I saw this in DairyReporter, a newsletter I subscribe to.

Multi-nutrient inadequacies in ANZ linked to diet-related disease calls for food-based interventions – a2 Milk-funded study.  A study has found multi-nutrient inadequacies within the Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) populations, including nutrients associated with diet-related disease, highlighting the need for public policies and food-based recommendations to promote intake…. Read more

A2-milk again?  The last time I wrote about it, I titled my comments, A2 milk: still making claims based on industry-funded research.

Well, here’s the latest .

Welcome to the online Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Food Studies, edited by Darra Goldstein.

The articles submitted to this project so far are here.

I wrote one for it: Nestle M.  Food Politics and Policy.

I looks to me as though these articles are Open Access, meaning you can read them for free.

Enjoy!

I am indebted to NutraIngredients-Europe for this collection of articles on the trendy herbal supplement, ashwagandha.

Ashwaganda is one of those supplements said to do wonders for stress and anxiety (of which we all have lots these days) and sleep (also a common problem).

The Ashwagandha plant is native to India, northern Africa, and the Middle East—but is now grown around the world. While the whole plant is cultivated, the root and leaf are used in extracts. Ashwagandha is a traditional herb long used for its adaptogenic properties to help your body adapt to stressors. Adaptogens are plants that facilitate your body’s ability to adapt to stress.

The NIH Office of Dietary Supplements says

Ashwagandha appears to be well tolerated for up to 3 months of use. However, the efficacy and safety of long-term ashwagandha use over months or years for stress, anxiety, or sleep is not known. In addition, ashwagandha may have potential adverse effects on the liver and thyroid and might not be safe for people with prostate cancer or those who are pregnant or nursing.

What is especially interesting are the contradictory views of this supplement.  Some see benefits.  Others see risks.

The purported benefits

• Study: Ashwagandha effectively relieves chronic stress: Standardized root and leaf aqueous ashwagandha extract safely and effectively reduces stress in chronically stressed people, according to a new study…. Read more
• Ashwagandha intake linked to memory and attention benefits: Acute and repeated supplementation with liposomal ashwagandha may boost select cognitive effects, including memory, attention, vigilance and reaction time in healthy adults, says a new study…. Read more
• Review reveals benefits of ashwagandha on ‘inflammaging’: A new synthetic review on ashwagandha (Withania somnifera, or WS) has underlined the herb’s potential for treating ‘inflammaging’—persistent low-grade inflammation linked to aging…. Read more

The risks

• French agency warns ashwagandha unsafe in specific populations: The French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (ANSES) has warned against the use of ashwagandha in a number of specific populations, making it likely operators will be advised to use label warnings…. Read more
• European food safety report ‘taking pot shots’ at popular botanicals: A working group of 26 member states has published a report suggesting the need to ban or restrict 12 ‘critical’ ingredients such as ashwagandha, curcumin, maca and substances like melatonin…. Read more

The debate

• AHP responds to claims of ashwagandha abortifacient effects: The American Herbal Pharmacopoeia (AHP) has responded to the growing number of European authorities reporting ashwagandha as an abortificient, arguing they have incorrectly cited the WHO monograph and AHP review…. Read more
• Ashwagandha concerns branded pure ‘horse s**t’: On-trend herb thrives despite authority unease: While ashwagandha investment and innovation is surging, some European authorities are showing signs of safety concern, leading industry experts to criticize a spread of “complete misinformation” across the continent…. Read more
• UK launches ashwagandha safety consultation as Indian experts step up defense:  Ashwagandha suppliers are being urged to invest in defense as the UK Food Safety Agency (FSA) launches a consultation into the herb and Indian experts refute safety concerns…. Read more

Comment

I, as you undoubtedly have guessed, am a supplement skeptic.  If European agencies are warning against it, I vote for avoiding it, especially if you are in one of the risk categories: pregnant or breastfeeding women, people under the age of 18, and those with endocrine disorders (particularly dysthyroidism and hyperandrogenism), liver or heart problems or undergoing treatment with a central nervous system depressant action.

Supplement sellers can fight back all they like; I urge caution.

Here’s what started all this:

P&G, Coca-Cola make Olympics promotional push: Procter & Gamble and Coca-Cola are among the companies making a promotional push around the 2024 Olympic Games in Paris. P&G is planning to focus its efforts on specific brands such as Pampers diapers and Gillette razors, and Coca-Cola has plans for over 70 markets. Sponsors of the International Olympic Committee have spent 18% more than they did for the Tokyo Games in 2021, Comcast reports.

And here’s the response:

TODAY, the global digital campaign, “Hey Big Soda!”  was launched demanding an end to Big Soda’s sponsorship of sport…Please share the campaign with the hashtag #KickBigSodaOutofSport!

Sign the petition from Kick Big Soda Out urging the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to terminate the Coca-Cola Company’s sponsorship.

For more information: info@kickbigsodaout.org.

In its Week #2 report, Kick Big Soda Out says:

Over 34,000 people have signed the petition, and 60 organizations from 21 countries have endorsed the campaign as Campaign Partner Organizations!

Partner materials are here.

Examples from the Mexico team:

• A demonstration, featuring the campaign and organized by El Poder del Consumidor and other Mexico partners, was held in front of Mexican Olympic Committee Headquarters on July 23. Multiple publications covered the event including Greenpeace Mexico, Aristegui Noticias, Cronica and 24 Morelos, among others.
• Simón Barquera, took to Instagram and Twitter to urge his followers to sign and share the “Kick Big Soda Out of Sport” petition. https://x.com/SBarquera/status/1815410422490825089

Food Politics in action!  Join the campaign.

The latest outbreak of illnesses caused by Salmonella in raw milk means it’s time to talk about that again.

To start:

Food safety lawyer, Bill Marler, takes a dim view of how the California Department of Health is handling this outbreak:

California Department of Health still silent on 165 ill from consuming Raw Milk: Over the last 30 plus years of practice I have been a vocal advocate for robust public health involvement in disease – especially food borne illness prevention. It is beyond me to comprehend why public health would remain mute in the face of at least 165 sick, 20 hospitalized and 40% of the ill five… Continue Reading

He takes even a dimmer view of how the producer of the raw milk has responded.  The Raw Farm producer is Mark McAfee.

Mark, you are as full of shit as your milk is:  Mark, first, my beef is with the California Sate Health Department that spiked that your products sickened at least 165 people in four states with a combination of Salmonella, Campylobacter and E. coli (you are not illegally selling raw milk across state lines again?).

Comment

What to say about raw milk?  No question, it’s risky.  How risky?  As with so much else in nutrition, it depends on point of view.

Federal agencies and public health groups warn against it.

• The FDA rebuts all claims made for raw milk:  “None of the claims made by the raw milk advocates that we have examined for you can withstand scientific scrutiny. Unfortunately, the false “health benefits” claims of raw milk advocates may cause parents to give raw milk to their children and prompt immuno-compromised people, such as pregnant women, the elderly, and hospitalized patients, who want better nutrition, to also start consuming raw milk. It is these very same sub-groups of the population, however, that are most at risk for becoming ill or even dying from foodborne illness as a result of consuming adulterated raw milk.”
• Harvard Health: Why drinking raw milk can be dangerous: take heed of the research, be aware of the risks associated with drinking raw milk, and in general, avoid drinking it.
• Physician’s Weekly: Less than Half of Adults Know Dangers of Raw Milk:  “It is important that anyone planning to consume raw milk be aware that doing so can make you sick and that pasteurization reduces the risk of milk-borne illnesses,” said Patrick Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Health and Risk Communication Institute at the University of Pennsylvania.

Lawsuits seem to be the only disincentive; sellers of contaminated raw milk do not go to jail, apparently, even when deaths are involved.

Owner of raw milk creamery behind fatal outbreak sentenced to probation.  A man who owned a raw milk creamery behind the deaths of two people has been sentenced to probation. U.S. Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks in New York sentenced Johannes Vulto on July 9 to three years probation, a $100,000 fine and 240 hours of community service. Vulto and his… Continue Reading

Risk warnings are not pausing raw milk consumption:  At a time when friends don’t let friends drink raw milk and some world-renowned scientists with deep expertise in the H5N1 virus think the situation is serious enough that it should be illegal to sell milk products that are not pasteurized, not much is happening. The raw milk business is… Continue Reading

If you must drink raw milk, know your farmer, make sure the milk is fresh and comes from one cow, and use it right away.  The risk goes up the more it is pooled and sits around.

Raw milk is always risky.  How risky?  No way to know.

I prefer Pasteurized.

This one was sent to me by a reader: Animal vs. Plant Protein: New Research Suggests That These Protein Sources Are Not Nutritionally Equivalent: Scientists found that two-ounce-equivalents (oz-eq) of animal-based protein foods provide greater essential amino acids (EAA) bioavailability than the same quantity of plant-based protein foods. The study challenges the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs) which suggest these protein sources are nutritionally equivalent.

I went right to the study: “Effects of Consuming Ounce-Equivalent Portions of Animal- vs. Plant-Based Protein Foods, as Defined by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans on Essential Amino Acids Bioavailability in Young and Older Adults: Two Cross-Over Randomized Controlled Trials” by Gavin Connolly, Joshua L. Hudson, Robert E. Bergia, Eric M. Davis, Austin S. Hartman, Wenbin Zhu, Chad C. Carroll and Wayne W. Campbell, 25 June 2023, Nutrients. DOI: 10.3390/nu15132870

Oh.  It’s in Nutrients, a journal that might as well be called “The Journal of Industry-Funded Research” (authors have to pay for publication of their articles in this journal–2900 Swiss Francs).

The study was designed to demonstrate that protein from animal sources is better than protein from plant sources, immediately raising the question: Who sponsored this study?

Funding: This research was funded by the Pork Checkoff and the American Egg Board—Egg Nutrition Center. The supporting sources had no role in study design; collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; writing of the report; or submission of the report for publication.

Do the authors report conflicts of interest?  Yes, they do:

Conflicts of Interets: When this research was conducted, W.W.C. received research funding from the following organizations: American Egg Board’s Egg Nutrition Center, Beef Checkoff, Pork Checkoff, North Dakota Beef Commission, Barilla Group, Mushroom Council, and the National Chicken Council. C.C.C. received funding from the Beef Checkoff. R.E.B. is currently employed by Archer-Daniels-Midland (ADM); the research presented in this article was conducted in a former role and has no connection with ADM. G.C., J.L.H., E.M.D., A.S.H. and W.Z. declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

I’m not going to bother going through the methods, results, or other details.  The point here is that industry-funded research has a high probability of producing results favorable to the sponsors’ interests, as happened in this instance.  The statement that the sponsors had no role may or may not be true; it’s hard to know without further investigation, but research on this question demonstrates that the statement is not always accurate.  Funding exerts influence, whether recognized by researchers or not.

Jennifer Grayson.  A Call to Farms: Reconnecting to Nature, Food, and Community in a Modern World.  Countryman Press, 2024.

What a great title! I did a blurb for Jennifer Grayson’s previous book, Unlatched: The Evolution of Breastfeeding and the Making of a Controversy, and was happy to have the chance to blurb this one too, not least because “A Call to Farms” is such a great title.  Grayson, as it happens, is one terrific writer.   

Here’s the new blurb:

In this deeply inspiring book, Jennifer Grayson examines the motives, practices, problems, and successes of a diverse collection of young small-scale farmers growing food sustainably and achieving enormous satisfaction and joy in the process. The farmers described in A Call to Farms, provide abundant reasons for hope in the future of food healthier for people and the planet as well as for its producers.  If you are looking for hope, here it is.

And here is a short excerpt capturing its essence:

A week into my first farm job, I realized it was the most joyful and fulfilling work I had ever experienced.  After two months of being outside all day, nearly every day, I felt the best—both physically and mentally—that I ever had in my life.  But the real transformation occurred as I began to meet and learn bout the new and driven farmers, graziers, and food activists emerging all over the country.  They hadn’t grown up in farming families; they came from backgrounds vastly underrepresented in agriculture; and many of them were far younger than I was, not to mention decades younger than the average American farmer.  I was awestruck by their intention and ingenuity.  They hadn’t turned to this way of life as some back-to-the-land fantasy.  They had chosen sustainable agriculture as a tactile way to effect environmental activism and food justice; for cultural reclamation; to reconnect to nature, food, and community; to live aligned with their values; to do, in the words of one farmer you’ll meet in this book, “something that means something.”

As I said, inspiring.  Get out there and farm!

I saw this on FoodNavigator–Asia, a newsletter to which I subscribe.

Red yeast rice impact: Kobayashi Pharmaceutical records nearly US$25m losses in Q1: Kobayashi Pharmaceutical reported an “extraordinary loss” of nearly US$25m (JPY$3.86bn) in its Q1 results due to the recall of its contaminated red yeast rice products, raw materials, and compensation of medical expenses. Read more

Red yeast rice is a dietary supplement with a statin-like component observed to reduce blood cholesterol levels, although not nearly to the same extent as statin drugs.  Consumer Lab tests show at least half not to contain what they say they do.

Now, on top of that, the supplements were associated with kidney disease (at least 50 cases) and deaths (at least 2) among takers in Japan.

Comment: Dietary supplements are the wild west of the food supply.  Anyone can make and sell them.  Because they are mainly harmless, nobody much bothers to test them, even major pharmaceutical companies.  Problems with red yeast rice supplements have been known for a long time.  As a result, supplements are risky.  How risky?  Nobody knows.  I don’t recommend them.