Friday, 31 May 2013

HEALTH ALERT: Low carb, high protein diets may be unhealthy in the long term

Low carb, high protein diets may be unhealthy in the long term

Published in EUFIC

Low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets (an example of such a diet could be the Atkins diet), are popular for weight control. Short-term intervention studies suggest that these diets produce a similar weight loss to traditional high-carbohydrate, moderate-protein diets. However, a large observational study has suggested that low-carbohydrate, high-protein diets may not be healthy in the long run.

Researchers from Greece used data from the multi-centered EPIC trial (European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition) to investigate relationships between mortality and dietary composition. 22,950 healthy adults aged between 20 – 86 were followed between 1993 and 2003. Diets were recorded using a validated food frequency questionnaire.

It was found that there was significantly lower mortality risk for those adults with the highest carbohydrate intake, while diets richer in protein were associated with a non-significant higher risk of mortality. For subjects who followed a dietary pattern which combined the highest protein and lowest carbohydrate content within the sample, the risk of mortality increased. The authors suggest that these types of diets may not be a healthy option in the long-term.

For more information, see
Trichopoulou A et al (2007). Low-carbohydrate-high-protein diet and long-term survival in a general population cohort. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol 61, pp 575-581.

EUFIC related material:Nutrition-Protein
Nutrition-Carbohydrates
Health & Lifestyle-Diet & weight control

Published inn EUFIC

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

The book is available on Amazon and Kindle for $4.99 USD. Visit amazon/Kindle to order now:
http://www.amazon.ca/Social-Media-Marketing-Agri-Foods-ebook/dp/B00C42OB3E/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1364756966&sr=1-1

Written by Bruce MacDonald, a 30 year veteran of the Agri-food industry, in "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain", Bruce applies his background and expertise in Agri-foods and social media to the latest trends, tools and methodologies needed to craft a successful on-line campaign. While the book focuses on the Agri-food market specifically, I believe that many of the points Bruce makes are equally applicable to most other industries.

5 OR MORE CUPS OF COFFEE A DAY INCREASES WEIGHT GAIN, DIABETES RISK

Published May 30, 2013 in Food Product Design

PERTH, Australia—Individuals who drink 5 or more cups of coffee a day may put themselves at risk for weight gain and an increased risk of diabetes, according to a new study published in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry. The findings suggest a polyphenol in coffee called chlorogenic acid (CGA) known to reduce blood pressure and aid weight loss has the opposite effect in large doses.
Researchers from the Western Australian Institute for Medical Research (WAIMR) and the University of Western Australia's School of Medicine and Pharmacology found excess consumption of CGA found in coffee could have health implications, from preventing fat loss to developing insulin resistance.
Studies have shown that coffee consumption lowers the risk of developing type 2 diabetes. This also included research on decaffeinated coffee, which suggested that the health benefits are from a compound in coffee apart from caffeine.

“With this in mind, we studied the effects of polyphenols, or more specifically CGAs, which are very rich in coffee but also found in tea and some fruits including plums. The CGAs were previously known for their health benefits, increasing insulin sensitivity and reducing blood pressure and body fat accumulation," the researchers said. “However, this study proved the opposite in dosages equivalent to five or six cups of coffee per day."

The researchers found that the equivalent dose of CGA fed to laboratory mice affected the utilization of fat in the liver and caused abnormal retention of fat within cells. The obese mice also had a tendency for a higher degree of glucose intolerance and increased insulin resistance. They also found CGA doesn't prevent weight gain in obese laboratory mice fed a high-fat diet when used at higher doses.

“It seems that the health effects are dose-dependent. A moderate intake of coffee, up to three to four cups a day still seems to decrease the risk of developing diseases such as cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes," the researchers added. "Everybody knows about the effects of caffeine, but when we're considering our lifestyle choices it's important to remember that compounds such as CGA can have an effect on our health if they're not consumed in moderation."

Sources:

Western Australian Institute for Medical Research: Study Questions the Effectiveness of Coffee for Weight Loss

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

Thursday, 30 May 2013

U.S. RECOGNIZED FOR ROBUST BSE CONTROLS

Published May 30, 2013 in Food Product Design

WASHINGTON—The American Meat Institute (AMI) announced that the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) has recognized the United States as having negligible risk status for bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).

"Negligible risk" is the lowest risk level under the OIE animal health code. Countries with "negligible risk" status have implemented robust BSE controls and done extensive surveillance of their herds to demonstrate this extremely low risk level.

"We are gratified OIE has recognized the health of the U.S. cattle herd and the safety of our beef supply," said AMI President J. Patrick Boyle. "This recognition affirms our two decades of industry, government and scientific community collaboration to protect our cattle and produce safe, wholesome beef products for consumers worldwide."

Sources:

American Meat Institute: American Meat Institute Welcomes World Organization for Animal Health Affirmation of U.S. BSE Controls

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

What are the potential benefits of genetic improvement?

Some of the benefits we and our children can expect in the future include:

Foods with a higher content of vitamins, minerals or protein or lower in fat - making it easier to choose a healthy diet.

Higher yields of crops and therefore more competitive prices

New types of crops and foods

Improved shelf life of fruits and vegetables. Crops able to resist diseases from bacteria and viruses and able to defend themselves against attacks by insects.

Herbicide tolerant crops - this means lesser amounts of herbicides can be used to destroy destructive weeds without destroying the crops as well.

Quicker diagnosis of diseases in plants and animals. Together these benefits will lead to improved quality foods, at lower prices, available to more people throughout the world.

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

The positive influence of family meals on children’s food choice

Published May 29, 2013 in EUFIC

In a recent study, Dr Skafida from the Centre for Population Health Sciences and the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships (University of Edinburgh) explored why family meals lead to better food choices among children. Eating the same food as their parents was most strongly associated with healthier diets in children. Food choice issues seem to play a more important role than type and place of meal.

Using a representative sample of 2,332 five-year-old children from Scotland, face-to-face interviews were conducted with the mothers of these children. The quality of a child’s diet was measured by asking mothers about their children’s consumption frequency of various food categories. The relationship between the quality of children’s diets and meal occurrence, meal habits and meal enjoyment, was investigated. ‘Meal occurrence’ referred to whether children eat more full meals or have the tendency to snack throughout the day. ‘Meal habits’ looked at what mothers could recall about where, when and with whom their children eat. Additionally, mothers were asked about the perceived social quality of their children’s meals, in order to collect data on ‘meal enjoyment’.

Results showed that almost all children (99%) ate one main meal. Of these, most (75%) ate at regular times with one or two parents (90%) around. About 71% ate the same food as their parents. Some mothers (14%) reported that mealtimes were rushed, 19% said that never or only occasionally was there a chance to talk, and a quarter felt that mealtimes are never or only occasionally enjoyable for everyone.
In line with previous research, it was found that the quality of children’s diets is “socially stratified”, meaning children from less advantaged backgrounds also showed poorer quality diets. Furthermore, girls, firstborn, children of mothers with higher education and children of two-parent households showed healthier diets.

Meal habits and meal enjoyment were shown to have a significant effect on the dietary quality of the child. These relationships held true across differences in gender, education of the mother, employment status and/or household composition. Analysis of meal occurrence, on the other hand, indicated that those children who did not eat a main meal but rather snacked on crisps, fruit or sweets all day had significantly poorer diets. Higher quality diets were more present among children with a regular meal schedule, who were reported to have enjoyable and talkative meal times. Location of the meal, i.e. rooms traditionally linked with eating (e.g. kitchen, dining room) also had a positive impact on the dietary quality of the child.

While eating together with their parents or not was not a significant predictor for the quality of the children’s diet, differences in the type of food eaten did influence dietary quality: the more often children ate the same food as their parents, the better the quality of the children’s diet. The differences between these results and previous literature call for further analysis. Contrary to previous research, data from the present study suggests that eating together with the family is a far less important aspect of family meals than previously thought. When the author ‘digs a little deeper’ it becomes clear that the type of food eaten rather than the mere presence of the parents during mealtime accounts for differences in the dietary quality of children. Eating the same food as the parents was the aspect of family meal habits most strongly associated with healthier diets in this study. These findings redirect the attention towards food choice issues, rather than the type and place of a meal. A children’s diet has a higher nutritional quality if children are encouraged to eat what their parents eat.

Data obtained in this study has some limitations. It consists of self-reported answers from children’s mothers, answers could be biased by the mothers’ desired perception of their child and may not necessarily reflect the actual eating habits. Moreover, the role of the father is not explored any further in this study. Future research should include both parents’ diets and dietary habits into the analysis.
Overall, the findings presented above show that eating habits develop during the early years of children in their families. Parents play a crucial role in influencing their children’s dietary behaviour. Public health messages should target parents to encourage and enable them in making healthy food choices both for themselves and their children.

For further information:
Skafida, V., The family meal panacea: exploring how different aspects of family meal occurrence, meal habits and meal enjoyment relate to young children’s diets, Sociology of Health & Illness (2 April 2013)

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

Who’s who in international and European food safety and nutrition?

Within Europe and across the globe, several official organisations have a remit which includes food safety and nutrition. These organisations publish policy documents, develop strategies, monitor food intake or health, and in some cases implement regulations. By their actions, they have the potential to influence the foods that consumers get

Published in EUFIC

World Health Organization (WHO)

This global organisation with its headquarters in Geneva is responsible for co-ordinating health within the United Nations (UN) system. It has a wide remit covering chronic and infectious diseases, mental health, nutrition, food safety, accidents, biohazards, health economics and preventative health. WHO’s wide-reaching role includes providing leadership on global issues (the H1N1 flu virus is an example of this), funding research, setting standards, creating evidence-based policy, monitoring health trends, and providing technical support to individual nations. The WHO headquarters office in Geneva also co-ordinates six satellite offices covering the major regions of the globe. The WHO European office is based in Copenhagen, Denmark where it oversees the public health needs of more than 50 different countries.

As a global organisation, WHO’s policies take into account the needs of poor or emerging nations as well as those of affluent Western nations. WHO’s activities in the area of food safety, diet and nutrition come under two departments: 1) Nutrition & Health, and 2) Food Safety & Zoonoses.
The Nutrition & Health department has four work streams:
1. Growth assessment and surveillance: WHO produces standard growth charts for infants and children up to 19 years, which are used widely by health professionals;

2. Country-focused nutrition policies and programs: WHO provides strategy and guidance to help individual countries develop effective food and nutrition policies. Topics include infant and maternal nutrition, obesity, older people, dietary recommendations, food security and HIV/AIDS. A key report is the Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health;

3. Reduction of micronutrient malnutrition: WHO surveys vitamin and mineral intakes in various populations and publishes recommendations to safeguard intakes, such as vitamin A, iodine and iron;
4. Nutrition in development and crisis: WHO provides technical support and surveillance during emergencies (e.g. war, famine, flood) in order to prevent malnutrition and increase food security.

WHO also works closely with the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition, which is mandated to raise awareness about malnutrition, mobilise commitment to solve problems at global, regional and national levels, and promote international policies to improve food security.

The Department of Food Safety & Zoonoses has responsibility for food safety across the entire food chain. Its aim is to create policies and implement actions that safeguard health, with a special focus on the reduction of food-borne diseases worldwide. Issues have included acrylamide in cooked foods, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) and dioxins in salmon, and biomonitoring of persistent organic pollutants. A major trans-national initiative has been the ‘5 Keys to Safer Food’, which provides training and resources that can be adapted locally to promote good food hygiene. Food safety is also covered by the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN) which is a global network of 177 national food safety authorities.

Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)
With its headquarters based in Rome, the FAO is another important UN organisation. The mandate of FAO is to raise levels of nutrition, improve agricultural productivity, better the lives of rural populations and contribute to the growth of the world economy. It also acts as a neutral forum where different countries can meet to debate international policy and negotiate agreements.

There are eight departments in FAO. Food safety and nutrition pertains to the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Protection. Although FAO covers a broad range of food-related topics, e.g. food composition, additives, nutrition education, risk assessment and quality assurance, the emphasis is on assisting countries where food insecurity is rife. Thus, the work of FAO overlaps with that of WHO in identifying those at risk of malnutrition and putting in place local policies to improve food security. However, FAO has special expertise in food production, animal and plant disease control, and trade.

The FAO facilitates a number of web-based portals where people can access food-related information from different countries. The FAOLEX database brings together national laws and regulations on food, agriculture and renewable natural resources. The Global Forum on Food Security & Nutrition facilitates knowledge transfer between 300 food and nutrition practitioners from five continents. The international portal on Food Safety, Animal & Plant Health facilitates trade and food safety by providing a single access point to official international and national standards and legislation. The FAO statistical databases are a valuable and much used source of information when trends in food consumption are compared time-wise and between different countries. Other activities of FAO include the publication of food composition tables (e.g. for Asian and African foods) and working with WHO to publish scientific advice on food and nutrition (e.g.; requirements for energy and micronutrients). Finally, FAO is the home of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.¹
The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) is an international scientific expert committee that is administered jointly by the two UN organisations. This committee has been meeting twice a year since 1956, initially to evaluate the safety of food additives. Today, it is also tasked with the evaluation of contaminants, naturally occurring toxicants and residues of veterinary drugs in food.

European organisations
As in a number of Member States, risk assessment and risk management with respect to the food supply is tasked to different organisations. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is responsible for risk assessment while the European Commission (EC) is responsible for implementing actions arising from scientific advice, i.e. policy, research and regulation in collaboration with the European Parliament and Member States. Both organisations are described in more detail below.

European Commission (EC)
Within the EC, food safety and nutrition is shared between three policy directorates; Agriculture & Rural Development, Health & Consumers, and Environment, with overlap between remits. Underpinning this work is a substantial research program co-ordinated under various frameworks by the Directorate General (DG) Research.
Within DG Agriculture & Rural Development, topics include food quality, food supply and plant/animal health. Work undertaken includes initiatives to supply dairy products and fruit/vegetables to targeted schools, educational and awareness-raising schemes, and programs to distribute food to disadvantaged communities within the European Union (EU).
The EC is the primary source of food regulations across the EU, with Member States taking the role of enforcers rather than law makers. Topics include provenance, authenticity, addition of nutrients, nutrition claims, health claims, additives and permitted ingredients. The lead directorate in this area is DG Health & Consumers whose activities include labeling, regulation, public health and food chain safety (including animal health and feed as well as food safety).

The DG Health & Consumers also promotes policies to help Member States address lifestyle-related conditions such as obesity, cardiovascular disease and cancer. A key example of work is the Platform for Action on Diet, Physical Activity and Health which co-ordinates trans-national action to reformulate food products, limit marketing of less healthy foods, improve labelling, promote physical activity and educate at-risk populations. Members include a wide variety of European stakeholders ranging from food companies to consumer organisations.

A major partner of this Platform is the High Level Group on Nutrition and Physical Activity, which comprises representatives from all 27 Member States plus the four countries of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). Since 2007, the group has facilitated an exchange of policy ideas and practices around nutrition, food product reformulation and promotion of an active lifestyle through the built environment. A recent outcome has been the creation of a Europe-wide campaign to reduce salt intakes which is set for review in 2010.

European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)
EFSA was set up in 2002 by the EC as an independent authority, in response to a series of food scares, to ensure a high level of consumer protection and help to strengthen confidence in the EU food supply. The remit of the organisation covers the safety of human food and animal feed, nutrition, animal health and welfare, plant protection and plant health.
EFSA complements the regulatory role of the EC, and the policing role of Member States, by providing independent risk assessment and communication on food safety and nutrition matters. This work can be in response to a request from the EC, the European Parliament or a Member State, or can be initiated by EFSA itself. All advice is publicly available.
EFSA has 10 Scientific Panels and an overarching Scientific Committee, comprising independent experts mainly from across the EU. The Panels cover topics such as animal health, food additives, toxicology, genetically-modified organisms, plant health, nutrition and allergies. Panel members are supported by EFSA staff who are responsible for providing data on intakes, methods and exposure in order to inform deliberations. Examples of Panel opinions include the welfare of farmed fish, safety assessment of wild and farmed fish, safety aspects of adding lycopene, taurine and aspartame to foods, setting of nutrient profiles for foods bearing nutrition and health claims, reviews of tolerable intake levels, and advice on citrus pests.

A key development in nutrition is the regulation on Nutrition & Health Claims which involves the EFSA Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies. This Panel has been tasked with working through more than 4000 submitted health claims and delivering opinions on whether or not these are justified by the science. Once this work is complete, the EC will draw up a list of permitted EU-wide health claims which can be used by the food industry to communicate benefits to consumers.

On the topic of safety, a key development is reassessment of the regime to prevent BSE in cattle, which has implications for the meat industry. The Biological Hazards Panel has been involved in assessing the potential risk to human health as a result of these changes in practice.

Further information
World Health Organization www.who.int/enJoint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA)http://www.who.int/ipcs/food/jecfa/en/
Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health reportwww.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/strategy/eb11344/en/index.htmlWHO Briefing note on ‘5 Keys to Safer Food’www.who.int/foodsafety/consumer/Briefing_keys.pdf
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations www.fao.orgEuropean Commission http://ec.europa.eu/policies/index_en.htm
European Food Safety Authority http://www.efsa.europa.eu/
References

EUFIC Food Today n° 44 (2004). What is Codex Alimentarius? Available at:www.eufic.org/article/en/page/FTARCHIVE/artid/codex-alimentarius

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

Healthy plants equal healthy food

Published by European Food Information Council

Consumers may wonder, as they bite into a piece of fresh fruit or crunch on a vegetable, what extra “ingredients” they might be about to swallow. The latest report from the European Commission on pesticides and food should allay any concerns in the minds of those who appreciate the goodness in healthy, fresh produce. Meanwhile, EU policy makers are currently reviewing already strict rules on the use of pesticides in food production to ensure they are applied stringently.

Consumers need not fear the use of pesticides on the food that they eat. According to a report on monitoring programs carried out by EU countries in 2001, most of the products we eat (fruit and vegetables, cereals, and foods of animal and plant origin) which have been treated with pesticides do not carry residues at levels that are harmful. In fact, 96% of samples tested by national authorities and the EU’s Food and Veterinary Office either had no detectable residues at all, or contained quantities so minute that they do not pose any risk.

EU legislation on pesticides, or “plant protection products”, strictly regulates which pesticides, insecticides, fungicides, etc. can be used and how. In 1991, the EU decided that it would check all the products being used in Member States and either authorize them for use throughout the EU, or require that they be taken off the market, depending on the outcome of each assessment.

There are also EU laws that limit how much of a plant protection product may remain in fruit and vegetables, cereals, and foods of animal and plant origin. These laws set so-called “maximum residue limits” which are established from evaluation of data on critical good agricultural practice (the actual or proposed authorised uses) and data from the prescribed residue trials. They are in fact, much stricter than toxicological limits set by scientists. To be sure that the safe legal levels are respected, however, the EU carries out regular monitoring and reporting programs, such as the one mentioned in the first paragraph.

Now, the European Commission is proposing to update some of the legislation relating to the use of plant protection products in the EU. Since 1991, it has become apparent that the 2003 deadline for assessing all the substances being used in plant protection products could not be met. Therefore, the Commission is proposing to extend the deadline to 2008 and to introduce “fast-track” procedures for substances where the decision to authorize or withdraw is clear. Since the EU’s new and independent food safety agency, the European Food Safety Authority is now up and running, it will be involved in reviewing assessments and recommending action. The Commission is also assessing “new” substances put on the market since the 1991 rules were adopted.

Up to now, national authorities could set a residue limit for products marketed in their own countries, if there was no EU limit. However, national differences have caused minor trade disputes in the past because products manufactured in one EU country could not be sold in others with stricter restrictions. This is contrary to the idea of a single European market, where goods and services move freely from one country to another.

Therefore, the European Commission has proposed that residues of products not checked out at EU level should not exceed 0.01 milligrams per kilogram of food. As scientific assessments of products are completed, the EU will set all legal limits in a single legislative text.

Therefore, as long as products that protect plants from disease and hungry bugs are used carefully and in compliance with the law, consumers can continue to enjoy plentiful supplies of nutritious food without unwanted levels of chemicals.

Check out my latest e-book entitled: "Social Media Marketing in Agri-Foods: Endless Profit and Painless Gain".

Wednesday, 29 May 2013

Did the Healthy Food Trends of 2013 come true?

The Healthy Food Trends of 2013

Posted: 04/17/2013 12:25 pm

Carol Dombrow

Registered Dietitian, Health Check

h , Healthy Living Health News , Health Food Trends 2013 , Healthy Eating ,Healthy Food Trends 2013 , Stay Healthy 2013 , Canada Living New

always interested to see if what the experts predict about healthy food trends actually comes true. So, I scanned the internet for the latest healthy food trends and compared them to what I'm seeing in the marketplace. In many cases, it certainly does seem that we are moving in the directions predicted, which is a good thing in terms of healthy eating.

There were a number of predicted trends that I love and hope come true, like minimizing food waste. Right now, we're wasting about 40 per cent of our food and over half of this amount (51 per cent ) is coming from your house and mine.

Reducing our food waste allows us to reduce our food budgets and can improve our nutritional intake. One suggested change that could help reduce waste is the standardization and explanation of what the expiry dates on products mean. Knowing if the food is still safe to eat could potentially reduce waste by 20 per cent. Planning our meals, taking stock of what's in our kitchens and making shopping lists will help to ensure that we only buy the type and amounts of foods we need to make healthy meals and snacks, resulting in less waste.

Experts are also saying that we're going to snack more and have mini-meals. We know that people who snack more often have healthier diets although portion control is key to making this work. Encouraging healthy snacking and ensuring that we have healthy options and suitable portion sizes of foods available in the grocery store, restaurant and vending machines will help make this trend a reality.

As part of the health and wellness trend we are seeing an increase in the variety of healthy products, such as Greek yogurt. This product provides more protein, as well as the other essential nutrients usually found in regular yogurt, making it a great breakfast food. We're also noticing that gluten-free products now have their own section in most supermarkets. This is a service to people with celiac disease, but not sure the expansion of this category developed as a result of this need.

Going gluten-free is a hot topic but we will see how long this lasts. Another trend is the expansion of the availability of different types of grains, such as quinoa, wheat berries, barley, and others being stocked at your regular supermarket. Having increased access to healthier foods is very positive in helping improve Canadians' diets.

Finally, another positive trend I'm seeing is that the consumer is becoming more aware of food and nutrition issues. I see this from the types of questions sent to me on a regular basis by consumers. They want to know more about omega-3 fats, what foods to eat to lower their cholesterol levels, how to reduce their sodium intake, etc. Our job is to deliver the correct information to truly educate the consumer.

Please visit healthcheck.org and heartandstroke.ca for more nutrition information.



50 Of The Healthiest Foods





1 of 51



