Showing posts with label unhealthy beverages. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unhealthy beverages. Show all posts

Sunday, 7 September 2014

APPETIZER The DNA of our love for coffee: How caffeine’s effects are rooted in nature and the evolution of the java plant


The DNA of our love for coffee: How caffeine’s effects are rooted in nature and the evolution of the java plant

Why is the caffeine in coffee different from that in chocolate? It's related to how the plant developed, scientists say.
Alan Diaz/AP filesWhy is the caffeine in coffee different from that in chocolate? It's related to how the plant developed, scientists say.
  •  
WASHINGTON — Scientists have woken up and smelled the coffee — and analyzed its DNA.
They found that what we love about coffee — the caffeine — is a genetic quirk, not related to the caffeine in chocolate or tea.
“It’s an accident that has been frozen in place very likely by the influence of natural selection,” says University of Buffalo evolutionary biologist Victor Albert. He and more than 60 other researchers from around the world mapped out the genetic instruction book of java. Their results were published Thursday in the journal Science.
Albert says researchers discovered that caffeine developed separately in the coffee, tea and chocolate because it is in different genes in different areas of plants’ genomes.
But once coffee mutated to have caffeine — not just in the bean, there’s even more in the leaves — it turned out to be a good thing for the plant, Albert says. Bugs don’t chew on the coffee plant leaves because they don’t like the caffeine, but pollinators like bees do.
‘I wouldn’t be able to do all this fabulous work on coffee if it weren’t for the coffee itself’
“So pollinators come back for more — just like we do for our cups of coffee,” Albert says, admitting he also likes the buzz.
“It wakes me up every morning,” Albert says. “I wouldn’t be able to do all this fabulous work on coffee if it weren’t for the coffee itself.”
University of North Carolina plant genomics professor Jeff Dangl, who wasn’t part of the study, notes “natural selection to help coffee plants deter insects turned out so well for us.” But he adds, “Unfortunately, coffee is now under epidemic attack by pathogens that are not deterred by caffeine, and we need all the clever genetics and genomics to save it.”
The research will be presented next week at the 25th International Conference on Coffee Science in Colombia.

Tuesday, 2 September 2014

FOOD FORMULATIONS: Diet Beverages: Encouraging Unhealthy Selections?

Formulating Foods explores the latest health and nutrition news and research—as well as the latest ingredient and food application innovations—to determine what consumers want (and need) from the food and beverage products they consume, and how industry can make it happen. 

Diet Beverages: Encouraging Unhealthy Selections?
 - Blog
Print


New research from Texas Christian University (TCU) suggests that drinking beverages sweetened with non-caloric sweeteners—versus drinking water or a sugar-sweetened beverage—may encourage unhealthy diet choices.
For the study, published this month in the journal Appetite, researchers conducted three experiments in which 116 participants ages 18 to 25 years were randomly given an unmarked cup filled with either a non-caloric sweetened beverage (a diet soda), a sugar-sweetened beverage (regular soda) or non-sweetened beverage (sparkling water). Researchers then measured their cognition, snack choices and responses to sugary food.

In the first experiment, the diet soda drinkers were faster to identify the names of high-calorie foods (like hamburger or milkshake) than participants who drank a non-sweetened or sugar-sweetened beverage. “There was no difference among the groups in identifying the words of low-calorie foods like ‘apple’ or ‘carrot’," said study author Sarah Hill, associate professor of psychology, TCU. Hill suggested these results may indicate that diet beverages “prime you to choose unhealthy food items. Those foods are on your mind."

In the second experiment, participants—who were told they were taking part in a consumer product study—were given the choice to take home a bag of chocolate candy, a pack of sugar-free gum or a bottle of spring water. The diet soda drinkers were significantly more likely to choose the high-calorie candy than were the participants who had regular soda or sparkling water.

Finally, to test participants’ response to sugar, researchers had the volunteers eat as many cookies as they wanted and then report on their satisfaction. “We found that drinking a diet drink didn’t change how many cookies they ate," Hill said, “but the participants who had the diet drink did report feeling less satisfied after eating."
But don’t think sugary beverages get a free pass.

Hill notes that, in the sugar response experiment, there was no difference in the number of cookies eaten by those who drank regular soda and plain water. “People just don’t seem to compensate for the calories consumed in a beverage," Hill said. “Even if we consciously think about it, a less deliberate part of our mind might not really register those calories."

Sweetening beverages has presented its share of challenges—sugar-sweetened beverages have been blamed as lead contributors of the obesity epidemic, while non-nutritive sweeteners have been blamed for weight gain and increased cravings. As pressure continues to mount on nationwide sugars intake (as with FDA’s recent proposal to include “added sugars" on the Nutrition Facts panel), product designers are forced to find ingredients that can reduce calories and maintain the sensory qualities consumers seek, often in “natural," clean-label solutions.
The Food Product Design FoodTech Toolbox recently took a close look at the sweeteners landscape in this freereport, to help mitigate some of these challenges that come with reducing sugar content in products. 

Saturday, 5 July 2014

HEALTH & WELLNESS: New York’s Highest Court Kills Restriction on Big Sodas

New York’s Highest Court Kills Restriction on Big Sodas
 - Blogs
Print



Nearly two years after the Big Apple adopted a controversial restriction on large sodas in an effort to combat obesity, New York’s highest court has permanently killed the “Portion Cap Rule."

New York City lawyers have exhausted their appeals. That’s good news for the beverage and restaurant industries. They claimed in a 2012 lawsuit that the rule—the brainchild of former mayor Michael Bloomberg—would have imposed undue burdens and was arbitrary and capricious because it excluded a number of businesses.
Sixteen months ago, a state judge enjoined local officials from enforcing the restriction on sugary drinks, and two appeals courts in New York have upheld the ruling invalidating the city’s decision. The most recent ruling by the New York State Court of Appeals comprised the final blow to the Portion Cap Rule.

“We are pleased that the lower courts’ decisions were upheld.  It would have created an uneven playing field for thousands of small businesses in the city and limited New Yorkers’ freedom of choice," said Chris Gindlesperger, a spokesman with the American Beverage Association. “With this ruling behind us, we look forward to collaborating with city leaders on solutions that will have a meaningful and lasting impact on New Yorkers and families across the country."
New York City officials said the decision wouldn’t dissuade them from pursuing solutions to address obesity. "The June 26 ruling does not change the fact that sugary drink consumption is a key driver of the obesity epidemic," Health Commissioner Mary Bassett said, “and we will continue to look for ways to stem the twin epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes by seeking to limit the pernicious effects of aggressive and predatory marketing of sugary drinks and unhealthy foods."

Zachary Carter, New York City Law Department Corporation Counsel, echoed those remarks. “Given the magnitude of this epidemic, we have no doubt that the Board will continue to address the obesity crisis and the role of over-consumption of sugary drinks," he said.

Relying on a 1987 case that distinguished between legislative action and rulemaking, the New York State Court of Appeals found the health board exceeded its authority, encroaching on the powers of the City Council.
“An agency that adopts a regulation, such as the Portion Cap Rule or an outright prohibition of sugary beverages, that interferes with commonplace daily activities preferred by large numbers of people must necessarily wrestle with complex value judgments concerning personal autonomy and economics," Associate Justice Eugene Pigott wrote for the majority. “That is policy-making, not rule-making."

But in a dissenting opinion in which Chief Judge Jonathan Lippman concurred, Associate Justice Susan Read said the majority rendered the wrong decision because the health board had authority to impose the restriction on sugary drinks.

New York’s “legislature has entrusted the Board to act with a great deal of discretion, while also ensuring that it will address specified areas of concern, and has provided procedures for doing so," Read declared. “That the residents of New York City no longer count typhoid and dysentery among their chief health concerns is a sign that those scourges have been conquered, not a ground for preventing the Board from turning its attention to contemporary public health threats."

The majority’s ruling will most certainly not end the contemporary debate on how the United States should tackle an obesity epidemic compromising the health of millions of Americans and whether Congress, states and local governments should impose restrictions on fatty and sugary foods and beverages. In fact, California recently proposed a state law that would have required a warning label on sugar-sweetened beverages. But the bill recently died after it failed to clear the California Committee on Health.

The conversation over the role of government in promoting nutrition could soon shift to Capitol Hill where Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) intends to introduce a bill to tax sugar-laden beverages.

Expect vigorous opposition to such legislation from the beverage industry.

“If we want to get serious about obesity, it starts with education – not laws and regulation," said Gindlesperger of the American Beverage Association. “Politicians should focus on what matters most – education, jobs and the economy – and leave the grocery shopping to us.  What you eat, drink and feed your family is your choice and not the government’s.  People don’t support taxes and bans on common grocery items, like soft drinks.  That’s why the public policy debate has moved on from taxes and bans and onto real solutions."

But DeLauro indicated the relatively inexpensive cost of soda is contributing to the overconsumption of sugar.
“Added sugar is pervasive and almost inescapable at the supermarket," she recently said. "And of course many times it is the sugary foods and drinks that are the easiest for families living on the edge of poverty to afford. When a two-liter cola is 99 cents and blueberries are over three dollars, something has gone very wrong."

Thursday, 3 July 2014

HEALTH & WELLNESS: How strong is your summer drink? Calculating the alcoholic punch of beverages can be tricky in patio season

How strong is your summer drink? Calculating the alcoholic punch of beverages can be tricky in patio season

Your gender, the amount of booze in the cocktail and the temperature and humidity outside can all change the way alcohol affects the body.
Getty ImagesYour gender, the amount of booze in the cocktail and the temperature and humidity outside can all change the way alcohol affects the body.
WASHINGTON — How strong is that pina colada? Depending on how it’s made, it could contain as much alcohol as two glasses of wine.
The U.S. National Institutes of Health is trying to spread the word: Take a look at its online alcohol calculator to see how much you’re really drinking with those summer cocktails.
“Most people don’t realize how much alcohol is actually in a drink,” said Dr. George Koob, director of the NIH’s National Institute on Alcohol Abuse andAlcoholism.A “standard drink” is the amount of alcohol in a 12-ounce beer, five ounces of wine or 1.5 ounces of distilled spirits. It’s a useful way to track alcohol consumption. But the multiple ingredients of mixed drinks make for a harder count.
“Obviously it depends on the bartender and who’s mixing the drinks,” Koob adds.
Recipes matter: The calculator’s pina colada example, for instance, assumes it contains three ounces of rum. Plan on using two ounces instead? The calculator adjusts to show it’s like 1.3 standard drinks.
What about a margarita? The calculator concludes it’s the equivalent of 1.7 standard drinks, if made with 1.5 ounces of tequila, an ounce of orange liqueur and half an ounce of lime juice.
A mojito? 1.3 standard drinks. A martini, extra dry? 1.4 standard drinks.
Other favourites? Type them in on this calculator.
And beyond beverage choices, Koob, who specializes in the neurobiology of alcohol, has some other tips:
SUMMER HEAT
Heat increases thirst but alcohol is a diuretic, Koob notes. So in addition to the usual advice to pace yourself — no more than one standard drink an hour — Koob says to stay hydrated by alternating some water or club soda with the alcohol.
GENDER DIFFERENCES
Women’s bodies react differently to alcohol, and not just because they tend to weigh less than men. They don’t metabolize alcohol as quickly, and their bodies contain less water. On average, it takes one less drink for a woman to become intoxicated than a man of the same weight, Koob said. The NIAAA’s definition of low-risk drinking for women is no more than 7 drinks a week and no more than three drinks on any single day, while for men the limit is no more than 14 drinks a week and no more than four drinks on any single day.
BEYOND DRINKING AND DRIVING
Holiday weekends are historically dangerous on the highways: 38% of fatalities involved alcohol-impaired driving over the July 4th weekend in 2011, according to the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
But alcohol also doesn’t mix with boating, or swimming and diving, Koob warns. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, alcohol use is involved in up to 70% of adult and adolescent deaths associated with water recreation.
HOLDING YOUR ALCOHOL
What determines why one drink is plenty for one person while another routinely downs two or three? Genes play a big role. So do environmental factors, such as getting used to drinking a certain amount. That tolerance is a balancing act, Koob says. He cites research showing the person who can drink others under the table is at higher risk for alcohol problems later in life than is someone more sensitive to its effects.
WHEN ALCOHOL IS A PROBLEM
Alcohol use disorders affect an estimated 17 million Americans. There are two medications that can help, targeting different steps in the addiction cycle, Koob said. More medications that work in different ways are needed, but changing lifestyle, cognitive therapy and support groups all play a role, he said.
Medications “are never going to cure the disease,” Koob said. “What they will do is help you on the way.”

Friday, 27 June 2014

ENERGY DRINKS: Are More Americans Croaking from Caffeinated Energy Drinks?

Are More Americans Croaking from Caffeinated Energy Drinks?
 - Blogs
Print


Since 2004, 34 deaths reported to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have been linked to energy drinks, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest.

The non-profit education organization and a lawyer representing the parents of a deceased teenager, Anais Fournier, obtained the documents under the Freedom of Information Act. Fournier’s parents sued Monster Beverage Corp. for wrongful death, though the energy company has blamed her death on a preexisting medical condition.
Fournier’s case is just one of dozens of fatalities tied to an energy drink sector under close watch by consumer advocates, regulators and lawmakers.

Twenty two deaths have been linked to 5-Hour Energy, 11 fatalities have been linked to Monster, and one death has been linked to Rockstar, according to CSPI in a June 25 press release. CSPI revealed 17 previously unreported deaths linked to energy drinks since late 2012.

"As I see in my medical practice, energy drinks are clearly causing symptomatic arrhythmias," said Dr. Stacy Fisher, director of complex heart diseases at University of Maryland School of Medicine, in the release. "These new reports of deaths and other injuries raise the level of concern about the adverse effects of energy drinks."

According to the results of the public records request, FDA received 276 adverse event reports (AERs) connected to energy drinks between Jan. 1, 2004 and March 10, 2014. Of the non-fatalities, 42 involved life-threatening injuries while 115 incidents resulted in hospitalization, CSPI said.

5-Hour Energy and Rockstar did not respond to requests for comment. Monster referred an inquiry to the American Beverage Association, which also did not respond to a request for comment.

The adverse event reports (AERs) don’t prove the energy drinks actually caused the events, FDA representatives have consistently said.

“FDA has and continues to investigate every one of these reports to try to determine whether the product caused or contributed to the event," said FDA spokesman Arthur Whitmore. “Frequently there are other complicating factors, such as existing disease or medications the person may have been taking. Often, despite our best efforts, we are unable to get more information, either because of a lack of medical records or contact information."

Whitmore said the agency has been studying energy drinks for years to determine if they pose an increased risk to consumers other than the caffeine in the products that must be declared on the label.

In a letter Wednesday to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, CSPI asked the agency to start a rulemaking in order to require warning labels on energy drinks to let consumers know about the potential risks of a convulsion, heart attack or other adverse side effects.

Many substances found in energy drinks—including caffeine, guarana, taurine, glucuronolactone, and ginseng—may produce harmful effects, CSPI warned in the letter. “As far as we can tell, the FDA has not examined some of those ingredients for safety, effectiveness, purity, or interactions with other energy-drink ingredients," the organization said.