COFFEE VS SODA-THE EMERGING TREND

Modern America is considered the consumption capital of soda (say cola drink), the much hated sugary drink with caffeine, phosphoric acid and caramel color. Compared to any other nation in this planet Americans can boast that their per capita consumption of soda is the highest in the world and some time one wonders whether soda consumption and power go hand in hand! It took quiet some time for these super rich nation to realize that soda consumption can be dangerous to the health of their citizens and what New York did recently to ban large sized soft drinks through retailers is a right step in the right direction to curb consumption of sugary drinks. Now comes the news that there is a distinct trend emerging where brewed coffee is being increasingly being favored in preference to soft drinks. Here is a commentary on this new development that may have some implications on the health of the population in that country.

"And that makes sense. New survey data from the NPD group, which tracks trends in what Americans eat and drink, finds that 18- to 24-year-olds are turning to coffee, rather than caffeinated sodas, as their pick-me-up of choice. In 2002, about 25 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds reported drinking coffee sometime within a two-week period. But by 2012, the percentage of young adults drinking coffee in that same time frame hit 39 percent. For evidence of this trend, I hit a coffee shop near the campus of George Washington University, which is just a Metro-ride away from NPR headquarters here in D.C. In mid afternoon, I found a packed house. "This is nothing for two o'clock in the afternoon," senior Arturo Lichaucho tells me. Often times, the line is out the door and around the block, he explained, and lots of students hit the coffee shop before hitting the books in the late afternoon. The students I chatted with gave lots of reasons for a steady coffee habit, including increasing demands on their time that lead to less sleep, and the 24/7 culture of overstimulation. And why not drink more coffee? Recent studies link coffee consumption to a range of good health effects, including decreased risk of dementia and decreased risk of depression among women.
But experts say there is one downside that's often overlooked: Coffee consumption can get in the way of a good night's sleep. "Our data has shown that a brewed coffee contains much more caffeine than a cold cola beverage" says Bruce Goldberger, a toxicologist at the University of Florida. The Center for Science in the Public Interest took a look at several popular items and analyzed their caffeine content. It found that a 12-ounce cup of coffee from Starbucks contains about 260 milligrams of caffeine, which is about five times more than a 12-ounce can of Diet Coke".

What worries some health pundits is the possibility of increased levels of caffeine consumption as coffee contains significantly higher levels of this intoxicant. Caffeine is a natural component of beverage crops like coffee, tea and cocoa and beverages based on these crops have been consumed for ages without any adverse consequences. However an issue that needs consideration is whether at the moderate levels of coffee consumed during yesteryear it has any ill effects at all whereas to day there is a tendency to over consume that can result in undesirable impact on health. Advent of decaffeinated coffee was thought to lessen the impact of caffeine on human health through high consumption of this stimulant beverage but it appears there are not many takers for this version except for medically impaired conditions. Is it not time ripe for the WHO to come up with a universal safe upper limit for caffeine for the sake of millions of people who are addicted to coffee? If appropriate guidelines are forthcoming from competent sources, coffee consumers may yet moderate their coffee drinking habit to stay below the danger mark vis-a-vis caffeine.  

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

SODA CONTROVERSY-SUPREME COURT INTERVENES

It is most unfortunate that in India decisions which can be taken by the executive authorities often end up in judicial courts for orders and directives. Latest case to knock on the doors of the Court pertains to the safety of soda. When there are hundreds of food products, some of which are not even edible, are sold in the market with no proper overseeing, time of the Courts and the government is wasted on silly issues like safety of soda made by the industry as per the standards laid down by the concerned authorities. The observation of the court that consumer must be educated regarding the undesirability of consuming synthetic drinks touches the very core of the problem. Assuming that such education process is a long drawn affair, why should any one suspect that all soda products are dangerous? If so world over these products would have been banned by now. Here is a take on this issue as reported recently. 

"Justice KS Radhakrishnan and Justice Dipak Misra called for the records of the FSSAI's technical committee after counsel Prashant Bhushan said the authority's Sep 12 order was given by its committee on advertisement and labelling, not by the scientific panel on food additives. As Bhushan focused on the health hazards of carbonated beverages, Justice Radhakrishnan observed that the "best course is to educate people not to consume beverages." "All cricketers are promoting soft drinks on television," he said. Assailing the order which was submitted to the court, Bhushan said the order, issued Sep 12 by FSSAI assistant director Kamal Kumar, was like affixing the authority's stamp on a report by soft drink manufacturers. Bhushan, appearing for petitioner Centre for Public Interest Litigation, told the court that the order said benzene residue in carbonated beverages was formed only under certain conditions when agents like benzoates and ascorbic acid were present together with heat, ultraviolet light and metallic ion mixture."However, in the absence of benzoic acid and ascorbic acid together, benezene residues are not generated (in carbonated beverages)," the order said. It said that according to studies by Indian Council for Medical Research, the consumption pattern of the beverages was only 500 ml per day in a "worst case scenario which do not appear to pose any health hazard." The order said Indian Beverage Association had confirmed to the FSSAI that in India, benzoic and ascorbic acids were not present together in the beverages. Seeking the minutes of the technical committee which had a hearing for eight days, Bhushan asked if the FSSAI had itself done any test to determine the presence of benzoic acid in carbonated beverages. Bhushan told the court that the FSSAI was not accepting the findings of its own lab in Ghaziabad."

One may recall the pending proposal in New York, to limit the size of soda products sold in the market to 16 oz or less, is still mired in controversy while in India the very safety of the product is being questioned. If some body is using non-permitted chemical preservatives in a beverage product there is adequate reddressal mechanism in the statute books and those breaking the law can be hauled up for punishment. Regarding the issue of Benzene the traces of this chemical coming from thousands of Petrol Bunks located all over the country and being inhaled by those residing near these outlets and those using fossil fuel based transport must be more dangerous than a sip of soda! Probably not many are concerned about this danger while industry as a whole is being made a whipping boy! Consumer activists do serve a purpose but there should be some balance in accusing the industry day in and day out for things they cannot be blamed.

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

SUPER SIZED SODA AND POLITICS-WHAT IS THE REALITY?

Many ideas are emerging for the policy makers to attack the problem of food related health disorders such as over weight, obesity, CVD, diabetes etc. Unfortunately none of them seems to be working with many logistical and social problems cropping up during the translation of these policies into reality. Latest to arrive on the scene is a "ban" being attempted in New York by its well meaning Mayor to prevent the retailers from offering large volume beverage packs for sale. According to the framers of such a policy, consumers buy large sized bottles of high sugar beverages like soda, may be unconsciously, as a part of their mindset buying the most economic size disregarding the risks involved in consuming them regularly on their health. It makes sense because even the limited 16 ounce bottle, permitted under the proposed law, will provide more than 60 gm of sugar, much above the recommended level of 44 gm per day per adult by some health professionals. Naturally the question that begs for an answer is why such a size is selected knowing fully well the sugar load caused by consumption of a 16 oz bottle of soda. More shockingly the hostile reaction by many consumers to the above ban defies logic. It is interesting to listen to the comments by different groups to the ban proposal.  

"Reaction to the proposal came from many fronts on Thursday, falling along two general tracks. The idea was either sound health policy rooted in research, or a perfect illustration of a supersize government gone too far. Some health experts said there might be some correlation between restrictions on soft drinks — many locales, including New York, already ban or limit them from schools — and a leveling off, or in some places even a decline, in childhood obesity. But one researcher whose work was cited by City Hall in defense of the policy said in an interview Thursday that he did not think it would work. At least two candidates for next year's mayoral race also came out against the proposal Thursday, to varying degrees. Christine C. Quinn, the City Council speaker, said that by limiting personal choice, rather than promoting knowledge, "It seems to me to be more on the punitive side of things." And William C. Thompson Jr., the former city comptroller who lost to Mr. Bloomberg in 2009, released a statement saying, "This move does nothing to teach people about positive nutritional values and sounds more like parlor talk than real solutions for the obesity epidemic." The proposed ban — the first in the nation — would prohibit the sale of any cup or bottle of sweetened drink larger than 16 fluid ounces, though consumers would not be prohibited from getting refills or multiple servings.  It would apply to virtually an entire gamut of drinks including energy drinks and iced teas, but not to diet sodas, fruit juices, dairy drinks and alcoholic beverages, or to beverages sold in groceries or convenience stores. It would take effect in March 2013, after public hearings".
The attitude of the beverage industry is totally negative and instead of cooperating with the law makers who framed this policy in the interests of the citizens, industry has gone on a blitzkrieg attacking the government for this socially benevolent policy. In what way it is adversely affected by this new restrictions is not clear though there may be apprehensions about possible downturn in business which is misplaced. After all any one wanting to binge on high sugar beverages always has the option of buying more than one bottle of 16 oz till his hearts content! One is remained of the tactics of a reputed coffee chain which offers its products under the "small" category which itself has 12 oz while other versions have larger volumes of the drink! Though it has an 8 oz version also, 99% of the consumers never know about it as this is not offered unless one insists on it. Obviously industry does not want to do any thing related to consumer well being voluntarily and only such forceful measures can bring in results.

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

ALCOHOL IN SODAS?-NEW REVELATIONS!

Alcoholic drinks are taboos for many people on grounds of religious and other considerations and therefore foods containing alcohol also receive critical attention from safety authorities. But under the testing protocols traces of alcohol are invariably ignored because many natural foods are known to contain small levels of alcohol formed as a part of the metabolic reactions in the fresh produce materials. Alcohol is also a part of many flavoring substances and when externally flavored products are made, alcohol gets into the products also. Whether it is semantics or genuine apprehension, presence of alcohol in foods and beverages evoke strong reactions and recently there was a furor about its presence, albeit at extremely small levels in many soft drinks marketed by almost all major players in this sector. How this report is going to affect the soft drinks market is still not clear. Here is a gist of the above report.   

"According to tests carried out by the Paris-based National Institute of Consumption, more than half of leading colas contain traces of alcohol, Daily Mail reported Wednesday. These include the brand leaders Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola, while it is mainly only cheap supermarket versions of the drink which are alcohol-free. "60 Million Consumers", the French magazine, published the results of the tests in its latest issue. The tests suggest that the alcohol levels are as low as 10 mg in every litre, and this works out at around 0.001 per cent alcohol. But the figures will still be enough to upset the thousands of Muslims who regularly drink Cola because their religion forbids them from drinking alcohol, the daily said". 

If the target of the report is consumers belonging to Islam religion, there is going to be some debate regarding the question whether such beverages containing minuscule amount of alcohol, are Halal or Haram. According to some religious pundits alcohol in manufactured products, added during the processing, make the final products Haram where as products containing alcohol naturally formed as an artifact of metabolism or natural fermentation can pass the Halal test. How far the food and beverage industry can avoid alcohol is some what difficult to predict as of now but the fact still remains that alcohol is one of the most affordable and safest solvents available to the industry and the alternative options of organic solvents may not be as safe as alcohol. It is time that those involved in Halal certification consider these facts before coming to any conclusion regarding the advisability of declaring beverages like Colas as Haram.

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

WILL TAXATION REDUCE SODA CONSUMPTION?-YES AND NO!

After the New York initiative to ban selling of sugar sweetened drinks with serving size beyond 16 ounces being taxed, many more cities are considering similar approach in tackling obesity among children who are the primary targets of the soda industry. The angst among the parents and policy makers is understandable when the stark statistics of soda consumption reveal a reality that cannot be brushed under the carpet any more. Is it not a horror when a city declares that more than half of its kid population are obese measured by the established yardsticks and on an average a kid gobbles up 1.8 units of soda each and every day? In the face of such a reality, can the community sit quiet and watch the emerging catastrophe without doing any thing? Probably such fiscal measures as being proposed or contemplated in many parts of USA should be viewed in this context. Whether such a policy will succeed in reversing the trend is another matter. At least these policy orchestrations must be given a chance to buck the trend. Here is a peep into the efforts of a community in California to stem the rot that was ushered in by the beverage industry. 

"As in other places, soda consumption is highest among teenagers, with more than two-thirds downing 1.8 sugar-sweetened beverages a day. Based on 242 calories a serving for a 20-ounce bottle of Coke, that equals roughly 150,000 extra calories and can lead to more than 20 pounds of weight gain a year, Dr. Brunner said. A recent study found an average of five retail food outlets within a quarter mile of every Richmond school. Alongside the announcement last week by Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg of New York supporting an outright ban on the sale of sweetened drinks larger than 16 ounces, the coming vote in Richmond may be a sign that soda and similar beverages are becoming the new tobacco in terms of public perception of health risks. "Both are pretty bold moves that wouldn't have been imaginable even five years ago," said Kelly M. Brownell, the director of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, which conducted much of the research supporting the efficacy of a one-cent beverage tax. "It shows that government is beginning to stand up to the food industry and there is more public support for doing so." If the Richmond ordinance passes, it will be the first of its kind in the country intended specifically to combat obesity. But soda taxes have failed elsewhere — most notably in Philadelphia, where Mayor Michael A. Nutter's attempts to impose a 2-cents-per-ounce charge on sugary drinks have sputtered twice. Nevertheless, Mr. Nutter is scheduled to be the keynote speaker this week at the nation's first Sugary Drinks Summit in Washington, sponsored by the Center for Science in the Public Interest".

Many skeptics may feel that such measures will not work, given the past history when similar attempts in alcoholic beverages and tobacco did not bring much relief in curbing their consumption. With economic recession causing immense misery, especially among the low income group, probably such attempts to make soda costlier may succeed, at least to some extent. Some diversion of purchasing power from soda sector to other more pressing daily needs may have the effect of over all reduction of soda consumption but how far this change will impact on the health front is some what uncertain. One can only wish success to these types of earnest efforts at addressing the problem of obesity.

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