Category Archives: FDA

Antibiotics In The Food Supply

In 2011, the FDA denied petitions from consumers and other groups to restrict the use of several antibiotics in the food supply. Instead, the FDA issued legislation limiting the use of one type of antibiotic, cephalosporins.

This class of antibiotics is not given to animals directly in their feed but instead issued, usually, prior to slaughter. The FDA is concerned that this type of antibiotic is so important for use in humans (especially in life-threatening cases such as meningitis) that overuse in animals can potentially cause bacterial resistance, thereby limiting its usefulness in humans.

Since cephalosporins are a “last resort” type of drug it's important that their effectiveness not be compromised by over-usage in the animal industry. However, the FDA does not completely ban the use of this class of antibiotics, they merely limit it instead.

This is unfortunate since more than 70% of the antibiotic use in this country is used by the agriculture industry for food animals. Not because the animals are already sick, but to keep them from getting sick due to how they are raised; in unhealthy, high intensity settings. Unfortunately, this means that when you consume conventionally raised animal products, meat, dairy, and eggs, you are getting a dose of antibiotics. Just a dose, not a full course.

I was unable to find numbers indicating how much the cephalosporin limit reduces the total antibiotic usage in the animal production industry. Given the excessive antibiotic use in animal husbandry, I have to believe it provides only a modest reduction. It still means that the vast majority of antibiotics used in this country are used to allow producers to raise animals in inhumane, unhealthy, confined, and condensed operations. Where is our compassion as living, sentient beings for those beings whose purpose is to be raised for food?

I also question the logic behind an agency that is presumably supposed to monitor and protect the food supply which instead kowtows to major corporations and their bottom line.

I find myself skeptical that this “limited use” will actually be limited. I am now uneasily awaiting headlines proclaiming a new class of bacterial infection that has successfully overcome cephalosporins and is wreaking havoc in hospitals and medical settings across the country.

The best way to protect yourself and your family from antibiotic exposure in your meat is to purchase organic (since it's not allowed in organic production) and to source the best quality, most humane meat option you can find.

Sources

Gut check: Just say no to antibacterial burgers. Published online September 16, 2009. Accessed September 12, 2022. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/15/AR2009091500736.htm

“Herd Health: Agriculture’S Role In The Global AMR Crisis”. Pharmaceutical Technology, 2019, https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/analysis/animal-antibiotics/.

Laskawy T. Scrooged: FDA gives up on antibiotic restrictions in livestock. Grist. Published December 29, 2011. https://grist.org/factory-farms/2011-12-28-scrooged-fda-gives-up-on-antibiotic-restrictions-in-livestock/

Jayaweera, Jayaweera Arachchige Asela Sampath, and Wikum Widuranga Kumbukgolla. “Antibiotic Resistance Patterns Of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Isolated From Livestock And Associated Farmers In Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka”. Germs, vol 7, no. 3, 2017, pp. 132-139. Asociatia Pentru Cresterea Vizibilitatii Cercetarii Stiintifice (ACVCS), doi:10.18683/germs.2017.1118.

Sickly-sweet Additives

by Tenaya Craigadditives, FDA, ingredients, labeling, sweeteners, testing

You’ve likely never heard of Senomyx, a biotech flavor engineering company that works with many major corporations from Kraft Foods and Nestle to Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. This flavoring manufacturer has stated in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission: [quote]The goals of our high potency sweetener program are to allow for the reduction of calories in packaged foods and beverages and to enable our collaborators to use product labeling referencing ‘natural flavors.’[/quote]

In line with this objective, Senomyx announced in August that its new additive “Sweetmyx S617” will soon be added to PepsiCo’s Manzanita Sol and Mug Root Beer soft drinks in the United States. This artificial ingredient will allow food and beverage companies to reduce the calorie and sugar content of their products by amplifying the sweetness of sugar and other sweeteners.

Sweetness is arguably one of the most significant tastes we experience and crave in modern culture as we are seemingly bombarded with it – sugar is added to 74% of packaged foods! Added sugar can sneak its way into your diet even when avoiding desserts like cookies and ice cream as it is found in many savory items like crackers, bread, salsa and pasta sauce.

The Power of Sweet

When we eat, the taste receptor cells on our tongues relay information to the brain signaling the specific type of flavor. Sweetness from sugar is particularly powerful and has been found to stimulate brain pathways similar to the way an opioid would. In fact, in a well-known study, rats addicted to cocaine chose sugar over the drug when given the choice because the stimulating “high” from sugar is more pleasurable.

The startling reality is that many people are actually addicted to the sensation of sweetness and food manufacturers are taking advantage of this. A typical 12-ounce can of regular soda can contain as many as 46.2 grams of added sugar, far exceeding the American Heart Association’s recommendations for sugar in an entire day. One leading brand of yogurt contains 29 grams of sugar per serving and a breakfast bar made with “real fruit” and “whole grains” lists 15 grams of sugar per serving!

Many processed foods with “healthy” marketing jargon contain a shocking amount of added sugar, as we can see in this slideshow.

Corporations have been incredibly successful adding more and more sugar to processed foods so that we keep coming back for more.

However, in light of the obesity epidemic in this country, there has been some push back to reduce sugar content of processed foods. Processed items with labels touting less sugar or lack of high fructose corn syrup are likely to be picked up by busy moms who want healthier convenient options for their kids. Unsurprisingly, food manufacturers are working to meet this demand with manipulation instead of simply creating healthier formulations. They’re seeking the best ways to reduce sugar without sacrificing the intensely sweet flavors that have us hooked and coming back for more.

In theory, a product that reduces calories and added sugar sounds like a great advancement for health. Senomyx’s new additive Sweetmyx S617 is expected to reduce calories in the two newly formulated soft drinks by 25 percent, but at what cost?

Where To Look for Sweetmyx S617 on the Label

These flavor “enhancers” are not considered actual ingredients and are not required to be listed on packaging as anything other than “artificial flavors.” Frighteningly, Senomyx’s aim is to take these additives one step further and have them labeled as “natural flavors.” Much like MSG, these flavor enhancers operate on a neurological level to produce this heightened sweet sensation, essentially tricking the brain into thinking foods are sweeter than they actually are. This sounds like anything but natural!

The most troubling aspect of these new additives is that limited testing has been done to prove they are safe for consumption. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has determined through public records requests that the FDA does not have detailed safety information on these flavor enhancers and the limited analysis the Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association has done does not meet FDA standards. Many recommended tests are missing, including cancer studies, reproductive studies and screens to test how ingredients affect the nervous system. Susan Schiffman, a sweetener expert and professor at North Carolina State University has said that [quote]To put anything into the food supply with this little testing is astounding.[/quote]

How can you avoid added sugar and corporate flavor manipulation?

You won’t find Sweetmyx S617 listed on any product’s label. As the FDA is comfortable deeming Senomyx’s flavor enhancers as Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS), avoid all processed foods that list “artificial flavors” among the ingredients where possible, to opt out of these untested additives. In addition, reference Appendix One of Mira’s book The Pantry Principle for a comprehensive list of the many different names sugar can be found under and which ones to avoid.

Who Put Beer In My Ice Cream?

by Miraadditives, dairy, FDA, ingredients

Ben & Jerry's is concerned about climate change. So they've created a new flavor in partnership with New Belgium Brewing. Ice cream and beer. They're both called Salted Caramel Brown-ie (Brownie) Ale. Profits from the sales of these products will go to Protect Our Winters, a climate advocacy group in support of winter sports.

While I certainly support the idea of supporting efforts to educate people about climate change and to create positive ways to reverse it I'm not sure what beer and ice cream have to do with it. Just being honest on that point right up front.

Because these are a products with a social message I imagine they'll sell pretty well. Truthfully it sounds like an interesting flavor and Ben & Jerry's is known for good ice cream. I don't drink beer so I can't speak about the ale. Ben & Jerry's has a great mission statement that supports GMO labeling, they do not use rBGH in their dairy products, and they are proponents of Fair Trade ingredients. New Belgium Brewing also believes in non-GMO sourcing for their products. All good things.

The Ingredients

So what's the one major thing that will keep me from eating this ice cream? * Carrageenan. This red seaweed has been linked with gastrointestinal inflammation, colon cancer, and it is very damaging to those with gastrointestinal disorders. There is also a study, partially funded by the American Diabetes Association, looking at the relationship between consuming carrageenan and it's impact on diabetes. Because carrageenan appears in so many products (primarily dairy, alternative dairy, and frozen confections) the amount of exposure can be significant. Eating organic foods is no escape as carrageenan is approved for use in those foods as well. Which serves as an important reminder that just because something is organic doesn't mean it's good for you.

Many people who have bloating and digestive issues often find their symptoms significantly diminished or removed when they stop eating this ingredient. While low level inflammation and gastrointestinal distress are not always significant enough to be noticed (as opposed to conditions such as ulcerative colitis, irritable bowel syndrome, or crohn's), when removing this ingredient from their diet for a period of time many people notice a difference. The science behind the negative impact of carrageenan is increasing. The Cornucopia Institute has petitioned the FDA to remove carrageenan from the approved list (and is seeking input from consumers who have noticed changes to their health after eliminating carrageenan from their diet). The response of the FDA's Select Committee On GRAS Substances (SCOGS) from February of 2015 concludes, “uncertainties exist requiring that additional studies should be conducted.”

There's also the matter of the “natural flavors.” We don't really know what they are and there are a lot of things that can fall under that “natural” label that are less than desirable.

Surprisingly there is lactase in the ice cream. Not a negative, just interesting. This is the digestive enzyme that specifically helps to break down milk sugar. I haven't bought ice cream in a while so I haven't been looking at the label. This is something that could be a good idea to help digest the dairy products. However please note that for those who are lactose intolerant this enzyme addition is not sufficient for them to be able to consume the ice cream without also taking some additional enzyme support. It will be fascinating to start reading ice cream labels and seeing if other manufacturers are following suit.

It's important to remember that no matter how good the social mission, no matter how well sourced some of the ingredients are, if there's something in a food that you can't eat, you simply shouldn't eat it. Remember to always read the label and eat well to be well.

*We're leaving out the fact that this does contain gluten (beer/malted barley, wheat flour, and malted barley flour)

Repealing Country-of-origin Labeling Isn’t Cool

by MiraFDA, food fraud, government, meat, USDA

The House just voted to repeal Country-of-Origin labeling (COOL) for beef, chicken, and pork. The reason that this happened makes sense but the fact that it happened at all makes no sense. But first, a little background.

COOL was first signed into law in 2002 as part of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act as a voluntary labeling process. Initially it was intended for the label on fresh beef, pork, and lamb products. In 2003 it became mandatory to label COOL. By 2008 the program was expanded and the current labeling requirement covers beef, veal, lamb, chicken, fish, shellfish, pork, goat, macadamia nuts, pecans, ginseng, peanuts, and perishable agricultural commodities. For the purposes of this post I'm focusing on meat.

The intent of COOL was to clearly identify the chain of supply for fresh food. If an item was destined for a processing plant where it would be significantly changed for example, turning fresh beef into a shepherd's pie, that process would remove the need for COOL. The FDA's definition of processed is so broad that many foods were able to avoid using the label.

What does the label look like? It's confusing. There's no clear standards for a COO label. It can be any size, font, color, location on the package. There are standards about what it has to say but even there it can get a little confusing. The Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) which is part of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) does publish a list of the standard terms acceptable for labeling which covers country names and their abbreviations as well as labeling options covering the chain of supply from birth to either slaughter or slaughter and import. Prior to May 2013 even that was less than clear due to commingling. This was the practice of allowing a single label for meat that has more than one country of origin as long as it was processed in the same slaughterhouse all on the same day. Commingling is no longer allowed which should make for clearer labeling of where animals were born, raised, and slaughtered.

In theory the ability to know where your meat is coming from, where it was raised, is a good one. In practice COOL does not work as advertised. I believe part of this is due to the lack of consistency with labeling, a lack of clear understanding for the consumer, and too many loopholes. I also believe that people really are paying more attention to where their food comes from, how it's raised, and where it is processed. They want to know but are confused about the label due to inconsistent and unclear implementation.

The supply chain can sometimes become very convoluted. As the Horsemeat Gate Scandal in the early part of 2013 highlighted, our food can travel a great distance before it lands on our dinner plate. This unfortunate incident where horesemeat was fraudulently sold as beef only revealed the scale of travel for processing not for birth and rearing. Obviously because it was processed it also would have been able to sidestep a COOL process had one been in place.

Horsemeat Gate also revealed a significant breakdown in the traceability of where our meat comes from. The EU is currently investigating possible solutions to prevent this from happening again. Something along the lines of COOL comes to mind, but only if it's properly implemented. It's important to note that this was by no means a stand-alone incident, it was simply the biggest, most reported on episode. There have also been incidents in China such as a 2013 investigation into the use of rat, mink, and fox meat being adulterated and sold as mutton. And it doesn't seem to get better. Just last year there was a recall in China of donkey meat contaminated with fox. These incidents, by the way, give serious pause to the thought of eating any meat from China. And yet the USDA has approved the import of American raised chickens to China for processing and then re-imported for sale. Currently the transportation costs for poultry are too expensive and it does not appear that any American producers are doing this. Unfortunately, if they do, it may be hard to know because the chicken would come back in a processed form that would thereby allow it to avoid COOL.

So why is COOL on the chopping block? In a single word, politics. Canada and Mexico filed a complaint with the World Trade Organization (WTO) claiming that COOL was discriminatory. It is interesting to note that China is listed as one of the third parties in the complaint. Canada contends that meatpackers offer lower prices for their products. Not because they are lesser quality, but because the meat packers don't want to track and label the meat. Canadian producers claim this has cost them nearly US$1 billion. Unfortunately the WTO agreed with the plaintiffs. This is the second time they've done so, the first time the US reworked COOL but apparently this was not perceived as being enough. Now Canada and Mexico are threatening import taxes on certain products from the United States unless COOL is repealed. Due to fears about trade the House has voted to dismantle COOL altogether. The next step is to go before the Senate.

This is a huge mistake. While the process of modification on any legislation is certainly challenging, the fact remains that this program was never thoroughly laid out or utilized to begin with. Given the increasing issues with food contamination, adulteration, mis-labeling, and because of sourcing concerns it makes sense to keep COOL and more clearly identify the supply chain for our food. Consumers want to know, and have the right to know, where their food comes from.

“natural” Food Label Under Attack

by MiraFDA, gmo, labeling, Uncategorized

When it comes to food labeling there is currently a lot of media attention to GMO issues and whether or not GMO foods should be labeled. So far legislative challenges have either failed or been so severely curtailed as to be very difficult to achieve. Consumers are very outspoken about their desire for GMO labeling and some retailers have responded by mandating GMO-free products on their shelves within a certain timeframe. I have no doubt that GMO labeling will happen, it's simply a matter of time.

But this column isn't about GMO-labeling. It is, however, about the label that appears on our food and how it can be manipulated to hide information. At this point the only ways to avoid GMOs is to purchase foods which are known to not be genetically modified, foods which are labeled by the Non-GMO Project, or to purchase organic for those foods known to be highly contaminated by GMO. Sadly many people think that the “natural” label also means it is not genetically modified; this is not true and could lead to the purchase of foods with ingredients you do not want to eat. Not only are there very few legal rules regarding the use of the “natural” label, it's currently under attack.

The Grocery Manufacturer's Association (GMA) is a trade organization which is the front group for more than 300 companies in the food business. Large names such as ConAgra, Coca-Cola, Monsanto, and PepsiCo. GMA is currently being sued in Washington State amid claims that it illegally hid contributions from large corporations in the GMO labeling fight for Initiative 522. GMA is once again serving as the spokesgroup for it's member organizations and petitioning the FDA to allow genetically modified foods to be classified as “natural.” It is important to note that there are very limited rules governing the use of the word natural. The FDA specifically states, “FDA has not developed a definition for use of the term natural or its derivatives. However, the agency has not objected to the use of the term if the food does not contain added color, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances.” Some of the claims made in the GMA's letter are:

GMA's members have a strong interest in “natural” labeling for foods containing ingredients derived from biotechnology. Several of the most common ingredients derived from biotechnology are from crops such as corn, soy, canola, and sugar beets. There are 26 state legislatures considering whether foods containing ingredients derived from biotechnology should be labeled and whether they are permissible in “natural” foods. Moreover there are approximately 65 class action lawsuits that have been filed against food manufacturers over whether foods with ingredients allegedly derived from biotechnology can be labeled “natural.” Given the predominant use of crops derived from biotechnology in our economy as well as consumer and state interest in this issue, whether foods that contain ingredients derived from biotechnology can be labeled “natural” is an important matter to GMA members and one that warrants FDA's involvement.

This is startling for a number of reasons. One is that GMA admits that GMO food labeling is an important issue but obviously spins this in their direction. They are conveniently leaving out the millions of dollars they have already spent in other states to fight against labeling. Another issue to remember is that if this change were permitted to be amended into the limited definition of “natural” foods, it would be a hidden use as the GMO ingredients would still not be declared on the label. And lastly is the number of lawsuits and legislative actions currently on the books regarding this issue. To my knowledge not a single state legislature vote is against GMO labeling. And it is probable that the majority of the class action lawsuits are against the use of GMO in “natural” food products.

But again, GMA is spinning this in their direction. They want labeling as long as it is to their benefit and does not allow consumers to truly understand what's in their food. Genetic modification is not natural. And while the natural label is so weak as to be close to worthless, it should not be modified or amended to specifically include the use of GMO items. There is no petition or open comment from the FDA at this time regarding this issue.

The only way to stay on top of food labeling and health issues is to become an educated consumer. One good resource is the book The Pantry Principle: how to read the label and understand what's really in your food. Staying informed is the best way to know how to make the healthiest food choices for yourself and your loved ones.

Peanut Butter Risks And Alternatives

by Miraallergies, FDA, nutsFDA, nuts, peanut butter

The FDA is out to lunch - with yet another case of food poisoning in the news it's clear that those charged with keeping our food supply safe are not doing their job. The scariest part of this is that in the face of budgetary cuts there are talks of allowing food producers more leeway to self-monitor. This is putting the fox in charge of the hen house. If true sanctions and consequences were put into place there might be more attention paid to the safety of the food products.

Salmonella Contamination

Fortunately that is happening in at least one situation. Sunland Inc, the company responsible for manufacturing salmonella-laden peanut butter in the recent outbreak has been closed. Articles that I have seen indicate that the company was surprised by this move and thought they would be able to re-open by the end of the year. But after reading the conditions there and the continual disregard for food safety it is good to know that they will not be allowed to continue until they can prove (not just say but prove via inspection) that they have cleaned up their act. I hope this trend of requiring manufacturers to truly be responsible, and not just say they're following the rules, continues.

I was so upset to read this latest article from the Consumer's Union. Apparently PCA, the company responsible for the salmonella-contaminated peanut butter that has killed a number of people and sickened many more has declared bankruptcy. This effectively removes them from any legal due process being brought against them. The worst part is that they knew and ignored the fact that their product was contaminated as reported here.

The best that we can hope for at this point is that there are no further illnesses or deaths and that this will bring about much-needed changes to our food supply system.

Rat Feces

And salmonella isn't the only thing found in peanut butter. Although this article is two years old it mentions rat feces. I was not able to find specific mention of rat feces allowed in peanut butter (assuming that is part of what the FDA lists as "objectionable matter contributed by rodents") but did find mention of rodent hairs at 1 or more per 100 grams of product being considered an "aesthetic" (their word not mine) defect and possibly actionable. Also found in peanut butter? Neurotoxic chemicals. Peanuts are a highly pesticide residue contaminated crop; this makes choosing organic an important factor for those who choose to eat peanuts and peanut products.

I found it interesting to note that the article also did a side by side taste-test comparison of various peanut butters. All of them were jarred, most had oil residue floating on the top, and sounded very unappealing from both a taste and visual perspective. While the article didn't list the ingredients I'm sure that most of them have added fat (thus the extra oil floating at the top), sugar, and salt. None of which is really needed for peanut butter.

Other Challenges

Over the years peanut butter has increasingly gotten a bad rap, primarily due to allergies. It's a popular legume though and that makes it difficult to tell people that they should avoid peanuts. That bad rap, however, is not undeserved. Part of the health challenge is that peanuts are a highly inflammatory legume. They also tend to be high in carcinogenic aflatoxins and are frequently contaminated by the aspergillis fungus.

Additionally many health issues, from migraines to candida overgrowth to intestinal disorders are negatively impacted by consumption of peanuts and peanut products. So while we consider them delicious they should be severely reduced or eliminated from the diet.

It turns out peanut butter used to be considered a health food and was actually only sold regionally. Over time this has changed and we now ship the stuff all over the world. Except for the grind-your-own variety of course.

Healthy Alternatives

At my local grocery store there is a grind-your-own peanut butter machine. At $3.99 per pound for organic, unsalted peanuts they sell a relatively creamy, good tasting, fresh smelling product. Of course there is no way to know if anything has gotten into the peanuts in the machine; this means trusting the grocery store to clean it thoroughly on a regular and frequent basis.

For those who can have nuts, a healthier choice might be almonds, and almond butter, which is the most alkaline of nuts and has a much lower allergenic profile.

Want to know what's really in your food? Get a copy of The Pantry Principle to learn more.

Bubblegum Flavored Apples Anyone?

by Miraadditives, FDA, fruit, questionsapple, bubblegum, fake food

Consumer Question:

"We came across these apples at Stop & Shop here in town. We could not believe our eyes when we saw flavored apples!! I told my husband to take a pic to send to you because I wasn't sure you would believe me when I tell you that they had bubblegum flavored apples. I believe there were four flavors total to choose from.

I'm curious what your thoughts are. I walked away all kinds of confused. Was this an attempt to help kids with poor eating habits cross over the healthy eating or the other way around? How exactly did they alter this apple to make it flavored? And of course the obvious...yet another example of FAKE food.

Oh and as you can see it was placed right next to the apples and the packaging says ready to eat snack. What's so difficult about preparing an apple for eating? hmmm you wash it?!?!"

The Answer

Good eye and good thinking. This is very similar to something I just saw in my local grocery store called grapples.

Research indicates that the flavoring comes from "natural" (read possible MSG ingredients) and artificial flavoring. It seems that the apples are marinated for several days in an undoubtedly chemical concoction which allows the apple to soak up the flavor. This process has apparently been approved by the FDA.

The Grapple company website assures the consumer that the product has not been genetically modified and there are no added sugars or calories. Unfortunately, there is a huge chemical load, not just from the flavorings, but one assumes these are not organic apples and therefore potentially high in pesticide residue.

The Crazy Apple company website says they can't tell you how they do it but I assume it's the same sort of process. They do however assure you that their apples are gluten free (duh!), dairy free (again, duh!), and contain no soy or nuts.

I believe this is seen as a way to market apples to kids but I'm not really sure why this sort of adulteration is seen as a positive. Since apples by themselves are sweet, crunchy, and tasty I'm not sure what the appeal is here. Unfortunately I see this as a big step backwards as items like these further dull the taste buds to what food should taste like.

Update: It turns out these apples are being spotted all over the place and most of you are not happy about it. My friend Adrienne suggests, "If you want a grape flavored apple take a slice of apple and some grapes. Eat them together. It's a party in your mouth!" Good advice.

Another Helping Of Meat Glue?

by Miraadditives, FDA, ingredients

First it was pink slime. And no matter what anyone says I do not believe that is something that should be considered fit for human consumption. But I've already written about that. Now we have meat glue as an adulterant in the food supply.

What is meat glue?

Approved for human consumption by the FDA, allowed in Canada, and defended by the American Meat Institute it is made from something called Microbial Transglutaminase (mTG). mTG is made utilizing Streptoverticillium mobaraense which is a micro-organism that secretes mTG. (For a more extensive explanation visit the American Society for Microbiology.) Used to put together pieces of meat, this powder can be used to make them look like a better cut of meat. It is also used to improve the texture of certain foods.

According to my research, mTG, or meat glue, can be found in processed meat and other foods such as imitation crabmeat, fish products, constituted “chicken breast”, and processed meats such as hot dogs, chicken nuggets, and ham products. However it's not just used for meats; mTG can also be used in those food products where a gelling process is needed such as cheeses, jellies, yogurts, or frozen desserts. Additionally mTG can also be used to increase volume and texture in breads. gluten free products such as pasta and baked goods.

One complaint is that producers may be selling cheaper cuts of meat as a higher grade because it looks like something it's not. This is a valid point; it would definitely be a reason to get upset for being overcharged by a producer making cheap cuts of meat pieces look like a very expensive filet. Searching the web it appears that one area where this may happen is buffet restaurant settings. Those places where you can get as much filet mignon as you want for one low low price. Apparently there's a reason that price is so low; it may not be what you think it is. I want to point out, in all fairness, that there is a big kerfluffle about this issue but so far I have not found any legal cases where a producer or seller is being charged with this practice.

Health issues

The health challenge is potentially different. The use of meat glue means that there could be a higher risk for bacterial contamination due to the increased number of surfaces. The more surfaces, the more area for bacteria to live. For those consumers who like their meat less well done this creates more risk. If the meat is not fully cooked (i.e., rare rather than well done) the joined parts may not reach a temperature capable of killing bacteria. With the new meat nutrition labeling requirement we should be able to see if mTG is used on the meat at the grocery store. However, I have yet to see a single package that is using this new labeling.

According to Dr. Peter Osborne, gluten expert and author of No Grain, No Pain, mTG treated dairy is a problem for those with gluten sensitivity issues. This is because the immune system registers mTG treated dairy as a form of gluten. This means that for those who struggle with gluten sensitivity, if you feel like you've been “glutened” you may also need to consider dairy as a possible source of contamination.

Made by Ajinomoto, the same company that makes MSG, I would like to point to a few other health issues that concern me. This ingredient comes with a dose of maltodextrin and sodium caseinate. Maltodextrin is corn based so there is probably some GMO exposure as the use of organic corn would not make financial sense. Sodium caseinate is a milk protein and according to Truth In Labeling always has free glutamic acid making it a form of MSG. Additionally there is a possibility that the milk used to obtain the protein has rBGH in it, a hormone that makes cows give more milk. That's a whole blog post in and of itself, but the bottom line is you don't want to consume rBGH. The issue at hand is the possible reaction to corn or dairy that could be brought about by ingestion of meat in those with high level food sensitivities.

Avoiding meat glue

How to avoid meat glue? That appears to be a little trickier. It makes sense to be extra diligent about reading labels at the grocery store lately. However, as yet, I have not seen mTG listed on any ingredient labels. For meat products I believe the answer to be the purchase of organic meat or to buy from a trusted source. It is important to note that Kosher meat is not exempt from the use of meat glue as there is a kosher version available. Otherwise, until meat labeling actually happens, and unless they include mTG on the label, you won't know. For other products I don't have an answer at the moment. Purchasing organic dairy, which I recommend anyway, is a good option. But until this product is properly labeled or removed from the food supply we may not know if we are ingesting it.

Reconditioned Food

by MiraFDA, pantry, pest control

Under the what's-in-your-food catgory…an article caught my attention at the beginning of the week about reconditioned food. I'll be totally honest with you and share that this idea never ever crossed my mind. I assumed that if food was in any way spoiled it needed to be discarded. This article, however, made it abundantly clear that this is not the case. The fact that the company in question only received a “sharp censure” from the FDA is truly wrong.

In Home Ec (as we used to call it) I remember being taught in the sixth grade that soft foods with any hint of mold, discoloration, or odor should be immediately destroyed as bacteria travelled quickly through them, whereas in hard foods they are more localized. I don't know about you but in my book applesauce is a soft food.

The FDA has a manual that talks about food reconditioning. But just because you can doesn't mean you should. With the increasing rates of food recalls due to bacterial infections, poor sanitary conditions and massive outbreaks of illness why is our government willing to allow corporations to knowingly serve bad food for profit? Silly question…we all know the answer is money.

As a consumer the answer boils down to what is one of my top catch phrases…eat real food. Do I buy some packaged foods, yes I do. But I try to buy as little as possible, purchasing most of our groceries as whole food and then making the items myself. We have already severely reduced our canned goods (most of what we have on hand is in our emergency preparedness closet), and are weaning ourselves off of most snack foods. This last is not so popular with our teens but we certainly don't have nearly as much as we used to. I also get more and more products from local sources that I trust.

The more I learn, the more I am motivated to make things myself. For example learning that “an average of 225 insect fragments or 4.5 rodent hairs per 8 ounces of macaroni or noodle products.” is okay is motivating me to get out the pasta maker again. I still, and always will, throw out whatever is contaminated in my house. When we have had a moth infestation everything they got into was destroyed. That's why my dry goods are stored in glass or plastic, to keep them out. Hard food products can be washed, and cleaned so although I don't like it I understand how it can be allowed in a case like the one in Illinois. But it's motivated me to double check the pantry seals on things.

The FDA has set up a Reportable Food Registry which is a first step. But I believe they need to know that this practice is unacceptable. What are your thoughts on the matter?

Food Day

by MiraFDA, USDA

Our food system in this country is broken. Many people don't have access to real food, often eating highly processed, low nutrition food; they live in what are called food desserts. Much of our food supply is not raised in a sustainable, environmentally friendly manner. Many of our food animals are raised in confined quarters making their lives less humane. And Big Ag receives massive subsidies from the government, our tax dollars paying for processing instead of supporting wholesome, whole foods and the farmers who raise them. This in turn often leads to more ill health and more tax dollars supporting a sick-care system.

Food Day is an organization that is lobbying Congress to make changes to our system. To help bring real food back to our schools and our neighborhoods. To help educate people about what truly constitutes a healthy diet. To bring real food back into our homes. This issue is more than just me or you. It's our neighbors, our community, it spreads outwards and I believe it is a vital part of our future.

With more and more food recalls happening, with the shrinking of the American family farm, with the aggressive advertising that junk food producers create, our health as a nation is rapidly declining. We need to turn this cycle around. I believe one way to do this is to speak up, to tell your elected representatives how you feel.

I rarely publicize campaigns on this blog but in this particular instance I feel moved to do so because this one issue encompasses so many of the challenges facing our food supply. I have signed the petition and I encourage you to visit Food Day, learn more about the issues, and sign.