Once again I am indebted to Bill Marler for keeping me informed about items related to food safety: Publisher’s Platform: The House Appropriations Committee Directs the FDA to Restructure – will it be Ignored? 

He points to this item on page 79 of the House Agriculture Appropriations bill.

I’ve written about problems with the FDA’s oversight of food and food safety previously (see this for example).

Food has always been a stepchild at the FDA, getting much less attention than drugs or medical devices.  When I was on the FDA’s Food Advisory Committee in the early 1990s, the FDA seemed to be trying to do better but that committee did not last long.  In any case, we were not advising the FDA on what it was proposing to do; we were giving the FDA a notion of the response to decisions it had already made.

What’s needed now is to unite the three units of FDA that deal with food: the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, the Center for Veterinary Medicine’s food oversight programs, and the office that overseed food regulations.

And bring back the Foods Advisory Committee and listen to its advice.

The FDA commissioned a report on what it should do (see Reagan-Udall Foundation report and my comments on it).

What will happen now?  As Bill Marler puts it, “Grab the popcorn.”

Here’s what the FDA says it’s doing (thanks to Jerry Hagstrom’s Hagstrom Report for the links)

• FDA — Proposed Human Foods Program Organization Chart 
• Updates to FDA Proposal to Unify Human Foods Program / Create New ORA Model
• Proposed Office of Regulatory Affairs Organization Chart

This does some of what’s needed but the organization charts still look complicated, and the more complicated an organization chart, the least likely it is to work.

Will this work?  Bill Marler says it might.  Grab the popcorn indeed.

Last week, I attended and spoke at the UNICEF-WHO Global Congress on Implementation of the International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes at WHO headquarters in Geneva.

The meeting was attended by more than 400 government, health, and advocacy representatives from more than 100 countries.  Representatives of infant formula companies were not invited to participate.

Its purpose was to encourage governments to promote and enforce the International Code, which nearly all U.N. member states ratified and committed to in 1981 (the U.S. was a long-standing holdout).

This meant they would control inappropriate marketing of infant formulas by banning advertising to people who are pregnant or nursing, gifts of formula samples, and doing anything to make formula appear superior to breastfeeding.

The logic of the Congress:

• Breastfeeding is the superior method for feeding human babies.
• Successful breastfeeding requires support from families, society, and government.
• It is quite easy to undermine confidence in the ability to breastfeed.
• Formula companies do all they can to undermine confidence in breastfeeding.
• Formula companies’ main goal is to sell more formula.
• Formula companies promote their products as normal and superior.
• Breastfeeding is easier when formula marketing is controlled.y

I talked about the food industry “playbook”—strategies and tactics used by industries (tobacco, chemical, drug, alcohol, and food as well as infant formula) to cast doubt on unfavorable research, fund their own research, and lobby against public health recommendations (photo: Arum Gupta).

Many country representatives discussed the effects of the playbook in their areas, and what they are trying to do to stop formula companies from using  the playbook to get around the Code.

The general consensus:  Formula companies should NOT be allowed to:

• Advertise or market products in violation of the Code.
• Participate in public health policymaking.
• Partner with relevant government agencies or non-governmental groups.

Obviously, formula companies are not happy with such recommendations.  If you would like to see an example of the playbook in action, take a look at the response  from the International Special Dietary Foods Industries.

It was exciting to be with so many people who cared so deeply about this issue.

Resources

• WHO Breastfeeding page
• WHO International Code FAQ
• The Global Breastfeeding Collective

Oxygen nanobubbles?  Oxygen in little tiny bubbles?

For this gem I am indebted to an item I read in NutraIngredients-Europe:

Oxygen nanobubble drink found to enhance athletic performance, study suggestsA new study finds the consumption of an oxygen nanobubble beverage significantly improves the time-to-completion of maximal and submaximal exercises performed by male cyclists…. Read more

I went right to the article.

The study: A Double-Blind, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Pilot Study examining an Oxygen Nanobubble Beverage for 16.1-km Time Trial and Repeated Sprint Cycling Performance.  Journal of Dietary Supplements. https://doi.org/10.1080/19390211.2023.2203738.

The concept: Athletes need oxygen and water.  Therefore, oxygen-supplemented water should improve performance.

The result: As comparied to placebo, Althletes who consumed the oxygen-nanobubble beverage demonstrated significantly improved performance.

The conclusion:  “An oxygen-nanobubble beverage improves performance during submaximal and repeated sprint cycling, therefore may provide a practical and effective ergogenic aid for competitive cyclists.”

Guess who funded this: “This study was funded by Avrox Technologies Ltd, Harrogate, North Yorkshire, HG3 3SZ. Avrox Technologies provided the experimental beverages but had no role in study design, data storage, analysis and interpretation.

I wondered what the placebo was and whether study subjects could distinguish the drinks.  The beverages:

were supplied by Avrox Technologies in 500 mL individually sealed bottles and consisted of the same solution containing water, glycerol, glycyrrhizin, lecithin and citric acid. Both beverages have similar organoleptic properties, including taste, aroma, and texture. Previous investigations have indicated that the oxygen nanobubble drink consists of a suspension of lecithin vesicles with a modal diameter of ∼100 nm and concentration 7 × 1012 particles/ml.

The authors deal with my question in their discussion of the study’s limitations:

we did not evaluate the success of our double-blind design, therefore, changes in performance might be somewhat attributed to participants’ expectancy of positive outcomes from their belief that they successfully identified the O₂ beverage…Whilst there were no notable differences in taste, texture or appearance of the O₂ and PLA [not spelled out in the study but must refer to the placebo] beverages, we should have assessed blinding via treatment allocation questionnaires to determine whether participant biases influenced results.

Yes, you should have.

I also wonder whether club soda or Pellegrino might have the same benefit?  Or giving water a good shake?

The prolific International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems has produced another must-see report:

Here’s what it’s about:

Corporate influence over food system governance has become the new normal: the 2021 UN Food Systems Summit exposed the ability of multinational agri-food corporations to influence food system decision-making and dominate seemingly inclusive ‘multi-stakeholder’ processes…corporations have
succeeded in convincing governments that they must be central in any discussion on the future of food systems. Public-private partnerships and ‘multi-stakeholder’ roundtables…have normalized a prominent role for corporations and given them an inside track to decision-making.

Here’s where it’s headed:

To meet the needs of those impacted by  worsening hunger and malnutrition, it will be necessary to address the influence of corporations at all levels, including through a UN-wide Corporate Accountability Framework and robust conflict of interest policies, taking inspiration from World Health Organization frameworks for tobacco control and engagement with non-state actors.

IPES Food is doing great work.  Read their reports!

Chocolate for breakfast? Kellogg’s + Hershey’s collab takes cereal to new heights in IndiaThe breakfast cereal giant has joined forces with one of the largest chocolate manufacturers in the world to launch Kellogg’s Hershey’s Chocos on the Indian market…. Read more

When I saw this, I wondered what was new here.  We already have plenty of chocolate breakfast cereals, organic and not, most of them aimed at kids.

These, for example:

At best, these cereals have some cocoa in them, usually as the 5th ingredient or less.

I can’t find an ingredient list for the cereal aimed at India, but I did find one for similar products sold in other countries.

Chocolate is the first ingredient!

Candy for breakfast!

Yum!

I am not a big fan of the MyPlate food guide.

• It was created without doing consumer research to find out how well people understand it.
• Pie charts are harder to understand than pyramids (the old pyramid, despite its flaws, conveyed the what-you-should-eat messages much better).
• The Protein section makes no nutritional sense; grains and dairy are also excellent sources of protein, and beans, which are high in protein, are vegetables.

Never mind.  We have to live with it.

It appeared in 2010.  Now the USDA is trying to sell it, and with a catchy music video no less.

Will this sell kids on eating their veggies?

I hope the USDA has an evaluation in the works.

This has not been a good year for artificial sweeteners.

The World Health Organization says don’t use them for weight control and don’t give them to children.

The recommendation is based on the findings of a systematic review of the available evidence which suggests that use of NSS does not confer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children. Results of the review also suggest that there may be potential undesirable effects from long-term use of NSS, such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mortality in adults.

US Right to Know says: Aspartame: Decades of science point to serious health risks  

• Dozens of studies have linked the artificial sweetener aspartame to serious health problems, including cancer, cardiovascular disease, Alzheimer’s disease, seizures, stroke and dementia, as well as negative effects such as intestinal dysbiosis, mood disorders, headaches and migraines.
• Evidence also links aspartame to weight gain, increased appetite and obesity-related diseases.

A member of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, the professional association for Registered Dietitian Nutritionists, sent me this emailed announcement from Pork & Partners, a program of the National Pork Board Checkoff.

The accompanying message:

A Friend To All Foods + CPEUs for You!

Pork & Partners is an exciting new community for RDNs, tailored to help you meet your professional needs. Become a Partner to access free CPEU opportunities, fresh lean pork recipes, client resources, research, and so much more. Join today!

CPEUs are continuing professional education units, required for maintaining dietetic registration.   Dietitians usually pay for continuing education.

It’s so generous of the National Pork Board to offer free credits:

Introducing Pork & Partners, your new communityfocused on the needs of nutrition professionals. We’re here to provide free continuing education opportunities, exciting events, featured recipes, evidence-based handouts and peer-reviewed research. Join us to access resources and support to take your practice to the next level.

The Pork & Partners website emphasizes the nutrition, health, sustainability, and cleanliness of pig production.

I couldn’t find anything on the site about confinement of pregnant sows, the subject of a recent Supreme Court decision, or the many lawsuits over offensive odors from pig CAFOs.

Pork producers must not want dietitians talking about such things.  Hence: free CPEUs.