According to researchers in Australia and the United States, those who persistently eat red meat may be more susceptible to E. coli infection. Apparently, the meat contains sugar molecules, Neu5Gc, that accumulate in cells lining the intestines and blood vessels and act as a “magnet” for E. coli toxins. The scientists reportedly tested the affinity of the bacteria for Neu5Gc in a lab dish and noted, “The human samples showed the presence of the Neu5Gc toxin binding sites in the gut and the kidney, the two target organs for the disease.” Then, they confirmed the results with genetically modified mice that have the gene which produces Neu5Gc suppressed. The research appears in Nature, but was not available when the Update was prepared. See The Australian, October 30, 2008.
Inquirer staff writer Faye Flam begins her piece on phthalates and possible human health effects by reporting that a Philadelphia surgeon is seeing double the number of baby boys, since he started practice 30 years ago, in need of repairs to their genitalia. Surgeon Howard Snyder hypothesizes that some of them have been exposed to phthalates in the womb. These “hormone-disrupting chemicals” are, according to Flam, found in everything from perfumes, hand and body lotions, nail polishes, deodorants, shower curtains, and children’s toys to IV tubing in hospitals. Phthalates apparently “interfere with the synthesis of testosterone,” and a study conducted by a University of Rochester researcher involving 134 boys born to women tested for compounds metabolized from phthalates showed that “boys whose mothers were most exposed to certain phthalates were more likely to have undescended testicles and to have smaller penises.” Chemistry trade groups reportedly challenge such research, saying the…
According to a news source, the Chinese press is reporting that melamine is commonly used in animal feed “to reduce product costs while maintaining protein count for quality inspections.” The Nanfang Daily apparently calls the practice an “open secret” in the industry. Unnamed industry analysts reportedly said that such news reports constitute “an unusual departure for Chinese officials” and amount to a tacit admission that the scandal, which has affected a range of food products in recent months from milk to eggs, could affect even more parts of the food supply chain. U.S. food safety officials reportedly indicated some months ago that melamine detected in livestock feed did not pose a threat to human health. Details about their conclusions appear in issue 213 of this Update. See BBC News, October 31, 2008.
The Australian Food and Grocery Council (AFGC) recently released a Responsible Children’s Marketing Initiative in response to “community concerns about food and beverage advertising during children’s television programs.” AFGC developed the initiative after the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) published its draft Children’s Television Standards 2008, which did not recommend further government regulation of food and beverage advertising. In agreement with these preliminary findings, AFGC nevertheless stated that industry “is still keen to address community concerns regarding advertising to children.” The initiative covers advertising on free-to-air television, pay television and the Internet; the use of licensed characters; and promotions in children’s publications. Companies that publicly commit to the program must institute an action plan focused on six core areas: (i) advertising messaging; (ii) the use of popular personalities and licensed characters; (iii) product placement; (iv) the use of products in interactive games; (v) advertising in schools; and (vi) the…
The University of Arkansas School of Law has announced that it will be accepting applications for graduate studies in agricultural law beginning in fall 2009. The nine-month course, billed as the only one of its kind in the nation, covers a range of issues from farm to fork, including labeling law, food policy, sustainability, biotechnology, international trade, and environmental issues. Additional information about the program is available at http://law.uark.edu/llm. The university also hosts a related blog. See Food Law Prof Blog, October 29, 2008.
Nielsen’s Consumer Insight Magazine reports that rising rates of obesity in the United States can be attributed not only to increasing calorie consumption and less exercise, but also to “pure demographics.” According to the report, “The population is older than ever before and Americans tend to be fatter when older. Women are heavier, and because they live longer than men, they make up a higher share of the older population. Lastly, Hispanics—the fastest growing immigrant group in the U.S.—tend to have higher obesity rates.” The report, titled “A Widening Market: The Obese Consumer in the U.S.,” also notes that the average American consumes 15-20 more pounds of fat each year than he did 100 years ago. As to assessing responsibility for weight gain, more than 80 percent of consumers admit they are to blame, about the same as those agreeing in 2006 that weight gain is attributable to eating too…
Several of the nation’s largest food and beverage companies have reportedly agreed to market their products under a common nutritional standard and logo designed to lessen consumer confusion at the supermarket. The “Smart Choices Program” allows participating manufacturers to display a “check mark” logo alongside calorie and serving size information on the front of products that meet specific nutritional thresholds set by a coalition of scientists, retailers and industry experts and based on federal dietary recommendations. These products cannot exceed the program’s limits for total fats, saturated fats, added sugars, or sodium. In addition, they must contain several “nutrients to encourage” that include calcium, potassium, fiber, magnesium, vitamin A, vitamin C, and vitamin E. Fruits and vegetables, whole grain, and low- or no-fat dairy products are also eligible for the marketing claim. “It’s simple, it’s easy-to-use, it’s consensus based, it’s science based,” said one spokesperson for Unilever PLC. “We would hope…
A rancher in eastern Washington has reportedly sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in federal court, seeking changes to its country-of-origin labeling (COOL) rules for beef products. According to a news source, Easterday Ranches claims that the regulations are adding to costs for the U.S. beef industry and consumers. Apparently, cattle born in other countries must be segregated from domestic animals and cannot be slaughtered on the same day; extensive records must be kept and buyers must keep the meat separate in processing plants. Easterday’s president reportedly claims that commercial buyers are paying far less per head for Canadian or Mexican cattle, and there is no premium price being paid for U.S. cattle. He also contends that the regulations do nothing for food safety and contradict the North American Free Trade Act. See Tri-City Herald and meatingplace.com, October 28, 2008.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have announced a November 4, 2008, public meeting to consider agenda items coming before the 17th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems (CCFICS). Slated for November 24-28 in Cebu, Philippines, the Codex session will address (i) the proposed draft “Principles and Guidelines for the Conduct of Foreign On-Site Audits and Inspections;” (ii) the proposed draft “General Model Health Certificate;” and (iii) the annex to the “Guidelines for Design, Production, Insurance and Use of Generic Official Certificates.” In addition, the committee will discuss “the need for guidance for national food inspection systems, the need for further guidance on traceability and product tracing, and the development of guidance on the prevention of international contamination of food,” according to USDA. Codex was formed in 1963 by the United Nations, the Food and…
A subcommittee of FDA’s Science Board has released its peer review of the agency’s draft assessment of bisphenol A (or BPA) for use in food contact applications. The FDA’s draft assessment concluded, on the basis of industry-funded studies, that “an adequate margin of safety exists for BPA at current levels of exposure from food contact uses.” Further information about the draft assessment appears in issue 272 of this Update. According to the peer review, scheduled to be reviewed by FDA’s Science Board on October 31, 2008, the FDA properly focused on dietary exposures to children, “because they are likely to have both greater exposures and susceptibility than adults as a function of food consumption patterns, metabolism, vulnerability of developing systems and other factors.” The peer review then criticizes the agency’s assessment for its lack of “an adequate number of infant formula samples” and reliance “on mean values rather than accounting…
