The
Campaigning for safer, healthier food
Published by The Food Commission Issue 46 . July I Sept 1999 . £3.95 Nestle pushes health claims to the imit and beyond?
rading stan dards officers are investigating special packs of Shred ded Wheal whether Nestle is breaking th e law over mention coronary hean disease and Tclaims made on special packs of Shredded CHO four times. Wheat promoting the company"s Healthy Heart 'In our view the wording of the Campaign in support of the British Heart Slatements on the packages may lead Foundation . consumers to assume that eating The Food Commission has complained that Shredded Wheat would help reduce Ihe risk of claims made on the packsare 'medicin al claims'. coronary heart disease: sa ys the Food Such claims tha t a food can cure, treat or prevent a Commission's le tter of complaint. Zero particular disease are not permitt ed . Yet the In an apparent move to dis tance itself from the complain ts, the tolerance for BritishHeart Foundation has OM foods 1 issued a statement saying 'Zero tolerance' is a phrase we expect to hear 'The British Heart from New York's Chief of Police. But now irs the Foundation does rallying cry in the laleSl debate over genetically not endorse the modified IGMj food - Ihe debate over how Shredded Wheat much GM material companies can allow in non· product'. No GM foods. Exactly at whallevel such a doubt the British ·lDlerance' level should be set IS being hotly Heart debated by food compallles, by European Foundation, a bureaucrats and now, by consumers. nation al charity, Our exclusive survey found some would not wish supermarkets allow as much as 2% GM In food to find itself claiming to be non·GM, while others say they aim embroiled in the for zero tolerance levels. Meanwhile the same ki nd of European Union is expected to come up With its accrimonious own proposals this autumn which are widely debate as rumoured to Include a tolerance level as high as surrounded the 2-3%. We say that's unacceptable. Consumers endorsement of searching out GM-free foods need to know that Ribena Toothkind Ihe stnctest practical standards operate to keep juice drinks by GM contamination out of the entire foodchain. the BritISh Dental Association last What the supenmarkets allow - pages 9-11. year Isee Food Magazine 411.
Get the facts with the Food Magazine FO·-THEOD editorial contents COMMISSION ''I
fo od Magazine 46 2 Jul/ Sep 1999 news
GM soya may not GMOs : more suspect additives Since we publish ed our listing of additives that can be derived from GM crops [see Food Magazine 45. page to. and our book GM Free) we have been be Isubstantially alerted to other additives which should be included. The list is growing and so far includes : equivalentl E101 an d E10 1a riboflavin, a vitamin and colouring agent that can be made by GM organisms . The whole basis on which be less potent sources of clinically Monsanto's herbicide-tolerant relevant phytoesHogens than their E1 50 caramel colouring from chemically treated Roundup Ready soya gained approval conventional precursors.' they sugars. which may be from GM maize. is being challenged by new evidence conclude . about the levels 01biologically·activ e Monsanto's original tests on its E1 53 carbon black. a colouring from burnt phytoestrogens found in the Roundup Ready GM soya used beans vegetable matter possibly including GM crops. genetically modified [GM) bean. that were grown without the reports Sue Dibb. application of Roundup. the E160<1 Iycopene. a red dye from tomato extracts, Re searchers have found that weedkiller to which the soya has possibly including GM tomatoes . levels of the biologically·active been engineered to be tolerant. chemicals are 12-1 4% lower in the When we previously reported this E16 1c cryptoxanthin. a yellow dye which may be GM strains, raising questlons as to [FM40) we also raised concerns that obtained from GM maize. whether the GM soya can be levels of phtoe strogens may be considered to be 'substantially significantly different in GM E306·9 relatives of vitamin Ewhich can be distilled equivalent' to conventional soya. glyphosate·treated beans . from oil from GM soya . As the Food Magazine has often If the findings of this new reported, phytoestrogens, which can research are borne out by tests on E322 lecithin, an emulsifier usually made from mimic oestr ogen and have other other soybean varieties. this would soya. possibly including GM soya. biological effects , are increasingly the raise doubts about Monsanto' s focus of re search into potential health claims that GM soya ca n be E270. E325. E326. E327 lactic acid compounds which can be based benefits as well as ri sks to health. considered to be 'substantially on starch from maize. including GM maize. particularly to infants. In this new equivalent' to conventional soya study. Mark Lappe and Britt Ba iley the basis on which it ha s been E41 5 xanthan gum. obtained from starch from from the Cente r for Ethics and Taxies approved for use as a food maize. possibly including GM maize, in California analysed the worldwide. phytoestrogen concentrations in two E460[al. E460[bl. E461 . thick ene rs derived from plan t cellulose, which varieties of GM herbicide tolerant • l appe. MA, Bailey EB, Childress C. E462. E463. E464 . could include GM-derived plant material soybeans and their conventional Selchell. KOR. Alternations In Clinically E465. E466 counterparts grown under similar Important Phy1oestrogells ill Genetically conditions, 'This data sugges ts Modified Herblclde-Tolerallt Soybean s, E471. E4 72a. E472[b l. thickeners and emul sifiers obtained from fats genetically modified soybeans may Journal 01 Medicinal Food, 1:4. 1999. E473. E4 75. E476b. and oils. including GM soya and maize oils, or E477.E479a. E479b from lactic acid derived from sta rch . possibly including GM maize starch.
GM land loses value E570. E572. E573 anti-caking agents from fa ts or oils. possibly including GM soya and mai ze oils. Farmers using GM crops may find the growing modified crops may affect value of their farms falling. according neighbouring land values, too. E620. E621. E622. fl avour enhancers made from fermenting to a survey by the Aoyallnstitution of The Institution advises farmers E6 23. E624 . E6 25 vegetable protein. po ssibly including GM soya . Cha~ered Surveyors . Over half of not to grow such crops. They have land managers surveyed believed also been considering proposals to E951 artificial sweetener aspartame. which is that farms would be harder to sell if require tenants to notify their apparently made using GM technology in the they had been used for GM landlords if they intend growing GM USA. but not in Europe. production. and many thought that crops_ and to set up a register of all land used for such crops. I Et404. Et410. E;412: thickeners made from starches derived from E141 3. Et4 14. E1420. plant sources, potentially including GM maize. E14 22. E1440. E14 42. Organic feed needs soar E1450
A huge shortage of organic lives tock manager Alastair Leake. The demand feed is predicted. as more than 80% for organic feed may suck in imports Note: Theseare the 'E' numbered additives that COUld. potentially. be derived 01 farms currently converting to from Australia, Argentina. Canada from GM crops. It does not cover the non 'E' additives such as flavourings. I organic status are live stock unit s. and Den mark . nor the processing aids, such as enzyme s. solvents or oils. according to Co-op Farm s project
Food Magazine 46 3 Jul / Se p 1999 news
Monsanto aims to control No agreement on GM world water supplies terminators
The meeting of the 175-member UN Convention on Biological Diversity in Montreal last June, failed to agree According to environmental campaigners in India, investment capital and on-the-ground on a resolution condemning the capabilities to our effort.s. ' development of genetically modified the world's largest agro-biotech business is now Monsanto, says Ms Shiva, lNOukl IGM) terminator crops. despite pleas moving into the control of water. like to divert this public money from from environmental and third world public supply of water to esta~ ishing groups . Monsanto has Its eyes on privatlslng cent In rural communities, and is the company's water monopoly. Since Terminator crops are the water supplies of India andMexico. estimated to be worth $300 million by in rural areas the poor cannot pay, bioengineered to ensure the seeds So claims Vandana Shiva, one of India's 2000 in India and Mexico Thisis the Monsanto will need to crea te service become sterile as they matu re , leading environmental camapigners. amount currently spent by NGOs for arrangements with local government the reby preve nting farmers from Writing in The Hindu (10/5/99). Ms water development projects and local and NGOs. and to develop charging using them the following season. Shiva quotes Monsantoas sa ying : government water supply schemes. mechanisms such as microcredit. There are mounting concern s that 'Since water is as central to food The Indian Government spent over $1.2 Monsanto's water business, like its terminator genes could spread to productIon as seed is. and withaUl billion between 1992 and 1997 for seed business, is aimed at controlling wild varieties of crop s, rendering wa ter fife ;s not possible. Monsanto is various water projects, while the World the vital resources necessary for them sterile, potentially causing a now trying to establish its control over Bank spent $900 million. surviva l. converting them into a market huge loss of biodiversity. Companies water. During 1999, Monsanto plans As a Monsanto document states : and using public finances to underwrite respon d by saying that the spread of to launch anew waler business. 'We are particularly enthusiastic the investments. Amore efficient these genes is unlikely, and the starting with India and Mexico since about the potential ofparlnenng wah conversion of public goods into private problem is self -limiting as the both these countries are facing water the Imernational Finance Corporation profit would be difficult to find. affected wild plants will die out. shortages. . (lFe! of tfoe WorldBank to Jomt ven ture Farmers in developing countrie s She goes on to quote passages projects in developmg markels The • Vaodaoa Shiva is Director of the may become locked into economic from Monsanto's own strategy papers: IFe is eager to work WIth MonsanlO to Research FoundatIOn lor Science, dependence on the biotech Firs!, we believe that commercialise sl.lstarnability Technology and Ecology, New Deihl, companie s, worry some discontinuities (either majorpolicy opportunrties and would bring both India. campaigners. Such countries may changes or major rrendline breaks in try to legislate to protect their resource quality or quantity) are likely fa rmers, but the US delegation in particularly in the area of water and Montreal made it clear that we Will be wefl·positioned via these countries trying to enact businesses to profit even more moratoriums against terminator significantly when these technology will face economic and discontinuities occur. Second, we are trade sanctions. exploring the potential of non conventional financing (NGOs. World Bank. USDA. etc. ! that may lower our investment or provide local country Pesticides business-building resources. ' These are the markels that are the wheels of most relevant to us as a life sciences company committed to delivenflg food, the EU go slow, health and hope to the world. and there are markets in which there are predictable sustainability chatfenges slow, slow and therefore opportunities to create Some good news from Europe. The business value. ' European Union is drawing up a By 2010. about 2. 5 billion people in positive list of pesticides. So far it the world are projected to lack access has taken eight years to give three to safe drinking wa te r. At least 30 per pesticide s the all clear and take cent of the population in China. Ind". seven off the market. The bad news Mexico and the U.S. is expected to is that theres a further 850 to go. face severe water stress. At the current rate of progress It Monsanto estimates that providing should ta ke another 680 years to sa fe water is a several billion dollar IWe 'll be rich, Johnson. I've got the consider the rest. so don't hold your market. Water supplyactivitiesare breath. as they say. reported to be growing at 25 to 30 per patent on water!'
food MagaZIne 46 4 Jul / Sep 1999 news Dioxin: MAFF's advice leaves loopholes open
Advice issued by the UK Ministry of Much of this imported food went to the catering trade and much of the Dioxins found Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (MAFF) at rest went to be processed into multi the height of the Belgian dioxin affair ingredient processed foods . No processed foods packaged in Britain in 1997 and appears to show little understanding of will teUyou where each ingredient the problems faced by consumers. was sourc ed. Few if any caterers tell 1998. you where their supplies were The contamination of food with produced, And the egg industry told dioxins revealed in Belgium in May the Fo od Commission that lion 1999 is not the first of its kind. As The statement from MAFFi ssued to chicken meat was found to be stamped eggs could technically be the Food Magazine revealed last the national press about Belgian contaminated at the level of 2400 imported eggs re-packed in the UK, year, a survey by a French dioxide contamination said that picogram s of dioxin per gram . but in practice this does not happen. environmental organisation found exposure to an acute dose of high But perhaps the most disturbing It may be relatively easy to avoid 'high levels' of dioxins in samples of levels of dioxin should not be of advice of all is the suggestion from Belgian pate. choco lates or supermarket-bought meat. concern as 'adverse effects in humans MAFF that 'consumers who wish to mayonnaise . But how do you kn ow Samples of beef steak, minced usually occur only after prolonged take precautions are advised not to where the butter came from in a UK beef and veal chops were found to exposure to high leve!s of dioxins '. eat any pork. beer or poultry. or made Danish pastry. croissant. or ice contain levels which could push The press relea se acknowledged products derived from them {including cream?V\lhere did the salami come daily intake well above French food that dietary exposure to dioxin from dairy products} produced in Belgium. ' from in a fr ozen pizza. or the chicken sa fety standard levels, according to the Belgian con tamination could be How did they expect us to do this? in a baby food? Even raw ingredients a repon by the National Centre for 100 times higher than would be How can shoppers aVOid Belgian meat may not indicate their origin - for Independent Information on normally found, although it did not 'Say and dairy products? example. few butchers display the Wastes in 1998. what the 'normal' level was. DiDxins Last year we imported 150 million source of their meat. In 1997, tests by the French act as potent carcinogens and as co litres of milk from abroad. mostly from For once, MAFF's faith in agriculture ministry found dioxin s carcinogens, helping boost the EU member states, plus 53 million 'consumer choice' fall s foul of their present in Brie. Camembert and carcinogenic effects of other toxins . kilograms of butter, 219 million kg own reluct ance to improve the butter sourced in northern France. Data from the US Environmental cheese, 21 million kg milk powder. f 76 labelling of fo ods. But perhaps the real According to Le Monde, experts of Protection Agency shows carcinogenic million kg pork. 217 millinn kg poultry problem lies in MAFF' s own inability to the Council of Europe advised that effects following long-term intakes at 1 and over 700 million egg s, all from EU trace where all the potentially dairy products should not contain picogram per gram (one part per countries. and presumably this trade contaminated imports went to. more than 1picogram per gram of triliionJ. the lowest level tested. At the continued throughout this spring fat. but levels between 1.5 and 3.2 dioxin-affected farms in Belgium. be fo re the EU banned Belgian exports . were found.
Dog flesh in animal feed 'And after
The use of industrial waste oils in considered a common practice to we've eaten it, animal feed, the source of the fertilise the soil. The use of human we'll play dioxins in Belgium, is not the only sewage for fertilising grazing land is alarming Ingredient that finds its also commonplace since dumping at Animal, way into the diets of livestock. sea was banned. Vegetable or In 1985, the pioneering book And the dog flesh?The Modem Meat by Orville Schell gave Department of Ag riculture in Dublin. Mineral' examples of cattle in the USA being Ireland. admitted in June this year fed cement dust. newspapers and that dog carcasses were being used cardboard, and even described tests in feed for pigs and poultry. A 'small on the nutrient value of feeding proportion' of the 30,000 stray and cattle with pellet sof their own abandoned pets destroyed by local manure. authorities each year were In 1990, an outbreak of botulism processed into meat and bone meal. In cattle m the UK was traced back a practice encouraged by the to the use of chicken shed waste Department. including chicken manure, leathers Much of this is exported to other and decomposing carcasses EU countries. being spread on cattle grazing land.
Food MagaZine 46 5 Jul ! Sep 1999 news
Hi gher pesticide residues in GM soya EU gives und ermines 'environmentally-friendly' claims limited
Monsanto has made a lot of nOise with GM glyphosate-tolerant crops. • reduces growth of earthworms approval to about GM crops meaning less pesticide Despite the substantiJI increase and increases their mortality; use. But the company has made a lot granted to residuesof glyphosate on • is toxic to many of the beneficial food irradiation less noise about the way in which it soya MAFF has yet to publish any mycorrhizal fungi which help plants has applied tor, and been given. an figure s on residue levels of the to take up nutrients from the soil; increase in the amount of its herbicide in GM soya . And Two European Directives (1 999/2/EC weedkiller, glyphosate (trade name supermarkets, such as Sainsbury's are Furthermore researchers in Swedenl and I 999!3/EC I have been agreed Roundup) permitted to remain as not making their results public. say non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, one of after the deliberations of the residueson soya beans. In the UK approval of g~phosate is based the most rapidly increasing cancers in Conciliation Committee . As a result. European Union this has meant a on data submitted in the 1970sand the Western wond, rs probab~ caused from 20 September 2000 all member staggering 200 fold increase from the MAFF has not reviewed the chemical by several commonly used crop sprays. states will have to permit the trading prevrously permitted limit of 0.1 mw1 Food Magazine 46 6 Jul/ Sep 1999 news US hormones: something Partial victory on lin da ne to beef about The government has responded to years of campaigning to have the toxic pesticide, lindane. banned, by SI XsterOid hormones, which are used (zeranol, trenbulone and Of 200 samples examined by the instituting only a panial ban. In June to promote growth in beef production melengesterol acetate). The European Commission between May Food Safety Minister. Jeff Rooker in the US and Canada. pose a Committee's report concludes that and November last year. 12% were announced that the use of lindane potential health fisk to consumers, one of the hormones. 17 13 oestradiol. found to contain hormone residues. would be banned as a seed particularly young children, says an is a carcinogen and 'for all SIX treatment because of risks to those expert report from the European hormones endocrine, developmental. 1 Assessment of potential risks to treating seed. Union, reports Sue Dibb. immunological, neurobiological, human health from hormone residues As we reported In our last issue Use of these hormonal growth immunolOxic . genotoxic and in bovine meat and meat produc ts. (Food Magazine 45) a leaked promoters, and the Import of meat carcinogenic effects could be Opinion of the Scientific Committee on confidential report from the EU produced with their use, is iliegal in envisaged ' . Veterinary Measures Relating to confirms the chemical's harmful the EU but this ruling is being Furthermore the Committee Public Health. 30 April 1999. effects including damage to the strongly challenged by the US. considers that children below the Avai lable at nervous and immune systems, through the World Trade age of puberty would be most at risk http://euro pa. e u.i n tldg 24/sc/sscliIltlex hormone disruption. birth defects and Organisation. If the WTO has its and that no threshold levels can be en.html breast cancer. way, the European Union will be set for any of the six substances. 2 Foo d Ethics Council. Drug Use in However, its use as a spray on forced to open its doors to hormone that is. no level below which there Farm Animals, June 1999. Price £10 apples . wheat, maIZe and other reared meat. At the heart of the would be no effects. Tel: Ot 636 8t 2622 crops. in timber treatment and for row, which threaten s to spiral into UK Agriculture Minister. Nick domestic pest control will be allowed an all out trade war, is the science Brown. is on record as saying 'the BST update to continue, despite the chemical behind the question of safety to EU ban is not justified by science.' being banned in many countfles consumers of the si x steroid But a new report from the Food At the end of June the Codex including Denmark. Germany, hormones and whether wider ethical Ethics Council 2, which believes that Alimentarius Commission, the UN's Netherlands and Sweden. issues. such as animal welfare . decision·making should be based on main food safety body, refused to The Food CommiSSion is calling should be considered by decision wider ethical Issues as well as set a Maximum Residue Level for for a complete ban on lindane. To making bodies. science. says that the ban should the milk-boosting hormone. BST. add your support write to your MP at At the end of March, the EU's continue indefinitely. The Food thereby refusing to endorse it s the House of Commons. London SCientific Committee on Veterinary Ethics Council says that hormone safety. SWtA OAA. Measures Relating to Public Health 1 use for growth promotion In our last issue (FM45) we identified a risk to the consumer compromises animal welfare, reported on new evidence from eKcess intake of hormone consumer choice and threatens questioning the safety of SST both Spot the lindane residues and their metabolites for human health. for animals injected with the drug the six hormones in que stion; three Meanwhile Brussels is and for huma ns drinking mil k Nobody knows how much lindane is natu rally occurring steroid threatening an all out ban on US produced with il. The US, where being used as a domestic pesticide hormones (1713 oestradiol beef lollowing the discovery of SST is permitted, has been pushing not even the government. Now [oestrogen]. testosterone, hormone residues in mea t for Codex to endorse the product's UNISON and the Pesticides Trust progesterone) and supposedly produced safety by setting a Maximum want to show the government how three synthetic without the use of Residue Level for SST. Such a easy it is for us to get hold of lindane, compounds the hormones. decision would have allowed the US pollute the environment and risk our to challenge the EU and other health. countrie s such as Canada which They are asking everyone to go have banned the drug. Sut US into their local garden centre or DIY delegates surprised the Codex store and search out ant or insec t meeting by backing off from powder , flea killers or othet insect confrontation with the EU. The sprays and fumigants as well as decision wa s applauded by wood preservatives on sale to the Consumers International, which general public which contain lindane represents 245 consumer or 'gamma HCH' as it is also known. organisations in 110 countries. 'as a Don't buy the product but send victory for the health and safety of UNISDN details of the product, its consume rs '. size and weight, price and details of where and when it was on sale. by • For further information see 30 October 1999. Consumers International website: WNW .CO ns ume rsi nt ernational.0 rg/ • lindane Campaign, UNISON, Steroids: US goes fo r bigger beefcake, campaigns/fo od 15 Cas tl eGale, Not1in gham NG 1 6BY. Food Magazine 46 7 Jul/ Sep 1999 news GMOs may follow hormones FDA ignored into the trade wars GM warnings The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has ignored warnings from its own scientist s that its approval To protect the European market the EU nor found it necessary to conduct proce ss for GM foods was comprehensive scientific reviews inadequate, according to evidence slapped a ban on US hormone-reared of foods derived from bio released under the Freedom of beef. Now they might want to do the engineered plants ... consistent Information Act. with its 1992 po/icy'. 1 Internal reports and memos same to US-grown genetically modified Given the Americans' lack of obtained in a lawsuit being filed by (GM) crops, suggests Tim Lobstein. data to show safety, it might not be consumer groups against the US so difficult for the European government reveal that the FDA's Commission and its advisory claim in 1992 - that it was 'not en years ago . when the EU European farmers can choose to committees to find some good aware of any information shOWing banned all imports of go down one of two paths . They reasons for stopping the US A's GM that foods derived by these new Thormone-treated beef, it can try to ho ld off the outsiders crops entering the EU. We report Ibiotech l methods differ from other offered no scientific basis for the beating at their doors for as long as one piece of evidence on page 3. foods in any meaning ful or uniform ban . And it oHered no scientific possible, while they get their own For consumers, there is for once way' ~ was not true. It 's own staff evidence for mamtaining the ban In GM productivity up to competitive a possible agreement between scientists had warned that foods t 996 when the United States and levels. This means strong internal what our farme rs need to do to produced using recombinant DNA Canada filed a complaint with the inve stment in the technology, a protect their markets and what technology entail different ris ks than World Trade Organizati on IWTOI fast-trac k trial and approval system. consumers want Public appositlon do conventionally produced claiming that Europe's action was and the creation of strong to new technology is normally counterparts. just a ruse to protect European beef consumer demand to keep the ignored by policy makers in FDA compliance officer, 01 linda farmers from foreign imports. market IOtact. Clearly there are Europe's agriculture mIOistlle s, but Kayl. said that she and other Only this spring after long delays problems in making this option thiS time public opposition might be scientists had recommended that did the European Commission work. as consumers are rathe r useful to them. genetically engineered foods undergo produce a report identifying some increasingly wary of GM trials and Thi s may seem cynic al , but special testing, but to no avail. In human health risks tha t might result resistant to GM products. farmers and consumers may well assuming there were no substantial from the consumption of hormone So the other option might be agree tha t declaring Europe a GM differences in foods produced hom reared beef Isee page 71 . The data tried Instead. This is the 'beef free zone could be the answer. If GM crops. the FDA ·were trying to fit are hOlly contested. hormone' option - i.e. to look for this is, indeed. the strategy to be a round peg in a square hole: she Protecting the European market valid reasons for keeping outSiders' followed by farmers and the said. for European farmers flies in the products outside. It means moving European Commission , then watch Or loUiS Pnybl, of the FDA·s face of free trade agreements and away from GM production. just as out for more scientific evidence of Microbiology Group, warned of the the WTO. But the European Europe has moved away from health hazards from GM crops . profound differences between the Commission is reluctant to remove hormone-reared beef production. offiCially sanctioned by the EC's types of unexpected effects that Common Agricultural Policy ICAPI And it may mean finding scientific advisory committee s. And watch might be found using conventional support and leave farmers exposed reasons for keepin g the US for a furious US response. breeding and genetic engineering, to foreign competition. products out. which he said had been inadequately The largest slice of CAP support SCientific reasons may not be so 1 FD A statement cited In The Lancel addressed in the FDA's 1992 policy goes 10 farmers prodUCing grain for difficult to find. Environmental 353. 29/5/99. papers. animal fe ed. The biggest threat 10 problems are emerging from field these farmers is therefore the gram trails, including long-distance cross • See Mokhiber and Wisseman. Focus and soya crops grown in the pollination. and the damaging effect on the Corporation. June 1999 prairies of the USA. Canada, South of the pollen on benign insect life. __- -- I S ,~! .., I America and Australia. World prices There may also be a host of hidden already undercut EU farmers, and human health problems . and the Urban agriculture: not a the potential for GM crops to push USA is especially open to being contradiction in terms but a prices further down is worrying upstaged on this. City Harvest practical reality, says this report many of the EU's ·barley barons. Surprisingly. the US approval from the CityHarvest project. Full The battle is looming. The system for GM food products of valuable ideas, typical projects Deputy Secretary of the United requires little demonstration of and case studies, guidance for States Treasury, Stewart safety. The Food and Drug local authorities, voluntary Elsenstatz. has announced that AdministratIOn took a tolerant view organisations and anyone within five years . 100% of US in 1992 towards GM food which it interested in food production in agricultural products will be regarded as essentially similar to city areas, this report covers the genetically modified. And. he adds , non-modified products - food range. 160 fact-packed pages, Europe's resistance to GMOs is deiined as having 'substantial £30 inc. from Sustain, 9q White the biggest threat to trade that the equivalence'. The FDA re-iterated lion St, london Nl 9PF Itel 017 1 US faces. ItS position this January: 'FDA has 837 1228, fax 0171 837 1141 I. Food Magazine 46 8 Jul/ Sep 1999 We investigate food company policies on GM to lerance levels GM-free or not GM-free? - that is the question Virtually all UK retailers and efore we all relax and think the ban Ie to accidentally occurs. This amount of leeway is major food manufacturers are keep GM off our supermarket shelves has known as a 'tolerance' level. And the reason these B been won, there's a new debate raging discussions are hatting up is that everyone is now committed to removing over exactly what GM-free should mean. Should it waiting for the EU to set a legal tolerance limit. It mean exactly what it says. to be completely free of is likely that an announcement will be made this genetically modified (GM) all traces of GM crops or ingredients. or should food autumn and rumours put the likely EU proposal on a ingredients from their foods. companies be allowed to accept a trace of GM tolerance level being somewhere around 2-3%. soya or maize and still be permitted to call their We say that's unacceptably hi9h. Furthermore. But given the possibility of products 'free from genetically modified as our exclusive survey of food retailers over the some cross-contamination, ingredients'? page reveals, such a figure is far higher than many It might sound technical but it is far from companies are already achieving. what exactly should GM·free academic. Behind the closed doors of bodies like mean? the British Retail Consortium. which represents the retailers. and the Food and Drink Federation. What is a tolerance whose members are food manufacturers, discussions on 'tolerance levels' are level? ~ continuing, about what is technically _. ~ _ - possible. what they think consumers The amount of GM material that is allowed to ~~ will accept and the kind of leeway contaminate non· GM crops, foods or ingredients U companies want in order to protect is known as a 'tolerance' or 'threshold' level. [ themselves legally. if despite their best VVhile many companies say they are already r ' endeavours to keep GM operating at zero or as near to zero as 0.1% ingredients out. (equIvalent to one soya bean in 1,000) , it is contamination thought that the EU is likely to propose a standard as high as 2-3% lequivaleOl to twenty 10 thirty soya beans In 1.000). Tolerance levels are used for other food standards. For example, durum wheat is allowed to coOlaln up to 3% non-durum wheat and still call ilS self 100% durum wheat. Whether you think this sounds like a cheat or a pragmatic solution to a practical problem of obtaining pure seed probably depends on whether you are a consumer or a produce r. The other level that is curreOlly under discussion is what is known as the de minim is threshold . This is the level at whIch companies have to decide whether an ingredient has to be declared as GM for labelling purposes. EU proposals of 0.01% would mean that ingredienls which make up less than 0.01% of the final food leg flavourings. colourin gs or processing aids) will be exempt fromhaving to declare whether or '...and the company is 97% certain that this product is not they are 'productsof genetic modification' on almost GM-jree, at least in parts' the label. Food Magazine 46 9 Jul ! Sep 1999 CHECKOUT What should we tolerate? or those who have been campaigning to seems that unless the market for GM crops is What we found keep our food GM-free, any kind of halted completely, consumers of conventionally F tolerance level seems an anathema. It produced foods will be faced with the prospect We asked the major retailers and trade bodies for will be hard enough for consumers to accept that of having to accept the possibility of some, their policies on GM tolerance levels. Tesco, non-GM might mean, 'non-GM as far as we can possibly very small, levels of contamination, but Safeway, Marks &Spencer and Budgen told us that be sure' let alone 'significantly non-GM-free' possible contamination nonetheless. they aim for zero tolerance although they did not We are told that even if companies put in Organic producers, on the other hand believe, say what is the highest level they will accept if this place strict 'identity preserved' lIP) systems it that the separate supply chain already in place aim is not met. Sainsbury's was more specific. will be impossible to prevent all genetic pollution for organic foods can preserve the non-GM The company says it is achieving its maximum limit and contamination. It's a depressing realisation status of organic produce. This, though, of 0.1%. Furthermore, it is committed to reducing that even if seed supplies can be kept pure, even depends on sufficient controls being placed on this to 'even lower levels'. This is the same if separate silos are used to store crops, even if the growing of GM crops to prevent the genetic commitment that the wholefood trade is working lorries. ships and containers are thoroughly pollution of organic crops by cross· pollination towards, says Genetix Food Alert. cleaned. even if factories use separate facilities Isee box below). Other companies, though, are working to higher for making non-GM foods. even if.. it is still So what is an acceptable GM tolerance level? tolerance levels. ASDA says it operates a not possible to guarantee absolutely 100% that Set levels too high and consumers will feel tolerance level of 1% - ten times higher than no traces of cross contamination will occur and cheated and their trust in company claims to be Sainsbury's, although it says it normally achieves that there won't be accidents and human 'non-GM' will Quickly evaporate. Set a limit too 0.5%. Iceland says it allows up to 1% but is aiming mistakes or even worse fraudulent practices low, says the industry, and it will be virtually for 0.1%. somewhere along the line . impossible (and certainly more expensive) to Meanwhile the Co-op says a 2% level is Furthermore, even though laboratory testing achieve. 'realistic'. Somertield says it 'capable of doing for GM is now extremely sensitive. it still can't We say if levels are set to those currently better than 2%, while Waitrose says it is awaiting guarantee the result below a limit of detection. achievable by best practice - and many 'the outcome of EU deliberations' which the While detection may be as low as 0.01%, tests companies told us that their aim is zero company believes it is likely 'will be set at 1-2%'. still can't say for sure what's in that tiny fraction tolerance - then there is every reason to believe Organic producers say they will not accept a smaller than 0.01%. 0.01% might sound that within a realistic timescale, the food standard other than zero tolerance for organic infinitesimally small. but think of a container load industry as a whole can achieve these levels. produce Isee bOX). of soya and 0.01% is Quite a hill of beans . The debate over 'tolerance levels' is making all of us, consumers as well as food producers, Written and researched by Sue Dibb. What we want face up to the stark reality of a GM world . It Additional research by Rachel Sutton. We believe that companies which say they are committed to supplying foods made with non GM ingredients must: Organic standards • ensure they have in place an identity preserved liP) system which meets the highest standards to prevent cross The Soil Association is opposed to any GM Among the new measures are: contamination throught the food chain; contamination of organic food. 'When consumers • have separate food production facilities for say they want GM-free food, they don't meanfood • five year ban on conversion to organic farmin g non-GM foods: contaminated up to athreshold of 0. 1%, 1% or for land used to grow GM crops: • provide a time commitment to ensuring 2%. GM free should mean 100% GM free and it is • a ban on the same farm growing GM and animal feed is non·GM if this is not already the government's responsibility to uphold this organic crops: the case: choice,' says the organisation. • a requirement that SA licensees inform the • aim for zero tolerance and accept a A recent MaRl poll found that 74% of organisation if any GM test sites appear maximum of no more than 0.1%. consumers say they would be concerned if organic within a six mile radius of their farms As some companies are already achieving this standards could include organic crops that have considered the maximum likely distance for we believe that these are realistic and achievable been cross pollinated with GMOs. pollen drift. objectives for the whole food industry. In response to fears of GM contamination of Furthermore there should be restnctions on the organic crops, the Soil Associati on has introduced For more information: Soil Association growing of GM crops to ensure no cross stricter standards to minimize the risk of cross· 0117 929 066 1 contamination of organic crops to guarantee that contamination. ()(ganic producers can maintain zero tolerance levels. Food Magazine 46 10 Jul/ Sep 1999 CHECKOUT What the compan ies say: ASDA Sainsbury's Waitrose :4S0A operates to a tolerance level of 1%. In 'Despite the most rigorous controls in place, the 'For those ingredients which require GM fabelling actual fact our tests show that 0.5% is the most whole of the food industry may be affected by we have specified that any soya or maize must be common tolerance level and rarely rises adventitious contamination eg cross-pollination. derived from conventionally grown sources and occasionally to 1%so we are well under the 2% Because of this a maximum limit of contamination that a traceability system is in place. For those which is being mooted as a possible EU directive is set by the industry. This maximum limit is ingredients (such as additives and oil) which do on tolerance levels. ' usually 3%. not require GM labelling we are working with our Through the work Sainsbury's has done to suppliers to source any soya or maize component Budgens source non-GM ingredients and the stringent from conventional crops, or amend the recipe, 'We require from our suppliers a zero tolerance, verification programme Sainsbury's have put into 'It is likely the level for ~adventitious which may mean that our suppliers will have to place, a tighter maximum limit of 0.1% can now contamination"of crops will be set by the EU at replace GM soya or maize with alternatives to be achieved. Customers should note that even 1-2%. We are still awailing the outcome of those achieve this tolerance level. ' while working to this 0.1 %limit Sainsbury's will deliberations. ' continue to refine farming and processing Regarding a de minimis threshold, the Co-op, CWS practices to reduce this to even lower levels. ' company says 'we are using 0.01 %of the The Co-op wants levels to be 'as low as realistic material which may contain GM element (for for compliance purposes' and believes a 2% level Somerfield example soya lecithin). Work in this area is realistic. 'In the case of soya and maize purchased as continues. ' identity preserved crops then the proposed legally Iceland permitted allowance of up to 2% tolerance will be British Retail Consortium The company say its 'target tolerance level is accepted·... although this 'is the worst case (represents retailers) 0.1% ' . The maximum it currently accepts is 1%. scenario. We are easily capable of doing better The BRC told us that its members were working although it rarely finds this level. The companys than 2% and believe we will do even better in the towards a target of zero, 'Bearing in mind the de minimis threshold is 0.01%. future. expectations of consumers together with the 'In the case of ingredients. additives and current lack of activity in Brussels on tolerances, Marks & Spencer processing aids we will not dec/are genetic BRC members have decided to approach the We require all our food products to be made from modification where the ingredient, additive or problem on the basis of de-mimmis rather than non-GM ingredients. We do not specify a processing aid is present in the final product at setting a specific tolerance. Specifications will be tolerance level. We expect OUf suppliers to take less than 0.01 %on a weight by weight baSIS. set for non-gm product.' every precaution. at all stages of food production, 'We have made considerable progress over the to prevent the accidental mixing of GM and non last 3months and believe that we will have Food and Drink Federation GM ingredients. ' completed all our modifications on own label (represents food manufacturers) products to comply with this policy by the middle 'In the absence of EU legislation specifying a Safeway ofJuly.' threshold, companies are seeking to comply with 'Safeway's aim is one of 0% tolerance with current EU requirements on GM soya and maize regard to the amount of GM material in non-GM Tesco and will label products in accordance with these soya or maize 'In line with our "honesty in labelling" campaign it requirements. We look forward to seeing EU is our intention to have a zero tolerance for GM clarification of this issue.. ingredients in Tesco own brand products. ' Linda McCartney foods kick out soya When tests on Linda McCanney's products found 0.5% contamination with GM soya earlier this year. the company decided to re-formulate. Out are all soya ingredients. as th e company says that these cannot be guaranteed GM-free, and instead the vegetarian foods will be made with wheat and other protein sources. More recently Tesco was similarly caught out when tests for BBC News found GM soya, at levels thought to be around 4% in Tesco pizza, supposedly made with non-GM soya. Food Magazine 46 11 Jul / Sep 1999 CHECKOUT Loopy labels Continuing our look at the loopy world of labelling, sent by our eagle-eyed readers Fren ch from around the world. fl avo ur These peanuts are packed in France but have 3-language Literary labelling _lntriguingly_ what we would normally call-flavour enhancer E621' the french company have called 'exhausteur de gout E621'. We couldn't find the culture word exhausteur in our dictionary, but it gives the impression of depleting rather than enhanCing the flavour. French again (see To set the record right, though, the packet goes on to give the ingredients right). this time with a in English. This time we are told the additive is -exaltation of flavour E621'. bio-yoghurt made in france but sold in the UK. The makers, Danone, clearly had Tooth less smiles a little problem about the definition of 'Bio'. Danone again Isee leh). through The French for 'organic' is their subsidiary group Jacob's 'biologique', and to be quite sure they didn't mislead a Bakery , On the back of this pack of French tourist in Britain they have added a statement on the pot. It tells us biscuits a suitably toothless-looking and this must be a first in the world - that the product is definitely not an youth tells us about the nutritional organic one . merits of these jam biscuits. A One little problem they overlooked is that you couldn't possibly read this raspberry logo tells is that the until you had bought the four-pack and opened the wrapping. products are 'nutritious snacks real fruit'. And acaption tells parents vitamin powder, allowing the how the products are 'snacking company to tell us how much of our choices that are tasty and daily recommended needs the She found a pack of wholesome'. biscuits will fulfil. Walkers Utes crisps claiming We are sceptical. Jacob's IS Sorry Danone. Vitamin in the small print 70% fat free! making a product which contains deficiencies are not the major In fact the product says it more than 50% fat and sugar Iby nutritional problem in our children is 23% fat, so Walkers could weight and by calories) and less today, whereas obesity and tooth have claimed a higher fat-free than 4% fruit las raspberry jam)_ The decay Temaln rampant. (For more on content. But that's their loss, recipe includes a sprinkling of vitamin fortification, see page 16.) and Ms lund's gain. The month after we published OUf criticismof the 'fat free' claims, the government's Food Advisory Committee - the most senior body advising ministers on food legislation - annou nced The winner of our competition for that 'Percent fat free' clai ms the highest fat levels in a product should not be made, boasting '70% fat-free' lsee last Guidance to industry will be issue's Loopy Labels) has been issued by MAFF, but is unlikely to won by our sharp-eyed reader come into effect for two years, Vivien Lund. food Magazine 46 12 Jul/ Sep 1999 japan an's Japan , for twenty-five years a arm box schemes have been a fast growing afeature of urban and vIllage culture. Telkeigroups phenomenon of the 1990s in the UK. but in deveioped rapidly in the 19705. at a time when the leading supporter of F Japan they havebeen a fam iliar part 01 the intensilication 01 Japanese agriculture and the social culture for over 25 years. But now Japan is growth in the use of agrochemicals in an already community-farming links, is moving on. Th eir box schemes appear to have densely populated country was leading to concerns now developing professi onal reached their peak of popularity. and arebeing about pollut ionand contaminated food supplies, and supplemented by larger distribu tion schemes run on the impact of rapid industrialisation on the organic distributions systems commercial lines. environment. The Japanese Organic Agriculture to complement the smaller, The idea of linking a local group. such as a Association (JOM) was also lounded in the early tenants' association or residents group, to a nearby 1970s, andone of its main principles is to foster local initiatives. Kathy farm in order to buy freshly-grown foods at lower relkef groups . co st . ha san attraction in any country. In Ja pan. the A 1990. survey 01 telkel groups lound 238co· Adams reports. development of (eikei ('agreement') co-opera tives operatives, involving over 40.000 households. Some was a natural extension of the neighbourhood of these had existed in the late 19605. but 135 were groups. largely women-based. which have long been lormed rn the 1970s. and a lurther 73 in the 1980s. Food Magazine 46 13 Jul / Sep 1999 Japan• ,...... IO·U.""·" • '; ~:;'i· Local newspaper advertisements encourage purchasing throug h Organ ic Food Di strrbution Schemes, allowing fam ilies to order their own selection of products. -- en ~-:. _ i '! =0 ' ,,.,..r< < 1n ! t 1 J ~~~ill \~ r !",i\ LlJl t' · . ® ~ I ~ ~ \ . i i~l i t • §l ~ ~ ~ i 1 b~ .: [8G3~, .\E '~U 0 ~'I'l~"~~'\l'~~ .. Il ~t " .' -t, ~ 1· . .\I\-....~",,~ _ \,,\1,~, . '. ,L.J ,.,\\~t, Not all of these teikel groups were strictly UK. but with adirect home delivery service thrown relationships With the farming families. The organic. Many had individual contracts with ,n. strength 01 the OfOSs lies in their prolessional farmers which set out the methods of production These enterprises. known as Organic Food distribution methods. wider range of goods and that were acceptable. In 1979 there were 55 Distribution Schemes (OfOSsl. have seen reliabitity, but this comes at the price of a lost link {BIke; groups which were also members of the remarkable growth. Four teading OfOSs (Nilin Club. between farmer and food purchaser. with less JOM. but by 1996 this had risen to only 60. Sizhena Network, Radish Boya and Oaichi) have discussion about the methods ollarming and less implying that the movement overall had reached a seen their membership grow from less [han 4.000 sharing of [he costs of bad weather or the benefits plateau in membership. households in 1986 to 36,000 in 1992 and 96.000 of a surplus crop. Even if teikei groups have reached their peak of in 1996. A lifth club (Seikatsu) claims 214.000 The future may lie in greater liaison between popularity. the same cannot be said for the organic members, the two movements. The JOM has stated its movement as a whole. A remarkable growth in The reasons lor the popularity 01 OfO Ss over strong support for telkel groups in its founding other forms of distribution for organic produce has teikel groups probably lie in the increasing number principles, and this may restrict its acceptance of been taking place in Japan, particularly in the form of women in work. reducing their ability or alternative di st ribution schemes. The JOM does of commercially-run inclination to volunteer for teikei co-operative not admit profit-making organisations dis tribution companies that labou r. sorting and distributing boxes, accounting as members. and it has also see themselve s as and ordering additional products, kept its distance lrom serving social purposes, attending meetings and commercial distribution differentiating maintaining close schemes. such as themselves from OFOSs . This may be conventional one of the reasons supermarket and why there have been retail systems. They long delays in the are more like the setting of regulations and wholelood co certification programmes for operatives in the organic produce. leaving Japan ...... behind North America and Food Magazine 46 14 Jul/ Sep 1999 Japan• 1 Organic distribution schemes compared I Teikei OFDS Retai ler Farm er: -Guarante- es- farming- method- s- and practices- - yes yes not necessarily Delivers to homeS/cl ubs on fixed schedules yes yes no Discusses farm ing with customers yes maybe no Cu stomer: The Aihara fam ily, whose one hectare Accepts whatever quality/quantity is delivered yes no no sma llholding supplies weekly vegetable boxes for a teikei neighbourho od group. Distributes produce among neighbours yes no no Helps farmers with weeding etc. yes no no Helps agree produce prices for a year ye s no no Europe in its natIOnal enforcement of organic standards. Helps farmer financially ye s no no The popularity of OFD Ss will no doubt force change. The variou s parts of the organic -Knows farmer- - who grows their produce yes maybe no movement may need to reach agreement that a Can visit farm yes maybe no range of organic distribution methods can be developed in synchrony, with teikel seen as a niche Can influence what farmer grows each year yes maybe no sector of the wide r co-operative movement and a speciali st part of organic foo d distribution. Pays membership fee to farmer/co-op/distributor yes maybe no Has choice in product selection each week no yes yes For more details see the following (available In the Food Commission library) ' Can change distributor from week to week no no yes • Alternative Distribution Systems for Organic Produce Can buy produce whenever needed no no yes If) Japan, Nalsuko Kumasawa, Masters thesIs, Dalhousie -- -- UnIVersity. Halifa x. Nova Scotia. 1998, Degree of choice of produceavailable limited large unlimited • 'The Production and Marketing of Organtc Produce in Japan: Practice. Problems and Potential'. Saleem Ahmed, Source' adapted from SAhmed 1995. East West Centre Workmg Papers, 40, 1995: • 'Success of the 'Telkei' Movement and Future Challenge' in DIverslfymg Organic Food DIStribution In Japan, Toshiko Musagata and Hiroko Kubala, Japan Consumer Information Centre. 1992 The author is very grateful to the Japan OHspflng Fund fo r th elf support In supplymg mfo rmation and organising a fa rm VISit The fi xed price, variab le qua ntitity box fr om a teikei farm. The produce is fre sh and from a k.nown source. food Magaline 46 15 Jui / Sep t999 ------nutrition------ Produk!bMkriVe"': Spre, ristede malsllak IngredlenMr. Mais. sukker, Vitamin wars rnattetcstrakt. salt How manufacturers love to enco urage a poorly-balanced diet. They say add vitamins! But do we want that adding vitamins to 'junk' fo od items does little to promote good health. as most die tary fortified junk? problems in Europe are a result of too muc h fa t and sugar, too little fibre, and too few fruits and vegetables. Vitamin deficiencies are rare and all< around the supermarket and you nol a justification for fortification, with the can fin d fortified tinned pa sta. fortified possible exception of folic acid. Adding a W soft drinks such as Sunny Delight. and narrow range of specific nutrients to foods that fortrfled sweet biscuit s such as Happy Faces (see areotherwise of low nutrient quality, they page 11). argue, is not an adequate response to poor Britain has some of the weakest regulations dietary health. Fortification IS not permit1ed in regarding fortification of food s in Western Europe. Harmonisation of European markets means that, Danish cornflakes (left). but It IS allowed In Scandinavian countries have the toughest. refusing gradually. the members of the European Union several countries, such as in these cornflakes to let manufacturers add extra nutrients to virtually should unify their law s, and moves have been afoot from Spain (right). all food s. and even then only a narrow range of for some time to get harmonisation on the vitamins IS allowed. fortification laws. As the table shows (see below) Manufacturers love to fortify , The extra the laws at present vary considerably fr om one are fortified, as are virtually all other brands, while ingredients are a huge marketing opportunity for member state to another. in Denmark there are no fortified cornfla kes on sale claiming the foods are valuable sources of essential Draft proposals are expected to be agreed as all such products are prohibited by law. nutrients. Children's products are especially during the year 1000. which would permit a list of Consumer groups need to th ink carefully what targeted. as a dose of vitamins can help put a nutrients that can be used, and the minimum (and their position should be. Some might prefer 10 opt parent's mind at rest while the child scoffs the possibly the maximum) levels allowed. There for acompromise position allowing the re stitution product. appear to be no proposals to restrict the type of of nutrients lost during processing. This would Manufacturers can also get a double benefit. foods that can receive these added nutrients , require a list of specified foods and a list of the Some additives, such as vitamin C, act as Taking a strong lea d on the issue is Kellogg's. specified nutrients allowed in them. antioxidants within the food - helping to reduce The company has been busy this summer the rate at which the producing pro-fortificatio n material, and lobbying Th e f ood Co mmi ss ion is aimmg to produce a fats become rancid or nutritionis ts and policy makers. In the name of report In Ihe autumn on food fortificatIOn, and we the added colourings 'reducing the limits to consumer chOice' . it wants woul d greatly apprecia te read ers' com ments and fade. Vitamin Cadded the freedom to marke t fortified products across views on th e Issue. Orga niC regu lations, for ~ to meat products Europe . example, prohibit the addition of vitamins and ~ such as sausages Ironically. Ke llogg's themselves do not offer minerals exce pt th ose req ui red by law (e .g . in helps keep the fat such consumer choice. In the UK . all their cereals margarine) . Is thi s what we want? .-.... fresh and helps keep the added dye bright red, making the fat look like lean meat Fortification rules in Europe differ from state to state for as long as the sausage sits on the Allowed in .. . Which nutrients? shelf. UK nearly all foods no restriction But many ------ nutritionists are Belgium all foods list of those allowed wary of fMifi ed Germany all foods list of those allowed food s. They worry that the food s may Italy only dietetic foods no restriction be of poor France only dietet ic foods list of those allowed nutritional quality apart from the Netherlands all foods list of those prohibited added ingredients. Finland restricted food categories list of th ose allowed and that the sales gimmicks Sweden ---restricted food categories no restriction Denmark restricted food ca tegories short list of those allowed Norway very restricted food ca tegories short list of those allowed Weanrng onto sugared food. In Spain, ------Kellogg's shows how you should add milk and a good dose of sugar. Source: Industry briefing to nutritionists Food Magazine 46 16 Jul / Sep 1999 international Consumers get anew voice Codex The at Interna tional The newly-formed International to continue 10 ensure all si milarly, to ensure that Codex Association Association of Consumer Food • irradiated foods are fully fabelled; • standards for contamination of of Organisations [IACFO ) has to maintain transpa rency in all mineral water do not undermine Consumer FOOd participated in all three Codex • Codex proceedings; higher national standards; Organizations meetings held since IACFO's to have a written commitment to to improve the quantitative accepta nce as an off ic ial Codex • the precautiona ry principle in risk • labelling of fo ods - such as Ihe observer last Aplil. evaluation; fish content of breaded or IAC FO. whose current to allow certain food standards battered fish products; membership includes the Food • to be set locally ra lher than by to strengthen the requirement to Commission, the Washington-based Codex - 8.g. on pasteurisation • label the nutrient content of Center for Science in the Public of milk and cheese; foods. whether or not they make Inter es t. and the Tokyo-based Japan to ensure that Codex standards nutritional claims; Offspring Fund. has made • on food additives do not and to furth er increase consumer • For IUr1her de tails on IAC FO submissions urging Codex: undermine higher national • representation within Codex activIties contact the Food Commission. standards; meetings . School milk - good for whom? WHO call s for sustainable " ..,' ,,_"' , ~It', """''' I , ",,' food produ ction ,., " . o WI, . , ,, .• The European Commission actually worked for an animal feed announced in June that they would company. 'If there is no dairy indu st ry continue the scheme for subsidising because consumers are not drinking A set of dran propo sals from the attendance milk provided to school children. milk. then we do not benefit and nor European Regional Office of the • of public Currently 1 million UK primary does the dairy industry: he said. It World Health Org anisation argues health children benefit from the scheme seems that Association for British that a safe, healt hy diet can promote specialists ® which refunds local authorities up Nut rition is a grouping of large a sustainable environment. but that at Codex to 12 pence per pint from animal fe ed companies who depend Europe needs a food policy that and EU Community fund s. Farm ministers on the dairy industry buying their highlights the importance of health. meetings; argued that the scheme was prodUCTS. A set of specific proposals include • training for primary health expensive. but agreed to continue Readers may also want to keep the setting up of Food and Nutrition providers in diet and physical until the re was better evide nce on an eye out for the School Milk Councils in each country [though they activity technique s; the role it played in promoting the Re search Project -- a scheme set may ha ve ot her names. such as Food • greater support for farmers using health of young people. up by the Milk Oevelopment Council Standards Agency) that would help environmentally sustainable The UK's agriculture minister Nick and dairy producer interes ts. to ensure that health is taken into techniques: Brown strongly supported the account in national foo d policies. It • a strengthening of the public's scheme's retention. His decision may • A group of researchers in Sweden afso calls for; right to participate in decision have been influenced by a publici ty have called for increased health • policies to increase access to making on food production campaign costing a reported education on cuning dietary fa t for frui ts and vegetables, especially methods and access to safe. £300.000. conducted by an childrenand adolescents. They found for low income households; healthy foo d organisation called the Association tha t at least a fifth of children • legislation to control advertising for British Nutrition. This previously regularly consumed full- fat milk . and of high-fat. ene rgy-dense foods The plan aims to 'create a European unknown organisation appears to that they [and their parents) believed to children; movement to promote a safe and ignore arguments that fre sh fruit it was the healthier choice [C Berg et • improved mat ernal and child healthy variety of nutritious foods for might be a healthier food for al. 8th European Nutrition Conference, nutrition. including breast feeding all age group s. In addition to reducing sc hoolchildren tha n milk - tillehammer. June 1999.) promotion; levels of disease. protecting and especially the full fat milk which promoting health. it has the benefit of receives the most subsidy. The protecting the environment and Association spoke sperson. Alastair Not so fat stimulating socto-economic and ClOftS. instead suggested that if A study of adolescent girls in Finland found that one in three girls of normal sustainable development.' children drank less milk they would weight thought that they were overweight or very overweight. Worse. 52% be drinking more unhealthy sugared of underweight girls also thought they we re overweight. The frgures for boys • For more details, contact Arleen filZY drinks. were less dramatic. although one in five underweight boys thought of Rober1s on, WHO Euro pe. Copenhagen Challenged on Radio 4's Farming themselves as overweight. [V Mikk;la et af. 8th European Nutrition - email: [email protected] Today abo ut what his real interests Conference. lillehammer. June 1999.) were. Mr Crans admitted that he Food Magazine 46 17 Jull Sep t 999 marketplace- ---- GM FREE A shopper's guide to What the Label Doesn't Tell You genetically modified food Sue Dibb Sue Olbb and Tim Lobstein Food la bels will only tell you so much. This no-non What we know, wha t are don't know · and how to sense cons umer's guide will help you through the make the right chOice for you and your family maze of food marketing hype, government hush-ups £5.70 inc p&p and media scare stories. Special offer - posta ge and packing free! £6.99. The Shopper's Guide to Organic Food Lynda Brown Poor Expectations All you need to know on organic food and farming . with Wrinen by The Maternily Alliance and NCHAClion an A-Z guide to organic foods for Children. A devastating report on under-nutri £8. 99 inc p&p tion among pregnant women on low incomes. showing the poor diets being ea ten at present and The Nursery Food Book 2nd edition the difficulty of affording a healthy diet on Income Mary Whiting and Tim Lobstelfl Support. £5.50 inc p&p. The newly re~sed lively and practical book exploring all issues relating to food. Excellent handbook for nursery Food Irradiation nurses and anyone caring for young children. Tony Webb and Tim Lang £13.99 inc p&p Good food doesn'l need irradiating yet the UK has now legalised the proce ss . £6 .50 inc p&p. Healthy Eating for Babies Be Children - _.. _- Mary Whitt;,g and Tim Lobstein Back issues of The Food Magazine Includes over 60 pages of excellent recipes. Sack issues cost £3.50 or £3000 for a full set of £6 .99 inc p&p . available issue s. Send for index of major news ------stories and fea tu res in pa st issues. Stocks are The Food We Eat 2nd edition limited and some issues are already out-of-stock. The award-winning author Joanna Blythman's exami nation of the best and worst in British food today. Now only £7 .99 incl. p&p. order form publications Food Irradialion .. .£6.50 .0 What the Label Ooesn'l Tell You .. .. £6. 99 .. . .0 GM FRE E...... £5.70 .. . 0 Poor Expectations ...... £5 .50 . . ..0 Shopper's Guide 10 Organic Food .. ... £8.99 .. ..0 Additives· Shoppers Guide .. .£2.00. .. ..0 The Food We Eat 2nd edition .. .. .£7.99...... 0 Full set of available back issues The Nursery Food Book 2nd edilion. . .. £13.99. . ..0 of Ihe Food Magazine.. n o.oo . .0 Healthy Eating for Sabie s & Children ..£6 .99. ...0 Index of avai lable bac k issues .. .. free .. . .0 ______Fasl Food Facts ... £5.95. .0 ______It subscriptions I donations I extra issues : , If you are not a regular subscriber to the Food Magazine why not take out your own subscription and help support The Food Commission's work? , The Food Magazine is published four times a year. Your subscription will start with our next published issue. Extra issues to the same address cost just £9 .50 pa. Individuals, schools, libranes .£ 19.50 ...... 0 Overseas organisations, companies ...... £4 5.00 ...... 0 Organisation s. companies...... £4 0. 00 ...... 0 Extra issues to the same subscriber address @ £9.50pa. Overseas individuals. schools, libraries ...... £25.00 ... .0 No. required . .0 I have enclosed a donation of £ ...... to support The Fo od Commission's work \ ------.------. ------I payment and address details Name : Overseas purcha sers should send payment in £ sterling , and add £2.00 per book for airmail delivery. Ad dress : cheque payments I have enclosed a cheque or postal order Poslcode: made payable to The Food Commission for £ .. , Overseas payments- Eurochequc wrr tten In £UK, Imernaltonal postal·money order or Bankers draft payable IhtOugh a UK bank , I credit card payments Credit card hotline 0171837 2250 , I We can accept Visa. Access. Mastercard and Eurocard for book orders I I over £5.00 and for subscriptions to The Food Magazine. ,I , Please charge my account to the amount of £ .. My credit card number is: I I I Card expiry date: . Card type: ... Signature: . , I I Please send your order to Publications Dept The Food Commission, 94 White Lion Street london N1 9PF . I I : Tel : 0171 8372250. faK : 0171 8371141. Delivery will usually take place within lq days. : L ______J Food Magazine 46 18 Jul i Sep 1999 books/feedback Keep on writing but please keep your letters shon! You can faxus on01718371141 Letters can categorically state that suga r Kosher call (sucrose) derived from UK·grown Pl ease mform your readersth at the sugar beet in NOT genetically NOAH project, a Jewish modified and consumers need have environmental group, is calling for no concerns. GM food to be described as non kosher. Geoff l ancaster Jew s. Muslims (they can eat Britis h Sugar kosher) and those who want to eat Peterboroug h, Ca mbs kosher food should be able to get w...... ,,_...... It"o ....0: ...... guaranteed GM·free products . Our concerns were with the sugars .... ,,~, .....H ...... " derived primarily from starches sucll Details from Aoz Salile, as maile starch. these can include action, certainly of party-political ph one 01 81 78 073 35. glucose syrup and fructose. We are Th e Perils of activity, and confines its pleased that British Sugar, which Progress: recommendations to an controls most of British sugar-beet individualistic mode (,buy organic', production, is eschewing GM The health and environ mental 'recycle your packaging', 'support No vartis regrets technology for commercial crops. hazards of modern technology. and your local farm') which anyone likely 'All the companie s, we all owe the The company had previously what you can do abo ut them to be buying a book with this tit le public a mea culpa. We have not acknowledged that it was probably knew already. lislened carefully enough: developing GM sugar beet strains In John Ashton &Ron Laura, Zed Books, Furthermore, although published the laboratory. 7 Cynthia Street, London N1 9JF, in London by Zed Books, the authors Will y De Greef, Head of Re gulatory 1999, ISBN 1 85649 69 7X. £14.95. make lillie reference to UK material and Government Affairs in their evidence of food concerns. A Nova rtis AG, Switzerland chapter on food irradiation makesno Real Food fo r a reference to any European activity on (No, this isn't a fetter to the Food the issue. let alone th e excellent Magazine, though it ought to have Change. work in the UK by Tim Lang and Ton y been. But it is a genuine quotation How th e simple act of eating can Webb during the late 1980s lor In from a Novartis senior executive, boos t you r health and energy, Australia by Tony Webb reported by ReUiers. WashIngton, knock out stress, revive your subsequently). It is too US-oriented, t9499.) community, clea n up the pla net. and too remote from real campaigning. The authors look as if they are good at library research, but Wayne Robens, Rod MacRae and there's little sign that they have ever GM-free sugar LOll Stahl brand, Random House of spent their Su ndays stuffing I was disappointed to see sugar Canada , 1999, ISBN 0 679 30973 X, envelopes. listed with a number of other $21. Real Food for a Change on the foodstuff s as possibly derived from Thanks to Suza nnah Parkins (10), other hand doesnot attempt to add GM sources (Food MagaZIne 45). We Chinnor, Oxon There are plenty of books telling us lists of 'correct' activity to the end of how we can improve our lives. but a chapter, but instead gives its that doesn't stop publishers and prescriptive recommendations as authors conspiring to add at least part of its main text. two more to their number. It is a cheertul and witty book, One of the books, The Perils of starting off with ten reasons to eat Genetic Engineering. referenced Progress, even has sections at the organic INumber 1: Organic food is Food and Our guide which is end of every chapter called What anxiety-light') and carryi ng on in the Environment, strong on the you can do', Sadly, the same good humour through to a potential recommendations say little or chapter called AVOId Gassy Food A Brief Guide environmental nothing about getting active in local which turns out to be about food impact of organisations. or joining national miles and the need 10 source our luke Anderson genetically groups campaigning on relevant food from local suppliers. And it ha s ISBN 1879878 1. £3 .95 . engineered issue s. or even subscribing to the good sense to finish with a list of Green Books, Foxhole, Danington, crops and its journals like the Food Magazine 29 groups and organisations offering Totne s, Oevon T09 6EB impact on And there lies the problem with a opportunities to get active , The Itel 01803 863260) farming both in the developed and book like Perils of Progress, which problem is that all th ese groups are the developing world. shows how terrible is the effect of in Can food Magazine 46 19 Jul j Sep t999 backbites New Labour, New Wal-Mart Fish meal In Downing Street this spring, Wal Wal-Mart promises cut- price Talking of the Food Standards he said, 'that we have stopped Mart executives shared a glass of good s in giant warehouses . Savings Agency , the Bill setting up the FSA dumping sewage in the sea, which sherry with our Prime Minister. A of 20% or more can be yours. Food is now working its way through the means that fish do not have enough couple of months later two Wal will be cheaper than ever. If poor Commitlee stage before its Third to eat, yet we are now dumping it Mart executive sarrived in the UK on families need better access to low~ Reading. on the land... ' a Monday and left two days later, cost foo d- give them a Wal·Mart! We were pleased to see that our How marine life survived and having snapped up the AS DA chain Besides the need fo r a car, there predecessor, the London Food evolved without a human sewage for £6.7 billion, are several other fli es In the Commission, now has its place in its supply, we may never know. The connection? We may never ointment. (t) Wal-Mal1 may history. Hansard records MP John A few hours later, Mr Paterson know, but it is likely that Wal-Mart demand some out·of·town McDonnell stating in the Second was on his feet again, commenting was checking how its presence in development site s. which Labour Reading of the Bill that he had been on the relative importance of public the UK might be viewed by UK will have to spin as providing a local a GLC councillo r in the early t 980s health ve rsus private profit in the authorities which, in John Major's social service. 121 As we have wh en '/ funded the London Food control of the new Food Standa rd s time imposed planning restrictions shown in this magazine before, Commission. At that time it was Agency: 1 on supermarkets' new out-af-town cutting food prices does little to help described as a loony left project. but 'If the producers are not well development s. and under Blair have those relying on price -linked it promoted many of the Objectives represented, the food industry may brought in the Offi ce for Fair Trading benefi t5. including many single of rhe Bill.' well view the agency as the poodle to examine supermarket pri ces. parent families and many Not everything reported in of public health interest groups. The PM clearly gave Wal-Mart a pensioners, as a fall in average Hansard is so acc urate, thoug h. In That would be disastrous - there positive reply. And there may be prices is matched by a the Committee stage, one MP. Owen would be no co-operation [from more behind Blair's approval than corresponding tightening of benefit Paterson, got very excited over the Industry/. It is vital that the agency is mere servitude to American levels. And (3) if we thought that remit of the Ag ency. and its need to respected as much by the food economic expansion. It is possible the likes of Tesco and Sainsbury cover o n~ f arm issues, such as the industry as by the public and that Downing Street believes Wal were screwing UK farmers to the use of sewage sl udge. 'It is bizarre, . interest groups. ' Mart can deliver labours anli· floor with their cut-throat contracts, poverty strategy, wait till Wal-Mart enters the ring. Wise move? The most senior nutritionist in the advised Monsanto not to engage ~ country, Dr Ma rt in Wiseman at the with environmental groups on Department of Health, is apparently factu al issues . leaving his job. We can only speculate on which Where does a man with such a food companies might be queuing at wealth of inside information about B·M's door to gain access to their <& government food policy go? To the new man, Or perhaps the " public relations industry of course. fonhcoming Food Standards Agency There is a rumour from usually has afew quid to throw at a public reliable sources that Or Wiseman relations company, and will be has accepted a post with Burson wanting a familiar face where it Marsteller, the agency which dealt counts. with the Bhopal disaster, and which 'You're in luck - it's specially for large, There once was a time when only afew Portuguese peasants knew what low-income families' Monsanto meant. Perhaps this small hill·top village should consider Irrigati on to defend the integrity of its good name ". or better still, it could start issuing press releases against GMOs, artifiCIal sweeteners and SST - and Legal, decent, thick-skinned and ... completely confuse everybody! If you don't fancy the job of being chair and decisive under pressure' says the of the new Food Standards Agency (3- job description. 'She/he will have good 4 days/week, £60,000 intellectual skills .. . diplomatic £80,000 pal then there IS skills ... relevant experience.. .' always the director She/he will have to generalship of the withstand occasional criticism Advertising Standards of the ASA's work' and 'will Authority (full time. ~ have the judgement to head £80,000-£90,000 pal. AS.I\ the consumer protection arm of The ASA is looking for a aseff-regulatoty system wftile replacement for Matti maintaining the confidence of Alderson who is leaving in mid-2000. the advertising industty.' And public 'She/he will remain calm, clear-headed confidence? Food MagaZine 45 20 Jul / Sep t999