THE "VILLAINOUS" SUGAR!-NEW FINDINGS ON ITS DANGERS!

Food science is getting more and murkier day by day if thousands of conflicting reports/findings/inferences being published in hundreds of journals as well as media publications are meticulously read! Practically every report on one or the other aspect of food, nutrition and health is contradicted by a different group though both claim their findings are truthful and correct! For example who does not know that too much sugar or salt or fat can be injurious to health for people in a sedentary society though "how much" is "too much" is still mired in controversy. According to a recent study published in a decent scientific periodical, it is claimed that those who consume added sugar are more vulnerable to death with lesser life span than those taking limited sugar who live longer. This finding is based on some laboratory studies using mice as subjects and extrapolating the results to humans. Here is a take on these new "findings".

"When mice were fed a diet that was 25% added sugars – an amount consumed by many humans – the females died at twice the normal rate and the males were less likely to reproduce and hold territory, scientists said in a study published Tuesday. The study shows "that added sugar consumed at concentrations currently considered safe exerts dramatic impacts on mammalian health," the researchers said in the study, published in the journal Nature Communications. "Many researchers have already made calls for reevaluation of these safe levels of consumption." The study's senior author, University of Utah biology professor Wayne Potts, said earlier studies fed mice sugars at levels higher than people eat in sodas, cookies, candy and other items. The current study stuck to levels eaten by people". 

Granted that the results might be true for mice which were living in a restricted environment, how can one conclude that the same could apply to humans who are living in unrestricted environments with freedom to exercise as much as they want or can. After all calorie burning is influenced by the extent of physical activity indulged by the humans. If the logic of study is taken seriously, practically every food item coming from the soda, pastry, confectionery, ice cream or dessert industry sectors must be banned forthwith!. Take the population in India where thousands of ethnic foods are made and consumed for centuries containing high sugar levels and the mortality should have been astronomical according to the above studies. But only recently Indians are developing diabetes probably by the lack of calorie burning exercises while those generations preceding the present one never had so much problem consuming sugar. The key to this mystery is adequate physical activity which was part and parcel of life in the last century and years preceding that. No wonder diabetes is practically non-existent in the rural areas where hard working farmers consume lot of jaggery and sweetmeats practically every day, much more than what these mice ate in the above studies. Of course to day's society must heed to the warning alarm raised by the findings and must cut down sugar drastically or do rigorous exercise regularly to burn the high calorie foods they take in their diets.  

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

A SINLESS CHOCOLATE-REALLY POSSIBLE

Amateur innovators can some time throw the traditionally accepted technological truths upside down as reflected by a recent report that some one in the UK has created "chocolate" products with a caloric content of only 20 kC per bar! Can this be really true? When popular media flashes such explosive news, consumers get highly excited! A careful scrutiny of the claim by this chocolate entrepreneur reveals that, unlike the standard chocolates familiar to the consumers, the new product contains high moisture which may not pass the test of identity for chocolates accepted universally. It is fashionable these days for the industry to propagate food products containing less and less of sugar, fat and salt though most such products fail to live up to the billing. The new low calories chocolate also may fall under this category and once commercial production and promotion start, the real problems will emerge. Here is a take on this new development. 

"London-based Aneesh Popat's recipe ditches high-calorie ingredients such as butter, cream and eggs. Instead, 25-year-old Popat, a maths graduate, combines flavour-infused water with cocoa to create The Chocolatier, which contain as little as 20 calories a bar, 'The Daily Express' reported. Popat claims his chocolate is as tasty as sugar-packed rivals and comes in flavours from fizzy cola and strawberry mint to chai tea and apple pie. "If everything in the world was made of chocolate I'd have eaten it by now. My love of chocolate led me to devote and apply my mathematical and scientific backgrounds to create the most unique flavour combinations with utmost precision and creativity," he said. "Chocolate is good for you if made in the right way," he said. Popat's low-fat chocolates are already taking the culinary world by storm. After support from thousands of visitors to his stall at the BBC Good Food Show in Birmingham, he is hoping his chocolate will hit the open market. It is already supplied to Michelin star restaurant Apicius in Cranbrook, Kent, and five star hotel Le Meridien in London".

Reducing sugar and fat are laudable objectives provided the product features are not grossly distorted and the new chocolate products probably will never be universally accepted no matter what health claims are trumpeted. One has to only look at the ice cream industry which has been in business since ages and the basic identity of this yummy product has never been seriously compromised in spite of the fact it is rich in sugar and fat! Of course there are imitative ice cream products like frozen yogurts, gelato etc which probably gives same culinary pleasure, as that given by true ice cream products, for those who want to control the ingestion of sugar and fat. Therefore the new 'chocolate" product, as claimed by the above entrepreneur, can be easily positioned as another chocolate like product and may as well click, provided it has a reasonablu good shelf life.   

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

IS SUGAR BECOMING BITTER?-A MINISTER'S PRIORITY!

In India the citizens are left wondering as to how many caps a minister can wear simultaneously, miserably failing to do any thing properly and efficiently! Any one watching the sordid cricket "circus" on the electronic media during the last one week must have noticed that it is the politicians who "manage" cricket in this country though none of them would have even handled a bat or a ball in their life. Same is true with all sports bodies where politicians, even in their seventies and eighties refuse to allow others younger and more knowledgeable than them to assume responsibility. Analogous to this, the cooperatives in this country also are "infested" with politicians of all hues and colors and even when they assume ministerial responsibilities , their industry interests are above that of the poor citizens. Here is an example of the agriculture minister of the country canvassing for the interests of the cooperative sugar industry by demanding from his own government to make sugar more expensive to the consumer through import policy manipulation! Probably he must be thinking that the citizens affected by such rise in sugar prices, will forget it during election time! Further he must be sure that electorates are just fools not capable of punishing him for his misdeeds and will reelect him every 5 years without fail! Here is his case.

"The minister said that despite drought in Maharashtra, India's sugar production in the 2012-13 crop marketing year that will end on September 31 is expected to be around 25 million tonnes. When these are added to the season's opening balance of six million tonnes, it will leave the country with around eight million tonnes in stocks when the current  season ends. "Therefore, availability of sugar will be much more than domestic consumption , despite the drought in Maharashtra. Hence, we do not need imports at this stage," Pawar is believed to have written. According to industry officials, usually, the country's opening balance of sugar is around 4.5 million tonnes. Giving another reason for increasing the import, officials said the minister let as international prices of sugar have been falling in the last few months, the Indian market has also dropped. The domestic price has seen a steady fall since October 2012, which has led to the accumulated cane arrears and hence, the import duty should be hiked, Pawar wrote. India's sugar production has stabilised at  23-25 million tonnes because of a declining recovery ratio. Recently, the government partially removed some of the decades-old curbs on the  Rs 80,000 crore sector, which is expected to boost its efficiency in the coming years. It abolished the levy sugar mechanism, under which millers had to sell a fixed portion of their annual produce to the government for distribution through ration shops at cheap rates. It also gave the mills freedom to sell any quantity of sugar at any point of time."

More concessions government gives, higher is the appetite for making money at a faster pace as far sugar industry is concerned. It was very recently that government decontrolled the sugar sector, removing the levy sugar system for two years and with this one policy change sugar sales by the manufacturers are now driven purely by supply-demand dynamics. Though this sector was happy initially, it soon realized that its fortunes are influenced by international sugar market prices as India, being a member of WTO has to ensure free trade as a part of its commitment to the world body. As the global sugar prices are falling, imports are cheaper than that expected by the industry. The domestic industry is not able to make killing profits as it has hoped and hence this demand by the minister who is also a prominent sugar baron to increase import duty substantially so that domestic prices can also be raised! Why the poor sugarcane producers are being used as a pawn in this dirty game should e understood in this context. The rich sugar barons have money for every thing in life but plead  that liquidity problems prevent them from paying the mandated minimum price for the sugarcane crop to the farmers when it is delivered at their factory gate. It is time that the government stands up to their machination, does not buckle under their lobby and does not sacrifice the interest of the poor farmer.  

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

SUGAR LADEN "HEALTHY" FOODS!-INDUSTRY'S NEW STRATEGY

Any responsible country will spare no efforts to make the lives of its citizens safe from many dangers lurking around them including unsafe foods. In balancing the citizen's right and his well being, reasonable restrictions will have to be put in place on the former so that the public place becomes more secure for the society in general. In the case of food also every country has a legal frame work within which only food handlers, traders and processors will have to work. Lately there appears to be a bias in favor of the industry players in allowing many foods to be made and marketed by them which are patently unhealthy if the scientific yardsticks are strictly applied. Food products containing unusually high levels of sugar and fat are becoming the mainstay of the industry which is exploiting the weakness of consumers to these palate tingling offerings and over a period of time get hooked on to these life threatening products. The result is the wide spread prevalence of food related human disorders like CVD, Diabetes, Hypertension, Kidney ailments etc and there is almost a unanimous view that to day's Obesity epidemic associated with many wealthy countries is mainly due to over consumption of such foods while physical activity of individuals is declining rapidly. Governments are usually reluctant to displease the industry by mandatory restrictions and depend more on persuasion for voluntary action by the manufacturers for improving the health credentials of the products they make and sell. According to the experience in several countries such voluntary actions agreed to by the industry is often a sham and only lip service is made to mislead the governments as well as the consumers. Here is a critique on this on going "ping pong" game between the government and the industry leaving the consumer a silent spectator!

"The nation's largest food and beverage companies are under renewed attack for what critics see as misleading ads for obesity-promoting foods, especially ads aimed at kids. "The trickery that we're trying to stop includes General Mills' false claims that some of its corn-syrup- drenched products are 'natural,' and Coca-Cola Company's deceptive health claims about its Vitaminwater (which would be better called Sugarwater)," the Center for Science in the Public Interest said Wednesday in a release launching its "Stop the Lying Labels" campaign. Industry representatives counter that they have worked to make their products healthier - just as critics have demanded. "Since 2002, we have introduced more than 20,000 new product choices with fewer calories, reduced fat, sodium and sugar, and more whole grains," the Grocery Manufacturers Association said in an e-mail. "We have voluntarily adopted strict advertising criteria" through the Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative."

One of the strategies of war is to give an inch if peace can be brought which may not make any significant loss to the one who makes such a gesture and food industry also seems to be adopting this practice if their promises and performance are closely monitored. There are thousands of products made by the industry which contain very high amounts of sugar, fat and salt and to buy peace with the consumer activists and reluctant government safety agencies either the concentration of these ingredients is marginally reduced or a healthy ingredient is included in the recipe! High pressure promotional campaigns are undertaken to highlight the "sacrifice" made by the industry by changing the "established formula" of the products! It is like adding a drop of "Elixir" to a chalice of poison and claim that the product is better than the original poison!  Probably food industry will learn only when consumers start putting pressure on the industry by banishing unhealthy products from their buying basket and force the government to discipline the industry leaving no option but to make only healthy products. In this endeavor grading of foods based on some scientifically valid scale and printing easily recognizable icons on the label can go a long way to use the consumer force to weed way unhealthy products eventually.

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

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

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

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

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

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

SELLING SUGAR UNDER THE NAME OF FRUIT! THE GAME PLAN!

Is it not a tragedy that in this century most consumers are swayed by highly aggressive advertisements and commercial promotional strategies of some of the industry giants and buy food products considered least healthy for them? For example while marketing fruit based beverages many manufacturers get away selling fruit pulp based beverages containing hardly 10% of the pulp, rest being sugar and the designs used in presenting the product to the consumer conveys the impression that they are fruit juices! Is it not unethical to market such products though the law may permit? The food laws are not specific regarding the way the label must be designed leaving sufficient leeway to the industry to present such products to give the appearance of a genuine juice though synthetic drinks have to carry the declaration that they do not contain fruit solids. The result is highly attractive fruit beverage packs crowding the retail shelves attracting the consumers in droves who buy them thinking that they are fruit juices. Recent introduction of a 100 ml tetra pack based fruit beverage is an excellent example as to how industry sings about consumer welfare and at the same time targets the consumers that too in poor vulnerable village sector to swell their sugary beverage business. Here is a take on this new strategy of tapping the rural wealth for a wrong cause.   

"This is going to be the lowest price for a Coke product in the non-returnable ready-to-drink category, where the pricing ranges from Rs 8 to Rs 12 and goes on to as high as Rs 60 for a two-litre plastic non-returnable pack. In package size, too, this is the smallest in the beverage product category - the smallest so far were the 200 ml returnable bottles. Explaining the strategy, Coca-Cola India President & CEO Atul Singh told Business Standard in an exclusive interview: "There are two million retail outlets in rural India where we sell our products. There are consumers who want packaged beverage at an affordable price. We have been working with our suppliers to get affordable packaging and have got Maaza at the right price point." He said the challenge would be making carbonated drinks affordable for the rural market. At present, these are sold at Rs 8-12 - not affordable for a large swathe of the market. "We need a sustainable model and there are cost constraints. But, we do recognise there are consumers who are not ready to buy at high prices. That's a challenge; we have to innovate in packaging, distribution, transportation and cooling equipment." At present, neither of the two beverage majors - Coke and PepsiCo - has ready-to-drink mainline branded products at Rs 6. Coke had introduced Fanta Fun Taste powder for Rs 5 but that had to be mixed with water. It had also introduced micronutrient powder sachets at Rs 2.50-3. PepsiCo, on the other hand, sells fruit juice powders for Rs 10, besides Tata Glucose (under a JV with Tatas) for Rs 6".

A part of the blame will have to be born by the food safety authorities in the country for making the law so flexible allowing these merchants of ill health to exploit the unwary citizens in the country. Products based on 100% sugar but with flavors latched on to them to imitate real fruits are popular in India because of the hot and sultry climatic conditions prevailing in most regions of the country during major part of the year. But these products at least carry the declaration that they are made without fruit solids. It is the fruit beverages which are dangerous because they do not warn the consumers that the fruit juice content is minuscule in them and to make up for low fruit solids artificial flavors are permitted! It is time that the category of fruit beverage is withdrawn from the statute books altogether. Alternately industry should not be allowed to add external flavors and this will make these products whither away gradually due to less attraction to the consumers. Another interesting aspect of this strategy is to shrink the pack size to bring down the price and enlarge the consumer base thereby increasing the business volume. Here is an example of a beverage pack of 100 ml priced at Rs 6 per 100 ml which really costs to the consumer Rs 60 per liter where as the same product is available in two liter packs at Rs 30 per liter! The poor is really trapped in this price matrix having no choice but to pay a higher unit price because of their lower purchasing capacity. Thus the pack shrinking strategy hits the poor economically as well nutritionally!      

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

SUGAR IN FOODS-THE WRITING ON THE WALL!

Health pundits are becoming increasingly concerned that all efforts to rein in food industry from making high sugar products and persuading consumers to cut down on sugar consumption are proving to be ineffective during the past two decades. From time to time there have been strident voices advocating stringent action against food industry which is raking in billions of dollars by churning out such sugar sweetened products after realizing the weakness of humans to sweet tasting foods. Whether there is any unanimity or not on this issue, excess sugar intake has been unequivocally implicated in many diseases which debilitate human beings reducing the quality of life for millions, with mortality rate progressively climbing up! Here is the latest scientific documentation that seems to justify clamping down on the food industry through coercive policies to restrict added sugar in processed foods. 

"As currently formulated, Coke, Pepsi, and other sugar-based drinks are unsafe for regular human consumption," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Like a slow-acting but ruthlessly efficient bio-weapon, sugar drinks cause obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. The FDA should require the beverage industry to re-engineer their sugary products over several years, making them safer for people to consume, and less conducive to disease." In a 54-page regulatory petition filed today with the FDA, CSPI details the substantial scientific evidence that added sugars, especially in drinks, causes weight gain, obesity, and chronic diseases like diabetes, heart disease, and gout. In particular, a growing number of clinical trials have found that people who are assigned to drink sugary beverages gain more weight than those assigned to drink sugar-free beverages. Other clinical studies found that high-sugar diets increase triglycerides, LDL ("bad") cholesterol, and liver fat. "If one were trying to ensure high rates of obesity, diabetes, or heart disease in a population, one would feed the population large doses of sugary drinks," said Walter Willett, professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. "The evidence is so strong that it is essential that FDA use its authority to make sugary drinks safer." Willett is one of 41 leading scientists and physicians who signed a letter to FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg in support of the petition. Willett and his colleagues have conducted epidemiology studies that strongly link consumption of sugary drinks to obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and gout. Soda and other sugar drinks are the single biggest source of calories in the American diet.Americans, on average, consume between 18 and 23 teaspoons—about 300 to 400 calories worth—of added sugars per day. Teens and young adults consume half again more than the average. About one-fifth of adolescents aged 12 to 18 consume at least 25 percent of their calories from added sugars, according to the government's 2007-2008 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. About 14 million people of all ages consume more than one-third of their calories in the form of added sugars. The FDA classifies high-fructose corn syrup, sucrose, and other sugars as "generally recognized as safe," or "GRAS" in agency parlance. To be GRAS, there must be a scientific consensus that the ingredient is safe at the levels consumed. CSPI's petition contends that the current scientific consensus is that added sugars are unsafe at the levels consumed. The petition asks the FDA to determine what level of added sugars would be safe for use in beverages, and to require those limits to be phased in over several years. The petition did not propose a specific safe level, but notes that several health agencies identified two-and-a-half teaspoons (10 grams) as a reasonable limit in a healthier drink. In 1982 and again in 1988, the FDA committed to undertake a new safety determination if sugar consumption increased, or if new scientific evidence indicated a public health hazard. Both of those conditions have been met, which CSPI says obligates the FDA to act".

If there is a convincing perception that sugar including High Fructose Corn Syrup is becoming a public hazard, governments in any responsible country is duty bound to take pro-active steps to protect its citizens from the consequences of such practices of the industry. While the evidence is clear regarding the ill effects of sugar, what is lacking is the will to restrain the organized industry which seems to have a vice-like grip on the governing class in most of the countries where it has predominance! One cannot but agree with the suggestions in the above critique that upper limits for sugar in foods and beverages must be enforced sooner than later.

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

MANDATORY LIMITS ON "UNHEALTHY" INGREDIENTS-IS IT POSSIBLE?

What is the purpose of the "Front of the Pack Labeling " regulations which are in vogue in most of the countries across the world? The simple answer is to achieve "transparency" in food quality and safety parameters for the benefit of the consumer. The next question is whether it is really effective? Here the answer is yes and no! While the consumer gets a broad insight into the product contained in the pack, for a layman most of the information provided does not make much sense. Besides effectiveness of any law depends on the way it is monitored and implemented and here the governments in many countries have failed their citizens. There might be many reasons for this situation but it is a reality one must face. Nutrition labeling is often touted as a successful way for consumer education and improvement of consumer health. This is at best a long shot based on the perception that "some thing is better than nothing"! In countries where literacy levels are high such labeling practices may be more relevant and naturally consumers there are demanding more transparency. Latest in this saga is the demand by some experts to regulate the industry with statutory limits being imposed for "bad" nutrients so that only healthy foods are marketed. The demand by Australian Heart Foundation based on some scientific and ground realities to force the industry to make only healthy foods is contained in the following report. 

The National Heart Foundation of Australia is today calling on the Australian Government to enforce mandatory nutrition targets for the food industry to make our processed foods healthier. The call follows the release of the Heart Foundation's new paper, Effectiveness of food reformulation as a strategy to improve population health, which reveals: * removing 15-25% of the salt in Australia's processed foods over 10 years, could avert 5,800-9,700 heart attacks and 4,900-8,200 strokes every year a mandatory approach to salt reformulation is twice as cost effective and averts twice the burden of disease compared to a voluntary approach even a modest salt reduction (1-3grams per day) in the population's diet is shown to have potential health benefits. Heart Foundation CEO, Dr Lyn Roberts, said excess salt, saturated fat and trans fats found in processed foods were causing an unnecessary national heart health crisis. "We know processed foods are now a large part of the Australian diet and often contain hidden and excessive amounts of salt, saturated fat, trans fat and energy," Dr Roberts said. Government enforced mandatory targets for all processed food products would be far more transparent and effective at improving health than the voluntary opt-in approach we've seen to date. "Setting maximum levels of unhealthy ingredients in all processed foods will ensure food manufacturers make their products healthier, making a huge difference to our nation's health." Reformulating current and new processed foods involves manufacturers reducing the unhealthy ingredients such as salt, saturated fat and trans fats in their products and increasing the healthy nutrients such as dietary fibre, wholegrains, fruit, vegetables and unsaturated fats.

More interesting is another demand that food products churned out by the industry must be redesigned to enrich them with healthy ingredients like dietary fiber, unsaturated fatty acids, fruits, vegetables etc. How far the authorities in that country will go to accommodate this demand depends on consumer pressure. Also to be borne in mind is whether it is technically feasible to design products to meet the new standards which may be evolved for more healthy and less risky foods in future. Voluntary action being preferred by the industry may be effective to a limited extent as there might be many black sheep among them not adhering to such guidelines. Therefore Governments have the responsibility to force the industry to change its outlook for the benefit of their citizens. Best way to achieve the objective is to form a consortium of government, industry, consumer activists, health experts and food technologists to advice the authorities regarding the standards that are feasible and achievable on a long term basis.

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

SUGAR BY ANY NAME IS SUGAR!-A NEW STRATEGY FOR PEDDLING SUGAR

Industry's ways to fob of the consumer are mind boggling indeed! After the universal front of the pack labeling practices were introduced a few years ago, it was no more possible for the manufacturers to hide what each product contains in terms of its ingredients and nutrients. At least this was the thinking of the policy makers. This was supposed to have ushered in an era of transparency the consumers could feel comfortable. However those who designed the labeling policies did not reckon with the ingenuity of an industry which has least concern for consumer well being and more interested in boosting their financial health. There are hundreds of instances where industry uses devious ways to mislead the consumer, some contravening the rules and others using loopholes in the statute book. Here is a latest case of mislabeling of a product, though legally it might be difficult to take the manufacturer to task. It concerns suppressing the information regarding the sugar ingredient in a product by using the scientific alternative terminology that can confuse an ordinary consumer to no end. Here is a take on this latest labeling "circus".

"While the name thing may sound like mere semantics, the stakes for the food industry are actually pretty high. FDA issued a guidance three years ago suggesting that manufacturers shouldn't use the term evaporated cane juice to describe sweeteners made from sugar cane syrup because the term hides the fact that ultimately it's sugar. Of course, because it's a guidance, and a draft one at that, the agency technically can't enforce it. Earlier this year, northern Californian Katie Kane sued the yogurt company Chobani in federal court, claiming its use of the term "evaporated cane juice" misled her into buying the company's Greek yogurt. Her class-action suit is seeking unspecified damages, and she relies heavily on FDA's guidance in her argument. We contacted Chobani. It wouldn't comment on why it uses the term "evaporated cane juice" instead of sugar. But a Chobani spokesperson told The Salt in an email that its labels are not misleading and that it plans to "vigorously defend" itself against Kane's charges. While some folks appear to be distancing themselves from the name "sugar," corn refiners have been on a longstanding quest to put on the sugar mantle. Alas, for them, the FDA ruled earlier this year that the makers of high fructose corn syrup could not change the name of their product to corn sugar. Either way, it might be best to keep in mind a version of the famous Shakespeare line: Sugar by any other name tastes just as sweet — and has just as many calories".

It is true that cane sugar is made from sugarcane by extracting the juice, cleaning it up, concentration and crystallization leaving behind the molasses. Technically evaporated cane juice and a sugar syrup has a vital difference in that the former contains all the natural ingredients which include minerals, vitamins, phytochemicals and waxy substances which were originally present in the cane. But a larger question is whether the manufacturer has really used the natural concentrate which has a characteristic brown color and chlorophyll small, making it an untenable ingredient in a product with snow white color! In the statute book there is no additive by name evaporated sugar cane juice and therefore no standards of identity for such an ingredient. For those watching out for sugar containing products it can be misleading as they may not be aware that the product contains sugar. If such leeway is given to industry next move may be to use the expression "extracted juice from peanut" in place of peanut oil to hide the fact the product contains fat! It will be interesting to watch the outcome of the legal proceedings against the industry which camouflaged the use of sugar by expressing the term evaporated sugar cane juice.

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

ENERGY DRINKS UNDER THE SCANNER-WHAT IS ITS TRUE WORTH?

During the last few years carbonated soft drinks and other sugary beverages have seen their market progressively shrinking or the growth rate very disappointing. The most pressing issue vis-a-vis their consumption is the presence of High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) which was linked to development of obesity and health disorders, though no clinching evidence to support this accusation has surfaced yet. Whether it is HFCS or natural sugar, nutritive sweeteners if consumed abundantly can cause undesirable health consequences against which consumers need to be cautious. The very basis of the policy of New York civic authorities to ban sale of over sized sugary beverages is based on the perception that citizens must be restrained at least indirectly from over consuming these "fattening" drinks. Another contentious issue is presence of caffeine in some products like Cola beverages which is claimed to be an intoxicant that can cause damage to children and pregnant women folks. The new breed of drinks being marketed by the Energy Drinks sub-sector of beverage industry has escaped the regulatory regime, especially with regard to caffeine and some of the other ingredients used and its surprising growth is some what a mystery. While the caffeine content is about 3 times more in Energy Drinks as compared to that in soft drinks, the products are usually supplemented with Taurine and B-vitamins and the target consumers are athletes and sports persons, obviously suggesting that energy drinks are helpful in restoring energy and boosting the performance. Though these drinks were having a free run without being challenged by the food safety authorities during the last few years, they are now coming under the scanner after the reported death of a girl due to arrhythmic heart failure after consuming energy drink. Here is a take on these emerging developments.

Energy drinks remain a tiny part of the carbonated soft drinks market, representing just 3.3 percent of sales volume, according to the industry tracker Beverage Digest. But while soda consumption has flagged in recent years, energy drinks are growing by leaps and bounds. Last year, sales volume for energy drinks rose by nearly 17 percent, with the top three companies - Monster, Red Bull and Rockstar - each logging double-digit gains, according to Beverage Digest. The drinks are often marketed at sporting events such as surfing and skateboarding, popular among younger people. The levels of caffeine in the drinks have raised worries. Although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration caps the amount of caffeine in soda to 0.02 percent, there is no such limit for energy drinks. "The FDA could easily say energy drinks are soft drinks," said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which advocates for food safety. But he noted that the FDA cap was established about 60 years ago, long before energy drinks came to the market. In general, the level of caffeine in energy drinks (160 milligrams in 16 ounces) is about half that in the same amount of brewed Starbucks coffee (320 milligrams), according to CSPI. But compared with soda such as Coca-Cola,energy drinks have more than three times as much caffeine. That could be problematic for younger consumers who may guzzle them without realizing how much caffeine they're consuming, Jacobson said. The other risk is that kids would drink it at parties along with alcohol, he said. As for the other ingredients energy drinks often tout - such as taurine or B vitamins - Jacobson said it's mostly for marketing purposes and that they serve no real function. "They say it serves as a detoxifying agent or that it improves mental performance," he said. "That's malarkey."

Justification for marketing such drinks is based on the fact that brewed coffee provides much more caffeine per drink compared to that ingested through energy drink. What makes the energy rinks more risky is that the major target group is youngsters who rarely take coffee and volume of energy drink consumed tends to be high frequently. Total quantity of caffeine consumed via energy drink could be significantly higher, especially during sports events and athletic gatherings and therefore some sort of regulation needs to be put in place sooner than later. Also claims made because of addition of Taurine and B-vitamins do not make any sense, as they are not based on science or clinical evidence.

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

CARBONATED LASSI-WHAT IS THE LOGIC?

Yogurt is a product universally liked and many variations of yogurt have established a niche market in western countries. Traditionally curd, made and consumed in India for centuries is a culinary item served during meals in the southern part of India for mixing with rice as a last course of a meal. In contrast people in northern parts of the country consume curd after beating with sugar or salt, called Lassi as a refreshing beverage. Some times Lassi is flavored with aromatic essences for making it more tasty. The salted version of Lassi has the advantages of a reduced calorie count. Blends of fruit pieces or pulps preserved for a few days through modern technology are very popular among kids in the West and this approach is considered a desirable one to attract children to these products, claimed to be rich in pro and pre biotics with many health attributes. Frozen yogurt is another version that is widely accepted as a dessert in place of ice cream products which are increasingly being shunned due to high sugar and fat contents. If recent reports regarding the development of a carbonated Lassi are true, another hitherto untried version of this product may be available one day to the consumers. Here are some details about such a product reported from a famed dairy research organization in India.

It's a perfect healthy carbonated drink for those who want to avoid heavy calories and sugar," Tomar said.After four years of intense research, scientists at the National Dairy Research Institute ( NDRI) in Haryana have discovered a bacteria stain, Leuconostoc Ln 27, which will be used to manufacture carbonated sweet lassi, just like the soft drinks. "Efforts are on to get the process of preparation of the beverage patented, since patent of organisms is not allowed in India," Sudhir Tomar, senior scientist at the Dairy Microbiology Division, NDRI, told Deccan Herald on Tuesday. "The sweetened carbonated Lassi will be 35 per cent less in calories and 65 per cent low in sugar and sans any artificial sweetener," he added. "The bacteria is unique in its phenomenal ability to release a very high level of natural sweetener, mannitol, when it reacts with sugar in curd. It turns the sweet mixture into a very high value mannitol that preserves the sweetness and is low in sugar content as well. Carbon dioxide is naturally released during the process, which adds fizz," Tomar said. The process took nearly four years, during which nearly 200 plant and animal samples were examined. The research team comprised Falguni Patra, A K Singh and Rameshwar Singh. The NDRI plans to sell the patented technology to a company interested in manufacturing the lassi in the country.  Officials at the NDRI said the carbonated lassi would be pitched as a substitute for soft drinks and is likely to appeal to children and teenagers. 

Drinks like Doogh, Ayran, Labban etc popular in Iran, Afghanistan, Turkey and other countries are also basically curd preparations with minor variations in composition and preparation mode. Basically Lactic acid bacteria belonging to several species have the capacity to convert Lactose present in the milk to lactic acid and the final texture and taste are influenced by the make up of the seeding culture used for fermentation. Casein and other proteins present in milk naturally get precipitated as the acidity develops. The carbonated Lassi, the new product developed in India apparently used a Leuconostoc strain isolated from indigenous sources and its uniqueness lies in generating sweet Mannitol imparting natural sweetness, avoiding too much loading with sucrose as done during preparation of traditional Lassi products. Another unusual feature is that the product has in situ generated CO2 in stead of the high pressure carbonation method used by the fizz drink industry. How far the product can be called carbonated is not sure because traditional CO2 infusion creates pressure as high as four atmosphere. Probably this product is more akin to Champagne though it is not clear regarding the CO2 pressure developed. It will be interesting to see the organoleptic experience of drinking a carbonated product with such high levels of suspended solids and that it self is exciting!  

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

POLICY PARALYSIS-IMPACT ON FARM FRONT

The present government in India is being criticized by many dispassionate observers for not taking right decisions at right time on many issues leading to distortions in the development of the country. This situation often described as "policy paralysis" can have long term consequences on the orderly progress of the nation affecting the lives of the 1.2 billion plus people inhabiting the country. There is no unanimity within the government itself as reflected by the divergent views expressed by the ministers on many issues that concern the nation. Latest to come to the fore is regarding the export policy which is causing lot of heart burns among some sections of farming community. Whether it is the wheat, sugar or cotton, government invariably takes long time to decide what to do with the surpluses putting every body involved in unnecessary suspense, some time causing economic losses in the process.  Recent open letter by the Agri Minister to the Prime Minister criticizing some of his own colleagues is a classical example of such a policy paralysis whereas what is needed is a dynamism to address the issue promptly before any damage is done. Here is a take on this episode which could have been avoided if there is a vibrant government sensitive to the needs of the country. 

"Irked by curbs on milk, cotton and sugar exports, Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar has shot off a letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stating that the government's policies are hurting farmers who are being asked to subsidise the industry. Pawar wrote to the Prime Minister yesterday, a day after group of ministers disallowed cotton export beyond 13 million bales for the current marketing year. He strongly criticised Food Ministry headed by KV Thomas and the Textile Ministry under the charge of Anand Sharma for the policies which are "ambivalent" and go against farmers. Describing restriction on cotton exports as "retrograde", the NCP chief said: "Indian cotton farmers should not be asked to bear the burden of subsidising the textile mills. "Compromising the interest of small cotton farmers to benefit the textile magnates is indeed a travesty of justice. Moreover, it defies logic to permit the consumer of cotton (textile industry) to dictate terms to cotton producer...". Similarly, he said the "negative approach" of the Food Department in allowing sugar exports has led to heavy losses in export earnings which could have been used to clear cane arrears to farmers that have crossed Rs8,000 crore. Pawar told the Prime Minister, "On numerous occasions I have discussed with you the need to have farmer-centric agriculture policy...On each of these occasions, I have found you in consonance with these ideas. "However, despite this our government has time and again taken decision which go against the interest of the farming community and adversely impacts its growth and stability". High input cost and low realisation from his produce has pushed the farmer into a corner where he fights for his survival, he said, underscoring the need for a free trade regime to ensure a remunerative prices to farmers".

Whether farmer or consumer is supreme is a question that must be haunting the government as any action taken in agricultural front should be equitable to both. Inordinately high prices paid to the farmer can have negative consequences on the consumer in the form of high food inflation making the lives of many poor citizens miserable. Similarly unduly favoring the consumers by depressing the prices of agri commodities will have disastrous impact on the agri front affecting the production and availability adversely. Free trade regime as is being talked about is ideal but if agri production is affected by drought or other reasons, the market conditions can get distorted because of mismatch between demand and supply. Whether any responsible government in India which depends on rain Gods too frequently to come up with normal agri production can adopt such a model is doubtful. Unless a stable and dynamic export policy regime is put in place both farmers and consumers are bound to suffer. When taking decisions the impact of the same on the domestic front should not be ignored. While cotton and sugar are commodities which can be left to the free market forces, more care is needed when it comes to milk and food grains, prices of which in the domestic market should not be allowed to be distorted due to excessive exports.  

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