- Email: [email protected]
Food additives
Book reviews
control of bread distribution from bakers. In the 20th century, rice growers engage wheat producers in a struggle for vital government investments and price supports. Recent reactions to attempts to raise restaurant prices in Cuba, or limit Argentine consumption of beef, show that food politics in Latin America goes far beyond the struggle between ‘haves’ and ‘have-
In short, these essays are an exercise in politicotechnology of food production, processing and distribution. It is a curiously refreshing intellectual nourishment; policy makers and executors need more such inputs.
Frank Meissner Development Bank Washington, DC, USA
Inter-American
nots’ .
An excess of alcohol THE EUROPEAN WINE INDUSTRY by Roger Voss Special Report No 1980, The Economist Intelligence Unit, The Economist Publications, London, 1984, 85 pp
The author attempts to address a wide range of issues in this 85 page overview of the European wine industry. The report purports to make a detailed analysis of the structure of the wine industry, beginning with the producers and ending with the final distributors. It also discusses wine consumption, now and in the future, and puts into context current political discussions on the wine surplus. The report is divided into four main sections relating to supply, consumption, European Community policy and concluding remarks. Of the wineproducing nations, recent entrants to the Community, Spain and Portugal, are given the attention which they deserve, and which may have been lacking from earlier investigations into the wine industry. However, it was disappointing that the not insignificant development and innovations within UK vineyards and UK wines were not afforded greater discussion. Perhaps the complexities and mechanisms of the Community wine regime deserve a greater level of explanation than given in this report. An analysis of wine-related cases reaching the European Court of Justice would provide a valuable appendix, relating court rulings to existing legislation and clarifying the relationship between harmonized and national rules regarding wine produc-
FOOD POLICY August
1986
tion and sale. The effect of the continuing divergence of alcohol duty rates could also usefully be discussed here in the context of competition policy. The ‘wine lake’ dilemma is given enlightening coverage with an interesting analysis of the causes of, and remedies for, surplus production. Overall this report made pleasant reading, each issue discussed being given a ‘headline’ lead comment. The only disadvantage of this style of presentation was the fact that sections
were not tackled on a standardized basis. A series of statistics are presented in an appendix, illustrating trends and volumes mentioned in the text.. A glossary of terms, however, is lacking. Considering the numerous designations and nomenclatures relating to wine this would have provided a useful reference point. The concluding remarks, relating to future production, marketing and consumption of wine are relevant to all those active in the wine industry farmers, policy makers and distributors alike. On a general basis this report provides a useful summary of current issues and activity within the wine industry. It is, therefore, potential reading material for producers, industrialists, academics, students and wine connoisseurs who wish to broaden their knowledge of the trade today, and acknowledge potential developments during the next decade. Diana Welch Credit-Suisse Buckmaster and Moore Ltd Stock Exchange, London, UK
For better or worse? FOOD ADDITIVES by Erik Millstone Penguin Books, Middlesex, 163 pp, f2.95
UK, 1986,
The use of additives by the food industry can be criticized in two quite different ways, In the first, it is argued that additives are used to mislead the consumer and to disguise food of inferior quality. They are used for the convenience of the food industry even at the risk of using additives which have not been properly tested, are unsafe, and sometimes dangerous. All of this, of course, is with the aim of making bigger profits for the industry. The second kind of criticism is quite different. It is based on a belief that natural, unprocessed foods are ‘better’, ie healthier, for our well-being: the fewer processed foods we eat, the better it is likely to be for us. Such a view, considered irrational by others,
logically extends to preferring organic foods to those produced with artificial fertilizers and pesticides. This second view, held by a small minority of farmers, growers and consumers in Western developed countries, is growing rapidly, but it is not considered by Millstone. He tells us that his interest in additives was aroused by an article called ‘Death for Dinner’, in which it was argued that the US food industry was using chemical additives in ways which enabled them to enhance the profitability of their activities but failed to guarantee that no harm was being done to the health of consumers. Millstone has concluded that the ways in which food additives are used and regulated in the UK are profoundly unsatisfactory. He asserts - but does not provide evidence - that there have been earlier times when we were better fed, and that the food supply in the UK is inferior in many respects to that available in other countries. In
269
Book reviews
effect, it is a conspiracy theory: a wicked, exploitative food industry, which has the civil servants of the UK Ministry of Agriculture and Food in its pocket, is conning the public. Rather than immediately dismissing this view as absurd, consider the following. If the industry is strictly limiting itself to using additives that are really necessary (eg as preservatives), and if the use of additives is being properly regulated, then how is it that a Raspberry Flavour Trifle is being marketed with the following ingredients: Raspberry Flavour Jelly Crystals: Sugar, Gelling Agents (E410, E407, E340, Potas-
sium Chloride), Adiuic Acid, Aciditv Reaulator (E336), Flavourings, Stabilizer (E466L ,, Artificial Sweetener (Sodium Saccharin), Colour (E123). Raspberry Flavour Custard Powder: Starch, Salt, Flavourings, Colours (E124, E122). Sponge, with Pre: servative (E202), Colours (E102, EllO). Decorations, with Colours (EllO, E132, E123, E127). Trifle Topping Mix: Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil, Whey Powder, Sugar, Emulsifiers (E477, E322), Modified Starch, Lactose, Caseinate, Stabilizer (E466), Flavourings, Colours (E102, EllO, E16Oa), Antioxidant (E320).
As Millstone points out, the product contains no raspberry whatever, but does contain at least 22 additives - we do not actually know how many because the ‘flavourings’ may contain many components. The additives provide flavour, colour and texture to what are just sugars, starches and fat.
Instant desserts Whatever we may personally think about a product with such a composition, the fact is that there is a growing market for ‘instant’ desserts and other convenience foods. Indeed, the market seems to be increasingly polarized: on the one hand, discerning consumers are demanding (and getting) low fat, high fibre and increasingly, additive-free and organic products, which major retailing chains are now making available to a much wider public. On the other hand, the sales of convenience foods, fast foods and snacks, which usually have a high additive content and are highly processed, continue to increase and are especially popular with children and teenagers. This suggests that the prob-
270
lem lies with the parents, but that is not a view favoured by the liberal establishment. It is easier to blame the industry and the government. The trouble is that Millstone’s specific criticisms omit essential information and are often misleading. For example, his criticisms of the Food Advisory Committee are not well founded. Only four (not five) of its members are from industry, and he does not tell us the total membership of the Committee, which is 13. Four members might dominate a committee, but it is very unlikely. Since their recommendations may critically affect the health of the whole nation, the Committee would be foolish indeed if it were to regard industry profit more important than the well-being of the consumer; certainly no food company would survive on the basis of such an attitude. Another example is Millstone’s criticism of nitrite. Nowhere does he tell us that this preservative is responsible for the characteristic flavour of bacon and ham, that it is used in cured meat products to protect against botulism, and that in fact there has not been a case of botulism in the UK from a meat product for many years. His criticism of additives does not seem to be very discriminating; the need for nitrite is very different from the need for a synthetic dye like tartrazine, for example. I suspect that the real problem about additives is a different one. It is that, quite genuinely, food industry technologists see nothing wrong in piling up additives in Raspberry Fla-
vour Trifle and other products, and feel that since the daily intake of colouring matters by a child is estimated to be ‘only’ 40 milligrams, we need not be worried. They can also point out, quite correctly, that ‘natural’ foods and substances are not necessarily safe or healthy. For example, the commonest cause of allergies are all natural foods: dairy products, eggs and wheat, in that order. Nevertheless, allergic reactions to tartrazine and other additives do occur. One solution, therefore, is for the food industry to make available a wider range of additive-free products and leave it to the consumer to choose. The large retailers have already taken the lead in this, with their own-label products. Why has there not been a more positive response from the food manufacturing industry? One might ask, though, why it is that food allergies seem to have become so much more common, first in the USA and, rather later, here. Is it that they were not recognized before? Or does the consumption of a diet with a large proportion of highly processed foods containing additives lead, over time, to a state of dis-ease manifesting as allergies to natural as well as artificial food components? It may prove that the second kind of criticism mentioned at the beginning of this review will turn out to have a scientific basis, as was the case with fibre.
Tile Ulbricht London, UK
LandUse Policy
Special issue on land use in Africa Vol3
No4
October 1986
land use problems in the Middle Major articles on desertification; Belts; drought impact; irrigation; forestry; plus Viewpoints, conference reports, book reviews and regular features. For information write to Colin Blackman, Land Use Poky, Westbury House, Bury Street, Guildford GU2 5BH, UK.
PO Box 63,
FOOD POLICY August
1986
control of bread distribution from bakers. In the 20th century, rice growers engage wheat producers in a struggle for vital government investments and price supports. Recent reactions to attempts to raise restaurant prices in Cuba, or limit Argentine consumption of beef, show that food politics in Latin America goes far beyond the struggle between ‘haves’ and ‘have-
In short, these essays are an exercise in politicotechnology of food production, processing and distribution. It is a curiously refreshing intellectual nourishment; policy makers and executors need more such inputs.
Frank Meissner Development Bank Washington, DC, USA
Inter-American
nots’ .
An excess of alcohol THE EUROPEAN WINE INDUSTRY by Roger Voss Special Report No 1980, The Economist Intelligence Unit, The Economist Publications, London, 1984, 85 pp
The author attempts to address a wide range of issues in this 85 page overview of the European wine industry. The report purports to make a detailed analysis of the structure of the wine industry, beginning with the producers and ending with the final distributors. It also discusses wine consumption, now and in the future, and puts into context current political discussions on the wine surplus. The report is divided into four main sections relating to supply, consumption, European Community policy and concluding remarks. Of the wineproducing nations, recent entrants to the Community, Spain and Portugal, are given the attention which they deserve, and which may have been lacking from earlier investigations into the wine industry. However, it was disappointing that the not insignificant development and innovations within UK vineyards and UK wines were not afforded greater discussion. Perhaps the complexities and mechanisms of the Community wine regime deserve a greater level of explanation than given in this report. An analysis of wine-related cases reaching the European Court of Justice would provide a valuable appendix, relating court rulings to existing legislation and clarifying the relationship between harmonized and national rules regarding wine produc-
FOOD POLICY August
1986
tion and sale. The effect of the continuing divergence of alcohol duty rates could also usefully be discussed here in the context of competition policy. The ‘wine lake’ dilemma is given enlightening coverage with an interesting analysis of the causes of, and remedies for, surplus production. Overall this report made pleasant reading, each issue discussed being given a ‘headline’ lead comment. The only disadvantage of this style of presentation was the fact that sections
were not tackled on a standardized basis. A series of statistics are presented in an appendix, illustrating trends and volumes mentioned in the text.. A glossary of terms, however, is lacking. Considering the numerous designations and nomenclatures relating to wine this would have provided a useful reference point. The concluding remarks, relating to future production, marketing and consumption of wine are relevant to all those active in the wine industry farmers, policy makers and distributors alike. On a general basis this report provides a useful summary of current issues and activity within the wine industry. It is, therefore, potential reading material for producers, industrialists, academics, students and wine connoisseurs who wish to broaden their knowledge of the trade today, and acknowledge potential developments during the next decade. Diana Welch Credit-Suisse Buckmaster and Moore Ltd Stock Exchange, London, UK
For better or worse? FOOD ADDITIVES by Erik Millstone Penguin Books, Middlesex, 163 pp, f2.95
UK, 1986,
The use of additives by the food industry can be criticized in two quite different ways, In the first, it is argued that additives are used to mislead the consumer and to disguise food of inferior quality. They are used for the convenience of the food industry even at the risk of using additives which have not been properly tested, are unsafe, and sometimes dangerous. All of this, of course, is with the aim of making bigger profits for the industry. The second kind of criticism is quite different. It is based on a belief that natural, unprocessed foods are ‘better’, ie healthier, for our well-being: the fewer processed foods we eat, the better it is likely to be for us. Such a view, considered irrational by others,
logically extends to preferring organic foods to those produced with artificial fertilizers and pesticides. This second view, held by a small minority of farmers, growers and consumers in Western developed countries, is growing rapidly, but it is not considered by Millstone. He tells us that his interest in additives was aroused by an article called ‘Death for Dinner’, in which it was argued that the US food industry was using chemical additives in ways which enabled them to enhance the profitability of their activities but failed to guarantee that no harm was being done to the health of consumers. Millstone has concluded that the ways in which food additives are used and regulated in the UK are profoundly unsatisfactory. He asserts - but does not provide evidence - that there have been earlier times when we were better fed, and that the food supply in the UK is inferior in many respects to that available in other countries. In
269
Book reviews
effect, it is a conspiracy theory: a wicked, exploitative food industry, which has the civil servants of the UK Ministry of Agriculture and Food in its pocket, is conning the public. Rather than immediately dismissing this view as absurd, consider the following. If the industry is strictly limiting itself to using additives that are really necessary (eg as preservatives), and if the use of additives is being properly regulated, then how is it that a Raspberry Flavour Trifle is being marketed with the following ingredients: Raspberry Flavour Jelly Crystals: Sugar, Gelling Agents (E410, E407, E340, Potas-
sium Chloride), Adiuic Acid, Aciditv Reaulator (E336), Flavourings, Stabilizer (E466L ,, Artificial Sweetener (Sodium Saccharin), Colour (E123). Raspberry Flavour Custard Powder: Starch, Salt, Flavourings, Colours (E124, E122). Sponge, with Pre: servative (E202), Colours (E102, EllO). Decorations, with Colours (EllO, E132, E123, E127). Trifle Topping Mix: Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil, Whey Powder, Sugar, Emulsifiers (E477, E322), Modified Starch, Lactose, Caseinate, Stabilizer (E466), Flavourings, Colours (E102, EllO, E16Oa), Antioxidant (E320).
As Millstone points out, the product contains no raspberry whatever, but does contain at least 22 additives - we do not actually know how many because the ‘flavourings’ may contain many components. The additives provide flavour, colour and texture to what are just sugars, starches and fat.
Instant desserts Whatever we may personally think about a product with such a composition, the fact is that there is a growing market for ‘instant’ desserts and other convenience foods. Indeed, the market seems to be increasingly polarized: on the one hand, discerning consumers are demanding (and getting) low fat, high fibre and increasingly, additive-free and organic products, which major retailing chains are now making available to a much wider public. On the other hand, the sales of convenience foods, fast foods and snacks, which usually have a high additive content and are highly processed, continue to increase and are especially popular with children and teenagers. This suggests that the prob-
270
lem lies with the parents, but that is not a view favoured by the liberal establishment. It is easier to blame the industry and the government. The trouble is that Millstone’s specific criticisms omit essential information and are often misleading. For example, his criticisms of the Food Advisory Committee are not well founded. Only four (not five) of its members are from industry, and he does not tell us the total membership of the Committee, which is 13. Four members might dominate a committee, but it is very unlikely. Since their recommendations may critically affect the health of the whole nation, the Committee would be foolish indeed if it were to regard industry profit more important than the well-being of the consumer; certainly no food company would survive on the basis of such an attitude. Another example is Millstone’s criticism of nitrite. Nowhere does he tell us that this preservative is responsible for the characteristic flavour of bacon and ham, that it is used in cured meat products to protect against botulism, and that in fact there has not been a case of botulism in the UK from a meat product for many years. His criticism of additives does not seem to be very discriminating; the need for nitrite is very different from the need for a synthetic dye like tartrazine, for example. I suspect that the real problem about additives is a different one. It is that, quite genuinely, food industry technologists see nothing wrong in piling up additives in Raspberry Fla-
vour Trifle and other products, and feel that since the daily intake of colouring matters by a child is estimated to be ‘only’ 40 milligrams, we need not be worried. They can also point out, quite correctly, that ‘natural’ foods and substances are not necessarily safe or healthy. For example, the commonest cause of allergies are all natural foods: dairy products, eggs and wheat, in that order. Nevertheless, allergic reactions to tartrazine and other additives do occur. One solution, therefore, is for the food industry to make available a wider range of additive-free products and leave it to the consumer to choose. The large retailers have already taken the lead in this, with their own-label products. Why has there not been a more positive response from the food manufacturing industry? One might ask, though, why it is that food allergies seem to have become so much more common, first in the USA and, rather later, here. Is it that they were not recognized before? Or does the consumption of a diet with a large proportion of highly processed foods containing additives lead, over time, to a state of dis-ease manifesting as allergies to natural as well as artificial food components? It may prove that the second kind of criticism mentioned at the beginning of this review will turn out to have a scientific basis, as was the case with fibre.
Tile Ulbricht London, UK
LandUse Policy
Special issue on land use in Africa Vol3
No4
October 1986
land use problems in the Middle Major articles on desertification; Belts; drought impact; irrigation; forestry; plus Viewpoints, conference reports, book reviews and regular features. For information write to Colin Blackman, Land Use Poky, Westbury House, Bury Street, Guildford GU2 5BH, UK.
PO Box 63,
FOOD POLICY August
1986