Archive for December 7th, 2005
JO EWART MACKENZIE
THE British organic egg market is booming. According to the Soil Association’s Organic Market Report 2005, published earlier this year, the sector is worth £17 million annually, with some egg packers reporting double-figure sales increases to the big retailers during 2004.
However, the growing army of converts could face problems finding home-grown organic eggs in the new year with the introduction of new government legislation. This will set out new requirements for the raising of organic pullets (chicks reared to lay eggs).
While the rules are designed to raise standards in the sector, in the short term at least, it seems consumers might lose out.
Here we take a look at why you might struggle to whip up an organic omelette in 2006 - and what you can do to help turn the situation around.
WHAT’S AN ORGANIC EGG?
An egg that has been laid by an organic pullet which has been fed a natural, GM-free diet and not routinely treated with antibiotics.
Organic egg producers must be registered with one of the ten approved British certification bodies, which adhere to strict EU-enforced regulations.
WHY SHOULD I EAT THEM?
Organic eggs come from free-ranging hens whose flock size is restricted and the birds have access to fresh air and either pastureland or runs on which vegetation grows. Their organic diet also means that their eggs are free from any chemical nasties.
HOW IS THE LAW CHANGING?
Under current regulations, non-organic pullets can be brought on to organic holdings and converted once they are there. However, new legislation to be introduced by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) on 31 December requires any pullets destined for an organic farm to be certified organic prior to arrival, and ideally they will have been reared organically from hatching.
SO WHAT’S THE PROBLEM?
Organic Farmers & Growers (OF&G), a UK organic accreditation body which certifies about 70 per cent of British organic poultry, fears egg producers have not got the message that they will no longer be able to introduce non-organic pullets into their units, and so have not put pressure on pullet rearers to supply birds raised under the new rules. OF&G believes that most rearers may be holding back from adopting the new systems because they are uncertain of demand. So the risk is that organic pullets will be in short supply next year.
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO ME?
Fewer organic pullets in the UK means fewer home-grown organic eggs. Richard Jacobs, chief executive of OF&G, explains: “The rearers are not being made aware of the full level of demand there will be… If this doesn’t change we could be looking, by spring of next year, at having to de-certify egg producers because they cannot get the pullets they require.”
CAN’T WE IMPORT ORGANIC EGGS?
Yes. But more imported produce means more food miles, more greenhouse gas emissions, damaged livelihoods and fragile local economies. Some retailers say they won’t be affected. Marks & Spencer for one doesn’t foresee any issues in availability of home-grown eggs because their producers are British and have been complying with the new regulations for several years.
HOW CAN I SECURE MY SUPPLY?
Demand leads to supply, so if your retailer starts offering only imported stock, lobby them to get home-grown organic eggs back on the shelves. Alternatively, seek out a local egg supplier you trust.
Source: news.scotsman.com
December 7th, 2005
By Caroline E. Mayer
The Washington Post
WASHINGTON — Advertising junk food on television has enticed children into eating massive amounts of unhealthful food, leading to a sharp increase in obesity and diabetes, according to a report issued Tuesday by a prestigious national science advisory panel.
The Institute of Medicine, a government-chartered institution that studied the health effects of food advertising on children for Congress, said most foods and beverages introduced and marketed to children are high in calories, sugar, salt and fat and low in nutrients.
“There is strong evidence that exposure to television advertising is associated with” obesity, the report said.
The institute called on food and beverage manufacturers and restaurants to create more healthful products, and to shift their advertising emphasis to promote them. If these companies fail to do so, the report added, Congress should step in and mandate changes, especially for ads aired on TV.
The institute also called on Congress to enhance nutritional standards and create incentives, including awards and tax breaks, to encourage companies to develop and promote healthful products for children and adolescents.
“There is growing evidence that the early life environment is an important determinant of obesity later in life,” so significant changes are needed to reshape children’s attitudes and practices, the report said.
The report is in response to a congressional directive to review the influence of food marketing on the diets and health of children, after the government reported a sharp increase in the number of obese children and teens. Childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 40 years, and the prevalence of Type 2 diabetes among children and youth has more than doubled in the past decade.
“The dietary patterns of our children and youth put their health at risk,” the report said. These patterns “have been reinforced if not encouraged by prevailing marketing practices,” and any turnaround has to depend on aggressive and sustained leadership from the government, parents, schools and the food and beverage industries, the report said. “This is a public health priority of the highest order.”
The institute found that children between 2 and 15 influence about $500 billion of purchases a year, compared with $295 billion in 1993. In 2004, food and beverage companies spent an estimated $10 billion to market foods to America’s youth. The number of new food products aimed at kids is growing at a far faster rate than new food products in general, and for the most part these new kids’ products were high in total calories, sugar or fat, the report found.
The long-awaited report represents a consensus of a panel of 16 members who came from varied backgrounds: nutritionists, advertising and marketing experts, child and adolescent development professionals and entertainment executives. Panel members, in interviews, said they were surprised they were able to agree on their strong findings, given that wide divergence of backgrounds.
The American Advertising Federation, which represents food marketers, advertising agencies and media firms, criticized the report for failing to note many of the changes food companies have taken in the past year. Some fast-food restaurants have added more healthful alternatives to their menus, including milk and apples in kids’ meals. Pepsico has mandated that half of its new products be healthful, while Kraft Foods announced this year that it would stop advertising its less nutritious products on TV and radio and in magazines aimed at children under 12.
Many food companies also have sponsored fitness campaigns and curricula at schools and youth clubs.
“It’s disconcerting that the report doesn’t bother to recognize the specific industry initiatives that have been under way for the past year to combat childhood obesity,” said Wally Snyder, the federation’s president.
Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, who pushed Congress to approve $1 million for the institute’s study, said, “This landmark study comes as no surprise to me, and it will come as no surprise to the junk-food industry.” Harkin said the industry doesn’t spend billions a year “marketing junk food to kids in order to waste money.” They do it “because it works brilliantly.”
The institute’s report was based on a review of more than 120 studies of the effects marketing may have on children’s diets and health.
Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company
Source: seattlenews.nwsource.com
December 7th, 2005
(Reuters)
7 December 2005
WASHINGTON - Most food and drink advertising to children promotes unhealthy choices and the government should step in if the industry fails to improve the situation, an experts’ report said on Tuesday.
“There is strong evidence that television advertising influences the diets of children” said Dr. Michael McGinnis, a senior scholar at the Institute of Medicine, which conducted the review.
Studies also suggest marketing can lead to higher rates of body fat, though more evidence is need, said the institute, an independent, nonprofit body that advises the government.
The group called for a nationwide campaign to educate families about healthy foods, national standards for food offered at schools, and expanded industry guidelines to monitor the Internet and other nontraditional ad venues.
If industry efforts fail, Congress should force companies to advertise healthier choices, it said. US officials should monitor progress and update lawmakers in two years.
“We think that the issues confronting the health and well being of America’s children, particularly with respect to childhood obesity … require an ’all hands on deck’ effort,” McGinnis told reporters.
Food and beverage industry groups have rejected the idea of government restrictions, saying consumers should make their own choices.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association said many of its members have already improved food labels and promoted healthier lifestyles. But the industry-funded Center for Consumer Freedom rejected the study’s findings, saying a lack of exercise, not food, was to blame for rising obesity.
Last year, the food and beverage industry spent about $11 billion in advertising, including $5 billion on television commercials, mostly for high-calorie products with little nutritional value.
Promotions led children ages 2 to 11 to ask for certain products, and kids aged 4 and younger could not tell the difference between television advertisements and programming, the report said. Those 8 and younger did not understand that commercials are meant to persuade.
The impact on teen-agers was less clear, because too little research has been done, the report found.
Experts also found companies were increasingly targeting children through the Internet, product placement and other activities.
To reach its conclusions the team of media and health experts reviewed 123 published studies and industry information at a time when more Americans of all ages are getting fatter.
About 9 million US children and teen-agers, or about 16 percent, are obese compared with 5 percent in the 1960s. The number of young people with type 2 diabetes, which is linked to obesity, also is on the rise.
Sen. Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat who pushed legislation requiring the $1 million study, said the “report proves that the onslaught of junk-food marketing is endangering the health of our children.”
Consumer groups welcomed the findings, but some expressed doubts about whether companies would risk profit by curbing junk food ads. Others, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest, called on Congress to act immediately.
Source: khaleejtimes.com
December 7th, 2005
12/07/2005
The Asahi Shimbun
The government Monday will lift the two-year ban on U.S. beef imports despite consumers’ doubts that U.S. measures can eliminate the risk of meat tainted by mad cow disease.
Officials said once the decision is finalized Monday, importers will be allowed to start buying U.S. beef, making it available to Japanese consumers around the Christmas holidays.
The Cabinet Office’s Food Safety Commission on Thursday is expected to report to the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries and the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare that the risk of mad cow disease in the U.S. beef imports “is extremely low.”The government will only allow U.S. beef from cattle 20 months old or younger, as long as safety measures, including the removal of high-risk parts, are observed.
Despite the commission’s report, consumers are wary.
According to an Asahi Shimbun survey in late October, 67 percent of consumers said they would not eat U.S. beef if the ban is lifted.
Even the Food Safety Commission has heard the safety concerns directly from the public.
The commission received several thousand responses by Nov. 29 after soliciting public opinions about U.S. beef imports.
Many consumers questioned if the United States and its safety measures can ensure its beef carries no risk of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, the officials said.
Critics have said Tokyo’s move to lift the ban despite such concerns shows that it is simply kowtowing to U.S. pressure.
Tokyo intends to reach an agreement on the beef imports with Washington by Sunday, the officials said. In fact, Japan already informed the United States about the resumption schedule for U.S. beef imports during working-level talks, and has unofficially concluded talks about the conditions for lifting the ban.
The government will explain the contents of the Food Safety Commission’s report to the ruling coalition parties on Friday, the officials said.
After the announcement is made Monday, the government will immediately dispatch experts on animal quarantine and food hygiene to conduct safety checks at several meat-processing plants in the United States, the officials said.
The central government also intends to hold meetings at nine locations nationwide by Dec. 16 to explain the decision to resume U.S. beef imports.(IHT/Asahi: December 7,2005)
Source: asahi.com
December 7th, 2005
(Reuters)
Updated: 2005-12-06 09:18
Previous reports have shown that early dietary interventions can improve cholesterol levels in children, and now new research adds to this by showing that blood-vessel function is also enhanced, at least in boys.
The findings, which appear in the American Heart Association’s journal Circulation, are based on a study of 1062 healthy 11-year-old children who were either put on a low saturated fat diet or and unrestricted diet starting in infancy.
Somewhat fewer than 200 children in each diet group had the elasticity of the interior walls (or endothelium) of their veins and arteries measured by using ultrasound to look at dilation of the blood vessels under various circumstances.
The low-fat diet was associated with better endothelial function in boys and girls, but this was significant from a statistical standpoint only in boys, Dr. Olli T. Raitakari, from the University of Turku in Finland, and colleagues note.
“Early nutrition may play an important role in the later vascular health of males,” Raitakari said in a statement. “It may be associated with less atherosclerosis and a lower future risk of cardiovascular diseases.”
As to why a significant association was not seen in girls, Raitakari said it may relate to “differences in sex hormone levels.”
Source: chinadaily.com.cn
December 7th, 2005
December 6, 2005
BY JANET RAUSA FULLER Staff Reporter
One of the most popular items on the children’s menu at Chicago’s Wishbone restaurant is something called the Rabbit Patch — a choice of three sides from a vegetable-heavy list of more than a dozen offerings, plus a corn muffin.
Co-owner Guy Nickson said kids who order the dish tend to pick one starch such as mashed potatoes and then “something a little more intrepid” — often sauteed green beans or asparagus.
Wishbone’s pint-sized customers may have the opportunity to go for the greens, but variety and vegetables are still lacking in children’s menus, a report from a Chicago restaurant consulting firm shows.
Chicken fingers, pizza, burgers, mac ‘n’ cheese and grilled cheese are the five most common entrees on kids menus at chain restaurants, according to the report by Technomic Information Services.
The report surveyed the 250 top restaurant chains, 161 of which had separate kids menus, and found a vegetable entree offered by only one restaurant, Cracker Barrel. Salads were listed 25 times on the menus surveyed, usually as a side.
Kids menus offer on average seven items. Chicken entrees, pasta dishes, burgers and sandwiches account for nearly half of all items, the report found.
The tally of menu items doesn’t surprise Diane Quagliani, a registered dietitian and nutrition consultant in Western Springs.
“These are kid-friendly foods and foods that kids really like and restaurants don’t serve foods that their customers won’t order, and that’s the bottom line,” she said. “And actually, these are a lot of the same foods kids are eating at home, too.”
Indeed, another survey by Technomic done earlier this year showed that chicken fingers were what parents said they ordered most often for kids, said Eric Giandelone, editorial manager at Technomic.
‘Children’s miserable diets’
There has been a move toward healthier items and preparations on kids menus in recent years in response to rising obesity rates, experts say. Obesity among children has more than tripled over the past four decades, according to an Institute of Medicine report on food marketing to kids to be released today.
The Technomic report cites the addition of grilled chicken at several chains, including Houlihan’s and Outback Steakhouse, and the much-publicized rollout of fresh fruit sides at McDonald’s and Wendy’s.
But eateries still should be doing more, such as using reduced-fat cheese and whole grains, “to make these mediocre foods less bad,” said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The center did a nutritional analysis of typical fare on kids’ menus in February 2004 and found calorie and fat counts comparable to adult meals.
“Restaurants should see it as a responsibility to be part of the solution to children’s miserable diets,” he said. “I recognize they can’t turn their restaurants into a health food operation, but they can certainly do a lot better than they’re doing now.”
jfuller@suntimes.com
Source: suntimes.com
December 7th, 2005
By Jessica Heslam
Tuesday, December 6, 2005
Mothers who frown upon those extra pounds take note:
Youngsters whose moms worry about their kids’ weight are more likely to diet and obsess about being thin, a new Hub study found.
But don’t just blame mother. Thin celebrities and peers had a bigger influence on the youngsters’ diet and desire to be skinny.
“It’s important for parents to realize that their own weight concerns may be transmitted to their children,” said lead author Alison Field, a researcher at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Children’s Hospital.
“It’s important to get children away from the dieting mentality when they are young,” Field said.
The researchers studied data from more than 5,300 adolescent girls and nearly 4,000 boys who took part in the Growing Up Today Study.
About half of the mothers said it was important that their daughters and sons not be fat. About 4 to 5 percent of the youngsters “accurately perceived” that their weight was important to their mother.
The boys and girls who knew weight was important to their mother were more likely to diet and think a lot about wanting to be thinner, the researchers said.
Dieting is among the top New Year’s resolutions. But instead of making a resolution to diet, mothers should adopt healthy eating habits and exercise for a “healthier lifestyle,” Field said.
Children who diet gain more weight than those who don’t, previous research has found.
“It will send a much better message,” Field said. “We need to get away from talking about losing weight all the time.”
The findings appear in this month’s Archives of Pediatric Adolescent Medicine.
jheslam@bostonherald.com
Source: theedge.bostonherald.com
December 7th, 2005
