Survey: Nearly Half of U.S. Consumers Avoid GMO Foods; Large Majority Primarily Concerned About Human Health Impact

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 27, 2018 Download the full report Survey: Nearly Half of U.S. Consumers Avoid GMO Foods; Large Majority Primarily Concerned About Human Health Impact Proposed Federal Bioengineered (BE) Foods Disclosure Suggests Lower Consumer Acceptance, Less Willingness to Pay Under Various Labeling Options (Washington, D.C.)—Labels proposed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) to disclose “bioengineered” (BE) foods dramatically increase a wide variety of consumer concerns, especially regarding human health. Those are among the findings of new research by the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation into areas where AMS sought comments on its proposed BE labeling standards, as well as consumers’ views generally of genetically modified foods, or GMOs. Concerns Arise When BE Foods Are Labeled With AMS’s July 3 deadline to comment on the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Law fast approaching, the IFIC Foundation tested reactions to the three BE labeling symbols and two variations of text disclosures. In every combination, levels of concern across a variety of factors increased—often substantially—when a disclosure label was applied. For example, consumers were shown bottles of canola oil 1) without any BE logo or text, 2) with one of the three symbols (a plant, a sun or a smile), 3) with a symbol, plus “bioengineered” in text and 4) with a symbol, plus “may be bioengineered” in text.  An additional group of consumers were shown just text disclosure, without any BE logo. When shown the bottle without any disclosure, approximately one-third (31 percent) of a group of respondents had human health concerns. But that rose to 50 percent when shown the BE “plant” symbol, further increasing to 51 percent when text was added to indicate that the product was “bioengineered,” and to 57 percent when “may be bioengineered” was added to the “plant” logo. Human health […]

Media

Front & Center: Nutrition Labeling Research To Help Consumers Make Healthier Choices

(Washington, D.C.) — The use of Front-of-Package (FOP) nutrition labeling schemes has increased dramatically worldwide in recent decades. In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has initiated qualitative and quantitative consumer research to explore the development of a standardized FOP nutrition labeling scheme. In November, the FDA submitted its proposed rule on FOP nutrition labeling to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).   With a much-anticipated proposed rule on FOP nutrition labeling expected from FDA soon, the International Food Information Council (IFIC) is hosting a webinar on December 12 at 2pm ET. This free, 60-minute webinar, Front-Of-Package Nutrition Labeling: Front & Center Food Information To Encourage Healthy Choices, will feature food labeling insights from IFIC Senior Director of Research & Consumer Insights, Kris Sollid, RDN, as well as IFIC President and CEO, Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, MS, RDN. The two will discuss the FDA’s efforts to develop standardized nutrition labeling for the front of food packaging, IFIC consumer research on the FOP labels being considered by FDA, and the importance of improving nutrition communications to encourage healthy food choices.   “Americans are food curious, and time-crunched, making it difficult to quickly convey accurate and complex information about food. As the American food consumer evolves, so must on-and off-label nutrition communications. FDA and IFIC efforts, among others, are critical to improve consumer use and understanding of Front-of-Pack nutrition labeling concepts,” said Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, MS, RDN, IFIC President & CEO.      Given the multiple FOP initiatives underway at the FDA and health agencies throughout the world, over the past few years, IFIC has conducted two studies among American consumers. The first was released in November 2021, the second in June of this year, with Front-Of-Package (FOP) Nutrition Labeling: Front & Center Food Information To Encourage Healthy Choices.    “In IFIC’s most recent […]

Media

Simple Safety Tips for Grilling with Dad

Father’s Day is almost always accompanied with grilling and spending time together outside with your old man. Don’t let this year be an exception. You may have heard of some risks from polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and heterocyclic amines (HCAs) from grilled meat. According to the NIH, these compounds have been found to be mutagenic. In other words, they cause changes to DNA which may increase risk of cancer. PAHs form when the fat from meat drips into an open flame and the reaction forms the carcinogen. HCAs form in a similar fashion, but instead of fat, it involves sugar, amino acids, and creatine, all present in meat. But did you know there are easy ways to reduce the formation of both of these compounds? Let’s go over three quick-and-easy tips to perfect your grilling game. Manage the Flame and Your Meat It can be easy to become distracted while grilling. But managing the temperature and avoiding any direct contact between meat and fire is one of the most effective ways to reduce HCAs and PAHs. Distributing the heat and lowering the temperature also helps. Besides producing a healthier end product, this is what any worthy grill chef should be doing in the first place! Also, while it may seem obvious, flip your meat often. Avoid letting part of the cut become charred or blackened. Learn to Love Lean PAHs are formed from fat in the meat reacting with the flame. The equation on this one is pretty straightforward: less fat, less PAH formation. Try your hand at grilling a good turkey burger or marinated chicken breast. In addition to reducing PAH levels, your body will thank you for leaner meat in general. For vegetables, the concern for PAH is non-existent. Vegetables naturally contain little lipid content in comparison to […]

article

Hydration: It’s a Fluid Situation

This is the second installment of a new video series in partnership with Osmosis, a group that focuses on health science education, highlighting the basics of several nutrition topics. Click here to watch the first video in the series, “Fundamentals of Fats”. Water is essential for human life. It makes up more than 50 percent of a person’s body weight, and it’s directly involved in every biochemical reaction in our body. Staying hydrated is important because water does so many important things in the body. It’s critical for digestion: The water in saliva moistens food when we chew and it serves as a fluid environment in which digestive enzymes break down our meals. Water forms the bulk of blood, which allows oxygen and glucose to move around the body, and it plays a role in eliminating toxins through urination. Water can also help with weight loss and maintaining a healthy body weight — replacing sweetened drinks with water reduces calorie intake and drinking water before and during a meal can increase our sense of fullness and prevent overeating. Ultimately, maintaining the right balance of water in our body is what keeps us alive. Total body water can be subdivided into two major compartments: the fluid inside our cells, known as intracellular fluid, and fluid outside our cells, called extracellular fluid. Extracellular fluid is made up of blood, and the fluid found between cells in the interstitial tissue. Both inside and outside the cells, water acts as a solvent to dissolve electrolytes like sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium, chloride, bicarbonate, phosphate and sulfate, which are kept at very specific concentrations. About 80 percent of our water intake comes from drinking fluids. The recommended daily fluid intake for women is around 11 glasses of water, or 2.2 liters, and for men it’s about […]

article

What to Know About Sugars on the Nutrition Facts Label

In 2016, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) finalized its update of the iconic Nutrition Facts label, which made news headlines across America. However, these types of major policy changes take time to be fully implemented. While the majority of food and beverage manufacturers were required to use the new label by January 1, 2021, the FDA set a separate deadline of July 1, 2021, for makers of pure honey, pure maple syrup and other pure sugars and syrups, as well as dried cranberry and cranberry beverage products. Many people may now be familiar with the updated look and information on the new Nutrition Fact label, but some of the information can be difficult to understand at first glance. Below are tips that can help to correctly interpret food label information about sugar. Improving Total Comprehension of Added Sugars The new FDA Nutrition Facts label presents information about sugars in two ways that are different from the original label. First, the amount of sugar found in one serving of a product is now displayed as “Total Sugars.” This information was previously displayed on the original label as “Sugars.” Second, there is a new line on the label for added sugars information; this is the first new line to appear on the Nutrition Facts label since trans fat labeling became mandatory in 2006. This new line represents the amount of sugar that has been added to a food or beverage during manufacturing. The decision to include added sugars information on the new label was based in part, on the conclusions of the 2015—2020 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) in a continued effort to help Americans eat more healthfully. The line for added sugars appears indented, directly below “Total Sugars.” Changing label terms from “Sugars” to “Total Sugars” may not seem […]

insights

Bread Science and Black History: The Innovations of Joseph Lee

Bread is the proverbial stuff of life—a staple food in many households throughout ancient and modern history. Today, we encounter bread when we make a sandwich, eat a salad with croutons, or enjoy it as an accent on a delicious charcuterie board (we love a good baguette!). With the variety of breads that are now widely available in supermarkets, farmers’ markets, and bakeries, we can enjoy a plethora of tastes and textures to suit our day-to-day preferences. But if you’ve ever considered the bread-baking techniques that yield your desired loaf, you likely haven’t connected them with Black history. Let’s shed some light on a segment of rich history of Black food production innovators in the U.S.—in particular, the story of Joseph Lee, a bread-production pioneer and recently inducted member into the National Inventors Hall of Fame. It all started with a recipe—and kneading There are hundreds of different types of bread today, but most recipes have evolved to require four basic ingredients: flour (of which there are many different types), water, yeast, and salt. Joseph Lee, born in 1849 in Charleston, South Carolina, knew these ingredients well due to the many years he spent cooking and baking in restaurants and the hospitality industry in the late 1800s—which culminated in the opening of his own catering company and restaurant (a major feat for the son of former slaves). Over his many years of bread-baking, Lee observed the importance of kneading the dough to deliver consistent loaves at a large scale. Today’s researchers have observed that kneading dough promotes the “homogeneous mixing of all the ingredients, the hydration of the flour constituents, the phase transitions that involve proteins and amorphous starch, the development of the gluten network, and the inclusion of air bubbles, giving a viscoelastic dough as a result.” That may […]

article

MSG: A Brief History

Monosodium glutamate (MSG) is a flavor enhancer that gives foods a specific savory taste that is also known as “umami.” Although MSG is found naturally in some foods, such as tomatoes and certain cheeses, it wasn’t until the early 20th that MSG was discovered by Kikunae Ikeda, a chemistry professor at the Imperial University of Tokyo. The legend goes that Professor Ikeda was eating soup when he noticed that the broth tasted better than usual. Upon inspection, he realized the enhanced taste was due to the addition of kelp, and he was inspired to begin studying its chemical structure. By 1908, Professor Ikeda had determined that the savory taste was due to L-glutamic acid (glutamate), a nonessential amino acid. When glutamate was combined with sodium, the substance became known as MSG. In 1909, Professor Ikeda filed a patent to produce MSG commercially. MSG was subsequently developed as a product that entered the food supply as a seasoning. Today, MSG is a popular food additive and is produced from fermenting starch, sugar beets, sugar cane, or molasses. Although MSG is odorless and tasteless by itself, when it’s added to foods it brings out those special brothy or meaty umami tastes. The flavor has been deemed so enjoyable that “umami” was named after “umai,” the Japanese word for “delicious.” The enjoyment can be broken down chemically: When MSG is eaten, the sodium and glutamate break apart in the saliva, and the free glutamate activates a person’s umami taste receptors, creating that especially satisfying and savory flavor. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permits the use of MSG in the food supply under Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS) criteria. To be considered GRAS, substantial research and expert review needs to show that a food additive is safe for consumption under its intended […]

article

Hazard Versus Risk in Perceptions of Food Safety: The Case of Titanium Dioxide

This study was conducted to explore the contrast between hazard-based and risk-based assessments of food safety through a case study of the food ingredient titanium dioxide. Based on a hazard-based assessment, titanium dioxide has been banned by the European Food Safety Authority. In contrast, the ingredient is allowed within the limits set by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. We addressed the following question: How do American consumers describe their perception of threat, or lack thereof, posed by titanium dioxide when informed or reminded that the color additive is common in the United States but banned in the European Union? Focus group participants shared their reactions to a brief video reviewing the titanium dioxide issue. These consumers were comfortable with a risk-based assessment, acknowledging that the potential for harm is low. Participants also identified a paradoxical situation in which they were overwhelmed or desensitized by the wealth of information about the many potential hazards they face yet were disappointed by the lack of actionable information available. Based on these findings, practitioners of risk communication in the food industry would likely benefit from transparency by agencies regarding the distinction between hazard and risk when communicating about food safety policies. Dialogue among agencies such as the European Food Safety Authority and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration could help fill the information gap perceived by the study participants. Sellnow T, Flood A, Hoffman J, Freihaut R, Demarco I, Salazar S, Sheng X. Hazard versus risk in perceptions of food safety: The case of titanium dioxide. Food Prot Trends. 2024. doi:10.4315/fpt-23-008.

research