 |
|
|
    
 |
|
U.S.D.A. eyes drastic reduction in enriched grains intake
Source: Bakingbusiness.com, June 24, 2004
by Josh Sosland
WASHINGTON - In a move that would advocate a monumental shift in America's eating patterns and could have seismic implications for the grain-based foods industry, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is actively considering a recommendation aimed at cutting consumption of enriched grains by 40% to 50%.
The 2005 edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans would include the recommendation, part of an intensive effort to increase consumption of whole grains. Eric Hentges, who heads the Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (C.N.P.P), the U.S.D.A. agency in charge of the guidelines, reviewed the proposed changes at the Independent Bakers Association's annual meeting this week in Washington.
Mr. Hentges said the prospective recommendations would call for adult men to cut enriched grains intake by 51% and adult women to cut intake by 39%.
"The recommendation in the proposed pattern would be that half the servings of grain should be whole grains," he said.
Together with the cuts of enriched grains intake, the Department would recommend whole grains consumption increases of 275% and 227%, respectively, for men and women. Overall (enriched and whole grains combined), the guidance would recommend an 8% increase in grains intake by women and a 12% decrease by men.
Current U.S. Dietary Guidelines recommendations urge Americans to consume 6 to 11 servings of grain-based foods daily. At a meeting in May, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee tentatively agreed to cut the recommended servings to 5 to 10. Mr. Hentges did not comment last week on that proposed cut.
In certain respects, the proposed change to reduce enriched grains intake could constitute a subtle one. The Department nudged consumers to shift to whole grains for several years. Recommendations in the 2000 guidelines urge consumers, "To choose a variety of grains, especially whole grains."
But in placing specific numbers on how much enriched grains intake should decrease, the Department would recommend a massive cutback in U.S. consumption of enriched grains, a mainstay of the American diet.
In addition, because consumers have widely resisted in the past turning to whole grains, cuts in enriched grains intake may not be offset. In certain important grain-based foods groups, such as pasta and pizza, whole-grain versions hold a minuscule market share.
At this week's meeting, some industry members expressed concern that consumers could heed a recommendation to cut enriched grains but continue to shun whole grains. In such a "doomsday" scenario for grain-based foods, per capita consumption of flour could plunge.
While it had become clear in recent days that members of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee have pushed for a cut in enriched grains consumption, doubts persisted that the recommendations would find their way into the final guidelines.
Briefing the I.B.A. one day before Mr. Hentges, Judi Adams, president of the Wheat Foods Council, told the bakers that the committee considered calling for major cuts in consumption of enriched grains as part of the effort to promote whole grains intake.
Ms. Adams criticized the proposal and remained optimistic that the U.S.D.A. would reject it as unrealistic.
"I don't see the consumer increasing whole grain intake more than 200%," she said. "People don't make those kinds of changes. This could hurt us in the long run, resulting in net lower grain consumption."
Because the ultimate decision for the guidelines rests with the C.N.P.P. and the Department of Health and Human Services and not with the advisory committee, Ms. Adams remained hopeful that realism would prevail.
"Fortunately, the C.N.P.P. staff and H.H.S. staff take a very common sense, down-to-earth approach," she said. "They have a better feel for what the consumer might actually do."
That optimism appears to have been misplaced. Still, Mr. Hentges confirmed that the C.N.P.P. seeks to take a practical, realistic approach in what he described as the "guiding principles" that form the philosophy for U.S.D.A. food recommendations.
"Our guidance deals with overall health," he said, showing a graphic array of the various factors the Department considers in coming up with its recommendations. "We are not N.I.H. (National Institutes of Health). We don't deal with specific diseases. Our recommendations are not based on therapeutic issues but on overall health issues. It must be based on the latest data and must deal with the total diet, not just a portion of it.
"In the middle is a reality check. Recommendations must be flexible. There are many individual needs, philosophies and religious issues. It has to be realistic. It has to deal with realistic foods, foods we actually eat and that we are not deviating too much. And of course it always has to be evolutionary."
Mr. Hentges said U.S.D.A. considered the need for realism in developing recommended dietary changes. He noted that on a percentage basis, even greater shifts will occur in vegetables, where the guidelines urge will consumers to move away from starchy vegetables and dramatically increase intake of green, leafy vegetables.
"These sound like huge numbers, three- to four-fold increases," he said. "And it is a challenge. But for the dark green vegetables, over a full week the increase is the equivalent of two cups of broccoli. Two cups over a week would allow consumers to meet that recommendation."
While Mr. Hentges did not provide a similar example of cutting enriched grains 40% to 50% and trebling whole grains intake, he made the extraordinary revelation that the dietary guidelines committee actually had considered recommendations completely eliminating enriched grains from the American diet.
"The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee asked my staff to run a pattern that had no enriched grains in it," he said. "The staff ran that pattern and went back to show them, 'This is not a good idea.' This 50/50 worked very well to get all the nutrients. If we said enriched grains don't have a role, there are issues about all these nutrients, enrichment, folic acid, those types of issues. So it was very clear to the committee that was not a viable or healthful suggestion."
Pressed on the question of whether it was realistic to expect consumers to shift so dramatically from enriched grains to whole grains, Mr. Hentges said industry must change the products it offers.
"You can change the food supply through technology," he said. "Developing greater varieties of whole grains - that will be part of the solution. We will try to be part of the education and get the behavior change. It's a substantial change. It's high expectations, but I believe it's doable expectations."
Industry representatives remained determined to ensure that the positioning of grain-based foods in the guidelines remains different than that presented by Mr. Hentges.
"It certainly puts us on notice," said Nicholas A. Pyle, I.B.A. president. "The industry is not going to roll over and play dead. There will be an opportunity to make changes. This process is far from over. What we heard is not going to be in the final results."
Ms. Adams specifically objected to the negative overtones toward enriched grains in the proposal. For example, Ms. Adams said the guidelines committee may recommend consumers "aim for at least three servings of whole grains per day, preferably by substituting for refined grains."
She said the W.F.C., in its comments to the committee, has urged the committee not to make disparaging comments toward enriched grains. "Say, 'Strive for three whole grains servings per day.' As nutrition educators, we recognize that people like to hear positive recommendations, not negative."
Mr. Hentges noted that once the proposed 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans is published, the industry will have an opportunity to comment on the proposal.
# # #
|
|
|
|
|
