TRENDING FOODS

Trending Foods examines the latest news, market trends, surveys and stats that are helping shape the food industry. 

Courting the Specialty Foods Customer

Judie Bizzozero

September 26, 2014 - Blog

Print

• E-Mail
• in

U.S. consumers spend approximately $760 billion food and beverages each year, so understanding your target market is critical to any new product launch. This means food and beverage marketers have to know what consumers want, whether it be organic, sustainable, nutritious or indulgent.

Just look at the organic industry—what began as a niche industry a decade ago, accounted for more than $32 billion in retail sales in 2013. The same can be said for the specialty foods sector that has experienced a rebound as the economy picked up and consumers are willing to spend a little extra money on something indulgent.

According to the “Today’s Specialty Food Consumer Report 2014" from the Specialty Food Association and Mintel International, the specialty foods sector is thriving, experiencing nearly an 8-percent jump in annual sales over last year. In 2014, 145 million people—59 percent of U.S. consumers—purchased specialty foods.

Consumer engagement in specialty foods is broad. Overall, specialty food shoppers are spending 1 in 4 of their food dollars on specialty food, up from 1 in 5 in 2013. At least 1 in 5 specialty food consumers have recently purchased products in each of the total 34 specialty food categories included in the 2014 survey.

Core specialty food consumers are ages 18 to 44 years, earning more than $75,000 annually. Of those consumers, 42 percent said they try new foods in order to eat healthier; 71 percent support companies that practice sustainability; and women are more likely than men to purchase specialty food products. Younger adults report spending more on specialty food than baby boomers and those older, and older consumers buy specialty foods more for everyday cooking at home versus snacking.

Chocolate, olive oil and other specialty oils, and cheese remain the top three categories purchased, with more than half of specialty food consumers buying these products. Tea is a new entrant to the top 10 categories purchased this year, up from No. 15 in 2013.

According to the survey, supermarkets remain the prime location for specialty food consumers to buy specialty foods, largely due to convenience. About one-third of consumers frequent natural food stores and mass merchandisers, while one-quarter of specialty food consumers shop at farmers markets and specialty stores.

“Overall, specialty food consumers have these foods and beverages on hand for regular usage, whether as an everyday snack or meal or as a treat," said Denise Purcell, senior director, content development for the Specialty Food Association. “This daily engagement bodes well for the market as a whole."

The top 10 categories for specialty food sales include chocolate, olive oil/other specialty oils, cheese, coffee, salty snacks, frozen desserts/ice cream, meat/poultry/seafood, non-alcoholic beverages, bread/baked goods and tea. Food and beverage makers have a tremendous opportunity to grow the specialty foods sector with creative new product launches targeting the right demographic. What's more, retailers have a tremendous opportunity to promote specialty food products in a creative and eye-catching manner to attract more consumer interest.

THE FOOD LAW BLOGGER

The Food Law Blogger explores food litigation, including cases involving foodborne illness and labeling disputes, as well as key regulatory developments at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture. Ping Josh Long with story ideas at jlong@vpico.com.

Consumer Group Seeks to Eviscerate New USDA Poultry Inspection System

Josh Longhttp://www.foodproductdesign.com/Blogs/Food-Law-Blogger/2014/09/Consumer-Group-Seeks-to-Eviscerate-New-USDA-Poult.aspx

Print

• E-Mail
• inShare

A consumer rights group wants a federal court to vacate a new poultry inspection system adopted by an agency within the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

The regulations, finalized this summer by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) and taking effect on Oct. 20, would give chicken and turkey slaughterhouses the green light to “dramatically increase their slaughter line speeds, while threatening public health and introducing unwholesome poultry into interstate commerce," Food & Water Watch contends in the lawsuit.

The new inspection system violates the Poultry Products Inspection Act because it eliminates mandatory inspection requirements and the regulations were finalized before the opportunity for public comment, according to the suit, which was filed on Sept. 11 in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. The lawsuit also contends the regulations are arbitrary and capricious.

FSIS did not immediately respond on Thursday, Sept. 19, to a request for comment.

On July 31, the food-safety agency announced a new poultry inspection system that it said imposes new requirements to control Salmonella and Campylobacter and would prevent up to 5,000 foodborne illnesses annually. Under the inspection system, poultry companies will review carcasses for defects, a move FSIS said will free up its inspectors to focus on food-safety examinations.

The poultry industry expressed support for the new inspection system before the regulations were finalized. Rather than being confined to examining the dead birds for physical defects such as bumps and bruises, FSIS inspectors will have flexibility to search for causes of foodborne illnesses such as Salmonella, said Keith Williams, vice president of communications and marketing with the National Turkey Federation, in a phone interview earlier this year. According to a powerpoint presentation from FSIS, such sorting activities largely relate to the marketability of the carcasses rather than food safety.

Consumer and labor groups argued the proposal would compromise food safety and exacerbate the burden on inspectors who already suffer carpel tunnel syndrome and other ailments. Responding to public comments on its proposal, FSIS said the finalized regulations would cap at 140 birds per minute maximum line speeds, remaining consistent with current programs. FSIS had proposed increasing the number of inspections to 175 chickens per minute with one FSIS inspector on the line and one FSIS inspector off the line.

Before FSIS adopted the new regulations, government inspectors examined every carcass, according to Food & Water Watch. The lawsuit estimates the new system will lead to a reduction of as many as 770 federal inspectors.
“USDA’s new system will harm consumers and reverse 100 years of effective government regulation of the meat industry," said Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food & Water Watch, in a statement. “It’s essentially a return to Upton Sinclair’s The Jungle. It’s a huge step backwards for our food safety system."

But USDA said it has learned a great deal about managing pathogens such as Salmonella since it began inspecting poultry more than a half century ago, requiring a more modern approach. FSIS has refuted criticism that fewer inspectors will compromise food safety, citing data from a pilot program showing “greater compliance with sanitation and HACCP regulations, carcasses with lower levels of visible fecal contamination, and equivalent or lower levels ofSalmonella contamination."

“These positive results were able to be achieved with fewer inspectors overall, but more inspectors deployed to more meaningful food safety-based activities," FSIS said in a Q&A on “Poultry Slaughter Modernization."

Under the new system, all poultry facilities must conduct microbiological testing at two points in their production process to demonstrate that they are controlling two common pathogens, Salmonella and Campylobacter. FSIS said it is the first time such requirements have been imposed.

NATURAL FOODS: Egging on Clean-Label Formulation

Egging on Clean-Label Formulation

Lynn Kuntz

August 28, 2014 - Blog

Print

• E-Mail
• in

Clean label is one of those nebulous terms used in the food and beverage industry that lacks a strict definition. It’s a bit like that oft-used definition of porn: A consumer knows it when they see it. But the concept of clean labelgenerally encompasses factors like:  “natural" (this word also open to interpretation); short, simple ingredient lists; no artificial additives or preservatives; and real ingredients your average cook could find in his or her kitchen cupboard. Some consumers may be searching for free-from labels, and others may want their green issues addressed in clean-label products. Whatever the interpretation, the general concept is becoming a huge force in the market.

According to a 2013 Datamonitor survey, when asked ““How appealing do you find the following food and drink product concept? A product that is formulated with the lowest number of ingredients possible." Almost ¾ (72 percent) of U.S. respondents said they would find it "somewhat" or "very" appealing.
So, for many formulations, that means a back-to-basics approach. One ingredient that fits well with this strategy is the familiar egg, which comes in a variety of ingredient forms to facilitate its use in manufacturing and can provide a range of functionalities, from emulsification to color. Elisa Maloberti, director of egg product marketing, American Egg Board, Park Ridge, Illinois, shares with Food Product Design readers why the functional and nutritional properties of real eggs are grounded in real science, and how eggs can improve quality and consumer acceptance in this growing clean-label environment.

Simple Solutions with Real Eggs
In an era of technological advancements, the simple solution sometimes is overlooked—but perhaps that simple solution is the best. In the hands of a formulator, the familiar and simple turns to stupendous, with egg ingredients supplying 20-plus functional benefits from aeration to whipping in multiple applications.  In addition, eggs are a good source of bioavailable protein plus a host of other vitamins and minerals.

Some simple facts might show there is more to egg ingredients than meets the eye.

Simple Solutions: Real Eggs are GMO-Free
Eggs in their natural state—in their shells—are not a genetically modified (GM), or bioengineered, food. In fact, neither chickens nor eggs are genetically modified. Misconceptions might arise because corn and soybeans grown in the United States might be genetically modified, and these form the primary constituents of most animals’ feeds. However, none of the genetic materials pass through the hen to the egg; they are completely digested. Regardless of the type of feed the hen consumes, her digestive process breaks down the proteins and nucleic acids present. ¹

Simple Solutions: Egg Ingredients Create Clean Labels
As stated before, egg ingredients supply more than 20 functional benefits to food formulations yet are listed simply as “eggs" on the product label. While a recent flurry of lawsuits might have food formulators searching for synonyms for the word “natural," the concept of transparency and simplicity is going strong. Consumers prefer product labels with ingredient names they recognize and can easily pronounce. If a formulator is considering alternatives to eggs, for example, any method will more than likely involve multiple ingredients in order to mimic the properties available from the egg. Egg ingredients help products remain clean and simple on the label while maintaining the proper texture, appearance, taste, color and desired shelf life.

Simple Solutions: Egg Ingredients Help Create Gluten-Free Foods
Proper formulating within the baking segment is critical to gluten-free product success. The gluten matrix provides dough with extensibility, resistance to stretch, mixing tolerance and gas-holding ability. The protein in wheat also needs to be replaced when absent from bread, for proper formation and structure. Egg ingredients perform superbly in gluten-free formulations, contributing protein, binding, aeration, humectancy, moisture and color.

Simply Sustainable
The results of a 50-year impact study found that egg farmers are reducing their environmental impact while continuing to supply the needs of a U.S. population that has increased 72 percent over this same time period. Today’s hens are producing more eggs and living longer due to better health, nutrition and living environments. At the same time by instituting scientific advances for feed and improving efficiencies, egg farms are producing less waste, using less water and have cut greenhouse gas emissions by 71 percent.

Elisa Maloberti is the Director of Egg Product Marketing for the American Egg Board (AEB). American Egg Board (AEB) is the U.S. egg producers’ communications link to educate food manufacturers and developers of new food products about the functionality and nutritional benefits of eggs. Visit aeb.org.

To find out more about the simple solutions egg ingredients can supply to formulators, interested parties can sign up for the National Egg Products School hosted at Auburn University, September 15-17, 2014. This biannual seminar brings together the brightest minds involved in egg production and functional ingredient applications for a combination of educational lectures and practical hands-on laboratory sessions in Auburn, Alabama. Participants can earn continuing education credits for Research Chefs Association or the Institute of Food Technologists. Seeaufsi.auburn.edu/neps/. 

Organic Food May Contain More Antioxidants Versus Conventional

Organic Food May Contain More Antioxidants Versus Conventional

Rachel Adams

August 01, 2014 - Blog

Print

• E-Mail
• in

• 

Organic foods and crops—including fruits, vegetable and grains—may have more antioxidants and fewer, less frequent pesticide residues than their conventional counterparts.

A recent study looked at 343 peer-reviewed publications comparing the nutritional quality and safety of organic and conventional plant-based foods, and found that overall, organic crops had 18 to 69 percent higher concentrations of antioxidant compounds. Specifically, the organic crops had 19 percent more phenolic acids, 69 percent more flavanones, 28 percent more stilbenes, 26 percent more flavones, 50 percent more flavonols, and 51 percent more anthocyanins.

An organic label on food and beverage products can translate to a healthy bottom line for manufacturers. In fact, according to this FoodTech Toolbox infographic, sales of products labeled as “organic" reached $8.9 billion in 2013. However, labeling foods as “organic" can open manufacturers up to unwanted legal hassle if not implemented correctly.  (For a closer look at the legal implications of food product labeling, check out the FoodTech Toolbox slide show, “Legal Pitfalls in Marketing and Labeling Food Products.")

Since organic farmers are not allowed to apply synthetic pesticides, the research also unveiled that pesticide residues were three to four times more likely in conventional foods than organic ones.

While crops harvested from organically-managed fields sometimes contain pesticide residues, the levels are usually 10-fold to 100-fold lower in organic food, compared to the corresponding, conventionally grown food. Specifically, researchers found that conventional crops had about twice as much cadmium, a toxic heavy metal contaminant, as organic crops. They hypothesized that certain fertilizers approved for use only on conventional farms somehow make cadmium more available to plant roots.

Preserving Foods the Natural Way

Preserving Foods the Natural Way

Lynn Kuntz

July 24, 2014 - Blogs

Print

• E-Mail
• in

Replacing synthetic preservatives with effective natural ingredients is not a new concept, but interest is currently at an all time high as consumer sentiment shifts to a “natural is better" mindset. One of the trickier areas is antimicrobials that work against spoilage organisms and provide pathogen protection. Two recent studies have added to the body of knowledge on the topic. One discusses the use of cinnamon as a as a natural antibacterial agent, and the other analyzed the use and safety of commonly used preservatives and other additives, both synthetic and naturally derived.

In the first study,“Inhibitory effect of Cinnamomum cassia oil on non-O157 Shiga toxin-producing Escherichia coli," (Food Control, Vol. 46, Dec. 2014, pp 374–381), researchers tested the antibacterial efficacy  of oil from C. cassia, a widely used spice, on CDC’s “top six" non-O157 STECs ( O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145 serotypes). "The oil can be incorporated into films and coatings for packaging both meat and fresh produce," said co-author Lina Sheng, a graduate student in the School of Food Science, Washington State University. Pullman. "It can also be added into the washing step of meat, fruits or vegetables to eliminate microorganisms." The study found that cassia oil is effective in low concentrations; rates as low as 0.025% (v/v) in water killed the bacteria within 24 hours.

Cinnamaldehyde provides the characteristic flavor and aroma to cinnamon and is also known for antimicrobial properties. Analysis by GC/MS found that the cinnamaldehyde content of the C. cassia oil used in this study was 59.96%. Cassia cinnamon comes mainly from Indonesia and has a stronger, harsher odor than Ceylon cinnamon (C. zeylanicum), which is often considered “true cinnamon."

The second paper, “Adding Molecules to Food, Pros and Cons: A Review on Synthetic and Natural Food Additives," Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, Vol. 13, No.4, pp 377–399, July 2014, DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12065) looked at a number of food-additive categories, including antimicrobials. The authors discussed synthetic antimicrobials commonly used in food including organic acids and their salts (such as benzoic, acetic, sorbic and propionic), nitrates, etc. They identified studies that brought their safety under scrutiny, as well as those that refuted claims of harm or toxicity. The paper also identified a number of natural antimicrobials that can be added to food, which typically are terpenes (e.g. thymol, carvacrol), peptides (e.g. nisin), polysaccharides (e.g. chitosan) and phenolic compounds (e.g. eugenol). Antimicrobial technologies, such as preservative films and modified atmosphere packaging, and processes such as pulsed-light, high pressure, pulsed-electric, and magnetic fields, high-pressure processing, ionizing radiation and ultraviolet radiation, are other methods discussed as solutions.

Some of these have gone beyond the experimental phase and are commercially available, some have yet to prove effective. There are a number of barriers. For example, like cinnamaldehyde, many naturally occurring compounds can impart flavors. While the flavor of cinnamon might hold appeal in a Moroccan tagine or Cincinnati-style chili that uses cinnamaldehyde, it’s probably not going to be quite as well-received in orange chicken or Southern fried chicken.

Another issue, is that while many of these natural compounds seem innocuous and may even deliver health benefits—cinnamaldehyde looks to be an anti-diabetic compound, for example—their safety is not assured just because they are “natural." And increased use could invoke that cautionary phrase “The poison is in the dose." And even a high level of use doesn’t guarantee that their efficacy against bacteria, yeast or molds with be as good as the synthetics. This could be a potential safety issue when looking at improving pathogen protection in foods.

Natural product protection is becoming a priority in the food industry. However, while the additive paper authors were referring to benzoates, they made a claim that likely holds true for many synthetic antimicrobials"… the only way they will be removed as additives is when a substitute with the same effect and no toxicity is found. Without these compounds, food spoilage and poisoning would have a much higher incidence."
   -Lynn A. Kuntz

FUNCTIONAL FOOD DEVELOPMENTS: Formulating Functional Beverages

Formulating Functional Beverages

Rachel Adams

July 17, 2014 - Blogs

Print

• E-Mail
• in

Functional beverages inherently address two top concerns for consumers: nutrition and convenience. However, like any other food and beverage product, taste is a primary concern, and, when it comes to formulating functional beverages, maintaining the taste, texture, mouthfeel and overall quality consumers expect can be a challenge.
Determining what benefit a functional beverage will provide—and how consumers will receive it—is the first, and possibly most important, consideration when designing a functional beverage.

For example, in the energy drinks sector, companies like 5-hour Energy and Monster Energy launched women-friendly energy drinks after market research showed busy moms consume more energy drinks than other demographics. In fact, busy moms are more likely to use energy drinks than young, post-college adults and singles in their 20s and 30s.

Monster’s beverage, “Zero Ultra," features no sugar or calories, a sweeter flavor and packaging with feminine design elements. 5-hour Energy pumped up its selection with a pink lemonade offering, and contributed a portion of its sales to a breast cancer foundation. Both beverages saw immense success, prompting Monster to release another similar product with plans for a third.

Of course, pumping a beverage full of a highly-sought ingredient doesn’t automatically mean success. If the beverage is lacking on taste, texture or other sensory attributes, consumers won’t come back for more.
Achieving good taste is one of the biggest challenges to overcome when creating a functional beverage. Many nutritional ingredients tend to contribute off-flavors, which may require the use of masking agents or other ingredients or processing methods to improve taste.

And to improve texture in functional beverages, proper use of gums and starches can aid in providing desired sensory attributes when adding nutritional components.

However, creating a beverage that provides benefits consumers are seeking, and also provides quality sensory attributes and good taste is only part of the challenge. Product designers must ensure functional ingredients remain effective through the product’s shelf life.

Each functional ingredient’s efficacy should be evaluated in the finished product to ensure functionality. Sensitive ingredients can also be protected from degradation during shelf-life via encapsulation.

For a closer look at formulating functional beverages—including trending functional ingredients—download Food Product Design’s free Digital Issue, “Functional Foods & Beverages."

FOOD FACTS: Fear of Foods and Effective Science Communication

Fear of Foods and Effective Science Communication

Lynn Kuntz

July 03, 2014 - Blogs

Print

• E-Mail
• in

Yesterday, in this blog, I discussed a recent Cornell study published in the journal Food Quality and Preference(“Ingredient-Based Food Fears and Avoidance: Antecedents and Antidotes," May 20, 2014), that examined the concept of food fears among consumers (mothers in particular) and what can be done to correct misperceptions regarding the safety and health implications of various ingredients in the market today. The study’s authors suggested countering misinformation with education and making the consumer more familiar with the ingredients’ history and use.

But is that as simple as it sounds, particularly given the relentless publicity and drama given such phrases as “pink slime’ and “yoga mat chemicals," and the oft-repeated narrative that “Big Food" and “Big Ag" is in cahoots with the devil, or at least Dr. Evil?

So I posed the question to one of the study’s researchers, Aner Tal, Ph.D., Post-Doctoral Research Associate, Food and Brand Lab Dyson School of Applied Economics, Cornell University: Who would be best to communicate the science behind food/ingredients in terms of believability—and w

His answer: “Well, it depends. Different audiences may attribute credibility differentially to different sources. For example, government sources are more credible to some people, less to others. For some, the opinion of their faith healer might represent the epitome of truth. There might not be a consensus as to what source is the most credible. That said, science and modern medicine still hold some weight in current American society, and so knowing that information comes from a scientific source might help boost its believability. That’s because there is a lot of trust in science as the best ‘source of truth,’ so that if something appears scientific, it’s more credible." He mentioned that the Cornell group has an article coming out later in the year about this topic.

Science is great. I love science. Most of my favorite people love science. But what happens when it’s industry-funded science? After all, we know Food Babe is not bankrolling research. And it’s not just the Food Babes of the world given the accusatory tone of Marion Nestle’s “Guess Who Funded the Study" column. (By the way: Props to commenter Henry Chin on the “Food Politics" site comments as well as to our guest blogger Kevn Klatt for their explanation and analysis of the science.)

Tal replied: “Replication. Accumulated evidence by different parties. Knowledge is not absolute, and as the blog entry you provided says, we sometimes see contradictory results. And sometimes how results are presented is a matter of representation—numbers rarely tell a story on their own—it’s the words you use to describe them that do. I’m all in favor of people being skeptical consumers of information: it’s good to ask: ‘What’s the basis for a particular claim?’ ‘How were particular studies behind it conducted? “So how do we trust that a phenomenon is real? By seeing repeated evidence from credible sources. And by being a critical reader of scientific reports. If the researchers behind particular findings are credible, they are hopefully not lying (though there have historically been cases of that as well). Most researchers would not risk their reputation by publishing poor quality work. But there is still room to critically read their results to see how studies were conducted and how results were interpreted. And there is room for continued debate in follow up research —always. Science is a continuous process, not the arbiter of absolute truth. Claims should be supported by multiple sources and from multiple angles, while adhering to the standards of scientific research.

“And to answer your question more concretely, I think transparency is a possible solution (allowing people to assess the basis for claims), as well as critical examination by disinterested parties. That is what the peer review process is for, although it certainly doesn’t vouch absolutely against errors," Tal concluded.

While I agree wholeheartedly with Tal’s reply, that still leads to a number of questions that have no easy answers. Where exactly would the study funding for “multiple sources" come from in this age of austerity? And how do we encourage people to be “critical readers of scientific reports"?
   -Lynn A. Kuntz

THE NATURAL FOOD DEBATE CONTINUES - What are your views?

The ‘Natural’ Debate

Rachel Adams

July 03, 2014 - Blogs

Print

• E-Mail
• inShare

Amid a maelstrom of class-action lawsuits, use of the seemingly simple word “natural" is one of the most risky
decisions today’s beverage innovators can make. Whether a product claims to be free of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) or gluten, or identifies itself as a beverage or dietary supplement, marketing and labeling issues have hit a whole new level of complexity.

In the free report, “The ‘Natural’ Debate and Other Regulatory Obscurities," a panel of experts shared an update on the controversial nature of natural, along with practical insight for the future.

Justin J. Prochnow, attorney and shareholder at Greenberg Traurig LLP, detailed some of the key regulatory and legal issues facing beverage and liquid dietary supplement companies. He also explained the threat of a class-action lawsuit has become one of the biggest concerns for brand holders. The lawsuits, frequently positioned as false or deceptive advertising actions, have covered a wide range of issues, with “all-natural" or “100-percent natural" claims leading the way.

Despite the shaky ground, Mark Rampolla, founder and former CEO of ZICO® Beverages, acknowledged the stakes are more lucrative than ever. Not only does “natural" represent a fundamental shift in what consumers are looking to drink, it also constitutes one of the fastest-growing segments of the beverage industry—one that’s birthed a number of mega brands.

In fact, according to Peter Leighton, founder of Abunda, more products on store shelves are using the term “natural" in some manner to help ingratiate the brands to consumers. As such, it’s important for marketers to provide clear information about a brand’s environmental and nutritional advantages.

The silver lining of the litigious environment, as pointed out by Eric Skae, CEO of The Bricktown Group, is that brands must reconsider what’s in their products. Additionally, it’s made the USDA organic and verified non-GMO seals much more relevant for beverages.

To read the full report, visit SupplySide Beverage Insights.