NG Food US

Third-Quarter Coca-Cola Profits Up By 8.4%

Tue, 19 Oct 2010 15:15:00 +0100

Coca-Cola profits continued to increase through a testy third-quarter, up by 8.4 percent. The soda maker has seen a steady improvement in the North American market and a marked improvement in markets like Russia and Brazil.

In North America, Coca-Cola grew by only two percent, a marked improvement from recent tepid sales during the same quarter last year which saw stagnant growth. Internationally Coca-Cola fared much better, recording healthy profits from the same period last year.

Coca-Cola reported a profit of $2.06 billion, or 88 cents a share, up from $1.9 billion, or 81 cents a share, a year earlier. Excluding restructuring and other impacts, earnings climbed to 92 cents from 82 cents as revenue increased five percent to $8.43 billion.

According to the Wall Street Journal, sparkling beverages, which include Coke's carbonated-drinks business, had world-wide volume growth of 3 percent in the quarter from last year, including 4 percent growth internationally.

Coca-Cola's largest recorded growth volume occurred in Eurasia and Africa, which grew 12 percent - including 30 percent volume growth in Russia - while volume in the Pacific grew 11 percent in the quarter, supported by 12 percent growth in China, 11 percent in Japan and 19 percent in the Philippines.

"We continue to build on our momentum, delivering solid volume, revenue and profit growth this quarter, with our results exceeding all of our long-term targets and generating sustainable value for our shareowners," said Muhtar Kent, Coke's Chief Executive Officer.

In addition, Coke has said it will buy back $2 billion in shares before 2011. Shares were up 1.3% to $60.75 in recent premarket trading as the results beat analysts' expectations, according to the Journal.

Related articles:

Coca-Cola's health kick - Ingredients and R&D - NG Food US | Food Industry News | Starbucks global marketin

Cloned cow milk scandal rocks FSA

Mon, 02 Aug 2010 16:21:00 +0100

The Food Standards Agency has said it will investigate claims that milk produced from a cloned cow's offspring is on sale in the UK.

According to reports, an ‘unnamed British diary farmer' has said he used milk from a cow ‘produced from a cloned parent'. The FSA has said it had not approved the milk, labelled a "novel food", and would investigate.

All foodstuffs produced from cloned animals must get approval before being sold, the agency stated. An FSA spokeswoman said, "Since 2007 the FSA interpretation of the law has been that meat and products from clones and their offspring are considered novel foods and would therefore need to be authorised before being placed on the market.

"As the UK authority responsible for accepting novel food applications the agency has not received any applications relating to cloning and no authorisations have been made.

"The agency will of course investigate any reports of unauthorised novel foods entering the food chain."

The story was broken when the International Herald Tribune reported that an unnamed farmer was selling milk from a cow bred from a clone. The farmer said he was selling embryos from the same cow to breeders in Canada.

Health concerns

While there are said to be no health risk to humans, the production of milk from the offspring of cloned animals raises a number of economic, ethical and welfare issues.

Among the scientific community, it is held that there should be no health risk from consuming cow's milk. However the RSPCA says it is a bad idea and condemns it on animal welfare and ethical grounds.

"Cloning has huge potential to cause unnecessary pain, suffering and distress which cannot be justified by purely commercial benefits," a spokesman said.

"Food from cloned animals may seem a tasty option for some, but it leaves a distinctly bad taste in the mouth when it comes to animal welfare."

The RSPCA also stress the risk to biodiversity in reducing the variance in livestock populations - whereby, theoretically, a disease could wipe out an entire herd because all animals were equally susceptible to particular strains, when normally there would be varied immunity in any given herd.

The investigation continues.

Cadbury holding firm against Kraft?

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 15:22:00 +0100

With Cadbury's rejecting Kraft's bid of over $15 billion, industry analysts are wondering what the next step for Kraft will be.

Michael Osanloo, Executive Vice-President of Kraft, has stated that the US food-giant will remain "financially disciplined" in its pursuit of British confectionery firm Cadbury saying,

"There has been a lot of talk about what Cadbury is worth...The simple fact is that Cadbury is worth what someone is willing to pay for it - nothing more."

He added, "we are the most logical buyer but we will remain financially disciplined."

Some industry experts have theorised that Kraft Food's interest in the chocolate giant could spark off a bidding war. Deborah Cross, an industry analyst for food and beverage ingredients at Frost & Sullivan, said in a recent interview to Talking Retail,

"Cadbury's rejection of Kraft's recent bid is likely to promote further interest in the company from alternative confectionery companies, and looks likely to result in a further bid from Kraft.

"Kraft's initial bid may have undervalued the company, but further more generous offers are expected, and a price offer of around 100p to 150p extra per share would present a fairer and more attractive bid proposition for completion of the deal."

However, despite rumblings of a possible joint venture from Nestle and Hershey, such a bis has yet to emerge. Nestle especially haven't shown any interest, with CEO Paul Bulcke

A possible hostile takeover from Kraft has not been ruled out through with Irene Rosenfeld

In 2008, Cadbury had 10.3 percent of the world confectionery market, second only to Mars's 14.8 percent. Kraft, whose chocolate brands include Milka and Toblerone, was fifth at 4.5 percent. If the deal were to succeed, the enlarged group would seriously challenge Mars and have an annual turnover of over $50 billion.

Some Kraft shareholders aren't too sure though, with the company's shares falling around 6 percent on the saying the company had no plans for any big acquisitions in 2009 or 2010. reputably saying the option is still on the table and it's clear to see why. New York Stock Exchange as shareholders weighed up the likely impact on its finances of such a large acquisition. Things weren't so bad for Cadbury's however; share prices soared 40 percent indicating that investors feel a merger would be beneficial to the UK firm.

McCurry: Proving that McDonald's doesn't own the prefix 'Mc'?

Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:23:00 +0100

In a true David and Goliath battle, McDonald's have lost an eight year battle to prevent a family-run Kuala Lumpur restaurant from calling itself McCurry, saying that the use of 'Mc' infringed upon its trademark.

It was determined by Malaysia's top court that McDonald's did not have a monopoly on the prefix 'Mc' and that any restaurant was allowed to use it as long as their food was suitably different from McDonald's.

The owner P Suppiah, who has long insisted that 'Mc' meant 'Malaysian Curry', was happy with the decision. He said to reporters,

"We feel great that this eight-year legal battle is finally over. We can now go ahead with whatever we plan to do such as opening new branches."

He also stated he is now looking for partners to expand now that the legal campaign is over, with plans to launch a chain of restaurants across Malaysia and possibly overseas.

Speaking to Bloomberg, Suppiah said, "We definitely want to bring our vision to a broader clientele. We're even looking at opening international franchises."

McDonald's, which has more than 170 outlets in Malaysia, first sued the McCurry restaurant in 2001 and the lawsuit rapidly became a 'cause célèbre'.

Mr. Suppiah's 24-hour restaurant quickly become a local icon in the Jalan Ipoh district of Kuala Lumpur, with red-and-white signage and a popular menu with Malaysian-style tea, coconut rice with spicy shrimp and chicken, and chicken tandoori.

McDonald's initally won in 2006 when a High Court ruled in its favour, but then McCurry took the case to the Court of Appeal, which overturned the ruling. McDonald's then took the case to the Federal Court, where a three-member panel today unanimously dismissed the application.

According to the Associated Press, McDonald's have accepted the decision.

8/09/09

Kraft put in bid for Cadbury

Mon, 07 Sep 2009 14:58:00 +0100

American company Kraft Foods has put in a bid to take over UK confectionery firm Cadbury in a offer worth $16.7 billion (£10.2 billion).

Krafts currently owns brands such as Kenco, Oreos, Toblerone and Jacobs, and despite Cadbury already rejecting its advances, it is clear to see why Krafts have their eyes set on acquiring the chocolate firm. The US firm have previously stated that Cadbury's brands were "highly complementary" to its portfolio and "would benefit from Kraft Foods' global scope and scale and array of proprietary technologies and processes".

They have also stated that the takeover would protect UK jobs as well as saving a factory that has been rumoured to shut. The US firm added it wished to create "a global powerhouse in snacks, confectionery and quick meals".

Kraft have already stated that their offer would allow Cadbury to save up to $625m a year in distribution, marketing and product development costs.

Kraft chairman Irene Rosenfeld said in a statement, "As we have done, Cadbury has built wonderful brands by focusing on quality, innovation and marketing, but we believe the next stage in Cadbury's development will be challenging, given the increased importance of scale in the industry."

"We are eager to build upon Cadbury's iconic brands and strong British heritage through increased investment and innovation. We have great respect and admiration for Cadbury, its employees, its leadership and its proud heritage."

Krafts already have experience in the confectionery industry, owning the Green & Black's chocolate brand and Halls lozenges, Trident and Dentyne gum brands, and Liquorice Allsorts maker Bassett's.

If the two powerhouses were to join forces, industry experts predicts annuals sales of around $50 billion (£30.5 billion). Unsurprisingly, Cadbury shares have soared by more than a-third in early trade, following news of the takeover approach.

Starbucks names new Chief Marketing Officer

Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:35:00 +0100

Starbucks have hired a veteran employee of PepsiCo to be their new global chief marketing officer, responsible for the franchise's worldwide marketing and product strategy.

Annie Young-Scrivner comes to the coffee giant from Quaker Foods and Snacks, a division of PepsiCo, where she worked as chief marketing officer and vice president of sales. Prior to that, she was chairman and region president of PepsiCo for Greater China, and oversaw various global brands, including Pepsi, Frito-Lay, Quaker, Tropicana and Gatorade. She will now be in charge of Starbucks global marketing and product strategy.

In a statement, Starbucks president and CEO Howard Schultz said,

"Annie brings a wealth of knowledge in international business and a proven track record in global marketing and product strategy, including health and wellness."

Starbucks was hit hard by the economic recession and have been pushing their marketing team hard in recent months in order to diversify and bring back business.

Such schemes include expanding their advertising presence on social networks... and it seems to be working.

In July, the coffee chain surpassed Coca-Cola as the most popular brand on Facebook. Starbucks digital strategy director Alexandra Wheeler recently said the company has implemented an aggressive digital and social media strategy, experimenting on the likes of Twitter and other social media.

The company has also been expanding its menu in order to compete with the likes of McDonalds who has emerged from the economic downturn with record profits.

Young-Scrivner is expected to start her role later this month.

Would you eat pain-free animals?

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:47:00 +0100

For many, the plight of animal suffering is the main reason that large factory farms are widely condemned, but what if it was possible to breed an animal that feels no pain? To create a situation where you could still eat meat but avoid animal suffering? Welcome to the world of genetically engineered animals.

More and more consumers are checking products to make sure they have been ethically sourced. Labels such as "hormone-free" and "free-range" are important to those buying meat, so could a breakthrough in neuroscience see the introduction of "pain-free" meat products?

Currently, over 300 million tonnes of meat are consumed each year worldwide. As a result, factory and battery farms are becoming more and more common in order to keep up with demand. These farms are notorious for their cramped conditions and ill treatment of animals. In the case of battery farm chickens, many have their beaks removed without anaesthetic or pain relief to prevent them from pecking their neighbours.

With institutes such as this becoming more common, is there an ethical duty to make sure the animals suffer as little as possible or are we simply alleviating our consciences by genetically engineering livestock to not feel pain?

According to Adam Shriver, a philosopher at Washington University in St Louis, Missouri, we have an ethical duty to at least consider the option.

If we can't do away with factory farming, we should at least take steps to minimise the amount of suffering that is caused," Shriver said, declaring that genetically engineered pain-free animals are the most acceptable alternative to inflicting suffering on animals for our consumption.

"I'm offering a solution where you could still eat meat but avoid animal suffering."

However, critics of the plan have stated that by removing animal's ability to feel pain, they could easily put themselves in harm's way. Neuro-scientists at the University of Pennsylvania believe that this can be overcome. Citing people on morphine as able to feel pain but remain "less troubled" by it, scientists believe that it might be possible to eliminate the suffering caused by pain without tampering with the physical sensation.

Despite this, there is something unsettling about eating an animal that has been engineered for our consumption, it is one of the reasons that cloned animals have yet to be served up on menus. However logic dictates that if we are to continue eating meat and battery farms continue to function, then surely engineering a farm animal so it does not suffer from pain is surely more humane than killing one that does?

Logic can't dismiss the sheer initial reaction of the idea - images of a Frankenstein-esque scientist experimenting on cows immediately spring to mind for many, making the idea seem like one step too far for science. However with so many consumers enjoying affordable meat to consider the plight of factory-farmed animals, perhaps this concept is just what is needed to make customers consider the plight endured by animals for our culinary delights.

Dunkin' suing for more dough?

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 16:47:00 +0100

In these hard financial times, many companies might be hard pressed to make a profit. Not for Dunkin' Donuts. The company has come up with a unique way of supplementing its income, hitting its franchisees with hefty penalties and legal fees.

According to the New York Post, the Dunkin' Donuts franchise has been hitting branch operators with penalties and the threat of losing their franchise rights. Often, these fines run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars and can include legal fees for Dunkin's lawyers.

The unusual tactic is not a new one either. Between 1 January 2006 and 21 August 2009, Dunkin' Donuts had been involved in 356 cases against its franchises. If we are to assume each case is against a different franchisee, then that means the company is currently engaged in lawsuits with over 15 percent of its US branches. Currently, the company has about 2,250 franchisees in the America.

Robert Zarco, a partner at law firm Zarco Einhorn Salkowski & Brito who has represented Dunkin' franchisees, calls the company's litigation tactics "legalized extortion."

He cited an example of a recent Dunkin' settlement where one operator was order to pay more than $500,000 in penalties, including a "transfer fee" that Dunkin' would pocket when the franchise rights were sold.

"Dunkin has decided that there's a smarter, more efficient way to increase revenues and that is to find and target franchisees that are vulnerable," he said.

Dunkin' Donuts have been quick to respond to such accusations with a spokeswoman saying,

"We conduct our business with uncompromising integrity, with no tolerance for unlawful behavior. As a 100 percent franchised company, everything we do is always with great respect for our relationship with our franchisees."

"For anyone to suggest or imply that our actions are taken for any reason other than to protect our franchisees and insure that our customers have a consistently outstanding experience in our shops is both wrong and irresponsible."

Despite this, Dunkin' Donuts was called the "most litigious franchise system in the country" by the Dunkin' Donuts Independent Franchise Owners. Even industry experts feel the same way, with Jonathan Maze, an associate editor at industry trade publication Franchise Times, saying, "I do not know of any other chain like it."

Ice cream to support gay couples

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 18:53:00 +0100

Food companies and social issues. Traditionally the two don't go together, but self-styled 'activist' ice cream maker Ben & Jerry's has taken a stance on the controversial issue of civil partnerships by introducing a new flavour that is going to support gay couples.

The new flavour called 'Chubby Hubby' flavour was unveiled by the company last night in the state of Vermont, where it was announced that gay couples could now apply for marriage licences. To celebrate this, the ice cream was temporarily named Hubby Hubby.

The issue of gay marriage is a controversial one in the United States where not every state allows gay couples to get married.

It is not the first time, Ben & Jerry's have been involved in political issues. The ice cream makers are constantly drawing attention to the damage climate change can cause to the planet and have made efforts to cut their CO2 emissions. Today, they now produce 32 percent less CO2 than they did in 2002.

They are also no strange to controversy; in 2006, they released a flavour of ice cream called "Black and Tan", which was named for the drink made by mixing stout and pale ale. However, many complained that the 'Black and Tans' was a name given to an irregular force of British ex-servicemen, recruited during the Irish war of independence and renowned for their brutality. Despite this, they continued to be a significant part of America's social landscape, even changing one of their flavours to Yes Pecan, when Barack Obama won the presidency.

By making the bold move of announcing their new flavour, it is clear that Ben & Jerry's are not worried about any possible controversy. They even made the announcement via Twitter and on its Facebook fan page, both of which can be seen nationwide and internationally.

"We believe that social justice can and should be something that every human being is entitled to," says Ben & Jerry's CEO Walt Freese.

"From the very beginning of our 30 year history, we have supported equal rights for all people. The legalisation of marriage for gay and lesbian couples in Vermont is certainly a step in the right direction and something worth celebrating with peace, love and plenty of ice cream."

Beer companies: Do they hold too much pricing power?

Wed, 02 Sep 2009 17:21:00 +0100

With beer demand slumping, you'd be forgiven that now would be a good time for beer companies to slash prices in order to attract customers. However, both Anheuser-Busch InBev - purveyor of the Bud Light - and MillerCoors, a joint venture between SABMiller and Molston Coors, are raising prices.

Whilst this beer price increase may seem like madness, the two companies currently hold 80 percent of the market and have clearly realised their position. The decision to do this, while many of their consumers are suffering from financial constraints, highlights the tremendous pricing power that these companies hold today.

Traditionally, beer companies change prices to reflect changes in the cost of barley or hops but in recent years, the landscape of the beer industry has changed. The competitiveness is not what it once was with Miller and Coors starting a joint venture against Budweiser and InBev watching its finances following a $52 billion buyout of Anheuser. So despite an economic downturn, beer companies are raising prices despite the falling income of customers. A beer company executive has even been quoted as deeming the current conditions "favourable".

In terms of combating such 'price control', the Obama administration could have a tough, yet popular battle. The White House has been quick to condemn corporate behaviour since the credit crunch and has vowed to take a tougher line on such acts. It would also, no doubt, score points by taking on the foreign-owned beer companies, but the fear is that it would be contrary to creating a competitive market.

However, a lawsuit against brewer Pabst merging with Blatz in 1959 by the Department of Justice saw the judge note that "if not stopped, this decline in the number of separate competitors and this rise in the share of the market controlled by the larger beer manufacturers are bound to lead to greater and greater concentration of the beer industry into fewer and fewer hands." Pabst was forced to divest Blatz.

Perhaps the likes of Coors, Miller and Bud should not count on the government doing nothing...

Pringles firm to be olympic sponsor?

Tue, 01 Sep 2009 09:31:00 +0100

Consumer product giant and owner of Pringles, Procter and Gamble (P&G), have signed on as a sponsor with the US Olympic Committee (USOC), in a bid to appeal to audiences worldwide.

Kirk Perry, a spokesman for the potential olympic sponsor P&G, said the company had been attracted by the Olympics' appeal for women, teenagers and adults ages 18 to 34, which matched the firm's consumer base. The company has a wide range of brands including Gillette, Wella, Patene and Head n' Shoulders shampoos, Hugo Boss fragrances, Ariel and Bold washing detergents, Pampers nappies and of course, popular crisp brand Pringles.

Whilst details of the deal have not been made public, partners to the USOC usually pay a minimum for $15 million for such sponsorship.

In terms of sponsorship, the USOC has lost several name brands such as General Motors and retail chain Home Depot, so to land a company like P&G is a significant achievement. They are also currently trying to renew deals with Bank of America and communications company AT&T.

The recession has seen many sports sponsorship deals fall through in recent months and thus far, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has only filled nine of its 11 global partnership slots, places that are normally snapped up by companies eager to have their brands associated with The Games.

P&G has itself been hit by the economic downturn, experiencing an 18 percent fall in profits between April and June. The slump was attributed to consumers cutting back on unnecessary household spending, products such as Oral-B power toothbrushes, Duracell batteries, Pringles snacks and its fragrances had suffered particularly badly, the company reported.

Despite this, P&G is the still the 8th largest corporation in the world by market capitalization and 14th largest US company by profit. Founded by William Procter, a candle-maker, and James Gamble, a soap-mnaker, in 1837, the Ohio based company has gone from strength to strength, being a frequent entry in the Fortune 500 lists and coming 10th in Fortune's Most Admired Companies list in 2007.

Has the recession created 'store brand' consumer loyalty?

Thu, 27 Aug 2009 16:10:00 +0100

The recession has seen consumers turn away from higher price branded products to supermarkets' 'own-brands' in order to cut costs, but could this trend continue when the economy improves?

According to a survey done by Retail Forward in April 2009, three quarters of consumers queried had altered their shopping behaviour by buying less, using discount coupons and choosing supermarket brands over larger brands.

Last year, 'own brands' saw an increase of $7 billion from the year before when they totalled $73 billion. The president of the Private Label Manufacturers Association, Brian Sharoff, said that store brands had seen an increase of between 9 and 14 percent over the last two recessions.

"In both of those economic downturns, consumers tried store brands, liked them and stayed with them after the economy improved," he said.

Far from being the 'Value' products of the 70s and 80s, when supermarket brands often came in clunky white packaging with the product branded on it in black, block letters, supermarket brands have consistently gotten better and better and now make up more than a quarter of food sales.

"Generics have virtually disappeared from stores and now quality, assortment and innovation are driving the success of private label," Sharoff said in a statement released by the PLMA. "The state of the economy can create an historic expansion of retailers' store brands, but only if the industry remains committed to offering consumers the best store brands possible."

Even the 'big boys' have expanded their range to deal with demand. Wal-Mart Stores has expanded its Great Value brand, while A&P has come out with a discount line of organic groceries. Best Buy and Kohl's have also expanded their store-brand items citing that "trading down to private brands is among the most prevalent changes in shopping behavior."

It is not just America either, Canada has seen similar trends. According to a survey by the NPD group, 55 percent of shoppers have said they consider store brands equally good or better than name brands. Amazingly, some grocery suppliers have gone as far as introducing private label versions of their products to profit from the trend.

Joel Gregoire, NPD's food and beverage analyst, said, "If people are starting to perceive the quality of store brands as being comparable to that of name brands, what else should a name brand focus on? Focus on your brand and the brand's equity."

How tough are things for the spirits industry in the current economy?

Thu, 27 Aug 2009 11:04:00 +0100

Much has been made of how the beer and spirits industry have been hit hard by the economic downturn with consumers choosing to stay at home rather then go to bars and pubs, but with drinks giant Diageo announced pre-tax profits of over $3.2 million, one has to wonder how much they really are struggling?

Of course, Diageo PLC is the world's largest spirits maker, so you'd expect them to make a profit no matter what, but they have also announced a seven percent rise in profits.

Unfortunately, this is isn't simply from steady sales, but also due to cost-cutting schemes the company has had to put in place to maintain profit margins, with many brand labels suffering poor demand.

However with Diageo, who owns Johnnie Walker whisky, Baileys, Smirnoff vodka and Guinness stout, cutting its profit targets for the year yet making a 15 percent increase in revenue to $15 billion, those have who have suffered from their cost cutting measures are wondering why they were let go in the first place.

It has particularly angering union leaders in Glasgow, who are protesting the company's decision to close a 199 year-old distillery in the city and a bottling plant in Kilmarnock at a loss of over 900 jobs.

Unite union spokesman Len McCluskey has accused the drinks giant of greed saying, "Even in a global recession, Diageo can pull in billions of pounds in pure profit."

"For 185 years, generations of Scotland's workers have delivered for this company. Their hard work has made this company extraordinarily wealthy and its products loved around the world."

Diageo has responded by saying that the job cuts will be partly offset by the creation of 400 new jobs at its packaging plant in Fife.

Diageo Chief executive Paul Walsh has said that despite the huge profits, it had been a 'challenging' year and he was "very comfortable" with the cost-cutting measures, which he claimed would save the company £120m next year and allow greater spending on marketing its brands.

He also slammed the protesters saying, "I'm aware of the jobs campaign and I am concerned that people are almost trying to dent the image of the brand, which will not be good for the remaining employees, so I think it's very short-sighted."

So I guess things are only bad for the spirits industry if you're at the bottom of the ladder...

Can science prevent food shortages?

Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:53:00 +0100

Not many people know the name Norman Borlaug. They don't know that he's an American agricultural expert, the father of the 'Green Revolution' and a Nobel laureate. They almost certainly don't know that he is responsible for saving over one billion people from starvation.

In the 1950s, countries such as Pakistan, Mexico and India were facing food shortages due to the wheat being constantly battered and ravaged by wind and disease. To prevent the nations' populations from starving to death, Borlaug developed semi-dwarf high-yield, disease-resistant wheat varieties through cross-breeding different types of wheat. Traditionally, most of a wheat plant's energy goes into growing a long stem rather than nurturing the vital grains that are needed.

The result was a wheat that was only half the height of traditional corn but yielded just as much cereal.

Combining these high yielding varieties with modern agricultural production techniques, wheat yields in India increased from 11 million tons to 60 million tons. He has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the Congressional Gold Medal and the Padma Vibhushan, India's highest civilian honour to non-citizens of exemplary accomplishment.

Borlaug's 'dwarf wheat' is still utilised today and is a prime example of how science has saved the world from starvation, but can it do so again?

It is expected that the world's population will reach 7 billion within a few years and food shortages are already rife in certain developing countries. But are the world's scientists doing anything to prepare for a potential humanitarian crisis?

Despite its controversial nature, genetically modified food products may be a solution.

In Hertfordshire, Great Britain, at the Rothmadsted plant research centre, scientists have spent over 160 years experimenting with food stuffs to improve their yield and genetically modified products are definitely an option.

Professor Keith Goulding, head of soil studies, says yields can be boosted without GM, but would be enhanced far more rapidly with it.

"We'd like it considered more sensibly because it has the potential for controlling pests and disease virtually without using chemicals at all."

"It is frustrating that GM is not more acceptable. We don't have to put more exotic genes across the species barrier - it can be just about using genes from other plants."

Like Borlaug, Rothmadsted scientists also work on wheat varieties. In one of their many greenhouses is a wheat strain developed to withstand drought. With global temperatures increasing, the threat of harvests failing is more prevalent and are falling water levels.

Professor Peter Shewry, acting director of Rothamsted, believes that an increasing global population can be fed, it is just a matter of utilising the existing technologies not to mention the regional conditions and financing needed.

Is there too much sugar in American diets?

Wed, 26 Aug 2009 17:10:00 +0100

The New American Heart Association have warned Americans against binging on sugar. They say that added sugar, which is sprinkled on and processed into packaged food and beverages have become too common a staple in the American diet.

They are arguing that sugar binging is helping to drive the uptick in metabolic changes in the American population, such as the exploding obesity rate. They have now recommended an upper limit on daily consumption, in which they recommend that women should consume no more than 100 calories per day of added sugars, and men should consume no more than 150 calories per day of added sugar.

These figures mean that there will be no more sneaky cans of soda, as the average 12-ounce can, contains about eight teaspoons, or about 33 grams of added sugar, this is the equivalent of 130 calories. According to the American Dietetic Association, one gram of sugar is the equivalent of four calories.

These statistics mean that the average American, is consuming an excess 22.2 teaspoons of added sugar, or 355 calories if you want to look at it in that format. It is believed that most of these, in fact come from sugar-sweetened drinks.

If you don't find yourself with a sweet tooth for sugary drinks, you're still in danger of consuming too much sugar, as added sugar in food has increased 19 percent between 1970 and 2005.

US News, has compiled a list of foods, that are surprisingly high in added sugars.

Fortune cookies. One pack of fortune cookie, contains about 3.6 grams of added sugar.

Flavoured booze. Watch out when you're drinking your flavoured alcohol. One ounce of crème de menthe has 14 grams of added sugar; 53-proof coffee-flavoured liqueur has 16 grams of added sugar per ounce.

Baked beans. One-cup serving of canned baked beans with no salt added will cost you nearly 15 grams of added sugar.

Dried, sweetened cranberries. One serving, a third of a cup of these will hit you with 25 grams of added sugar.

Ketchup. A favourite condiment with your food, you will find that a single one-cup serving of regular, or low sodium ketchup racks up nearly 40 grams of added sugar in it.

Cream substitutes. A one-cup serving of a liquid "light" cream substitute packs 22 grams of added sugar, while a one-cup serving of a powdered "light" cream substitute adds a huge 69 grams.

BBQ sauce. A one-cup serving of this summertime favourite adds 9 grams of added sugar onto those ribs and chicken.

"Reduced" salad dressings. A one-cup serving of reduced-calorie French dressing is 58 grams of added sugar, and a one-cup serving of reduced-fat coleslaw dressing will add a colossal 103 grams of added sugar.

Lemonade. A cup of lemonade powder has a massive 200 grams of added sugar. A single serving of the drink has almost 17 grams of added sugar.

Flavoured popcorn. Fat-free-syrup caramel popcorn has 18 grams of added sugar per ounce serving.

Granola bars. Often deemed as a healthful snack, but a 1-ounce serving of a granola bar with oats, fruit, and nuts has 11 grams of added sugar.

Looking at these statistics are scary, it certainly makes you reconsider certain foods before you eat them.

How hard have droughts hit food supplies this year?

Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:27:00 +0100

Mexico, China, Kenya, India, even the United States, it seems there is almost no country that hasn't suffered some form of drought this year.

In Asia, India has decreed that it may have to ban corn exports for a second season in a bid to boost local supplies after the driest monsoon in seven years. In the northeast Jilin province of China, over 4.5 million people are said to short of water, with 8.67m hectares of crops and over 4 million head of livestock under 'severe threat'. Hunan and Hubei provinces in central China are also facing shortages because of high temperatures and low rainfall.

It is a grave situation as many of these regions depend on rainfall to survive, especially in areas with poor irrigation systems.

Some are benefiting however. A halt in Asian corn exports means an increase in sales for North and South American suppliers. However, these continents are facing their own agricultural woes.

In Mexico, a prolonged drought has seen the loss of hundreds of thousands of hectares of crops. It has been estimated by the Mexican National Farmers' Confederation (CNC) that up to 80 percent of the country's land has been eroded by the lack of rain and a large percentage of farm land is now facing possible desertification.

Hit hardest has been bean and maize production, two staples of the Mexican diet. The CNC has reported that up to 80 percent of the bean crop, approximately 650,000 tonnes, has been lost due to lack of rain.

Even one of the most prosperous areas in the world, California, hasn't escaped unscathed. For the past three years, poor rainfall coupled with restrictions on water pumped from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta have cut the irrigation supplies of many farmers based in the San Joaquin Valley. According to the US Drought Monitor, 43 percent of the state is listed as being in a 'severe drought'.

It is a trend that is set to continue. With rising temperatures and sporadic rainfall, the lack of food production could be the first step to a global food shortage.

Food industry needs to prepare for cap-and-trade pricing

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:01:00 +0100

Unless manufacturers start developing more efficient supply chains rapidly, the American Clean Energy and Security Act, otherwise known as cap-and-trade, will impose carbon pricing that could be particularly damaging to the food industry. A new report has been developed by NSF International, a public health and safety company, and Trucost, a global provider of environmental data and analysis, entitled 'Carbon Emissions - Measuring the Risks'.

The report claims that the food industry is especially vulnerable to carbon pricing as 90 percent of its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions come from their supply chains indirectly, rather than directly through their manufacturing practices and are higher than any other sector. For example, this includes the emission of carbon through the manufacture of pesticides for farmers from whom a cereal manufacturer purchases wheat, or the energy use in water abstraction.

According to the report, the food industry is likely to see a sharp rise in the price of goods and services purchased from manufacturers who pay for their carbon emissions. Therefore, in order to cut costs food companies will have to prepare for a lower carbon economy by actively monitoring waste and efficiency within its supply chains. "Armed with data on emissions from their operations and supply chains, companies can identify opportunities to reduce emissions, manage carbon risks, use resources more efficiently and cut costs," the report said. One of the benefits of the cap-and-trade policies for food companies is that by becoming more environmentally efficient, they are likely to attract more investment.

The cap-and-trade bill was passed by the House of Representatives in June this year, but will need to be approved by the Senate before it can become a law. The bill will allow the government to set a cap on the amount of carbon that can be emitted nationally, meaning businesses could then by licenses to emit CO2. Year on year, the cap will be lowered to progressively cut overall emissions.

In the House version, the bill would attempt to reduce carbon emissions by 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020 and by 83 percent by 2050. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the cost of carbon allowances for manufacturers would rise from about $15 a ton in 2011 to $26 a ton by 2019.

At present only 40 percent of food and beverage companies disclose their GHG emission figures, leaving many companies unprepared for reporting requirements that will be introduced by the Environmental Protection Agency.

Caffeine: Solution or contribution to the effects of alcohol?

Mon, 24 Aug 2009 17:01:00 +0100

It is widely believed among alcohol drinkers that a hit of caffeine after a night out from a morning cup of tea or coffee is sure to make them feel better - the perfect way to release themselves from the previous nights intoxication. However, a beverage company in Chicago are under scrutiny for producing drinks that can make drinkers think that caffeine can counteract intoxication, an illusion which critics claim to be extremely dangerous, especially for for its target market of twentysomething, party-going college kids.

Four Loko and Four Maxed, produced by Phusion Projects Inc. of Chicago, are canned caffeinated alcoholic drinks sold in the US and EU and contain 10.0 percent ABV, coming in two flavors - grape and citrus. Up to 25 state attorney generals secured a victory in December 2008 against caffeine-boosted, high-alcohol brews when MillerCoors, under pressure from the officials, agreed to remove the stimulants from its Sparks beverage, the market leader. Anheuser-Busch Cos. agreed to do the same with its Tilt and Bud Extra brews. Since Sparks was reformulated, Four has become one of the top brands in caffeinated alcoholic beverages. The focus of the investigation, led by Illinois state attorney general Lisa Madigan, is on whether Four or any other similar drinks, have engaged in misleading marketing campaigns. The idea of increased levels of caffeine in alcoholic drinks is a concern among officials, who believe it can lead to excessive and prolonged drinking among young people who believe the caffeine can delay tiredness and off-set the levels of intoxication.

Four's ingredients are pretty standard for energy drinks: containing caffeine, the stimulant guarana and an amino acid called taurine. Whereas Four does not divulge its caffeine content, popular energy drinks will typically have two to three times as many milligrams of caffeine per ounce then a can of cola, but generally less caffeine than a cup of tea or coffee. However, according to the federal Alcohol and Tobaco Tax and Tarde Bureau alcoholic beverages should not contain more caffeine than cola. This has been the reason concerns have been raised over drinks like Four. The high alcohol levels of these drinks, especially Four, are also cause for alarm. Four Loko, sold in 23.5-ounce cans, has as much as 12 percent ABV; Four Maxed has 10 percent. Most beer has 4 percent to 5 percent alcohol by volume, and even high-alcohol malt liquors typically don't go much higher than 8 percent.

Four's target market is 21 to 27-year-olds, according to Chris Hunter of Phusion Projects. The college market is also a target as the company sent marketers to college campuses across the US, and one of those managers saw how popular beer pong, a ping-pong-ball drinking game, was on campuses at the time. So Four started sponsoring tournaments affiliated with the World Series of Beer Pong. However, Four is juts one example of many beverage firms targeting fun-loving college students.

Students already mix popular energy drinks with alcohol, an academic study of more than 4,000 college students by Wake Forest University's School of Medicine, found that 24 percent of them mixed energy drinks with alcohol. Beverages such as Four and Joose cut out the middle-man by producing and marketing alcoholic drinks ready-mixed with energy ingredients.

Whole Foods Vs the customer: Who will win?

Fri, 21 Aug 2009 17:11:00 +0100

John Mackey, the co-founder of the US-based Whole Foods retail chain, has criticised Obama's US healthcare reform, and outraged customers of Whole Foods.

It all started when Mackey was asked to describe his perfect summer meal. Yes, he described his perfect summer meal, but he didn't just stop at that.

He went on to say that he was considering "bribing" some of his staff with larger bonuses to help them lose weight if they chose to follow his new healthy-eating regime. But it wasn't just his staff he criticised, it was his customers too.

"We sell a bunch of junk" he admitted. "We've decided if Whole Foods doesn't take a leadership role in educating people about a healthy diet, who the heck is going to do it?"

This in itself could be classed as a dig towards Obama's healthcare, but Mackey had more to say this month. Mackey has quite often positioned himself as a free-market libertarian, and strongly anti-union, and expressed this by criticising the healthcare reforms that Obama is promoting.

It seems that this is one step too far Whole Food customers, who particularly objected to his statement, "Healthcare is a service that we all need, but just like food and shelter it is best provided through voluntary and mutually beneficial market exchanges". Also adding that "Unfortunately, many of our health-care problems are self-inflicted: two-thirds of Americans are now overweight and one-third are obese."

Mackey's comments have angered some so much, that they are boycotting. A Facebook group has also been set up, stating, "John Mackey, CEO and co-founder of Whole Foods wrote an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal on August 12, 2009 quoting Margaret Thatcher and suggesting that healthcare is a commodity that only the rich, like him, deserve."

The group so far has attracted over 21,000 members, and a blog has been set up, wholefoodsboycott.com, which has attracted over 2,000 comments from people with views.

The boycott couldn't come at a worst time for Whole Foods - they have suffered during the recession, due to people haven't got the extra money unable to afford luxuries like artisan cheese and Fairtrade chocolates.

The more people that join the Facebook group, the more Mackey has to worry. He has already written on the Whole Foods website, claiming his comments were taken out of context by the Wall Street Journal, but is it too little too late for the company? Will they get past this boycott with Mackey still at their helm. Currently this can't be predicted, so we'll just have to wait and see.

Is rice becoming a US obsession?

Thu, 20 Aug 2009 17:43:00 +0100

Rice is among the most important foods in the world, a staple food of many countries, especially in Asia, with millions of people relying on the crop for survival. The magic of rice is that it can be cultivated in a variety of environments: lowland, rain fed; lowland, irrigated; deep water (or floating); coastal wetland and upland, also known as 'Ghaiya rice'. There are concerns about the growing demand for the crop and the fight to build up its immunity to things like damaging flood and drought. The US have worked with the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) on a number of projects to help research and develop the world's knowledge of rice and its survival, but they have also examined the possibility of its medicinal properties within the United States.

Although rice production has doubled over the past 40 years, demand is continuing to grow. The crop is the staple food for more than three billion people around the globe. In 2006, the University of California, Davis, US, and the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) based in the Philippines, worked together in research that identified a gene that allows rice plants to survive being completely submerged in water for up to two weeks. The majority of rice plants die within a week of being under water, but the research revealed the new gene, called Sub1A-1, will offer greater protection to the world's rice harvest. The importance of such studies must not be underestimated - farmers in south-east Asia lose an estimated $1 billion each year from rice crops being destroyed by flooding, because so many rice growing regions in southern Asia are located in low-lying areas that are at serious risk from flooding during monsoon season.

In 2005, a study led by US-based The Institute for Genomic Research (TIGR) unscrambled the genetic code of rice, a development that is hoped will help end hunger around the world. The blueprint discovered will speed up the hunt for genes that improve productivity and guard against disease and pests. The study was alerted by findings that rice yields must increase by around 30 percent over the next 20 years in order to avoid shortages. They found that trends indicated about 4.6 billion people will be reliant on the crop by 2025, and global warming will increase the necessity for rice to be more resilient against droughts and severe flooding.

Again in 2007, the US Department of Agriculture gave the go ahead for exploration into the possibility of growing genetically modified rice to produce human proteins. The plan would see rice plants, including human genes involved in producing breast milk, grown in the state of Kansas. Ventria Bioscience, the company behind the proposal, said the plants could be developed into medicines for diarrhoea and dehydration in infants.

But it isn't just the US that are keen to explore the full capacity of the tiny food. The Nagoya University in Japan have just developed a new rice that can grow 'snorkels' when exposed to floods. The plant elongates rapidly in response to being submerged in water, which could boost the production of rice in Asia and Africa, where up to 40 percent of crops are subject to flash floods or deep water. The 'snorkels' grow as hollow tubes from parts of the plant called internodes, preventing it from drowning. When the floods arrive, the super rice plants can grow up to 25cm per day.

Thankfully, it is not just the US that have developed an obsession for rice and the extent of is capabilities. The crop is so important to the global population that extensive research and investment in the development of rice is essential. Especially if the projections are accurate and around a third of the world's population will be dependent on it in a little over fifteen years time.