I’m still seeing articles coming out from the USDA’s Economic Research Service, now sadly moved to Kansas City.  This one is based on an older article.*  It’s about how “consumption” of sugars (in quotes because the data actually reflect the availability of sugars in the food supply—production less exports plus imports).

Here’s how I read this chart:

• Overall sugars are down almost to the level of the late 1970s.
• Refined (table) sugar dropped at about the time High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) became widely used; it is holding steady.
• HFCS accounted for the increase in total sugars from 1975-1999.  The subsequent decline is also mainly in HFCS.

The big reason for the decline is lower consumption of soft drinks (these account for nearly half total sugars consumed).

Another trend is substitution of HFCS by table sugar.  This is to the higher cost of HFCS relative to table sugar.  It used to be much cheaper but increased demand for corn to produce ethanol has made HFCS and table sugar cost about the same.

Also, HFCS has a reputation for being worse for health than table sugar, but they are about the same physiologically.  HFCS is glucose and fructose separated.  Table sugar is glucose and fructose stuck together (but quickly separated in the body).

I’m all for eating less of either one.  This, at least, is a healthy trend.

*Sugar and Sweeteners Outlook: July 2019 , by Michael McConnell and David W. Olson, ERS, July 2019

DairyReporter.com has a Special Edition on infant feeding 

Infant formula companies have a problem: the products are virtually identical in nutrient composition (they all have to meet the same FDA standards), babies only need them for the first year, and the number of babies is finite.  From the formula industry’s perspective, the challenge is how to increase sales.  Here’s how this industry is managing this challenge.

Where next for infant nutrition?

In this special edition, we take a look at the infant formula sector, which far from being static is changing through novel ingredients, smart packaging, the explosion in plant-based products, and production of breast milk from cells.

• Making baby formula transparent with Danone’s Track & Connect:  Packaging with QR codes and a new digital platform make up Danone’s Track & Connect service for baby formula products. It is available in China, with launches in France, Germany, Australia and New Zealand soon… Read
• How to trigger a growth spurt in infant nutrition:  Consumers could be forgiven for believing that innovation in infant nutrition is less radical or slower than it is in other parts of the nutrition industry… Read
• Alternatives to traditional infant nutrition hit US market:  Market trends and unique consumer needs in infant nutrition have producers thinking outside the realms of tradition. New launches from Else Nutrition and Biomilq have recently hit the US, forming new categories… Read
• TurtleTree Labs secures funding for production of milk from cells:  TurtleTree Labs, the Singapore-based company working with biotechnology to create the full nutritional content of milk, has announced it has completed its pre-seed funding round… Read
• Stricter EU infant formula marketing rules to come into effect:  New EU food law designed to further restrict the advertising and marketing of infant formula are to come into force on 22 February in a victory for campaigners critical of current guidelines… Read
• Combating cow’s milk protein allergy: Nestlé Health Science China introduces two new FSMPs brands:  Two of Nestlé Health Science China’s infant nutrition products for youngsters with cow’s milk allergies have obtained Food for Special Medical Purposes (FSMPs) status in the country… Read
• Catering for different life stages: What’s next for China’s A2 milk industry in 2020?  China’s A2 milk sector is likely to see the rise of more products catered to different life stages and specific consumers groups, beyond just infant nutrition, as more domestic companies join in the competition… Read

A report from the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) says that USDA recalls of meat and poultry have nearly doubled since 2013.

• USDA posts its recalls and notices here.

The PIRG report says FDA recalls of the products it regulates—produce, seafood, and processed foods—have dropped.  The Food Safety Modernization Act rules are in effect, and working.

• FDA posts its recalls and notices here.

To do something about meat and poultry recalls, some of which involve Salmonella, food safety lawyer Bill Marler along with  Consumer Reports and other advocacy groups, have petitioned USDA to classify Salmonella as an adulterant, an action that is long overdue (see the Washington Post’s story on Marler’s action.

Does USDA have the authority to do this?  I think yes, even though courts have ruled that because Salmonella can be killed by cooking, they are a natural contaminant.

Yes, but supermarket raw chicken is frequently contaminated with Salmonella and frequently associated with disease outbreaks.

Salmonella-contaminated chicken requires special handling in kitchens: Don’t wash it!  Keep it entirely separate from all other foods.  Don’t put it on counters, plates, or cutting boards that can come in contact with other foods.   In other words, run your kitchen like a maximum security laboratory.

It’s high time the USDA did something about this one.

The study: A Collagen Supplement Improves Skin Hydration, Elasticity, Roughness, and Density: Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Blind Study.  Nutrients 2019, 11(10), 2494.

Purpose: “The purpose of this randomized, placebo-controlled, blind study was to investigate the effects of the drinkable nutraceutical ELASTEN^® (QUIRIS Healthcare, Gütersloh, Germany) on skin aging and skin health.”

Conclusions: The test product significantly improved skin hydration, elasticity, roughness, and density…These positive effects were substantially retained during the follow-up.

Funding: This research was funded by Quiris Healthcare, Germany.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The sponsor had no influence on execution, analysis and interpretation of the data.

Comment: The funder, Quiris Healthcare, “develops and sells innovative, natural health products. The focus is on effectiveness and special quality.”  What struck me about this particular example is how the authors report no conflict of interest and state that the sponsor had no influence on how the study was conducted, analyzed, and interpreted.  Most research on the influence of industry funding indicates that it most often shows up in the study design.  Research also shows that investigators are unaware of the influence; it occurs at an unconscious level.  I review data backing up these statements in my book Unsavory Truth: How Food Companies Skew the Science of What We Eat.

David Michaels.  The Triumph of Doubt: Dark Money and the Science of Deception.  Oxford University Press, 2019.  

Even though this book is not strictly about food politics, it has enough about the sugar and alcohol industries to qualify.  I did a blurb for it.

Triumph of Doubt is an industry-by-industry account of how corporations manipulate science and scientists to promote profits, not public health.  Nothing less than democracy is at stake here, and we all should be responding right away to David Michaels’ call for action.

Michaels, a former OSHA official, has written an insider’s look at a wide range of industries that follow the tobacco industry’s playbook for casting doubt on inconvenient science.  The range is impressive: football, diesel fuel, opioids, silica dust, Volkswagen cars, climate denial, food packaging chemicals, alcohol, sugar, and Republican ideology

He’s got some ideas about what to do—keep conflicted scientists out of policy making, for example—but in this political environment?

That leaves it up to us folks to take to the streets.  If only.

I can hardly keep up with the accounts of the CBD business.  The business is booming.

The research?  Not so much.

The regulation? Lagging.

Here are some recent items.

• NASDA, the National Association of State Departments of Agriculture, has a report on hemp.
• Plaintiff’s Bar turns attention to CBD with wave of lawsuits alleging products contain ‘significantly lower levels’ than advertised
  redicted in the wake of reports highlighting discrepancies between actual and stated levels of CBD in consumer products, the plaintiff’s bar has turned its attention to the burgeoning category with a series of lawsuits alleging that products contain “significantly lower levels of CBD than advertised.”.. Read
• CBD’s Novel Food status reiterated by German high courts:  A higher court in Germany rules that cannabidiol (CBD) is a novel food confirming the decision made by one of the country’s administrative courts back in November last year. Read more
• Recall round-up: Hemp extract in spray and drug-contaminated supplements:  Aphrodisiac supplements for men, an update to a cumin recall and a non-approved Novel Food found in a CBD dietary supplement are among notices issued by food agencies last month in NutraIngredients monthly round-up. Read more
• Italy adopts decree setting maximum THC levels in supplements:  Italy’s Ministry of Health confirms the maximum level of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) permitted in food supplements is set at two milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). Read more
• EFSA warns THC levels of hemp-containing supplements exceed safety limit:  The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) warns of consequences to the heart and cardiovascular system as a result of consuming large amounts of hemp products that includes supplements, teas and energy drinks. Read more
• FDA asks for $5 million for CBD initiatives; industry groups cautiously in favor:  A $5 million FDA budget request earmarked for CBD initiatives has garnered the cautious support of dietary supplement stakeholders…. Read more
• CBD’s Novel Food status reiterated by German high courts: A higher court in Germany rules that cannabidiol (CBD) is a novel food confirming the decision made by one of the country’s administrative courts back in November last year… Read 
• CBD ruling major blow to industry: The novel foods status of cannabidiol (CBD) has been a major blow for the industry, but one that is not so easily enforced, experts have claimed…. Read more
• CBD food decision made by Food Standards Agency:  The Food Standards Agency (FSA) is giving the CBD industry a deadline of 31 March 2021 to submit valid novel food authorisation applications…. Read more

Formula companies must be desperate for sales.  They are spending four times what they used to on advertising of “toddler milk,” formula ostensibly aimed at children who no longer need infant formula and are perfectly capable of eating real food.

So says a new study in the journal Public Health Nutrition.  The study comes from the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, now at the University of Connecticut in Hartford, a group specializing in research to inform policy.

The report points out that increasing sales of toddler formula come at a time when pediatric authorities specifically recommend against feeding toddler milks to young children.

Why?  Because young kids do not need them and the milks contain unnecessary added sugars.

As the paper points out, “These findings also support the need to regulate marketing of toddler milks in countries that prohibit infant formula marketing to consumers.”

The advertising of toddler milks gets around those policies and should stop.  Right now.

The Trump Administration has released its proposed budget for fiscal year 2021.

I emphasize proposed because Congress has to pass it before it goes into effect.  What will Congress do?  Time will tell.

With that said, here are the White House documents.

• The main budget page
• The 2021 budget: “A budget for America’s Future”
• Major savings and reforms
• Analytical Perspectives.  Its web page links to specific chapters
• Fact sheets  (two are particularly relevant: Support for working families, and Investing in Rural America)
• Budget summary tables

From the Hagstrom Report (thanks Jerry)

• Agriculture Department section
• Health and Human Services section

These sections are classic examples of double-speak.  The words mean precisely their opposites.  “Reform,” for example, really means cut budget and enrollment.

You want evidence?  The budget proposes an 8% cut to overall USDA spending, with a $15 billion cut to SNAP.

The Fact Sheet summarizes SNAP proposals [with my translations]:

Reforming [cutting budget and reducing SNAP participation]the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

The Budget proposes to strengthen work requirements to help all able-bodied adults participating in SNAP enter the job market and work toward self-sufficiency [lose eligibility for participation].

The Budget also promotes the use of data and technology to improve program integrity and streamline State operations [Tightening up on fraud will reduce participation].

Finally, the Budget proposes to combine the traditional retail-based SNAP electronic benefit with the direct provision of nutritious and 100 percent Americangrown USDA Foods, maintaining our commitment to helping needy families avoid hunger while generating substantial savings to the taxpayer and allowing innovative partnerships with the private sector [Really?  USDA still hasn’t given up on Harvest Boxes?].

This is so awful that a group of Democratic members—all former recipients of SNAP benefits— wrote a letter to Trump expressing concerns.

Let’s hope Congress rejects these cuts.

The New York Times’ analyses

• Trump’s $4.8 Trillion Budget Would Cut Safety Net Programs and Boost Defense
• Trump budget would fray safety net
• What’s in President Trump’s 2021 fiscal budget