Finally here is an "artificial" nose that can help optimize use of flavorings!

How are the foods assessed for their flavor by the processors before deciding about their quality and acceptance by the consumers? In many cases there are marker chemicals representing the major flavor notes which can be quantitatively estimated using advanced instrumentation/ gadgets like gas-liquid chromatography, high pressure liquid chromatography, nuclear magnetic resonance instrument, mass spectroscopy etc. Still in cases where the flavor composition is very complex no instrument will be able to correctly forecast the quality and therefore human nose, oral cavity and tongue play important roles in assessing the flavor and texture. The science of organoleptic evaluation or sensory evaluation has progressed so much to day that there are reliable and dependable objective tests using humans, especially trained panelists to take decisions regarding product quality.Tea tasting, coffee tasting and wine tasting are still in vogue and specially trained taste panels do these evaluation regularly with remarkable reproduceability. Now comes the news that an artificial nose has been designed by a firm in the UK which can assess the quality of chocolates suitable for use by major chocolate producers with some degree of reliability. Here is a take on this new development which may be a standard feature of quality testing protocols by the chocolate industry in future. 

"Snacking giant Mondelez - behind brands such as Cadburys, Oreo and Kenco - has just installed an artificial nose at its UK research headquarters that it hopes can sniff out some new ways to create products, perhaps making them a little more Willy Wonka-ish along the way.The way that the compounds in chocolate work together can be analysed by the machine The machine, based at Reading in Berkshire, has a pretty sophisticated sense of smell, able to identify the compounds that make up different foodstuffs - in the case of chocolate, about 40. "We have always been able to measure the compounds but this is the first time that we've been able to analyse how they interact with each other in real time," explained Alex Webbe, senior group leader at Mondelez international global science and technology research centre.

So when the artificial nose is given some chocolate to smell, it is able to pick out two key compounds - a cheesy note not usually associated with chocolate, alongside the more traditional cocoa flavour. The progress of the compounds as they are put through an artificially created eating process can be monitored via a computer readout, offering a kind of digital signature for the chocolate. Scientists can see how the water-soluble "cheesy" flavour dies off when the chocolate is chewed, giving way to the more familiar cocoa flavour. So what does this real-time view of chocolate tell us about this popular favourite guilty pleasure? One thing it suggests is that chocolate is probably best enjoyed "at ambient temperature", said Mr Webbe. But it isn't just about taste. "Some people like the texture of chocolate straight out of the fridge." The artificial nose is also being used to analyse the flavours in chewing gum and work out why they come to an end, perhaps even suggesting ways that it can keep flavour for longer."

How far this "nose" will correlate with consumer perception of what is to be expected from a piece of chocolate remains to be seen. Though at present this instrument is used largely for theoretical research into the basic flavors of chocolate, the innovators expect this to be useful tool to profile the desirable flavors in many products with multiple chemical substances, each contributing certain notes to the final flavor of the product. Will there be similar instruments evolved in future for products like tea, coffee and wine with a cocktail of complex flavor constituents? Only future will tell!

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

Agricultural farms sans labor?-Too futuristic to think of now!

No wonder a country like the UK is thinking in terms of higher degree of mechanization and automation in their agricultural farms because of acute scarcity of labor and high cost involved in accessing them. Most farm workers are migrants as UK's indigenous population cannot do all the chores required to keep the nation going. Mechanized contraptions are already available for individual operations like tilling, sowing, planting, weeding, fertilizing, harvesting, threshing etc but here also lot of skilled workers are needed to operate these machines. Recent musings by one of the government policy makers in that country regarding application of IT enabled solutions to further cut down on the number of workers deployed in the farms reflect the frustration faced in the country to raise food production to feed the population without depending heavily on imports. Here is a take on this new strategies UK is thinking about as a future option.

"Farms have changed "dramatically" from the stereotype of the Wurzels and will soon have driverless tractors, the Environment Secretary has said. Liz Truss said that modern agriculture means "jobs done by hand are now done by machine", reducing the need for migrant labour. She said that while the number of jobs on farms will continue to decline, there will be greater demand for coders and IT experts. She said that the perception that farming and the food industry is about the Wurzels, the folk band, and "hairnets and wellies" is outdated. She said: "There's a big agricultural engineer in my constituency called Herbert's that produces potato pickers. Those are jobs that were done by hand and are now done by machine. I think we are seeing that taking place. "I think the number of people working on farms has declined for years, but that doesn't mean there won't be more jobs available in food overall. "If you think about the whole food chain, whether it's Sainsbury's hiring coders or whatever, it's a different profile of jobs. Farming itself is something where we are going to end up with driverless tractors very soon, I'd imagine. Most of the farm equipment you now need to be able to programme."

Farming is no more a low technology affair in advanced countries like Europe, the US, Canada, Australia etc where the population is either diminishing or hardly growing to any meaningful extent while immigrant population is increasing very significantly. There is another issue that is worrying developed countries to no end. This concerns the ever increasing incidences of food poisoning occurring in these countries in spite of the best technological inputs available to them! As most food borne diseases are caused by human intervention it makes sense to reduce contact between man and the food handled to the absolute minimum as far as possible. If food processing factories can work with a small force of workers due to very high degree of automation achieved, there is no reason why farms also cannot manage with the same type of IT enabled technologies. With organic foods registering phenomenal growth across the world, higher safety requirements for these foods can be achieved more easily if human contact is restricted to the unavoidable minimum. For a country like India such changes may be just be a pipe dream because if human beings are replaced by machine, where else will the farm labor go for gainful employment? A right blend of policies can however benefit the country involving selective deployment of technologies and machines farsighted vision to expand and diversify employment opportunities for displaced farm labor as it is reported to be happening in China.

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

Community supermarkets-Can they make a difference to the poor in India?

Poverty by far is the most ignominious paradox that divides people and nations on economic criteria. Hunger, in turn is related to poverty and food security and nutrition security for every one in this planet cannot be possible unless the people are economically "empowered". While socialism talks about the welfare of the entire society through wealth distribution and equity, capitalism lays more stress on individual entrepreneurship and enterprise to create wealth at individual level. The latter system therefore invariably concentrates wealth in a few people considered brilliant and influential in the society, leaving far behind a majority of population with income levels varying from high to middle to poor, the last category never able to meet both ends meet.in their dreary life. There are various safety net works tried in different countries to ensure inclusive economic growth but most of these schemes end up as "doling out" practices which cannot help these unfortunate people in the long run. Whether soup kitchens or similar feeding programs they provide only temporary succor to the poor without looking at the root of the problem. One such experiment being tried out in the UK seems to be very interesting, though it depends on the charitable bend of mind on the part of the big retailing industry. Read further below.  

"Britain's first "community supermarket" opens for business today, allowing hundreds of struggling families to buy surplus food donated by shops including Marks & Spencer and Ocado at 70 per cent discount – with 20 more planned across the country. The Community Shop, in Lambeth, south London, will sell low-cost, high-quality surplus food to residents on income support while helping them back into work. The store will work on a membership basis, with 750 members who must live locally and be on income support. They must also enrol on a tailored professional development programme – called The Success Plan – which aims to improve their confidence and help them find jobs. The scheme, the first of its kind in the UK, is backed by the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson. The food donated by supermarkets – which  may have been over-ordered, mislabelled, or come in damaged packaging – may otherwise have gone to landfill or been fed to animals.  The London branch marks the start of the national roll-out programme after the success of a pilot store, which opened in Goldthorpe, South Yorkshire, in December last year. One in five of this store's 500 members who completed their training have already found work. It is the first of a planned 20 stores across the country, which aim to help about 20,000 people nationwide. This model of using unwanted supermarket stock to tackle food poverty was highlighted by the All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry into Hunger in the United Kingdom in its Feeding Britain report as one that should be developed to "make a real and positive difference to people's living standards". John Marren, chairman of Company Shop, which runs the scheme, said: "Community Shop is tackling the problem of surplus food, whilst giving it real social purpose. "Not only do we offer high-quality, low-cost food to people experiencing tough times, but we provide them with the chance to take up support services because they are motivated to do better." Retailers and manufacturers taking part in the scheme include Marks & Spencer, Asda, Tesco, Morrisons, The Co-operative, Ocado, Innocent, Brake Brothers, Nestlé and Muller. Participants will be given a mentor who will help identify which areas of their lives they need to work on and then agree on a plan to improve their lives. Courses include confidence-building, home-budgeting and writing a CV. These services will be funded by the sale of the food. It is estimated that around 3.5m tonnes of food is wasted every year in the UK, before it even reaches people's shopping basket. About 10 per cent is good enough to be eaten." 

By creating a community supermarket the organizers are trying to help poor families in buying their daily requirements for sustenance at low prices and as such it is a welcome initiative. As long as the quality of food offered in these markets are on par with those in regular supermarkets, there should not be any worry regarding any psychological impact it might have on the minds of these consumers. Still by branding them as community supermarket, an impression is given that they are meant only for poor people. Therefore it is for consideration whether such "distinction" can be avoided to make shopping in these places more honorable from the perspectives of those who are compelled by circumstances to shop there. Already there are distinct shopping centers like Waldi in the US where many products are available almost at half the cost compared to the prices prevalent in other supermarket chains like Walmart and Target. In India the Public Distribution System peddling essential commodities at low prices is the nearest relative to UK's community supermarket but the dreary environment and filthy shops which dispense the commodities are some thing no self respecting citizen would like to go but for his penury!. All said and done the new supermarkets under the brand name Community Supermarkets will herald a new chapter in the social justice practices in rich countries like the UK. Whether such initiatives are feasible and practical in other countries remains to be seen.

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

Fresh Fish and super markets-A big contradiction?

The word "fresh" is one of the most misused terminologies by the food industry as most consumers want to eat their food as fresh as possible. Unfortunately there is no unanimity regarding the exact meaning of the word "fresh", different stake holders meaning different things. Consumer expects that fresh fish should the one caught immediately prior to be sold to him while the sellers aim at selling them before deterioration starts setting in. The arbitrator viz the government wants to ensure it is not dangerous to the health of the consumer. The food scientists and quality experts consider any thing fresh if the eating quality is essentially same as that when the fish was caught. In a food like fish which deteriorates in quality pretty fast the seller cannot afford to delay the time lapse between catching and selling too much though to day's technology has the wherewithal to keep it fresh for a few hours after catching. The reported situation in some of the super markets in the UK indicates that fish branded as "fresh" were actually caught 15 days back and consumers are buying a product with practically 80-90% of its life gone! Here is the low down on this tricky issue. 

"Mr Chivers said: Supermarkets selling 'fresh' fish that's really 15 DAYS old  if not in the past few days. 'They think the fish is going to be fresh and tasty. But some of the samples we tested they are not going to enjoy at all.' He used the Torry scale – an industry standard system to measure freshness – in which experts rate the fish's physical characteristics to estimate how long ago it was caught.  Mr Chivers found some fish was in danger of going off quickly. 'These are not off, but give them a day in a domestic fridge and you would begin to taste an off odour,' he told the Sunday Mirror. Current guidelines say fish can be sold as fresh if it has been kept on ice since being caught. Morrisons' fisheries manager, Huw Thomas, said: 'Careful planning ensures that the time between the fish being caught and then sold on our counters is minimal . In our experience, the Torry scale is a reliable tool for judging quality, but not food safety or how long each fish has been out of the water.' A Tesco spokesman said: 'We ensure all our fish is of good quality.' Asda also defended the freshness of its products, saying: 'We are the only retailer to publish how and where we source our wild fish.'A Sainsbury's spokesman said all its fish would remain 'good quality for the duration of its shelf life'"

While consumer is the "King" as far the market is concerned, the manufacturers and marketeers do expect some consideration for their logistical difficulties in procuring and distribution of the product. Industry normally endeavors to minimize the lapse of time between procurement and delivery to the consumer. However consumer is willing to give reasonable time and he expects the industry to be truthful. Where is the necessity of declaring a 15 days old fish as fresh? As long as such declarations are not made consumer may be willing to patronize the brand as long as it tastes good to his palates. Those who sell stale fish cannot be expected to remain in the market for too long and the market will take care of those indulging in  such deceiving practices. Fluid milk vendors often use the words "Dairy Fresh", again to exploit the weakness of consumers to all such things which are fresh (except for liquor). Ultimately under a branded marketing regime, whether fresh or not the quality and safety of the product only can ensure survival of the brands. 

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

NEW AGRI-TECH STRATEGY OF THE UK- BETTER LATE THAN NEVER!

R & D is such a broad area that many scientists and technologists engaged in this endeavor often fail to understand the real purpose of their effort viz to come out with workable and viable technologies with mass production potential. While research on basic science generates ideas developing the finding further through integrated efforts of scientists and engineers lead to development of feasible technologies. Majority of technological developments do not go beyond the four walls of the laboratory, getting no opportunity for productionization. Technology can stall if its transfer to the field is not properly managed after establishing its viability at the lab level. Here is where most universities and R & D institutions fail. Against this background the recent strategy being put in place in the UK to integrate the efforts of various stake holders in agriculture and food processing deserves applause. Here is a take on the intent and objectives of the action plan enunciated by the UK government in a recent document. 

"The UK will become a world leader in agricultural science and technology following the launch of a new strategy to deliver sustainable, healthy and affordable food for future generations. Breakthroughs in nutrition, informatics, satellite imaging, remote sensing, meteorology and precision farming mean the agriculture sector is one of the world's fastest growing sectors. Developed in partnership with industry, the Agricultural Technologies Strategy will ensure everyone from farmers and retailers, to cooks and shoppers share the benefits these exciting opportunities bring. It includes a £160 million government investment in developing cutting edge technologies, and taking innovative products such as cancer-fighting broccoli from the field to the shopping aisle. Industry is also expected to invest heavily in the strategy which will transform farming in the UK, using the latest technologies to ensure the process is as productive as possible whilst reducing environmental impact and resource use. With the demand for food rising rapidly worldwide, the strategy also aims to make the UK a world leader in addressing global food security issues. Agri-tech is a well-established and important UK sector. The entire agri-food supply chain, from agriculture to final retailing and catering, is estimated to contribute £96 billion to the economy and employ 3.8 million people. Universities and Science Minister David Willetts said: Some of the biggest brands in farming and food are based in the UK. We have a world class science and research community and our institutes and universities are at the forefront of agricultural research. To get ahead in the global race, this strategy sets out how we can ensure that we turn our world-beating agricultural science and research into world-beating products and services. This Agricultural Technologies Strategy follows the recent plans for automotive, construction, aerospace and other key sectors to secure sustainable future growth in the economy. Defra Minister for Science Lord De Mauley said: We face a global challenge to feed the rapidly increasing population in a way which is affordable and sustainable. We are investing in technologies that will enable British farmers to meet these challenges and take advantage of the growing demand in export markets for British food. To take advantage of agriculture's opportunities and drive growth the Agricultural Technologies Strategy sets out a range of key actions, including: a £90 million government investment in world class Centres for Agricultural Innovation with additional investment from industry. The centres will support the wide-scale adoption of innovation and technology across key sectors, technologies and skills in the food and farming supply chain. This includes up to £10 million for a Centre for Agricultural Informatics and Metrics of Sustainability which will use data from farms, laboratories and retailers to drive innovation creating a £70 million Agri-Tech Catalyst to help new agricultural technologies bridge the so called 'valley of death' between the lab and the marketplace. Co-funded with industry, the catalyst will specifically support small and medium sized enterprises. The investment includes £10 million to support the transfer of technology and new products to developing countries, the creation of an industry Leadership Council to unify the agriculture technology sector and make the UK more internationally competitive the recruitment of a new UKTI agri-tech team to boost exports and overseas investment in the UK's agricultural technologies".

Of course declaration of intent is one thing and implementing the same is another thing. How far the government will be able to weave together the different but related players for a cohesive and integrated team is a million dollar question begging for answer. The most important part of the strategy is to set up the Agri-Tech Catalyst for facilitating the growth of the small and medium enterprises which are generally starved of technical support because of their limited resources unlike the Big Fish with deep pockets and high risk taking capacity. The intention to facilitate transfer of technologies to developing countries is to be applauded though export of products from the UK to these countries may not be feasible to any great extent. All said the strategy looks excellent on paper but there is a nagging suspicion whether the budget is a little too short to achieve all that is aimed at. If this will raise the stature of the UK as a technology giant it is good for the country.  

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

FOOD FRAUDS ON THE UPSWING?-IMPACT OF ECONOMIC DOWNTURN

Economic conditions and food frauds have a direct connection and higher the inflation bigger will be the incentive for fraudsters to imitate high priced food products to make a fast buck. History is replete with instances where costly products like olive oil, saffron, cavier, scotch whiskey and a host of others being imitated with even experts some time getting fooled! If recent reports are any indication this malaise that affects every society in this world is spreading its tentacles far and wide with safety management agencies not being able to cope up with the pace of growth of "innovators" for imitation who are able to imitate practically every product including the day to day foods of the citizens with impunity. Look at the milk industry in India, a country which happens to be the top most nation producing huge surplus milk where "man made" milk is flooding the market to attract cost conscious but innocent citizens in greater and greater numbers. A concoction of oil, shampoo, detergents, urea and and a host of other chemicals can be made to look like milk, behave like milk and fool the consumers while these "formulations" are sold at prices far below the ruling market price for genuine milk! Here is a commentary on fraud foods from Europe which seem to be reaching unmanageable proportion with safety authorities mulling over its consequences. 

"Investigators have uncovered thousands of frauds, raising fresh questions about regulatory oversight as criminals offer bargain-hunting shoppers cheap versions of everyday products, including counterfeit chocolate and adulterated olive oil, Jacob's Creek wine and even Bollinger Champagne. As the horse meat scandal showed, even legitimate companies can be overtaken by the murky world of food fraud. "Around the world, food fraud is an epidemic — in every single country where food is produced or grown, food fraud is occurring," said Mitchell Weinberg, president and chief executive of Inscatech, a company that advises on food security. "Just about every single ingredient that has even a moderate economic value is potentially vulnerable to fraud." Speaking at a recent conference organized by the consulting firm FoodChain Europe, Mr. Weinberg added that many processed products contain ingredients like sugar, vanilla, paprika, honey, olive oil or cocoa products that are tainted. Increasingly, those frauds are the work of organized international criminal networks lured by the potential for big profits in an illicit trade in which most forgers are never caught. The vodka gang boss, Kevin Eddishaw, was — but not before he had counterfeited liquor on an industrial scale, generating profits to match, according to investigators, who estimated that his distillery produced at least 165,000 bottles costing the British government £1.5 million, or $2.3 million, in lost tax revenue. "He was living a very nice lifestyle," said Roddy Mackinnon, criminal investigation officer for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, "a couple of properties, nice cars: a Range Rover, a Mercedes." Here at Moscow Farm, the gang used the production techniques of a modern-day factory equipped with at least £50,000, or $77,200, in equipment (while ignoring safety rules). Gang members bought bottles from the supplier of the real makers of Glen's vodka, saying they were destined for Poland. When forged label prototypes printed in Britain were deemed unpersuasive, higher-quality ones were brought from Poland. The gang faked duty stamps on boxes. "They tried to do as much as they could to replicate the real thing," Mr. Mackinnon said. "They were very professional, there was attention to detail." So well was the secret plant hidden that it was detected only when someone suspected in another case led investigators there in 2009. Though Mr. Eddishaw worked through intermediaries and used pay-as-you-go cellphone numbers, investigators tracked his calls, proving from the location where they were made that the phone belonged to him and linking him to a fraud that brought him a seven-year prison term. The plot fits a pattern, identified by Europol, the European Union's law enforcement agency, which says organized crime groups have capitalized on the economic downturn".

The "accidental" uncovering of the imitation Vodka factory in England as reported above shows how blatant adulterators  and fraudsters can go in cheating the consumers with no concern about the adverse impact of their products on consumer health. This disturbing revelation is all the more perturbing considering that the helpless consumers have no recourse to avoid such fraudulent foods with the safety authorities grossly under manned to tackle the situation though infrastructure wise European testing facilities are one of the best in the world. In contrast countries like India are doubly handicapped because they have neither adequately qualified staff in quality and quantity nor the requisite testing infrastructure! Most citizens are food illiterate, ignorant of food safety, health and nutrition. How can the world face such a "no win" situation though there are honest intentions? Probably one of the effective deterrents could be very severe punishment including capital punishment for serious offenders indulging in life threatening food fraud episodes and plugging all loopholes in the legal system.  

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

THE REAL "FAST" FOOD-GLOBALIZATION OF CATERING

With major cuisines from China, Mexico, India and other countries becoming universally sought after, the national boundaries are getting blurred more and more and the ease of travel across the globe has further accentuated this trend. Restaurants specialized in the traditional cuisines of many countries are springing up every where in the world and there is no dearth of customers for these joints. The explosive development of Food Truck industry, especially in the US, has taken eating experience to a different level with customers patronizing these mobile food caterers in great numbers. It is in this context one has to appreciate the novel approach to catering by an entrepreneur in London with his offer of the foods prepared in his restaurant any where in the world using a renovated Jet fighter acquired from Iraq. According to the claims made by him the foods are much sought after by many celebrities from many countries and he seems to have developed the necessary skill to deliver these foods in prime condition. Here is a take on this new phenomenon.  

"The owner of an Indian restaurant in Britain has bought a fighter jet to deliver his food to celebrity clients across the world. Rob Abdul, 40, who runs the Cafe Taj restaurant in Gravesend, Kent, bought the now abandoned Iraqi warplane with a pilot friend, and has spent 35,000 pounds ($55,000) restoring it. "One thing you cannot do as a businessman is disappoint your customers. I regularly get requests from around the world," Abdul was quoted as saying by the Daily Express. Abdul has previously sent food from his restaurant to the England cricket team on tour to Australia".

One is curious to know the over head cost incurred in supplying food out side England by air and whether the eventual price tag would not be too high. Probably for celebrities who earn thousands of dollars every minute through their talent, any price tag might not be too high. 

Modern food technologies like modified atmosphere packing, freezing, aseptic filling, high pressure processing etc, capable of preserving the quality of food for significantly longer periods, there may not be any technological challenge for the venture. Logistical problems like phyto-sanitary clearance and border controls between countries may still pose some uncertainties, especially under the present security concerns for international travel and freighting. All said, the new initiative deserves to be applauded and it is worth watching the experience of this entrepreneur to guide future developments in this area. 

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

FOOD SELECTION-DOES NUTRITION LABELING REALLY HELP?

Consumer surveys, if carried out scientifically provide valuable information to the industry regarding the trend of thinking amongst consumers and plan new product development activities to evolve products with maximum acceptability. Food labeling provisions have been evolved on the basis that consumers are literate and can understand the implications of the information provided on the label. This may be true of industrially front line countries where as such assumptions may not be valid in many countries where a substantial segment of the consumer population cannot comprehend the significance of label declarations. An interesting survey in the UK has brought out the fact that most consumers buy products in the market based mostly on taste factors giving secondary importance to nutrition data.

"A new survey of UK consumers' understanding of nutrition information on food labels found most had a good grasp of predominant front-of-pack schemes – but only 27 per cent used that info to inform their food choices. Deciding on the best nutrition labelling scheme has been a contentious issue in Europe, as an all-EU system is anticipated in the new food information legislation. While the European food industry largely likes its guidance daily amounts scheme, others – such as traffic lights, Choices, and the Swedish keyhole – also have staunch supporters. The new study, published in the journal Appetite, was conducted by the Danish Aarhus University and the European Food Information Council with the cooperation of some major retailers. The conclusion that the majority of consumers can decipher nutrition info from nutrition labels but base their purchasing decisions on taste considerations instead, reinforces the need to ensure that sensory properties of healthier food options are not overlooked. But more than that, at a policy level the authors said there has been too much emphasis on choosing the right labelling scheme – and not enough on the motivating people to eat healthily. They say there is a need for a broader nutrition policy where labelling is just one of multiple instruments. In order to prevent over-reporting of nutrition label use seen in previous research, the study was conducted in two parts: interviews and questionnaires, and in-store observations. From 2000 interviews the researchers, led by Prof Klaus Grunert, found that 88 per cent of consumers were correctly able to identify the healthiest ready meal of a selection using GDAs, 84 per cent using hybrid GDA-traffic lights, and 84 using traffic lights alone. On a scale of 1-10 subjective understanding of the health info on labels was seen to be 7 for GDAs and 6.9 per traffic lights, leading Prof Grunert and co to conclude that the high level of understanding was independent of format".

The survey findings send an unmistakable message to the food industry that products having high nutrition credentials need not succeed in the market unless they are good from taste and flavor angles. No matter how hard the nutrition facts are stressed, it may be difficult to convince the consumers to change their perception of food. It is unfortunate that nutrition information becomes important only when the consumers are afflicted with one or the other health problem or over-conscious about being healthy. The survey findings raise the inevitable question whether government intervention is necessary to keep out unhealthy foods from the market through executive action. Probably before such a situation develops, industry may be well advised to combine nutrition with sensory quality in their product portfolio for a win-win situation.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

FOOD SAFETY AGENCY IN THE UK-FIT TO BE AXED?

In those countries where accountability is taken seriously, lackadaisical approach to food safety by the agencies vested with the task of monitoring food products under the regulatory regime,, can cause considerable turmoil amongst the citizens. Food Standards Agency ( FSA) in the UK was set up specifically to be a guardian of the consumers when it comes to unsafe foods and uncaring industry. It looks like the agency has not been able to live up to the expectation of its constituencies as reflected by the furore against its working, as highlighted by the media. The latest incidence that has rattled the agency is the appearance of meat products made from cloned cows in the UK market which was not detected, in spite of the universal disapproval of consuming such meats on many considerations. Abolition of FSA is being sought by the public and one should not be surprised if the new Coalition government the UK wields the Axe.

"Such a slapdash approach should come as no surprise. The FSA, set up by the last government in response to the BSE scandal, has a record of complacency, notably over the avian flu outbreak of 2007 caused by the import of infected Hungarian meat. Its performance then left much to be desired. Such sloppiness should have made the FSA a prime candidate for the quango cull initiated by the Coalition in June. Amazingly, it has escaped. In a little-noticed announcement two weeks ago, the Department of Health said that the FSA would not, contrary to the expectations of many in the food industry, be axed. Instead, it is to lose responsibility for nutrition policy, which the DoH will take in-house, while the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs will take over food labelling".

Though there is no ban in using milk and its products as well as beef obtained from cloned animals, there is no unanimity regarding its safety, especially on the long term in Europe. In the US also there is no ban but FDA allows marketing these products without insisting on compulsory labeling, though the industry has been "cautioned" to go slow in their marketing effort, what ever that means!

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

MOBILE PHONES-A MAJOR SOURCE OF INFECTIOUS DISEASES?

After the computer key board, it is the turn of mobile phones now to receive critical attention from the pathologist community and if they are to be believed the ubiquitous mobile phone can be a serious source of microbiological hazard to users. It is understandable that the hand held mobile phone which is more or less a personal item of inventory can have accumulation of microorganisms derived mostly from the owner of the phone. The type of microbes and their density on the phone will depend on the personal hygiene and sanitation of the user and same can vary enormously. As this electronic gadget cannot be cleaned regularly except by wiping to remove dust, over a period of time there can be considerable accumulation of micro organisms on different parts on the surface. Touch phones are marginally better because they do not have the regular number buttons as seen in normal phones which can harbor considerable number of microbes. Therefore the recent report by a survey study in the UK highlighting the microbiological status of mobile phones should not come as a surprise.

"The findings from a sample of dozens of phones by Which? magazine suggest 14.7 million of the 63 million mobiles in use in Britain today could be potential health hazards, reports the Daily Mail. Hygiene expert Jim Francis, who carried out the tests, said: "The levels of potentially harmful bacteria on one mobile were off the scale. That phone needs sterilising." The most unhygienic phone also had 39 times the safe level of enterobacteria, a group of bacteria that live in the lower intestines of humans and animals and include bugs such as salmonella. It boasted 170 times the acceptable level of faecal coliforms, which are associated with human waste. Other bacteria including food poisoning bugs e.coli and staphylococcus aureus were found on the phones but at safe levels. Which? researcher Ceri Stanaway said: "The bugs can end up on your hands which is a breeding ground and be passed back to your phone. They can be transferred back and forth and eventually you could catch something nasty. "What this shows is how easy it is to come into contact with bacteria. People see toilet flushes as being something dirty to touch but they have less bacteria than phones. "People need to be mindful of that by observing good hygiene themselves and among others who they pass the phone to when looking at photos, for example." Which? has previously found that some computer keyboards carry more harmful bacteria than a lavatory seat".

While no one would have any quarrel with the scientific data generated by the study, there does not appear to be any reason for undue alarm because mobile phones are used more or less exclusively as a personal possession, not shared with others. Whatever microorganisms detected on each phone are from the person who owned it and therefore they are unlikely to pose any risk to that person who could be immune to them. Probably thousands of phone booths and cyber kiosks that work in India are more dangerous as more than 100 persons, on an average, with different health conditions use the telephone instruments daily and possibilities of spread of infection are far greater under such environments. Studies like the one cited above will have to be viewed in right perspective without causing alarm to the general public.

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

GM FOODS "CONTROVERSY" IN THE UK-ENTRY THROUGH ANIMAL FEEDS

Ban on GM foods in Europe continues to irk the promoters of genetically tampered food raw materials with multi billion dollars commercial stake. It is well known that the GM foods lobby has powerful influence with decision making authorities in many countries through investment of vast resources to mold their views. In a shocking revelation, the food authority in the UK seems to have adopted some of the arguments of GM food lobby "verbatim" while recommending clearance of these foods in the market under the pretext that food prices might go up if such restriction is continued.

"A powerful lobbying organisation representing agribusiness interests helped draft a key government report that has been attacked by environmentalists for heavily favouring the arguments of the genetically modified food industry. The revelation comes after the resignation of two government advisers who have criticised the close relationship between the Food Standards Agency (FSA), the body that oversees the UK's food industry, and the GM lobby.Emails between the FSA and the Agricultural Biotechnology Council (ABC) show the council inserted key sentences strengthening the case for GM food that ended up in the final report. The report, "Food Standards Agency work on changes in the market and the GM regulatory system", examines how GM products are entering the UK, where the growing of GM products is banned, through the animal feed system. It acknowledges food prices could go up if GM products continue to be excluded".

The industry lobbying to allow GM foods is understandable because the cost of raw material inputs and their supply are increasingly under pressure since GM versions of soybean and corn are predominantly grown outpacing the natural varieties. But a regulatory agency like FSA needs to be impartial while considering the pros and cons of adopting a controversial approach involving mass consumption of GM foods with uncertain safety credentials. It is also deplorable that some GM foods have already entered the food chain through the back door by becoming part of many animal feed preparations. How safe it is for the consumers to eat animal foods derived from such animals is not known. Also not understood is the necessity for this country to go against the collective wisdom of the EU community.

V.H.POTTY

http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

CARBON "LOAD"-NEW "MANTRA" IN UK

Whether it is a useful practice with any impact on the environment or a ploy to buy out time, the current thinking in the UK, Australia, Japan and other countries to introduce a provision under the labeling regulations to declare the "carbon load" of each processed food product, remains to be seen. The new policy is supposed to guide the consumer in the isles of supermarkets to products causing lowest pollution during its production and processing. If the consumer has very limited choice vis-à-vis "green" products, it is unlikely that the expected result is achieved.

"Supermarket food in the UK will be labeled to show its carbon footprint, country of origin and animal welfare standards as part of the government's new food strategy for the next 20 years, reports the Telegraph. The voluntary "green" food labels will show how much carbon was produced in the manufacture and transportation of food, according to the article. Companies such as Tesco, PepsiCo and other leading brands already display a "carbon reduction label" on certain products showing the amount of carbon dioxide produced in grams in growing the food, packaging and transportation, reports the Telegraph".

In the absence of reliable and independent verification system to ascertain the claims of carbon reduction by different manufacturers, it may degenerate into a "free for all" situation allowing all and sundry to declare that their products are "green", similar to the health claims made by some of the manufacturers without any scientific data. WTO should frown upon such practices to prevent undue discrimination against imported products which invariably will have more carbon load. Such a system may be difficult to be implemented because of deemed discrimination against small processors who have no means to comply with such compulsory regulation due to cost and logistical constraints and the big players with unlimited resources and muscle will elbow out smaller ones from the market on this score. Instead of resorting to such gimmicks, national governments must sensitize the growers, distributors and retailers regarding the urgency to reduce CO2 emission at their operational levels.

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

FOOD INDUSTRY TO GET LEAN? SHIFTING THE FOOD PRIORITIES

Global trends vis-à-vis food industry developments is a window for any country to understand the trend in various countries regarding the future of this sector. Of course each country has its own specific food preferences and purchasing power which may not be strictly comparable but still some lesson can be gleaned from the experience of others. Look at the UK food industry trend being projected by the concerned government agency, predicting a marked shift from processed foods based on animal sources because of various factors.

"These are the three priorities identified in a report by the government's independent advisory body on sustainability, the Sustainable Development Commission (SDC), which calls for radical changes in patterns of consumption.The report – which will dismay many in the livestock and processed food industries – will feed into all government departments and procurement agencies. Well-placed sources say it has created tension between Whitehall departments and advisers over its potential impact. The study acknowledges that cutting processed food and reducing consumption of intensively-produced meat and dairy foods could lead to a shrinking of the UK food and drink industry. The UK's retail supply system would also be affected – the SDC report recommends that people reduce energy consumption by shopping more on foot or over the internet and that they replace bottled water with tap water. While about 18% of the UK's greenhouse gas emissions are related to food and drink consumption and production, the industry is the single biggest manufacturing sector in the UK, accounting for 7% of GDP and employing 3.7m people".

How, the desire to expand food processing which is considered crucial in the economic landscape of the country and the need to reverse the present scenario regarding deteriorating health status of the population, is going to be balanced remains the biggest challenge. Can India learn a lesson or two from the experiences of the UK and take appropriate course correction in the development chart of the food industry to prevent a similar situation developing in future?. It is time the National Planning Commission(NPC) spares a thought on the issue for evolving necessary guidelines for the "healthy" development of food industry in the country.

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