The Hartman Group has a handy Infographic on the effects of front-of-package labels on purchasing patterns. I haven’t seen this summarized so nicely anywhere else.
And here’s the whole thing. It would make a great poster, no?
Too small to read? Try this excerpt:
Nonrenewals of membership in the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA) are adding up (see my previous post on this). Helena Bottemiller Evich at Politico is keeping score (this may be behind a paywall):
The GMA has long behaved as if the food movement doesn’t exist and its industry can continue to take consumer-unfriendly positions on food issues that the public cares about—with no consequences.
Politico quotes a spokesman for the GMA:
GMA and its board are continuing our work to build the new GMA for the future to meet the needs of long-time and new member companies and of consumers…The food industry is facing significant disruption and is evolving — and so is GMA. We all will continue to evolve and change at an even faster pace.
I have some suggestions for this evolution:
Adrienne Rose Bitar. Diet and the Disease of Civilization. Rutgers University Press, 2017.
I did a blurb for this one:
Bitar’s fascinating thesis is that diet books are ways to understand contemporary social and political movements. Whether or not you agree with her provocative arguments, they are well worth reading.
I also took some extra notes because the publisher wanted a particularly short blurb. As you might suspect from my brief comment, I have some quibbles with some of Bitar’s arguments, but the book is interesting, well written, and worth a look.
Bitar deals with four categories of diet books: Paleolithic, faith-based, South Seas paradise, and detox (this last category strangely includes Michael Pollan’s and my work).
Here’s a sample from the chapter I thought strongest, the one on Paleolithic diets. It refers to classic images of man arising from apes, and then degenerating into obesity.
These images suggest what is much more explicit in the text—that the diet is a story about humanity, about evolution, about civilization and dis-mankind. The body of the individual dieter is situated in a long, deep history of mankind. The dieter is biologically indebted to the Paleolithic Era and, in turn, the coming generations will be indebted to him. Everyday body practices of the individual—eating, sleeping, walking—are elevated to symbols of mankind’s ascent or descent, failures or triumph, in the grand narrative of progress (p. 41).
Is nothing in nutrition safe from congressional intervention?
The American Society for Nutrition has a useful policy newsletter that ran an item that caught my attention:
DRI Committee Becomes Political: Many Republican members of the House Appropriations Subcommittees on Agriculture and Labor and Human Services two House Appropriations Committee subcommittees sent a letter December 5, 2017 to the President of the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine raising concerns about the composition of the ad hoc Committee to review the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) for Sodium and Potassium, which was announced October 31, 2017. The letter shares concerns including “At least six of the 12 proposed members have published multiple papers or have been quoted in the press expressing their unequivocal view that current sodium intake is excessive, or publicly dismissed science that runs counter to this view….”
The DRIs are standards for daily intake of nutrients. The ones for sodium and potassium were last updated in 2005.
I don’t think anyone thinks that potassium intake is debatable, but sodium is hugely controversial. Doctors generally advise reductions in sodium intake as a means to prevent high blood pressure. Some think sodium reduction unnecessary or potentially harmful.
I cannot imagine that anyone appointed to this committee lacks an opinion. The point of the deliberations is, or ought to be, to review the research and try to come to some consensus about what the issues are and what to do about them.
Its best if Congress stays out of this. I wonder which lobbying group or groups got to these members.
FERN’s Ag Insider reports: USDA’s top lawyer says politics has nothing to do with the recent reassignment of senior officers.
Of course it doesn’t.
Stephen Vaden, the former Trump transition official now serving as the USDA’s interim chief lawyer, says politics played no part in the reassignment of 13 of the department’s top-rank and highest-paid civil servants since the new administration took office. Four of the career employees retired rather than accept the new posts. “All reassignments were based on organizational need,” said Vaden in a seven-page letter released within hours of a request from all 10 Democrats on the Senate Agriculture Committee for information about the personnel moves.
Does he really think anyone believes this?
Statements from USDA these days are easily interpreted. They mean the opposite.
Let’s start with the report issued by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General (OIG). Now that the Food Safety Modernization Act gave the FDA the authority to issue recalls of unsafe food, the OIG wanted to know how it was using that authority. OIG’s opinion:
FDA did not always have an efficient and effective food-recall process that ensured the safety of the Nation’s food supply. We identified deficiencies in FDA’s oversight of recall initiation, monitoring of recalls, and the recall information captured and maintained in FDA’s electronic recall data system, the Recall Enterprise System (RES). Specifically, we found that FDA could not always ensure that firms initiated recalls promptly and that FDA did not always
(1) evaluate health hazards in a timely manner,
(2) issue audit check assignments at the appropriate level, (
3) complete audit checks in accordance with its procedures,
(4) collect timely and complete status reports from firms that have issued recalls,
(5) track key recall data in the RES, and (6) maintain accurate recall data in the RES.
FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb responded to the OIG report.
The FDA has authority to act in a variety of ways when it is made aware of an unsafe food product. But often the fastest and most efficient way to ensure unsafe foods are recalled quickly is by working directly with the involved companies while simultaneously providing the public with timely, accurate information that they can act on….Fortunately, most companies are cooperative and rapidly initiate a voluntary recall of a hazardous food product. On average, the recall occurs within four calendar days of the problem being discovered…Sometimes the recall process does not work as well as we’d like.’
In that response, he explains that the FDA has more work to do. He also says so on Twitter.
Politico’s Dan Diamond interviewed Gottlieb last week. As Politico Morning Agriculture puts it, “Pour coffee & listen here” to the interview.
In the meantime, CSPI and other food-safety advocacy groups are asking the FDA to reveal the names of retailers that are selling recalled products. What they—and food safety lawyer Bill Marler—are also arguing is that the FDA needs to release the names of retailers who are selling recalled goods as a measure to help consumers protect themselves. The FDA appears to consider this information proprietary. If so, it is putting business profits above public health and should rethink that policy.
As the Washington Post puts it, the FDA’s interpretation
differs from that of other agencies in the federal food safety system, an overlapping and often illogical network of regulatory fiefdoms. The system, which is responsible for keeping food free of bacteria and other pathogens, frequently has to weigh the very real interests of private food companies against potential risks to the public. In the case of releasing retailer lists during major outbreaks, the FDA has historically sided with business, ruling that such lists constitute “confidential commercial information” and thus should not be available for public consumption.
Documents
At last some good news: New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo has proposed a “No Student Goes Hungry” program.
It has five components:
Advocates are thrilled; a coalition of 70 organizations issued a statement supporting the proposal.
This, of course is just a proposal. The New York State legislature still has to pass it.
But it is a great proposal, deserving of enthusiastic support. New York residents: if you agree with the proposals, write your representatives and say so. Now.
How?
The Institute of Food Technology publishes a newsletter. IIts December 27 issue provides a roundup of food-trend predictions from a bunch of sources.
I’ve picked out a few examples from among the long lists.
The editors of Food Technology: Animal Welfare Versus Price: The stigma of conventionally produced animal products will decrease as consumers realize that they cannot or will not absorb the higher costs associated with “humanely raised” beef, poultry, and pork. —Toni Tarver, Senior Technical Editor
McCormick: Handheld Flavor Fusion: Take to the streets for the latest fusing of global cuisines. Carts, trucks, and food halls are merging high-flavor fillings with unique crepes, buns, and breads for loaded street fare you eat with your hands. Arepas are a taco-sandwich hybrid made from crispy corn cakes stuffed with sliced meat, veggies, and spicy tzatziki sauce.
Firmenich has announced fig as “Flavor of the Year” for 2018 based on the growing appeal for this healthy and fruity flavor worldwide. Long touted for its culinary uses as well as its health benefits—including its high fiber content and a variety of essential minerals such as magnesium, manganese, calcium, and potassium—fig has surged in popularity in recent years.
Innova Market Insights: the global market for dairy alternative drinks is expected to reach $16.3 billion in 2018, up dramatically from $7.4 billion in 2010….As consumers become more concerned about naturalness and minimal processing techniques, the industry is reviving traditional processes such as fermented foods and cold brew tea and coffee, alongside the development of new ones.
Whole Foods: Because powders are so easy to incorporate, they’ve found their way into lattés, smoothies, nutrition bars, soups, and baked goods. For an energy boost or an alternative to coffee, powders like matcha, maca root, and cacao are showing up in mugs everywhere. Smoothie fans are raising a glass to powders like spirulina, kale, herbs, and roots. Even protein powders have evolved beyond bodybuilders to pack in new nutrients like skin- and hair-enhancing collagen.
Mintel: Concerns over safe packaging disposal will increasingly color consumers’ perceptions of different packaging types, and impact shopper purchase decisions. While collecting waste plastic from the sea to recycle into new packaging can raise consumer awareness, it won’t solve the problem. In order to keep plastic out of the sea, a renewed effort toward the circular economy is needed to keep packaging material in use.
National Restaurant Association: According to the survey, menu trends that will be heating up in 2018 include donuts with non-traditional filling, ethnic-inspired kids’ dishes, farm/estate-branded items, and heritage-breed meats. Trends that are cooling down include artisan cheeses, heirloom fruits and vegetables, and house-made charcuterie.
Sterling Rice Group: Moringa is the Thinga: Consumers just can’t get enough of the green, which is why we predict that moringa—a superfood derived from the dried leaves of the “tree of life”—will be popular in 2018 and beyond. With more protein, fiber, calcium, and vitamins than matcha, watch for moringa to become the next matcha or golden milk.
CCD Innovation: Cannabis Cuisine: Ready or not, modern and artisan THC- and CBD-enhanced cuisine goes beyond brownies in 2018 thanks to “potrepreneurs” at all levels.
Grubhub: 10 dishes expected to rise in popularity in 2018 (based on orders in 2017):
I knew you would want to know.
