The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is urging the Food and Drug Administration and state attorneys general to crack down on “slack fill” in food packages. Industry apparently defines slack fill as the difference between the capacity of a container and the volume of product inside. The federal government’s existing regulations are intended to restrict slack fill to situations in which some air in packaging actually helps protect the contents or where some product settling makes slack fill unavoidable. According to CSPI, excessive “nonfunctional” slack fill is illegal, and food manufacturers and their regulators don’t seem “overly concerned” with enforcing the regulations. “It would be disheartening, even shocking, if it weren’t so commonplace,” CSPI Executive Director Michael Jacobson was quoted as saying. “But as consumers, we’ve almost come to expect that our food packages will be half full of food and half full of air.” See CSPI…
Category Archives Other Developments
Comparing fast-food advertising icon Ronald McDonald to Joe Camel, Corporate Accountability International has initiated a campaign calling on McDonald’s Corp. to “Retire Ronald.” The campaign is based on a report, “Clowning with Kids’ Health,” that calls the character “the product of a well-orchestrated and shrewd marketing strategy” that targets those most vulnerable to food-industry marketing—children. The report traces the development of Ronald McDonald, now claimed to be as recognizable as Santa Claus, and notes how the character is even used on report cards in schools. Decrying the “unhealthy food” that the character promotes and the industrial supply chain fast food supports, the report calls on McDonald’s to stop using celebrities or cartoon characters to promote its products and urges individuals to support local efforts to remove food advertising from schools, libraries and playgrounds. Corporate Accountability International is a Boston-based corporate watchdog nonprofit whose advisory board includes nutrition professor Marion Nestle, public…
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) held an open session on April 9, 2010, to gather information on front-of-package (FOP) nutrition rating systems and symbols. Speakers included representatives from (i) the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and U.K. Food Standards Agency, (ii) the American Heart Association, (iii) ConAgra Foods, the General Mills Bell Institute of Health & Nutrition and Unilever, and (iv) Texas A&M University, the University of Maryland, the University of Washington, and the Yale Prevention Research Center. In addition, New York University Professor Marion Nestle addressed concerns about nutrition rating systems and other perspectives on FOP labeling. According to SHB attorney Sarah Sunday, who attended the meeting, FDA provided an update on its continuing assessment of FOP labeling and indicated that after failing to release guidance as scheduled, the agency intends to complete its consumer research in May. But Nestle registered opposition to the adoption of any FOP…
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has announced an April 9, 2010, open workshop to continue its review of front-of-package (FOP) nutrition rating systems and symbols. As tasked by the Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, IOM established a committee to evaluate and report on “the use of symbols, logos, and icons to communicate nutritional information on the front of food labels.” At the forthcoming open session, the committee will gather information on both international and domestic nutrition rating systems and symbols. Scheduled speakers include representatives from (i) the U.K Food Standards Agency (FSA), (ii) the American Heart Association, (iii) ConAgra Foods, the General Mills Bell Institute of Health & Nutrition and Unilever, and (iv) Texas A&M University, the University of Maryland, the University of Washington, and the Yale Prevention Research Center. In addition, New York University Professor Marion Nestle will address concerns about nutrition rating…
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has issued a report card that rates 128 companies for their policies on marketing food to children. According to CSPI, most of the food makers, restaurants and entertainment companies failed “either for having weak policies or for failing to have any policies whatsoever.” Based on research conducted in summer 2009, the report found that industry spends some $2 billion on youth marketing annually. Grades in the “Report Card on Food-Marketing Policies” ranged from a B+ for Mars, Inc., for its policy to exclude marketing to children ages 12 and younger, to an F for Denny’s “for marketing to children through its children’s menu, which includes many nutritionally poor items; games on its Web site; and a kid’s birthday club.” In all, seven of the companies earned a D, and 95 received an F. “Despite the industry’s self-regulatory system, the vast majority…
The Pew Charitable Trusts’ Produce Safety Project (PSP) recently published a cost analysis claiming that health-related expenditures for foodborne illness far exceed the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s estimate of $6.9 billion annually. Authored by former Food and Drug Administration (FDA) economist Robert Scharff, the report concludes that the United States spends $152 billion per year on foodborne illnesses from all sources. The study also notes that these numbers cover health-related costs only and thus represent “a lower bound estimate of the total societal costs,” including costs to industry and government. “Even when pain and suffering losses from acute illnesses are not included, the cost to society is $103 billion,” maintains the report, which used FDA methods to determine the costs of physician services, pharmaceuticals, and hospital visits related to foodborne illnesses, as well as quality of life losses such as lost life expectancy, pain and suffering, and functional disability. Intended…
Yale University’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity has published a study alleging that the “number of products with youth-oriented cross-promotions increased by 78 percent” between 2006 and 2008. Jennifer Harris, et al., “Marketing foods to children and adolescents: licensed characters and other promotions on packaged foods in the supermarket,” Public Health Nutrition, March 2010. After examining 397 products gathered on three separate occasions from one large U.S. supermarket, researchers reported that (i) “71% of cross-promotions involved third-party licensed characters”; (ii) “57% appealed primarily to children under 12 years of age”; (iii) “the use of other forms of promotion increased from 5% of the total in 2006 to 53% in 2008”; and (iv) “promotions targeting pre-school and general audiences increased from 23% to 54% of the total.” In addition, they wrote, “Only 18% of products met accepted nutrition standards for foods sold to youth, and nutritional quality declined during…
Two public health advocates have penned an article in the February 23, 2010, edition of the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) that calls for an end to all front-of-package (FOP) food labels. According to New York University Professor Marion Nestle and Children’s Hospital Boston Obesity Program Director David Ludwig, the food industry has historically used loopholes in labeling laws to make tenuous health claims and develop “self endorsement labeling systems” in an effort to sell more products. The authors note that although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) “intends to examine the entire issue of front-of-package labeling,” the agency continues to maintain that “point of purchase labeling . . . can be an effective way of promoting informed food choices and helping consumers construct healthier diets.” Nestle and Ludwig, however, remain skeptical that these systems will not be co-opted by food and beverage manufacturers seeking to promote sales.…
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has issued a policy statement calling for warning labels on foods that pose a high risk of choking. The medical organization has identified hot dogs as “the food most commonly associated with fatal choking among children,” as well as other high-risk foods that include “hard candy, peanuts/ nuts, seeds, whole grapes, raw carrots, apples, popcorn, chunks of peanut butter, marshmallows, chewing gum, and sausages.” According to a February 22, 2010, press release, the policy contains “recommendations for government agencies, manufacturers, parents, teachers, child care workers and health care professionals to help prevent choking among children.” In addition to the warning labels, AAP has urged these groups to consider strategies for (i) recalling food products that pose a significant choking hazard, (ii) establishing “a nationwide food-related choking-incident surveillance and reporting system,” (iii) designing new food and redesigning existing food to minimize choking risk, and (iv)…
The Cornucopia Institute has written to the CEOs of Sara Lee and National Public Radio to express its concerns with the marketing campaign for Sara Lee’s EarthGrains® products. In its February 22, 2010, letter, the institute refers to a study it made of the claims and calls for Sara Lee to “immediately suspend promotional activities until your organization can complete its own analysis of our findings.” Institute co-director Mark Kastel stated, “Even though they’ve done a countrywide media rollout, including underwriting spots on National Public Radio, Sara Lee is, in essence, playing a shell game. . . . If advertising executives could be charged with malpractice, this would be a major felony.” According to the institute, Sara Lee claims that its EarthGrains® bread contains, “Eco-Grain™,” an ingredient that “is more sustainable than organic grain.” The institute calls this a “crass and exploitive marketing ploy” that has angered the organic community…
