to reflect their preferences.

According to projections for future direction for the food industry to grow, consumers are yearning for more products that are considered natural and showed a marked tendency to shun products with other claims. "In 2008, food and beverage claims classified as "Natural" - including all natural, no preservatives, organic and wholegrain - were the most frequently featured on new products globally, according to Mintel's Global New Products Database (GNPD). Claims of 'fortified products', on the other hand, took a hit, while declarations of "low" (e.g. low-fat) stagnated"

It is an encouraging sign that consumers are maturing fast to distinguish between natural foods and others containing preservatives or processed, obliterating the fresh nature of the food. Probably such an attitude may discourage the industry from indiscriminate fortification of foods at the processing stage, the effectiveness of which is increasingly being questioned. At the same time foods which are low in sugar, fat, salt, calories which ought to be promoted, are stagnating with hardly any growth. This may be some what of concern especially when developed countries are struggling to cope with obesity, diabetes, blood pressure and other life style diseases threatening future generations. In India in absence of any such reliable data base, food industry is on a costly 'trial and error' mode to hit at the right product having maximum acceptance.

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