Hot Pockets Being Recalled

Be careful when you bite into that Hot Pocket, those might not be pepperoni, but rather small, red pieces of hard plastic. Nestle recalled 215,660 pounds of Pepperoni Pizza flavored Hot Pockets recently because of this. Check to see if the side of your box has “8157544614D,” “EST 7721A,” and “BEST BEFORE JAN2010.” stamped on it.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Half of All Food Produced is Thrown Away.

Think back to when you were a child, and you sat there at the kitchen table, your slimy, sickly-green brussel sprouts getting cold on your plate as your mother yelled, "finish your food! think of the starving children in Africa!" Well, she might have been onto something. The Stockholm International Water Institute issued a report last week stating that half of all food produced is wasted, either during processing, transport, in stores and kitchens, and finally by the consumer. This of course is a tragedy in and of itsself, considering the number of people living in poverty without enough to eat. It's also, the Institute states, the source of 40 trillion liters of water flushed down the drain each year.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Maple Leaf confirmed as source of listeria, expands recall

8/26/08 *UPDATE* a possible twelve people have now died from consuming tainted meat.
Four people have now died of listeriosis caused by eating tainted meat from Maple Leaf Foods, Canada's largest food processor. Maple Leaf was confirmed to be the source of the meat yesterday, and expanded its recall to include all products made from January 2008 on. The complete list can be viewed here.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

FDA OKs Use of Radiation to Kill Germs in some Veggies

On Friday the FDA is expected to issue new regulations regarding the use of radiation on lettuce and spinach to kill microorganisms such as e-coli, salmonella, and listeria. Irradiation of food, also controversially known as "cold pasteurization", has been in use since the 1960's as a way to control germs, as well as insects in food. The process was first invented in 1905. From 1953 to 1980, the government sponsored the National Food Irradiation Program, which did many research projects on the use of irradiation in food. Critics of the procedure say that the longest study of people eating irradiated food was 15 weeks, and no long term studies have been performed on the effects this may have in humans. They also say that irradiating food is an easy way to cover up sloppiness in the harvest and production of foods that create situations where contamination can occur in the first place. Another worry is that important vitamins and nutrients are destroyed in the process. Furthermore, critics worry about food becoming radioactive itsself. The FDA maintains that the food does not retain any actual radiation after the procedure. However, a statement on food irradiation on the Environental Protection Agency's website said the following:

Can irradiation make food radioactive?

No. Food does not come in contact with radioactive material during food irradiation, and cannot be contaminated this way. Radiation that is too energetic, however, can disrupt the energy balance in the nuclei of food atoms, making them unstable (radioactive). This is known as induced radioactivity.

Electron and x-ray beams can be energetic enough to induce radioactivity. To prevent induced radioactivity, FDA limits the energy of the radiation from these sources to less than 4 mega-electron volts. Radiation from cobalt-60 sources is not energetic enough to induce radioactivity.

Food that is treated with irradiation is required to be labeled with the international symbol of irradiated food, the "Radura" pictured above. It is also required to have the words "Treated with Radiation" or "Treated with Irradiation".

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Canadian Deli Meat Plant Closes After Listeria Outbreak.

*8/23/08 Update* Four deaths have now been confirmed.


Seventeen people have contracted listeriosis after eating tainted deli meat from Maple Leaf Foods, based in Winnipeg, Manitoba. One of the affected people has died. Maple Leaf has temporarily shut down production until the source of the contamination is found. A list of recalled products is below:



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26365	Sliced Cooked Turkey Breast	470 g	SE 30
02106	Schneiders Bavarian Smokies	1 kg	OC 28
02126	Schneiders Cheddar Smokies	1 kg	OC 28
21333	Sure Slice Roast Beef	1 kg	SE 30
21388	Sure Slice Combo Pack	1 kg	SE 30
60243	Deli Gourmet Roast Beef slices	1 kg	SE 30
02356	Seasoned Cooked Roast Beef	500 g	OC 07
42706	Roast Beef, Seasoned and Cooked	500 g	OC 07
21334	Sure Slice Turkey Breast Roast	1 kg	OC 14
21444	Sure Slice Corned Beef	1 kg	OC 14
44938	Montreal Style Corned Beef	500 g	OC 14
21440	Sure Slice Black Forest Style Ham	1 kg	OC 21
21447	Sure Slice Salami	1 kg	OC 21
21331	Sure Slice Smoked Ham	1 kg	OC 21
48019	Schneiders Deli Shaved Corned Beef	200 g	OC 21
48020	Schneiders Deli Shaved Smoked Meat	200 g	OC 21
48016	Schneiders Deli Shaved Smoked Ham	200 g	OC 21
48018	Schneiders Deli Shaved Smoked Turkey Breast	150 g	OC 21
48017	Schneiders Deli Shaved Fully Cooked Smoked Honey Ham	200 g	OC 21
21360	Burns Bites Pepperoni	500 g	09 JA 01
99158	Turkey Breast Roast	1 kg	SE 30
71330	Roast Beef Cooked, Seasoned	2.5 kg	SE 30
71331	Corned Beef, Smoked Meat	2.5 kg	SE 30

Blogged with the Flock Browser

FDA knew about problem peppers months before outbreak.

The FDA insists that they were as surprised as anyone that the salmonella outbreak that sickened 1,423 people this year turned out to be from jalapeno and serrano chili peppers from Mexico. Were they really? An AP investigation of FDA records showed that Mexican peppers had a long history of contamination. FDA Border inspectors apparently turned away contaminated chilis 88 times. This year. That's 491,200 metric tons of rejected peppers.Ten percent of those batches had salmonella. The rest were either filthy, used illegal pesticides, or in one case, were simply poisoned. The USDA reports that 84 percent of all fresh peppers consumed by the United States come from Mexico.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

No room for your own dairy farm? Think again.

Meet the Dexter Cow, an irish breed of cattle created in the 1800s. The Dexter, once considered a very rare bovine, has increased in popularity lately. Why? because these cows are about the size of a large dog. Priced at a reasonable ~$400 - $4000, these mini-heifers produce about 2 gallons of milk per day, more than enough for any household.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Pedigree Recalls Salmonella Tainted Pet Food

Pedigree pet foods has recalled 100 bags of "Pedigree Complete Nutrition Small Crunchy Bites" because they contain a component which tested positive for Salmonella. The bags were mistakenly shipped to Albertsons stores in Southern California, and Costco stores in Northern California. 

Blogged with the Flock Browser

USDA Allegedly Sponsored Movement to Defeat Farm Animal Rights Bill

Sponsors of California's Proposition 2- the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act, are sueing the USDA and the American Egg Board right now because of $3,000,000 that was allegedly set aside to defeat the bill. Californians for Humane Farms says that the board is not allowed to use government money for political campaigns. Proposition 2, if passed, would require farm animals to be in enclosures big enough for them to turn around in.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Oops...

Oh hey, no big deal or anything, but Nebraska Beef forgot some beef when they made last week's e-coli recall announcement. Only about 160,000 lbs. Oh, and, you might not be able to tell if you have the meat or not. You see, these boxes of cow with "EST. 19336" on them were sent to companies to be processed even further. Apparently you are supposed to just "check" with your retailer. I'm sorry, but somehow I don't really feel comfortable putting my life in the hands of the pimple-faced kid who bags my groceries. No offense. Think I'll stick to chicken for a while. 

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tuna Recall

Pre-made Tuna salad from Home Made Brand Foods has been recalled due to a possible contamination by Listeria Monocytogenes. According to wikipedia, this organism is rare but dangerous. It has a case death rate of 25%. In comparison, Salmonella has a case death rate of 1%. It is especially dangerous for children, the elderly, those with weakened immune systems, and can infect fetuses in the womb, usually causing miscarriages. The products being recalled are as follows:

• 99/ 5 lbs. units of "Home Made Brand Foods Tuna Salad" dated 8/19/08 expiration
• 412/10 lb. units of "Stop and Shop Tuna Salad" dated 8/19/08 expiration
• 366/12 oz. units of "Stop and Shop Tuna Salad" dated 8/19/08 expiration

No illnesses have been reported.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

What???

Erm, just in case any of my readers here like to dine on COW HEAD, I'm here to inform you that there has been a recall of 38,000 of these bovine noggins. Why? because apparently their tonsils have not been completely removed. Yes, while every other part of the head is apparently ok to eat, cow tonsils are required to be removed because they can contain prions, the evidently theoretical infectious agent thought to cause Mad Cow Disease. Why don't you just have a nice steak?

Blogged with the Flock Browser

E-coli Outbreak from S & S Foods Spreads

A Virginia Boy Scout camp was shut down this week when 72 people fell ill after eating tainted beef processed at S &S Foods. Earlier this week we reported that 11 people had become ill in Wisconsin and Pennsylvania. Asuza, California-based S & S Foods is now recalling 153,630 lbs of beef after this latest incident. 

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Supermarket Chains to Stop Selling Certain Types of Fish

Supermarket chains Giant Food as well as Stop and Shop have decided to discontinue sales of certain types of fish that appeared on a report recently released by Greenpeace on overfishing. Orange Roughy, Shark, and Chilean Sea Bass were all removed from seafood counters until their ocean populations stabilize.

Look here for more ways you can help curb overfishing, including form letters to send to other chains of grocery stores, and a number you can text to find out the status of certain types of fish.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Beef recall *again*- this time from Whole Foods!

Didn't we just do this?


Company: Whole Foods
Location: Beef was processed at same Nebraska Beef plant that caused e-coli outbreak earlier this summer.
Market: Connecticut, Rhode Island, Maine, Massachusetts, Florida, New Jersey, New York, Kentucky, Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Washington D. C., Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Illinois, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Wisconsin and Canada.
What Happened: 7 people have fallen ill.
Product Details: Any ground beef bought at Whole Foods between June 2 to August 6.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Tyson recalls 51,000 pounds of chicken because it might contain soy.

Wait, what? how does a raw chicken breast contain soy? I want my chicken to contain chicken. period. until I add some seasoning to it.

Anyway, Tyson is worried that people allergic to soy will have a reaction to their product. The chicken being recalled was frozen raw chicken breasts packed at a plant in Vicksburg, Miss between July 23 and Aug. 1. I don't know if you will be able to tell any of that by reading the package, so if you have Tyson chicken in your kitchen and you are allergic to soy, toss it and don't buy any for a while. Or how about don't buy any more at all, and start buying some chicken that is actually chicken. Preferably organic, humanely raised, and local. ::steps off soapbox::

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Once again, a company recalls beef due to E-Coli.

::sigh:: I think I should just have a template for these articles.

Company: S & S Foods, LLC
Location: California
Market: Beef was shipped to Milwaukee, Wisconson and Allentown, Pennsylvania.
What Happened: 11 people have fallen ill.
Product Details: 30-lb boxes of "742798 MFST, 100% GROUND BEEF BULK, 80/20, 1LB. BRICK."
Check Label For: "EST. 20375" inside the USDA mark of inspection and a case code beginning "06238" ink-jet printed on the side of the box"

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Company that manufactures bovine hormones is quitting the business.

new format testing, folks, bear with me.

Monsanto Co. is the company responsible for creating rBGH, or recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone, sold under the brand name POSILAC. This is the hormone commonly given to cows to produce up to 10 more gallons of milk per day than normal. On Wednesday Monsanto Co. made the announcement that they would be selling off this portion of their business.

"While POSILAC is a strong product for the business, we believe repositioning the business with a strategic owner will allow Monsanto to focus on the growth of its core seeds and traits business while ensuring that loyal dairy farmers continue to receive the value of POSILAC in their operations," said Carl Casale, executive vice president of strategy and operations, in a statement.

Could this decision be led by the recent uprising against the drug? Many stores and distributers, including Walmart and Starbucks, now refuse to carry milk with rBGH. There has been speculation that the hormone can cause early puberty in children, among other problems. The hormone is also considered by many to be cruel to the cattle it is used on. Hopefully Wednesday's announcement  signals the beginning of the end for rGBH.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Yale: Too Many People, Too Much Consumption

http://e360.yale.edu/content/feature.msp?id=2041

Over some 60 million years, Homo sapiens has evolved into the dominant animal on the planet, acquiring binocular vision, upright posture, large brains, and — most importantly — language with syntax and that complex store of non-genetic information we call culture. However, in the last several centuries we’ve increasingly been using our relatively newly acquired power, especially our culturally evolved technologies, to deplete the natural capital of Earth — in particular its deep, rich agricultural soils, its groundwater stored during ice ages, and its biodiversity — as if there were no tomorrow.

The point, all too often ignored, is that this trend is being driven in large part by a combination of population growth and increasing per capita consumption, and it cannot be long continued without risking a collapse of our now-global civilization. Too many people — and especially too many politicians and business executives — are under the delusion that such a disastrous end to the modern human enterprise can be avoided by technological fixes that will allow the population and the economy to grow forever. But if we fail to bring population growth and over-consumption under control — the number of people on Earth is expected to grow from 6.5 billion today to 9 billion by the second half of the 21st century — then we will inhabit a planet where life becomes increasingly untenable because of two looming crises: global heating, and the degradation of the natural systems on which we all depend.

If we fail to bring population growth and overconsumption under control, then we will inhabit a planet where life becomes increasingly untenable.”Our species’ negative impact on our own life-support systems can be approximated by the equation I=PAT. In that equation, the size of the population (P) is multiplied by the average affluence or consumption per individual (A), and that in turn is multiplied by some measure of the technology (T) that services and drives the consumption. Thus commuting in automobiles powered by subsidized fossil fuels on proliferating freeways creates a much greater T factor than commuting on bikes using simple paths or working at home on a computer network. The product of P, A, and T is Impact (I), a rough estimate of how much humanity is degrading the ecosystem services it depends upon.

The equation is not rocket science. Two billion people, all else being equal, put more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than one billion people. Two billion rich people disrupt the climate more than two billion poor people. Three hundred million Americans consume more petroleum than 1.3 billion Chinese. And driving an SUV is using a far more environmentally malign transportation technology than riding mass transit.

The technological dimensions of our predicament — such as the need for alternatives to fossil fuel energy — are frequently discussed if too little acted upon. Judging from media reports and the statements of politicians, environmental problems, to the degree they are recognized, can be solved by minor changes in technologies and recycling (T). Switching to ultra-light, fuel-efficient cars will obviously give some short-term advantage, but as population and consumption grow, they will pour still more carbon dioxide (and vaporized rubber) into the atmosphere and require more natural areas to be buried under concrete. More recycling will help, but many of our society’s potentially most dangerous effluents (such as hormone-mimicking chemicals) cannot practically be recycled. There is no technological change we can make that will permit growth in either human numbers or material affluence to continue to expand. In the face of this, the neglect of the intertwined issues of population and consumption is stunning.

Many past human societies have collapsed under the weight of overpopulation and environmental neglect, but today the civilization in peril is global. The population factor in what appears to be a looming catastrophe is even greater than most people suppose. Each person added today to the population on average causes more damage to humanity’s critical life-support systems than did the previous addition — everything else being equal. The reason is simple: Homo sapiens became the dominant animal by being smart. Farmers didn’t settle first on poor soils where water was scarce, but rather in rich river valleys. That’s where most cities developed, where rich soils are now being paved over for roads and suburbs, and where water supplies are being polluted or overexploited.

As a result, to support additional people it is necessary to move to ever poorer lands, drill wells deeper, or tap increasingly remote sources to obtain water — and then spend more energy to transport that water ever greater distances to farm fields, homes, and factories. Our distant ancestors could pick up nearly pure copper on Earth’s surface when they started to use metals; now people must use vast amounts of energy to mine and smelt gigantic amounts of copper ore of ever poorer quality, some in concentrations of less than one percent. The same can be said for other important metals. And petroleum can no longer be found easily on or near the surface, but must be gleaned from wells drilled a mile or more deep, often in inaccessible localities, such as under continental shelves beneath the sea. All of the paving, drilling, fertilizer manufacturing, pumping, smelting, and transporting needed to provide for the consumption of burgeoning numbers of people produces greenhouse gases and thus tightens the connection between population and climate disruption.

So why is the topic of overpopulation so generally ignored? There are some obvious reasons. Attempts by governments to limit their nation’s population growth are anathema to those on the right who believe the only role for governments in the bedroom is to force women to take unwanted babies to term. Those on the left fear, with some legitimacy, that population control could turn racist or discriminatory in other ways — for example, attempting to reduce the numbers of minorities or the poor. Many fear the specter of more of “them” compared to “us,” and all of us fear loss of liberty and economic decline (since population growth is often claimed necessary for economic health). And there are religious leaders who still try to promote over-reproduction by their flocks, though in much of the world their efforts are largely futile (Catholic countries in Europe tend to be low-birthrate leaders, for example).

But much of the responsibility must go to ignorance, which leads mainstream media, even newspapers like The New York Times, to maintain a pro-natalist stance. For example, the Times had an article on June 29 about a “baby bust” in industrialized countries in which the United States (still growing) was noted as a “sparkling exception.” Beyond the media, great foundations have turned their “population programs” away from encouraging low fertility rates and toward topics like “changing sexual mores” — avoiding discussion of the contribution demographics is making to a possible collapse of civilization.

Some leading economists are starting to tackle
the issue of overconsumption, but the problems and its cures are tough to analyze.”Silence on the overconsumption (Affluence) factor in the I=PAT equation is more readily explained. Consumption is still viewed as an unalloyed good by many economists, along with business leaders and politicians, who tend to see jacking up consumption as a cure-all for economic ills. Too much unemployment? Encourage people to buy an SUV or a new refrigerator. Perpetual growth is the creed of the cancer cell, but third-rate economists can’t think of anything else. Some leading economists are starting to tackle the issue of overconsumption, but the problem and its cures are tough to analyze. Scientists have yet to develop consumption condoms or morning-after-shopping-spree pills.

And, of course, there are the vexing problems of consumption of people in poor countries. On one hand, a billion or more people have problems of underconsumption. Unless their basic needs are met, they are unlikely to be able to make important contributions to attaining sustainability. On the other hand, there is also the issue of the “new consumers” in developing economies such as China and India, where the wealth of a sizable minority is permitting them to acquire the consumption habits (e.g., eating a lot of meat and driving automobiles) of the rich nations. Consumption regulation is a lot more complex than population regulation, and it is much more difficult to find humane and equitable solutions to the problem.

The dominant animal is wasting its brilliance and its wonderful achievements; civilization’s fate is being determined by decision makers who determinedly look the other way in favor of immediate comfort and profit. Thousands of scientists recently participated in a Millennium Ecosystem Assessment that outlined our current environmental dilemma, but the report’s dire message made very little impact. Absent attention to that message, the fates of Easter Island, the Classic Maya civilization, and Nineveh — all of which collapsed following environmental degradation — await us all.

We believe it is possible to avoid that global denouement. Such mobilization means developing some consensus on goals — perhaps through a global dialogue in which people discuss the human predicament and decide whether they would like to see a maximum number of people living at a minimum standard of living, or perhaps a much lower population size that gives individuals a broad choice of lifestyles. We have suggested a forum for such a dialogue, modeled partly on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but with more “bottom up” participation. It is clear that only widespread changes in norms can give humanity a chance of attaining a sustainable and reasonably conflict-free society.

How to achieve such change — involving everything from demographic policies and transformation of planet-wide energy, industrial, and agricultural systems, to North-South and interfaith relationships and military postures — is a gigantic challenge to everyone. Politicians, industrialists, ecologists, social scientists, everyday citizens, and the media must join this debate. Whether it is possible remains to be seen; societies have managed to make major transitions in the recent past, as the civil rights revolution in the United States and the collapse of communism in the Soviet Union clearly demonstrate.

We’ll continue to hope and work for a cultural transformation in how we treat each other and the natural systems we depend upon. We can create a peaceful and sustainable global civilization, but it will require realistic thinking about the problems we face and a new mobilization of political will.

Pizza Hut To Offer Healthier Pizza

http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/08/pizza-hut-offers-healthier-pizza.php

Beginning in Tampa, FL and Dallas, TX Pizza Hut chains, the popular pie company will soon offer a pizza made with a multigrain crust, organic tomato sauce and preservative-free toppings.

While this is not the Jared-diet, the pizza--dubbed "The Natural"--does allow customers to blend healthier options into their pizza. The crust is made from a blend of honey, olive oil and five different whole grains. The sauce blends organic tomatoes and natural (made without preservatives, artificial colors or flavors) cheese. The pizza comes in two versions - The Natural and the Natural Rustica, which contains sausage, tomatoes and red peppers.

The Natural pizza will also be packed in a box made from 75% recycled materials. No word on whether all pizzas will be using this better packaging or just The Natural. The pizza will be available nationwide later this year.

Indian Ocean tuna catch drops, experts differ on why

http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL462932520080804?sp=true

VICTORIA, the Seychelles (Reuters) - Tuna catches across the Indian Ocean have fallen sharply in the last two years but experts are split over what is threatening the region's $6 billion industry.

Conservationists blame years of unchecked exploitation while processors say climatic conditions may be driving the fish deeper away from their nets.

Tuna catches in the Indian Ocean, which accounts for roughly a quarter of the global haul, dropped by about a third last year to their lowest level for more than a decade.

Early indicators for this year show catches to be markedly below recent averages, Alejandro Anganuzzi, head of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, told Reuters.

"We cannot rule out the possibility that overfishing has occurred," he said.

Other forces such as changes in wind patterns, currents or the impact of predators might also play a part, he said.

Similar falls in catches are seen in the Pacific, where environmental groups say decades of overfishing has slashed some stocks by as much as 85 percent. European fishing firms now chase tuna in the Pacific after numbers fell in the Atlantic.

RICH REWARDS

Last month, EU fisheries regulators banned trawling for bluefin tuna in the eastern Atlantic and Mediterranean to stop overfishing of a species that was approaching complete collapse.

Rewards for fishermen remain high.

Market prices for the delicacy have roughly tripled since last year. In Japan, where there is huge demand for tuna to make sushi, top quality fish can sell for up to $100,000 each.

In the Seychelles, tuna canning is worth $180 million a year and accounts for more than 90 percent of export earnings.

One of the biggest canners in the region, Indian Ocean Tuna (IOT) Ltd, says its volumes have dwindled by about 18 percent to 70,000 tonnes processed annually for the last two years.

IOT's general manager, Alain Olivieri, said the Indian Ocean had seen a "terrible" fall in catches, which he blamed on higher water temperatures pushing fish deeper out of reach of nets.

Experts are divided over whether these warmer warmers are the result of climate change or of cyclical ocean conditions.

Olivieri said most of the fish had descended from their normal level of around 250 meters below the surface, where they could be caught, to depths of 400 meters, where they were safe.

"I believe the fish are there and they will not stay permanently down, so when the temperatures improve they will move higher up where fishermen can catch them," he said.

David Ardill, a Mauritius-based expert, said tuna fishing in the southwest Indian Ocean was worth up to $6 billion a year, with Mauritius alone earning nearly $400 million annually.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Consumers are raising cane over corn sweetener

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-soda2-2008aug02,0,3762938.story?page=1&track=rss

You can spot Dawn Wynne at the grocery store. She's one of those conscientious label readers busy studying cans, bottles and jars in aisle after aisle.

But it's not calories, sodium or preservatives she is looking for. She is on patrol for high fructose corn syrup; it's an unadvertised part of sauces, cereal, candy and especially soda, and she wants none of it.

The Redondo Beach resident looks for foods sweetened with "pure cane sugar, honey or fruit juice." Wynne believes "they are healthier and break down in the body more easily."

Consumers -- at the grocery store and restaurants -- are increasingly demanding sodas and other products sweetened with sugar, not corn syrup.

The trend is so strong that the Corn Refiners Assn. has launched a major marketing campaign and Internet site, www.sweetsurprise.com, to defend the sweetener. They are battling signs like the one saying, "Get Real! . . . No High Fructose Corn Syrup" that faced the parking lot at the Jamba Juice shop in Seal Beach on Thursday.

High fructose corn syrup has become a favorite target of the health-conscious as an alleged cause of America's obesity boom. A typical 2-liter bottle of soda contains 15 ounces of corn syrup, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Whether it's really at fault is open to debate.

The Corn Refiners Assn. contends that high fructose corn syrup is just as natural as table sugar and honey. Others say it's not natural at all, because it is manufactured through a chemical process and does not occur in nature by itself. The Center for Science in the Public Interest called the corn refiners' campaign "deceptive."

Most medical research says it is the calories, rather than the sweetener, that make a difference to a person's health. And sugar and high fructose corn syrup have identical calorie counts.

"Our message is that people should cut down on both," said CSPI Director Michael Jacobson. Likewise, the American Dental Assn. says sugar is equally bad for teeth regardless of whether it comes from corn or cane.

The Corn Refiners Assn. is reacting to a steady slide in sales of high fructose corn sweetener.

"We have been very concerned about the misunderstanding of our product in the marketplace and want to provide the facts so that consumers can make their choices based on science rather than urban myth. HFCS and sugar are treated by the body the same, they contain the same calories, and nutritionally are no different," said Audrae Erickson, president of the Corn Refiners Assn.

Even so, so many consumers have become wary of corn sweeteners that smaller drink makers such as Hansen, Jones and Thomas Kemper have reformulated their sodas to use cane sugar.

Taco Bell and other fast-food chains have added sugar-sweetened beverages as alternatives to their corn sweetener-laden soft drink menu.

Meanwhile, U.S. sales of Coca-Cola Classic made with corn sweetener fell 5.5% last year, according to the Beverage Industry 2008 Soft Drink Report. Sprite dropped 9.2%, Pepsi-Cola was down 8.9% and Mountain Dew declined 3.1%

The growing popularity of bottled water and other drinks is one reason for the decline of sweet carbonated drinks. But shoppers say drinks made with sugar cane just taste better.

"It has a crisper flavor, not as cloying. I think it is a better-flavored drink," said Charlie Howell, who periodically finds cane-sugar-sweetened Coca-Cola imported from Mexico at the Costco in the Los Feliz neighborhood of Los Angeles.

The shift in consumer taste and uncertainty about high fructose corn sweetener is apparent to John Nese, owner of the Galco's Soda Pop Shop, a 10,000-square-foot soft drink emporium in Highland Park. "Our sales are up 20%."

"There's just a lot more awareness about high fructose corn syrup among the public, and once people taste a soda flavored with cane sugar they like it better," he said.

Nese sells 500 different soft drinks, including cane-sugar Coca-Cola, Dad's root beer and Nesbitt's orange soda, an 80-year-old Los Angeles brand.

His Coke comes from Mexico through a third-party supplier. Mexican bottlers still use cane sugar because the crop is plentiful in Latin America. They also do not have to contend with U.S. trade barriers that drive up the price of cane sugar imports.

Soda makers are also reacting to the trend. Hansen abandoned corn syrup last year, when a third of the calls to its customer service center were from consumers objecting to the sweetener, said Gregg Arends, vice president of marketing for Corona-based Hansen Natural Corp. Natural foods retailers had complained about the same issue for years, and some threatened "to kick Hansen's out," Arends said.

It took the beverage company the better part of a year to make the switch because of the difficulty in reformulating the drinks to maintain the same flavor profiles. It's only been in the last few months that the cane sugar soda has been widely distributed.

 

Most research about the nation's collective fatness blames calorie intake and couch potato sloth, rather than any sweetener.

Some scientific research points to adverse health effects from fructose, a type of sugar that makes up 55% of the sweetener in soft drinks with corn syrup. Although chemically different, cane sugar is half-fructose.

Whether that extra shot of fructose is any worse than identically caloric soda pop made with cane sugar isn't clear, said Dr. Peter Havel, a UC Davis nutrition expert who is launching a National Institutes of Health study that will look at the effects of fructose.

"This is really an area that needs further study," Havel said.

Still, angst over high fructose corn syrup has taken a toll on the business.

Annual per-capita consumption of the sweetener in the United States peaked at 63.7 pounds in 1999. But it has dropped steadily since then and stood at 56.3 pounds in 2007, 12% off its peak. That's the lowest consumption level since 1994.

Cane sugar consumption also has dropped during the period, but by a smaller 6% and now is at 62.1 pounds.

Beverage makers started the switch to high fructose corn syrup in the 1980s because it's less expensive than sugar, decays less quickly, and is easier to transport and mix into formulas. Even with the recent increase in corn prices, it is still less expensive to use corn syrup than sugar.

The big beverage makers aren't likely to spend money on retooling to go back to sugar, said beverage consultant Tom Pirko.

Some shoppers say they don't want to consume the sweetener but don't have time to worry about it.

"I'm aware that edibles would be healthier -- and probably taste more natural -- without the addition of corn syrup or that high fructose junk," said Michele Mooney of Van Nuys.

"But I don't look for that ingredient when I purchase foods mostly because the labels are too long, the ingredients too numerous, the print too small and the chemicals too frightening."

jerry.hirsch@latimes.com

Blogged with the Flock Browser

Settlement will reduce carcinogens in potato chips

http://www.suntimes.com/lifestyles/food/1087869,chips080208.article#

LOS ANGELES---- Snack lovers, rejoice: Munching on potato chips just got a little healthier.

Four food manufacturers agreed to reduce levels of a cancer-causing chemical in their potato chips and french fries under a settlement announced Friday by the state attorney general's office.

California sued H.J. Heinz Co., Frito-Lay, Kettle Foods Inc., and Lance Inc. in 2005, alleging they violated a state requirement that companies post warning labels on products with carcinogens.

The companies avoided trial by agreeing to pay a combined $3 million in fines and reduce the levels of acrylamide in their products over three years, officials said.

''Other companies should follow this lead,'' Attorney General Jerry Brown said, calling the settlement ''a victory for public health.''

Acrylamide forms naturally when starchy foods are baked or fried. Studies have shown the chemical, which also has industrial uses, causes cancer in lab animals and nerve damage to workers who are exposed to high levels. The Food and Drug Administration is researching whether acrylamide in food poses a health risk.

''Everybody's trying to figure out how to lower levels (of acrylamide) without significantly, adversely affecting taste,'' said Michele Corish, an attorney for Lance, which produces Cape Cod chips.

Corish said the modified snacks will be available nationwide. Messages left with the other three companies were not immediately returned Friday night.

The attorney general's office said the levels of acrylamide in most Cape Cod chips are already near the compliance level as defined by the settlement. However, Brown said Cape Cod Robust Russets contain 25 times the acceptable amount.

Corish said ''Robust Russets'' chips are no longer being sold.

According to the terms of the settlement, Frito-Lay, which is owned by PepsiCo Inc. and produces most of the chips sold in California, will pay $1.5 million and chip-maker Kettle Foods will pay $350,000 in penalties. Heinz, which produces frozen fries and tater tots, agreed to pay $600,000. Lance will pay $95,000.

The state also sued McDonald's Corp.; Wendy's International Inc.; Burger King Corp.; KFC, a subsidiary of Yum Brands Inc.; and Procter & Gamble Co. over acrylamide levels in 2005. Those lawsuits were settled after the companies agreed to either properly label their products or lower levels of the chemical.

Blogged with the Flock Browser

U.S. probe into salmonella outbreak criticized

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/01/MN55123I43.DTL&tsp=1

Two days of congressional hearings this week into the nation's largest salmonella outbreak in a decade revealed a Keystone Kops government investigation that spanned more than two months and stretched from a false alarm about U.S. tomatoes to suspicions about peppers from Mexico.

State health officials and growers slammed federal officials for refusing to ask for help or use common sense.

Growers in California and Florida, reeling from losses for a contamination they had nothing to do with, want an investigation of the investigation. Testy federal officials claimed mom-and-pop operations left messy paper trails that slowed their work. The Centers for Disease Control refused to exonerate tomatoes, one of the most common foods in the U.S. diet, but the Food and Drug Administration said tomatoes now are safe to eat.

One thing is clear: The sprawling U.S. food chain, now delivering a billion meals a day every day, is no stronger than its weakest link. And there are plenty of weak links.

"The one great certainty," said Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research at the University of Minnesota, "is that there will be a next time, and it could be as soon as tomorrow."

The exact source of the outbreak is still unclear. The rare Saintpaul strain of salmonella has sickened 1,304 people, although many more probably were affected. More than 250 were hospitalized, and two, an elderly man and a cancer patient, died. The outbreak has slowed, but the investigation continues, focusing now on serrano and jalapeno peppers from two widely separated farms in Mexico.

Federal officials said they do not know where the contamination occurred, although they are warning consumers to avoid Mexican-grown jalapeno and serrano peppers.

The peppers that traveled from Mexico to 43 states and Canada, picking up salmonella somewhere along the way, are the latest in a string of produce-related outbreaks, including a rare and lethal E. coli pathogen that devastated California's spinach industry two years ago.

Imports of fresh fruits and vegetables are soaring as consumers demand fresh produce year round. Much of those imports come from poorer countries where not all farms meet high sanitation standards.

15% of food imported
Food imports have risen 40 percent in the last decade, now making up 15 percent of the U.S. food supply, including 60 percent of fruits and vegetables and 80 percent of seafood, according to industry statistics. California is the nation's biggest producer of fresh produce.

William Hubbard, a former associate FDA commissioner, testified that the agency's investigative staff has fallen even as the number of food-borne illness outbreaks has doubled. Outbreaks now average 350 a year, he said, up from 100 in the early 1990s. The FDA can inspect the 120,000 U.S. food-processing facilities only once a decade, he said, and the 200,000 foreign facilities exporting food to the United States "are almost never inspected by the FDA."

A typical American meal, said Tennessee's top epidemiologist, Timothy Jones, includes foods from six countries. "Fresh produce travels a mean of 1,500 miles to get to our plates," Jones said. "Feedlots can hold 300,000 head of cattle. Outbreaks involving several hundred victims no longer shock us."

Fruits and vegetables are essential to a healthy diet yet are vulnerable to contamination by pathogens common in soil, carried in water and harbored in the fecal matter of birds, reptiles and mammals, including humans. Many produce items are picked by hand and transferred many times before reaching their final destination. Often that is the home kitchen, where studies have found the average dish sponge has more germs than a toilet.

Patchwork of agencies
Government regulators are sprawled across dozens of federal, state and local agencies. The top U.S. regulator, the Food and Drug Administration, according to testimony, could be the least capable. The Department of Agriculture is responsible for 20 percent of the food supply, mainly meat and poultry, but has many more investigators than the FDA, which oversees 80 percent of the food supply.

The FDA relies mainly on border inspections to prevent contaminated imports but inspects just 1 percent of imports and conducts analyses on just 0.2 percent, according to congressional testimony.

Food-borne contaminations go far beyond high-profile outbreaks. The Centers for Disease Control estimates that 76 million Americans get sick every year from food contamination, 325,000 are hospitalized, and 5,000 die. Most do not know they have food poisoning; outbreaks are noticed only when a patient seeks medical attention and the doctor orders the right diagnostic tests.

State health officials and growers faulted both agencies in the salmonella investigation for such things as blaming Florida tomatoes when only three of 18 million Floridians got sick and most of the illnesses were in Texas and New Mexico. They also said federal investigators at the two agencies failed to tap a wealth of state and industry information, and did not share what they knew with those who might have helped them, prolonging the investigation and the collateral damage.

States' help not sought
"Unfortunately, if FDA chooses to limit the information they share with states, we are likewise limited in how useful our assistance will be to them," said Florida Agriculture Commissioner Charles Bronson. "FDA failed to ask states to provide them with information we now know they needed, and we had no way of knowing what kind of data that was without them telling us."

The FDA associate commissioner for foods, Dr. David Acheson, faulted poor industry record keeping, especially at mom-and-pop operations, for slowing the agency's ability to trace back the source of the contamination.

Ed Beckman, president of California Tomato Farmers, said a random test for congressional investigators at a Sacramento Jack in the Box found the source of its tomatoes in 35 minutes. Another random test hatched over lunch at a Subway sandwich shop on Capitol Hill tracked tomatoes to Virginia's Eastern Shore in less than four hours.

Florida and California have so-called trace-back systems in place to allow quick identification of produce.

FDA's Acheson said the investigation process "is what it is. It worked. It was just slow."

Farmers seek recompense
Tomato growers are demanding compensation from Congress, with estimates above $100 million. Asked to exonerate tomatoes, Acheson said with some pique that the FDA has all but done so, but cannot overturn findings from the Centers for Disease Control, whose surveys of consumers pointed to tomatoes. The Centers' King responded, "We respectfully disagree that tomatoes weren't involved."

Minnesota health officials finally pinpointed the peppers in their own investigation, which took less than two weeks.