Friday 1 August 2014

FOOD PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT: Increasing the Value of Processed Foods

Increasing the Value of Processed Foods
 - Blog
Print

The

American Society for Nutrition (ASN), an organization of nutrition researchers, clinical nutritionists and industry, recently released a scientific statement on processed foods and their contributions to nutrition.

The paper, published in the June issue of The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, discussed why, contrary to the rising demonization of processed foods as unhealthy and of poor nutritional quality, food processing aids to both food security and nutrition. In short, why processed foods are not inherently bad and why most forms of processing are helpful.

The synopsis of the paper is as follows:
  • Both fresh and processed foods make up vital parts of the food supply.
  • Processed foods are nutritionally important to American diets. They contribute to both food security (ensuring that sufficient food is available) and nutrition security (ensuring that food quality meets human nutrient needs).
  • Processed foods provide both nutrients to encourage and constituents to limit as specified in the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
  • Analyses of data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 2003-2008 show that processed foods provide substantial amounts of nutrients to encourage including 55% of dietary fiber, 48% of calcium, 43% of potassium, 34% of vitamin D, 64% of iron, 65% of folate, and 46% of vitamin B-12.
  • NHANES data analysis also showed that of the constituents to limit, processed foods contributed 57% of energy, 52% of saturated fat, 75% of added sugars, and 57% of sodium.
  • Diets are more likely to meet food guidance recommendations if nutrient-dense foods, either processed or not, are selected.
  • A call for a consortium of stakeholders to develop definitions and processes to improve the food supply.
This is not news to food scientists or to most people involved in the production of foods and beverages. It makes no sense to consider a carton of yogurt, a jar of preserves or a package of whole-wheat bread has any significant nutritional difference than the same product made at home (“not processed")  other than that caused by difference in ingredient choices—most of which are not due to processing, but to consumer preference (more sugar) or cost . Or that the wilted “fresh" broccoli in my vegetable crisper is any better than the Green Giant’s version. But of course, that’s preaching to the choir.

But this particular piece is directed to RDs, clinical nutritionists and other nutrition professionals that might not understand food processing from a food-science perspective….and are also subject to the same misinformation as the general public. Food science education generally includes nutrition but nutrition education generally doesn’t include much in terms of processing and the rest of the moving parts in food science. So this serves as an introduction and educational piece to additional facets. It also provides a roadmap as to how nutrition can be more fully integrated in product design. Which is certainly a necessary step to revive the tarnished reputation of processed foods.
   -Lynn A. Kuntz

1 comment:

  1. Meanwhile, if the existing supplier were to catch wind of your company’s desire to displace their component from the OEM’s product, then while you are attempting to prove yourself worthy to the OEM , the competitor may start to fight back. Common defensive tactics are discounting prices or increasing product quality to persuade the OEM to keep using their component. Depending on the competitor ’s reaction, your business requirements may become a moving target as the competitor continually adjusts its strategy. An incumbent offering an aggressive price discount could potentially destroy your hoped-for gross profit margin as well as cause a change in the OEM ’s risk versus reward calculus on accepting your new product. thought leadership examples

    ReplyDelete