Saturated fats in foods-Are they villains or just harmless players?

Thousands of treatise have been written, millions of words printed, umpteen number of seminars and workshops organized and many national and international advisories issued regarding the dangers inherent in consuming diets rich in saturated fats. Practically every school going child has been indoctrinated into believing that saturated fats are not good for health and almost every nutrition and health expert of some standing "villainize" these fats endlessly with no respite. Can we hold all of them irresponsible in making such claims during the last 3 decades? One cannot help getting a feeling that they are all prisoners of the big hype created against saturated fats based on inadequate interpretation and improper appreciation of the knowledge already available. It is good that this record of denunciation is being set right by recent massive studies to decide once for all whether saturated fats are really as bad as it has been made out to be.

According to new studies surfaced during the last 2-3 years saturated fat when consumed as a part of a balanced diet can never be harmful to the body though on a nutritional scale unsaturated fats may score over the former. Dramatic shift in the attitude of Westerners towards saturated fats in favor of their  unsaturated counterparts during the last 3 decades, did not bring down the incidences of diseases like CVD, Blood Pressure, Obesity and Diabetes among the population there! On the contrary this shift in dietary changes in favour of unsaturated fats containing MUFA and PUFA with emphasis on Omega-3-acids has increased the obesity and over weight population to a record high of 35% of the total population in a typical wealthy country like the US! Against this background can any one claim that consumption of more unsaturated fats has contributed to this epidemic? The lesson one has to draw is that diet needs to be considered in a holistic way, not based on the presence or absence of one particular ingredient such as saturated fat.  

One of the defining moments in the history of American dietary habits was demonizing saturated fats which led to a situation when industry literally went over board, curtailing and eliminating fats altogether from their products. Instead of fats, the new range of products contained more sugar and highly refined carbohydrates to replace the pared down fat ingredients. One of the consequences was that these products were not able to create necessary satiety in the consumer, to stop him from eating more, leading to the phenomenon of binge eating and uncontrolled weight gains. The industry did not stop at that and went on creating more and more eye catching products with high sensory attraction to tickle unsatiated consumers who responded to this by buying such products more frequently. It is said that a consumer can eat a product containing no fat almost double the quantity compared to a normal product with normal fat concentration! This is how the history of American obesity epidemic is going to be written for posterity. Can we claim that saturated fats caused this? Positively not! 

Health pundits are now more or less agreed that saturated fat when consumed from a mixed diet in which carbohydrate components are derived from whole cereals, unprocessed legumes, fruits and vegetables can never cause those diseases from which world is suffering to day. When discussing about fat,  one should not forget to mention the role of trans fats which are created by man in food products, by bad processing practices and which is really considered harmful to human body without any doubt. Where does it come from? Many creamy products to which people including kids are addicted, use hydrogenated fats made from liquid oils through catalytic saturation using heavy metal catalysts. It is rather mysterious why no country in the world has banned production of hydrogenated fats which during its process of manufacture generate trans fatty acids. The policy of restricting its presence to certain levels came rather late after some procrastination and mandatory declaration of the same on front of the pack labels are right steps that can contribute to better health of the consumers.

Though the above commentary makes it clear that consumers should not abhor saturated fats altogether, further work with human subjects through well designed clinical trials can confirm the above facts beyond a shadow of doubt. Mean while if one wants to continue to use liquid oils in preference to saturated fats like Palm oil or coconut oil they are free to do so, probably for a better health index. Recent publication about the beneficial effect of a blend of raw sesame oil and refined rice bran oil.on human beings, in terms of lowering cholesterol levels and reducing blood sugar levels is refreshing in these days of fat bashing! These findings clearly bring out that unrefined foods, as natural as possible can be the game changer for the survival of humanity with sound health.  

It is good that the world is slowly coming to the realization that low fat foods do not achieve much in terms of health and probably lower consumption of refined carbohydrates like white sugar, HFCS, refined grain flours and restricting salt intake would do more good in the long run. A low fat product loaded with refined carbs and salt may put the consumer in the comfort zone without realizing that such diets can be more harmful that saturated fats. Those advocates who promote low fat and zero fat consumption must realize that there are many fat soluble ingredients including vitamins, some micro nutrients and a variety of plant derived health protectants that will not get access to the blood stream unless adequate fat is present in the diet consumed every day. The ultimate "mantra" for good health is live like a normal human being as our ancestors lived by adopting a diet which is based on natural, unprocessed and unrefined food components as much as possible without caring whether they contain saturated fat or not!  

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

The Jute bag controversy- A Lobbying "contest"!

The eternal fight between jute lobby and plastic lobby for cornering a greater share of orders for packing bags for sugar and food grains does not seem to be ebbing as reflected by the attempts to dilute the much touted Jute Packaging Material Act of 1987 (JPM ACT) promulgated by Government of India to protect the interests of the jute farmers and jute mills predominantly located in North Eastern India. It was realized early by the government that jute industry is vital for saving employment and sustenance of jute farmers for which policy protection is necessary. There appears to be about 4 lakh workers engage by the jute industry who are not adept in doing any other work and therefore working of these mills is imperative for their livelihood. Besides about 40 lakh families are involved in farming activities to raise jute fiber whose very existence depends on the working of the jute mills. In the light of these compulsions government's move in promulgating the above Act mandating the use of jute bags for packing food grains and sugar has been timely and reassuring.

Advent of cheaper plastic sacks seems to have tempted the food grain and sugar sector to switch over to them though under the Law there is a limit beyond which plastics cannot be used. Offense under the JPM ACT is serious punishable crimes capable of attracting financial penalty and imprisonment. Still this Act is violated frequently while the government is a helpless bystander! The reasons are many for such a peculiar situation vis-a-vis jute bag use. According to JPM Act at least 40% of sugar produced must be packed in jute bags while 100% of grains stored and distributed must be in jute bags. From time to time government dilutes the stringent provision of the Act mainly because of inadequate availability of jute bags when required, based on the recommendations of ministries concerned. In 2012-13 the jute bag demand was about 14 lakh bales while the jute industry could supply only 13 lakh bales calling for increased use of plastic sacks. Similarly in 2013-2014 Government projected a need of 20 lakh bales but jute industry could only "commit" 16 lakh bales. Ultimately how much they can really supply is some thing one has to wait and see.

As a packing material plastic sacks recommend themselves because of their greater functionality, especially with regard to moisture ingression. For a commodity like sugar protection from moisture is absolutely necessary to prevent moisture absorption by this hygroscopic product. Some blame must be borne by the jute industry for its stagnant technological base and lack of innovative spirit. If adequate research and development activities were practiced it could have thrown up modified jute bags with superior functional properties. Still jute use must be encouraged in India because empty bags generate so much down stream business activities providing gainful employment to millions of people. Besides jute is a sustainable commodity unlike plastics which are made from fossil fuels with high polluting capacity.

In a move that smells of a victory for the plastic lobby, recent advocacy by the textile ministry for allowing plastics to be allowed for packing 80% of sugar production in the country, raises many uncomfortable questions. There is nothing wrong if plastic sacks are allowed to be used if there is a genuine shortage of jute bags. But whether there is really a shortage is not clear though there are reports that domestic jute industry is importing jute bags from Bangladesh illegally. Indian situation is some what odd because the government is being asked to micro manage two industries and it can never satisfy both of them. Probably since the government buys more than 40% of the jute bags produced in the country for packing procured grains in different states, it may be inevitable that such a role is played to act equitably for all the stake holders.

If there is a choice between plastics and jute, government is justified in going for the latter considering social, environmental, economic and other advantages inherent in the case of jute. By providing a minimum support price (MSP) to jute farmers government is doing a yeoman service and in the absence of such a mechanism jute would have vanished from India long ago. It is another matter that to day's market price for jute is significantly higher than the MSP but these are good times for jute industry and MSP's USP will be realized only during distress time when market value plunges due to extraneous problems, both domestic and international. The unique strength of India as a top jute producing country must not be forfeited though Bangladesh is almost at the heels of India in matching jute production. As against India's production of 2 million tons (MT) Bangladesh raises 1.5 MT and China 4,400,00 MT. 

A million dollar question that begs for an answer is whether the domestic demand for jute bags will remain same if and when the country goes in for modern storage technology like silos which can considerably reduce jute bag use. Similarly use of paper bags with ultra strength properties may also pose a challenge while new technologies in the plastic front can throw up much superior and cheaper alternatives to jute. Here is where the jute industry must try to diversify jute uses and exploit the "natural" tag attached to their products. Besides its "Green" credentials are high making it the choice for millions of people concerned about global warming and environmental destruction through unsustainable technologies and resources. probably it could take a leaf out of the strong coir industry in Kerala which has diversified the use of coir in a wide variety of modern day products.     

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

SUGAR IS NOT THE REAL CULPRIT IN FOOD ADDICTION? NEW FINDINGS

Overweight and obesity are the most worrying health issues of 21st century and no one knows for sure the real reason(s) behind such startling changes in human anatomy during the last two decades. Though this phenomenon was first noticed among populations in wealthy countries with high per capita income, it is no more true to say that this is a rich man's problem only because in almost all countries the ratio of over weight people to healthy ones is consistently increasing. To imagine that 25-50% of the population in a country can have abnormal body weight and shape is itself scary but this is the bitter truth the world has to face. The adverse economic, health and social consequences of high body mass index (BMI) values are very real which can sap the energy and resources of a country to a great extent. 

Over weight and obese population invariably are characterized by lower productivity in works place, higher disease rates and higher medical expenses to treat or prevent fatal consequences. In a country like the US billions of dollars are spent every year for treating obese people which is considered a drain on the public exchequer. The incidence of heart diseases, diabetes, high blood pressure and other life threatening disorders is comparatively high among them reducing the life span and quality of life significantly. Another way of looking at this issue is that such undesirable human health problems have spawned a lot of economic activity with pharma companies and medical communities engaged in treating them! Thus it is hard to decide whether such transformation is part of the modern economic dispensation and one has to live with it! What a paradox indeed! 

As for food scientists, some blame has to be born by them because many products innovated by them ignore their health impact on the consumers while the industry, which mass produce them indiscriminately and promote them through high pressure advertisements, commercialism and often false claims, will have to take a major portion of the blame squarely on their shoulders. The so called junk foods loaded with empty calories are the staple among low income consumers because they are priced low to make them attractive. It is also a paradox that healthy foods like fresh foods, vegetables and similar ones are priced sky high making them beyond their reach. 

In the evolution of food industry, new technologies and high capacity equipment to manufacture newer products continuously have progressively enabled them to reduce the cost of processing and increase its capacity and capability to cater precisely to the palates of the consumers. High fat foods and those containing high sugar levels are invariably tasty and often addictive enough to capture more and more consumers almost on a permanent basis. This has made the industry less and less careful in marketing healthy foods. The profitability of the industry is also very high when it comes to making junk foods. Consumers have witnessed the endless charade among health experts regarding the real culprit for the damage to human health and among the health food makers making tall claims regarding their offerings like low calorie foods, low fat foods, low sodium foods etc. Health supplements containing many ingredients with doubtful and unproven benefits are flooding the market with no one certain about their credentials and credibility. 

There are hundreds of treatise regarding the addictive attributes of sugar whether it is sucrose, glucose or HFCS. This has spawned an entire industry offering low calorie foods and low sugar products playing upon the fears of the consumer. If people are developing tendency to over eat, sugar has been implicated while some believed it is a disease. Now comes the report that it is not sugar to which people are addicted as being propagated during the last three decades. The addiction is attributed to eating itself rather than to any particular ingredient. It is believed with some scientific certainty that only the psychological compulsion to eat due to the pleasure and satisfaction it generates when eating food is responsible for this phenomenon.  Over-eating is more a behavioral disorder and is similar to the compulsion with gamblers to back to the slotting machines and the card tables again and again in spite of losing heavily.

If the above findings are true, where lies the solution for tackling the obesity epidemic? Can industry be really blamed for making products with high palatability and acceptability since it is their mission to give consumers the very best and win the fierce competition in the market. If they are forced to compromise on the sensory aspects, can they survive in the market?:No matter how bland a food is, compulsive eaters with food addiction will invariably reach for the food when the urge to eat develops. Alcohol products and tobacco items are examples where no amount of policing, control, price escalation and government intervention has worked in the past in any part of the world. What is needed is education, persuasion, treatment of food addicts and industry initiative to improve the nutritional quality of their products with least compromise on sensory aspects. 

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

THE JUTE BAG POLICY-IS IT RIGHT?

Jute cultivation and production are more or less concentrated in the Indian subcontinent and being the second most important natural fiber after cotton, it has garnered for itself a distinct market during the last 300 years. Britishers, the colonial overlords in this region till the first half of last century were literally looting countries like India by taking the harvest to the UK to process into value added product for local use. Though the jute fiber extraction and processing were predominantly manual, Britishers still found it a good source of high quality fiber with many potential industrial uses. It is a fact of history that Britishers discovered a special way to make jute fiber amenable to machine processing involving treatment with Whale oil. It is another matter that many innovative products have been developed using jute as a base and jute is meeting the new aspirations of the modern world to move away from synthetic fossil fuel based fibers by providing an excellent natural alternative.

The jute plant belonging to the genus Corcherous yields long, soft, shiny vegetable fibers, found very strong with many desirable physical properties. It is a ligno-cellulosic substance containing both cellulose (plant fiber) and Lignin (wood ) and hence provides the softness of celluloe as well as the strength of wood. There are similar fiber sources growing wild like Kenaf, industrial hemp, Flax, Ramie etc which are available only in limited quantities in some parts of the world. Organized cultivation of jute is confined to India, Bangladesh, Myanmar and to a smaller extent in some other countries and the most prolific producers are India and Bangladesh, accounting for more than 95% of world production to day. While Bangladesh exports a substantial portion of its jute production, in India there is enough domestic demand to absorb the entire production leaving very little for export.

As many jute mills are reporting losses in their operations because of the advent of more economical and convenient plastics based bags, it had the effect of reducing demand for jute bags progressively. Government of India in its wisdom came to the rescue of jute mills, probably considering the adverse impact large scale closure of these mills might have on jute farmers and mill employees, promulgated coercive laws to force two commodities viz, food grains and sugar to be sold only in jute bags. It is true that jute is eminently suited for packing these materials but providing such a prop for a section of the industry raises some questions regarding its impropriety. How can the rich jute mill owners have any incentive to bring in innovation and improvisation for modernizing the production facilities and diversifying its use into other more profitable areas under such a protective regime? Is it not that the government is exposing its weakness by the blackmailing tactics of the jute mills by way of threatening their closure frequently?

Why should the jute industry be given such protection? Is the price of jute in India very high compared to prevailing prices in the neighboring countries? What prompted the government (GOI) in this country shoot down a proposal to import jute from Nepal and Bangladesh in the light of complaints by the users about shortage? The ruling price for jute in Bangladesh is about Rs 7000 for a bale of 180 kg while in India the corresponding price is Rs 3000 per 100 kg which is some what cheaper and therefore importing jute from that country is going to be costlier. Unless there is a significant quality superiority who is going to buy jute from Bangladesh?   


The Jute Packaging Materials Act (JPMA)-1987, a Central legislation, provides for 100 per cent mandatory reservation for jute bags for packaging of sugar and food grain. Since both sugar and foodgrains are under the reserved sector, the Union law ministry has expressed reservations over import of gunny bags from Nepal and Bangladesh under the garb of legal and technical difficulties. It should be recalled that the very GOI had allowed such imports earlier, probably for use by industries other than food grains and sugar packers. If the Jute Mills Association (IJMA) spokesman is to be believed only one million tonnes (mt) of jute sacks are needed to pack food grains and 0.2 mt for packing sugar. This can be met comfortably by the Indian jute industry which has the capacity to churn out 1.5 mt of sacks and sacking capacity is almost 0.55 mt higher than peak government demand. One wonders whether these calculations are really realistic considering the bumper production of food grains this year with the possibility of a substantial portion of the surplus production forced to be stored under the CAP mode using gunny sacks as primary packing material. 

Bangladesh, considered an "all weather" friendly neighbor to India, produces around 0.5 mt of gunny bags each year as against India's 1.1 mt. Bangladesh's raw jute production is around five million bales (1 bale is 180 kg) in comparison to India's 11 million bales. What is notable is that Bangladesh is a more prominent player than India when it comes to international trading in jute products. There is an allegation that this country mostly thrives on discounts that are covered up by huge government subsidy, enabling the jute industry there to export over 60 per cent of its products while Indian export is hardly 10-12 per cent. Interestingly the jute bag order exempts packing below 25 kg and above 100 kg from its purview! Major industrial sugar users like giant beverage manufacturers still refuse to use Indian gunny bags as they contend that sugar packed in these bags is unsuitable for their manufacturing process! 

It is time that the closed Indian mindset in controlling "every thing and every body" through the brutal power at the disposal of the government is changed in favor of a free regime as under the WTO regime and allow free trade for attaining its own equilibrium through market forces. If Bangladesh is using unfair means for dumping its jute bags in the Indian market there are always policy and legal options to check them. Jute is a precious natural resource which is likely to be pole-vaulted into prominence in the near future because of its multifaceted advantages. It is 100% biodegradable, cheapest fiber available, high tensile strength, low extensibility, better breathability, low thermal conductivity, good aquastic insulating property etc. Of course its poor drapability, poor crease resistance, britleness, fiber shredding tendency and gradual yellowing may make it unsuitable for some applications. Even if a fraction of the investment going on cotton fiber development in India, were to be made for improving jute fiber, the results would have been phenomenal by now! Scientific neglect of this sector has ensured that it remains an archival piece on the modern industrial landscape in the country. 

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

   

CARAMEL UNDER CLOUD-CAN IT BE CARCINOGENIC?

When sugar is heated to about 170C, its molecule breaks down and the artifacts so generated recombine into compounds with characteristic color and flavor liked universally by most people. Basically the reaction is initiated by the removal of water from the sugar molecules, isomerization and polymerization into high molecular weight compounds of non-homogeneous nature. Since time immemorial caramel color as well as flavor were liked by the consumers, establishing it as a GRAS additive for addition in most foods consumed to day. Though there were periodic questions raised against uncontrolled use of caramel in a wide spectrum of foods, it is only recently that serious attempts are being made to curtail its use because of some studies highlighting its role in some health hazards, mainly based on animal experiments.

There are distinct four types of Caramel preparations with code numbers E150a, E150b, E150c and E150d, each with different properties and characteristics. By simply heating sugar without any additives yields the Type E150a, inclusion of sulfite compounds during heating generate Type 150b, use of Ammonia but without the presence of sulfites gives rise to Type 150c and if both Ammonia and Sulfites are used during the process Type 150d is formed. Alcoholic beverages like Whiskey incorporate Type150a caramel to provide the attractive mild brown color while Beer, synthetic soy sauce, confectionery etc contain Type 150c for the necessary color tint. Type 150d caramel is used extensively in acidic products like soft drinks and this version is considered the most dangerous by the toxicologists.

Due to persistent efforts by some consumer groups in some states in the US for banning this coloring substance, attention is being received at the national level to review its use in a limited way. The Food and Drug Administration of the US was petitioned recently by the reputed Center for Science in the Public Interest, long associated with efforts to ban potentially harmful foods, charging that the caramel coloring contains two cancer-causing chemicals, requesting that it should be banned. The chemicals in question are 2-methylimidazole (2-MEI) and 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI). Studies published in 2003 and 2005 by the National Toxicology Program of NIH are reported to have found that these chemicals caused cancer in some mice and rats and raises serious concerns regarding the advisability of continuing its uncontrolled use in various products, from pharmaceuticals to rubber. Other studies also found some evidence for cancer in lungs, liver, thyroid and leukemia in experimental animals. It may be illogical to take any risk whatsoever from a purely cosmetic coloring angle and such a situation may not justify the use of caramel in foods. As is to be expected beverage industry maintains that there's no evidence that the chemical, 4-MEI, causes cancer in humans but in its own interest it must take action to voluntarily cut down on the use of caramel in some of its products.

For some time there was this illusory feeling that caramel with a reported ADI of about 200 mg per kg body weight cannot cause any health damage. How ever with new scientific evidence emerging, even an exposure of 16 mcg per day is considered risky and therefore giving warning to consumers on the label of products with more than this limit may be an appropriate step to safe guard the safety of the consumers in the long run. Some cola beverages are known to contain more than 100 mcg of 4 -MEI alone per a 12 oz can and there may be many products which may contain this chemical, much more than this level.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

"SWEETENING" THE SUGAR-TECHNOLOGY OPTIONS

Sugar from cane or beets forms an important component of modern diets. While sugarcane cultivation in Brazil, India and other countries constitute a major portion of world production, sugar beets dominate in the US and Europe. More than 50% of sugar consumed in the US comes from beets, with the GM varieties dominating the field. Recent spurt in sugar prices in the international market has raised alarms and in India the prices have registered more than 100% rise in one year making it a serious political issue to the government in power. Globally the price is predicted to jump to more than 45 US cents per kg ( more than Rs 20). In man's quest for getting 2000-2500 kc of energy per day, sugar is an important source, though it is being implicated lately in causing serious health disorders. The fructose+glucose combination (HFCS) derived from corn is used extensively in processed foods and beverages and the burgeoning obese population in some western countries is attributed to uncontrolled consumption of HFCS. Against such a scenario, the role of sugar needs to be defined before any long term policy option is considered for increasing or decreasing world production.

Some experts suggest that daily sugar intake must be restricted to no more than 44 gm where as the actual consumption works out to more than 65 gm per capita. It is unlikely that this level of consumption will go down significantly in spite of all dire warnings about the dangers posed by high consumption of sugar. The annual growth in consumption averages around 2% while production and stocks are declining. Against a global demand of 167 million tons (mt), actual production in 2009-10 is not anticipated to be more than 160 mt. In India the production registered a catastrophic decline of almost 11 mt in 2008-09 from the peak of 26.3 mt in 2007-08. According to current projections the sugar output may recover partly during 2009-10 to reach about 22 mt. The area under sugarcane cultivation fluctuates between 10.5 and 13 million hectares (mha).

Sugar situation in India is complicated by factors like inconsistent government policies, diversion of cane to jaggery production, direct consumption, inconsistent export policy, uncertainties regarding minimum support price guaranteed to growers and huge payment arrears to growers by the mills. The per capita availability fell from about 60 gm in 2007-08 to less than 40 gm a day in 2008-09 that seems to have led to the current price escalation. Even if the production regains the momentum eventually, now is the time to think of a long term policy regarding country's over dependence on sugarcane. With yields like 80 tons per hectare, sugarcane at best can deliver only about 8-9 tons of sugar whereas Tapioca containing 25-30% sugar equivalent starch and a yield as high as 80 tons/ha can provide same sugar from less than half of the current acreage under sugarcane with considerably lesser water requirement. The technology for fructose + glucose products equivalent to sucrose in sweetness is well established and India must go for this system increasingly at least to meet the sugar needs of the food industry.

Another possibility is increasing the sweetness quotient of cane sugar by admixing with safe sweeteners like Stevia glycosides, Sucralose and /or Neotame and extend the supply. Sucralose a unique modified sucrose molecule is made by introducing 3 chlorine atoms in place of 3 hydroxyl groups in the disaccharide structure of sucrose which results in boosting its sweetness 600 times. Technical feasibility of processing sugarcane juice directly for making sucralose needs to be explored and blends of sucrose and sucralose can be cleared for manufacture and consumption. Such a route offers the possibility of introducing different versions of sugar with varying sweetness and differential prices. Safety considerations are important but sucralose has been cleared for use by humans in more than 80 countries with approval from FAO, WHO and other global agencies. More than 4500 food products are manufactured to day containing sucralose. The intake limit of 15 mg per kg weight per day offers very high safety margin as individual consumption beyond 200 mg per day (equivalent to less than 3 mg/kg body weight) is beyond the realm of possibility.

There will be stiff opposition to such a strategy from the sugar lobby and some consumer activists who oppose anything which is not natural. But in the long term interests of the country such policy options must be considered after making sure that consumer safety is not compromised in any way.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/
http://foodtechupdates.blogspot.com

'SWEET' POLITICS! BITTER AFTERMATH!

In the normal diet cane sugar and products containing sugar upwards of 10% provide pleasant taste and calories though corn based high fructose syrup(HFCS) has lately been finding increasing use in place of cane sugar. Since USA is not a major sugar cane grower, HFCS was developed there to encourage corn farmers and reduce dependence on imported sugar. Weight watchers and sugar compromised consumers strive hard to reduce sugar consumption as much as possible for obvious reasons. Besides dentists consider sugar as the biggest culprit for majority of tooth related problems and invariably advise people to shun sugar and if unavoidable to brush the teeth immediately to prevent proliferation of bacteria in the mouth. With the economy of many countries like Brazil, India, Mauritius and others depending heavily on sugar cane, it is difficult to stop world trade in sugar. The massive use of sugar cane in Brazil for ethanol production that can be an acceptable fuel singly or in blends with gasoline is a development fraught with implications for future and there is a possibility the world may see a slow fading of cane sugar into eventual oblivion.

The business opportunities offered by declining sugar consumption for health reasons have been grabbed with open arms by the chemical industry to develop synthetic sweteners like Saccharin, Aspartame, Acesulfame Potassium, Neotame, Cyclamate, Sucralose etc which to day command significant patronage by sugar-wary consumers. An area of concern for the consumers of synthetic sweeteners is their safety for long term consumption. There is no uniform approach in the world as to how these food adjuncts have to be cleared to ensure consumer safety in absolute terms. Some are banned in some countries while others allow all the synthetic sweeteners except Cyclamate with intake restrictions. Accepted Daily Intake (ADI) levels for Aspartame (50mg/kg body weight), saccharin (5mg/kg), Acesulfame (15mg/kg) and Sucralose (5mg/kg) have been established. Since these are 200-600 times sweeter than cane sugar, their consumption can be considered reasonably safe.

Leaves of Stevia plant contain several glycosides, called steviosides sweet to taste and the species Stevia Rebaudiana yield almost 10% of these steviosides grown extensively in Paraguay, Japan and Brazil. World production of Stevia sugar is estimated at 1300 tons per year. These glycosides are about 500 times sweeter than cane sugar and are considered 100% safe because of the fact that stevia leaves were being consumed for centuries by the native population of Paraguay with no recorded adverse effect. ADI for Stevia sugar is determined to be 12 mg/kg body weight by the JEFCA of FAO?WHO. The process of making colorless and odorless product from the leaves is well known and pure steviosides are costly to make due to complexity of the technology. In India Touch Natural Pvt Ltd based in Mao in Manipur has ventured into Stevia sugar involving 300 farmers and setting up a plant in Kainu. Sun Fruits Ltd, Pune is reported to be taking up cultivation of the variety (SRB)128 for producing stevia sugar in India. 2-3 tons of dry leaves can be harvested with about 15-20% stevioside content from this variety which is expected to be grown in West Bengal and North East Region.

If stevia is a safe bet as a sugar substitute why is its consumption confined to a few countries, inspite of the fact that its cultivation is relatively simple? Why only Japan consumes more than 50% of the stevia sugar produced in the world? The answer is simple, the political intrigues amongst corporate bodies stradling the western world looking for greater and greater returns on their investments Otherwise how any sane person can justfy marketing of stevia sugar for table top use but not permitted in processed food products? Aspartame the most widely used artificial sweetener is associated with G D Searle and Monsanto Chemicals and they are bent on keeping their turf safe from competition. With the patent on Aspartame expiring and the prices tumbling down, Sucralose from Zydus Cadila, another corporate giant, is taking over the market as the new star and the combined efforts of this lobby is keeping Stevia out under one pretext or the other. Also in the news is the keen interest by Coca Cola and Cargil, the super giants, in Stevia sugar and their patents have not yet been cleared. They are already marketing table top sweeteners based on Stevia under the brands Rebiana and Truvia respectively. It is unlikely that Stevia will be cleared before the pending patents from the corporate giants are sealed. The recent announcement by Coca Cola to market beverages sweetened by Stevia sugar though not yet cleared by FDA, is a pointer that it will be approved as a safe industrial sweetener soon and in absence of any major manufacturers, industry will have to depend heavily on these multinational companies for years to come for supply of stevia sugar.

V.H.POTTY
http://vhpotty.blogspot.com/