From the monthly archives:

May 2009

Are Functional Foods Recession Proof?

by Janet on May 27, 2009

good-bellySales of functional foods and beverages are starting to taper off. 

As the recession bites into grocery spending, shoppers may be focusing more on the essentials, and cutting back on these pricier and “fancier,” fortified extras.

A new report by Packaged Facts  indicates that the U.S. retail market for functional foods and beverages is up 6% — but that’s compared to an 8% gain in 2007. This slowdown is likely due to maturity of the market and economic pressures, the analysts concluded. I wonder if there’s a bit of backlash over glorified claims and increased skepticism — and maybe a return to real food.

Even though the market has not proven to be recession proof, the analysts at Packaged Facts said functional products have some advantages that could prevent them from being as vulnerable as other specialty products. They said shoppers are more focused on maintaining their health in the poor economy, and they may justify spending on functional products as a way to combine food with nutrients that they’d otherwise buy in the form of more expensive dietary supplements.  A Packaged Facts survey of 2,600 U.S. adults found that 55% prefer to buy foods for nutritional benefits rather than supplements. 

Yogurt remains the largest functional category; other best-selling functional products include energy drinks, blended fruit drinks, smoothies and soy milk.  The analysts predict the revenue for functional products will not drop dramatically and believe shoppers will make other trade-offs, including cutting back on restaurant meals.  They expect functional foods and beverages will ramp back up as the economy improves to reach $43 billion by 2012.

 

venga_group

{ 0 comments }

New Frontiers in Functional Foods

by Janet on May 22, 2009

In a few weeks, the Institute of Food Technologists  Annual Meeting and Food Expo will showcase “The Best of Food Thinking 2009.”  This is where the major food and ingredient companies from around the globe will showcase the latest, greatest products — hoping to be the next big thing.  This month’s Food Technology journal has a preview of what will be unveiled at the meeting.   Here are a few highlights:sensara4

  • Beauty From Within.  Several companies will be touting ingredients for “beauty foods,” which appear to be coming on strong lately.  There’s even a session on the science of beauty foods, including the role of vitamins, essential amino acids and other nutraceuticals on skin health.
  • Fiber.  Looks like fiber will be a big deal on the exhibit floor — promoted for heart health, immunity and digestive health. It’s all about barley and oat beta-glucans, ancient grains, prebiotics, maltodextrin and gluco polysaccharides.
  • Joint Health. New “natural” remedies are on the way for arthritis and inflammatory diseases — ingredients that claim to stimulate cartilage tissue and ease joint pain.marigold3
  • Eye Health.  Could marigolds be the new super flower?  One company is touting a natural extract of marigold flowers that contain lutein and zeaxanthin — two carotenoids linked to eye health.  These are the same nutrients found in eggs (and there’s even an enriched egg that was co-developed by ophthalmologists).
  • Weight Management. With obesity a global health problem, numerous products are showcasing the ways they can be part of the solution.  Ingredients include CLA, which the company says can be used to make “marketable claims” about reducing body fat and increasing lean muscle.  Other ingredients are focused on satiety or appetite control, including Hi-Maize resistant starch and Slendesta potato extract.

chia-barOther major players appear to be probiotics and healthier fats, including companies touting various sources of DHA and EPA omega 3 fatty acids.  There’s even a high DHA omega-3 fortified brownie “positioned for the children’s nutrition market.”   Protein looks like it will be a hot nutrient on the exhibit floor, with whey-derived ingredients promoted for muscle strength and healthy skin.  The Chia Company will be there boasting about the wonders of this super seed — which is beginning to show up in a range of products.  But, you know how I feel about that…if you read my earlier post about chia seeds.

The article in Food Technology talks about a range of “forward thinking” new products that will be on display — probiotic ice cream, nutricosmetic licorice, heart-healthy chocolate chip muffins and satiety smoothies.  A conference like this is where it all starts.  So stay tuned — like it or not, these new fortified foods will be coming soon to a store near you.

{ 1 comment }

Myths About Feeding a Healthy Family

by Janet on May 20, 2009

secrets-of-feeding1Eating should be enjoyable.  But for many families, eating translates to trouble.  It’s frequently a source of guilt, frustration and stress.  Parents today say they often worry and feel overwhelmed in their attempts to prevent childhood obesity, according to a new survey by Mintel.  For starters, they don’t know where to focus — diet or exercise?  Nearly three quarters of parents (72%) believe kids have too much access to “junk food,” while 69% feel that a lack of exercise is more to blame for obesity.

Parents also feel unsuccessful.  While 93% consider it very or somewhat important to limit their children’s access to “junk food,” only 77% feel they have been very or somewhat successful at accomplishing this.

But limiting access to certain foods may not be the answer.  That’s the major myth that Ellyn Satter tries to bust in her newly revised book Secrets of Feeding a Healthy Family: How to Eat, How to Raise Good Eaters, How to Cook.

She says we should be focusing on raising “competent eaters.”  The secrets of feeding a healthy family, she says,  is to love good food, trust yourself and share that love and trust with your child.  In her 30+ years of clinical practice, Satter found that many families became demoralized about eating — even demoralized overall.  She created the Satter Eating Competence Model  that represents a “fundamental shift from the conventional approach to eating management.”  The eating competence model has four parts:

  • Feeling positive about eating:  Cultivate positive attitudes about eating and about food.  Emphasize providing rather than depriving.
  • Having regular meals:  Take time to eat and provide yourself with rewarding meals and snacks at regular and reliable times.
  • Eating enjoyable food:  Enjoy your eating, eat foods you like, and let yourself be comfortable with and relaxed about what you eat.
  • Eating enough to be satisfied:  Pay attention to your sensations of hunger and fullness to determine how much to eat.

“Foods that aren’t forbidden become ordinary foods that you eat in ordinary ways,” she said.  “Big portions lose their appeal when you know that you don’t have to try to make yourself go hungry in the name of weight control.” To become competent in your eating, Satter recommends we focus on permission and discipline:

  • The permission to choose enjoyable food and eat it in satisfying amounts
  • The discipline to have regular and reliable meals and snacks and to pay attention when eating them

Satter often talks of the importance of  dividing the responsibility.  She says for children to eat and grow well, parents must manage the what, when and where of feeding and let the child manage the how much and whether of eating.  As a parent wrote to Satter after “Satterizing” her approach to feeding her family:  “The basic idea is so Zen — stop controlling, stop struggling, stop worrying and you change the very nature of the problem.”

And talking about part of the problem, some of the messages that young girls receive in the media often work against these principles.  I really shared the rage of Jezebel (“It’s Never Too Early To Hate Your Body”) over an article in the April/May issue of Girl’s Life magazine.  It’s worth checking out the angry analysis of the misguided magazine article that tries to give nutrition advice to 10-15 year old girls.  With promises of “get a bikini body fast!” the article  is full of red flags.  It’s exactly the opposite of competent eating (and competent writing).

{ 1 comment }

Our troubling economy may be contributing to the expanding waistlines of U.S. workers, suggests a new CareerBuilder study.  Results indicate that 43 percent have gained weight in their current jobs, with a quarter of employees reporting that they’ve gained more than 10 pounds; 12 percent say they’ve gained more than 20 pounds. 
 
Among the survey respondents, women are more likely (48 percent) than men (39 percent) to say they’ve gained weight at their current jobs.  Part of the problem appears to be snacking — one in 10 report increased snacking during the day due to concerns over the current economic situation.
 
It does appear than snacks have taken center stage in American eating.  NPD Group refers to snacks as the fourth meal of the day.  Why not, 21% of all meals are now snacks. 
 
According to Snack Foods Culinary Trend Mapping Report  from Packaged Facts, today’s time- crunched Americans are snacking more than ever — turning to snacks as meal stand-ins and eating more often to fuel on-the-go lifestyles and avoid energy crashes.  As snacks grow in importance and become not simply a  hunger-soothing bridge between formal meals, consumers are demanding more from their snacks.
 
The new report says emerging snacks are combining health and indulgence, with a new focus on quality ingredients, vivid flavor  and pumped-up nutrition.  Here are a few examples from the trend mapping report of the new snacking dynamics :
 
porkrindsSwanky Pork Rinds:  Goodbye down-home, hello upscale.  High-quality pork rinds illustrate the “real meat” trend and are showing up at  high-end bars and restaurants.
 
Gastro Popcorn:  No longer simply a Cineplex stand-by.  Gastro Popcorn has transformed this movie favorite into a gourmet snack with grown-up flavor profiles, such as curry and black truffle.   
 
Seaweed Snacks:  Inspiration from the sea.  Seawood Snacks offer a globally inspired duo of taste and health.
 
Alternative Chips:  A colorful palette of crunch.  New veggie chips that go beyond the pale potato are gaining in popularity thanks to their “minimally processed/maximum nutrition” persona, along with offering crunch and salty, spicy flavors.
 
Nuts Gone Global:  Lavished with exotic flavors from around the world.  Upscale nuts transform the familiar via striking new personalities. 
 
Whole Nutrition Sweets:  Promises of nutrition and indulgence.  Innovative treats are being created with such nutrient-packed ingredients as brown rice and soybeans.
 
The restaurant industry has also jumped on the snack bandwagon — with the growth of small plates and mini meals.  In the QSR arena, new products focus on smaller, snack-like portions — which is really just to entice you to come in more often.
 
 

{ 0 comments }

Cheerios (General Mills)General Mills got its hands slapped over the cholesterol-lowering claims on those bright yellow boxes of Cheerios. FDA sent a warning letter that said the company crossed the line by promoting the cereal as a drug. The specific complaints were focused on these claims:

  • You can lower your cholesterol 4% in 6 weeks.
  • Did you know that in just 6 weeks Cheerios can reduce bad cholesterol by an average of 4 percent? 
  • Cheerios is clinically proven to lower cholesterol. A clinical study showed that eating two 1 1/2 cup servings daily of Cheerios cereal reduced bad cholesterol when eaten as part of a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol.

You’ve probably seen these claims because they’ve been on the package for more than two years. But now FDA says the boxes are misbranded and the health claims turn those toasted Os into an “unapproved new drug.”

I certainly agree that health claims have gotten out of control, and many foods and beverages go too far, but is this the example that FDA should call out as abuse?  At least the ads for Cheerios don’t say you can cheat death!pom-wonderful-ad-0013

I can certainly think of a lot of other products that I’d start with first.  If you’re swayed by the messages on the box, what’s the harm of sitting down to a whole grain bowl of Cheerios in the morning?  You’ve certainly made a better choice than dashing to the drive-thru for a sausage-egg biscuit or grabbing a 600-calorie chocolate chip muffin. 

Some of the media coverage I’ve seen about the FDA warning makes it sound like there’s something seriously wrong with the cereal:  “Cheerios, the world’s best-selling cereal, isn’t so wholesome as its maker General Mills Inc. contends.”  Huh?  I don’t think that’s the issue.  Even though a lot of people are applauding FDA’s crackdown on health claims, I think it has also confused the public.  That’s probably why the FDA issued a  follow-up Q & A to help clear up any confusion.  For example, the warning letter does not question the safety of Cheerios.  And what appears to be a bit of a back peddle, FDA emphasized that the warning letter was not intended to discourage people from including  Cheerios in a balanced diet:  “No. In fact, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans encourages the consumption of whole grain foods, which includes whole oats found in products such as Cheerios.”   FDA even reinforced that Cheerios is eligible to make the FDA-approved health claim related to soluble fiber (including oats) and a reduced risk of heart disease. 

Currently, the FDA recognizes 17 specific health claims, each linking a food or ingredient to a disease or health-related condition.  You can argue all you want about the merits of health claims, but those are the current regulations, and Cheerios does qualify to make a heart health claim. FDA does not have the same control over the claims made by dietary supplements, and that’s where you can find tremendously misleading claims. total-cleanse-banner5

So what’s the issue with Cheerios?  FDA did not challenge the science supporting the soluble fiber heart health claim, but the agency had problems that the claim was presented as a separate stand-alone message.  Basically the layout of the box troubled them because some of the qualifying language was on the back.  Also, the claim was not supposed to identify any degree of risk reduction, and the Cheerios box specified a 4% reduction in cholesterol in 6 weeks.  That’s what the clinical trial found (although keep in mind, the research involved eating a serving of Cheerios for two meals a day).

FDA also pointed out problems with the General Mills web site, which the agency considers part of the Cheerios labeling (so the same rules apply).  The claim needed to include messages about the total diet — such as the importance of fruits and vegetables and keeping saturated fat and cholesterol low.

Sure, Cheerios is not a silver bullet to lower cholesterol or avoid heart disease.  Indeed, it’s the total diet that counts.  But eating more whole grain foods that are rich in soluble fiber is a good thing. Maybe a single bowl of Cheerios in the morning may not bring miraculous results, but it is one positive step.  Studies have shown that if you take several positive steps like this (a portfolio approach of many different cholesterol-lowering foods), then you can make a big difference.  

Yes, it’s good to be skeptical.  But here’s a case where I hope people don’t over-react.  This is not an example of a fraudulent marketing scam.  Plenty of other products come to mind — not this humble  oat cereal. So whether you enjoy a bowl of Cheerios, oatmeal or other  fiber-rich cereal in the morning, keep it up.   Skip the “total cleanse” and go for the grains  instead.   

 

 

{ 4 comments }

Singing the Praises of Tabbouleh

by Janet on May 12, 2009

If you saw my earlier post about Authentic Lebanese Tabbouleh, then you know I love this parsley, tomato and bulgur salad.  That’s why I couldn’t resist sharing this hysterical video of the “Tabbouleh Song”  that I spotted on one of my favorite food sites Eat Me Daily (where you can find the lyrics).   Check out Remy for the hummus rap and other songs.

 

{ 2 comments }

Putting the “No” in Innovation

by Janet on May 11, 2009

shreddedwheat-c2

I wrote earlier about the trend of simplicity and the campaign that Shredded Wheat had in the works.  Now the new anti-innovation ads have been launched, which play into today’s increased  desire for authenticity and simple, honest nourishment.  The campaign features a rather (pardon the term) innovative web site called the Palace of Light  that makes a whimsical case against progress. 

 “The world has progressed at lightening speed over the past 100 years.  To a fault, one could argue in light of the times.  So it’s both oddly funny and fascinating to consider that Post Original Shredded Wheat, which has used the same single ingredient for over 100 years, ends up being one of the healthiest foods on your grocery shelf.”

In a playful way, the campaign pokes fun at innovation and elevates the current backlash against heavily processed or engineered foods…

“Today we see all sorts of chemically enhanced, artificial fiber-infused, carb-refused cereals — a far stretch from simple, honest nourishment.  Post Original Shredded Wheat, on the other hand, hasn’t changed.  It is still just one simple, honest ingredient, which naturally comes with fiber, vitamins and minerals.  Why would we mess with that?”

That’s become the collective consumer sentiment, don’t mess with my food!  During these tough economic times, this humble breakfast food has hit on a perfect storm — familiar childhood favorite, back to basics, value, simple and naturally nutrient rich.  How can you beat that?

{ 3 comments }

Diet Myths That Keep Us Fat

by Janet on May 7, 2009

I haven’t read this book yet, but I like the title.  Darn, it’s the book I wish I diet-myths-that-keep-us-fat1would have written.  But there are lots of other myths out there to tackle!    It looks like from Dr. Nancy Snyderman’s appearance on Today that she focuses on debunking these myths…

Myth 1:  Your weight is your fault
Myth 2:  Your body shape doesn’t matter
Myth 3:  Calories don’t count
Myth 4:  Carbs are bad for you
Myth 5:  Carbs are good for you
Myth 6:  Diet drugs are a magic bullet
Myth 7:  Dieting is all you need to lose weight
Myth 8:  Supplements will make you thin and happy

I liked a lot of the things she had to say…

  • Many of us have been fed bad information about diet, nutrition and weight loss.  Bad information means bad choices, and bad choices mean bad results — or no results.  You can’t get in shape and stay healthy unless you know the truth.
  • Make informed decisions using sound, straightforward information.  Question whether a popular diet will really work for you.
  • Learn to make a friend of food and exercise.  This will allow you to safely sprinkle the not-so-healthy stuff through your diet and not feel deprived.
  • Escape the forbidden-food mentality, allow yourself some leeway and learn to enjoy food again.
  • It’s not about becoming supermodel thin or adhering to someone else’s ideal — it’s about being healthy and feeling great.  And it’s never too late to begin the journey.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

{ 2 comments }

gdietAnother celebrity diet book.

This time it’s Elisabeth Hasselbeck from The View.  She’s written a book called “The G-Free Diet: A Gluten-Free Survival Guide” that extols the virtues of going gluten-free.  Perhaps you’ve seen her making the rounds on all the talk shows.  If not yet, you will.

Elisabeth has celiac disease so a gluten-free diet is her treatment.  It’s the only way to manage this autoimmune disease.  So it’s great that she’s sharing her personal story, but I have real problems with her glorifying gluten-free and making it appear to be the best thing since, er, sliced bread.   “Even people with no health issues have a great deal to gain by giving up gluten,” she writes.  “The G-Free Diet can help with weight management, it can elevate your energy levels, improve your attention span and speed up your digestion.  Whatever your motivation for going G-free, this book will help you achieve your goal.”

Not necessarily.  In fact, many people say they’ve gained weight by going gluten-free — especially if they load up on all the gluten-free processed foods that have exploded onto the market. It can also be tough nutritionally — many people who eliminate all gluten-containing foods wind up deficient in several nutrients.   If celiac is ruled out, there is little or no evidence to support a connection between gluten and other ailments.  Read my earlier post  Gluten-Free is Latest Diet Craze.

On the positive side, Elisabeth’s media blitz is bringing attention to celiac disease — one of the most under-diagnosed disorders in the country.  The estimated incidence is 1 out of 1oo people , yet 95% of the people who have it don’t know it.  So it’s critical that people who suspect a problem get a proper diagnosis. 

The big problem I have with The G-Free Diet is that it makes giving up gluten appear trendy.  Self-diagnosis is already rampant and this book will simply add fuel to the fire.   Jumping on the gluten-free bandwagon without being tested for celiac may make a proper diagnosis even trickier.  If you do have celiac, eliminating gluten will help the gut heal temporarily.  So if you get tested after you’ve started a gluten-free diet, an accurate diagnosis could be missed.  That’s what troubles registered dietitian Shelley Case, a leading expert on celiac and gluten, who I spoke to about the book.   She’s concerned that without an official diagnosis of celiac disease, people might not be motivated to strictly adhere to the diet or receive follow-up medical care.  For people who truly have celiac, gluten-free is far from a fad — it’s the only treatment and it must be adhered to for life.

Shelley pointed out several errors in the book, including the descriptions of which foods and ingredients contain gluten.  Come on, that’s pretty bad if you can’t even get that right.   Elisabeth also incorrectly refers to celiac as an allergy.  Several online reviews have pointed out some of the book’s shortcomings, and many folks in the “celiac community” have become alarmed over the misinformation. 

Elaine Monarch, founder and executive director of the Celiac Disease Foundation, just released a statement pointing out many of the inaccuracies in “The G-Free Diet.”  Among her comments: 

  • “Several items in the book are misleading and inaccurate and place further limitations on the GF diet.  The gluten-free lifestyle is a lifelong commitment for the diagnosed celiac, not an option, not a fad diet — adhering to the GF lifestyle requires patience and persistance.  This lifestyle cannot be trivialized.”
  • “Our mission is to assist in getting people accurately diagnosed and the message in this book could defeat this mission.  It appears that this book is being marketed as a fitness diet — eat g-free and feel so much better.” 
  • “While it is important to call attention to celiac disease, the information must be accurate — the inaccuracies in this book are potentially dangerous and detrimental to celiacs and to those yet to be diagnosed if people self diagnose and start eating GF.”

What disturbs me the most is that  Elisabeth sets herself up as the expert.   I hope in her media interviews she will point out the need to see registered dietitians like Shelley who specialize in celiac and gluten-free diets. Giving up gluten can be tough since this ingredient is so prevalent in our food supply, and the diet is fairly restrictive.   Nutrition counseling with an RD will help people learn the complexities of a gluten-free diet and the nutritional challenges.  

I also hope she’ll urge the public to NOT try the diet before seeing their doctor to be tested for celiac.  That’s the best public service she could provide.

{ 19 comments }

Debating Our Diets

by Janet on May 5, 2009

As promised, wanted to give you an update on some of the discussions last week from the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.  This panel is dg20101is charged with developing the revised guidelines that will be issued next year by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).  I appreciated all of the comments from my earlier post, and I understand some of the cynicism.  But I will remain optimistic.  The group has emphasized many times that they’re using an evidence-based system to draft the report, so the strongest science should win out.  Let’s hope.

But I agree with many of you that people are confused.  In fact, that’s being discussed at the meetings.  Patricia Crawford from the University of California, Berkeley, told the committee that the public understands the recommendations for fruits and vegetables, but that’s about it.  She said they can’t translate what they’re supposed to do with the information given.  What’s needed, she said, is a “national set of benchmarks and standards.”

Who knows what will be in the final report, but here are a few highlights from the discussions:

  • Eat whole foods.  Rather than focusing on individual nutrients, the committee talked about the need to emphasize whole foods.  After all, people eat foods, not nutrients.  Research suggests many Americans are confused by the Dietary Guidelines, which they find too complicated and too focused on nutrients, rather than specific foods. 
  • Positive nutrition.  Instead of focusing on what NOT to eat, a more pyramideffective approach may be to advise Americans on what to eat more of — such as fruits, vegetables, beans and whole grains.  So it’s about foods to encourage, rather than discourage.
  • Figuring out  fat.  The committee debated the merits of eliminating a limit on total fat and instead focusing on reducing just the unhealthy type — saturated fat, trans fat and cholesterol.
  • Cut the salt.  Sodium was heavily discussed and there’s some indication that it may be the next trans fat.  Most Americans have trouble keeping sodium under the current recommended daily limit of 2,300 mg and now there’s talk of potentially lowering it to 1,500 mg per day — or at least the “rationale” for doing so was presented. There was some discussion of the benefits of increasing potassium to offset our high-sodium diets.
  • New view of food groups.  We grew up  with the “Basic Four” and now MyPyramid identifies five food groups.  What’s the best way to categorize foods?  Besides the individual groups, there was a lot of talk about identifying the best or most nutrient-rich choices within each food category.
  • It’s the calories, stupid.  The committee talked about bringing the attention back to calories.  Popular weight loss plans all achieve about the same weight loss results — so it’s about eating less, not following a particular diet.  Cutting calories was the main ingredient for successful weight loss.
  • Economics of eating.  A huge part of the discussion involved eating well on a budget.  Adam Drewnowski suggested that we  look at obesity as an economic issue first — food costs affect diet quality and appear to significantly increase the risk of obesity and type 2 diabetes.   Andrea Carlson showed how it’s possible for a family of four to meet the Dietary Guidelines for $137 per week by using  USDA’s thrifty food plan.
  • Nutritional gatekeepers.  Brian Wansink encouraged the group to target the nutritional gatekeepers — women who make 72% of the food decisions for their families, whether they eat at home or at a restaurant.

I’ll report back after the 4th committee meeting in the fall.  In the meantime, I welcome your comments.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

{ 3 comments }