ANOTHER FOOD PACK LABELING INITIATIVE-WILL IT WORK?

Scouting for good but healthy foods is a nightmare for many families visiting a supermarket where thousands of products are presented as attractively as possible tempting the buyers to pick them up. While the price tag and expiry date weigh heavily in making purchase decisions so often, some discerning buyers do glance through the nutrition labeling though it is far from clear as to how much they really understand! Food safety authorities world over deserve kudos for putting in place a "front of the pack"  labeling regime that is helpful to millions of consumers to have a better understanding about the contents of the pack before making actual purchase and over the years the system is progressively being modified to make it more and more transparent and consumer friendly. Still attempts are going on in some parts of the world to bring about more clarity and in one such attempt in Australia, a new type of labeling guideline is being introduced to enable the consumer to decide at the first sight itself how healthy the product is without being forced to spend time and efforts to read through the fine printed information presently in vogue. This system is based on a system of star rating and following critique gives an idea about its mode of working and logistics of implementation.

The introduction of an easy-to-understand food labelling system was a key recommendation of the 2011 Blewett review of food labelling commissioned by the federal government. But reaching consensus on the best system to implement has been difficult. Food manufacturers have voluntarily adopted their industry's own percentage daily intake (%DI) labelling scheme since 2006. But the scheme doesn't meet the Blewett review's requirement for an "interpretive" system. The daily intake system only presents information about the contribution that a single serve of food makes to the "average" person's daily dietary requirement. It has been criticised as being confusing for consumers, and potentially misleading. The Blewett review specifically recommended traffic-light labelling, which uses green, amber and red to show, at a glance, the relative healthiness of products, as the preferred scheme. The recommendation was strongly supported by public health groups. But traffic-light labels are vociferously opposed by industry, primarily because food manufacturers don't want to put red (negative) labels on their products. By the end of 2011, the federal government had rejected the call to implement traffic-light labelling. This was widely seen as government caving in to lobbying pressure from the food industry, which has been extremely active in its campaign against traffic-light labelling, both in Australia and internationally. In an effort to develop a labelling system that could be supported by all parties, the federal government established a multi-sectoral committee to work on a proposal for a new scheme in 2012. In May 2013, this committee finalised their recommendations for the health star system. The scheme is based on a system proposed by the US Institute of Medicine. Under the proposed system, processed foods will be labelled using a scale ranging from half a star (least healthy) to five stars (healthiest). The front of food packages will also have an icon showing the number of kilojoules in the product, and nutrient information on saturated fat, sodium and sugars. Only the kilojoules in the product will be expressed in terms of recommended daily intake.Foods that are considered healthy (using government-defined criteria) will also be able to list a single "positive" nutrient (such as calcium) icon on the front of the package. And the standard nutrition information panel that is currently displayed on the back of the pack would remain in place. The system will initially be voluntary, and implementation is expected to be accompanied by a government-sponsored marketing campaign to explain and promote it.

Though on paper it looks really good, implementing the same will be a hard job because of the difficulties involved in assigning stars to thousands of products with different chemical and nutrient composition. Still it should be possible to implement the new guidelines in cooperation with the industry. Since the star rating system is voluntary at present there may not be any serious hiccups during the initial period as most products with good health credentials will queue up for getting the coveted star rating and once products start appearing in the market with the health star icons printed on the front, a positive force is likely to be unleashed that will push more and more manufacturers into the star rating system. When fully implemented the market environment may become so sanitized that bad and unhealthy packed foods would probably disappear from the shelves sooner than later! One aspect about this new policy which cannot be appreciated is that the government does not want to make it mandatory in the interest of its citizens. Probably industry may eventually be forced to implement the star grading system by mandatory policy compulsions.    

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

THE FAT TAX-A NEW INITIATIVE IN AUSTRALIA

Why do the governments world over impose taxes on products and services? Obviously because they want to generate resources which can be spend for their economic and social development. By far taxes in the form of sales tax, value added tax, octroi, entry tax etc spread the net far and wide among the citizens and generate huge revenue for the governments. The concept of using taxation as a tool to regulate consumption is relatively a new phenomenon and most common examples are Cigarettes and alcohol products. It is true that both smoking and alcohol consumption are not considered safe and therefore taxes on them are frequently increased to make them costlier while reducing the overall consumption. While such a strategy seemed to have worked in the case of tobacco products, the result in the case of alcoholic drinks cannot be considered a success. In a recent report it was revealed that the high end Scotch Whiskey demand world over is rising rapidly though it is one of the costliest among spirit products! This approach was tried on foods also in Denmark where taxes were hiked on products considered highly unhealthy containing high amounts of fat and sugar. The result was not very encouraging because in the EU with a no restriction on inter country travel within the Community, Danish citizens had always access to cheaper products across the borders! Same strategy is now being thought of in Australia where plans are afoot to impose a "fat tax" on foods containing above a certain level of saturated fat. Here is a commentary on this new initiative to control obesity in that country where almost two thirds of the population is considered overweight. 

"The fat tax will apply to products containing more than 2.3 percent saturated fat. This will include but not be limited to oils, meats, cheeses, processed products, and fast foods. With 63 percent of Australians are overweight and nearly 22 percent of adults have high blood pressure, it is no wonder that such stringent actions are being put into action. The chief executive of the Heart Foundation, Lyn Roberts, said that more Australians were at risk of eating themselves to death. In order to boost the success of this new fat tax, eatforhealth.gov.au has published new dietary guidelines for Australians to follow, along with advice on choosing the right foods. In view of efforts like this, the fat tax is hardly as wicked as it first sounds. Sure, prices will increase, but the Australian population will learn how to manage their eating habits in a healthier way. Obesity Policy Coalition spokeswoman Jane Martin said policies encouraging physical activity and healthy eating appeared to stabilize, instead of increase, the numbers of overweight and obese children, but other efforts, such as this tax, were needed to reduce the numbers in the obese population. However, drawbacks to such a measure have been seen in Denmark as well as New York. When Danish officials attempted their fat tax, residents simply visited other countries to buy sugary beverages and fatty foods at an affordable price. When Mayor Michael Bloomberg attempted to restrict the sale of sugary beverages greater than 16 fl oz., residents protested and the law was never passed. These results may not necessarily be duplicated in Australia, as the country has established that more than half of its population is overweight and needs to urgently cut back on fat consumption".

Will Australia succeed where Denmark has failed? Probably yes because the nearest market to Australians is New Zealand which is about 2000 miles away. Government can also hike the import duty on such foods it considers as unhealthy. Desperate situation demands desperate efforts to address the problem and Australia really needs to tackle the "body bloating" syndrome now and here! One positive aspect of this policy orchestration is that the additional revenue generated is slated to be spent on subsidizing healthy foods which invariably cost much higher world over including Australia. It is an unprecedented tragedy that the consumer prices of unhealthy foods are declining significantly while that of healthy foods like fresh fruits, vegetables, whole grain products etc are showing an opposite trend putting them beyond the reach of more and more people who really need them to maintain decent health. 

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

FOOD SOLUTIONS-URBAN AGRICULTURE

According to experts watching the food scenario in Australia, that country is going to face a food crisis one day or the other, if adequate steps are not taken immediately to disperse production, creating smaller entities working nearer to consumption centers. It seems, on an average, fresh food supplies in many urban settlements reach there after traveling about 1500 kilometers in most cases and any disruption of this flow due to conditions beyond the control of the industry, people will be starved of fresh food supplies in 2-3 days time. This is the logic behind serious pleas by many planners to encourage setting up of local production centers near the urban settlements. Such an approach also reduces the carbon foot print very significantly besides providing fresher food with superior quality. Here is a commentary touching upon this issue which is very revealing.

"Steven Newton, the chairman of the Retailers Action Working Group, which plans food industry responses to potential national crises such as pandemics or floods, said that ''fresh food would be the first thing to go in a crisis''. He said the supply channels of Australia's increasingly concentrated and commercialised farming industry were more vulnerable to disaster shocks than the dispersed small-scale farming model of 30 years ago. Sally Hill, of the Youth Food Network, wants to turn back the clock to a time when fresh food came from local farms distributed across the urban hinterland and people grew vegetables in their backyards. ''The average distance food travels is 1500 kilometres,'' Ms Hill said. ''If anything interrupts that flow you have a real crisis on your hands.'' The Youth Food Movement, which grew out of the global slow food movement, argues that sourcing food locally and from smaller farms would not only insulate supply from the interruptions of disasters but also alleviate longer-term threats to food security such as climate change. ''If we had a really broad network of people going through local [farmers] or growing it themselves in their backyard you have a lot more resilient system,'' Ms Hill said. ''That tackles a whole lot of associated problems, like emissions from transporting food.'' She encourages young urbanites to think critically about where their food comes from and buy from local farmers - or grow their own. But getting young people interested and involved in agriculture is a difficult undertaking. The Bureau of Statistics has found the average Australian farmer is 55. Enrollments in agriculture courses are down dramatically. This year the University of Western Sydney's campus in Richmond - formerly Hawkesbury Agricultural College - suspended its agriculture course due to low student interest".

Theoretically such proposals are sound in concept but very difficult to implement. There are a few countries where urban agriculture is deliberately encouraged through incentive oriented policies but their impact nation wide cannot be considered significant. Australia is a country with vast land mass and centralized food production is easy to achieve. Therefore decentralization with emphasis on local production in and around urban areas may be some what formidable in nature. Still investment in developing lands near major towns and cities and creating a green belt for exclusively producing fresh crops like fruits and vegetables can bring in lot of advantages to the urban families. Parceling out small plots of land on a long lease to willing families for doing some type of farming operations, backed by evolving standardized input packages for use by these new generation of agricultural entrepreneurs may still be feasible if adequate efforts are made by the government. Such models can be thought of in many countries where land is controlled by the government and real estate activities are minimum.

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

A NEW "JUMBO" WHEAT WITH MEGA YIELD-AN AUSTRALIAN ACHIEVEMENT

Global food security issues are getting more and more complicated with different experts taking conflicting views and it is not yet certain that the 10 billion population expected by the year 2050 will be able to get their minimum needs of food as recommended by international nutrition agencies. The great Green Revolution has already run its course and while achieving record breaking yields it has also ruined the soil health to the extent that it is impossible to think of another such feat unless the land is rehabilitated and rejuvenated at great cost. The wonder technology going by the name Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) is not able to achieve significant production increase though food wastage in the field is controlled to some extent in some cases. Expansion of cultivated land or the irrigation infrastructure can achieve limited gains, not to the extent demanded by the situation. It is against this context one has to view the exciting development in wheat breeding taking place in Australia where scientists are reported to have identified wheat strains with yields, 30% more than traditional varieties grown at present. Here is a take on this new development which may have a far reaching positive impact on future food security.

"A CSIRO research team has made a chance discovery that could increase Australian wheat production by 30 per cent a year, The Australian reports. Grains Research & Development Corporation chief John Harvey described the discovery as 'serendipitous', and worldwide it is being heralded as a potential solution for future food shortages. The breakthrough occurred while researchers were experimenting with the genetic make-up of wheat, Mr Harvey says. "Researchers at CSIRO's division of Plant Industry were looking at ways to change starch in wheat (for industrial processing reasons) and noticed when they grew (these new wheat types) the plants ended up 30 per cent larger, with 30 per cent bigger heads and a 30 per cent increase in grain yield." This 'super wheat' is being grown in three locations around Australia after initially being bred in Canberra by the research team headed by Matthew Morell. Researchers hope this advancement will provide the leap in wheat productivity for which they have searched for years. CSIRO Plant Industry chief Jeremy Burdon says that researchers have changed their approach since the 1960s and 1970s from creating disease resistant varieties of wheat, to increasing wheat biomass and grain head yields. "That's why this new development is potentially so significant; a 30 per cent yield increase is an extraordinary achievement if it can be replicated in the field." Wheat is one of the most important food crops, with an estimated 650 million tonnes produced globally each year. Australia produced a record 29.5 million tonnes last year. With world wheat
prices hitting a record high in recent times due to drought in the US, Canada and Russia, the expectation is that process will rise in the next five to ten years. "With this technology, we see more vigorous wheat with larger seed heads, and larger seed," said Bruce Lee, director of CSIRO's Food Futures Flagship. "If we can achieve significant yield increases in the field, this will have a major impact on food production on a global scale." 
Wheat is by far the most sought after food grain with practically all industrialized nations consuming large quantities as it is the staple food there. Besides the multi billion bakery products industry is founded upon the unique protein, gluten present in wheat and the demand for this grain is bound to grow in the coming years. While Australian scientists deserve kudos for their chance discovery, what is disturbing is that the new technology is going to be "bottled up" through patenting, denying its benefits to those population which really deserve it. There must be a universal agreement at international level to share results of such vital scientific findings beneficial to people in all countries through some form of compensation to the discoverers for their investment in research.

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

WILL THE VEGAN PHILOSOPHY EVER BECOME UNIVERSAL?-UNLIKELY!

The debate about vegetarian diet against animal foods is as old as human history. Those who consider that animal foods are absolutely essential for good health and a life without these "valuable' foods is not worth living! Such protagonists are in majority is a fact of life and converting them into vegetarians is not a mean task. While nutritionally vegetarian diets have been proved to be as good as animal foods, if not superior, the food consumption habits nurtured over centuries are hard to change. In spite of many campaigns intended tp promote vegetarianism as a way of life have sound rationality and scientific foundation, their success at best is only minimal and not dramatic measured by any yardstick. Indians are considered predominantly vegetarians either due to religious considerations or economic compulsions, the pro vegan movement is not that strong within the country. In contrast more aggressive groups are taking up cudgels on behalf of vegetarianism if recent reports emanating from there are any indication. Here is a strong advocacy group in Australia arguing with the government that by 2020 there should be a total switch to vegetarian diets in the country which only can save the country from future environmental and health disaster.

"There is sound evidence that vegan diets are nutritionally adequate during all stages of the life cycle. In fact science supports a low‐fat, plant‐based diet for optimal health," said McFarlane. The vegan group's submission recommends that the National Food Plan aim to: * Ensure all Australians have access to affordable and adequate fresh fruits and vegetables and other plant foods irrespective of income by 2015. * Improve the health of Australians and lower the burden on the health system by reducing the incidence of dietary related diseases * Use Australia's land resources more effectively and sustainably.
* End the use of animal agriculture systems within the next 20 years by building up and supporting Australia's fruit, vegetable and grain producers. "We have known for some time now that climate change is a real threat to Australia's food supply, yet we continue to produce and consume greenhouse gas intensive meat and dairy products that only contribute to the problem."  "Animals are suffering and being killed in order to meet our unhealthy and unsustainable appetite for meat and dairy products. We really need to question our practices and begin the necessary changes as soon as possible."  "It is crucial that the Australian Government initiate regulatory reforms and develop innovative measures to facilitate the uptake of plant based diets. This should include the setting of targets for the reduction and eventual elimination of meat and dairy consumption".  "Australians deserve to be educated about the many benefits of plant‐based diets and supported by government. A good first step is to make sure fruits and vegetables and other plant foods are accessible and affordable to all Australians, including those living in regional and remote communities." 

One is reminded of the era, not long ago when cigarette smoking was universally frowned upon because of its association with lung cancer. In spite of taking every step conceivable to persuade people from smoking, no significant dent has been made on the smoking front and people continue to smoke knowing pretty well that it is dangerous! Similarly eating junk foods is known to be linked to many life style health disorders including obesity but still people refuse to cut down on sugary and fatty foods though millions of dollars are being spent to inculcate good eating habits. The Vegan advocates may be good meaning people but the proposal by them to convert the Australian population into vegetarianism may be too far fetched. Of course the attempt to do some thing in this area is itself praise worthy.

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

     

THE "INSATIABLE" DRAGON-REACHING FOR AUSTRALIAN LAND

A country as big as China with 1.3 billion plus population has the arduous responsibility of feeding its growing population by producing enough food to meet their minimum requirement and prevent malnutrition and hunger. As the land availability is not unlimited, increased production can be achieved either by higher productivity through technological breakthrough in agriculture or by expanding the area of cultivation. It is remarkable that so far, the Chinese government has done well in ensuring food adequacy mostly from domestic production though imports are resorted to during times of shortfalls in production. Chinese are adept at working in many third world countries especially in Africa and South America as a part of their foreign aid programs, earning lot of good will in the process besides evolving practices best suited to most of these countries. Extending its reach to other developing countries has enabled it to think in terms of organizing agricultural operations in many countries with lot of lands to spare and produce some of the foods required for its domestic consumption. Latest to be tapped is Australia which has very low population density with plenty of lands to spare and its efforts to "colonize" this country are highlighted in the following report.     

"CHINA would invest billions of dollars to transform vast tracts of undeveloped land in northern Australia for farming, under a plan confirmed yesterday by the federal government. But opponents said an ''Asia food bowl'' would come at the expense of giving Australians access to affordable, good-quality food. Trade and Competitiveness Minister Craig Emerson confirmed that the government was undertaking a joint study with Beijing to examine the policy changes needed for a massive investment by Chinese agricultural interests. Dr Emerson has denied that this means there are plans to ''buy up the farm'' and use imported labour to produce food for the voracious Chinese market, with its 1.3 billion citizens. ''It is designed to lift Australian food production for world markets,'' he said. The revelation, in advance of an official report expected midyear, has caused some consternation in Canberra, where foreign ownership of Australian farmland is a hot-button issue. Nationals senator Barnaby Joyce, who recently pushed for tougher restrictions on foreign ownership of land in a move that was seen as breaking ranks with the Liberals, said that the report would raise hackles in urban as well as regional areas across Australia. ''There is a strong concern in the Australian public about ownership of their farmland and it has a deeper philosophical vein to it than many other things,'' he said. ''It is not only a concern for regional people - it is reflected very, very strongly in urban constituencies.'' While the move by the Chinese was ''astute'', he said it exposed the lack of planning for our own food security since Australia was now a net importer of food and the resulting inflation had an impact on food prices. ''It's not that you'll run out of food, it's the form of food that you'll be able to buy, and that is happening right now. How often do you see people who in the past bought the roast, now buy mince? Why? Because they can't afford the roast, but that was once a staple.'' The question of selling Australian land to a foreign state-owned enterprise could also have troubling implications, according to Senator Joyce. ''It is held by an organ of the government, and governments, especially strong ones like the Chinese, don't go broke - therefore they can hold [the land] in perpetuity,'' he said. Joyce denied his views were xenophobic. ''Look at any other country and see what their controls of [foreign] investment are like and then compare it to ours and you'll see you can't buy [land] in China, you can't buy it in Japan, you can't buy it in South Korea, you're struggling to buy in the United States and there are vastly greater controls with buying it in New Zealand.'' Liberal senator Bill Heffernan said Australians were either ''too bloody tired or too bloody lazy'' to develop the land to ensure our own future. ''I think it's time that all Australians sat up and took notice,'' he said. While northern Australia has millions of hectares of underutilised land - as well as abundant water and good proximity to Asia - obstacles to development have included poor transport links and a difficult climate. Until now, the Chinese have focused on opening up farmland in South America and Africa to meet the demands of the burgeoning Chinese middle class. They are expected to continue to focus on wheat and rice production on the mainland while looking for new sources to meet their increasing needs for beef, sheep, sugar and dairy. It is the consumption of meat, in particular, that tells the story of the food needs of the world's most populous nation. More than a quarter of all meat produced worldwide is now eaten in China. In 1978, China's annual consumption of meat was 8 million tonnes - it is now 71 million tonnes and more than twice that of the United States".

While as a business deal, land leasing for short periods makes sense, most Australians are worried about the long term consequences of Chinese buying the land and becoming its owners. Chinese have a propensity to bring large contingents of labor into the country where land is leased out or bought and create a separate settlement for them near the work site, secluded from the local population. With cheap labor deployed for raising crops, the production cost tends to be significantly lower and this enables them to send them back to China or to the global markets. Interestingly Chinese interests are more in setting up animal farms for producing beef and pork, besides milk and dairy products. It appears that this country is not able to meet the aspirations of people whose purchasing capacity has increased significantly due to rapid economic development during the last two decades. Many experts believe that Australia should not be too much concerned about the Chinese programs as long as there are iron-clad safety provisions in the lease agreements. It must be realized that the low population in Australia, combined with the shortage of labor to work in farms, makes it imperative to seek such temporary arrangements as the one with China without compromising its sovereignty .

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

FOOD "MISCONCEPTIONS"-NEED FOR URGENT ACTION

Growing body of information about the food eaten daily in scientific and popular media makes citizens, even the well informed ones, really a confused lot with no degree of clarity on any issue. While this is understandable, what is alarming is the great divide taking place between urban and rural children regarding even the basic aspects regarding food. One can understand a kid coming from the US to India not knowing from where an egg comes or how milk is produced but in India itself many kids raised in urban areas have no clue regarding some of the basics of food, nutrition and health for which the current education system is to be blamed squarely. This is not only true in India but all over the world and action needs to be taken to address this subject as food safety issues are becoming more and more serious with each passing day. The Australian authorities were shocked by recent revelations about the extent of ignorance that exists among the children in urban parts of the country through a well carried out study. Following excerpts reflect the findings of the study. 

"Most Australian children in their last year of primary school think cotton socks come from animals while one-quarter believe yoghurt is from plants, a study warning of the growing gap between city and country found. The Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) survey of almost 1,000 students in grades six and 10 found widespread misconceptions about food processing and farming. An overwhelming majority knew where potato chips and coffee came from but almost 20 percent of the younger age group -- aged between 10 and 12 years -- thought pasta came from animals and scrambled eggs from plants. Some 75 percent said cotton socks were an animal product and 27 percent believed yoghurt was derived from plants. "Primary industry plays a vital role in Australian's economy and society, but the gap between rural and urban communities is growing, contributing to a lack of understanding of where food and other basic necessities of life come from," the study said. The agricultural lobby group which commissioned the survey, the Primary Industries Education Foundation (PIEF), said the findings were of concern as Australia prepared to confront food security and climate change challenges. "The people who will need to solve the problems related to food security are either currently in school or are yet to be born," said foundation chief Cameron Archer. Agriculture is a major part of Australia's economy, with two-thirds of all produce shipped overseas. Exports were worth Aus$34.2 billion ($36.6 billion) in 2010-11 and are expected to come in at $34.5 billion in 2011-2012."

For ages it has been argued by food scientists in the country for reforming the curricula in schools with inclusion of study materials highlighting some basic facts about food, hygiene, nutrition and health but with no appreciable success. How can a kid drink a glass of milk every day without understanding about its source and the method of milk extraction from the cow or buffalo? What thought the kids have when they are fed boiled eggs which are excellent sources of almost all vital nutrients? Once the children grow up they have neither the time nor the inclination to learn about these fundamental facts about food. It is time the HRD ministry of GOI and state authorities sit together to modify the curriculum in primary schools to include such essential information with the help of concerned scientists. A well informed kid of to day has a better chance to become a responsible citizen of tomorrow, capable of sharing the burden of ensuring safety of foods eaten every day. Sooner it is done better it will be for the country.  

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