The Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at the University of Connecticut has a new study out on the Howard County Unsweetened campaign.

The study’s key findings:

• Sales of sugar-sweetened soda declined nearly 20 percent
• Sales of 100 percent juice fell 15 percent
• Sales of fruit drinks with added sugars fell a little more than 15 percent

The study attributes the success of the campaign to its policy work:

• Eliminating sugary drinks in school vending machines
• Increasing access to water in schools
• Getting a state law passed to improve healthy drinks in childcare centers
• Getting a state law passed to make healthier drinks available on government sites
• Engaging nearly 50 community organizations to offer healthier drinks

It also notes community-wide public health outreach efforts:

• TV ads, social media messages, and online ads
• Direct dissemination of public health information at community and athletic events, local swimming pools, and health fairs
• Training of healthcare professionals

This was a big effort.  Big efforts pay off.

The documents

• The study
• The editor’s comment

The FDA warns pet owners not to feed their pets any of these foods because of risk of pentobarbital contamination (this seems like a really good idea).

• Evanger’s Hunk of Beef: 20109
• Evanger’s Braised Beef: 20107
• Against the Grain Pulled Beef: 80001

The products have expiration dates of December 2019-January 2021.

The FDA explains:

The FDA began investigating Evanger’s Dog and Cat Food Company Inc. when it learned about five dogs in a single household that suffered acute neurological symptoms shortly after eating the product. One dog was euthanized after secondary complications, and three others recovered after receiving veterinary care. One of the dogs treated remains on seizure medication, and the fifth dog that ate the least amount of food recovered with time.

The stomach contents of the deceased dog and an open can of the product were tested by an FDA Veterinary Laboratory Investigation and Response Network lab, and unopened cans of the product from the pet owner and retailer that sold the products (from the same production lot), were tested by FDA’s lab. All of the samples tested positive for pentobarbital.

In a classic example of how NOT to instill confidence among customers in your products, Evangers’ is fighting the FDA’s assertions about how it sources ingredients.

I highly recommend working with the FDA to clean up food safety problems.  Really, that is a much better approach.

Pet food buyers: There are plenty of pet food brands that do not contain pentobarbital (a euthanasia drug).

Give Evangers’ a pass until all this gets straightened out.

Sheldon Krimsky of Tufts University and Tim Schwab of Food and Water Watch have done an analysis of financial conflicts of interest among members of the committee that produced a large report on agricultural biotechnology last year.  Their paper (and the report) are open access so you can read them both and decide for yourself whether you think Krimsky and Schwab are being fair.

Academics’ financial ties to companies with an interest in the outcome of their work are a well established problem because such ties are known to influence the results and interpretation of research as well as the opinions of advisory committee members—even though the recipients of corporate gifts (even small ones) are unaware of the influence , had no intention of being influenced, and deny that such influence exists.

The Academies’ GMO report stated that none of the 20 committee members had financial ties to the GMO industry.

But these investigators found evidence of several kinds of undisclosed ties among six of the 20 members:

• Holds patents
• Holds equity
• Serves on company advisory committee
• Receives research funding
• Employed by company or non-profit funded by company
• Consults for company

The authors make it clear that these sorts of financial ties ought to have been disclosed.  I agree.

But here’s the National Academies’ in-denial response to the paper.  My translation: “we did everything right and this is a witch hunt.”

No you did not do everything right.  Disclosure should be rigorous, given the level of passion involved in views of GMOs and the need for trust in Academy reports.

And no, this is not a witch hunt.  This is a call for full disclosure.

Here is another one of FoodNavigator-USA’s Special Editions, meaning collections of its articles on specific topics written mostly from the perspective of food beverage companies.  This one is on trends in commercial beverages, and is highly relevant to food politics.

Special Edition: Beverage trendwatching

Few sections of the store are as dynamic as the beverage aisles. Meanwhile, the pressure to ‘clean up’ labels continues unabated. But how can we distinguish passing fads from sustainable trends? And who are the entrepreneurial companies driving innovation in this category?

• Experts weigh in on what the next ‘it’ beverage will be as sales for the once all supreme soda slow: For years, carbonated soft drinks were the go-to choice for Americans to quench their thirst and boost their energy, but in recent years the category has begun to falter – creating an opening for a bevy of innovative beverage brands to emerge, according to industry research. .. Read
• Bone broth sales more than tripled in 2016, albeit off a very small base: The bone broth category (shelf-stable and refrigerated) is pretty small in the scheme of things, but it’s growing rapidly, with US retail sales more than tripling to $19.7m in the 52 weeks to Jan 22,* fueled by a small but highly engaged set of health conscious consumers, Paleo enthusiasts and Whole30 fans, says one fast-growing player… Read
• AQUAhydrate targets ‘everyday warriors’ as premium pH segment continues to grow: Celebrity-backed AQUAhydrate has doubled its distribution over the past 18 months from around 30,000 to 60,000 outlets by appealing to a broad set of ‘everyday warriors’ it claims are seeking out more premium products and aspirational brands in the bottled water set… Read
• LIVE Beverages Founder: ‘Drinking vinegars are where kombucha was 4 years ago’: LIVE Beverages founder and CEO Trevor Ross sees great potential for the drinking vinegar category. He started the brand by launching a line of kombucha back in 2013, what he saw would “become a pretty crowded category.”.. Read
• The Dairy Aisle: La Colombe’s clever strategy to stand out in the crowded cold coffee category: Around 80% of La Colombe’s Draft Latte product is milk, so why not place it in the dairy section? That’s what ran through the mind of EVP of sales Kyle O’Brien, and retailers are going with it… Read
• Could molecular hydrogen infused water carve a niche in the functional beverages category?  In regular water, hydrogen is bound to oxygen (H2O) making it “difficult for our bodies to enjoy the [antioxidant/anti-inflammatory] benefits of hydrogen,” claims the company behind Hfactor, which contends that dissolving hydrogen gas into water via a patent-pending process enables Hfactor to deliver a variety of potential health benefits… Watch now
• Drinking vinegar could be the next kombucha if it can overcome four major hurdles: While most Americans remain unfamiliar with drinking vinegar, the category is gaining traction and could be the next kombucha if manufacturers work together to promote its many benefits and uses, according to one segment player. .. Read
• State bills call for warnings about risks associated with synthetic dyes & sugar-sweetened beverages
• Two California state senate bills would mandate controversial warnings on some foods and beverages, and if enacted could start a domino effect among other like-minded states, potentially creating a patchwork of laws and compliance headache for national brands… Read
• Packaging and sweeteners have most room for innovation, says Imbibe beverage expert: What does it mean to innovate in the beverage space? We speak with a beverage trends expert to find out more… Read
• Sparkling ICE unveils $37m ad campaign, queries soda tax inconsistencies: ‘It’s a mess’: Talking Rain Beverage Co has unveiled a $37m national ad campaign that president Kevin Klock says will give Sparkling ICE a stronger brand identity – something it has historically lacked, despite its meteoric growth (estimated retail sales have surged from around $10m in 2011 to well over $600m today)… Read
• Post Mexico’s sugar-sweetened beverage tax, purchases of levied beverages have fallen 7.6%, says study: Mexico’s sugar tax may have influenced beverage purchase decisions of Mexican households in urban areas, according to a follow up study by University of North Carolina Chapel Hill researchers… Read
• Plant-based water sales predicted to double by 2020: The trend for healthy hydration is driving growth in plant-based waters, with global sales growing 21% in 2016 to reach sales of more than $2.7bn… Read
• Ag Committee weighs whether SNAP should pay for sugary drinks: Prohibiting the purchase of sugar-sweetened beverages and other “unhealthy” foods and beverages with SNAP benefits, also known as food stamps, likely would not discourage their consumption, but would be costly and difficult for retailers to implement, industry stakeholders argued on Capitol Hill last week. .. Read
• Soup-To-Nuts Podcast: Countering the impact of climate change on coffee: Every year more people wake up to coffee or use it to fuel their day, but according to a comprehensive report recently published by the Climate Institute. this early morning ritual, and everything that goes into making it possible, face significant threats from climate change. .. Listen now

Martha Hodgkins, ed.  Letters to a Young Farmer: On Food, Farming, and Our Future.  Princeton Architectural Press, 2017.

This publication is from the Stone Barns Center for Food & Agriculture.  Its executive director, Jill Isenbarger, explains what it is:

Letters to a Young Farmer, written by some of the most influential farmers, writers, leaders, and entrepreneurs of our time, offers advice, observations, gratitude, and a measure of harsh reality.  Farming is a difficult endeavor and an arduous undertaking at best, yet farming remains one of the most important, tangible, and meaningful things one can do to improve human and environmental health and community well-being.  And it is vital to our future.

The book contains 36 letters, all inspiring.  One of them is mine (you can read it here).

Yes, says Martin Tobias’s must-read commentary in The Lancet.

The commentary cites a paper in the same issue arguing that low social rank, meaning “powerless to determine your own destiny, deprived of material resources, and limited in the opportunities open to you,” has a profound effect on lifestyle and life chances.  Its authors base these views on a study of 1·7 million adults followed up for mortality (all cause and by cause) for an average of 13 years.

Even with use of a crude categorisation of social rank based on occupation (professional, intermediate, and unskilled), the study was able to quantify the social gradient in mortality: an approximately 20% increase in risk per unit decrease in rank.

Tobias’ commentary recommends evidence-based strategies to minimize the impact of social hierarchy on health:

I’ve been asked to comment on the recent presidential election held by the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND—formerly the American Dietetic Association).

I’m not a member of the Academy, but I followed this election with great interest because one of the candidates (who ultimately lost) is a consultant for food companies but did not say so.

A member of the Academy called for transparency and posted the names of the candidate’s clients on Twitter.  For this, she was severely criticized.

The only point at issue here is the need for disclosure.  Whether the lack of disclosure cost the candidate the election is hard to say.

Conflicts of interest caused by financial relationships with food companies are a big issue in the Academy, which has been struggling hard to develop policies that will protect it from conflicts of interest.

Andy Bellatti, of Dietitians for Professional Responsibility, had three questions for the candidates:

• What are your thoughts on possible outreach strategies to bring dietitians who are currently not members of the Academy back into the organization?
• How would you like to see the current conversation on corporate sponsorship continue over the next year?
• What would you like to say to dietitian colleagues who want to see more robust criteria around exhibitor presence and session sponsorship at FNCE?

Unfortunately, neither candidate responded to them.  Their answers would have been instructive.

Much has been written about the politics of this particular election, all of it worth reading.

• Ninjas for Health:  Coke is running for president of the National Academy of Nutrition & Dietetics
• Mic.com:  Leaked emails reveal largest group of dietitians wants to hide ties to Big Soda
• Andy Bellatti:   The Academy’s new president-elect & reflections on this recent election
• Munchies Vice Media: America’s largest group of dietitians almost run by Big Soda

Let’s all give thanks to Philip Brasher who is writing a series of articles on the 2018 farm bill for Agri-Pulse.

If you are curious—and brave enough—to dive into this incredibly important but overwhelmingly detailed and phenomenally politicized piece of legislation (my take on the farm bill is here) , here is the place to start.

He’s done three so far:

• Lesson #1: Every farm bill is unique – the last one was a doozy
• Lesson #2: The Farm Bill ‘Math’ is complicated and ever-changing
• Lesson #3: Regional divides make writing a farm bill more of a gamble

More to come.  Don’t miss them.

In the meantime, just to get you started on the politics, literally hundreds of farm groups signed a letter to Congress urging it not to cut farm programs.

The undersigned organizations, representing America’s agriculture, nutrition, conservation, rural development, finance, forestry, energy, trade, local government, plant/animal health, agricultural sciences and veterinary medicine, labor, outdoor recreation, equipment manufacturing, cooperatives, hunters, anglers and crop insurance sectors, strongly urge you to reject calls for additional cuts to policies within the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry or the House Committee on Agriculture.

During consideration of the 2014 Farm Bill, the Agriculture Committees made the difficult choices necessary to deliver a bipartisan bill. Budget cuts made in that bill should be recognized as Agriculture’s contribution to deficit reduction. We know the committees will once again face challenging budgetary and policy choices in the development of the 2018 Farm Bill. That is why it is so important you ensure the committee process for the farm bill can proceed with some budget flexibility.

I’ll be following this as best I can.  Stay tuned.