Center for Science In The Public Interest

Center for Science In The Public Interest http://www.cspinet.org News on nutrition, food safety, and more. www.cspinet.org http://www.cspinet.org/images/pearblogicon.gif http://www.cspinet.org Health Groups Urge Obamas: Don't Water Down Calorie Labeling Rules http://cspinet.org/new/201205161.html Law Requires Calories at Chain Restaurants and All Similar Food RetailersThe <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml-letter.pdf">nation's leading health and consumer organizations</a> are calling on the Obama Administration to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/is-menu-labeling-working-factsheet.pdf">provide calorie labeling</a> at chain movie theaters, supermarkets, and for alcoholic beverages, and to provide clear labeling for vending machines. If those are exempted, consumers would have no clue about the often-surprising calorie counts in buckets of movie theater popcorn, alcoholic drinks, and ready-to-eat food sold at supermarkets and convenience stores. The 2010 health care reform law requires calorie labeling at all chain restaurants and "similar retail food establishments." In April 2011, the Food and Drug Administration proposed rules designed to implement that provision. However, those rules excluded chain movie theaters, hotels, stadiums, cafes in superstores, and other venues, even though they sell restaurant-type food. The proposed rules also would allow vending machine operators to provide calorie listings on hard-to-find, difficult-to-read posters rather than directly on vending machines near the item or its selection button as the law requires. And according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, those types of establishments are serving up lots of calories. <a href="http://youtu.be/QifyoBvGt0k">Theater-goers have no idea</a> that, for instance, a medium tub of popcorn (without buttery topping) at Regal Cinemas has 1,200 calories, and a large soda from that chain has 500 calories. A large bag of Reese's Pieces candy has 1,160 calories. Theater chains Regal and AMC were CSPI's "nominees for Best Supporting Actor in the Obesity Epidemic," when in 2009 the group released laboratory analyses of movie theater food. <img src="/regal-popcorn.jpg">A medium popcorn and large soda from Regal Cinemas "Calorie labeling at chain restaurants and other food retailers will help Americans identify foods with fewer calories and reduce their risk of overweight and obesity," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "It would be a real setback if Americans were denied this important nutrition information at chain movie theaters, bars, and superstores. We hope the Administration changes course and includes those retailers as Congress intended." Alcoholic beverages are the fifth-largest source of calories in adults' diets, and the government's Dietary Guidelines for Americans specifically urges people to monitor their calorie intake from alcohol. A 5-ounce glass of wine has about 125 calories and a 12-ounce serving of beer has about 150 calories. But some of the concoctions served at chain restaurants have several times the calories of wine or beer. Romano's Macaroni Grill serves a Margarita Prima with 440 calories. An Ultimate Mudslide at T.G.I. Friday’s has 730 calories. <img src="/tgif-drinks.jpg">T.G.I. Friday's Berri Acai Sour (left, 170 cal) and the Triple Berri Passion (330 cal) "Who would think that a single alcoholic drink at T.G.I. Friday’s would have more calories than its rib-eye with lobster dinner?" Wootan asks. "Or that its Triple Berry Passion cocktail (330 calories) has almost twice as many calories as the Berri Acai Sour (170 cal)?" <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_map.pdf">Restaurants that operate</a> in New York City and Philadelphia are already required to list calories for alcoholic drinks; local laws also require movie theaters to list calories in New York City and California. In a letter to the President and First Lady, officials from more than 20 of the nation's leading health and consumer groups also expressed concern about the Administration's interpretation of the law's requirement for vending machines. The law specifically requires vendors to "provide a sign in close proximity to each article of food or the selection button." But the FDA's draft rules would allow posters next to or even above banks of vending machines, where the information would be largely invisible and useless to consumers. While they are included in the proposed regulations, supermarkets and convenience stores are lobbying to get out of having to post calories for their restaurant-style, ready-to-eat foods. Although bakeries, salad bars, and hot-food bars at restaurants like Panera, Golden Corral, or Pizza Hut would be required to list calories, supermarkets are trying to avoid labeling their nearly identical bakeries and food bars. According to Wootan that exemption is not warranted considering that many supermarket chains offer seating and operate much like restaurants. In fact, 80 percent of the top 50 supermarkets that sell prepared foods have nutrition information for some of their prepared foods. They just need to provide it in their stores, where people can use it, and provide it for all their prepared items, says CSPI. "The Administration should not back down just because some powerful food retailers and the alcohol industry may find the new calorie-labeling law embarrassing," Wootan said. Besides CSPI, the letter to President and Mrs. Obama was signed by the heads of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (formerly the American Dietetic Association), the American Cancer Society’s Cancer Action Network, the American Public Health Association, the American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association, the Consumer Federation of America, the Environmental Working Group, the Prevention Institute, Trust for America’s Health, and many others. 2012-05-16 CSPI Urges Implementation of Recommendations in Institute of Medicine Obesity Report http://cspinet.org/new/201205081.html Campaign Could Be Funded with Sugary Drink Tax, Group SaysA new report from the Institute of Medicine is calling for dramatic action on the part of governments, the food and health care industries, and schools to help curb obesity. The IOM report recommends reducing the consumption of sugary drinks, something long urged by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. "The IOM report provides an excellent blueprint for solving America’s costly obesity problem. But policy makers will have to invest both money and political capital to convert the advice into reality," said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Congress should fund a multi-billion-dollar, multi-year anti-obesity program that includes national and local community and social-marketing campaigns. That program could be funded with a significant tax on sugary beverages. The SNAP (food stamp) program should be improved by testing the effectiveness of excluding purchases of sugary beverages and providing a bonus for fruits and vegetables." "This country has shown that it can solve almost any problem when we come together and make it a priority—as we have to cut smoking rates in half," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo Wootan. "With two-thirds of Americans affected by pre-obesity and obesity, this is clearly a societal problem that requires action by individuals, families, schools, health officials and professionals, governments, and industry." CSPI called on the Obama administration to finalize strong menu-labeling rules which cover all foods at chains, including alcoholic beverages, prepared foods in supermarkets, and snacks at movie <a href="http://youtu.be/QifyoBvGt0k">theaters</a>. Food and entertainment companies should abide by meaningful nutrition <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/FederalAgenciesProposed_MarketingGuidelines.html">guidelines</a> for food marketing to children, according to CSPI. Restaurants should cut portion sizes and calories, make vegetables and fruits the default side dishes in place of French fries, and remove sugary drinks from kids’ <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fact_sheet_defaults.pdf">menus</a>. And all levels of government should provide healthier foods through their cafeterias and vending machines, stop selling sugary drinks, and price foods to support healthier <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/procurementfactsheet.pdf">choices</a>, the group says. "The country has begun to address obesity, but we are still doing far too little given the tremendous burden it places on our health and health-care costs," said Wootan. "It's unconscionable that we are still doing so little to help the two-thirds of Americans who are at risk of costly and debilitating obesity-related problems like heart attack, stroke, amputations, blindness, and cancer." 2012-05-08 New Beef Traceback Policies Could Reduce Public Health Toll from E. Coli O157 http://cspinet.org/new/201205021.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalUSDA’s announcement of <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/NR_050212_01/index.asp">new policies</a> allowing for traceback of beef products when preliminary results are positive for E. coli O157:H7 could help reduce the toll of deaths and illnesses during outbreaks. Rapid traceback is essential for reducing the impact of E. coli outbreaks, and protects both consumers and the meat industry. When it comes to testing for E. coli, it makes sense to start traceback procedures upon a presumptively positive test result, and not lose valuable time waiting for a confirmation. USDA should do the same for antibiotic-resistant strains of Salmonella in meat products, which just last year hospitalized nearly 50 people and sickened 167. In addition, requiring companies to report instances when they have released unsafe product to USDA right away will give the agency much better information with which to protect consumers. USDA appears to be focusing intensely on E.coli, which is good news for consumers as grilling season approaches. But more action is needed. The agency should require retail beef grinders, including supermarkets, to keep records of everything they grind. As we saw last year in the outbreak linked to ground beef from Hannaford grocery stores, when supermarket chains grind beef from multiple sources, it makes it much harder for investigators to track down the source of an outbreak. 2012-05-02 Case of Mad Cow Disease Identified in California http://cspinet.org/new/201204242.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Attorney Sarah KleinA case of <a href="http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentid=2012/04/0132.xml&contentidonly=true">a single cow</a> with Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy is not a reason for significant concern on the part of consumers, and there is no reason to believe the beef or milk supply is unsafe. If the cow were exposed to the typical strain of BSE via animal feed—and the government says that’s not the case here—that would have represented a significant failure. The government’s ability to track down other cattle that may have been exposed via feed would have been hampered without an effective animal I.D. program. The United States has first-world resources and technology but a third-world animal identification system. In fact, some third-world countries do a better job of tracking livestock than America does. Botswana, for one, uses RFID microchips to track its animals up and down the supply chain. If American cattlemen suffer economic losses at the news of this discovery of BSE, they should blame only themselves and other opponents of a mandatory animal identification system. 2012-04-24 FDA Urged to Implement Mandatory Sodium Reductions http://cspinet.org/new/201204241.html CSPI Criticizes FDA for Ignoring 2-Year-Old Institute of Medicine AdviceTwo years ago the Institute of Medicine concluded that the food industry had not heeded calls over the preceding 40 years to voluntarily reduce sodium levels in its products and therefore called for mandatory limits. But even as <a href="http://cspinet.org/salt/">diets too high in sodium</a> contribute to tens of thousands of premature deaths each year and billions in medical costs, the Food and Drug Administration has not taken any action to curb the salt in packaged or restaurant foods. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspi_letter_to_commissioner_hamburg.pdf">In a letter today</a>, Center for Science in the Public Interest executive director Michael F. Jacobson told FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg that upwards of 100,000 lives could be saved annually if sodium levels in packaged and restaurant foods were halved. High levels of sodium consumption promote costly health problems, such as high-blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, and kidney disease. According to CSPI, direct medical costs would be cut by about $18 billion per year if sodium consumption were reduced from 3,400 milligrams per day to 2,300 mg per day; $28 billion could be saved if consumption were further reduced to 1,500 mg per day. "There is virtually nothing else the FDA could do to improve America’s food supply that would provide a greater benefit to public health than to reduce sodium levels," Jacobson wrote. "We urge the FDA to issue strong rules that will protect Americans’ health." In April 2010, <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/Strategies-to-Reduce-Sodium-Intake-in-the-United-States.aspx">the IOM recommended</a> setting gradually decreasing limits on sodium in the coming years, giving American palates time to adjust to safer levels. Companies could lower sodium in a variety of ways depending on the food, according to CSPI. Besides simply using less salt, companies could replace some of the sodium chloride with potassium chloride, use salt crystals of different sizes and shapes, add herbs and spices, or salting just the outside or one surface of foods. A study published earlier this month in the <a href="http://www.cmaj.ca/content/early/2012/04/16/cmaj.111895">Canadian Medical Association Journal</a> shows that American fast-food companies have plenty of room to bring sodium levels down at least to the levels seen in other countries. In the United Kingdom, where food regulators had made salt reduction a priority, several categories of fast food had about 15 percent less sodium than in the United States. "Every year of delay on the part of the Food and Drug Administration means hundreds of thousands of additional strokes, heart attacks, and deaths that could have been prevented," said Stephen Havas, M.D., adjunct professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. "I't's really astonishing that the agency has not seized the opportunity presented by the Institute of Medicine's landmark report and begun to use its regulatory authority to fix this huge problem with our food supply. How many more deaths will it take before they act?" 2012-04-24 FDA Voluntary Guidance on Antibiotics Tragically Flawed http://cspinet.org/new/201204112.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe Food and Drug Administration's <a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm299802.htm">new policies</a> intended to reduce the overuse of important antibiotics in animal production are tragically flawed. They rely too heavily on the drug industry and animal producers to act voluntarily in the best interest of consumers. Protecting public health is an authority and a responsibility that rests squarely with the FDA. The announcement at least indicates that the agency recognizes a "public health imperative" to tackle this problem. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/abrupdate.pdf">Decades of misuse have led to some common pathogens, like Salmonella, becoming more virulent and less treatable</a>. The FDA knows it can no longer afford to ignore antibiotic resistance. In March, the agency took a step in the right direction by banning certain extra-label uses of cephalosporin in certain food-producing animals. And last month, a federal court held that the agency must proceed with withdrawal actions on antibiotics. Many of these issues are addressed in the Preservation of Antibiotics in Medical Treatment Act, which the Administration should support. PAMTA would require the FDA to conduct regular reevaluation of drugs used in animal production. The problem of antimicrobial resistance, and the contribution of animal agriculture to that problem, is urgent and global. The United States needs to take a leadership role in bringing comprehensive, effective action, in both the agricultural and medical spheres, to bear. The time for half-measures and voluntary steps has passed. 2012-04-11 Preparations Underway for Second Annual Food Day http://cspinet.org/new/201204101.html October 24, 2012 to Galvanize Support for Better Food PoliciesFood movement leaders are gearing up for the second annual <a href="http://www.foodday.org">Food Day</a>, the nationwide celebration of healthy, affordable, and sustainably produced food. More than 2,300 events in all 50 states took place on the <a href="http://youtu.be/0WmyV55gy4c">first Food Day</a>, and organizers intend for Food Day 2012 to represent an even bigger grassroots campaign for improved food policies. Food Day is October 24 every year. Food Day brings together organizations and individuals working on food issues as varied as hunger, nutrition, agriculture policy, animal welfare, and farmworker justice. Some <a href="http://foodday.org/files/FoodDay_Report2011.pdf">2011 Food Day events</a> were large in scale, such as a big festival in Savannah, GA, and a Times Square Eat In, attended by celebrities, chefs, and prominent food activists. <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/0WmyV55gy4c" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Next year, Food Day will take place just 12 days before the 2012 elections, and organizers expect that it will provide an opportunity for citizens and candidates alike to discuss important food policy issues. (Food Day, like the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, the nonprofit group that is spearheading the event, does not take sides in campaigns or otherwise engage in electioneering.) Last year, elected officials used Food Day to launch new food policies, highlight locally grown produce, or issue proclamations. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHJNXtieXKs">promoted gleaning on farms</a> with the state’s Agriculture Department, while Mayor Thomas Menino of Boston used Food Day to deliver a <a href="http://dailyfreepress.com/2011/10/24/menino-looks-toward-a-healthier-boston-in-kicking-off-food-day/">"State of the Food Union" address</a>. In Maine, Rep. Chellie Pingree <a href="http://wholesomewave.org/maines-congresswoman-chellie-pingree-celebrates-food-day-unveils-local-food-bill/">announced a new bill</a> to assist small and mid-sized farms, while in Los Angeles, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's Food Policy Council coordinated healthy cooking demonstrations, film screenings and other events. New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg <a href="http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2011/10/24/bloomberg-hands-out-apples-in-queens-to-celebrate-food-day/">handed out apples to commuters</a> and appeared on ABC's The Chew on Food Day. "Food should be healthy, affordable, and produced with care for the environment, animals, and the women and men who grow, harvest, and serve it," said Food Day founder and CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "But too often, our policies fall short of that ideal. Food Day aspires to celebrate our food system when it works, and fix it when it's broken." Food Day's <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/food-day-advisory-board.php">2012 food advisory board</a> includes author Michael Pollan; prominent physicians Caldwell Esselstyn, Michael Roizen, and David Satcher; nutrition authorities Walter Willett, Kelly Brownell, and Marion Nestle; actor Jane Fonda; filmmaker Morgan Spurlock; Rodale, Inc. CEO Maria Rodale and Bolthouse Farms CEO Jeff Dunn; chefs such as Dan Barber, Nora Pouillon, and Alice Waters; and cookbook author and Food Network host Ellie Krieger. The Academy for Nutrition and Dietetics (formerly the American Dietetic Association), American Public Health Association, Community Food Security Coalition, Earth Day Network, Farmers Market Coalition, Humane Society of the United States, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Prevention Institute, and Slow Food USA <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/partner-organizations.php">all participate</a> in Food Day, as do many city, county, and state health or agriculture departments. "Food Day helped us to create a roadmap towards better policies and health interventions and the foundation we established was very powerful," said Alexa Delwiche, coordinator of the Los Angeles Food Policy Council. "I am very excited about the future. We saw what can happen with a small amount of planning and momentum." "With Food Day, Arizona's public health system was able to build momentum with the initiatives we have been promoting for a long time,” said Adrienne Udarbe, community programs manager for the Arizona Department of Health Services. "The food choices we make can have unintentional consequences that influence poor health leading to things such as chronic disease and environmental degradation. Food Day is a great opportunity for Americans to enjoy real, whole foods as opposed to packaged and heavily processed foods. Americans are craving change in our homes, our schools, on our farms, and in our communities." Food Day will reach millions of Americans through events on college campuses, schools, houses of worship, and even restaurants. But Food Day can also be celebrated by simple, solitary acts of personal responsibility, such as stopping drinking soda or other sugar-based drinks, or forgoing fast-food in favor of a healthy, brown-bag lunch. Organizers welcome restaurants, manufacturers, growers, and other food companies to consider using Food Day to announce changes that benefit the health of consumers, employees, farm animals, or the environment. 2012-04-10 CSPI Reacts to Dismissal of McDonald's Happy Meal Lawsuit http://cspinet.org/new/201204041.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonMcDonald’s must stop <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012151.html">exploiting children</a> at some point. Using toys, of all things, to lure young children to fast-food meals is not responsible corporate behavior. It’s a predatory practice that undermines parents, causes rifts in families, and harms kids’ health. In time, the practice of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YQOZoPtCO0&feature=player_embedded">using toys to market junk food</a> will seem as inappropriate and anachronistic as lead paint, child labor, and asbestos. Resolving this question will not hinge on whether the plaintiff in this lawsuit suffered a monetary loss in this case, though we maintain she did. We're studying the judge's decision and will discuss with the plaintiff whether to appeal. We will continue to urge all branches of government, including the courts, to stand up for parents and protect children from <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201006221.html">unscrupulous marketing techniques</a>. 2012-04-04 Antibiotic-resistant Bacteria Sickened 167, Hospitalized 47 in 2011 http://cspinet.org/new/201203081.html CSPI White Paper Tracks Outbreaks Linked to Resistant PathogensRampant use of antibiotics in animal agriculture means foodborne illnesses are likely to become longer, more serious, and harder to treat, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. In three major outbreaks of antibiotic-resistant foodborne illness in 2011, 167 Americans became sick, 47 were hospitalized, and one died, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/abrupdate.pdf">white paper released by the group today</a>. Two of those outbreaks were connected to ground turkey, one contaminated with Salmonella Hadar and one with Salmonella Heidelberg, and one outbreak was connected to ground beef contaminated with Salmonella Typhimurium. All of those bacteria were resistant to treatment from several antibiotics that are critically important to human medicine, including drugs in the penicillin, cephalosporin, and tetracycline families. "Antibiotics are the crown jewels of modern medicine, and they are critical to treating diseases in both humans and farm animals," said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "We must not continue to jeopardize the effectiveness of these drugs by using them recklessly for non-therapeutic uses on farms and in animal factories. Otherwise, consumers may face longer illnesses, more hospitalizations, and more fatalities when exposed to resistant strains of common foodborne pathogens." Antibiotic resistance is an inevitable consequence of antibiotic use, according to the CSPI report. The more antibiotics are used, the more bacteria will develop resistance—often to more than one drug at a time. Pigs, chickens, and cattle are often administered antibiotics in their feed or water, to promote growth or to prevent diseases caused by overcrowding and unsanitary conditions, according to CSPI. Exacerbating the problem is that farmers in the U.S. can obtain and administer antibiotics without prescriptions or veterinary oversight. The drug industry produced more than 29 million pounds of antimicrobial drugs approved for use in food animals, according to the Food and Drug Administration. CSPI says that food animals consume 80 percent of all antibiotics used in the United States and that 65 percent of those antibiotics are similar or identical to those used in human medicine. CSPI’s review of antibiotic-resistant foodborne illness outbreaks shows that outbreaks were most common in dairy products, with 12 such outbreaks since 1973, and ground beef, with 10 outbreaks. Four outbreaks were linked to poultry, with ground turkey appearing for the first time as a source of antibiotic-resistant bacteria with the two 2011 outbreaks linked to Jennie-O and Cargill products. CSPI presented its findings at a series of briefings for House and Senate staff in Washington along with several leading infectious-disease physicians and health experts, including Drs. Jim R. Johnson of the University of the Minnesota School of Medicine, Stuart Levy of Tufts University School of Medicine and the Alliance for the Prudent Use of Antibiotics, Lance Price of the TGen Center for Food Microbiology and Environmental Health, and Tara Smith of the University of Iowa College of Public Health. 2012-03-08 Lab Tests Find Carcinogen in Regular and Diet Coke and Pepsi http://cspinet.org/new/201203051.html Ammoniated "Caramel Coloring" Contaminated with 4-methylimidazoleNew chemical analyses have found that Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, Diet Coke, and Diet Pepsi contain high levels of 4-methylimidazole (4-MI), a known animal carcinogen. The carcinogen forms when ammonia or ammonia and sulfites are used to manufacture the “caramel coloring” that gives those sodas their distinctive brown colors, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit watchdog group that commissioned the tests. CSPI first petitioned the FDA to ban ammonia-sulfite caramel coloring in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201102161.html" target="cspi">February 2011</a>. CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/4-mi-letter-to-fda-march-5-2012.pdf">today reiterated</a> its call to the Food and Drug Administration to revoke its authorization for caramel colorings that contain 4-MI, and in the interim to change the name of the additive to “ammonia-sulfite process caramel coloring” or “chemically modified caramel coloring” for labeling purposes. “Coke and Pepsi, with the acquiescence of the FDA, are needlessly exposing millions of Americans to a chemical that causes cancer,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The coloring is completely cosmetic, adding nothing to the flavor of the product. If companies can make brown food coloring that is carcinogen-free, the industry should use that. And industry seems to be moving in that direction. Otherwise, the FDA needs to protect consumers from this risk by banning the coloring.” CSPI collected samples of Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, Dr Pepper, Diet Dr Pepper, and Whole Foods 365 Cola from Washington, D.C.-area stores. Pepsi’s products had 145 to 153 micrograms (mcg) of 4-MI in two 12-ounce cans. Regular Coca-Cola had 142 mcg per 12 ounces in one sample and 146 mcg in another. Diet Coke had 103 mcg per 12 ounces in one sample and 113 mcg in another. To put those levels into context, the state of California has a 29-microgram benchmark for 4-MI. Levels above that in a serving of food or beverage may be required to bear a warning notice. Based on California’s risk model, CSPI estimates that the 4-MI in the Coke and Pepsi products tested is causing about 15,000 cancers in the U.S. population. While federal law bans food additives that cause any number of cancers, the FDA has an exception for contaminants of food additives, for which it tolerates a lifetime risk of one cancer in one million people. Three of four samples of Dr Pepper or Diet Dr Pepper that CSPI tested had low levels of 4-MI, with about 10 mcg per 12 ounces. But even those levels pose a cancer risk of seven in one million—seven times greater than what FDA allows. The lower levels in those three samples indicate that it is possible to lower, if not eliminate, the amount of 4-MI. Pepsi told CSPI that it has switched to a coloring in California that contains much less 4-MI and plans to do the same in the rest of the country. “When most people see ‘caramel coloring’ on food labels, they likely interpret that quite literally and assume the ingredient is similar to what you might get by gently melting sugar in a saucepan,” Jacobson said. “The reality is quite different. Colorings made with the ammonia or ammonia-sulfite process contain carcinogens and don’t belong in the food supply. In any event, they shouldn’t be obscured by such an innocuous-sounding name as ‘caramel coloring.’” As troubling as the new test results are, CSPI says soda drinkers should be much more concerned about the high-fructose corn syrup or other sugars used in soft drinks. Soda drinkers are much more likely than non-soda drinkers to develop weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other health problems. 2012-03-05 Amway Makes Illegal Deceptive Claims for its Nutrilite Twist Tubes http://cspinet.org/new/201202281.html CSPI Intends Litigation Unless Company Drops Deception<a href="http://www.amway.com/EN" target="cspi">Amway</a>, the controversial multi-level marketing company, is facing the prospect of a class action lawsuit over its Nutrilite line of liquid dietary supplements. Labels for Nutrilite’s “fruits & vegetables 2GO Twist Tubes” claim in big print that the product represents two servings of fruits and vegetables. The fine print clarifies that a dose “contains the antioxidant equivalent of 2 servings.” Either way, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest says that the company’s 10-milliliter tubes do not come close to conveying the same health benefits as real fruit or vegetables. Similarly, Amway claims that Nutrilite’s Immunity Twist Tubes are an “immune system booster” that will “protect your cells.” (The Strawberry Kiwi flavor has neither strawberry nor kiwi, despite the attractive pictures of those fruits on the box.) The immunity claim is unlawful, according to CSPI, because it implies the product will prevent disease. It won’t, says the group. The watchdog group will sue the Ada, Michigan-based company unless it stops advertising unsubstantiated nutrition and health benefits in connection with “fruits and vegetables 2GO” and “Immunity” Twist Tubes. Also, both product lines contain the artificial sweetener sucralose, despite a print advertisement for “fruits & vegetables 2GO” that claims the product has no artificial ingredients. Twist Tubes are meant to be diluted in 16 ounces of water before consuming. “Amway is sending a horrible health message to American consumers when it holds out its Twist Tubes as a short cut to getting the health benefits of real food,” said CSPI staff litigator Seema Rattan. “People who want the health benefits of two servings of fruits and vegetables are far better off eating two servings of fruits and vegetables. And no one should be deceived into thinking that these pricey little tubes will prevent them from getting sick.” A 20-dose pack of Nutrilite “<a href="http://www.amway.com/Shop/Product/Product.aspx/NUTRILITE--Fruits---Vegetables-2GO-Twist-Tubes?itemno=110538" target="cspi">fruits & vegetables 2GO Twist Tubes</a>” costs $19.99 plus $7.95 shipping and handling if purchased at amway.com; <a href="http://www.amway.com/Shop/Product/Product.aspx/NUTRILITE-Twist-Tubes-Strawberry-Kiwi-flavor-for-Immunity?itemno=105483&dsNav=N:4294966646-4294965506" target="cspi">Immunity Twist Tubes</a> cost $12.35 plus $7.95 shipping and handling. Otherwise, the products are not available in stores but are sold by Amway distributors. “Fruits & vegetables 2GO” has “the antioxidant equivalent of two of the 9–13 daily servings of fruits and vegetables your body needs,” according to Amway. But there’s far more to fruits and vegetables than just antioxidants, according to CSPI. Neither “fruits & vegetables 2GO” nor Immunity Twist Tubes has any fiber, for instance. Real fruits and vegetables have up to 8,000 phytochemicals that may provide health benefits—something that supplements simply cannot mimic, according to CSPI. Vitamins, like the A, B, and C vitamins in Twist Tubes, account for only a small fraction of the antioxidant activity in whole fruits and vegetables. While the Immunity Twist Tube contains 1,000 mg of vitamin C, human tissues are generally saturated with vitamin C at 400 mg per day, and any excess is typically excreted. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/amway-nutrilite-demand-letter.pdf" target="cspi">letter</a> to Amway Chairman Steve Van Andel, CSPI says that Amway’s labeling and advertising for Nutrilite products violates federal regulations and consumer protection laws in the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Texas, New Jersey, and California. CSPI’s litigation unit has successfully prompted several major food companies, including Quaker, Frito-Lay, Procter & Gamble, Tropicana, and Pinnacle Foods, to halt a variety of misleading labeling or marketing practices. In 2008, CSPI joined litigation that returned approximately $12 million in refunds to consumers who purchased the dietary supplement <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808142.html" target="cspi">Airborne</a>; labels and ads falsely claimed the product would cure and prevent colds. 2012-02-28 Food Safety Experts Defend FDA Official Taylor from Internet Smears http://cspinet.org/new/201202171.html Petition on SignOn.org Called Conspiracy Mongering, Character AssassinationA <a href="http://signon.org/sign/tell-obama-to-cease-fda.fb1?source=s.fb&r_by=2105328" target="cspi">petition</a> attacking Michael Taylor, deputy commissioner for foods at the Food and Drug Administration, “represents the baldest sort of character assassination” and is full of factual misstatements, according to an <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/open-letter-re-michael-taylor.pdf" target="cspi">open letter</a> written by food safety experts to MoveOn.org, whose SignOn.org site hosts the petition. The food safety experts, and the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, are calling on MoveOn to send an email to its members correcting the petition’s errors and offering instructions to people who may want to remove their names from the petition. The petition, created by an Atlanta financial advisor, Frederick Ravid, criticizes Taylor for having worked at the controversial biotechnology company Monsanto. The signatories to the open letter to MoveOn.org write that they have a “diversity of views” on genetically engineered foods but are “unanimous in our belief that Taylor is a valued deputy commissioner, and we regret that a factually untrue Internet smear campaign has attracted so much support.” “All of us have known Michael Taylor for many years, including when he occupied previous high-level positions in the federal government, taught at George Washington University School of Public Health, and even when he worked at Monsanto,” the food safety experts write. “We acknowledge that Monsanto symbolizes a lot of things that many people (including some of us) don’t like about modern, industrial agriculture. But Mr. Taylor’s résumé is not reducible to his work at that company.” The letter goes on to praise Taylor’s work in the Clinton Administration fighting for pathogen controls for meat and poultry producers, and for his current work in the Obama Administration reforming the FDA. The letter to MoveOn also says that some of Mr. Ravid’s statements in the petition about genetically engineered foods are without basis in fact. The petition blames skyrocketing diagnoses of chronic disease on genetically engineered foods, and says that the biotech industry’s products “may also be contributors to colon, breast, lymphatic, and prostate cancers.” Despite the controversy over genetically engineered crops, no evidence supports those claims, according to CSPI. “Reasonable people can disagree about Monsanto’s corporate policies (often bad), or the quality of government oversight of GE foods (inadequate), or the appropriateness of genetically engineering food crops in the first place,” the open letter reads. “But all of us agree that there is no foundation for the outlandish statements made in the petition.” The open letter notes that far from being a food safety authority, the petition’s author, Mr. Ravid, <a href="http://www.reallyfree.org/aboutreallyfree.html" target="cspi">believes</a> himself to be “the 21st generation descendent from father-to-son of the famous 12th century Kaballistic [sic] Master Rabbi Abraham ben David, of Posquierres, known as the RaVaD.” Ravid’s <a href="http://www.reallyfree.org/archives.html" target="cspi">web site</a> indicates that he believes President Obama is the reincarnation of a Civil-War-era Senator, Lyman Trumbull, and that various world events, such as the earthquake in Haiti or the founding of the League of Nations, are related to solar eclipses. “We mean no disrespect for Mr. Ravid’s religious beliefs but we do question his respect for science,” the food safety experts wrote to MoveOn.org. Besides CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, other signatories to the letter include Carol Tucker-Foreman, a former Assistant Secretary for Food Safety affiliated with Consumer Federation of America, food safety lawyer William D. Marler, STOP Foodborne Illness chief executive officer Deirdre Schlunegger, J. Glenn Morris of the University of Florida’s Emerging Pathogens Institute, Michael Rodemeyer of the University of Virginia and the former executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, National Center for Food Protection and Defense director Shaun Kennedy, and Donald W. Schaffner, director of the Center for Advanced Food Technology at Rutgers. 2012-02-17 CSPI, Health Advocates Announce Sugary Drinks Summit http://cspinet.org/new/201202151.html Diverse Groups to Strategize on Reducing Consumption of Soda and Other Sugary DrinksPhiladelphia Mayor Michael A. Nutter will deliver the keynote address at a <a href="http://fewersugarydrinks.org/elements/pdf/summit_registration.pdf">national advocacy conference</a> to motivate and strengthen national, state, and local initiatives aimed at reducing consumption of soda and other sugary drinks. The Sugary Drinks Summit of 2012, the first conference of its kind, was announced today by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which is organizing the summit in collaboration with leading nutritionists, health officials, and organizations. Consumption of sugary drinks increases the risks of overweight and obesity, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, tooth decay, and many other costly health problems. Mayor Nutter has taken steps in Philadelphia to reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, including limiting soda sales in city vending machines, and he also proposed new taxes on soda. Other speakers include Kelly D. Brownell, director, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, Yale University; Barry Popkin, W.R. Kenan distinguished professor, University of North Carolina; Shiriki Kumaniyika, senior advisor, Center for Public Health Initiatives, University of Pennsylvania School of Public Health; Michael F. Jacobson, executive director, CSPI; health professionals; a former high-level soft-drink industry executive; and thought leaders and activists on sugary-drink issues from health departments around the country. <a href="http://fewersugarydrinks.org/elements/pdf/agenda_info.pdf">Sessions</a> will explore lobbying and marketing efforts by the soda industry, actions and policies to reduce sugary-drink consumption, and tactics to counter industry’s marketing of sugary drinks to young people and minorities. Other sessions will discuss strategies for reducing rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and other health problems. The conference will be of special interest to state and local health officials, nonprofit health organizations, nutritionists, and researchers. In August 2011, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201108311.html">launched</a> the Life’s Sweeter with Fewer Sugary Drinks campaign, which seeks to reduce consumption of soda and other sugary drinks by more than half to a maximum of 3 per person per week by 2020, a healthy target proposed by the American Heart Association. The campaign currently has some 170 partner organizations working to reduce sugary-drink consumption in homes, workplaces, and communities through the removal of sugary-drink vending machines, hard-hitting ad campaigns connecting soda to weight gain, and public education among other things. Some of the major public health departments that have signed on include Boston, Columbus, Cook County, Los Angeles County, Philadelphia, and Seattle/King County. Individuals and families are also encouraged to join the challenge. Where: Hyatt Regency Washington on Capitol Hill in Washington, DC. When: June 7-8, 2012 Registration: The early bird rate of $195 lasts until March 15, 2012. The rate will then increase to $250. Students are encouraged to attend at a discounted rate of $150. Attendees can register for the conference <a href="http://www.natalieshear.com/sugarydrinksummit/">here</a>. Press: Registration fee is waived but space is limited. Press R.S.V.P. to <a href="mailto:amorris@cspinet.org">Angela Morris</a>, 202-777-8316. 2012-02-15 FDA Urged to Make Oysters Safe http://cspinet.org/new/201202091.html CSPI Says Agency Should Use New Food Safety Law to Protect Consumers From Deadly Vibrio BacteriaMark your calendar: Between April and November, about 30 Americans will get seriously sick and approximately 15 will die after eating raw oysters or other shellfish contaminated with deadly Vibrio vulnificus bacteria. These contaminated oysters are mainly harvested from the Gulf Coast region, especially during the warmer summer months. Today the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest is <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/VvCitizenPetition-2012.pdf" target="cspi">urging</a> the Food and Drug Administration to set a performance standard for the shellfish industry that would reduce this threat to consumers. CSPI says FDA should act now, before the increase in Gulf Coast water temperatures creates a more hospitable environment for the naturally occurring but deadly contaminant. Raw or undercooked oysters are the primary Vibrio culprits. Symptoms include the classic signs of foodborne illness but for some consumers, the illness can progress to ulcerous skin lesions and septicemia. Almost half of those reporting these more serious infections die and those that survive can suffer lifetime infirmities. Those most at risk include consumers with diabetes, hemochromatosis, compromised immune systems or liver disease. While the shellfish industry resisted a 2009 FDA attempt to require mandatory post-harvest processing of contaminated oysters, the new food safety law signed by President Obama in January 2011 requires the FDA to set performance standards for significant foodborne contaminants like Vibrio vulnificus. “If we knew a serial killer were going to kill a dozen people like clockwork each year, the police would spring into action to stop it,” said CSPI senior food safety attorney David W. Plunkett. “We know Vibrio vulnificus strikes like clockwork. FDA should use its authority to keep seafood lovers safe from this hazard.” In 2002, the FDA <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/FDA-Response-1998-CSPI-Petition.pdf" target="cspi">denied</a> a CSPI regulatory petition calling for a performance standard for Vibrio, citing a voluntary plan to reduce the rate of illnesses coordinated by an Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC). The regulatory petition CSPI filed today cites the new authority given to the agency by the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, and the fact that the ISSC’s voluntary plan to reduce illnesses failed to achieve its goals. California, meanwhile, adopted the approach advocated by CSPI in its earlier petition and illnesses and deaths in that state were virtually eliminated. “Consumers have waited long enough,” CSPI wrote in a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/CoverLetter-VvPetition-2012.pdf" target="cspi">letter to FDA</a> Commissioner Margaret Hamburg that accompanied the petition. “In the nine years since FDA denied our original petition, 262 people have suffered serious illnesses including 121 people who died—all of which could have been averted.” The shellfish industry has a number of commercially viable methods of eliminating Vibrio, including four validated methods for pasteurizing oysters, or it could simply divert contaminated oysters to be cooked. Some restaurateurs and retailers, such as Legal Sea Food and Costco, only sell treated Gulf Coast oysters or oysters harvested from colder waters. 2012-02-09 Trans Fat Drop Huge Public Health Progress, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201202081.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe <a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2012/02/08/as-trans-fats-left-food-supply-levels-in-the-body-dropped/" target="cspi">news</a> that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found a 58 percent decline in trans fat in blood between 2000 and 2009 is great news for American hearts and arteries. Trans fat raises bad cholesterol, lowers good cholesterol, and promotes heart disease, so the less of it the better. That dramatic drop represents enormous public health progress and is almost certainly preventing thousands of heart attacks and premature deaths each year. Credit for the reductions in trans fat is shared by many parties. New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, California, Montgomery County, Md., and other jurisdictions banned most artificial trans fat from restaurant food. (Some <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html" target="cspi">bad</a> <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200602061.html" target="cspi">publicity</a> and <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2003/05/12/OREO.TMP" target="cspi">various</a> <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="cspi">lawsuits</a> also helped spur progress.) Many food manufacturers and restaurants voluntarily switched oils. The FDA helped greatly by requiring that trans fat be listed on Nutrition Facts labels. And oil processors, seed developers, and farmers worked hard to produce and market healthier oils for restaurants and food manufacturers to use. Still, products ranging from Long John Silver’s fried foods to Pop Secret Popcorn to Pillsbury’s Buttermilk Buscuits <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201201101.html" target="cspi">are loaded with trans fat</a>. It’s high time the Food and Drug Administration banned partially hydrogenated oil, the source of artificial trans fat, as CSPI petitioned the agency to do almost <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200405181.html" target="cspi">eight years ago</a>. 2012-02-08 Walmart Announces "Great For You" Labeling Program http://cspinet.org/new/201202072.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonWalmart's Great For You labeling program is an interesting way to identify many healthier foods. The symbol should help many shoppers choose healthier foods and should encourage some companies, starting with Walmart, to improve their products. Great For You joins NuVal, Guiding Stars, Facts Up Front, Heart Check, and other approaches that seek to steer consumers toward healthier diets. That proliferation of sometimes-inconsistent nutrition symbols on store shelves and packages indicates the need for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to develop one excellent system that would replace all the voluntary approaches. Walmart’s program does an excellent job of highlighting healthful foods in many food categories, but it is not fool-proof. Some distinctly not-great-for-you foods qualify for the symbol: cholesterol-rich eggs, salty canned vegetables and salt-water-injected fresh meat and poultry, nutrient-poor apple and grape juice, and grain foods that contain much more refined white flour than whole grain. 2012-02-07 Administration Misses Major Deadlines for Food Safety Reform http://cspinet.org/new/201202071.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalSaturday marked the "one-year-and-one-month" anniversary of the day that President Obama signed the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). Rules that would make our food supply significantly safer are apparently stalled at the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The administration is now over 30 days late on meeting several deadlines mandated by Congress. FSMA was enacted to improve the safety of many fresh foods, including eggs, dairy products, seafood, fruits and vegetables, and many processed and imported foods. But until FDA develops rules to describe the details of those improvements, the law is a hollow victory for consumers who want safer food. Congress passed FSMA in late 2010, following a steady drumbeat of major outbreaks involving a wide variety of foods regulated by FDA. Numerous Congressional investigations and hearings covered the nationwide outbreaks and recalls in 2006 (spinach); 2007 (contaminated pet food and imported seafood); 2008 (peanut butter); 2009 (produce); and 2010 (eggs). The President signed FSMA into law January 4, 2011, which started the clock for a number of statutory deadlines. In November and early December, FDA delivered proposed rules detailing food safety control programs for food manufacturers and importers, and new standards for the safe production of fresh fruits and vegetables to OMB for preliminary review. Proposals addressing produce and imports each carry a statutory deadline of 12 months; the other proposals are essential to implementing the law, and have July 4 deadlines for implementation. Given the urgency of food safety problems, Congress specifically mandated these deadlines for FDA to meet, to ensure that the safeguards included in FSMA did not fall victim to bureaucratic delays. But perhaps OMB didn’t get that message. Here it is again: Listeria in cantaloupe killed 30 people last fall. In the past few months raw alfalfa sprouts, pine nuts, and romaine lettuce have each caused major outbreaks. All are FDA-regulated products that might be safer after FSMA regulations take effect, but without them, consumers remain vulnerable. The Obama administration should fulfill the promise of FSMA and move rapidly to release these proposed rules. 2012-02-07 Juice Gone Wild! http://cspinet.org/new/201202011.html Nutrition Action Healthletter Unpacks “Confusion in Aisle 10”Minute Maid Help Nourish Your Brain 100% Fruit Juice Blend fairly typifies the new-fangled products in the juice aisle. It’s mostly apple and grape juice—two of the cheapest, least nutritious juices—though its label uses big print to highlight smaller amounts of pomegranate and blueberry juice. Its labels also bear highly misleading non-sequiturs related to brain health, including “Vitamin C is highly concentrated in brain nerve endings.” But according to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/articles/juice-gone-wild.html" target="cspi">review of juices</a> in the current issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter, people worried about memory or brain development needn’t waste their money on this Coca-Cola product. Nutritionists agree that juice is better than soda. But juice is not good for the waistline, according to Nutrition Action. In 2006, an <a href="http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/beverage/panel_recommendations" target="cspi">expert panel</a> comprised of leading scientists recommended limiting daily juice intake to no more than eight ounces per day. Liquid calories aren’t as filling as solid foods, one of several reasons why it’s better to eat fruit than to drink juice. Plus, drinking juice may raise the risk of diabetes. “Juice makers, including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, realize that consumers are concerned about losing weight and reducing their risk of diet-related diseases,” said Nutrition Action senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley, co-author of the review. “But no juice is going to perform miracles for eyes, skin, hearts, colons, or any other part of the body. That goes for just plain juice, and it certainly goes for a juice dressed up with some combination of water, artificial sweeteners, food dyes, or fake fibers.” Some orange juice labels, like those of Tropicana’s Healthy Heart with Omega-3, imply heart health. But that juice has only 50 milligrams of EPA plus DHA from fish oil, a tiny fraction of what one would get from a serving of heart-healthy salmon. Minute Maid Heart Wise orange juice, on the other hand, contains a hefty one gram of beneficial plant sterols. Two grams of plant sterols per day can lower LDL, or “bad” cholesterol by roughly ten percent over a period of 8 weeks. “Minute Maid wins,” says Nutrition Action. If you’re watching your waistline, a different Tropicana product, Trop50 Orange has 50 percent less sugar and calories than regular orange juice. Of course, it’s 60 percent added water and only 40 percent juice and is sweetened with the safe high-potency plant-based sweetener Reb A (Pure Via). Trop50 is a smart choice if you like the sweeter taste, says Nutrition Action. (Some Trop50 products play the usual tricks, though. Its Pomegranate Blueberry variety has more apple juice than pomegranate juice and more grape juice than blueberry juice.) Other examples of juice aisle trickery exposed in Nutrition Action include: <ul> <li>Ocean Spray Cran-Energy Raspberry. To its credit, it only has 35 calories per serving. Its “energy” presumably comes from its green tea extract’s 55 milligrams of caffeine and not added B vitamins. Otherwise, the drink is basically water, juice (again, more cheap grape than the touted, but more expensive, cranberry or raspberry), added vitamins, safe artificial sweeteners, and, to its discredit, Red 40 dye.</li> <li>IZZE. Most carbonated juice drinks like IZZE have no fewer calories than ordinary juice or cola, according to Nutrition Action. Once more, apple and white grape juice are the primary juices, even in IZZE’s more exotic flavors, such as Sparkling Blackberry, Blueberry, Clementine, Grapefruit, Lime, Peach, and Pomegranate. The IZZE Esque line has 50 calories per 12 ounce bottle because it’s 25 percent juice. Nutrition Action suggests adding seltzer to nutrient-rich orange juice to make a lower-calorie “sparkling” juice.</li> <li>Vita Coco Coconut Water has “more than 15 times the electrolytes found in sports drinks,” according to the company, which goes on to advise that “Life is hectic enough, and you should be hydrated when you do it.” Any beverage hydrates you, according to Nutrition Action. And the only time one would need electrolytes in a drink is after hours of vigorous exercise. That said, coconut water has roughly just 40 fat-free calories per cup and is a decent source of beneficial potassium</li> <li>Welch’s 100% Grape Juice with Fiber gives the impression that its fiber might come from “the whole Concord grape—skins and seeds included.” Rather, the fiber comes from the additive maltodextrin, a starch-like carbohydrate that resists digestion. Nutrition Action says there’s no good evidence that maltodextrin, or the dextrin added to V8 High Fiber or Sunsweet PlumSmart and Prune Juice Light, confers the kind of benefits as the fiber found in naturally in foods.</li> </ul> Nutrition Action also calculated scores for various juices based on the levels of 12 vitamins, minerals, and carotenoids, plus fiber. Carrot juice led the pack thanks to its high vitamin A and potassium content. Orange juice ranked second, followed by tomato juice (low sodium variety), grapefruit, prune, pineapple, unsweetened cranberry, coconut water, and perhaps surprisingly, considering all the hype generated by POM, pomegranate. Apple and grape juice came in last. Nutrition Action is published 10 times a year by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit watchdog group that advocates for improved nutrition, food labeling, and food safety policies. <a href="https://orders.cspinet.org/subscriptions/" target="cspi">Introductory subscriptions</a> are $10. Nutrition Action is advertising-free and, like CSPI, accepts no corporate donations or government grants. 2012-02-01 FDA Urged to Require Sodium Reduction in Food Supply http://cspinet.org/new/201201301.html 71 Percent of Americans Believe Industry Should Lower SaltVoluntary efforts by industry to reduce sodium levels in the food supply have failed, according to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda-comments-sodium-reduction2012.pdf" target="cspi">comments</a> filed with the Food and Drug Administration last week by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. On Friday CSPI urged the agency to create strong, but realistic, mandatory regulations to reduce sodium levels in restaurant and packaged foods. According to a recent survey commissioned by CSPI, the public sees the need to lower sodium. 71 percent of Americans indicated that the food industry had a responsibility to reduce the sodium content of their foods, and 58 percent support a government requirement to reduce the sodium in processed and restaurant foods. “Overconsumption of sodium is one of the single greatest causes of hypertension and cardiovascular disease, and restaurant and packaged foods—not salt shakers—are far and away the largest contributors of sodium in the American diet,” said CSPI deputy director of health promotion policy Julie Greenstein. “Unfortunately, the food industry has failed to significantly bring down sodium levels despite 40 years of governmental admonitions. It’s time for the FDA to step in and require reasonable reductions.” The U.S. government’s 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends that people with hypertension, those who are middle-aged or older, and African Americans should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day. According to the Center for Disease Control, about 70 percent of adults fall into those categories, yet current average daily consumption is actually closer to 4,000 mg. Recently, the American Public Health Association passed a resolution that calls on FDA to begin regulating sodium in the food supply within one year and to establish a timetable for gradually reducing sodium in the food supply by 75 percent over 10 years. CSPI’s filing notes that reducing sodium consumption would save billions of dollars in medical costs, and upwards of 150,000 lives annually. Overwhelming evidence indicates that excess sodium levels pose significant health risks, but consumer education efforts are poorly funded and ineffective, according to CSPI, making efforts to reform dietary habits of Americans difficult. A recent survey indicates that 59 percent of Americans are “not concerned” about their sodium intake. As a result, an Institute of Medicine committee recommended mandatory regulations limiting sodium levels to improve public health and decrease healthcare costs. Many frozen dinners and canned foods contain high amounts of sodium. Boston Market frozen Meatloaf with Mashed Potatoes and Gravy has 1,460 mg of sodium per serving (about one day’s worth). Marie Callender’s frozen Creamy Chicken and Shrimp Parmesan has 1,200 mg of sodium (almost a day’s worth). One of the worst restaurant offenders is Applebee’s Provolone-Stuffed Meatballs with Fettuccine, which has 3,700 mg of sodium (more than two days’ worth). Denny’s Spicy Buffalo Chicken Melt has 3,760 mg of sodium (two and a half days’ worth). CSPI first petitioned the FDA in 1978 to reduce salt in processed foods. Besides urging the FDA to set mandatory limits on sodium content in the food supply, CSPI asked the agency to lower the Daily Value for sodium from 2,400 mg to 1,500 mg. 2012-01-30 New USDA School Meal Nutrition Standards Praised http://cspinet.org/new/201201251.html “One of the Most Important Advancements in Nutrition in Decades” says CSPIAmerica’s school-aged children will have twice the amounts of fruits and vegetables on their school lunch trays, as well as more whole grains, and less sodium and trans fat, under the new <a href="http://www.ofr.gov/(X(1)S(dzdqxpogowgusgdpzmckyi0r))/OFRUpload/OFRData/2012-01010_PI.pdf" target="cspi">nutrition standards</a> for school meals unveiled today by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Despite heavy lobbying by the food industry and Congressional interference, the new standards are the best ever, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. “The new school meal standards are one of the most important advances in nutrition in decades,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “They’re much needed, given high childhood obesity rates and the poor state of our children’s diets.” Approximately 32 million children eat school lunches and breakfasts, providing half of many children’s daily calories, according to USDA. The standards released today were mandated by Congress in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, signed into law by President Obama in late 2010. In the next month or two, USDA will propose regulations setting nutrition standards for the rest of the foods sold in schools, including through vending machines, school stores, and the a la carte foods sold in the cafeteria alongside the USDA-reimbursed meal. Although health groups praise the new standards, food industry lobbyists got <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201111151.html" target="cspi">Congress to prevent USDA</a> from limiting French fries and ensure that pizza counts as a serving of vegetables due to its tomato paste. “USDA, states, school officials, food manufacturers, food service workers, and parents need to work together to help all schools meet the new standards,” Wootan said. The rules set calorie maximums for the first time and lower calorie minimums to better ensure that school meals address obesity, as well as hunger. All milk sold in schools will have to be low-fat or fat-free. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act will provide schools with additional funding, training, model menus and recipes, healthy product specifications for commodities, and more frequent reviews to ensure that school systems comply with the new standards. 2012-01-25 USDA's Poultry Proposal: Proceed, but Cautiously http://cspinet.org/new/201201201.html CSPI says changes must lead to lower rates of Salmonella and CampylobacterStatement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/regulations_&_policies/Proposed_Rules/index.asp" target="cspi">proposal</a> for revamping poultry inspection would be the first major overhaul in over 50 years. Part of the proposal would have all poultry facilities monitor for pathogens both before and after chilling the poultry, which would give companies a real-time view of conditions in their facilities. In some plants, company inspectors would check for quality defects, likes bruises and sores, enabling USDA to reduce the number of its inspectors checking every carcass. Visual inspection cannot detect food borne pathogens. USDA should modify its inspection program carefully to ensure that the program reduces the unacceptably high levels of Salmonella and Campylobacter in chicken and turkey. One can’t escape the fact that the government is shrinking, and that historic programs like this one need to demonstrate their value. The proof will be in reduced contamination rates, leading to fewer deaths and illnesses. 2012-01-20 Artificial Trans Fat Still in Supermarkets Despite Heart Risks http://cspinet.org/new/201201101.html Sara Lee, Pepperidge Farm, and General Mills Among HoldoutsMarie Callender’s pies, Pop Secret’s microwave popcorns, and Long John Silver’s Breaded Clam Strips all share a little secret: they are among many products that still contain high levels of artificial trans fat. Because trans fat is a potent cause of heart disease, the federal government and the <a href="http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/FatsAndOils/Fats101/Trans-Fats_UCM_301120_Article.jsp#.TwW_P_nNkqM" target="cspi">American Heart Association</a> have urged consumers to avoid foods that contain it. After the Food and Drug Administration required trans fat to be listed on food labels, most large manufacturers removed partially hydrogenated oil, the source of artificial trans fat, from their products. And in response to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="cspi">lawsuits</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html" target="cspi">bad publicity</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="cspi">local-</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200807251.html" target="cspi">state-</a>level restrictions, most large restaurant chains similarly stopped using the discredited ingredient. Thus, while many consumers might consider the problem solved, several large companies continue to market products containing unhealthy, and unnecessary amounts of trans fat. Marie Callender’s Lattice Apple Pie (ConAgra Foods) contains 5 grams of trans fat per serving. Varieties of Pop Secret microwave popcorn (Diamond Foods) contain 4 or 5 grams of trans fat per serving. An order of Long John Silver’s Breaded Clam Strips contains 7 grams of trans fat. While White Castle recently eliminated trans fat from most of its products, some regionally marketed pastries contain large amounts. White Castle’s doughnuts contain a whopping 8 or 9 grams of trans fat per serving. The American Heart Association recommends that people limit their trans fat intake to no more than two grams per day. Since small amounts of trans fat occur naturally in beef and dairy products, that leaves very little, if any, room for artificial trans fat from partially hydrogenated oil. A <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/trans-fat-product-list.pdf" target="cspi">sampling of foods</a> containing three or more grams per serving includes Pillsbury’s Buttermilk Biscuits (General Mills), Pepperidge Farm’s Luscious 3-Layer Lemon Flavor Cake (Campbell Soup Co.), Utz’s Cheese Flavored Puff’n Corn, Jimmy Dean’s Sausage, Egg & Cheese Croissant Sandwich (Sara Lee Corp.), Celeste’s Original Pizza (Pinnacle Foods Group), and dozens more. Mrs. Budd’s Original Recipe Chicken Pot Pie, a regional brand, has more partially hydrogenated oil than carrots or peas, but consumers would have no way of knowing how many of its 17 grams of fat per serving are from trans fat: The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which regulates food with meat or poultry, hasn’t adopted the FDA’s trans fat labeling rule. (The company told CSPI that the pot pie contains 5 grams of trans fat.) In 2004, the Center for Science in the Public Interest filed a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/trans_fat_petition_may_18.pdf" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> urging the FDA to ban the use of partially hydrogenated oil in food altogether. “Considering the virtual unanimity among scientists that trans is the most harmful fat in the food supply, it is totally irresponsible for companies like Sara Lee, Pepperidge Farm, General Mills, and Long John Silver’s, along with many smaller ones, to continue marketing foods with artificial trans fat,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA could readily ban the use of partially hydrogenated oil or set a strict limit on the amount of trans fat in a product. Unfortunately, the FDA has let CSPI’s petition collect dust.” CSPI estimates that companies have <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat/" target="cspi">eliminated</a> well over half of the partially hydrogenated oil in the food supply. But the remaining trans fat continues to promote heart disease, likely causing thousands of unnecessary premature deaths annually. 2012-01-10 FDA Prohibition on Cephalosporin Small Step Forward http://cspinet.org/new/201201041.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalFDA's action is a small step forward on the path to preventing foodborne outbreaks from antibiotic-resistant pathogens. The order prohibiting certain uses of cephalosporin in many food-producing animals is clearly warranted, though it may be too little, and it is definitely too late. CSPI has identified at least <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/foodborne-outbreaks-ceftiofur-reistant-salmonella.pdf" target="cspi">five foodborne outbreaks</a> since 2001 linked to cephalosporin-resistant Salmonella, which resulted in at least 200 illnesses and one death. Extralabel use of cephalosporin is only a part of the problem. FDA should act soon to <a href="http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2011/whd_20110406/en/index.html " target="cspi">restrict or eliminate</a> all unnecessary uses of antibiotics critically important to human medicine, so they can be preserved for future generations. <a href="http://www.who.int/world-health-day/2011/presskit/whd2011_fs4d_subanimal.pdf " target="cspi">According to Dr. Margaret Chan</a>, Director-General of the World Health Organization, without urgent corrective action, "the world is on the brink of losing these miracle cures." Recently, FDA rejected a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/ar/petition_3_99.html" target="cspi">petition</a> by CSPI and other organizations to ban subtherapeutic uses of antibiotics in animals. The use of antibiotics in livestock increases the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens, which leads to infections in humans that are difficult or impossible to treat. This partial step should be followed with more definitive action to protect consumers from the illnesses caused by excessive use of antibiotics in food-producing animals. 2012-01-04 Food Safety Working Group's Report Praised http://cspinet.org/new/201112211.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe litany of new acronyms for the task forces and interagency consultations that are described in the Obama Administration's new Progress Report on Food Safety is worthy of a good spy novel: from SIP to CORE; from ICAT to CalciNet. It shows both the high level of attention that the Administration has paid to addressing food safety and the challenge when numerous federal and state agencies must work together during outbreaks and other critical food events. The report documents important improvements that have been made in the food safety system, especially with the adoption and implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act. However, with so many agencies involved, lapses can easily occur in the absence of strong leadership. It is promising to see the continuation of the <a href="http://www.foodsafetyworkinggroup.gov/">Food Safety Working Group</a>, which was established by President Obama early in his administration. Future progress will require additional commitments in several key areas: First, funding of the food safety programs at FSIS, FDA and CDC must be protected from across-the-board cuts. This funding is vital to further reduce the impact that major food safety problems pose for consumers and industry alike. Second, effective communication can save lives during outbreaks and other food crises. The administration should set timelines for better integrating IT systems to ensure that agencies can share information effectively. Finally, last summer's major food outbreak in Europe from a new E. coli strain and several recent U.S. outbreaks posed by <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201112201.html">antibiotic-resistant strains</a> of Salmonella in ground meat, underscore the problem that such emerging pathogens pose. The agencies should develop a unified system for identifying and addressing emerging pathogens in the food supply. 2011-12-21 Newest ABR Salmonella Outbreak Highlights Public Health Urgency http://cspinet.org/new/201112201.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Staff Attorney Sarah KleinAt least 14 consumers are sick—including 7 who have been hospitalized—from another outbreak of antibiotic-resistant Salmonella in ground beef. The outbreak strain, Typhimurium, has shown resistance to multiple commonly prescribed antibiotics, making the illnesses harder to treat. Salmonella Typhimurium has previously been implicated in two meat-related outbreaks, and is one of four ABR Salmonella strains that CSPI urged USDA to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201105251.html" target="cspi">declare as adulterants</a> earlier this year. That declaration would trigger enhanced testing for these dangerous pathogens, and could minimize their entry into commerce. FSIS says it is developing regulations to require better recordkeeping by retailers who grind beef—but that process can take years and consumers cannot afford to wait. Retailers must be responsible for keeping track of where beef is coming from so that they can assist FSIS and consumers with timely traceback during an outbreak investigation. The retailer, Hannaford, has recalled all of its house-label ground beef with sell by dates prior to December 17. Consumers who believe they may have purchased this or any contaminated product should dispose of it or return it. 2011-12-20 Congress Again Puts Food Industry Ahead of Children http://cspinet.org/new/201112161.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanFirst Congress declares pizza a vegetable; now it defends companies’ ability to market Froot Loops as healthy for children. This Congress has quite the nutrition track record. Too bad kids don’t have their own PAC, or $37 million in <a href="http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2011/Food_and_media_companies_lobby/" target="cspi">lobbying clout</a>. The <a href="http://rules.house.gov/Media/file/PDF_112_1/legislativetext/HR3671-IH-P3.pdf" target="cspi">Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2012, HR 3671</a>, includes a provision that would require the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of its final recommendations for food marketing to children (it already has put the recommendations out for public comment). This delaying tactic puts kids’ health at risk. Doing a cost-benefit analysis makes sense for regulations that require companies to actually do something. But there is no cost associated with something that is totally voluntary. Clearly the industry could use some advice about food marketing. Under industry's own marketing standards, Popsicles and Cocoa Puffs are <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-f-jacobson/healthy-kids-foods-not-healthy_b_987155.html" target="cspi">considered healthy</a> to market to kids and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pledgereport.pdf" target="cspi">80 percent</a> of the foods companies market to children is still of poor nutritional value, despite self-regulatory efforts. Unfortunately both the House and the Senate have fallen for industry's <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter-to-president-including_sign-ons.pdf" target="cspi">faulty claims</a> that marketing is not effective, that voluntary suggestions <a href="http://www.phlpnet.org/phlp/news/IWG-proposal-doesnt-violate-1st-amendment" target="cspi">violate the First Amendment</a>, or that they would <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/epi-jobs-analysis.pdf" target="cspi">reduce jobs</a>. Even when television ads for cigarettes were banned, media companies’ ad revenues continued to grow. Mars, Coca-Cola, and Hershey have voluntarily given up advertising to kids and seem to be doing just fine. 2011-12-16 Victims of Quorn Poisoning Appeal to FDA Commissioner http://cspinet.org/new/201112131.html "I broke out in hives and could feel my throat swelling and breathing was getting hard," wrote one woman.A spokesperson for the Food and Drug Administration recently told the <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=wall%20street%20journal%20quorn&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052970204517204577046370191497672.html&ei=rI7XTt62L4jW0QHLsqA7&usg=AFQjCNHJKb9APe-S1jgatEXiXxS0j0V1LA" target="cspi">Wall Street Journal</a> that the agency had heard from just seven consumers who had adverse reactions to Quorn, the line of meat substitutes made from vat-grown soil mold. That small number was puzzling to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, since the food safety watchdog group had <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200603281.html" target="cspi">forwarded hundreds</a> of such adverse reaction reports to the FDA over the years—reports that <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/victims.html" target="cspi">typically included</a> some combination of nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, hives, or difficulty breathing. To make sure that the FDA realizes the scope of the problem with Quorn, CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson asked consumers who became ill after eating the fungus-based faux meat to write directly to Margaret Hamburg, the commissioner of the FDA. The accounts provided by the consumers are harrowing—and include blackouts, ruined clothing, burst blood vessels, explosive diarrhea, and missed days of work. Many expressed their disappointment that the FDA hasn’t removed Quorn from the market or required prominent warning notices. “Gut wrenching,” is how 60-year-old Pacific Grove, Calif., resident Andrea Carter described her illness after she and her partner ate Quorn cutlets. “I had the most severe vomiting I had ever experienced.” Carter was so sick she had to miss work on the very day her employer was holding a retirement party for her. “I’ve always been called the person with the iron stomach, because nothing ever bothers me,” wrote Tayba Tahir, a university administrator in Akron, Ohio. Tahir became ill twice before realizing it was the Quorn that was causing her illness. “The first time, I experienced such violent bouts of vomiting that I threw up and the blood vessels in my eyes burst.” The next time, she was found unconscious on the bathroom floor by a family member. Some Quorn eaters described symptoms more characteristic of anaphylactic shock, including hives and difficulty breathing. “About half an hour after my meal, my throat started to itch, and then my skin,” Zarina Khan wrote to Hamburg. “I broke out in hives and could feel my throat swelling shut and breathing was getting hard.” Khan, who had eaten Quorn Chik’n Tenders induced vomiting and took antihistamines to make those symptoms stop. Port Saint Lucie, FL, computer professional David Popovich complained both to Quorn and to retailer Whole Foods after falling ill after eating Quorn Turk’y Roast for Christmas dinner in 2007. “The most frightening response was the tightness in my chest—I felt like I could not breathe.” Quorn conceded in an email to Popovich that “It would appear that you may have experienced a cross-reaction to the mycoprotein present in Quorn products.” Karen Koijane of Las Vegas, Nev., wrote that within an hour or two of eating a Quorn burger, “I was vomiting and lying on the floor of my bathroom trembling.” She related to Dr. Hamburg how she takes the time to warn people in the grocery store when she sees them eyeing Quorn products, and urged the commissioner to “Please use your position and influence to at the very least warn them as well.” Jacobson says the FDA erred in 2001 by allowing Quorn to be sold in the U.S. even after the agency had seen company studies showing that the meat substitute made some people ill. CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/quornpr_050102.html" target="cspi">first called</a> on the FDA to take Quorn off the market in 2002. “Quorn was a brand new food, never eaten by humans until fairly recently, so it was striking that the FDA was not more cautious about it at time,” said Jacobson. “Now we know that Quorn causes great inconvenience and misery—and life-threatening reactions—to those people who are allergic to this particular fungus.” Quorn executive David Wilson told The Wall Street Journal that one person in between 100,000 and 200,000 might have a “sensitivity” to Quorn. But a CSPI-commissioned <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200309231.html" target="cspi">telephone survey</a> found that nearly 5 percent of consumers in Great Britain, where Quorn has longer been available, reported being allergic to the fungus-based meat. “I remain angry and mystified that it is still for sale,” retired nurse Sue Zerangue of Astoria, OR, wrote in an email to the FDA. “I fully support efforts to remove this dangerous product from the food supply.” 2011-12-13 Foods with Color Additives Deceive Consumers, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201112081.html Group Urges FDA to Require Front-Label Disclosure of Artificial Colorings<a href="http://www.tropicana.com/#/trop_products/productsLanding.swf?Twister/111" target="cspi">Tropicana Twister Cherry Berry Blast</a> has no cherry juice. Nor does it have any berry juice. Despite the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/images2/tropicana.JPG" target="cspi">pictures</a> of cherries and berries on the label, this drink gets much of its dark red color from the controversial dye, Red 40. The Center for Science in the Public Interest says that’s deceptive. And today, the nonprofit nutrition and food safety watchdog group is urging the Food and Drug Administration to require food companies to disclose on the front of food labels whether a product is artificially colored. It's not just a problem with soft drinks. Salad dressing, bread, breakfast cereals, candy, baked goods, and even mayonnaise and pickles may get their colors from additives. Color additives are an inexpensive way to simulate absent fruit or vegetable ingredients, make white bread look more like whole wheat, or make sugary cereals more appealing to young children, according to CSPI. <a href="http://www.generalmills.com/home/brands/baking_products/betty_crocker/brand%20product%20list%20page.aspx#{28D3E942-EB49-421C-886C-84AA7E9D48F8}" target="cspi">Betty Crocker Carrot Cake Mix</a> has no carrots, as such. Instead, it has “carrot flavored pieces” made with corn syrup, flour, corn cereal, partially hydrogenated cottonseed and/or soybean oil, a small amount of “carrot powder,” unspecified artificial color, and Yellow 6 and Red 40. Most varieties of Mt. Olive and Vlassic pickles appear greener and fresher thanks to Yellow 5. Kraft Light Catalina Salad Dressing contains Red 40. And caramel coloring and cocoa darken Pepperidge Farm Pumpernickel Bread. “Betty Crocker is certainly free to make virtually carrotless carrot cake, and Tropicana is free to make berryless and cherryless juice,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But consumers shouldn’t have to turn the package over and scrutinize the fine print to know that the color in what are mostly junk foods comes from cheap added colorings.” Food colorings—be they synthetic dyes or obtained from nature—deceptively enhance the visual attractiveness of products and imply greater product quality, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/food-color-petition.pdf" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> CSPI filed with the FDA. CSPI says the agency should require that the label of a food containing color additives state ‘Artificially Colored’ on the package next to the product name—something the agency already requires of many artificially colored products. There are also health reasons to be concerned about artificial colorings. The FDA has acknowledged that artificial food dyes, such as Red 40 and Yellow 5, trigger hyperactivity and behavioral problems in some children. CSPI has also highlighted the cancer risks associated with certain caramel colorings, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, which are contaminated with carcinogens. In addition, some consumers are allergic to natural or synthetic color additives. “Companies substitute color additives for real food ingredients to lower their costs at the expense of consumers’ health and pocketbooks,” said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. “We hope that the FDA requires companies to label artificially colored foods honestly.” Currently, FDA requires manufacturers to list synthetic color additives, such as Blue 2 or Yellow 6, by name in ingredient lists. Companies must also declare by name two allergenic colorings, carmine and cochineal extract, which are made from insects. But other colorings may be listed as “Artificial Color,” “Color Added,” or similar terms. Three-quarters of Americans favor the mandatory disclosure on front labels when foods have been artificially colored, according to a national public opinion survey commissioned by CSPI in 2010. 2011-12-08 Quorn's "Mycoprotein" Not Safe, CSPI Tells FDA, Again http://cspinet.org/new/201112011.html Fake Fungal "Chik'n" Causes Anaphylaxis, Severe Vomiting, HivesThe vat-grown mold used to make the Quorn line of meat substitutes causes gastrointestinal distress and in some cases, life-threatening anaphylactic reactions, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The nutrition and food safety watchdog group has again <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/quorn-letter-to-fda-nov-15-2011.pdf" target="cspi">urged</a> the Food and Drug Administration to <a href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=wall%20street%20journal%20quorn&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052970204517204577046370191497672.html&ei=rI7XTt62L4jW0QHLsqA7&usg=AFQjCNHJKb9APe-S1jgatEXiXxS0j0V1LA" target="cspi">revoke</a> its “Generally Recognized as Safe,” or GRAS, designation for the controversial fermented fungus. If the agency does intend to allow Quorn’s “mycoprotein” to remain on store shelves, it should at least require a prominent warning label, the group says. Quorn is a meat substitute that typically takes the shape of artificial chicken patties or nuggets, imitation ground beef, cylindrical “roasts,” as well as other meatless incarnations, such as “Cranberry & Goat Cheese Chik’n Cutlets.” The principal ingredient is a microscopic fungus, Fusarium venenatum, which the company feeds with oxygenated water, glucose, and other nutrients in giant fermentation tanks. Once harvested from the tanks, the material is heat-treated in order to remove its excess RNA, and then dewatered in a centrifuge. Combined with egg albumen and other ingredients, it is then “texturized” into various meat-like shapes. CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/quornpr_050102.html" target="cspi">first urged</a> the Food and Drug Administration to take Quorn off the market in 2002, and has been collecting <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/cgi-bin/quorn/quorn.cgi" target="cspi">adverse reaction reports</a> from consumers ever since at QuornComplaints.com. CSPI has collected about 500 such reports from Americans and 1,200 more from European and Australian consumers. The vast majority of those reactions involved vomiting and diarrhea; others reported fainting or blood appearing in stool, vomit, or eyes. A smaller percentage of complaints involved hives or potentially fatal anaphylactic reactions. About 17 percent of complainants required medical treatment, sometimes hospitalization. According to a telephone survey of consumers in the United Kingdom (where the product is marketed more widely than in the United States), nearly 5 percent of consumers reported being sensitive to Quorn. CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson relayed 10 consumers’ complaints in a recent letter to FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor. One 20-year-old man from Waco, TX, told CSPI that two hours after eating Quorn Chik’n Nuggets, he began to feel nauseous, and, too far from a bathroom, tried to open a window in order to vomit. He blacked out and hit his head on a trash can. And, according to a report filed by her daughter, a 75-year-old woman from Towson, MD, vomited and passed out in the theater during a production of Les Miserables four hours after eating half of a Quorn Chik’n patty. She spent the night in the emergency room and required anti-nausea medicine to stop her vomiting. "We believe, and we suspect that any reasonable person would believe, that any novel food ingredient that causes hives, anaphylactic reactions, or vomiting so violent that blood vessels burst, cannot, indeed must not, be considered by the FDA to be ‘generally recognized as safe,’" Jacobson wrote. CSPI urged that Quorn products be removed from the marketplace. If the FDA declines to do that, CSPI suggested that the following notice be required on the fronts of Quorn packages: “Warning: This product might cause severe diarrhea or vomiting, or a life-threatening anaphylactic reaction; an allergy might develop only after consuming the product several times.” The group’s letter acknowledges that it is skeptical the FDA would require such a notice. “There are plenty of nutritious, safe, and environmentally-friendly meat substitutes, made with soybeans, mushrooms, legumes, rice, and other real food ingredients,” said Jacobson. “It’s crazy to knowingly allow a potent new allergen into the food supply yet that’s exactly what the FDA has done.” 2011-12-01 McDonald's Seeks to Circumvent San Francisco Law on Fast-Food Toys http://cspinet.org/new/201111302.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanMcDonald’s <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/11/29/MNUR1M5NCE.DTL" target="cspi">decision</a> to start charging 10 cents to have toys added to Happy Meals in San Francisco is a brazen and cynical attempt to circumvent the city’s law to encourage healthier children’s meals. It’s duplicitous for McDonald’s to claim that the toy was ever free—the cost of the toy has always been built into the cost of the meal. It would have been far better for McDonald’s to reduce calories, saturated fat, salt and sugary drinks in children’s meals, and to otherwise improve their nutrition by adding more fruits, non-fried vegetables, and whole grains. Other cities and state legislatures will need to prevent this workaround and protect children from toy-based junk-food marketing when they craft similar laws in the future. 2011-11-30 NAS Recognition of the Consumer "Right to Know" is a Victory for Food Safety http://cspinet.org/new/201111301.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaal<a href="http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=13304">Today's announcement</a> by the National Academy of Science that USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service should dramatically increase the amount of testing and sampling data available for consumers on the Internet is a major step forward in the quest for a truly transparent food system. CSPI has used FSIS data in the past to give consumers advice on which plants produced turkeys with the lowest rates of Salmonella but in subsequent years found it impossible to access usable data from FSIS to update its recommendations. Now, the NAS has concluded decisively that access to this data could lead to valuable public health benefits, and should be shared without undue delay. Importantly, the committee formally recognized the consumers' fundamental "right to know" as an important reason that information should be publicly accessible. Additionally, access to plant specific information provides opportunities for companies to understand how their food safety programs stack up compared to others in the industry, providing incentives for improvements that would favorably affect public health. CSPI has long advocated the release of food safety data for both these reasons, and urges FSIS to move rapidly to implement the NAS' recommendations. 2011-11-30 Congress Protects Pizza as a Vegetable in School Lunches http://cspinet.org/new/201111151.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanIt's a shame that Congress seems more interested in protecting industry than protecting children's health. At a time when child nutrition and childhood obesity are national health concerns, Congress should be supporting USDA and school efforts to serve healthier school meals, not undermining them. Together, the school lunch <a href="http://www.rules.house.gov/Legislation/legislationDetails.aspx?NewsID=601" target="cspi">riders</a> in the agriculture spending bill would protect industry's ability to keep pizza and French fries on school lunch trays every day of the week to the detriment of children's health. If finalized, this legislation may go down in nutritional history as a bigger blunder than when the Reagan Administration tried (but failed) to credit <a href="http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Ketchup-as-a-vegetable/119350988111157" target="cspi">ketchup as a vegetable</a> in the school lunch program. Pizza should be served with a vegetable, not count as one. 2011-11-15 Warning Label Urged for St. John's Wort http://cspinet.org/new/201111101.html Supplement Taken for Depression May Counteract Antidepressants, Contraceptives, and Other DrugsDietary supplements containing St. John’s wort may interfere with birth control, antidepressants, blood thinners, and other prescription and over-the-counter drugs. For that reason, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest has <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/st-john_s-wort-petition-11.10.11.pdf" target="cspi">called on</a> the Food and Drug Administration to require a warning label on those products. St. John’s wort is a flowering plant often promoted for its supposed antidepressant properties. But CSPI said that individuals who take it with prescription antidepressants may unwittingly be counteracting the very treatment they are seeking. Similarly, women taking St. John’s wort and oral contraceptives may have unplanned pregnancies. According to the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine, part of the National Institutes of Health, St. John’s wort may also interact with other potentially life-saving treatments, including heart medications, drugs used to control HIV infection, drugs used to treat cancer, and seizure-control drugs. Writing in the Journal of the American Medical Association, former FDA Commissioner Jane E. Henney warned that St. John’s wort “interacts with many drugs that are used to treat heart disease, depression, seizures, certain cancers, as well as drugs that prevent transplant rejection and pregnancy.” “Consumers take St. John’s wort and other herbal supplements based on their belief that they will benefit in some way, and perhaps some will,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “But all consumers need to know that St. John’s wort and many commonly prescribed drugs simply don’t mix.” The petition suggests the following warning label: “CAUTION: St. John’s wort interacts with some commonly used prescription and over-the-counter drugs. DO NOT USE this supplement if you are taking contraceptives, antidepressants, immunosuppressants (such as cyclosporine), anticoagulants, Digoxin, HIV medicine, blood thinners, seizure-control medicine, cancer medicine, or any other medications.” The petition also asks that this warning appear in a prominent black box on the package label. "Companies have taken a minimalist approach designed to protect themselves from litigation, rather than actually protecting consumers' health," said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. "FDA should mandate a standard warning label for St. John’s wort to protect consumers based on the research outlined in this petition." According to CSPI, the current advice on labels is inconsistent and fails to adequately warn consumers of the risks associated with St. John’s wort. Bluebonnet Herbals St. John’s Wort Extract does not have a warning label. Labels for Nature’s Plus Herbal Active St. John’s Wort Extended Release say “If you are pregnant or nursing, consult your healthcare physician before using any herbal product.” Vitamin Shoppe’s labels plainly state that “St John’s wort should not be used with antidepressants,” but does not address other drugs. Solaray labels merely advise consumers to “consult your physician.” “From the information we have gathered, it appears that many manufacturers simply wish to protect themselves from product liability suits by placing boilerplate warnings on the label rather than actually alerting consumers to the known, material risks of drug interactions associated with the product,” CSPI says in its filing. 2011-11-10 FDA Turns Down Petitions to Withdraw Medically Important Antibiotics from Animal Agriculture http://cspinet.org/new/201111091.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonWe are disappointed that, after 12 long years, the FDA <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/citizen-petition-1999-denial.pdf" target="cspi">rejected</a> our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/ar/petition_3_99.html" target="cspi">petition</a> and a more recent <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/denial-of-2005-petition.pdf" target="cspi">petition</a> to ban non-medical uses of antibiotics in animals. The industry's irresponsible use of antibiotics in livestock increases the prevalence of antibiotic-resistant pathogens, and those germs can cause infections in humans that are difficult or impossible to treat. The industry has long failed to cooperate voluntarily, and the FDA should take binding action. Consumers cannot afford another decade of delay. 2011-11-09 Mayors' Group Urged to Ditch Deal with Soda Industry http://cspinet.org/new/201111031.html CSPI Says Beverage Lobby Wants to Undermine Mayors' Efforts to Reduce Soda ConsumptionThe United States Conference of Mayors should withdraw from a $3 million deal it forged with the soft drink industry’s lobbying arm, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The nonprofit health watchdog group says the American Beverage Association is more interested in undermining many mayors’ efforts to reduce soda consumption than in reducing childhood obesity, the ostensible purpose of the program. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mayors-letter.pdf" target="cspi">CSPI</a> letter to USCM executive director Tom Cochran, CSPI said that the soda industry has a long history of using similar grant programs to curry favor with key influencers or to silence potential critics, and that it was unseemly for the mayors’ group to encourage cities to apply for such tainted pots of money. While CSPI says that it would be hard to argue with the stated purpose of the program, “to encourage healthy weight through balanced diet choices and regular physical activity,” the group said the soda industry spends far more heavily to discourage healthy, balanced diets. “Coke, Pepsi, and their lobbyists at the American Beverage Association are pouring millions of dollars into blocking or reversing much of the good work being done by courageous mayors who are trying to reduce soda consumption in order to fight obesity and reduce health-care costs,” said George Hacker, senior policy advisor for health promotion at CSPI. “This narrowly tailored grant program is specifically designed to exclude meaningful programs to reduce sugary-drink consumption in favor of highlighting unspecified ‘better solutions.’ Cities would be better off taxing soda and using that money to fund effective anti-obesity efforts.” A <a href="http://www.usmayors.org/79thAnnualMeeting/documents/USCMABApressrelease_062011.pdf" target="cspi">press release</a> on the USCM web site states that an independent panel will choose award recipients, but also says the “ABA will work with the conference to develop selection criteria.” Cities that take payments from the program would also be obligated to participate in a promotional press event alongside the ABA, according to the program’s materials. According to CSPI, the sugary-drink industry often emphasizes “physical activity” in order to deflect attention from the calories in its products. But a new <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/home/home.shtml" target="cspi">ad campaign</a> from New York City’s health department dramatically shows how much physical activity is required to balance the calories in soda: One would have to walk three miles, or from Union Square to Brooklyn, in the ad’s words, to burn off the calories in one 20-ounce soda. CSPI says that’s the kind of municipal effort that other cities should replicate. Health departments in <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/story/la-county-launches-sugar-loaded-drinks-campaign-2011-10-05" target="cspi">Los Angeles</a> and <a href="http://www.cityofboston.gov/news/default.aspx?id=5284" target="cspi">Boston</a>, with the support of Mayors Antonio Villaraigosa and Thomas Menino, respectively, are also running campaigns to reduce sugary drink consumption in those cities. Philadelphia Mayor Michael Nutter has proposed imposing taxes on sugary drinks, a move bitterly opposed and ultimately defeated by the industry. Nutter also drew praise from health advocates for turning away a $10 million <a href="http://articles.philly.com/2011-09-13/news/30149740_1_antiobesity-program-funding-million-grant" target="cspi">anti-obesity grant</a> that originated from the American Beverage Association. Over the years, CSPI has documented how the sugary-drink industry has used ostensible philanthropic programs to burnish its image in the eyes of health officials and the public. In 2009, Coca-Cola made a six-figure payment to the <a href="http://www.aafp.org/online/en/home/media/releases/newsreleases-statements-2009/consumeralliance-cocacola.html" target="cspi">American Academy of Family Physicians</a> to underwrite “consumer education content related to beverages and sweeteners.” In 2003, the <a href="http://www.aapd.org/hottopics/news.asp?NEWS_ID=212" target="cspi">American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry</a> took a $1 million payment from Coca-Cola. “We would not trust the American Foxes Association to administer a grant program aimed at securing the nation’s henhouses; nor should we trust the American Beverage Association to fund efforts aimed at improving the health of the nation’s children,” said Hacker. Sugary drinks are the single largest source of calories in the American diet and account for half of all added sugars consumed. Sugary drinks have been shown to have a causal role in promoting obesity: Each additional sugary drink consumed per day increases the likelihood that a child will become obese by about 60 percent, according to one study. The American Heart Association <a href="http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/NutritionCenter/HealthyDietGoals/Frequently-Asked-Questions-About-Sugar_UCM_306725_Article.jsp" target="cspi">recommends</a> that people limit their intake of sugary drinks to about 450 calories per week, or about three 12-ounce cans. Average consumption is now more than twice that. CSPI and a number of cities and local and national health groups are partnering in a campaign called Life’s Sweeter with Fewer Sugary Drinks, which aims to reduce soda consumption by more than half by 2020. 2011-11-03 Public Health Group Calls for Reducing Sodium in Food Supply by 75 Percent http://cspinet.org/new/201111011.html APHA Cites Deaths Due to Heart Disease and StrokeThe largest organization of public health professionals in the world is calling on the Food and Drug Administration to begin regulating the amounts of salt and other sodium-containing ingredients used in processed foods with an eye toward reducing sodium in the food supply by 75 percent. In a resolution passed unanimously today at the American Public Health Association’s 139th annual meeting, the group called on the FDA to “remove or modify” salt’s official status as a Generally Recognized as Safe (or GRAS) food ingredient—a status that allows unlimited amounts of sodium in foods. The resolution calls on the FDA to begin regulating sodium in the food supply within one year and to establish a timetable for gradually reducing sodium in the food supply by 75 percent within ten years. The resolution also recommends that all Americans consume no more than 1,500 mg of sodium daily. The evidence that high sodium intake raises blood pressure is clear and convincing, according to the resolution. The relationship between blood pressure levels and the risk of developing cardiovascular disease is “strong, continuous, graded, consistent, independent, and etiologically significant,” the group says, and that “reducing the amount of sodium added in the manufacturing and commercial preparation of food is a prudent and safe public health intervention, and the single most effective means of reducing the sodium intake of Americans.” The APHA resolution was praised by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which has been calling on the FDA to regulate and limit sodium in packaged foods since 1978. “Salt, in the amounts presently used in processed foods, is the single deadliest ingredient in the food supply, contributing to the premature deaths of tens of thousands of Americans each year,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “This has been widely acknowledged in the medical community for many years, but has been mostly ignored by food manufacturers and regulators. I hope that the American Public Health Association’s powerful recommendation spurs the Food and Drug Administration to act—at last.” In 2010, the American Heart Association and the U.S. Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee made 1,500 mg per day their recommended sodium limit for all Americans. The APHA resolution now also makes the same recommendation. The Institute of Medicine has recommended that the FDA regulate sodium in the food supply to help Americans limit their consumption of sodium. According to the government’s dietary advice, only people with hypertension, people who are middle-aged and older, and African Americans should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium daily. People in those groups represent about 70 percent of adults. The rest should consume no more than 2,300 mg of sodium per day, about a teaspoon of salt. However, Americans are consuming close to 4,000 mg of sodium per day—an amount that “far exceeds current recommendations and physiologic need,” according to the APHA resolution. And that excess sodium doesn’t occur naturally and isn’t coming from the salt shaker: between 75 and 80 percent comes from salt added to processed and restaurant foods. “In the United States, more than 400 people die prematurely every day and many more are becoming disabled due to the excessive sodium in our food supply,” said Stephen Havas, MD, author of the APHA resolution and adjunct professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine. “Their failure to prevent this toll of death and disability is inexcusable. We must do better.” CSPI first petitioned the FDA in 1978 to reduce salt in processed foods. Since then, it has filed a lawsuit against the agency for failing to take action, and in 2005 filed a new <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> asking the FDA to revoke the GRAS status of salt and set limits on sodium. The FDA held a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/FDA-salt-hearing-Oral-testimony-11-27-07.pdf" target="cspi">public hearing</a> on CSPI’s petition in 2007, but since then, the industry has only made minimal progress in reducing sodium, and sodium consumption remains at harmful levels. The FDA is holding a public meeting on sodium on November 10. “The Institute of Medicine concluded last year that industry’s voluntary efforts over the past 40 years to reduce sodium levels have utterly failed and that the FDA needed to set limits,” Jacobson said. "Presumably to fend off binding regulations, several large companies have said they would lower sodium modestly over the next several years. But even partial industry efforts are bound to falter without the level playing field provided by government regulations. It’s high time that the FDA acted.” Jacobson, CSPI’s director, will receive the APHA’s prestigious David P. Rall Award for Advocacy in Public Health at a ceremony tonight. 2011-11-01 Food Day Message Reaches Millions! http://cspinet.org/new/201110261.html Mayors, Governors Use Occasion to Accelerate Progress for Healthier Diets and Smarter Food PoliciesFrom <a href="http://www.dnainfo.com/20111024/midtown/mario-batali-morgan-spurlock-kick-off-food-day-times-square" target="cspi">Times Square</a> to <a href="http://www.santacruzheritage.org/FoodDay" target="cspi">Tucson</a>, Food Day events across the country brought hundreds of thousands of Americans together at more than 2,300 events in all 50 states—representing the largest grassroots mobilization for improved food policies in history. Mayors, governors, legislators, and health officials observed Food Day by issuing proclamations, announcing new food policies, attending gleaning events on farms, and distributing free apples to commuters. Food Day inspired new <a href="http://www.ewg.org/release/californians-urge-healthy-food-and-jobs-focus-fast-tracked-farm-bill" target="cspi">partnerships</a> among diverse organizations involved in hunger, nutrition, sustainability, and farm worker justice. And countless individuals simply celebrated with especially healthful home-cooked meals or potlucks with friends. Already, organizers are planning to make <a href="http://foodday.org" target="cspi">Food Day</a> an even bigger success in 2012. Started by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, Food Day is backed by dozens of local and national nonprofit <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/partner-organizations.php" target="cspi">organizations</a> and an <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/food-day-advisory-board.php" target="cspi">advisory committee</a> comprised of leading voices for improved food policies. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) serve as honorary co-chairs of that committee. Food Day will be observed every October 24. At a marquee event held in <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foodday/sets/72157627977883810/" target="cspi">Times Square</a>, New York City Health Commissioner Tom Farley announced a new phase in the city’s <a href="http://home2.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/cdp/cdp_pan_pop.shtml" target="cspi">campaign</a> to reduce consumption of soda and other sugary beverages, while attendees, including restaurateur Mario Batali, filmmaker Morgan Spurlock, nutritionist Marion Nestle, and several dozen area food activists enjoyed a healthy, affordable and sustainable meal prepared by Food Network host Ellie Krieger. During the meal half a dozen giant electronic screens carried Food Day <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foodday/6277988725/in/set-72157627977883810" target="cspi">messages</a> and <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/foodday/6277414632/in/set-72157627977883810" target="cspi">pictures</a>. Earlier in the day, Mayor Bloomberg <a href="http://www.ny1.com/content/news_beats/politics/149522/officials-encourage-new-yorkers-to-eat-healthy" target="cspi">handed out apples</a> to commuters in Queens and talked about Food Day on ABC’s <a href="http://beta.abc.go.com/shows/the-chew/episodes/October-24-2011" target="cspi">The Chew</a>. In Los Angeles, LA County Health Director Jonathan Fielding and Let’s Move to School Chef Giovanni Delrosario used the occasion to promote <a href="http://www.marketwire.com/press-release/national-food-day-la-county-promotes-healthy-food-access-in-schools-1576837.htm" target="cspi">healthier school breakfasts</a>. And Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s Food Policy Council coordinated healthy cooking demonstrations, film screenings, and other <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/dailydish/2011/10/food-day-la.html" target="cspi">events throughout the city</a>. “Many Angelenos are successfully working to make a meaningful difference in our local food system, particularly in ways that assist those residents most in need of healthy nutrition,” Villaraigosa said. “This is especially important for Angelenos who live in neighborhoods where healthy foods are harder to find, which puts them at greater risk for obesity and diabetes.” In Massachusetts, Governor Deval Patrick <a href="http://thefoodproject.org/blog/2011/11/24/governor-proclaims-food-day" target="cspi">harvested food</a> for hunger relief efforts and helped launch a Massachusetts Gleaning Project, while Mayor Thomas Menino gave a “<a href="http://dailyfreepress.com/2011/10/24/menino-looks-toward-a-healthier-boston-in-kicking-off-food-day/" target="cspi">State of the Food Union</a>” address at Tufts University. And in Maine, Rep. Chellie Pingree <a href="http://wholesomewave.org/maines-congresswoman-chellie-pingree-celebrates-food-day-unveils-local-food-bill/" target="cspi">announced a new bill</a> to assist small and mid-sized farms. “It’s just wrong that we would bail out the commercial banks and the investment banks and cut the food banks,” Menino said. “The Greater Boston Food Bank is one bank that should never fail.” With thousands of food festivals, assemblies, <a href="http://cce.wsu.edu/default.asp?PageID=781" target="cspi">debates</a> on college campuses, and hundreds of restaurants offering <a href="http://articles.boston.com/2011-10-19/yourtown/30298500_1_food-day-nutrition-healthy-options" target="cspi">special menus</a> showcasing local ingredients, Food Day wasn’t just about government programs, but embraced celebration and education. In Alaska, students at Rabbit Creek Elementary School in South Anchorage participated in a <a href="http://www.ktuu.com/news/food-day-education-alaska-ktuu-20111024,0,1944321.story" target="cspi">blind taste test</a> comparing locally grown carrots to out-of-state carrots. (The students judged the Alaskan carrots to be superior by a two-to-one margin.) In Potsdam, NY, 250 students from 30 school districts participated in a <a href="http://northcountrynow.com/news/30-schools-230-team-members-converge-potsdam-food-day-youth-summit-oct-24-040540" target="cspi">youth summit</a> to talk about such food issues as marketing and advertising, farming, and school gardens. In Omaha, Nebraska, 2,000 <a href="http://livewellomaha.org/news/what-we-are-eating/omaha-celebrates-national-food-day/" target="cspi">healthy breakfasts</a> were delivered to local children, and on the campus of the University of California Berkeley, a <a href="http://www.dailycal.org/2011/10/24/picnic-marks-first-food-day-at-uc-berkeley/" target="cspi">whole-grain-themed picnic</a> was typical of the several hundred campus-based events across the country. In Seattle, an <a href="http://www.eatlocalnow.org/2011-eat-local-now-dinner" target="cspi">Eat Local Now dinner</a> attracted hundreds to share local food and hear from Chef Greg Atkinson about how cooking, food, community, and justice can improve communities and the lives of individuals. Savannah, GA, a massive <a href="http://www.wellfedsavannah.com/foodday.html" target="cspi">festival</a> sponsored by Well FED Savannah magazine, the Savannah Chatham Food Policy Council, and other groups featured cooking demonstrations and other activities for children and families. In Springfield, MO, they held a <a href="http://www.fooddaycelebration.com/" target="cspi">fundraiser</a> for the Ozarks Food Harvest food bank and had 1500 people participate, with about 750 pounds of food donated. “Food Day captured the imagination of so many Americans—inspiring them to improve their diets and push for a food system that is just, fair, sustainable, and nourishing,” said Michael F. Jacobson, Food Day’s founder and the executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “As an annual event, Food Day will make the food movement more formidable, more united, and better positioned to fix the problems that plague our food system.” Food Day, like CSPI, is people-powered and accepts no funding from corporations or government grants, though businesses such as <a href="http://www.dole.com/NutritionInstituteLanding/NI_Articles/NI_NutritionNewsDesk/NI_NutritionNewsDesk_Details/tabid/990/Default.aspx?contentid=13052&nid=121" target="cspi">Dole Foods</a>, <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/bolthouse-farms-announces-support-of-national-food-day-130187528.html" target="cspi">Bolthouse Farms</a>, <a href="http://blog.wholefoodsmarket.com/2011/10/throw-party-food-day/" target="cspi">Whole Foods Market</a>, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mUSeiJ8KAQ" target="cspi">Cooking Channel</a>, <a href="http://www.epicurious.com/articlesguides/entertaining/partiesevents/food-day" target="cspi">Epicurious</a>, <a href="http://disney.go.com/magic-of-healthy-living/global/pdf/TRYIt_HealthyHalloween.pdf" target="cspi">Disney</a>, and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npSCW416uyc&list=UU9eAi3qM8UXZTjdbCIXgg9w&index=16" target="cspi">Veria Living</a> all participated. 2011-10-26 America Celebrates Food Day with More than 2,000 Events in 50 States http://cspinet.org/new/201110241.html Observations Include an “Eat In” in Times Square; a Festival in Savannah, GA; an Open House at the National Archives; and Events in Schools, Churches, Campuses, and HomesToday a diverse range of organizations, public officials, and Americans from all walks of life are celebrating Food Day—a nationwide grassroots mobilization that encourages Americans to eat healthy, delicious food grown in a sustainable and humane way and to advocate for smarter food policies. Spearheaded by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, <a href="http://foodday.org" target="cspi">Food Day</a> is being observed in all 50 states with more than 2,000 events from coast to coast. In the heart of Times Square, 50 notables from the food movement, including restaurateur Mario Batali, filmmaker Morgan Spurlock, Food Network host Ellie Krieger, nutritionist Marion Nestle, and several dozen area food activists staged an Eat Real “Eat In.” The group came together at a communal table, shared a healthy and sustainable meal (with most ingredients from the farmers market and <a href="http://foodday.org/files/FD-TimesSq-Program.pdf" target="cspi">recipes</a> from Krieger’s latest cookbook, Comfort Food Fix), and engaged in spirited conversation about the critical food policy issues facing the city and the nation. During the Eat In, the <a href="http://www.timessquare2.com/webcams.html " target="cspi">Reuters/Nasdaq</a> signs in Times Square will carry Food Day messages. “The typical American diet is promoting major health problems, causing serious environmental pollution, and unintentionally creating poor working conditions for those who harvest, process, and prepare our food,” said Michael F. Jacobson, CSPI’s executive director. “It’s time to urge Americans to change their own diets for the better and to mobilize for desperately needed changes in food and farm policy.” In just a few months, the campaign gained tremendous significant momentum, including the active participation of numerous grassroots-oriented partners, like <a href="hthttp://www.slowfoodusa.org/index.php/slow_food/blog_post/the_path_to_legislative_impact_heats_up_with_food_day/" target="cspi">Slow Food USA</a>, the labor group <a href="http://www.unitehere.org/detail.php?ID=3468" target="cspi">Unite Here</a>, and the campus-based <a href="http://realfoodchallenge.org/foodday" target="cspi">Real Food Challenge</a>. <a href="http://www.Change.org" target="cspi">Change.org</a> is devoting its homepage to food issues addressed on Food Day. Dole Food Company and Bolthouse Farms have placed millions of Food Day stickers on bananas and bags of carrots, respectively. Media partners including <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mUSeiJ8KAQ&feature=autoplay&list=UU9eAi3qM8UXZTjdbCIXgg9w&lf=autoplay&playnext=5" target="cspi">Cooking Channel</a> and the wellness-oriented cable channel <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npSCW416uyc&list=UU9eAi3qM8UXZTjdbCIXgg9w&index=1" target="cspi">Veria Living</a> have promoted Food Day. Condé-Nast’s award-winning Epicurious.com teamed up with Whole Foods Market to encourage <a href="http://www.epicurious.com/articlesguides/entertaining/partiesevents/food-day" target="cspi">dinner parties</a> aimed at raising money for local food charities. More than 30 governors and mayors have proclaimed October 24 as Food Day, including those in Colorado, Ohio, Oregon, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York City, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis, and Washington, DC. Special Food Day menus will be served in all Detroit public schools. Schools across the nation are hosting Food Day events as part of the ongoing <a href="http://www.farmtoschoolmonth.org/" target="cspi">National Farm to School Month</a> celebration. In Washington, the <a href="http://www.archives.gov/dc-metro/events/" target="cspi">National Archives</a> is hosting a Food Day Open House in conjunction with its “What’s Cooking, Uncle Sam?” exhibit. In New York City, Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg will hand out New York State-grown apples to commuters in Queens to observe Food Day, and will appear on ABC’s new daytime show, The Chew. The city’s health commissioner, Dr. Thomas Farley, is coming to Times Square to announce about the city’s expanded campaign to reduce consumption of soda and other sugary drinks. Also on Food Day, the city will be launching a new food policy web site, <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/nycfood" target="cspi">www.nyc.gov/nycfood</a>. The University of California-San Francisco and the Hastings School of Law are hosting a conference on food deserts and the food served in prisons. In Savannah, GA, organizers have planned a huge outdoor festival expected to draw around 15,000 attendees. Five days of lessons about food are planned in schools in Bentonville, AR. In California, groups including the Prevention Institute, the Strategic Alliance, the Environmental Working Group, and Roots of Change announced a <a href="https://secure2.convio.net/cspi/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=1271 " target="cspi">statewide petition drive</a> aimed at improving the next federal Farm Bill. “Food Day is an important way to focus on the critical need to have well-funded public health agencies that work on preventing diet-related and other diseases,” said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association, who is serving as the Joan H. Tisch Distinguished Fellow in Public Health at Roosevelt House, Hunter College. Besides events in public places, countless individuals will be celebrating Food Day at home with especially healthy meals and conversation about food. For inspiration, FoodDay.org has a free <a href="http://foodday.org/files/FoodDay_recipes_1006_final.pdf" target="cspi">recipe booklet</a> featuring recipes from Batali, Rick Bayless, Emeril Lagasse, Nina Simonds, and other top chefs and cooking authorities. Food Day’s <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/food-day-advisory-board.php" target="cspi">advisory board</a>, chaired by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), includes many of the most prominent voices for change in the food policy world, including urban farming proponent Will Allen, author Michael Pollan, scientists Walter Willett and Kelly Brownell, Seattle Mayor Michael McGinn, former Surgeons General Richard Carmona and David Satcher, chefs Dan Barber, Nora Pouillon, Barton Seaver, and Alice Waters, and other advocates for better health, sustainable agriculture, ending hunger, and improved labor practices. “The many activities and events spurred by Food Day will help foster a robust dialogue on how to promote better nutrition and health, lessen hunger and increase access to food, enhance opportunities for farm families and rural communities, and conserve natural resources,” said Senator Harkin. “There are differing ideas and perspectives on these issues and surely we all benefit from discussions about the connections among food, farms, and health.” “Food Day is about bringing people together, celebrating the incredible progress we have made in ensuring that Americans have access to safe, healthy foods—but also to recognize that there is still work to be done,” said Congresswoman DeLauro. “A shocking one in five children in this country are termed ‘food insecure,’ which means simply that they likely do not have enough to eat each day. And we have seen in recent weeks a food safety recall of cantaloupes that have resulted in the deaths of 25 people. So on this very first Food Day, let us not only recognize the great strides we have made, but also keep moving forward and making progress towards a better, healthier America.” Food Day, like CSPI, is people-powered and accepts no funding from corporations or government grants. 2011-10-24 Institute of Medicine Proposes Consumer-Friendly, Front-of-Package Nutrition Labeling http://cspinet.org/new/201110201.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe Institute of Medicine’s <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Front-of-Package-Nutrition-Rating-Systems-and-Symbols-Promoting-Healthier-Choices.aspx" target="cspi">proposal</a> is eminently sensible—and will probably be roundly condemned by food manufacturers. A simple icon with 3, 2, 1, or zero check marks would give shoppers at-a-glance information about nutritional booby traps lurking inside packaged foods. The IOM’s proposal is far preferable to the voluntary “Facts Up Front” labeling program that the grocery industry is rushing to market. The industry hopes to preempt more consumer-friendly requirements by the FDA. The industry’s complex scheme requires consumers to consider the amounts of calories and four to six nutrients, without any numerical score or useful symbols to convey a food’s nutritional value. It is worth noting that the IOM’s approach, like all of the systems yet developed, still has holes that the FDA would have to address. For instance, it gives no consideration to foods’ vitamin, mineral, fiber, or protein content. Also, white bread, whole wheat bread, broccoli, artificially sweetened soft drinks, and artificially colored and flavored diet Jell-O would all have top scores of 3. Still, the FDA should promptly assign a task force to develop a mandatory front-of-package labeling regulation based on the IOM’s advice. # # # Note: In 2006, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200611301.html" target="cspi">petitioned</a> the FDA to devise a front-of-package labeling system to supplant the proliferating systems being used by manufacturers and supermarkets. Subsequently, CSPI encouraged Congress to fund an Institute of Medicine study on front-of-package labeling, with today’s report being the second of two on the topic. 2011-10-20 General Mills Facing Class Action Lawsuit Over "Fruit Snacks" Full of Sugars, Partially Hydrogenated Oil, & Dyes http://cspinet.org/new/201110141.html Fruit Roll-Ups, Fruit by the Foot, and Fruit Gushers Make Misleading Claims of Healthfulness, Says CSPISomething is mostly missing from Fruit Roll-Ups, Fruit by the Foot, and Fruit Gushers, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fruit_roll-ups_complaint.pdf" target="cspi">complaint</a> filed today in federal court in California: fruit. Labels state those General Mills snacks are “fruit flavored,” “naturally flavored,” a “good source of vitamin C,” and low in calories, fat, and gluten, according to the complaint filed on behalf of a California mother by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and the consumer protection law firm Reese Richman LLP. But obscured on labels is the fact that the so-called fruit snacks are mostly sugars (some from fruit concentrate and some from corn syrup), artificial additives, and potentially harmful artificial dyes. <a href="http://www.generalmills.com/ColorBoxImage.aspx?ImageId=%7b70F95A88-FAE9-4853-BB95-E7F43C5D7640%7d&Width=730&Height=545" target="cspi">Strawberry Fruit Roll-Ups</a> are made from pears from concentrate, corn syrup, dried corn syrup, sugar, partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil, citric acid, acetylated monoglycerides, fruit pectin, dextrose, malic acid, Vitamin C (ascorbic acid), unspecified “natural flavor,” and Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, and Blue 1. Even with the pear ingredient, the product provides little of the beneficial fiber or nutrients associated with real strawberries. While labels tout the naturalness of the added flavorings, CSPI says that many of the ingredients are artificial by anyone’s definition, including the partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil and the acetylated monoglycerides. The side panels on some General Mills "fruit" candies read "Made With Real Fruit." At least one variety of Fruit Roll-Ups has pictures of strawberries and oranges on the box. But despite the names of the products, there are no strawberries in Strawberry Fruit Roll-Ups, nor watermelon in Fruit Gushers Watermelon Blast. The bright colors of those products come from synthetic, petroleum-based dyes that can <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes/" target="cspi">impair</a> some children’s behavior. “General Mills is basically dressing up a very cheap candy as if it were fruit and charging a premium for it,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “General Mills is giving consumers the false impression that these products are somehow more wholesome, and charging more. It’s an elaborate hoax on parents who are trying to do right by their kids.” According to the complaint, filed in United States District Court in the Northern District of California, the presence of partially hydrogenated oil in “fruit” snacks marketed as healthy and wholesome is deceptive. The artificial trans fat in partially hydrogenated oil lowers HDL, or “good” cholesterol, raises LDL, or “bad” cholesterol. CSPI states that the amounts of trans fat are small, but that they have no place in a product marketed as if it were healthful and a source of fruit. “Defendant is conveying an overall message of a healthful snack product to parents when, in fact, the Products contain dangerous, non-nutritious, unhealthy partially hydrogenated oil, large amounts of sugar, and potentially harmful artificial dyes,” the complaint states. The complaint contends that the labeling of fruit-flavored snacks violates various state laws, including Minnesota’s Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, and several California laws governing misleading and deceptive advertising and fraudulent business practices. General Mills is based in Golden Valley, Minnesota. General Mills has a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905121.html" target="cspi">habit</a> of skirting the truth with its marketing and advertising, according to CSPI. In 2009, the Food and Drug Administration took enforcement action against the company for making misleading cholesterol-lowering and cancer-prevention claims on Cheerios packages. Before resorting to litigation, CSPI had privately urged General Mills to change its “fruit” snacks labels, but without success. 2011-10-14 Coca-Cola, Froot Loops, Ethanol Subsidies Among "Terrible Ten" Things Impairing Americans' Diets, Health, and Environment http://cspinet.org/new/201110131.html "Terrific 10" and "Terrible 10" Lists Symbolize Hopes and Concerns of Food DayOrganizers of Food Day have named the <a href="http://foodday.org/files/FoodDay_TerrificTerrible.pdf" target="cspi">“Terrible Ten”</a> factors impairing Americans’ diets, health, and environment and that exemplify much of what the grassroots movement is trying to address when it culminates on October 24. In no special order, some of the Terrible 10 include: • Coca-Cola, the most aggressively promoted and widely consumed brand of sugar-loaded “liquid candy” in the world, has contributed mightily to the obesity epidemic. Each can of Coke contains 9 teaspoons of sugar. • Froot Loops, a fruit-less sugary cereal gussied up with synthetic dyes, is one of a host of junk foods marketed heavily to kids. Kellogg is one of many companies seeking to kill federal voluntary nutrition standards intended to promote children’s health. • Subsidies to companies that blend corn ethanol into gasoline, coupled with a mandate to market billions of gallons of that gasoline annually, cost taxpayers $6 billion a year. Using corn for fuel leads to higher prices for corn and foods with corn ingredients—all for a program without significant environmental benefit. • White flour—used in bread, pizza crusts, pasta, doughnuts, cakes, burritos, cookies, and dozens of other foods—has spurred the obesity epidemic by adding evermore vitamin-depleted, fiber-poor calories the diet. “This collection of terribles symbolizes some of the things that Food Day is trying to change,” said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit organization that is coordinating Food Day. “It’s time to encourage Americans to ‘eat real,’ which means ‘out’ with the Froot Loops and ‘in’ with real fruit. It means more food from farmers markets—and much less food, if any, from fast-food drive- throughs and vending machines.” Food Day is a celebration of healthy, affordable, and sustainably grown food. More than 1,500 events are planned from coast-to-coast in homes, schools, universities, parks, and even in Times Square. So Food Day organizers have paired their Terrible Ten list with a Terrific Ten list of things that are worth celebrating, including (again, in no particular order): • Water—humankind’s standard beverage for millennia—from the tap or filtered, carbonated or not, is a far better choice than soda and other sugary drinks. • Traditional Mediterranean and Asian diets that are heavy on vegetables and fruit and light on meat and cheese are delicious and reduce the risk of heart disease and other maladies. Plant-based foods are also easier on the environment than animal products. • Sustainable and organically grown foods build healthy soil and minimize harm to farmers, the environment, and consumers from dangerous pesticides, excess fertilizer, antibiotics in animal feed, and unsafe synthetic food additives. • The Coalition of Immokalee Workers has challenged—and improved—the inhumane working conditions endured by many Florida farmworkers, showing that persistent, aggressive action can stop injustices. Food Day is led by honorary co-chairs Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and an <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/food-day-advisory-board.php" target="cspi">advisory board</a> that includes author Michael Pollan; prominent physicians Caldwell Esselstyn and Michael Roizen; former Surgeon General David Satcher; nutrition authorities Walter Willett, Kelly Brownell, and Marion Nestle; filmmaker Morgan Spurlock; and Rodale, Inc. CEO Maria Rodale. The Terrible Ten and Terrific Ten lists do not necessarily reflect the views of members of the Food Day advisory board or local food Day coordinators and participants. <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/partner-organizations.php" target="cspi">National organizations participating in Food Day</a> include the American Dietetic Association, American Public Health Association, Community Food Security Coalition, Earth Day Network, Farmers Market Coalition, Humane Society of the United States, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Prevention Institute, and Slow Food USA, along with many city- and state-level organizations. 2011-10-13 Congress Needn't Rescue Junk-Food Marketers from Voluntary Government Nutrition Guidelines http://cspinet.org/new/201110121.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanWhat an unseemly spectacle it is to see panicked junk-food advertisers running to Congress for help fending off the innocuous, voluntary guidelines for food marketed to children proposed by the Interagency Working Group. I could understand how the industry might play the “national nanny” card if the government were proposing mandatory nutrition standards. But, in fact, the Administration is merely proposing non-binding, totally voluntary guidelines that, if adopted, would help make the industry’s own self-regulatory program more effective. It is to the great discredit of the food, entertainment, and advertising industries that they have resorted to a misleading campaign of fear-mongering and phony facts to kill these voluntary nutrition standards. But I suppose if you’re in the business of convincing young children to want to eat Cocoa Puffs, Cookie Crisps, Kool-Aid, and fake “fruit” snacks, it makes perfect sense that you’d try to change the conversation away from nutrition and health. I hope the House joins the Senate in support of the Interagency Working Group for Food Marketed to Children, made up of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. It’s not junk food marketers who deserve special Congressional protection—it’s children and parents who do. 2011-10-12 "Eat Real" Recipes Available for Food Day Events http://cspinet.org/new/201110041.html Batali, Bayless, Krieger and Other Chefs Give Ideas for Healthy, Sustainable, and Delicious MealsFood Day, taking place on October 24, is a grassroots mobilization for improved food policy—perhaps the largest ever. Although Food Day is an occasion to raise consciousness about health, sustainability, and farm worker justice, its also a day to enjoy delicious, healthy meals with family and friends. To that end, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest is offering a <a href="http://foodday.org/files/FoodDay_recipes1004.pdf" target="cspi">free Food Day recipe booklet</a> featuring recipes from Mario Batali, Rick Bayless, Ellie Krieger, Nina Simonds, and other top chefs and cooking authorities. A Food Day dinner might start with a Fennel and Apple Soup from Blue Hill chef Dan Barber, or the Squash and Mushroom Salad offered by Mario Batali. The James Beard Award-winning chef Emeril Lagasse offers up a Gumbo with Smoked Turkey and Wild Rice—a hearty but healthy main dish. Asian-cooking authority Nina Simonds suggests a gingery Hot and Sour Salmon with Greens. Some of the sustainable yet savory side dishes in the booklet are Chicago-based chef Rick Bayless’ Sweet Potato with Caramelized Onions & Guajillo Chili Dressing, and a Rosemary-Orange Cauliflower Purée created by Lynne Rossetto Kasper, host of public radio’s splendid The Splendid Table. And it’s hard to see how Food Day or any other autumn day couldn’t be improved by the delicious whole grain Apple Crisp offered by Food Network and Cooking Channel’s Krieger. “Part of the point of Food Day is to inspire Americans to return to their stoves and get cooking again for themselves and their loved ones,” said Simonds, author of the award-winning Asian cookbook A Spoonful of Ginger and the forthcoming Simple Asian Meals. “I hope this collection of easy recipes entices people and encourages them to try healthy and delicious new dishes. Food Day is a great time to start.” The Cooking Channel, the sister network to the Food Network, will also encourage Americans to cook by incorporating filmmaker Morgan Spurlock into its ‘Food People’ campaign. Morgan talks about his own formative food experiences and encouraging viewers to visit FoodDay.org. Dole Food is publicizing Food Day by putting Food Day stickers on 100 million bananas, and Bolthouse Farms is putting Food Day logos on 11 million bags of carrots between now and Food Day. Epicurious.com, in partnership with Whole Foods Market, will be encouraging foodies to host house parties to raise money for local food pantries, with regional menu ideas from their award-winning recipe database, as well as a Facebook contest starting October 6. Besides recipes, other resources for Food Day organizers include brochures, posters, conversation cards, postcard petitions, pumpkin carving stencils, and a film screening guide. Already, more than 1,000 events around the country are on an interactive map at FoodDay.org, including small house parties, conferences at colleges and universities, policy announcements, events at farmers markets, food festivals, and more. And Food Day’s <a href="http://www.cafepress.com/foodday" target="cspi">online store</a> offers everything from logo-emblazoned t-shirts to mugs. 2011-10-04 Deadly Outbreak is a Reminder That Produce Standards are Urgently Needed http://cspinet.org/new/201109272.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe tragic deaths from Listeria monocytogenes that are linked to tainted Colorado-grown cantaloupes is an urgent reminder that consumers are waiting for the Food and Drug Administration to release guidelines and regulations to help keep pathogens out of produce. Since 1990, melons have caused at least 36 outbreaks, although this one is the first attributed to Listeria. This pathogen is super-virulent for older or immune-compromised consumers, with a hospitalization rate of over 90 percent. It has a high mortality rate of 16 percent and can also cause miscarriages when pregnant women are exposed. The cantaloupes have been recalled, but they may have left behind the deadly pathogen in consumers' homes and refrigerators, where it may live on for months. CSPI is urging all consumers who know or suspect that they had a recalled cantaloupe in their homes to dispose of the cantaloupes in plastic bags and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/safekitchen.pdf" target="cspi">take additional precautions</a>. These precautions include washing and sanitizing all surfaces touched by the cantaloupe to eliminate Listeria, such as counters, vegetable bins and shelves, sponges, and dishcloths. In addition, all food that might have touched the cantaloupe or a potentially contaminated surface should be discarded. FDA should also move rapidly to release its guidelines and regulations for the production of safe produce, currently due for release in January 2012 and January 2013, respectively. Congress should fully fund FDA to implement the Food Safety Modernization Act, to ensure that outbreaks like this stop breaking records. 2011-09-27 President Urged Not to Retreat on Kids' Food Marketing http://cspinet.org/new/201109271.html Scientists Support Work of Administration’s Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to ChildrenThe Obama Administration should resist the food and advertising industries’ pressure to torpedo <a href="http://www.phlpnet.org/phlp/news/IWG-proposal-doesnt-violate-1st-amendment" target="cspi">voluntary nutrition guidelines</a> for foods marketed to kids, according to academic experts. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter-to-president-including-sign-ons.pdf" target="cspi">letter</a> today to President Barack Obama, 75 physicians, psychologists, nutritionists, and marketing experts from universities around the country urged the President to ensure that the Interagency Working Group (IWG) on Food Marketed to Children completes its work and finalizes the congressionally requested marketing guidelines. Comprised of officials from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the IWG released draft nutrition guidelines and marketing definitions in April. Nutrition and health advocates <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/Margo-Wootan-Testimony-IWG-Forum.pdf" target="cspi">praised</a> the guidelines, which recommended reasonable ceilings on the amounts of sodium, added sugars, and unhealthy fats and proposed minimum amounts of fruit-, vegetable-, or whole-grain-based ingredients in foods marketed to kids. But even though those guidelines are totally voluntary, junk-food advertisers are waging a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201107081.html" target="cspi">campaign of disinformation</a> aimed at getting the government to withdraw them. “You and the First Lady have helped Americans understand that child nutrition and obesity are national health concerns, with one in three children either overweight or obese,” the scientists wrote. “While numerous factors contribute to obesity and children’s poor diets, food marketing plays a key role.” Junk-food advertisers, in the guise of the Sensible Food Policy Coalition, have attacked the voluntary guidelines as an assault on the First Amendment, a point debunked <a href="http://www.phlpnet.org/sites/phlpnet.org/files/First_Amendment_Letter_IWG.pdf" target="cspi">by top Constitutional experts</a>, and claimed that adopting the voluntary guidelines would result in job losses, based on a flimsy industry “study.” Providing media relations work for the coalition is former White House communications director <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201107081.html" target="cspi">Anita Dunn</a>. Industry lobbyists have prevailed upon House appropriators to add language blocking the IWG, though the Senate Appropriations Committee has reaffirmed its support for the IWG. In a gambit to fend off the government’s proposed voluntary standards, the industry’s self-regulatory program, the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, recently released its own proposed nutrition standards. That proposal is an important concession for an industry that earlier refused to develop a uniform set of marketing standards for the program. Nevertheless, the industry’s proposed standards are weak and allow for the continued marketing to young children of Reese’s Puffs and Cookie Crisp cereals, some Kool-Aid drink mixes, sugary “fruit” snacks like Fruit Roll-Ups, and other overly sugary or salty junk foods. The letter points out that “while the CFBAI has prompted modest reductions in unhealthy food marketing to children and product reformulation, studies show that the vast majority of marketed products remain high in calories, saturated fat, sodium, or added sugars and/or are low in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. In 2009, with the industry’s self-regulatory program in effect, 86% of food ads seen by children featured products high in saturated fat, sugar, or sodium, down from 94% in 2003 (before self-regulation).” “It would be a real setback for children’s health if the Administration backed down on strong guidelines for food marketing to children, especially given the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/facts-and-myths-about-iwg-proposed-voluntary-standards.pdf" target="cspi">transparently specious arguments</a> of junk-food advertisers,” said Margo G. Wootan, nutrition policy director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit consumer watchdog group that organized the scientists’ letter. “Denying the science on food marketing and childhood obesity is like denying the science on global warming or evolution, and the Administration should not retreat in the face of the baseless arguments of food-industry lobbyists,” Wootan said. "If food marketing to children isn’t effective, why does the industry spend $2 billion a year on it?" Signers on the letter include Emory University professor and former CDC director , Jeffrey Koplan; Harvard Medical School professors George Blackburn, JoAnn Manson, and Carlos Camargo; University of Arizona children’s media authority Dale Kunkel; University of Minnesota professors Henry Blackburn and Mary Story; George Bray of Pennington Biomedical Research Center and Louisiana State University; Richard J. Deckelbaum of Columbia University’s College of Physicians and Surgeons; Steven Gortmaker of Harvard School of Public Health; New York University nutrition professor Marion Nestle; Victor Strasburger of University of New Mexico School of Medicine; and Harvard Medical School psychiatrist Alvin Poussaint. Curbing the amount of junk food advertising aimed at young children is also a major tenet of <a href="http://foodday.org" target="cspi">Food Day</a>, a grassroots mobilization for improved food policy culminating in thousands of events around the country on October 24. 2011-09-27 Olive Garden, Red Lobster to Cut Calories, Sodium http://cspinet.org/new/201109151.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanOther restaurants should follow Darden's lead and clean up their menus to make it easier for adults and children to choose healthy options. What's on the menu is important because both adults and children get a third of their calories from eating out. Eating out is linked to obesity due to excessive portion sizes and the dominance of high-calorie, fatty, salty options on the menu. Unfortunately, kids' food has become synonymous with unhealthy food. It should be just the opposite. Restaurants and food manufacturers should be marketing healthy options to kids to support their health and cultivate healthy eating habits that can last a lifetime. A study of the nation's top 25 chain restaurants found that 93 percent of children's meal combinations are too high in calories, 45 percent are too high in saturated fat, and 86 percent are too high in sodium. Darden, corporate parent of Olive Garden, Red Lobster, and several other restaurants, is helping to change that and make it easier for parents to order healthy meals for their children by making fruits and vegetables the default side dishes and milk the default beverage in place of the usual soda. 2011-09-15 Momentum for Food Day Builds as October 24 Nears http://cspinet.org/new/201109132.html Thousands of Events Will Celebrate Healthy, Affordable, Sustainable FoodFood Day, the nationwide grassroots mobilization for healthier diets and improved food policies, is gaining momentum as organizers plan thousands of events big and small on October 24. As the project moves into the home stretch, it has picked up some important national partners, including the Cooking Channel, Epicurious.com, and Change.org, all of which will be publicizing Food Day in the coming weeks and participating in events on the day itself. Fruit and vegetable marketer Dole will be supporting Food Day by putting Food Day stickers on 100 million bananas, and one of the nation’s largest carrot growers, Bolthouse Farms, will be including Food Day messages on 11 million bags of carrots. The National Archives in Washington, D.C., will host a Food Day open house in conjunction with its What’s Cooking, Uncle Sam? exhibit, which examines the government’s role in food policy. Most importantly, a wide variety of grassroots events around the country will focus on issues ranging from improving diets to supporting justice for food and farm workers to developing state and local food policies to celebrating sustainably grown local produce. The events are occurring at all types of venues from churches and college campuses to farms and restaurants to elementary schools, private homes, city halls, and municipal parks. “One of the best things you can do for your health is to cook and enjoy family meals made with fresh, colorful seasonal ingredients,” said chef and author Ellie Krieger, host of Healthy Appetite on the Food Network and a member of the Food Day advisory board. “Food Day is a chance to celebrate the power good food has to nourish us and bring us together.” Some of the Food Day events being planned around the country include: • A celebration in Union Square in New York City, in conjunction with Grow NYC’s Greenmarket; • A large <a href="http://www.wellfedsavannah.com/foodday.html" target="cspi">festival</a> in Savannah, GA, on October 22, where organizers expect to draw 15,000 attendees to enjoy healthful regional food; • The award-winning web site <a href="http://www.epicurious.com="cspi">Epicurious</a> will be providing specific regional menu ideas for those interested in hosting their own Food Day parties, and will award prizes for people who raise the most money in honor of the big day via Facebook; • In downtown Chicago, the advocacy group <a href="http://www.stopfoodborneillness.org/sites/default/files/foodday%20pressrelease.pdf" target="cspi">STOP Foodborne Illness</a> is inviting Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, former Mayor Richard Daley, celebrity chefs, and the public to spin a Food Safety Trivia Wheel; • Statewide Food Day activities in California are being led by the Strategic Alliance, the Prevention Institute, California Convergence, and Roots of Change. They are mounting a statewide petition campaign for smarter federal food and farm policies; • Following in the footsteps of Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper, Oregon Governor John A. Kitzhaber, M.D., Anchorage Mayor Dan Sullivan, and Las Vegas Mayor Carolyn Goodman, Mayors and Governors are issuing proclamations declaring October 24 as Food Day; • In Seattle, Eat Local Now! is organizing a <a href="http://www.eatlocalnow.org/2011-eat-local-now-dinner" target="cspi">Food Day dinner</a> for 350 people featuring locally grown food; • The University of California Hastings School of Law and the UCSF/UC Hastings Consortium on Law, Science, and Health Policy are organizing a <a href="http://www.ucsf-hastingsconsortium.org/event/consortium-sponsored-conference-food-deserts-legal-social-and-public-health-challenges" target="cspi">conference</a> on food deserts and food served at prisons; • The Denver Botanical Gardens will host a one-day Food Day conference with film screenings and food trucks on October 24, organized by the Colorado Public Health Department, Denver Urban Gardens, Sustainable Food Policy Council, and Live Well Colorado; • Organizers in Tucson are planning a <a href="http://www.santacruzheritage.org/FoodDay" target="cspi">Progressive Dinner</a> and bike tour along the Santa Cruz River, where Food Day’s six primary goals will be highlighted at the various stopping points; • The Omaha Farmers Market and the Gretchen Swanson Center for Nutrition will have a large-scale Food Day celebration on October 23, and will give away healthy breakfasts to about 2,000 children; and • Health departments in Rhode Island, Colorado, Los Angeles, Seattle, Philadelphia, and elsewhere are spearheading efforts in their communities. “Food Day is about eating real—which I believe means eating more food that comes from farms, and less food that comes from factories,” said Morgan Spurlock, a Food Day advisory board member who documented the effect of eating at McDonald’s for 30 days straight in his award-winning 2004 film Super Size Me. Besides events in public places, Food Day organizers are encouraging families to have healthful potluck dinners with friends, and to use these gatherings as opportunities to talk informally about food and our nation’s food system. For inspiration, FoodDay.org will post a number of delicious recipes from well-known chefs and cookbook writers. "Americans are craving change—they are improving their diets and they want to steer food and farm policies in a more just and sustainable direction,” said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which is providing national coordination for Food Day. “Food Day is a perfect opportunity for groups and advocates to advance their goals, for companies to announce more healthful or sustainably produced foods, and for health departments to launch new nutrition campaigns.” Food Day’s advisory board, chaired by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), includes many of the most prominent voices for change in the food policy world, including urban farming proponent Will Allen, author Michael Pollan, scientists Walter Willett and Kelly Brownell, Seattle Mayor Michael McGinn, former Surgeons General Richard Carmona and David Satcher, executive directors of the American Public Health Association and American Dietetic Association, chefs Dan Barber, Nora Pouillon, Barton Seaver, and Alice Waters, cookbook author Nina Simonds, and others. “All Americans will benefit from greater understanding and appreciation of food, agriculture and nutrition—spanning the food chain from farm families to family tables,” said Senator Harkin. “Participants in Food Day activities and events will be helping to promote better nutrition and health, lessen hunger and increase access to food, conserve and protect our land and water, and enhance the lives of consumers, farm families, and rural communities.” Neither CSPI nor Food Day accepts industry or government funding; CSPI’s Nutrition Action Healthletter does not accept any advertising. Food Day will also be funded in part by sales of merchandise from the <a href="http://www.cafepress.com/foodday" target="cspi">Food Day online store</a>. 2011-09-13 CSPI Urges Testing for Antibiotic Resistant Salmonella as Well as New E. Coli Strains http://cspinet.org/new/201109131.html Statement by CSPI Staff Attorney Sarah KleinToday’s announcement by USDA that it will expand its E. coli testing program for beef beyond O157:H7 to search for six other potentially deadly strains of E. coli is welcome news for consumers who expect and deserve to eat food without risk of illness. The six new adulterant strains—E. coli O26, O45, O103, O111, O121, and O145—have been linked to at least 10 outbreaks and nearly 700 illnesses since 1998, according to data gathered by CSPI. The new testing program will help prevent future outbreaks, as products testing positive for these strains will be diverted to further processing and not placed into commerce. The costs of the program are reasonable, particularly when stacked against the risk to consumers: approximately half a million dollars for USDA, and under $5 million for the entire $155-billion U.S. meat industry. Now USDA should turn its attention to another class of potentially deadly pathogens, antibiotic-resistant Salmonella. Earlier this year, CSPI petitioned the agency to declare four of these pathogens as adulterants under the law, which would trigger the same testing protocols now being undertaken for deadly E. coli strains. Since the petition was filed, consumers have already seen a huge recall of ground turkey contaminated with ABR Salmonella Heidelberg, and the same company, Cargill, implicated in that recall has just announced another recall of ground turkey contaminated with the exact same strain. Today, the agency has shown its willingness to exercise authority to declare non-O157 E. coli strains as adulterants; consumers deserve the same level of protection from antibiotic-resistant Salmonella as well. 2011-09-13 Del Monte Should Fight Contamination, Not FDA, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201108312.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalMost responsible food companies would be horrified to learn that customers who purchased their products became sickened with Salmonella. But after 20 people in 10 states fell ill after purchasing Del Monte cantaloupes traced back to one particular farm in Guatemala, Del Monte is instead lashing out against the Food and Drug Administration and food safety officials in Oregon. Rather than redoubling its efforts to prevent contamination, Del Monte filed a lawsuit to prevent the FDA from exercising its responsibility to protect the public’s health. Though the law sensibly allows FDA to take action to prevent the importation of food when the food “appears from the examination of such samples or otherwise” to be adulterated or misbranded, Del Monte’s suit seeks to defend its right to sell potentially contaminated food unless FDA has a "smoking gun" test result. Proving that a specific food carries the pathogen strain involved in an outbreak often can’t be done. Backtracking to find the exact food consumed weeks earlier is challenging, and even when products are located, they are often not uniformly contaminated so even a negative test result won’t clear a suspect product. And the law is clear that such a finding is not required. While no one wants FDA to act precipitously, it is vital that FDA and states act on the basis of epidemiologic links to foods purchased and consumed by the affected consumers. After all, contaminated food can be a life or death matter. FDA and Oregon used state-of-the-art techniques to identify the food item, and a lawsuit like Del Monte’s could have a dangerous chilling effect on the willingness of public health officials to recall foods or ban unsafe imports for fear of retaliation in court. Consumers should be outraged that Del Monte is using the courts to fight for its right to sell food that might be tainted. Worse yet, if Del Monte is successful, it could delay needed recalls and expose consumers to even more tainted imported products. 2011-08-31 Cities, CSPI, & Health Groups Announce Major New Campaign to Reduce Soda Consumption http://cspinet.org/new/201108311.html "Life's Sweeter with Fewer Sugary Drinks," Say Health OfficialsReducing the consumption of soda and other sugary drinks will be the focus of a new campaign to reduce diet-related disease announced today by health departments in several major cities as well as the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, the American Heart Association, the American Diabetes Association, and other groups. The campaign, <a href="http://www.fewersugarydrinks.org/" target="cspi">Life’s Sweeter with Fewer Sugary Drinks</a>, will seek to decrease average consumption of sugary drinks to roughly 3 cans per person per week by 2020. Health officials in Boston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, San Antonio, and Seattle say that reducing soda consumption is one of their top strategies for reducing rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and other health problems. All of those cities, plus 110 local and national health organizations, have embraced the Life’s Sweeter campaign. Sugary drinks are the single largest source of calories in the American diet and account for half of all added sugars consumed. And unlike any other food or beverage, only sugary drinks have been shown to have a causal role in promoting obesity: Each additional sugary drink consumed per day, according to one study, increases the likelihood that a child will become obese by about 60 percent. A reason that sugary drinks are conducive to obesity is that the calories in beverages aren’t as satiating as solid foods. The American Heart Association <a href="http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/NutritionCenter/HealthyDietGoals/Frequently-Asked-Questions-About-Sugar_UCM_306725_Article.jsp" target="cspi">recommends</a> that people limit their intake of sugary drinks to about 450 calories per week, or about three 12-ounce cans. Average consumption is now more than twice that. “Life’s Sweeter’s goal is to broaden the battle against sugary drinks from health experts to civic organizations, youth groups, civil rights groups, and others,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, Ph.D. “The enormous health and economic benefits that would result from drinking less ‘liquid candy’ will be supported by a broad cross-section of America. Not since the anti-tobacco campaigns has there been a product so worthy of a national health campaign.” The campaign’s web site, <a href="http://www.fewersugarydrinks.org" target="cspi">fewersugarydrinks.org</a>, invites individuals and families to take the Life’s Sweeter challenge to drink fewer or no sugary drinks. In addition, the campaign is encouraging employers, hospitals, and government agencies to adopt policies that would reduce soda consumption. Besides carbonated soda, the campaign targets fruit-flavored beverages with little or no juice, sweetened iced teas, lemonades, energy drinks, and so-called sports drinks such as Gatorade. “Campaigns like Life’s Sweeter with Fewer Sugary Drinks and our own local efforts will help raise awareness of the harmful consequences of consuming too many sugary drinks, which add empty calories to our diets, inches to our waistlines, and risks to our health,” said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, Director of Public Health and Health Officer for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health. Many big cities are already campaigning to reduce soda consumption. In New York City, for instance, officials have run hard-hitting ad campaigns connecting soda to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F4t8zL6F0c" target="cspi">weight gain</a>, and highlighting the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=62JMfv0tf3Q" target="cspi">sugar content</a> of soft drinks. Similar ads have been run in Seattle and Philadelphia. In Boston, Mayor Thomas Menino barred sugar-sweetened beverages from vending machines and concession stands on city property. Officials in San Antonio and San Francisco have similarly rid vending machines of high-calorie drinks. “Soda, sports drinks, and other sugar-sweetened beverages account for up to 10 percent of all calories consumed in the U.S. diet, and are known to be major contributors to obesity. Reducing our intake of these drinks can help reduce the incidence of preventable diseases like type 2 diabetes and certain cancers, arthritis, heart attacks, and stroke,” said Dr. Barbara Ferrer, Executive Director of the Boston Public Health Commission. “Here in Boston, we are creating an environment that makes the healthier choice the easier choice, whether it’s in schools, worksites, or other places in the community.” “With new scientific evidence suggesting that drinking more than one sugar-sweetened beverage per day raises the risk of high blood pressure, it’s imperative that we do more to help communities kick the soda habit,” said Rachel Johnson, Ph.D., vice chair of the American Heart Association’s nutrition committee and the Bickford Green and Gold Professor of Nutrition at the University of Vermont. “We are proud to support the Life’s Sweeter with Fewer Sugary Drinks campaign to help Americans make smarter beverage choices to reduce their risk for cardiovascular disease and improve overall health.” The beverage industry produces the equivalent of more than nine cans of sugary drinks per person per week, though some of that is wasted. Meanwhile, people who participate in food consumption surveys, such as that used in a study released today by the Centers for Disease Control, acknowledge consuming just over six cans per week. Because people typically understate consumption, especially of unhealthy foods, actual consumption is somewhere between six and nine. Those averages include the 50 percent of people that do not drink any sugary drinks on a given day. Research, branding, creative development, and messaging for the Life’s Sweeter campaign were conducted by the advocacy marketing firm Interlex, a national agency with extensive experience in public health and behavior change initiatives. “We believe that research-based campaigns are more effective at driving behavior change,” said Rudy Ruiz, CEO of Interlex. “This is the only campaign of this kind that has been tested nationally with general and multicultural audiences.” The Center for Science in the Public Interest is urging cities, states, and health groups to consider using <a href="http://www.foodday.org/" target="cspi">Food Day</a> on October 24 to introduce other policies aimed at reducing junk food consumption in favor of healthy, sustainable food. 2011-08-31 New Food Day Curriculum Aims to Help Youth "Eat Real" http://cspinet.org/new/201108251.html Teachers Invited to Observe Food Day with Healthy LessonsOrganizers of Food Day today published a <a href="http://foodday.org/files/Food-Day-Lessons.pdf" target="cspi">curriculum</a> for teachers to use on and around <a href="http://foodday.org/" target="cspi">Food Day</a>, a nationwide grassroots campaign on October 24 to encourage Americans to “eat real” and support healthy, affordable food grown in a sustainable, humane way. The Food Day curriculum offers five lessons designed to teach children the importance of eating real, fresh food; cutting back on processed foods; and advocating for a healthier community. It was developed by Pamela Koch and Isobel Contento, professors at Teachers College, Columbia University, and adapted from the Linking Food and the Environment Curriculum Series. “Teachers should consider using this curriculum not just on Food Day, but throughout the school year,” said Contento. “Each lesson has many ideas for projects that students can do, along with numerous resource for teachers. It’s important that we teach health and nutrition in the classroom along with science, math and other subjects.” The first lesson plan in the series covers how to “eat real.” Students will learn that real foods come relatively straight from a plant or animal and have the nutrients people need to stay healthy at every age. The lesson encourages students to become smart consumers who can choose a balanced, healthy diet. Other lessons teach students to eat mostly plants and not to eat too much, sensible practices inspired by Michael Pollan’s In Defense of Food. Additional inspiration for these lesson plans came from Food: Where Nutrition, Politics & Culture Meet by Deborah Katz and Mary Goodwin, as well as work by Teachers College professor Joan Gussow. The curriculum complements a few of Food Day’s six goals: 1. Reduce diet-related disease by promoting safe, healthy foods 2. Support sustainable farms & limit subsidies to big agribusiness 3. Expand access to food and alleviate hunger 4. Protect the environment & animals by reforming factory farms 5. Promote health by curbing junk-food marketing to kids 6. Support fair conditions for food and farm workers The lesson plans are crafted for middle school students, but can easily be adapted for elementary and high school students. “Educating young people about food and nutrition is critical if we are to prevent obesity and other diet-related diseases,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The lessons in this curriculum will help kids distinguish between real foods that promote health from junk foods that promote disease.” Schools are invited to celebrate Food Day in a variety of ways. Schools in Seattle, WA, are planning a special lunch menu that will highlight whole, fresh foods. Boulder, CO, schools will be observing a Meatless Monday and serving especially healthy items. School districts in Los Angeles, Tulsa, Chicago, Detroit, and elsewhere also will participate. Other schools could observe Food Day by organizing vegetable tastings in kindergartens, scheduling field trips to local farms, or by planning or planting vegetable gardens. Outside of schools, Food Day is being celebrated in diverse ways by health departments, colleges, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">restaurants</a>, and others. In Little Rock, AR, the mayor’s office is teaming up with the Clinton Foundation, Heifer International, and others to build and distribute raised-bed gardens for schools and individuals living in food deserts (communities with poor access to fresh, healthful foods). The University of California Hastings Law School and UCSF Consortium on Law, Science, and Health Policy are organizing a conference on food deserts, including at prisons. Food Day organizers in Savannah, GA are expecting 15,000 people at an event on the Saturday before Food Day in Mother Matilda Beasley Park. Hundreds of other Food Day events can be found on an interactive map at <a href="http://foodday.org/" target="cspi">FoodDay.org</a>. 2011-08-25 Restaurants Invited to Celebrate Food Day with Positive Steps http://cspinet.org/new/201108091.html Buying Local, Adding Whole Grains Among the PossibilitiesProminent chefs, nutritionists, and food activists are inviting the nation’s restaurants to celebrate Food Day on October 24 by announcing improvements to menus and sourcing policies that advance health and the environment. Organizers say that restaurants could observe <a href="http://foodday.org/" target="cspi">Food Day</a> in a wide variety of ways, including by buying more produce, meat, and eggs from local farms; by adding more whole grains to breads and pastas; or by collecting money for food banks, farmers markets, or other local organizations. Chefs already participating in Food Day include Alice Waters, of famed Chez Panisse in Berkeley, Calif., Dan Barber of Blue Hill in Manhattan and Blue Hill at Stone Barns, Michel Nischan of the Dressing Room in Westport, Conn., early organics pioneer Nora Pouillon of Washington, D.C.’s Restaurant Nora, and sustainable seafood expert Barton Seaver. Food Day is also partnering with groups like Chefs Collaborative, American Culinary Federation, and the Arcadia Center for Sustainable Food and Agriculture, and is encouraging local restaurants to seek out partnerships with area hunger and sustainable-agriculture groups. “Food Day is a great opportunity for restaurants to show their commitment to locally produced artisan foods, to showcase a variety of whole grains, and to reach out to an audience hungry for more sustainable ways to consume that are more in keeping with the health of our bodies and our environment,” said Ellen Gray, co-owner, along with her husband Todd Gray, of Equinox Restaurant, Watershed, and Todd Gray’s Muse at the Corcoran, all in Washington, D.C. Restaurants could invite farmers to meet diners, plan special menus or events, or publicize Food Day via email and social media. Some examples already in the works include: • A chain of vegan restaurants, Native Foods, will organize cooking demonstrations and tastings in its seven locations in California; • In Manhattan, the massive Italian market Eataly has started handing out Food Day materials, and will bring in 20 farmers to talk to customers; • Food Day organizers in New Haven, Conn., are planning a Real Food Restaurant Week during which restaurants will offer special meals featuring local produce and healthier options; and • Uncommon Ground restaurant in Chicago will observe Food Day by offering a three-course Farm-to-Table prix fixe menu from October 16 to October 24. Organized by the non-profit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, Food Day will encourage people around the country to sponsor or participate in activities that encourage Americans to “eat real” and support healthy, affordable food grown in a sustainable, humane way. Modeled on Earth Day, organizers hope Food Day will inspire Americans to hold thousands of events in schools, college campuses, houses of worship, restaurants, and even in private homes aimed at fixing America’s diet and food system. A Food Day event could be as small as a parent organizing a vegetable identification contest at a kindergarten class—or as massive as a rally in a city park, with entertainment and healthy food. Health departments, city councils, and other policymakers could use Food Day to launch campaigns, hold hearings, or otherwise address communities’ food problems. “I’m excited that many restaurants are seizing the opportunity presented by Food Day and becoming part of a movement aimed at getting people to celebrate honest-to-goodness real food that comes from farms and not factories,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. Food Day is led by honorary co-chairs Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and an advisory board that includes author Michael Pollan; prominent physicians Caldwell Esselstyn, Michael Roizen, and David Satcher; nutrition authorities Walter Willett, Kelly Brownell, and Marion Nestle; actor Jane Fonda; filmmaker Morgan Spurlock; and Rodale, Inc. CEO Maria Rodale. Besides restaurants, many national organizations, such as the American Dietetic Association, American Public Health Association, Community Food Security Coalition, Earth Day Network, Farmers Market Coalition, Humane Society of the United States, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Prevention Institute, and Slow Food USA, along with many city- and state-level organizations, are planning on organizing or participating in Food Day events. 2011-08-09 CSPI Urges Review into Government's Handling of Salmonella Outbreak http://cspinet.org/new/201108042.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe Salmonella Heidelberg outbreak shows a troubling lapse in coordination between federal agencies that are duty bound to protect the public. Today during a conference call with the Centers for Disease Control and the USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service, government officials presented a confusing timeline indicating that they might have had preliminary evidence by late May linking the outbreak strain to test results from turkey products coming out of a Cargill plant in Arkansas. Given the severity of the outbreak, involving over 20 hospitalizations and one death, prompt consumer warnings and notification of the company are essential to stem the outbreak. The failure to issue a public alert earlier or to even notify the company shows a troubling lack of coordination that potentially contributed to the size and severity of the outbreak. The government’s failure to either alert the public or the company of the problem should be fully reviewed. 2011-08-04 Death Results from Outbreak of Antibiotic-Resistant Salmonella http://cspinet.org/new/201108041.html Statement of CSPI Staff Attorney Sarah KleinNearly 80 consumers are sick and one has died from a dangerous strain of antibiotic-resistant Salmonella Heidelberg linked to ground turkey products. These strains of Salmonella increase the risk that consumers will face life-threatening illnesses. Infected individuals face longer illnesses, hospitalizations, and more severe consequences. The Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspi_petition_to_usda_on_abr_salmonella.pdf" target="cspi">petitioned</a> the U.S. Department of Agriculture in May to declare <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201105251.html" target="cspi">this and three other strains</a> that have caused outbreaks and recalls as “adulterants” under the law. That would trigger new testing for those strains and make it less likely that contaminated products reach consumers. USDA has a responsibility to move proactively to prevent outbreaks, rather than just responding to them once they occur. Both a USDA declaration of adulteration and government and industry testing for Salmonella should be utilized to address this problem. Furthermore, the Food and Drug Administration could help by stopping the use of antibiotics in healthy farm animals. That would reduce the growth of bacteria resistant to antibiotics used in human medicine. 2011-08-04 Unrealistic Serving Sizes Understate Calories, Sodium, Saturated Fat, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201108021.html Labels for Soup & Ice Cream Among Worst OffendersLabels for canned soup, ice cream, coffee creamer, and aerosol non-stick cooking sprays understate the calories, sodium, and saturated fat consumers are likely to get from those products, since the declared serving sizes are much smaller than actual serving sizes, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/serving-size-comment-062811.pdf" target="cspi">recent letter</a> to Food and Drug Administration chief Margaret Hamburg, the nonprofit consumer group again urged the agency to revise its serving-size regulations. Canned soup presents a dramatic example of how unrealistic the stated serving sizes are, according to CSPI. Labels for Campbell’s Chunky Classic Chicken Noodle soup indicate a serving is 1 cup (a little less than half a can) and has 790 milligrams of sodium—a hefty amount by any standard and about half the sodium most adults should consume in a whole day. But according to a national telephone survey commissioned by CSPI, 64 percent of consumers would eat the whole can at one time and would consume 1,840 mg of sodium—more than a day’s worth for most adults. Only 10 percent of consumers said they eat 1 cup portions. Similarly, CSPI’s survey found that 62 percent of consumers eat the contents of the entire can of a (reconstituted) condensed soup like Campbell’s Chicken Noodle Soup. An entire can holds 2,390 mg of sodium—far more than the 890 mg listed for one serving. That amount of sodium only applies if one can is divided into 2½ portions. Another 27 percent eat half a can at a sitting, so they get 1,195 mg. “Given the prevalence of hypertension, heart disease, and stroke in America, we need accurate food labels that would ensure that consumers really know what they’re likely to consume,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA should define serving sizes to reflect what consumers actually eat, as the law requires, not what the soup industry pretends that they eat.” The serving size for ice cream is a dainty half-cup, and Nutrition Facts labels for Häagen-Dazs Vanilla ice cream dutifully list 10 grams of saturated fat per serving. So someone eating a whole cup of that ice cream would actually be eating a full day’s worth of saturated fat (20 g). A ridiculously tiny serving size of a third, a quarter, or even a fifth of a second spray helps PAM and other aerosol cooking sprays boast zero calories and zero fat, even though the products are mostly fat. A six second spray would have 50 calories and 6 grams of fat. Another example is powdered coffee creamer. The serving size on the label of Fat Free Original Coffee-mate is one teaspoon, even though many or most consumers use several times as much. The small serving size leads people to think that they’re getting only 10 calories and no fat or saturated fat per serving. In fact, a two-tablespoon serving of Fat Free Original Coffee-mate would have 50 calories and 1.6 grams of saturated fat, according to a 2008 memo from Nestlé. (That’s not much different than the 40 calories and 2 grams of saturated fat in two tablespoons of ordinary half and half.) FDA regulations specify standard serving sizes for various foods to enable consumers to compare different brands. However, those serving sizes were based on data collected in the late 1970s, and even so were sometimes flawed. The FDA is now reviewing serving sizes in a broader revision of food labels. 2011-08-02 McDonald's Move on Happy Meals an Important Step in the Right Direction http://cspinet.org/new/201107261.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe improvements that McDonald’s has announced for its Happy Meals are an important step in the right direction. It’s good news that those meals will all have apple slices, smaller servings of fries, and fewer calories. While we wish that Happy Meals would include a bigger serving of fresh fruit or vegetable, including even a small serving—and without a sugary sauce—as a standard component is a real advance. McDonald’s clearly has a lot more to do, for both kids and adults. But this move is a sign that the company recognizes that parents don’t want burgers, fries, and soda to be the default fast-food experience. And, surely, McDonald’s recognizes that policy makers are becoming increasingly interested in ensuring that healthier foods are marketed to children. # # # The Center for Science in the Public Interest has pressed McDonald's and other companies to stop using trans fat, reduce sodium levels, and provide more-healthful options. In a lawsuit filed last year, CSPI represents a parent concerned about McDonald's use of toys to attract children to its Happy Meals. 2011-07-26 Saltwater "Enhanced" Meat and Poultry to Get Better Labels http://cspinet.org/new/201107211.html "Enhancing" Pumps Up Sodium Content and Prices, According to CSPIThe U.S. Department of Agriculture is poised to require better labeling of a controversial practice that lets processors increase the weight, and thus the price, of meat and poultry by injecting them with salt water. The <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/NR_072111_01/index.asp" target="cspi">proposed rule</a>, expected to be published early next week, would require processors to prominently disclose the percentage of the product that is added solution, and the solution’s ingredients. The agency will rule separately whether such products can be labeled “natural,” as many saltwater-injected meat and poultry products are. “Who wants to pay $4.99 a pound for the added water and salt?” asks Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Besides cheating customers financially, ‘enhancing’ meat and poultry delivers a stealth hit of sodium. Better labeling would help consumers concerned about high blood pressure, stroke, or heart disease avoid products that contribute to those diseases.” Chicken breasts, pork tenderloins, or other foods enhanced with a salt-water solution can have more than five times as much sodium as occurs naturally in those foods, according to CSPI. A whole chicken enhanced with a solution of water, salt, sodium phosphate, chicken broth, and other ingredients might have 550 milligrams of sodium per four-ounce serving, while a similar serving of unprocessed chicken has just 75 mg of sodium. According to USDA, 30 percent of poultry, 15 percent of beef, and 90 percent of pork contain added solutions. In 2007, CSPI filed a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200701031.html" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> with USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service urging the agency to go beyond labeling and actually set ceilings on the amount of sodium that would be allowed in all processed meat and poultry, including deli meats, bacon, sausage, chicken pot pies, and frozen dinners. CSPI had <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="cspi">previously petitioned</a> the Food and Drug Administration to revoke salt’s status as a Generally Recognized as Safe, or GRAS, ingredient and instead regulate it as a food additive, subject to reasonable limits or special labeling requirements. “We applaud the USDA for acting to protect consumers’ health and pocketbooks with this sensible proposal,” Jacobson said. 2011-07-21 Eating is Xtreme as Ever at America's Chains http://cspinet.org/new/201107191.html "Stacked, Stuffed, and Topped" is the Trend at Applebee's and ElsewhereIf this year’s winners of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/xtreme_eating_awards_2011.pdf" target="cspi">Xtreme Eating Awards</a> are any indication, the overfeeding of America seems likely to continue unabated at the nation’s chain restaurants. The dishonorees, unveiled in the current edition of the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, include burgers topped with pork belly and fried eggs, meatballs stuffed with provolone, and grilled cheese sandwiches stuffed with deep-fried mozzarella sticks. “If Americans are feeling a little more full when lumbering out of The Cheesecake Factory, Applebee’s, Denny’s, and other chains, it’s not in their heads,” said CSPI nutrition director Bonnie Liebman. “It’s as if the restaurants were targeting the remaining one out of three Americans who are still normal weight in order to boost their risk of obesity, diabetes, heart attacks, and cancer.” One chain, Applebee’s, is openly bragging about its new “stacked, stuffed, and topped” menu. But that’s hardly the only chain stacking, stuffing, or topping already high-calorie menu items with high-cal add-ons. To put the following numbers into context, consider that a typical eater should limit themselves to about 2,000 calories, 20 grams of saturated fat, and 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day. Roll out the red carpet: Five of the eight 2011 Xtreme Eating Awards include: • Denny’s Fried Cheese Melt: In the chain’s own words, it is “four fried mozzarella sticks and melted American cheese grilled between two slices of sourdough bread.” And in the chain’s own numbers, this cheesy collision, with its side of French fries and marinara sauce, has 1,260 calories and 21 grams of saturated fat (a full day’s worth), and 3,010 mg of sodium (two days’ worth). “The possibilities are wide open,” says Denny’s. “They’re wide, all right,” says Nutrition Action. Eating this meal is like eating two Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizzas. • The Cheesecake Factory Farmhouse Cheeseburger: This burger is “topped with grilled smoked pork belly cheddar cheese, onions, lettuce, tomato, mayo and a fried egg.” Red Robin, Denny’s and IHOP have similarly embraced the idea of topping burgers with eggs. But to take the spotlight, this Factory-farmed burger boasts 1,530 calories and 36 grams of saturated fat topped with 3,210 milligrams of sodium. That’s assuming you just eat the burger: French fries bring an additional 460 calories and 1,460 mg of sodium. Eating this would be the equivalent of eating three McDonald’s Quarter Pounders with cheese. Add another Quarter Pounder with cheese if you eat the side order of fries. • Cold Stone Creamery PB&C Shake: Even people accustomed to 1,500-calorie burgers wouldn’t expect 2,000-calorie shakes. A 24-oz. “Gotta Have It” size shake of peanut butter, chocolate ice cream, and milk has a day’s calories (2,010) and three and a half days’ worth of saturated fat (68 grams). Cold Stone’s Web site says, without a whiff of irony, “Your Health – Just as Important as Taste.” One large Cold Stone Creamery PB&C Shake is like drinking two 16-oz. T-bone steaks plus a buttered baked potato. • Applebee’s Provolone-Stuffed Meatballs With Fettuccine: Spaghetti with meatballs was never diet food. But Applebee’s stuffs provolone cheese into these meatballs and simultaneously tops the underlying fettuccine with a marinara sauce and a Parmesan cream sauce. With a piece of garlic bread, the four cups of pasta, two sauces, and cheese-injected meatballs deliver 1,520 calories, 43 grams of saturated fat (two days’ worth), and 3,700 mg of sodium (more than two days’ worth). It’s like eating two of Applebee’s 12-oz. Ribeye Steaks plus a side of Garlic Mashed Potatoes. • The Cheesecake Factory Ultimate Red Velvet Cake Cheesecake: Why stop at a slice of red velvet cake when you can top it with a layer of cheesecake, top that with another layer of red velvet cake, and top that with another layer of cheesecake? And then top that with cream cheese frosting, chocolate shavings, and a small silo of whipped cream? Weighing in at three-quarters of a pound, this dessert packs 1,540 calories and 59 grams of saturated fat (three days’ worth). Eating one slice of the Ultimate Red Velvet Cake Cheesecake is like eating one Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizza plus two Quarter Pounders with cheese except the cake has an additional days’ worth of saturated fat. Happily, this is likely to be the last year that these calorie counts aren’t right on the menu for all to see, according to CSPI. The Food and Drug Administration is finalizing a set of rules implementing a calorie-labeling provision included in the health care reform legislation signed into law by President Obama in March. “Perhaps calorie labeling will usher in a new era of common sense at America’s chain restaurants, and chains will compete with each other to come up with new, healthy menu items with more vegetables, fruits, and whole grains,” said Michael F. Jacobson. “I hope at some point chains will stop stuffing, stacking, and topping with cheese and meat and white flour. Instead of setting aside a few menu items called something like ‘Lean & Fit,’ why can’t menus have a small section called ‘Fatten Up!’ and keep the rest of the menu healthy?” Nutrition Action Healthletter is the publication that previously blew the whistle on the staggering calorie and fat content of movie theater popcorn, Chinese food, steakhouses, and other restaurant fare. Subscriptions to the 850,000-circulation Healthletter, the largest of its kind in North America, are $10 for first-time subscribers. 2011-07-19 Analysis: Government's Proposed Standards for Food Marketing Aimed at Kids Are Far Superior to Industry's Own http://cspinet.org/new/201107141.html Industry Hopes to Continue Marketing Cocoa Puffs, Kool-Aid, and Other Junk Foods to KidsThe food industry is up in arms over a voluntary set of <a href="http://ftc.gov/os/2011/04/110428foodmarketproposedguide.pdf" target="cspi">proposed nutrition standards</a> for marketing to children that food companies could either adopt or ignore. The industry’s latest salvo is a <a href="http://www.bbb.org/us/article/Council-of-Better-Business-Bureaus-Announces-Groundbreaking-Agreement-on-Ch-28325" target="cspi">competing set of voluntary nutrition standards</a> that it says companies participating in self-regulation will implement. But according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, today’s announcement is a transparent attempt to undermine the stronger standards proposed by the government’s Interagency Working Group. And, if the industry adopts its own proposed standards, young children would continue to be bombarded with ads for such junk foods as Cocoa Puffs, Cookie Crisps, Reese’s Puffs, and Corn Pops cereals, Kool-Aid, many Lunchables, and sugary Popsicles. “It’s great news that, at long last, the industry realizes that the current patchwork of inconsistent company pledges is not working, and that industry-wide nutrition guidelines are needed,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “We, along with many national health and medical organizations, call on the food and media industries to voluntarily adopt the sensible nutrition standards developed by the government agencies.” CSPI’s <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/iwg-report.pdf" target="cspi">analysis</a> of foods that are currently being marketed to children finds that the industry is close to meeting the proposed voluntary ceilings for saturated fat, trans fat, sodium, and sugars for many foods. Where most food products fall short is on making positive contributions to kids’ diets; few include enough fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. The industry standards released today indicate that marketers intend to allow artificial fortification to make foods of poor nutritional value meet their new standards. As instructed by Congress, an Interagency Working Group, comprised of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration, Federal Trade Commission, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, developed the voluntary guidelines with an eye toward reducing childhood obesity and other nutrition-related health problems. The proposed guidelines are based on government-backed, mainstream nutrition recommendations. Released in March, those guidelines recommend that foods marketed to kids not exceed certain limits on saturated and trans fats, sodium, and sugars, and contain meaningful amounts of ingredients that contribute to healthy diets, including fruits, vegetables, whole grains, or low-fat dairy. In 2006, the food industry formed the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, a self-regulatory program administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus. Up to now, participating companies have agreed to adopt their own, individually tailored policies setting nutrition criteria for foods marketed to children. Although the program has spurred some improvements, the vast majority of foods marketed to children, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pledgereport.pdf" target="cspi">according to CSPI</a>, still are of poor nutritional quality. Though industry has charged that whole wheat bread, peanut butter, and most yogurts don’t meet the IWG’s standards, they actually do, according to CSPI. “The food industry lost major credibility claiming that the Administration was trying to ban advertising of whole wheat bread, peanut butter, or other healthy foods to kids,” Wootan said. “The industry lost even more credibility when it fabricated a bogus study falsely claiming that the sensible, science-based standards backed by the government would result in job losses. Really, what the industry is trying to do is preserve its ability to spend $2 billion a year advertising things like Popsicle’s SpongeBob SquarePants Pop-Ups to impressionable young children.” Also today, CSPI, the American Heart Association, American Public Health Association, National PTA, and about 80 other groups and academic <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/iwg-sign-on-letter-signatories.pdf " target="cspi">experts wrote to the IWG</a> in strong support of the draft nutrition guidelines and marketing definitions. CSPI also filed detailed comments on both the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fmw-comments-nutrition.pdf" target="cspi">proposed nutrition principles</a> and the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fmw-comment-marketing-definitions.pdf" target="cspi">marketing definitions</a> urging that the agencies apply the nutrition guidelines to all marketing aimed at children under 12 years old, as well as marketing in preschools, elementary, middle, and high schools. 2011-07-14 New Campbell Soup CEO to Give Consumers Less Choice on Salt http://cspinet.org/new/201107132.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonWhen, in 2006, Campbell Soup Co. announced that it had reformulated many of its soups to contain less sodium, then-president of Campbell’s USA Denise Morrison told the Associated Press: “We look at it as the enabler to talk about the other health benefits of soup.” Unfortunately for millions of hypertensive Americans who have the occasional can of Campbell soup, it’s going to be a lot harder for the company to talk about the health benefits of soup. And how patronizing for Morrison, now the new chief executive, to claim that adding more salt to Campbell’s soups gives consumers more choice. Consumers are always free to add salt, but it’s impossible for them to get rid of the new salt Campbell has added. Why not trust consumers to add as much or as little as they want? If Campbell has reason to believe consumers don’t like the taste of their products, why resort to salt? Why not improve their soups with more and better-quality vegetables and chicken, or with herbs and spices? I suppose that’s a question that answers itself, and the answer is money. Campbell enjoys a huge profit margin selling what are often basically overpriced disease-promoting cans of salt and water. 2011-07-13 One Healthy Choice Not Enough for Kids' Meals http://cspinet.org/new/201107131.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThere's less to the National Restaurant Association's new <a href="http://www.restaurant.org/pressroom/pressrelease/?ID=2136" target="cspi">program</a> for children’s meals than meets the eye. Most restaurants already offer one or two healthy choices—but they are present amidst a minefield of high-calorie, salty, high-fat options. The great majority of choices on children’s menus should be healthy, given that kids are getting one-third of their calories outside the home, and eating out is linked to obesity. Kids' food and meals at restaurants have become almost synonymous with junk. A 2008 <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/kidsmeals-report.pdf" target="cspi">CSPI study</a> found that at the top 25 chain restaurants, 93 percent of the kids’ meals were too high in calories, 45 percent too high in saturated fat, and 86 percent too high in salt. Restaurants-especially McDonald’s, which is not part of the new initiative-should follow Burger King’s lead and not just shove fries and soft drinks into kids’ meals, but ask parents if they want a fruit or vegetable side dish and milk, juice, or water instead. Our study of McDonald’s found that even though it shows healthier options in its advertising, it usually sticks fries in the box without even asking parents what they want. 2011-07-13 Dem Consulting Firm "Should Be Ashamed" for Undermining Obama Administration Efforts on Protecting Kids from Junk Food Marketing http://cspinet.org/new/201107081.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThis is why Americans are fed up with Washington: It’s a city where people might spend a year or two serving a new Presidential Administration … until it’s time to leave that Administration and actively undermine it in exchange for big bucks. Former White House communications director Anita Dunn and her firm should be ashamed of themselves for leading the food industry’s panicky efforts to quash the Obama administration’s reasonable and voluntary nutrition guidelines proposed for foods marketed to children. I hope the revolving door didn’t hit her on the way out. Far from banning the Easter bunny, as the industry’s fear-mongering goes, the Interagency Working Group—at the instruction of Congress—simply proposed a voluntary set of nutrition standards that food companies could (or could not) adopt as part of their existing self-regulatory program. These standards are voluntary, and lest anyone forget, Congress had in 1980 specifically stripped the Federal Trade Commission of its rulemaking authority to police junk food ads aimed at kids. We’ve come to expect tantrums from the food industry when laws or binding regulations might impact the way it does business. But it’s a shame the industry is using such overheated rhetoric to fight reasonable, voluntary nutrition guidelines aimed at reducing kids’ risk of obesity, diabetes, and other diet-related diseases. Perhaps it’s a sign that the food industry’s self-regulatory program is not all that they have made it out to be. 2011-07-08 Advocates Call on Obama Administration to Strengthen Menu Labeling Rules http://cspinet.org/new/201107051.html Proposal Undercuts Congressional IntentToday over 80 national, state, and local health organizations and experts, including the American Heart Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, Center for Science in the Public Interest, American Public Health Association, and the National PTA, called on the Obama Administration to strengthen the final rules for calorie labeling on chain restaurant menus and vending machines. They charged that the Administration's proposed regulations do not comply with the labeling law that was passed as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in March 2010 and was championed by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT). The groups voiced strong support for calorie labeling on menus at chain restaurants and on vending machines. Their <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_sign-on_letter.pdf" target="cspi">letter</a> points out that with American adults and children consuming about one-third of their calories from eating out, menu and vending labeling will provide important tools to enable people to make informed food choices and spur industry to cut calorie levels in their offerings. (CSPI also filed more detailed comments on both <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/comments_ml_regs_cspi.pdf" target="cspi">menu</a> and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/comments_vending_labeling.pdf" target="cspi">vending</a> labeling.) However, the advocates had three major objections and vigorously urged the Administration: • to adhere to the definition of restaurants and similar retail food establishments in the draft menu labeling guidance that the FDA issued last summer and not exempt labeling for foods sold in movie theaters, casinos, bowling alleys, stadiums, hotels, airlines, and cafes and delis in superstores. • not to exempt alcoholic beverages from labeling. Congress required calorie labeling for all items on the menu and did not exclude those beverages. Alcoholic drinks are the fifth-largest source of calories in American adults' diets, and the calorie content of alcoholic beverages can vary widely. Without labeling, a person would not know that at TGI Fridays the Fresh Mango Lemonade Shaker (410 calories) has twice the calories of the Lemon Twist Martini (200 calories). • not to allow companies to post the calories for vending machine items on a sign next to the machine. The Affordable Care Act requires that companies "provide a sign listing the calories in close proximity to each article of food or the selection button" (emphasis added). The Administration also ignored congressional intent in proposing to exempt bulk vending machines, which usually dispense candy or other junk food and make up 20 percent of vending machines. "It's disappointing that the Administration would weaken the labeling proposals from what <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/harkin-delauro_ml_letter.pdf" target="cspi">Congress required</a> ," charged Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "You'd think, given the Administration's strong commitment to addressing childhood obesity, that it would try to provide nutrition information for as many foods in as many venues as Congress required. "Many of the foods sold in the venues that the Administration has proposed exempting are similar to foods that will be labeled in restaurants," said Wootan. "In addition to restaurants, Congress required menu labeling at ‘similar retail food establishments,’ which sell the same types of prepared foods as restaurants. The proposed rule is unfair to traditional restaurants and would significantly reduce the number of venues providing calorie labeling to their customers." The Administration has pledged to finalize the menu and vending labeling rules by the end of the year. The menu labeling rules are expected to go into effect in mid-2012 and the vending rules by the end of 2012. 2011-07-05 Broad-based Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue Proposes Tighter Controls of Antimicrobial Use on the Farm http://cspinet.org/new/201106291.html Last week in Brussels, Belgium, consumer organizations representing both American and European consumers approved a resolution calling on governments to reduce their use of antimicrobials in farm animals to ensure the continued effectiveness of those drugs for treating human illnesses. The resolution urged governments to ban the use of antimicrobials for non-therapeutic purposes in food-producing animals and to adopt policies requiring veterinarians to determine when the use of the drugs is needed. The <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/tacd_amr_resolution_-_final.pdf" target="cspi">resolution</a> states that a number of factors contribute to the growing threat of antimicrobial resistance, including the use of antibiotics in human medicine and its excessive use in animal husbandry. It states, “With regard to animal farming, antimicrobials are not just used to cure infections, but also routinely added to livestock feed and/or water to prevent infections in healthy animals and as growth promoters.” The Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) is a forum for consumer organizations in the United States and Europe to develop consumer policy recommendations on important food and trade issues. The 12th Annual Meeting of the organization was held in Brussels on June 21, 2011. Ensuring the safety of food was a priority area discussed at the meeting. Caroline Smith DeWaal, the Director of Food Safety for the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the Co-Chair of the TACD Food Policy Committee, discussed the resolution at a plenary session with Commissioner John Dalli, the European Commissioner of Health and Consumer Affairs. “The recent outbreak of foodborne illnesses in Germany illustrated the enormous challenge of food safety. That tragedy is a reminder that the biological world does not stand still or wait for sensible new policies to be adopted.” DeWaal said. “It is constantly moving, and governments must develop policies that anticipate problems before they erupt into major outbreaks.” The resolution on the use of antimicrobials adopted by TACD follows the recommendations issued during World Health Day 2011 by the World Health Organization (WHO), which called for governments to reduce the need for antimicrobial use on the farm through better policies and animal husbandry practices. The TACD resolution urged that the use in animals of drugs that are critically important to human medicine be significantly reduced or eliminated, along with a total ban on the non-therapeutic use of antimicrobials in animal and food production. In addition, the resolution calls on governments to create and fund systems to monitor the use of antimicrobials in food-producing animals. National surveillance systems should operate farm-to-table and integrate the findings of public health, veterinary, and food safety laboratories. Also discussing food policy challenges related to food safety was Sue Davies, the Chief Policy Adviser for Which? (a consumer advocacy organization based in the United Kingdom) and the EU Co-Chair of the TACD Food Policy Committee. Davies remarked, “[it is] a critical time for food policy as many issues are coming together and need to be tackled effectively to ensure that consumers can make healthy and safe food choices – whether that’s expectations of quality, origin, or the ability to act on ethical or other concerns.” She also mentioned the significance of the recent E. coli outbreak in Germany in highlighting how food safety must be addressed. She stated that governments need to be alert to new and emerging risks, especially in the face of an increasingly complex and globalized food supply chain. 2011-06-29 Fast-Food Chain Drops Toys from Kids' Meals http://cspinet.org/new/201106211.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanWe hope that McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, and Taco Bell are paying attention to Jack in the Box, which has decided to stop using toys to market fast-food meals to children. Using toys to market unhealthy restaurant meals to kids exploits children, annoys parents, and is frowned upon by nutritionists, behavioral scientists, and a growing number of public health officials around the country. It’s too bad that McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, and Taco Bell think they can’t compete on the basis of quality, value, taste, or nutrition, but instead must resort to such a discredited marketing tactic to lure families to their businesses. We congratulate Jack in the Box for stopping toy-based food marketing, regardless of its motivation, and hope local and state policymakers consider cracking down on the practice further. # # # Note: CSPI’s litigation department is currently in court as co-counsel to a California woman who is suing McDonald’s over their use of toys to market directly to children. More on that suit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012151.html" target="cspi">here</a>. 2011-06-21 CSPI Applauds USDA's New Healthy Eating Plate http://cspinet.org/new/201106021.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanUSDA's new healthy eating graphic is a huge improvement over the inscrutable food pyramid. While no one graphic can communicate every nuance of healthy eating, this easy-to-understand illustration will help people remember what their own plate should look like. It likely will shock most people into recognizing that they need to eat a heck of a lot more vegetables and fruits. Most people are eating about a quarter of a plate of fruits or vegetables, not a half a plate as recommended. Wisely, USDA is investing in a comprehensive campaign to get the new food plate and key healthy eating messages out to the public. USDA's <a href="http://http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/DietaryGuidelines/2010/PolicyDoc/SelectedMessages.pdf" target="cspi">simple messages</a>, such as “switch to low-fat milk” and “drink water instead of sugary drinks,” prioritize the 95-page Dietary Guidelines for Americans into key dietary actions that can help people avoid heart disease, diabetes, and other nutrition-related health problems. 2011-06-02 Food Day 2011 is Getting Cooking! http://cspinet.org/new/201105311.html Thousands of Events on October 24 Will Encourage Americans to ‘Eat Real’Communities around the country are gearing up for <a href="http://www.foodday.org" target="cspi">Food Day</a> —a grassroots mobilization aimed at improving America’s food policies. Set for Monday, October 24, 2011, Food Day will see thousands of forums and celebrations from coast to coast aimed at promoting healthy diets and solving local communities’ food problems. “Our food system is delivering up epidemic-levels of obesity and cardiovascular disease,” said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which, along with a prestigious <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/food-day-advisory-board.php" target="cspi">advisory board</a>, is spearheading Food Day. “And we’re paying billions of dollars in subsidies to farmers who don’t need them and little to those that do. We’re maximizing crop yields—and polluting our air and water with fertilizer, pesticides, and antibiotics—yet we haven’t ended hunger. Food Day will shine a light on solutions to these seemingly intractable problems.” The broad outlines of Food Day are beginning to take shape: • Events are being planned at the University of Vermont, University of Pennsylvania, University of Minnesota, New York University, Stanford, Yale, Harvard School of Public Health, University of North Carolina, and other campuses; • The American Medical Student Association is organizing Food Day activities around food deserts, hunger, and healthier diets; • Syracuse, NY, is organizing a festival to celebrate local food and their rich cultural and ethnic diversity; • The New Haven, Conn., Food Policy Council and community partners are organizing a city-wide cook-in and harvest festival; • Philadelphia is planning a city-wide event focused on ending hunger and food deserts; • Sioux City, IA, is planning for nearly 1,000 people to participate in activities at three cultural institutions; the highlight will be a major conference on how small and mid-size farmers can get their produce to market; • The America the Beautiful Fund will provide plant and flower seeds in September for all Food Day coordinators to plant community gardens; • California organizations are building a state-wide Food Day partnership to promote new food policies; and • At <a href="http://www.foodday.org" target="cspi">FoodDay.org</a>, Americans can now find Food Day events near them, or announce their own. Food Day organizers at the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s Washington office hope that the campaign will inspire Americans to organize events in schools, college campuses, houses of worship, hospitals, and even in private homes aimed at fixing America’s food system. A Food Day event could be as small as a parent organizing a vegetable identification contest at a kindergarten class—or as massive as a rally in a city park, with entertainment and healthy food. Health departments, city councils, and other policymakers could use Food Day to launch campaigns, hold hearings, or otherwise address communities’ food problems. “Americans want a better and healthier food system,” said Marion Nestle, the Paulette Goddard Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University and a member of Food Day's advisory board. “Food Day can inspire Americans to make healthier food choices, but even better, Food Day will help promote changes in food and farm policies that will benefit health, the environment, and the people who grow, harvest, prepare, and serve America’s food.” In Seattle, 100 public schools will observe Food Day with a special, healthy menu item. In that city Food Day enjoys the support of the mayor, the city council president, and other local officials. And, the University of Washington public health department will run an interdisciplinary symposium on the food system. “Food Day is a great way to increase public awareness about the importance of good food to health, economic prosperity, and regional and national security,” said Seattle City Council President Richard Conlin who has spearheaded the Seattle Local Food Action Initiative. Besides Jacobson, Food Day is led by honorary co-chairs Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and an advisory board that includes author Michael Pollan; former Surgeon General David Satcher; nutrition authorities Walter Willett, Kelly Brownell, and Nestle; public health expert Georges Benjamin; and chefs Dan Barber, Nora Pouillon, and Alice Waters. <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/partner-organizations.php" target="cspi">National organizations</a> such as the American Dietetic Association, American Public Health Association, Community Food Security Coalition, Earth Day Network, Farmers Market Coalition, Humane Society of the United States, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Prevention Institute, and Slow Food USA, along with many city- and state-level organizations, are publicizing Food Day or organizing events. 2011-05-31 USDA Urged to Prohibit Antibiotic-Resistant Salmonella in Ground Meat and Poultry http://cspinet.org/new/201105251.html Dangerous Strains Make Foodborne Illnesses Harder to Treat, Says CSPIGround meat and poultry found to contain antibiotic-resistant strains of Salmonella should be recalled from the marketplace or withheld from commerce, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspi_petition_to_usda_on_abr_salmonella.pdf" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> filed today by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The nonprofit food safety watchdog group wants the U.S. Department of Agriculture to declare four such Salmonella strains as “adulterants” under federal law, making products that contain them illegal to sell. CSPI is also urging testing for antibiotic-resistant Salmonella in ground meat and poultry, citing a number of major outbreaks of foodborne illnesses linked to the four strains. Those illnesses are harder for physicians to treat, resulting in longer hospitalizations and increased mortality, according to the group. “The only thing worse than getting sick from food is being told that no drugs exist to treat your illness,” said CSPI food safety staff attorney Sarah Klein. “And that’s what more consumers will hear if these drug-resistant pathogens keep getting into our meat.” USDA already recalls products contaminated with antibiotic-resistant Salmonella—but only after those products have made people sick, according to CSPI. The group’s petition asks the agency to establish a testing regime for these pathogens in ground meat and poultry in the same way that it has for E. coli O157:H7. USDA declared that particularly dangerous strain of E. coli an adulterant in 1994. “USDA should take action before people get sick, and require controls and testing for these pathogens before they reach consumers,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “The <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/abrfoodbornepathogenswhitepaper.pdf" target="cspi">research shows</a> that antibiotic-resistant Salmonella in ground meat and poultry is a hazard and its time to move to a more preventive system of controlling the risks at the plant and on the farm.” The four Salmonella strains covered by the petition, Salmonella Heidelberg, Salmonella Newport, Salmonella Hadar, and Salmonella Typhimurium, have all been linked to outbreaks. In 2009, an outbreak of antibiotic-resistant Salmonella Newport linked to Cargill beef resulted in at least 40 illnesses in four states. And this year, the USDA oversaw a recall of frozen turkey burgers contaminated with antibiotic-resistant Salmonella Hadar. That outbreak sickened at least 12. But because foodborne illness is dramatically underreported the true number of illnesses is likely much higher. “Physicians and patients are now facing pathogens that are virtually untreatable,” said Dr. Stephen A. Lerner, a professor of medicine specializing in infectious disease at Wayne State University School of Medicine. “This petition would reduce human exposure to some dangerous drug-resistant Salmonella, which is crucial because our critically-important antibiotics are losing effectiveness and they aren’t being replaced by new ones. We must do all that we can to reduce antibiotic-resistant infections from food.” The danger of antibiotic-resistant pathogens in the food supply is well-documented and has been recognized by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, and by USDA itself. Those agencies are working together to address the issue and recently produced a document stating that “drug resistant pathogens are a growing menace to all people,” and that “drug resistance threatens to reverse the medical advances of the last half century.” Antibiotic resistance is an inevitable consequence of antibiotic overuse, according to CSPI. Most antibiotics used on animal farms are not used to treat disease, but to promote growth or to prevent diseases caused by overcrowding, poor hygiene, and other problems. CSPI has long urged the FDA to stop the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics. In fact, CSPI is a co-plaintiff in a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nrdc_complaint.pdf" target="cspi">lawsuit</a> filed today by the Natural Resources Defense Council aimed at compelling the FDA to withdraw its approval for most non-therapeutic uses of two important antibiotics, penicillin and tetracyclines, in animal feed. Improving conditions on factory farms, thereby reducing both the need for antibiotic use and the resulting resistance, is a primary tenet of <a href="http://foodday.org/" target="cspi">Food Day</a>—a new grassroots mobilization CSPI is planning for October 24. Reducing overcrowding in hen houses and concentrated animal feeding operations, or CAFOs, could lead to more judicious use of antibiotics and would be beneficial for animal and human health, according to the group. 2011-05-25 Is Your Milk on Drugs? http://cspinet.org/new/201105041.html National Conference on Milk Policy Votes to Limit FDA’s Use of Important Test Showing Drug Residues in Veal CalvesConsumers’ risk of being exposed to dangerous drugs or antibiotic-resistant bacteria in milk and milk products could increase if the dairy industry succeeds in limiting FDA’s consideration of test results showing drug misuse on dairy farms, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The nonprofit watchdog group is urging the Food and Drug Administration to resist a recommendation from the National Conference on Interstate Milk Shipments (NCIMS), a little-known policy making body that includes state regulators and dairy industry representatives, which would omit veal from the testing protocol that FDA uses to detect potential problems with drug residues in milk. The issue is whether the presence of illegal or improperly administered drugs found in tests on veal calves at slaughter can be used as a basis for further investigating drug residue problems in milk coming from the farms where they originate. Bob veal calves—calves up to three weeks old that are used for meat—spend most of their lives on dairy farms. When regulators find illegal drug residues in veal tissues, it is an important indication that drugs may be improperly administered elsewhere on the same dairy farms, according to CSPI. “The industry wants the FDA to turn a blind eye to evidence of misuse of drugs on dairy farms,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “It’s like banning the police from using forensic evidence to narrow down a list of suspects. The dairy industry should be ashamed of this effort to bar FDA from considering useful scientific evidence of drug misuse on specific farms to identify those that may have problems controlling drug residues in the milk supply.” CSPI analyzed residue violation reports from the USDA’s Residue Violator Alert List from January 2010 to December 2010, which documented 17 different drugs in 735 positive tissue samples from bob veal calves, including the antibiotic gentamicin. Gentamicin—which is banned for use is cattle—was found in ten percent of the bob veal samples. It was also found in six percent of dairy cattle tested at slaughter during 2010. This antibiotic can accumulate in the kidney and has the potential to cause toxic effects in humans. The NCIMS is made up of dairy regulators from state agencies and also has members from Land o’Lakes, Dean Foods, the National Milk Producers Federation, and the International Dairy Foods Association. It has no consumer representatives. In a Baltimore hotel on Tuesday, the NCIMS passed Proposal 209, originally proposed by the National Milk Producers Federation, which simply strikes the words “and veal” from a list of methods that FDA may use to detect potential problems with drug residues in the milk supply. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/commissioner_hamburg_letter_05.02.11.pdf" target="cspi">letter to FDA Commissioner</a> Margaret Hamburg on Monday, DeWaal and CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson wrote: “CSPI respectfully requests that FDA exercise its rights to not concur with Proposal 209 should it pass in the NCIMS general session later this week, and ensure the agency has fully preserved its ability to use all available evidence to identify dairy farms with inadequate controls on the use of animal drugs.” In 2010, FDA announced a new program to test the milk from farms that repeatedly failed U.S. Department of Agriculture’s drug residue tests when their cattle were sent to slaughter plants. That milk testing program hasn’t started yet. The FDA also has authority under the Grade “A” Pasteurized Milk Ordinance to require states to test milk when there is evidence that problems exist with animal drug residues or other contaminants in the milk supply. 2011-05-04 Proposed Federal Standards for Foods Marketed to Children Praised http://cspinet.org/new/201104281.html The Center for Science in the Public Interest praised as “strong and sensible” the <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/os/2011/04/110428foodmarketproposedguide.pdf" target="cspi">nutrition and marketing standards</a> proposed today by the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children and urged food and entertainment companies to adopt the standards. The Interagency Working Group, comprised of officials from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Federal Trade Commission, Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, was tasked by Congress to develop a set of voluntary standards for food marketing to children under 17. The Working Group was required by a law championed by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and CSPI. “A key weakness of the current self-regulatory approach to food marketing to children is that each company has its own strategically tailored standards,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at CSPI. “While overall the standards look fairly similar, many have loopholes, like weak or no sodium standards for fast-food companies and weak sugar standards for cereal marketers.” In the past few years, a number of food and entertainment companies have announced policies on food marketing to children independently or through the Council of Better Business Bureaus’ Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. However, several studies show that those self-regulatory efforts are not having the desired impact. For instance, according to CSPI research, from before the self-regulatory program was in place, in 2005, to after, in 2009, ads for foods of poor nutritional quality <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pledgereport.pdf" target="cspi">decreased only slightly</a> on Nickelodeon, the most popular children’s television station—from 88 percent to 79 percent of food ads. “Companies’ policies aren’t making enough of a difference,” said Wootan. “If companies are serious about addressing marketing to children, they‘ll agree to follow the proposed national marketing standards.” Three decades ago, when the Federal Trade Commission first considered protecting children’s health by restricting junk-food ads on children’s television, Congress stepped in to restrict the agency’s authority. That proved to be a mistake, according to CSPI, because the advertising continued unabated and children today are now three times more likely to be overweight or obese as they were then. Food companies <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/07/foodmkting.shtm" target="cspi">spend</a> approximately $2 billion a year on marketing foods and beverages to children, mostly for foods high in calories, fats, sugars, and sodium, and low in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and key nutrients. Curbing food marketing aimed at children is one of five major goals of <a href="http://foodday.org/" target="cspi">Food Day</a>, a new grassroots mobilization launched by CSPI. Led by honorary co-chairs Senator Harkin and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), Food Day will be October 24. 2011-04-28 CSPI Releases Food Additives Mobile App http://cspinet.org/new/201104111.html "Chemical Cuisine" Database Now on Sale in iTunes App Store, Android MarketFor years, the Chemical Cuisine glossary of food additives has been one of the most heavily trafficked pages on the Center for Science in the Public Interest's web site. Today the group is launching a mobile application that will bring CSPI's food additive safety ratings directly to iPhones, iPads, the iPod Touch, and Android-equipped mobile devices. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/itunes"> http://www.cspinet.org/itunes</a> <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/android"> http://www.cspinet.org/android</a> <img style="float:right; margin-left:10px; margin-bottom:10px;" src="/images/buttons/iphone.jpg" alt="Chemical Cuisine App" width="93" height="195" />"Shopping for groceries was a lot easier when more food came from farms, and not factories," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "And the tens of thousands of packaged foods on supermarket shelves have a bewildering array of chemical food additives, designed to variously enhance the taste, texture, color, or shelf life of the product. We decided to make life a little easier for those who want to satisfy your curiosity about some of the most commonly used food additivesâ€”from the convenience of your mobile device." Happily, most food additives are relatively safe in the amounts they are used, according to CSPI. But the group's scientists have flagged those additives that everybody should avoid, as well as a number of additives most people would do well to cut back on. The app features a randomly selected additive each time it loadsâ€”and lets users search for specific additives or browse among categories. Some of the entries may surprise people, including: <img style="margin-bottom:-6px; padding-right:5px;" src="/images/buttons/checkmark.gif" alt="POLYGLYCEROL POLYRICINOLEATE" width="24" height="24" />POLYGLYCEROL POLYRICINOLEATE. It certainly sounds scary! It's used in some chocolate candies and margarines. But it's perfectly safe. One would be better off worrying about the saturated and trans fat in foods that contain it. <img style="margin-bottom:-6px; padding-right:5px;" src="/images/buttons/checktriangle.gif" alt="QUORN/MYCOPROTEIN" width="24" height="24" />QUORN/MYCOPROTEIN. This is a strange oneâ€”and it is more of a food itself (loosely defined) than an additive. A British food company found a tiny fungus growing in a dirt sample, and eventually figured out how to grow it in giant vats and process it until it resembles chicken or other meats. But in some consumers, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/">Quorn products</a> cause vomiting, nausea, diarrhea, and, less often, hives and potentially fatal anaphylactic reactions. <img style="margin-bottom:-6px; padding-right:5px;" src="/images/buttons/checkx.gif" alt="CARAMEL COLORING" width="24" height="24" />CARAMEL COLORING. Finally! A natural ingredient! But not so fast: Much of what goes by this innocent-sounding name is made with ammonia, or sulfites, or both. And the ammonia-sulfite-process caramel colorings used in Coke, Pepsi, and other soft drinks contains two carcinogens, 2- and 4-methylimidazole. CSPI recommends that everyone avoid it. Chemical Cuisine was researched by CSPI executive director Michael Jacobson, who authored "Eater's Digest: The Consumer Factbook on Food Additives" and holds a Ph.D. from MIT in microbiology. CSPI led efforts to restrict or ban the use of such additives as sodium nitrite, sulfites, olestra, Violet dye 1, and others. A CSPI petition calling on the FDA to ban food dyes spurred the Food and Drug Administration to hold a recent advisory committee meeting on the impact of dyes on children's behavior. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/itunes"> http://www.cspinet.org/itunes</a> <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/android"> http://www.cspinet.org/android</a> The app, built by the Washington, D.C., technology firm <a href="http://www.echoditto.com/">EchoDitto</a>, goes on sale today in the iTunes app store and the Android market for $0.99. 2011-04-11 Food Day Campaign is Launched! http://cspinet.org/new/201104041.html Thousands of Events on October 24 Will Encourage Americans to "Eat Real"Many of the most <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/food-day-advisory-board.php">prominent voices for change</a> in the food movement and a growing number of health, hunger, and sustainable agriculture <a href="http://foodday.org/about-food-day/partner-organizations.php">groups</a> today announced plans for <a href="http://www.foodday.org">Food Day</a>—a nationwide campaign to change the way Americans eat and think about food. Organized by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Food Day will encourage people around the country to sponsor or participate in activities that encourage Americans to "eat real" and support healthy, affordable food grown in a sustainable, humane way. Food Day will be observed on and about Monday, October 24, 2011, and will likely include a series of marquee events in Washington, New York City, San Francisco, and other major cities, and thousands of smaller events around the country. "Food Day is designed to further knowledge, understanding, and dialogue about critical topics in food, agriculture, and nutrition—spanning the food chain from farm families to family tables," said Senator Tom Harkin, chairman of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, and an honorary co-chair of <a href="http://www.foodday.org">Food Day</a>. "The many activities and events spurred by Food Day will help foster a robust dialogue on how to promote better nutrition and health, lessen hunger and increase access to food, enhance opportunities for farm families and rural communities, and conserve natural resources. There are differing ideas and perspectives on these issues and surely we all benefit from discussions about the connections among food, farms, and health." Modeled on Earth Day, organizers hope Food Day will inspire Americans to hold thousands of events in schools, college campuses, houses of worship, and even in private homes aimed at fixing America’s food system. A Food Day event could be as small as a parent organizing a vegetable identification contest at a kindergarten class—or as massive as a rally in a city park, with entertainment and healthy food. Health departments, city councils, and other policymakers could use Food Day to launch campaigns, hold hearings, or otherwise address communities’ food problems. The campaign will advocate progress toward five central goals: • Reducing diet-related disease by promoting healthy foods. The American diet is too low in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains and too high in fatty meat, soft drinks, and salty packaged and restaurant foods—contributing to hundreds of thousands of premature deaths each year due to heart disease, diabetes, stroke, and cancer. • Supporting sustainable farms and stopping subsidies to agribusiness. Billions of federal dollars a year would be better spent helping environmentally conscious family farmers than huge agribusiness operations. • Expanding access to food and alleviating hunger. Far too many Americans don't know where their next meal is coming from, or have access to fresh produce in their neighborhood. • Reforming factory farms to protect animals and the environment. Farming of animals can and should be done without cruelty, and without degrading the quality of life in rural America. • Curbing junk-food marketing to kids. Food companies should not be targeting children with foods that promote tooth decay, obesity, and other health problems. "Food Day will bring together a lot of people with common interests in food issues, but who otherwise haven't worked all that closely together," said Michael F. Jacobson, who founded CSPI 40 years ago. "So whether your primary concern is human health, farm policy, or the quality of life in rural America, Food Day can be an opportunity to start solving local and national food problems from the ground up." Besides Jacobson, Food Day is led by honorary co-chairs Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), and an advisory board that includes author Michael Pollan; prominent physicians Caldwell Esselstyn, Michael Roizen, and David Satcher; nutrition authorities Walter Willett, Kelly Brownell, and Marion Nestle; public health expert Georges Benjamin; and chefs Dan Barber, Nora Pouillon, and Alice Waters. National organizations, such as the American Dietetic Association, American Public Health Association, Community Food Security Coalition, Earth Day Network, Farmers Market Coalition, Humane Society of the United States, National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, Prevention Institute, and Slow Food USA, along with many city- and state-level organizations, are planning on organizing or participating in Food Day events. "Why Food Day? It is time to make real food the number-one priority in our country," said Alice Waters, proprietor of the acclaimed Chez Panisse restaurant in Berkeley, Calif. "The choices we make about food affect our health, the health of the planet—and the way we live our lives." "Food Day is an opportunity to celebrate real food and the movement rising to reform the American food system," the author Michael Pollan said. Soon, <a href="http://www.foodday.org">FoodDay.org</a> will let people type in their ZIP codes to find Food Day events near them—or to invite people to create their own Food Day events. 2011-04-04 CSPI Hails Proposed Menu Labeling Regulations http://cspinet.org/new/201104011.html Ten years after starting a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/">movement</a> to put calories on chain restaurant menus and menu boards, the Center for Science in the Public Interest strongly supports the proposed menu labeling regulations released by the Food and Drug Administration. The <a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm249471.htm">new regulations</a> are required by the health care reform law enacted last March, which requires chain restaurants with 20 or more outlets to post calories on menus and menu boards, and to provide additional nutrition information in writing upon request. The proposed rules released today are expected to be finalized by the end of the year. "A number of things contribute to obesity, but <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/lit_rev-eating_out_and_obesity.pdf">studies show</a> that eating out is linked to higher calorie intakes and higher body weights," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo Wootan. "Without nutrition information, how are people supposed to know that some salads have more calories than some burgers? Or that some ‘appetizers’ pack a thousand or more calories?" Studies show that providing nutrition information for packaged foods and restaurant foods has a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/lit_review-nutrition_info_studies.pdf">positive influence</a> on food-purchase decisions. While a few recent studies have found no effect, small studies lack enough statistical power to measure the public health effect that can be expected from menu labeling. One of the best studies was conducted by researchers at Stanford University. They found that menu labeling in New York City resulted in a 6 percent decrease in calories on average per transaction (for people buying more calories, the effect was bigger, a 26 percent decrease) at Starbucks. The researchers estimated that if people made similar changes at other chain restaurants, that would result in a 30-calorie per person per day decrease population-wide. "That is an important finding given that the obesity epidemic is probably fueled by about an extra 100 calories per person per day." Wootan said. Menu labeling laws have been passed in 18 states, cities, and counties and are in effect in Vermont, California, New York City, Philadelphia, and King County, Wash. As a result of the laws that have been implemented, many restaurants, including Starbucks, Dunkin Donuts, Taco Bell, Uno Chicago Grill, Romano’s Macaroni Grill, and others have reformulated menu items or added new lower-calorie choices. CSPI is disappointed that the proposed regulations excluded movie theaters and alcohol from the proposed menu labeling regulations, but will press the FDA to include them in the final regulation. "If a movie theater is going to serve up thousand-calorie tubs of popcorn, 400-calorie drinks, and 400-calorie boxes of candy, the least they could do is tell you about it," Wootan said. "Also, it will be confusing to customers if soft drinks are labeled on menus, but alcoholic drinks like beer and wine aren’t." 2011-04-01 Strong FDA Action on Food Dyes Urged http://cspinet.org/new/201103301.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonI’m glad that after many years of denial, the Food and Drug Administration is <a href="http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/CommitteesMeetingMaterials/FoodAdvisoryCommittee/UCM248102.pdf">reviewing</a> the evidence linking synthetic food dyes to behavioral problems in children. Red 40, Yellow 5, Yellow 6, and other dyes have no useful nutritional or preservative value; their only function is cosmetic. And by "cosmetic," I mean that dyes are often used to make junk food more attractive to young children, or to simulate the presence of a healthful fruit or other natural ingredient. Surprisingly, even foods that aren’t particularly colorful—such as instant mashed potatoes or pickles—are dyed. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/dyesreschbk.pdf">evidence</a> that these petrochemicals worsen some children's behavior is convincing, and I hope that the FDA’s advisory committee will advise the agency to both require warning notices and encourage companies voluntarily to switch to safer natural colorings. (The FDA isn't asking the committee about a ban.) Having brightly colored Froot Loops, Skittles, Mountain Dews, or pickles or anything else just isn't worth putting any children at risk. In <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201007201.html">Europe</a>, a law requires most dyed foods (there are few) to bear a warning notice, which is a powerful incentive for food manufacturers not to use artificial dyes. Last I heard, Europe is surviving quite well. It is to the great shame of many U.S.-based food companies that they are marketing safer, naturally colored products in Europe but not in the United States. 2011-03-30 FDA Urged to Prohibit Carcinogenic "Caramel Coloring" http://cspinet.org/new/201102161.html CSPI Says Artificial Caramel Coloring is Quite Different from Real CaramelWASHINGTON—The “caramel coloring” used in Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and other foods is contaminated with two cancer-causing chemicals and should be banned, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/caramel_coloring_petition.pdf" target="cspi">regulatory petition filed today </a> by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. In contrast to the caramel one might make at home by melting sugar in a saucepan, the artificial brown coloring in colas and some other products is made by reacting sugars with ammonia and sulfites under high pressure and temperatures. Chemical reactions result in the formation of 2-methylimidazole and 4 methylimidazole, which in government-conducted studies caused lung, liver, or thyroid cancer or leukemia in laboratory mice or rats. <img src="/images/ToxiColaCSPI.jpg">Photo Credit: Jorge Bach, CSPI The National Toxicology Program, the division of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences that conducted the animal studies, said that there is “clear evidence” that both 2-MI and 4-MI are animal carcinogens. Chemicals that cause cancer in animals are considered to pose cancer threats to humans. Researchers at the University of California, Davis, found significant levels of 4-MI in five brands of cola. “Carcinogenic colorings have no place in the food supply, especially considering that their only function is a cosmetic one,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA should act quickly to revoke its approval of caramel colorings made with ammonia.” Federal regulations distinguish among four types of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm#caramel" target="cspi">caramel coloring</a>, two of which are produced with ammonia and two without it. CSPI wants the Food and Drug Administration to prohibit the two made with ammonia. The type used in colas and other dark soft drinks is known as Caramel IV, or ammonia sulfite process caramel. Caramel III, which is produced with ammonia but not sulfites, is sometimes used in beer, soy sauce, and other foods. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/experts-letter-caramel-coloring.pdf" target="cspi">Five prominent experts </a> on animal carcinogenesis, including several who have worked at the National Toxicology Program, joined CSPI in calling on the FDA to bar the use of caramel colorings made with an ammonia process. “The American public should not be exposed to any cancer risk whatsoever as a result of consuming such chemicals, especially when they serve a non-essential, cosmetic purpose,” the scientists wrote in a letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg. CSPI also says the phrase “caramel coloring” is misleading when used to describe colorings made with ammonia or sulfite. The terms “ammonia process caramel” or “ammonia sulfite process caramel” would be more accurate, and companies should not be allowed to label any products that contain such colorings as “natural,” according to the group. “Most people would interpret ‘caramel coloring’ to mean ‘colored with caramel,’ but this particular ingredient has little in common with ordinary caramel or caramel candy,” Jacobson said. “It’s a concentrated dark brown mixture of chemicals that simply does not occur in nature. Regular caramel isn’t healthful, but at least it is not tainted with carcinogens.” In a little-noticed regulatory proceeding in California, state health officials have added 4 MI to the state’s list of “chemicals known to the state to cause cancer.” Under that state’s Proposition 65, foods or other products containing more than certain levels of cancer-causing chemicals must carry warning labels. For 4-MI, that level is 16 micrograms per person per day from an individual product. Popular brands of cola contain about 200 micrograms of 4-MI per 20-ounce bottle—and many people, especially teenaged boys, consume more than that each day. If California’s regulation is finalized, Coke, Pepsi, and other soft drinks would be required to bear a cancer warning label. To put the risk from caramel coloring in context, CSPI says the ten teaspoons of obesity-causing sugars in a non-diet can of soda presents a greater health risk than the ammonia sulfite process caramel. But the levels of 4-MI in the tested colas still may be causing thousands of cancers in the U.S. population. Separate from the risk due to caramel coloring, CSPI has been <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="cspi">urging the FDA</a> to ban synthetic <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes" target="cspi">food colorings</a>, such as Yellow 5 and Red 40. Those dyes cause hyperactivity and other behavioral problems in children, and Red 3 and Yellows 5 and 6 pose cancer risks, according to CSPI. The FDA is holding a Food Advisory Committee review of that issue on March 30–31. Over the years, CSPI's efforts have resulted in reductions in the use of, labeling requirements, or limits on Violet No. 1, sodium nitrite and sodium nitrate, sulfites, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">partially hydrogenated vegetable oils</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">salt</a>, and olestra. 2011-02-16 CSPI Turns 40 in February! http://cspinet.org/new/201102031.html Menu Labeling, FDA Reform, and School Foods Victories Cap Year 39 for the Group Sometimes Known as the "Food Police"WASHINGTON—It was 40 years ago this month that three young scientists who met in Washington decided to create an organization run by people with scientific training to improve public policies and to encourage other Ph.D. scientists to use their training for the public good. And so, in humble, borrowed office space in 1971 the Center for Science in the Public Interest was born. Working at first on trailblazing issues such as asbestos and lead, CSPI soon came to focus on the nutrition, food safety, and health work for which it is known today. CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson recalls the early days of the organization in <a href="http://cspinet.org/nah/memo/cspi40.html" target="cspi">his column </a> in CSPI’s flagship publication, Nutrition Action Healthletter. “If we had considered the matter carefully, we might have realized that we had no experience running an organization, no money, no connections, and almost no chance of success,” Jacobson wrote. “From that inauspicious beginning, CSPI has grown into an organization that is greatly respected (even by the government officials and politicians we sometimes criticize and by the executives at companies we sometimes sue), widely quoted in the media, and impressively effective.” Besides Jacobson, CSPI’s cofounders included chemist Albert Fritsch and James Sullivan, an oceanographer who remains on CSPI’s board of directors. CSPI is perhaps best known for its headline-grabbing exposés of the nutritional quality of restaurant meals—it famously called Fettuccini Alfredo a “heart attack on a plate” in 1994—and for spearheading support for the law requiring Nutrition Facts labels on packaged foods. It also waged successful efforts to define organic standards for foods; require allergens to be disclosed on all food labels; and reduce the amounts of partially hydrogenated oil, olestra, sulfites, nitrites, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">salt</a> used in the food supply. In CSPI’s 39th year, the organization played a major role in three major legislative achievements. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012021.html" target="cspi">Child Nutrition Reauthorization</a> signed by President Obama in December requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to set nutrition standards for the foods sold in vending machines, a la carte lines, and elsewhere in schools. That’s a historic development that will get junk food out of school hallways once and for all—something CSPI has advocated for decades. Similarly, in the culmination of a decade-long fight to prevent foodborne illnesses, CSPI campaigned for the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201101032.html" target="cspi">FDA Food Safety Modernization Act</a>. That law requires food manufacturers to have hazard control plans and requires the FDA to inspect food processing facilities more frequently. And an important health-promotion measure in the new health reform law requires chain restaurants to disclose the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201003211.html" target="cspi">calorie content</a> of every item on menus and menu boards. Though he’s thrilled with those public health victories, Jacobson sees much more to be done. Next month, for instance, CSPI plans to launch a major, nationwide initiative to engage Americans in transforming the food environment for the better. “Still, hundreds of thousands of Americans die each year due to a diet that promotes obesity, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, and certain cancers,” Jacobson said. “There’s a pressing need to expand the grassroots movement for healthy, affordable food produced in a humane, sustainable way.” Elsewhere in the current issue of Nutrition Action, longtime CSPI nutrition director Bonnie Liebman looks back at some of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cover_-_unexpected_findings_from_last_40_years.pdf" target="cspi">surprising nutritional findings</a> of the last 40 years. (For instance, not only does coffee not contribute to pancreatic cancer, as once feared, it now seems likely that drinking coffee reduces the risk of type 2 diabetes—though too much caffeine can cause other problems.) And, CSPI senior scientist David Schardt looks at other <a href="http://cspinet.org/nah/articles/40yearsago.html" target="cspi">major changes in the food environment </a> in the last 40 years—from microwave ovens to the rise of organic foods to the fall of artificial <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">trans fat</a>. “Back in the ’70s, foods like tofu, whole wheat bread, and brown rice were hard to come by,” Schardt writes. “We cooked more and snacked less. We ate less and weighed less.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, first published in 1974, has 850,000 subscribers, including 100,000 subscribers to a separate Canadian edition. Besides publishing CSPI’s famous restaurant studies, Nutrition Action highlights on its popular back page various supermarket foods as either <a href="http://cspinet.org/nah/foodporn/janfeb2011.html" target="cspi">Right Stuffs or Food Porns</a>. Oprah Winfrey called Nutrition Action “the mastermind critic that sounded the food alarms.” Nutrition Action is, as always, advertising-free and CSPI does not accept any corporate donations or government grants—so consumers can have confidence that the group’s advice is based on sound science and not on special interests. 2011-02-03 Safeway Sued for Failure to Notify Consumers of Recalled Food http://cspinet.org/new/201102022.html Supermarket Could Have Used Bonus Card Data to Contact Individuals Who Purchased Tainted Eggs & Peanut Products, But Didn’tWASHINGTON—Safeway should have known that Dee Hensley-Maclean purchased peanut butter crackers and Nutter Butter sandwich cookies that were part of a nationwide recall of products tainted with Salmonella. That’s because Hensley-Maclean used her Safeway Club card when she purchased those products. Safeway’s computers should have had her Ravalli County, MT, mailing address, phone number, and email address. And even though those cookies and crackers could have put Dee or one of her two teenage kids in the hospital with a life-threatening case of salmonellosis, Safeway made no attempt to warn her. Today, along with a San Francisco woman who bought contaminated eggs at her local Safeway, and with the backing of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, Hensley-Maclean <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/safeway_complaint.pdf" target="cspi">filed a lawsuit</a> against the California-based grocery giant. In a complaint filed today in California Superior Court, the women ask that they and others who bought recalled food be refunded the price of those purchases, and that Safeway commit to using its Club card data to contact consumers in the event of future recalls. “As a concerned parent I take care with my purchases and I assume that the foods we bring home from Safeway will be safe to eat,” said Hensley-Maclean, a 53-year-old civic volunteer. “If Safeway knows that there is a problem, and they know how to get in touch with me, quite frankly I’m astonished that they wouldn’t try to spare me or my children from a preventable foodborne illness.” Hensley-Maclean also purchased some similar snack foods made with peanuts at Costco. But unlike Safeway, Costco uses its membership data to contact consumers who purchased recalled food, and Hensley-Maclean received a letter from that company advising her not to eat the food and instructing her how to get a refund. Jennifer Rosen, a 40-year-old drama and Improv teacher, learned from a neighborhood listserv that the eggs she purchased from Safeway might have been contaminated with Salmonella. She and her family had already consumed several of them—some when they nibbled on raw cookie dough—though none of the Rosens became ill. Rosen was stunned that Safeway didn’t contact her and warn her not to eat the contaminated eggs, even though she, like Hensley-Maclean, used her Safeway Club card when she made her purchase. “My kids are little so I worried that if they got sick, they could get really sick,” Rosen said. “When I had my husband check the numbers on the carton, I couldn’t believe we had contaminated eggs. Safeway sends me emails all the time with paperless coupons. I can’t believe they wouldn’t text or email me with news of a recall.” Safeway is one of the biggest grocery chains that does not have a system that uses loyalty card data to notify consumers who purchased recalled foods. Ralphs, Kroger, Walmart, Sam’s Club, Costco, Giant Food, Harris Teeter, Wegmans, and ShopRite all routinely issue food safety alerts using a variety of methods, including emails and automated phone calls, according to CSPI. Examples of Costco’s alerts from the 2009 peanut-product recall are <a href="http://cspinet.org/audio/CliffBarRecall.mp3" target="cspi">here</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/costcoletter.pdf" target="cspi">here</a>. “Safeway aggressively uses its Club card data to churn out coupons, analyze its customers’ shopping habits, and otherwise boost sales,” said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">litigation</a> director Steve Gardner. “Yet when it knows it has sold products that may be contaminated with E. coli, Salmonella, or other hazards, it does not use its robust marketing database to prevent illnesses or deaths. That is hardly the “safe way” and just shows Safeway’s reckless disregard for the health and safety of its shoppers.” CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201005061.html" target="cspi">notified Safeway</a> in May that it might seek a court order directing the company to notify customers who bought food subject to Class 1 recalls if the company did not agree to do so on its own. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/safewayletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to Safeway</a>, CSPI said that selling food with deadly contaminants makes those foods “misbranded” and “adulterated” under federal law and California’s Health and Safety Code. Refusing to notify consumers of the fact that they are at risk is a violation of California’s Business and Professions Code. Besides CSPI’s litigation unit, the plaintiffs are represented by Craig Briskin and Steven A. Skalet of the Washington, D.C. law firm of Mehri & Skalet, PLLC, and Daniel T. LeBel of the San Francisco-based Consumer Law Practice. Skalet’s firm earlier worked with CSPI to obtain a historic agreement with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">Kellogg</a> that set nutrition standards for the foods that company markets to young children. In February of 2009, CSPI publicly called on the supermarket industry and other retailers that use bonus or <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200902031.html" target="cspi">loyalty card</a> programs to contact customers who bought recalled food. In addition, for customers who used a credit card to pay for the food, companies could use their bonus card data to automatically refund the purchase price of the recalled items, according to CSPI. 2011-02-02 CSPI Welcomes New Dietary Guidelines for Americans http://cspinet.org/new/201101311.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanFor 30 years, the Dietary Guidelines has offered basically the same, sensible advice: eat fewer calories; less saturated fat, sodium, and sugar; and more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. Only about 10 percent of Americans have followed that advice. The new <a href="http://usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentidonly=true&contentid=2011/01/0040.xml" target="cspi">Dietary Guidelines</a> acknowledges that most people find healthy eating like swimming upstream, given the aggressive marketing and ubiquity of foods laden with calories, saturated fat, salt, white flour, and added sugars. This time around, the messages are clearer than in the past. Rather than simply saying "increase fruits and vegetables," the news Guidelines recommend people fill half their plate with fruits and vegetables. Rather than just giving the vague advice to lower sugar intake, they now recommend drinking water in place of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">soda</a> and other sugary drinks, which are by far the largest source of sugar in Americans' diets. Importantly, the Guidelines call for "an immediate, deliberate reduction in the sodium content of foods" and for "effective policies to limit food and beverage marketing to children." Another major difference is that Obama administration officials have done more than just publish a pamphlet, cross their fingers, and hope that Americans eat better. They're enacting stronger policies and programs-like improving <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012021.html" target="cspi">school foods</a>, requiring menu labeling in chain restaurants, and funding communities to promote healthy eating and physical activity-and urging food companies to improve their products and practices. But without even more serious governmental efforts-such as banning artificial <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">trans fat</a> and limiting <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/hspackaged.html" target="cspi">sodium in packaged foods</a>-the Dietary Guidelines will not be sufficient to fend off the costly and debilitating diet-related illnesses that afflict millions of Americans. 2011-01-31 Antibiotic-Resistant Bacteria Has Emerged as a Foodborne Hazard, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201101251.html WASHINGTON—Foodborne illnesses due to antibiotic-resistant bacteria have been occurring since the 1970s, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/abrfoodbornepathogenswhitepaper.pdf" target="cspi">recent study</a> by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which signals that antibiotics used on the farm may be causing more serious pathogens in the nation’s food supply. CSPI’s analysis shows a steady increase of such outbreaks in every decade since the 1970s, though that may be due to increased testing and reporting, the group said. In its study of 35 documented outbreaks, raw milk, raw milk cheeses and ground beef appeared to carry the resistant pathogens most frequently. “Outbreaks from antibiotic resistant strains of Salmonella, though rare, can not be ignored by our food safety regulators. The problem has clearly emerged with respect to some high risk foods,” said CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety</a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “Both humans and animals rely on antibiotics to stay healthy. But overuse in some sectors may squander their effectiveness and leave consumer vulnerable to hard-to-treat foodborne infections.” Multi-drug resistance was found in 10 out of 14 outbreaks of antibiotic-resistant foodborne illness reported between 2000 and 2009, according to the study. CSPI says the problem of antibiotic-resistant bacteria needs much greater scrutiny by federal government if antibiotics are to remain effective in treating human and veterinary illnesses. Cataloging outbreaks of foodborne illness and then testing the pathogens for antibiotic resistance is a critical step if policymakers are to document the link between antibiotic use on farms animals and human illness from antibiotic-resistant bacteria, the group says. Antibiotic resistance is an inevitable consequence of antibiotic use, according to the CSPI report. The more antibiotics are used, the more bacteria will develop resistance. Patients who develop an infection from antibiotic-resistant bacteria are more likely to have longer and more expensive hospitalizations and increased mortality. And, the antibiotics that finally do provide successful treatment to resistant bacteria can be more toxic to humans, with more serious side effects than common antibiotics. CSPI presented its findings at a one-day conference it cosponsored with the Pew Charitable Trusts, Managing the Risk of Foodborne Hazards: STECs and Antibiotic-Resistant Pathogens. Besides DeWaal, other presenters at the conference included the USDA Undersecretary for Food Safety Elisabeth Hagen, FDA Deputy Commissioner for Foods Michael Taylor, Patricia Griffin from the CDC, and Danilo Lo Fo Wong from the World Health Organization. 2011-01-25 Strike Two for Front-of-Package Food Labeling http://cspinet.org/new/201101241.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonIn 2009, the food industry’s fatally flawed <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910202.html" target="cspi">Smart Choices</a> labeling program became a national laughingstock for putting its logo on junk foods like Froot Loops and Frosted Flakes. Today, the industry is striking out again with its new front-of-package <a href="http://www.gmaonline.org/issues-policy/health-nutrition/providing-innovative-and-healthy-choices/nutrition-keys-front-of-pack-labeling-initiative/" target="cspi">Nutrition Keys</a>. It’s a scheme consisting of confusing icons that will be largely ignored by consumers. It’s unfortunate the industry wouldn’t adopt a more effective system or simply wait until the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/01/23/can-wal-mart-make-us-healthier/the-fda-should-be-bolder-than-wal-mart" target="cspi">Food and Drug Administration</a> developed a system that would be as useful to consumers as possible. The whole point of front-label nutrition information or symbols should be to convey quickly and simply how healthful a food is. A system with green, yellow, and red dots to indicate whether a food has a good, middling, or poor nutritional quality would probably be a lot more effective than industry’s system. Alternatively, numerical ratings from -100 to +100 or 0 to 10 would allow people to easily compare one brand of food to another. In contrast, Nutrition Keys system appears to be designed to distract consumers’ attention from, not highlight, the high content of sodium, added sugars, or saturated fat in all too many processed foods. 2011-01-24 Walmart to Require Elimination of Artificial Trans, Reduction of Sodium & Added Sugars http://cspinet.org/new/201101201.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonI applaud Walmart for using its marketplace muscle to move the food industry in a healthier direction. This <a href="http://walmartstores.com/pressroom/news/10514.aspx" target="cspi">announcement</a> will virtually eliminate artificial <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">trans fat</a> in packaged foods and help spur food manufacturers to cut the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">sodium</a> in their products over the next several years. Those two moves by Walmart ultimately should save thousands of lives each year that might otherwise be lost to heart disease or stroke. I hope this move emboldens the Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture, which should immediately pull the plug on partially hydrogenated oil and set reasonable limits on sodium levels in different categories of packaged foods. 2011-01-20 Report Card Grades States on Reporting Outbreaks of Foodborne Illness http://cspinet.org/new/201101191.html 7 States Earn ‘A’s … and 14 States Get ‘F’s from CSPIWASHINGTON—A <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/alloverthemap.pdf" target="cspi">nationwide report card</a> grading the 50 states and the District of Columbia on how well they detect, investigate, and report outbreaks of foodborne illness finds great variability—indicating that many states are only reporting a small fraction of the number of outbreaks as states with better detection and reporting systems. Using 10 years of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Center for Science in the Public Interest’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak/pathogen.php" target="cspi">Outbreak Alert!</a> database, CSPI assigned a letter grade and created an outbreak profile for each state. CSPI used two states that are widely recognized for having strong investigating and reporting systems as benchmarks. Those states, Oregon and Minnesota, have excellent laboratory facilities and public health departments that are quick to interview individuals who are suspected to have been <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">outbreak</a> “cases.” They report nine and eight outbreaks per million people per year, respectively. Those two states, and five states that reported equally high reporting rates for outbreaks, received ‘A’s: Florida, Hawaii, Maryland, Washington, and Wyoming. In contrast, 14 states reported only one outbreak of foodborne illness per million people: Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and West Virginia. “States that aggressively investigate outbreaks and report them to CDC can help nail down the foods that are responsible for making people sick,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “But when states aren’t detecting outbreaks, interviewing victims, identifying suspect food sources, or connecting with federal officials, outbreaks can grow larger and more frequent, putting more people at risk.” In its report, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/alloverthemap.pdf" target="cspi">All Over the Map</a>, CSPI acknowledges that it may seem counter-intuitive to give higher grades to states with more outbreaks. But, in fact, those states are the most likely to have robust detection and reporting systems, according to the group. The report card suggests that states that received ‘D’s or ‘F’s may lack adequate funding for public health services, leading to health departments that are understaffed and overburdened. CSPI also identified a troubling trend. The percentage of solved outbreaks—those with both an identified food and an identified pathogen—has declined over the 10-year period, from 1998 through 2007. The peak reporting year was 2001 when 44 percent of outbreaks reported to CDC were solved; the lowest year, when only 34 percent were reported, was 2007. But CSPI says that the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201101032.html" target="cspi">signed into law </a> by President Obama earlier this month, requires the Food and Drug Administration and the CDC to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/50_state_fsma_fact_sheet.pdf" target="cspi">enhance coordination between federal, state, and local surveillance systems </a> and improve epidemiological tools available to the states. And within a year, the law directs the federal government to name five state health departments as regional Centers of Excellence to serve as resources for public health officials in response to outbreaks. “Hopefully, this report will stimulate discussions among public health officials, food safety policy makers, legislators and the public about the value of surveillance,” said Craig Hedberg, Professor of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of Minnesota School of Public Health. “Ensuring that all states benefit from effective foodborne disease surveillance is a long range goal. A network of Regional Centers of Excellence can develop and demonstrate the best practices that have helped Minnesota and Oregon maintain their excellent records of foodborne disease surveillance and outbreak investigation.” CSPI recommends that consumers and doctors do their parts, too. Consumers should notify their local health department when they suspect they have suffered a foodborne illness, and should seek medical treatment when needed, the group says. Physicians should likewise report suspected cases to health departments, and be more assertive about pursuing laboratory testing to detect and confirm foodborne illnesses. Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, and Vermont received ‘B’s, with each state reporting 6 or 7 outbreaks per million people. Alabama, Alaska, California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, North Dakota, and Wisconsin received ‘C’s, with each state reporting 4 or 5 outbreaks per million people. Delaware, the District of Columbia, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Montana, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, and Virginia received ‘D’s. Those states and D.C. each only reported 2 or 3 outbreaks per million people. In developing this report, CSPI used CDC data from OutbreakNet Foodborne Outbreak Online Database which became available on September 17, 2009. According to CDC, data available via the OutbreakNet Online Database originate from a dynamic outbreak surveillance database. Reporting agencies (state, local, territorial, and tribal health departments, and CDC) can modify their NORS reports at any time, even months or years after an outbreak. Therefore, specific results from Foodborne Outbreak Online Database are subject to change. 2011-01-19 FDA Needs Authority To See Evidence on Structure/Function Claims, Says GAO http://cspinet.org/new/201101141.html WASHINGTON—A report today from the <a href="http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-102" target="cspi">Government Accountability Office</a> says the FDA needs more authority from Congress to help police potentially misleading claims on <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodlabeling/" target="cspi">food labels</a>. Specifically, GAO says FDA should be able to see food companies’ evidence for so-called structure/function claims—the increasingly familiar claims that a given product affects the structure or function of the body. Those claims typically take the form that a food with calcium, say, “builds strong bones.” But according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, structure/function claims are often unsubstantiated, or worse, illegally imply the food will prevent or treat a disease. “If a company wants to claim a food will ‘maintain healthy joints’ or ‘support healthy eyes,’ the FDA should at least be able to see the company’s evidence for that, and if there is weak evidence the claim should not be allowed,” said CSPI senior regulatory counsel Ilene Ringel Heller. “Claims that a sugary drink, a yogurt, or a cereal provides ‘immunity’ to some unspecified disease would not and should not survive that kind of scrutiny.” The GAO also called on the FDA to issue guidance to industry spelling out the type and strength of the scientific evidence needed to prevent false or misleading structure/function claims. CSPI says that for conventional foods, Congress should also give the FDA authority to disallow structure/function claims that are not backed by significant scientific agreement. 2011-01-14 CSPI Supports American Heart Association's Call for Lower Sodium Recommendation http://cspinet.org/new/201101132.html New "Dietary Guidelines for Americans" Due Later This MonthWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest says that Americans should aim to consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day—far less than either the 2,300 mg recommended by the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans, or the 4,000 mg of sodium that the average adult currently consumes. CSPI is supporting a <a href="http://www.newsroom.heart.org/index.php?s=43&item=1237" target="cspi">new advisory</a> from the American Heart Association, published in the <a href="http://circ.ahajournals.org/cgi/reprint/CIR.0b013e31820d0793v1?maxtoshow=&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=1&andorexacttitle=and&andorexacttitleabs=and&fulltext=sodium&andorexactfulltext=and&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&sortspec=relevance&fdate=1/1/2011&resourcetype=HWCIT" target="cspi">journal Circulation</a>, which calls on the “public, health professionals, the food industry, and the government to intensify efforts to reduce the amount of sodium (salt) Americans consume daily.” “Without question, the amounts of salt used in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/hspackaged.html" target="cspi">packaged</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/hsrestaurant.html" target="cspi">restaurant</a> foods make it the deadliest ingredient in the food supply, causing high blood pressure, stroke, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905111.html" target="cspi">heart disease</a>, and kidney problems,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “We hope that the soon-to-be-released revision of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans reflects the scientific consensus that Americans are consuming too much <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">salt</a>. Even though reducing consumption to 2,300 milligrams—the target in the current Guidelines—would represent great progress, we urge the new Guidelines to provide the more desirable 1,500-mg target.” As part of the AHA’s goal to reduce deaths from cardiovascular diseases and stroke by 20 percent, the organization is recommending a population-wide reduction of sodium intake to less than 1,500 mg daily. In 2005, CSPI filed a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> with the Food and Drug Administration calling on the agency to regulate salt as a food additive, and set reasonable limits on the amounts that can be used in different categories of processed food. The next version of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, produced jointly by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services, is expected to be released later this month. 2011-01-13 USDA Releases New & Improved School Meal Nutrition Criteria http://cspinet.org/new/201101131.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanI applaud <a href="http://usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentidonly=true&contentid=2011/01/0010.xml" target="cspi">USDA</a> for proposing to bring school meal standards into the 21st century. The new standards represent an enormous improvement over the status quo. Capping calories, limiting French fries, and reducing salt will all help America’s school children avoid unnecessary weight gain and diet-related diseases. And requiring <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2009/School-Meals-Building-Blocks-for-Healthy-Children.aspx" target="cspi">school lunches</a> to provide more whole grains, fruits, and vegetables will teach kids healthy eating habits that may last a lifetime. In addition, the recently passed <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012021.html" target="cspi">child nutrition </a> reauthorization law will provide schools with more advice, model menus, healthy recipes, and funding to implement these rules once they’re finalized and adopted. 2011-01-13 President to Sign Historic Food Safety Bill, Reforming FDA http://cspinet.org/new/201101032.html Food Safety Plans & Inspections Will Reduce Recalls & Outbreaks, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Legislation that will dramatically upgrade the food safety functions of the Food and Drug Administration will be signed into law tomorrow by President Barack Obama, giving the agency a broad new mandate to prevent food from becoming contaminated. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, a long-time proponent of modernizing FDA’s food safety framework, says that implementation of the law will give Americans greater confidence in the safety and security of the food supply and will reduce the number of outbreaks of foodborne illness. “This is a historic victory for consumers, who can now look forward to a future of safer food,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal, who has been advocating for FDA reform for more than 10 years “For far too long, the FDA has been in reactive mode, chasing down contaminated food after people are already sick with E. coli, Salmonella, or other dangerous pathogens. Now, by incorporating modern scientific and legal tools, the FDA will put the horse before the cart, requiring food manufacturers and farmers to implement plans aimed at preventing contaminated products. This is the most important food safety advance in 70 years.” In recent years, the bill enjoyed the support of a broad coalition of consumer and industry groups. Besides CSPI, the coalition included the Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, the Pew Charitable Trusts, and the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, as well as the Grocery Manufacturers Association. Survivors of foodborne illness and relatives of deceased victims also played an important role lobbying for passage of the bill. “Soon parents should be able to shop without worrying that the spinach, tomatoes, peanut butter, or eggs in their cart are going to cause illness and misery,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Once implemented, the law will give consumers greater confidence that the food they purchase comes from farms and facilities that follow good food safety practices, and that FDA inspectors can help verify that companies are adhering to those practices.” Besides requiring companies to develop food safety plans and increasing the frequency of federal inspections, the bill gives the FDA authority to recall potentially contaminated food from the marketplace—a power the agency now lacks. The bill also improves surveillance of outbreaks of foodborne illness and sets higher standards for the safety of imported foods. “This bill reflects years of work by a number of Members of Congress, especially Representatives John Dingell, Rosa DeLauro, Frank Pallone, and Henry Waxman, and Senators Dick Durbin and Tom Harkin,” said DeWaal. “President Obama deserves credit for making food safety an early priority of his Administration. But FDA’s job of implementing the bill will require Congressional oversight and new appropriations to ensure that the agency can effectively use the tools it has been given.” Tomorrow’s bill-signing caps the most significant legislative year ever for food policy advocates and the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Besides passing the food safety bill, Congress set the stage for eliminating junk food from schools, when it passed landmark <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012021.html" target="cspi">child nutrition legislation</a>. And in March, another of CSPI’s longstanding legislative priorities became law when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was signed. Besides providing unprecedented amounts of funding for state and local campaigns to promote healthier diets, the health reform law requires chain restaurants to list calories on menus and menu boards. 2011-01-03 Health Warnings Urged for Soda & Other Sugary Drinks http://cspinet.org/new/201101031.html Health Groups, Local Agencies, and Nutrition Experts Support CSPI’s CallWASHINGTON—The federal government’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends that people drink less soda and other sugary drinks. To help implement that advice, today a number of health groups, state and municipal agencies, and prominent nutrition experts are calling on the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to require health notices where they will most help consumers—right on the bottle or can. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/soda_letter_to_fda.pdf" target="cspi">letter to FDA </a> Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, the health advocates said that the agency should use its authority to require a rotating series of messages on labels of sugar-sweetened drinks, warning about the risks of weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other health problems. “In light of the overwhelming evidence linking soft drinks to serious diseases, consumers deserve to know—and soft drink labels should disclose—those health risks,” the organizations and experts wrote. The Center for Science in the Public Interest formally <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200507131.html" target="cspi">petitioned the FDA </a> in 2005 to require health messages on soda labels. While the petition has languished, CSPI hopes that the Obama Administration, which has placed a high priority on reducing childhood obesity, will look more favorably on the petition than the Bush-era FDA did. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">Soda pop </a> and other sugary drinks are now the single largest contributor of calories to the diet, providing as much as 10 to 15 percent of teens’ caloric intake, according to one study cited in today’s letter. “Our leading source of calories is a nutritionally worthless beverage that promotes obesity, diabetes, and other debilitating and expensive conditions,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “A warning label would not solve the obesity problem, but it would be a simple, inexpensive way to remind consumers of key facts when they are considering buying a major cause of the problem. A comprehensive effort to reduce the consumption of sugary drinks would be one of the single most important things that government could do to reduce obesity in children and adults.” Signers of today’s letter include the American Public Health Association, the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, Shape Up America!, and the Trust for America’s Health. Notably, a number of health departments also signed on to the letter, including the New York State Department of Health, the Boston Public Health Commission, the Philadelphia Department of Public Health, and the El Paso, TX, Department of Public Health. Some of the health messages proposed in the letter include: <ul> <li>The U.S. Government recommends that you drink fewer sugary drinks to prevent weight gain, tooth decay, heart disease, and diabetes.</li> <li>Drinking too many sugary drinks can promote diabetes and heart disease.</li> <li>For better health, the U.S. Government recommends that you limit your consumption of sugary drinks.</li> <li>This drink contains 250 calories. Consider switching to water.</li> </ul> Even toddlers are drinking fruit drinks and soda pop, according to CSPI. The group estimates that one- and two-year-olds are drinking an average of seven ounces per day. Older boys drink even more. CSPI says that the average 12- to 19-year-old male drinks about 28.5 ounces—or 350 calories’ worth—each day. Individual cosigners on the letter include Henry Blackburn of the University of Minnesota School of Public Health; George Bray of the Pennington Biological Research Center at Louisiana State University; Carlos Camargo, JoAnn Manson, and Eric Rimm from Harvard Medical School; Barry Popkin from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; and Walter C. Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health. 2011-01-03 New Nutrition Labeling Rules for Meat a Missed Opportunity, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201012291.html The U.S. Department of Agriculture today released <a href="http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-32485.pdf">final rules</a> for the labeling of meat and poultry--rules that have been stalled at the agency for 10 years. Unfortunately, the rules provide no new consumer benefit, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Under the rules, packages of ground beef, a major source of saturated fat, and ground poultry must bear Nutrition Facts labels by January 2012. However, the Center for Science in the Public Interest said that most ground beef already has such labeling. The group <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/meatlabel.pdf">had urged USDA</a> to prohibit "percent lean" statements on labels of ground meat. CSPI says that its research shows that the term "lean" misleads consumers into thinking that, say, "80 percent lean" ground beef is lower in fat than it really is. The term "low fat," as defined by the Food and Drug Administration, could not be used on products that contain more than 3 grams of fat per serving, a level that no ground beef meets. When consumer and health organizations opposed "percent lean" claims in the 1990s, USDA shelved its proposed rule. Now the agency is allowing the claims because, it says, consumers are used to seeing them. "Use of the word 'lean' in the context of ground beef is designed to deceive," says CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "The meat industry has insisted on labeling ground meat that way to make ground beef appear leaner. Consumers assume that they are following advice to eat lean meat when they purchase ground beef that is 80 percent lean, yet it is one of the fattiest meats on the market. Nutrition Facts labels don't correct that deception." For steaks, chops, roasts, and other cuts of meat, USDA is requiring nutrition information either on labels or on signs in supermarkets. To date, supermarkets have always chosen to post signs rather than use labels. CSPI says that the signs are hard to find, difficult to decipher, and show nutrition information for relatively puny 4-ounce servings, thereby understating the calorie and fat content of typical servings of steaks. <a href="http://cspinet.org/nah/articles/kindestcut.html">Many Americans actually consume steaks that weigh two, three, or four times the official USDA serving size</a>. "It's too bad that USDA missed an opportunity to give consumers easy-to-use, on-package information about how many calories and how much saturated fat is in steaks, roasts, and other cuts of meat," Jacobson said. CSPI had urged the agency to require that single-serving packages of meat—one steak, say—bear nutrition information for the whole cut as sold. Alternatively, said CSPI, labels could have stated "Nutrition Facts are based on a 4-oz. serving. This package contains multiple servings." "USDA should err on the side of protecting consumers' health," Jacobson said. "But I fear that when the food industry wants one thing and consumers another, consumers get the short end of the stick." 2010-12-29 Class Action Lawsuit Targets McDonald's Use of Toys to Market to Children http://cspinet.org/new/201012151.html Practice Illegally Exploits Children, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—A mother of two from Sacramento, Calif., says that McDonald’s uses toys as bait to induce her kids to clamor to go to McDonald’s and to develop a preference for nutritionally poor Happy Meals. With the help of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, today the mom, Monet Parham, is filing a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mcdonald_scomplaint.pdf" target="cspi">class action lawsuit</a> aimed at stopping McDonald’s use of toys to market directly to young children. The suit will be filed in California Superior Court in San Francisco shortly after the court opens for business Wednesday morning. According to Parham, the main reason her six-year-old daughter, Maya, asks to go to McDonald’s is to get toys based on Barbie, i-Carly, Shrek, or Strawberry Shortcake. The food seems almost beside the point to the kids, says Parham, because the toy monopolizes the attention of Maya and her two-year-old sister Lauryn. <object width="325" height="250"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5YQOZoPtCO0"> </param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5YQOZoPtCO0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="325" height="250"></embed> </object> “I am concerned about the health of my children and feel that McDonald’s should be a very limited part of their diet and their childhood experience,” Parham said. “But as other busy, working moms and dads know, we have to say ‘no’ to our young children so many times, and McDonald’s makes that so much harder to do. I object to the fact that McDonald’s is getting into my kids’ heads without my permission and actually changing what my kids want to eat.” Documents cited by CSPI in the lawsuit show that the Parham family’s experience isn’t accidental. It is entirely by design. “Go after kids,” is how Roy Bergold, who headed McDonald’s advertising for 29 years as chief creative officer, described the company’s strategy in an article in QSR magazine. “Ray Kroc said that if you had $1 to spend on marketing, spend it on kids. Why? Because they can’t get to your restaurant by themselves and they eat a lot.” Bergold also acknowledged in a separate QSR column that “companies have found that kids are a lot more tempted by the toys than the food.” McDonald’s “gets into the parents’ wallets via the kids’ minds,” according to an online presentation by Martin Lindstrom, who advises McDonald’s on branding and “neuromarketing.” And Joe Johnston, who was on the advertising-agency team that developed the McDonald’s Fun Meal, which pre-dated the Happy Meal, bluntly explained the centrality of the toy to the meal’s marketing: “Yes, even then, we knew that we needed the toy to make it work.” Fast-food companies—with McDonald’s by far in the lead—spent over $520 million in 2006 on advertising and toys to market children’s meals. Toy premiums made up almost three-quarters of those expenses, totaling over $350 million. According to the Institute of Medicine and the American Psychological Association, kids as young as Maya do not have the cognitive maturity to understand the persuasive intent of advertising. Advertising that is not understood to be advertising is inherently deceptive—an idea that CSPI’s lawsuit points out is well established in law. “Every time McDonald’s markets a Happy Meal directly to a young child, it exploits a child’s developmental vulnerability and violates several states’ consumer protection laws, including the California Unfair Competition Law,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. Even though Happy Meals <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YQOZoPtCO0" target="cspi">television advertising</a> shows brief glimpses of healthier products, such as Apple Dippers and low-fat milk, the default options put into Happy Meal by McDonald's employees are usually French fries and sugary sodas. In a CSPI study of 44 McDonald’s outlets, French fries were automatically included in Happy Meals 93 percent of the time. Soft drinks were the first choice offered to customers 78 percent of the time. According to CSPI, a reasonable lunch for a typical sedentary four- to eight-year-old should not exceed a third of a day’s worth, or about 430 calories. Of the Happy Meal combinations that are possible, only a handful fall under that threshold—and even those have more than one-third of day’s worth of sodium. But none of the Happy Meals that are served with fries or a soda are healthy for children aged four to eight, according to CSPI. A meal of a cheeseburger, fries, and a Sprite has 640 calories, 7 grams of artery-clogging saturated fat, and 35 grams—or 9 teaspoons—of sugar. “McDonald’s congratulates itself for meals that are hypothetically possible, though it knows very well that it’s mostly selling burgers or chicken nuggets, fries, and sodas to very young children,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “In other words, McDonald’s offerings consist mostly of fatty meat, fatty cheese, French fries, white flour, and sugar—a narrow combination of foods that promotes weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and heart disease—and may lead to a lifetime of poor diets.” “What kids see as a fun toy, I now realize is a sophisticated, high-tech marketing scheme that’s designed to put McDonald’s between me and my daughters,” Parham said. “For the sake of other parents and their children, I want McDonald’s to stop interfering with my family.” In June, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201006221.html" target="cspi">first notified</a> McDonald’s it might be the target of a lawsuit. Repeatedly, CSPI offered to meet with McDonald’s to try to reach an agreement that would avoid litigation, but McDonald’s refused. In anticipation of filing its suit, CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/retention_letter_mcdonald_s_121410.pdf" target="cspi">served McDonald’s with a letter </a> on Tuesday instructing the company to preserve any documents in its possession related to the use of toys to market Happy Meals to children. Lawyers for Parham will seek to examine those documents in discovery as the case proceeds. In addition to CSPI's Litigation Unit, Parham is also represented by private attorney Richard Baker of Baker Law, P.C. in Birmingham, Alabama. CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">litigation unit</a> has taken on food marketing to children before. In 2006, CSPI notified Kellogg that it would be sued for marketing sugary cereals and other junk food directly to children. After negotiating for more than a year, CSPI and Kellogg reached a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">historic settlement agreement</a> that set nutrition standards for the foods the company may advertise on media with young audiences. Since then, Kellogg only advertises to young audiences if a serving of the food meets certain nutrition criteria. Subsequently, numerous other companies announced voluntary nutrition standards for their advertising. In previous fast-food litigation, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606121.html" target="cspi">sued KFC</a> for using partially hydrogenated oil, which made KFC’s chicken high in trans fat. CSPI dropped that lawsuit when the company agreed to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="cspi">phase out </a> partially hydrogenated oils. KFC chicken is now trans-fat free. McDonald’s use of toys to market to children is also beginning to come under scrutiny by local officials. The San Francisco Board of Supervisors recently <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201011091.html" target="cspi">passed an ordinance</a> setting nutrition standards for children’s meals sold with toys, and CSPI is urging other jurisdictions to consider similar legislation. See what experts are saying about Parham v. McDonald’s <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/what_they_re_saying.pdf" target="cspi">here</a>. 2010-12-15 Nestle Urged Not To Buy Chicken-Flavored Fungus Company Quorn http://cspinet.org/new/201012132.html CSPI Cites Dangerous Allergic ReactionsWASHINGTON—A nonprofit nutrition and food safety watchdog group is urging Nestlé not to purchase Quorn, a line of fungus-based fake meats that causes severe allergic reactions—including vomiting, diarrhea, and anaphylactic reactions—in some people. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/quornnestleletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to Nestlé</a>, the Center for Science in the Public Interest says that it will continue to press government agencies to withdraw <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn" target="cspi">Quorn</a> from the market or at least require that it bear labels warning consumers of the risks of eating it. Scientists first discovered Quorn’s fungus, Fusarium venenatum, in 1967 in a soil sample from the British town of Marlow. Grown in giant fermentation vats and continuously fed a supply of oxygen, glucose, and nutrients, Quorn’s fungus spawns a protein-rich paste. That paste is further processed into vaguely meaty chunks or strips. And in 1985, Marlow Foods introduced a “savoury pie” composed of what it now calls “mycoprotein.” Today, Quorn typically takes the shape of patties or nuggets designed to simulate chicken, as well as a one-pound cylindrical “Turk’y Roast” and ethnic dishes such as the “Tikka pieces” and “Fillets in Tomato and Olive Sauce” it sells in the U.K. The scientists who found Quorn’s fungus might have had an inkling about their discovery when they chose the Latin venenatum—or “filled with venom”—for its name. Sure enough, an early study by Quorn’s manufacturer found that 10 percent of 200 human subjects fed Quorn developed nausea or a stomachache. Other scientists found that Quorn caused allergic reactions in some patients. And in 2003, CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson published a letter in the journal Allergy characterizing the <a href="http://cspinet.org/quorn/medical_research.html" target="cspi">adverse reactions</a> of 284 Quorn consumers (CSPI has a Web site to collect such <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/cgi-bin/quorn/quorn.cgi" target="cspi">reports</a>). A subsequent article in the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200309231.html" target="cspi">American Journal of Medicine</a> reported that, according to a CSPI-commissioned telephone survey in Britain, a higher percentage of people believe they are sensitive to Quorn than to shellfish, milk, peanuts, wheat or other common allergens. Though no deaths have yet been linked to Quorn, anaphylaxis can be life-threatening. “It was clearly a mistake for <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200304231.html" target="cspi">food safety</a> regulators in Europe, the United States, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201009231.html" target="cspi">Australia</a> to approve Quorn for human consumption in the first place,” Jacobson said. “It would be a real tragedy for a major food company like Nestle to start marketing foods made with this harmful ingredient on a bigger scale. There’s so much concern about allergic reactions to conventional foods, so it’s especially inappropriate to broaden the marketing of an unnecessary and novel powerful allergen.” Quorn is presently owned by U.K.-based Premier Foods. It has been previously owned by private equity firms and the drug company AstraZeneca. CSPI has been urging the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/quorn_mcclellan_letter_4-23.pdf" target="cspi">Food and Drug Administration</a> to revoke its “generally recognized as safe” designation for Quorn mycoprotein, and CSPI’s litigation unit has <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200909171.html" target="cspi">filed suit </a> on behalf of an Pennsylvania woman who had a severe reaction from eating Quorn. Those efforts have not yet succeeded in getting Quorn off the market or requiring warning labels on the product, though previously CSPI got the company to at least acknowledge on the label that mycoprotein comes from a fungus. “I was curled in a ball on the bathroom floor for almost three hours continually throwing up,” said Marisa Santanna, a behavioral health case manager from Harrisburg, PA, who ate Quorn nuggets and cutlets. “It got so bad that I started to throw up blood. The next morning I felt fine, and I made the connection that the last time this happened I ate Quorn, too. I read the ingredients on the box and decided to look up mycoprotein and was shocked at what I found online. There isn’t even a warning on the box.” Quorn’s manufacturer used to claim that its signature ingredient was “mushroom based,” but the company still describes Fusarium venenatum as “an edible fungi [sic] like mushrooms, morels, or truffles.” But Fusarium venenatum is quite unlike mushrooms, and is actually a form of mold—some of which are edible and some not. Other members of the Fusarium genus produce dangerous mycotoxins and have been studied for potential use as biological weapons or herbicides. “We have so many safe, sustainable, and wholesome fruits, vegetables, and whole grains to enjoy on their own and from which to make meat substitutes,” Jacobson said. “Why resort to vat-grown, allergenic mold? To me, Quorn seems better suited to dystopian science fiction than health food stores.” 2010-12-13 New Law to Give America's Schools a Nutritional Makeover http://cspinet.org/new/201012131.html Statement of CSPI Director of Nutrition Policy Margo G. WootanGetting junk food out of schools has been ten years in the making. This bill is a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201012021.html" target="cspi">historic step</a> toward reducing childhood obesity and helping parents feed their children better. It’s the result of the hard work of many, but would not have passed without this Administration’s leadership. The President's and First Lady's tireless advocacy brought the child nutrition bill back to life several times as it made its way through Congress. 2010-12-13 Landmark Child Nutrition Improvements to Become Law http://cspinet.org/new/201012021.html Bill Tackles Hunger and Childhood Obesity by Improving School Meals and Eliminating Junk FoodWASHINGTON—The U.S. House of Representatives passed landmark child nutrition legislation today, providing the biggest increase in funding for the school lunch program in decades. The bill makes it easier for qualified children to receive free school meals, extends after-school meals to more at-risk children, and provides additional technical assistance to local school food service providers. And, when signed into law by President Obama, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act sets the stage for the elimination of soda and other junk foods from schools nationwide. The bill’s passage is the second big victory won by food policy advocates in the lame-duck session of Congress this week. The Senate passed historic <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201011301.html" target="cspi">food safety legislation</a> Tuesday. “Simultaneously tackling childhood obesity and hunger, this bipartisan bill gets a lot of junk food out of schools and a lot of healthier food into schools,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The bill requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to update its nutrition standards for foods that can be sold through vending machines, a la carte lines, and elsewhere on school grounds. Current standards are 30 years out of date and apply only to the cafeteria during mealtimes. In addition to providing higher reimbursement rates for school lunches, the bill includes several no-cost provisions to strengthen school food finances, increasing the funds available for healthy school food. The bill sets schools on a path to gradually increase the price of paid school meals to make them comparable to the reimbursements USDA provides for free meals; it provides guidance to schools about which indirect costs are allowable; and ensures that money meant for healthy school meals is not diverted to subsidizing junk food sold through a la carte lines in the cafeteria. “More American children depend on the school lunch and breakfast programs than ever before, and this act will ensure that those meals are more nutritious than ever,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “CSPI has been trying to get junk food out of schools for three decades.” Besides CSPI, some 1,350 health, education, and anti-hunger groups supported passage of the bill, which even gained the support of many major food companies. The bill enjoyed the vocal support of the Administration, particularly First Lady Michelle Obama, whose Let’s Move initiative is focused on reducing childhood obesity. “I’m glad the House of Representatives rejected the know-nothing nincompoopism of Sarah Palin, who apparently thinks junk food in schools is good for families,” Wootan said. “Most parents want the lunch money they send off with their kids to be spent on healthy meals and snacks, not on sugary drinks and candy bar. It's disappointing that the Republican leadership decided to play politics with the bill—and children's health. The last-minute Republican amendment, concerning background checks for child-care workers, was a transparent attempt to kill the bill, which would have left children less healthy and more hungry.” 2010-12-02 FDA to Hold Hearing on Food Dyes, Children's Behavior http://cspinet.org/new/201012011.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe news that the Food and Drug Administration, in response to CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="cspi">2008 petition</a>, will convene an advisory committee <a href="http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-30187.pdf" target="cspi">meeting</a> to discuss the link between food dyes and children’s behavior is welcome and overdue. Yellow 5, Red 40, and other commonly used food dyes have long been shown in numerous clinical studies to impair children’s behavior. But for years, FDA—which actually commissioned one of the first controlled studies—dismissed the mounting evidence against the dyes. The continued use of synthetic food dyes is hardly <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201006291.html" target="cspi">worth the risk</a>. What’s the benefit? Junk food that’s even more appealing to children than it already is? Why, when we’re medicating so many children for hyperactivity, would we let food manufacturers worsen some children’s problems? Behavioral problems aside, animal studies indicating that dyes pose a cancer risk provide another reason for banning those chemicals. <img src="/images/nutri-grain.JPG"> Photo Credit: CSPI Nutri-Grain bars sold in Britain contain natural colorings, like beetroot red, but the same product sold in the United States uses Red 40 and other synthetic dyes. Fortunately, a few companies are adopting smarter policies even in the absence of government action. Starbucks does not permit dyes in any of its beverages or pastries, NECCO has switched to safer natural colorings for its famous Wafers, and Frito-Lay is testing dye-free snack foods. Food safety officials in Europe have moved much more quickly to protect children from <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes" target="cspi">artificial dyes</a>. The British government has urged companies to stop using most dyes, and the European Union requires a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201007201.html" target="cspi">warning notice</a> on most dyed foods. As a consequence, Kellogg, Kraft, McDonald’s, and other American companies that do business in Europe use safe, natural colorings there—but harmful, synthetic <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200810221.html" target="cspi">petrochemicals</a> here. I hope that the FDA’s March meeting portends the end of artificially dyed foods in the United States. 2010-12-01 Historic Food Safety Bill Clears Senate http://cspinet.org/new/201011301.html One More Stop in House Required Before Presidential SignatureWASHINGTON—Historic food safety reform legislation passed the Senate today on a bipartisan 73 to 25 vote. The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act requires every food processing facility to implement a food safety plan and requires the Food and Drug Administration to conduct more frequent inspections of the farms and factories that produce America’s food. The bill, which is the first major overhaul of food safety law for the Food and Drug Administration in 70 years, represents the culmination of over 10 years of research and advocacy by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Its passage was supported by a broad coalition of consumer and industry organizations, including many survivors of foodborne illness. The House of Representatives must pass the Senate version before it heads to President Obama’s desk for his signature. In July, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">House</a> passed an even stronger food safety bill with 283 votes. “Everyone who eats will benefit from this historic legislation,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “FDA will have new tools to help ensure that America’s food supply is safer, causing fewer illnesses and deaths. Preventing contamination in the first place is paramount to reducing the health care and economic costs that are caused when unsafe food makes people sick.” Every year, foodborne illness sends several hundred thousand Americans to the hospital and kills five thousand, according to CDC estimates. Under current law, many peanut butter factories, spinach fields, and egg farms can go five or 10 years without a visit from an FDA inspector. The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act requires high-risk producers to be inspected much more frequently. And importantly, it gives the FDA mandatory recall authority. Currently, the FDA can only ask companies to recall contaminated foods on a voluntary basis. The bill also sets responsible standards for produce safety and for the safety of imported food. “And after every outbreak, we learn how infrequently some of America’s food processing facilities are inspected by authorities,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “This legislation will give Americans the confidence that the fruits, vegetables, seafood, eggs and packaged foods we serve our families are safe to eat.” The bill has been <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201009081.html" target="cspi">stalled in the Senate </a> for over a year and its passage was only possible after Senate leaders agreed to several weakening compromises, including exemptions for many smaller facilities and reductions in the frequency of inspections. CSPI hopes that all those shortcomings will be corrected in future years. CSPI would like to thank Senators Durbin and Harkin for their long standing efforts on food safety culminating in the passage of this law. 2010-11-30 FDA Declares Formulation of Four Loko, Others, as 'Unsafe' http://cspinet.org/new/201011171.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonI applaud the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm234109.htm" target="cspi">FDA</a> for tackling youth-oriented caffeinated alcoholic drinks and effectively getting them reformulated. Four Loko and Joose might no longer have caffeine, but they still contain three to four beers’ worth of alcohol in 23-ounce, single-serving cans. That’s a bad idea that deserves further scrutiny from regulators at the federal, state, and local levels. That these drinks are made with kid-friendly flavors like watermelon, blue raspberry, and lemonade says all one needs to know about their target audience. Government regulators would save a lot of young people from preventable traffic crashes, sexual assaults, and alcohol poisonings by regulating these drinks’ serving-sizes and alcohol content with greater care. 2010-11-17 San Francisco Moves Closer to Fast-Food Toy Marketing Curbs http://cspinet.org/new/201011091.html McDonald’s, Other Chains Exploit Children by Using Toys to Market Junk Food, According to CSPIWASHINGTON—The controversial practice of using toys to market unhealthy fast-food meals to children was dealt another blow today by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. By a vote of 8 to 3, the board gave final approval to a <a href="http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=11214" target="cspi">measure </a> sponsored by Supervisor Eric Mar that requires meals sold with toys not to exceed ceilings for calories, fat, sugar, and sodium, and to contain a half a cup of fruit and at least three-quarters of a cup of vegetables. “That’s good news for San Francisco’s parents and children,” said Center for Science in the Public Interest executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “It’s time for fast-food companies to stop exploiting children in order to sell more junk food, and this measure would at least set basic nutrition standards for meals sold with toys. Fatty meat, French fries, white flour, and sugary drinks are the last foods we should encourage kids to eat.” The measure now heads to the desk of Mayor Gavin Newsom, now the Lieutenant Governor-elect. Newsom has indicated he may veto it, but it seems the board has enough votes to override a veto. The Santa Clara, Calif., Board of Supervisors passed a <a href="http://www.sccgov.org/portal/site/scc/aspecial?path=%252Fv7%252FSCC%2520Public%2520Portal&contentId=662e022125068210VgnVCM10000048dc4a92____" target="cspi">similar measure </a> in April. “I hope that other health-conscious legislators around the country adopt their own laws to discourage the marketing of unhealthy foods to young children who, after all, do not yet have the cognitive ability to understand the persuasive intent of marketing,” Jacobson said. “That would deliver a strong message to McDonald’s, Burger King, and Wendy’s that those companies should not use toys to market foods or to limit the inclusion of toys to only healthier meals.” Separately, CSPI will soon send its own message to McDonald’s about toy-based marketing. It is planning on <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201006221.html" target="cspi">filing a lawsuit</a> aimed at stopping the practice of using toys to lure children to Happy Meals—a practice that CSPI says is unfair and deceptive. 2010-11-09 New School Beverage Study Shows Need for Child Nutrition Bill http://cspinet.org/new/201011011.html Statement of CSPI Director of Nutrition Policy Margo G. WootanA new study shows that unhealthy beverages were still in reach for almost half of all elementary students in the 2008-2009 school year. While the volume of sugar drinks sold in elementary schools is much lower than in high schools, unhealthy beverages—and foods—don't belong in any schools. <img src="/images/takomaparkelementarysodamachine.JPG">Photo Credit: Jane Welna, CSPI These vending machines in Takoma Park Elementary School in Maryland offer students sugary soft drinks and junk food. Congress needs to pass the child nutrition bill soon to get vending machines like these out of schools. Congress has the chance to change this by passing the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201007152.html" target="cspi">Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act</a> when it returns for the lame duck session. That bipartisan bill passed the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201008051.html" target="cspi">Senate</a> unanimously in August and includes a provision to get junk food and soda out of schools. Unlike a decade ago, improving school foods is no longer controversial. The child nutrition bill has the support of not only public health organizations, but also school groups and food and beverage companies, including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo. Given the sky-high rates of childhood obesity, Congress needs to support parents and protect kids by passing the child nutrition bill to finally get sugary drinks and junk food out of all schools. 2010-11-01 Is Soda Higher in Fructose Than Previously Thought? http://cspinet.org/new/201010272.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonIf the findings of <a href="http://goranlab.com/pdf/Ventura%20Obesity%202010-sugary%20beverages.pdf" target="cspi">new laboratory analysis</a> of popular soft drinks can be replicated, the soda industry will have a lot of explaining to do. The study, fittingly published in the journal Obesity, claims that up to 65 percent of the sugars in Coca-Cola and Pepsi are fructose. That’s surprising, because the soda industry has always claimed that the high-fructose corn syrup used in soda is only 55 percent fructose—a percentage much closer to that of table sugar, or sucrose, which is 50 percent fructose. Because the new analyses seem so improbable, confirmatory studies using the best analytical method need to be done before the alarm bells ring too loudly. Most scientists haven’t been willing to say that high-fructose corn syrup is some kind of nutritional boogeyman that is much worse than ordinary sugar because both are roughly half fructose and half glucose. If Coke and Pepsi actually contained much higher levels of fructose, that would make those and other HFCS-sweetened drinks even more harmful than previously thought since fructose appears to be especially conducive to weight gain. But no one should think that they’d be doing themselves a huge favor by switching to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">soft drinks</a> made with sugar. Regardless of the percentage of fructose to glucose, the main problem with sugars is that they are an empty source of calories. Even worse, consumed in liquid form, those calories don’t provide the same kind of satiety solid foods do. As a result, all sugary soft drinks promote weight gain, obesity, diabetes, tooth decay, and other serious health problems. 2010-10-27 Bayer Caves In to State AGs on One A Day Cancer Claims http://cspinet.org/new/201010271.html Drug Company Must Pay $3.3 Million to States and Support Future Claims with Competent Scientific EvidenceWASHINGTON—Bayer will be barred from claiming that its One A Day multivitamins may cure, treat, or prevent any disease, including cancer, unless the company can back up such claims with competent and reliable scientific evidence. As part of a settlement agreement reached yesterday with Attorneys General from Oregon, California, and Illinois, Bayer must also make a $3.3 million payment to those states. A complaint, filed by Oregon Attorney General John Kroger, accused Bayer of “deceptively leveraging fear of prostate cancer” in order to market One A Day multivitamins for men. Bayer claimed that “emerging research” suggested that the mineral selenium in One A Day might reduce the risk of prostate cancer. But according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, “emerging research” did no such thing. In fact, a seven-year, $118-million <a href="http://cme.nci.nih.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/SELECTJAMAresults2008" target="cspi">study funded by the National Institutes of Health </a> found that selenium does not prevent prostate cancer in healthy men. That massive trial, which involved 35,000 men, was abruptly halted when it became clear to researchers that selenium was not protecting the men from prostate cancer and may have been causing unexplained cases of diabetes. Yet Bayer continued to claim a protective benefit from selenium. In October of 2009, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910011.html" target="cspi">CSPI sued Bayer</a> in federal court in California over the selenium claims on One A Day, which a judge dismissed on technical grounds. CSPI was planning on filing suit on behalf of a California consumer in another court. But in the wake of the settlement agreement reached with the Attorneys General, CSPI is announcing that it will not move forward with the second suit. “We are very glad that the Attorneys General have obtained a binding settlement prohibiting Bayer from exploiting men’s fear of prostate cancer in order to sell more vitamin pills,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “And we’re also pleased that Bayer seems to have had a change of heart, since after CSPI publicly questioned the company’s unsupportable claims on One A Day, its response then was to threaten us with a libel lawsuit.” Bayer has since backed off that threat, Gardner said. The agreement reached yesterday is the latest in a long rap sheet of settlement agreements, fines, guilty pleas, and other enforcement actions involving the German pharmaceutical giant. In 2001, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/24/us/bayer-to-pay-14-million-to-settle-charges-of-causing-inflated-medicaid-claims.html" target="cspi">Bayer paid $14 million to U.S. and state governments </a> to settle allegations that the company’s actions helped health care providers submit inflated Medicaid claims for drugs. In 2003, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/17/business/bayer-agrees-to-pay-us-257-million-in-drug-fraud.html" target="cspi">Bayer pleaded guilty to a criminal charge and paid $257 million</a> in fines and penalties after a whistleblower exposed a scheme by the company to overcharge for the antibiotic Cipro. In 2004, <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/press_releases/2004/204602.htm" target="cspi">Bayer pleaded guilty to a criminal charge and paid a $66 million</a> fine after a Justice Department investigation into Bayer’s role in a price-fixing conspiracy involving a chemical used to make rubber products. And in 2007, Bayer paid $8 million to resolve allegations by <a href="http://www.atg.wa.gov/pressrelease.aspx?&id=11916" target="cspi">state</a> attorneys <a href="http://www.ksag.org/page/attorney-general-morrison-announces-30-state-settlement-with-bayer-corporation" target="cspi">general</a> that the company failed to warn physicians and consumers about safety issues surrounding its now-withdrawn cholesterol-lowering drug Baycol. Prior marketing for One A Day has also posed legal problems for Bayer. In 2007, it paid a $3.2 million civil fine as part of a <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/01/weightloss.shtm" target="cspi">consent decree</a> reached with the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice. The case centered on weight-loss claims that the FTC said violated an earlier order requiring that all health claims for One A Day be supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. And in 2009, Bayer was required to run a $20-million corrective advertising campaign about its birth control pill Yaz and to submit its ads for FDA approval, as part of a legal settlement secured by a number of <a href="http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/pressroom/2009_02/20090209.html" target="cspi">state</a> attorneys <a href="http://www.oag.state.md.us/Press/2009/020909.htm" target="cspi">general</a> and the FDA. 2010-10-27 CSPI Announces Resignation of Long-time Legal Affairs Director Bruce A. Silverglade http://cspinet.org/new/201010132.html WASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest is announcing with regret the resignation of Bruce A. Silverglade, who has served as CSPI’s director of legal affairs for more than 25 years. Mr. Silverglade will be joining the Washington, D.C., law firm of Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Bode Matz PC as a principal on November 1, 2010. “I greatly enjoyed working at CSPI, and it is difficult to say goodbye to long-time friends and colleagues, but it is now time to turn my career in a new direction,” Silverglade said. <p.Silverglade started at CSPI in 1981. He led the bipartisan campaign for the enactment of the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990—requiring the adoption of easy-to-read Nutrition Facts labels on packaged foods. He worked to change U.S. Department of Agriculture and Food and Drug Administration policy on labeling and additives, brought precedent-setting advertising complaints before the Federal Trade Commission, and worked with government officials from around the world to set safety and labeling standards for the global food trade. Silverglade recently helped negotiate voluntary agreements with international beverage companies that limited the sale of soft drinks in schools world-wide. “Bruce has demonstrated extraordinary persistence in fighting to protect consumers from inadequate and deceptive food labeling and advertising,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “And he has become a recognized expert on cross-border regulatory and trade issues affecting the food industry. Speaking on behalf of everyone at CSPI, I wish Bruce well in this new phase of his career.” Silverglade added, “I think that my experience finding solutions to complex public policy problems by working with government officials, industry leaders, and consumer groups fits well with Olsson Frank Weeda’s approach to proactively engaging government officials and using both conventional and creative approaches to advance the public policy process.” 2010-10-13 Institute of Medicine Pushes Front-of-Package Food Labels http://cspinet.org/new/201010131.html CSPI Says System Should Also Include Added SugarsWASHINGTON—A <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/Examination-of-Front-of-Package-Nutrition-Rating-Systems-and-Symbols-Phase-1-Report.aspx" target="cspi">report from the Institute of Medicine</a> concluded that simplified front-of-package food labeling could help improve Americans’ diets and health. That report, which the Center for Science in the Public Interest urged Congress to request, highlighted the importance of listing calories and three problem nutrients—saturated fat, trans fat, and sodium. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodlabeling" target="cspi">CSPI</a> today said that added sugars should also be included on front-of-package labels for at least some foods. “Unfortunately, without disclosing the amount of added sugars, a soft drink with that labeling would look pretty good because it has no fat and virtually no sodium,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “One solution would be to disclose calories and just one or two other nutrients, depending on the type of food. Soups, for instance, might focus on calories and sodium. Soda labels should highlight just calories and sugar.” And rather than highlighting trans fat on package fronts, the Food and Drug Administration should just ban the artificial variety of trans fat, which comes from partially hydrogenated oil, according to CSPI. “The biggest challenge is to figure out how best to display the information so as to encourage companies to produce and shoppers to choose the most healthful foods,” Jacobson said. “While the British government found that red-yellow-green color coding, or words like high, medium, and low, are most consumer-friendly, the food industry will fight tooth and nail to prevent the government from requiring such clear, understandable symbols. Companies don’t want their less healthful products clearly labeled as such, but that’s the kind of system that would most benefit consumers.” CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200611301.html" target="cspi">first urged</a> the FDA to consider a front-of-package labeling system in 2006. A year ago, the agency asked the food industry to halt its front-of-package labeling system, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910202.html" target="cspi">Smart Choices</a>. That program’s nutrition criteria allowed sugary cereals, such as Froot Loops and some white breads with no whole grains, to bear a Smart Choice icon. 2010-10-13 New York City Request to Exclude Soda from SNAP Deserves Support, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201010071.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe USDA should approve New York City’s sensible request to test excluding soda and other sugary beverages from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The empty calories in soft drinks pose a major public health problem by promoting tooth decay, obesity, diabetes, and other health problems. It’s also the case that those diseases have a disproportionate impact on low-income Americans. However, the extent to which SNAP recipients’ purchases of soft drinks is contributing to poor diets and obesity is unclear and controversial. I applaud New York City for seeking to get some real data to inform the debate. As it is, industry is enjoying about a $4-billion-a-year subsidy thanks to people spending SNAP benefits on soft drinks. 2010-10-07 Dr. Michael Jacobson Receives CDC Foundation Hero Award http://cspinet.org/new/201010051.html Jacobson Honored for Championing Science-based Nutrition and Food Safety Initiatives<img src="/images/CDCFoundationlogo.jpg"> ATLANTA – Michael F. Jacobson, Ph.D., received the 2010 CDC Foundation Hero Award at an event at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC Foundation is honoring Jacobson for his instrumental role in improving public health by championing science-based nutrition and food safety initiatives, empowering consumers to make healthful choices and encouraging scientists to engage in public interest activities. Jacobson is co-founder and executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a nonprofit health advocacy organization focused on nutrition and food safety. CSPI is a key player in the ongoing battle to prevent diet-related chronic diseases and food-borne illnesses in America. CSPI both educates consumers and encourages government and corporations to take steps to protect the public’s health. Since 1971, Jacobson and CSPI have used education, legislation and litigation to win important reforms, including laws requiring nutrition information on most food labels and warning notices on alcoholic beverage labels. CSPI's studies on the nutritional quality of restaurant meals generated worldwide interest and spurred major chains to add more healthful items to their menus. Jacobson and CSPI continue to address junk-food marketing aimed at kids, the nutritional quality of school meals, microbial contamination of foods, and the safety of food additives. "As our nation’s health care costs continue to rise due in significant part to the growth of preventable, diet-related problems in our population, Dr. Jacobson’s seminal work will continue to play a critical role in our nation’s public health for many years to come," says New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who nominated Jacobson to receive the CDC Foundation Hero Award. Jacobson holds a Ph.D. in microbiology from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and is the author or co-author of numerous publications, including: Six Arguments for a Greener Diet (2006, CSPI); Restaurant Confidential (2002, Workman Publishing); Marketing Madness (1995, Westview Press); What Are We Feeding Our Kids? (1994, Workman); The Fast-Food Guide (1986, 1991 Workman); The Complete Eater’s Digest and Nutrition Scoreboard (1986; Doubleday & Co.); Salt: The Brand Name Guide to Sodium (1983, Workman); Eater’s Digest: The Consumer’s Factbook of Food Additives (1972, 1976, Doubleday & Co.). He is the recipient of the Food and Drug Administration’s Commissioner’s Special Citation and Harvey W. Wiley Medal and the Food Marketing Institute’s Esther Peterson Consumer Service Award. “Obesity is an epidemic in this country," says Charles Stokes, president and CEO of the CDC Foundation. “CDC and other public health scientists conduct research to identify the causes of obesity and to determine the best strategies to fight obesity at the community and national levels. Dr. Jacobson and CSPI have mobilized thousands of individuals, organizations and policymakers to help put that science into action." First presented in 2005, the CDC Foundation Hero Award recognizes an individual who has made a significant contribution to improving the public’s health through exemplary work in advancing CDC’s mission of promoting health and quality of life by preventing and controlling disease, injury and disability. Previous recipients include: <ul><li>William Foege, M.D., M.P.H., senior fellow of The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and former CDC director</li> <li>Paul Farmer, M.D., Ph.D., founding director of Partners In Health</li> <li>Sir Michael Marmot, M.B.B.S., M.P.H., Ph.D., F.R.C.P., F.F.P.H.M., FMedSci, director of the University College London International Institute for Society and Health and MRC Research Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health</li> <li>Raymond J. Baxter, Ph.D., senior vice president for community benefit for Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc., and Kaiser Foundation Hospitals</li> <li>The Honorable Rudy Giuliani, 107th Mayor of New York City</li> </ul> Established by Congress, the CDC Foundation helps the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention do more, faster by forging effective partnerships between CDC and individuals, corporations and foundations to fight threats to health and safety. The CDC Foundation manages approximately 200 public health programs in the U.S. and in countries around the world. Each program involves a talented team of CDC experts and at least one outside funding partner. To learn more, please visit <a href="http://www.cdcfoundation.org" target="cspi">www.cdcfoundation.org</a>. *Press release from CDC Foundation 2010-10-05 Killer App: Olive Garden's Deep-Fried Lasagna Fritta is "Food Porn" http://cspinet.org/new/201009301.html WASHINGTON—How do you gussy up a dated restaurant menu item like lasagna? If you’re the culinary brain trust at Olive Garden, the answer is obvious: Throw it in the deep-fryer. Eating it, however, is throwing caution to the wind. Described by the company as “Parmesan-breaded lasagna pieces, fried and served over Alfredo sauce, topped with Parmesan cheese and marinara sauce,” the Lasagna Fritta appetizer has half a day’s calories (1,030) and a day’s worth of saturated fat (21 grams) and sodium (1,590 milligrams). But to the health watchdogs at Nutrition Action Healthletter, Lasagna Fritta is "<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/foodporn/october2010.html" target="cspi">food porn</a>.” Olive Garden already offered fried zucchini, fried mozzarella, and fried calamari appetizers. And other chains are innovating by deep-frying everything from balls of macaroni and cheese (The Cheesecake Factory) to pickles (Hooters). “Lasagna’s not exactly health food to begin with, but bread it with cheese, deep-fry it, and plate it with cream sauce and still more cheese, and you have a killer app,” said Jayne Hurley, senior nutritionist at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit publisher of Nutrition Action. “Shared with four or five people it wouldn’t be the end of the world. But odds are these 1,000-calorie appetizers are split with just one, amidst all-you-can-eat breadsticks, and in advance of a 1,000-calorie entrée. Lasagna Fritta is just garden variety food porn.” Food Porn is featured on the back page of every issue of Nutrition Action. Previous food porns include <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/foodporn/julyaug2010.html" target="cspi">Denny’s Grand Slamwich</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/foodporn/may2010.html" target="cspi">Land O’Lakes Margarine</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/foodporn/september09.html" target="cspi">Domino’s Bread-Bowl Pastas</a>. The same page also highlights a Right Stuff healthier food. This month, Nutrition Action recommends Organic Bistro Whole Life Meals—low-sodium frozen dinners that include a lemony Chicken Citron with spinach, quinoa and edamame. 2010-09-30 Ben & Jerry's to Drop "All Natural" Claims http://cspinet.org/new/201009271.html WASHINGTON—Ben & Jerry’s <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ben_jerry_ceo_letter.pdf" target="cspi">has agreed</a> to phase out its use of “All Natural” claims on labels on ice creams and frozen yogurts that contain alkalized cocoa, corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, or other ingredients that aren’t natural. The move amicably resolves a dispute arising from a letter that the Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201008121.html" target="cspi">sent last month</a> to Ben & Jerry’s parent company, Unilever. The letter said that at least 48 products were improperly labeled. “Ben & Jerry’s is doing the right thing by taking the phrase ‘all natural’ off its labels if the products have factory-made ingredients,” said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The Food and Drug Administration could do consumers and food manufacturers a great service by actually defining when the word ‘natural’ can and cannot be used to characterize a given ingredient.” The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which regulates meat and poultry, lets products be labeled “natural” if they do not include artificial colors or ingredients, or are not more than “minimally processed,” by which the agency means a process that doesn’t fundamentally alter the raw ingredient. But the FDA, which regulates all other foods, has no such definition. It told CSPI several years ago that defining the term was “not among our enforcement priorities.” When it criticized Ben & Jerry’s misleading use of the word “natural,” CSPI said that none of the questionable ingredients the company used was unsafe (even the tiny amount of partially hydrogenated oil used in the Chubby Hubby flavor is harmless). CSPI also noted, though, that plenty of ingredients that really are “natural” are still bad for your health, such as the artery-clogging cream that is the main ingredient in Ben & Jerry’s ice creams. 2010-09-27 Consumer Group Warns Australian Food Safety Officials About Quorn Fungus Foods http://cspinet.org/new/201009231.html “Mycoprotein” Meat Substitute Linked to Vomiting, Diarrhea, and WorseWASHINGTON—An American nonprofit food-safety watchdog group is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/australia_fsanz_quorn.pdf" target="cspi">calling on Australian officials</a> to prohibit the sale of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200909171.html" target="cspi">Quorn</a> brand meat substitutes. Quorn foods are made from a fungus grown in giant vats, from whence a protein-rich paste is harvested. The paste is then processed into strips or chunks designed to resemble chicken, ground beef, or other foods. But a significant percentage of consumers suffer allergic <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/victims.html" target="cspi">reactions</a> after eating the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/" target="cspi">fake meats</a>, with the most common symptoms being nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Some consumers experience potentially life-threatening anaphylactic reactions, including swelling of the throat and difficulty breathing. A CSPI survey in the United Kingdom found that a higher percentage of people are sensitive to Quorn foods than are allergic to peanuts, milk, or shellfish, several common allergens. On sale for several years in the United States and longer in Europe, Quorn’s fungus is now being sold Down Under for the first time. “I urge you to protect Australians from powerfully allergenic Quorn foods—that are marketed as if they were health foods—by barring their sale,” wrote CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson in a letter to Food Standards Australia & New Zealand. “At the very least, a prominent notice on the fronts of packages should advise consumers that the products can cause serious and potentially fatal allergic reactions.” Australian Joanne Roberts, of Frankston North, Victoria, first purchased Quorn Lasagna at Woolworth’s. Almost immediately, the 41-year-old homemaker realized something was not quite right. First came a gnawing pain in her upper abdomen, and then burping. Then, a tingling feeling in her limbs. Over the next six hours, she suffered severe and sometimes sudden vomiting. Following that, equally severe diarrhea—watery at first, then bloody. After various medications eased those symptoms, cramping and fatigue lingered in Roberts for a week. “It’s such a shame that an alternative for vegetarians is so harmful to my health,” Roberts said. “This product should have been checked more before being released upon the public.” Donna-marie Bradtke, a 47-year-old weight-loss consultant from Perth, had similar experiences after eating Quorn Southern Style Burgers, which she purchased from the retailer Coles. “I had such violent vomiting that my throat seemed to close and I really thought I was going to choke. I am very worried that someone old or very young may eat this product and have the same adverse reaction,” Bradtke said. Quorn’s fungus is a strain of mold found in the 1960s in a British dirt sample. Scientists found that the fungus could be cultivated in fermentation vats and turned into an inexpensive source of protein. The name of the fungus, Fusarium venenatum, might have tipped off scientists and food safety officials: venenatum is Latin for “filled with venom.” But early Quorn marketing materials sought to convey a relationship with more desirable fungi, such as mushrooms and morels. But that relationship turned out to be more distant than consumers were led to believe. One mycologist—a fungus expert—said that calling Quorn a mushroom was like “calling a rat a chicken because both are animals.” Another expert in fungal taxonomy told CSPI that “mushrooms are as distantly related to Quorn’s fungus as humans are to jellyfish.” “We were disappointed that food safety authorities in the U.S. and the U.K. would so quickly and incuriously welcome a brand new and powerful allergen into the human food supply, when the limited amount of testing that had been done raised so many red flags,” Jacobson said. “Unfortunately, notwithstanding all the evidence that Quorn foods are harmful, the Australian government has done the same thing.” Quorn comes in <a href="http://www.quorn.us/Products/" target="cspi">many forms</a>, including artificial chicken patties and nuggets, turkey-like cylindrical “Roasts,” and meat-free analogues of several British delicacies like “Cornish Pasties” and “Toad in the Hole.” Quorn’s Web site says that dishes such as “Quorn Schnitzels Cheese and Spinach” are now available at Woolworth’s, Coles, and other Australian grocers. CSPI has been trying to get Quorn off of American and British <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200312091.html" target="cspi">supermarket</a> shelves <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/quornpr_050102.html" target="cspi">since 2002</a>. Lawyers for the nonprofit group are presently representing an American woman who became violently ill after eating Quorn “Chik’n Patties.” Her <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200909171.html" target="cspi">lawsuit</a> seeks to compel the company to place notices on Quorn labels warning consumers about the adverse reactions. CSPI has also been collecting adverse reaction reports online (more than 1,500 to date), and recently began receiving reports from worried Australian consumers. Debra Connell of Melbourne was home with her three-and-a-half year-old twins when she became ill with vomiting, diarrhea, and a red rash after eating Quorn Lasagna. She says she’s a careful label reader, but had no idea what to expect from eating “mycoprotein.” “It took two days for my constricted chest, coughing, and burning sensation in my chest to subside,” Connell said, adding that “I’m beginning to wonder if there are going to be life-long side effects from eating Quorn.” As of now, the web site for Food Standards Australia & New Zealand blandly claims that “Reported cases of adverse events (gastrointestinal disturbance and allergy) are very rare. No safety concerns identified.” 2010-09-23 Proposed Name Change For High-Fructose Corn Syrup Still Misleading http://cspinet.org/new/201009151.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe term “high-fructose corn syrup” has misled many people into thinking that the sweetener is composed largely of fructose. But it is not. Sugar and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm#hfcs" target="cspi">high-fructose corn syrup</a> are nutritionally the same. So soft drinks and other products sweetened with sugar are every bit as conducive to weight gain as products sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup. The bottom line is that people should consume less of all added sugars. I don’t know if “corn sugar” is the best term to replace “high-fructose corn syrup” because it sounds like the sugars come right out of the corn. Canada calls the ingredient glucose–fructose syrup; another option might be “chemically modified corn sweetener.” 2010-09-15 Tons of Foods Recalled and Thousands Sickened as Senate Stalls on Food Safety http://cspinet.org/new/201009081.html Consumer Groups, Survivors of Foodborne Illness, Call on Senate to Pass FDA Reform Legislation This MonthWASHINGTON—As the nation reels from the impact of a massive egg recall that has sickened well over 1,500 people, survivors of foodborne illness and consumer advocates say that antiquated laws and poor enforcement are to blame. According to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/recipefordisaster-recalls.pdf" target="cspi">new report</a>, the massive <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201008191.html" target="cspi">egg recall</a> is only the latest—but largest—of 85 recalls that companies made while food safety reform legislation has been pending in the Senate, and since similar legislation passed the House in July of 2009. All told, at least 1,850 people have been sickened from foods subject to a recall, according to a report issued today by three consumer groups. And since foodborne illness is dramatically underreported, the actual toll of illness is almost certainly in the tens of thousands. “Recalls and outbreaks are the most public consequence of our ‘horse and buggy’ food safety system,” said Caroline Smith DeWaal, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety</a> director at the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. “Consumers are sometimes sickened and everyone up and down the chain has to check for, remove, and destroy the contaminated products. Only Congress can fix the underlying problems by passing legislation that has been languishing in the Senate for over a year.” In the 13-month period since the House passed H.R. 2749, the Food Safety Enhancement Act, researchers from CSPI, Consumer Federation of America, and U.S. Public Interest Research Group identified 85 separate recalls linked to at least 1,850 illnesses. 36 of those recalls were due to Salmonella contamination of lettuce, alfalfa sprouts, green onions, and ground pepper. Hydrolyzed vegetable protein contaminated with Salmonella spurred the recall of a wide variety of soup and dip mixes, dressings, and seasonings. 32 recalls, mostly from contaminated cheeses, were due to dangerous Listeria bacteria. E. coli bacteria on shredded romaine lettuce sickened at least 26 people in 23 states and the District of Columbia. At a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/carolinesmithdewaalstatement.pdf" target="cspi">press conference</a> in Washington, representatives from the consumer groups said that the Senate needs to take up food safety legislation immediately after it reconvenes. A conference committee will then have to craft a final bill before it can be sent to the President. For survivors of foodborne illness and their families, the wait has been too long. “I want to know that the food on my plate is safe,” said 13-year-old <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bio_-_rylee_gustafson.pdf" target="cspi">Rylee Gustafson</a>, of Henderson, Nev. In 2006, Rylee spent two-weeks on life support and was hospitalized for a month after eating spinach contaminated with E. coli. Since her illness, Rylee has been active with Safe Tables Our Priority (S.T.O.P.), which assists victims of foodborne illness and advocates for reform. “I hope that the Senate can finish work on the food safety bill, and that other kids won’t have to suffer from a foodborne illness like I did.” Both the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">House-passed bill</a> and the bill <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911181.html" target="cspi">pending in the Senate</a> require food manufacturers to develop written food safety plans and to implement preventive measures. Both bills give the FDA a mandate to conduct inspections of food processing facilities, and to conduct microbial testing. Under current law, many facilities go for five or 10 years without an inspection. The Senate bill would require high-risk producers to be inspected more frequently. Both bills give the agency the authority to order companies to recall potentially tainted foods. “Most Americans probably assume that FDA inspects farms and food processing plants are inspected regularly and that when problems arise, FDA can quickly order tainted eggs or spinach off the market,” said Chris Waldrop, director of the Consumer Federation of America’s Food Policy Institute. “In fact, neither of those assumptions is true. The Senate food safety bill would give the FDA the authority it needs to do its job.” “Unfortunately, the FDA is often in reactive mode, chasing down the source of an outbreak long after much of the food in question has been sold,” said Elizabeth Hitchcock, public health advocate for U.S. PIRG, which is activating its nationwide grassroots network to push for a vote on S. 510. “We need this food safety reform legislation so that the FDA can focus on preventing contamination in the first place—before the food ends up in Americans’ cupboards and refrigerators.” In 2009, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid assured young Rylee, the survivor of the 2006 spinach outbreak, that food safety was a priority. “We’re going to do everything we can to get this legislation done,” Reid said. A month later, the bipartisan food safety bill was unanimously reported out of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. But more than a year—and 59 recalls—later, no vote has been scheduled. “My Salmonella infection from eggs was the most devastating thing I have ever been through,” said Sarah Lewis, a mother of two from Freedom, Calif. “I would hate for anyone else to have to go through anything like it, especially if they have small children who need care. The fact that this egg outbreak could happen on such a large scale makes it clear to me that food regulation needs to be improved.” The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 76 million people suffer from foodborne illness each year. 325,000 will be hospitalized. And approximately 5,000 Americans will die. Children and the elderly are most likely to experience severe cases of illness and death from foodborne pathogens. 2010-09-08 CSPI Says FDA Findings at Egg Farm are "Stomach Churning" http://cspinet.org/new/201008302.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalWhile it is really helpful that <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/MajorProductRecalls/ucm223522.htm" target="cspi">FDA</a> is disclosing the results of their recent inspections of two facilities linked to a major illness outbreak from <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201008191.html" target="cspi">contaminated eggs</a>, FDA's findings are truly stomach churning. FDA found rodents and wild birds in the facilities, and five of the Wright County Egg facilities had giant manure piles inside their buildings. These violations are reminiscent of similar findings in another major outbreak linked to peanut butter. Equally troubling is that the inspections occurred the month following the date that the new <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/eggtimeline.pdf" target="cspi">egg-safety regulation</a> went into effect. Both companies involved had been on notice that they needed to meet requirements of the new egg-safety rule for over a year. Instead of finding companies that were ready to meet those requirements, FDA's inspections document companies with long-standing violations and apparently little intention to comply. The decrepit conditions in these hen houses reflect the fact that companies know that FDA inspections are so rare—even following the adoption of a new safety regulation—that there is no urgency to fix their buildings and their operations to assure compliance with FDA statutes and regulations. 2010-08-30 Super Sizing Alive and Well at Nation's Chain Restaurants http://cspinet.org/new/201008301.html Nutrition Action Healthletter Illustrates How One ‘Serving’ Is Really More Like Two, Three, or FourWASHINGTON—A typical burrito weighs about 5 ounces, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Yet a Chicken Burrito at Chipotle weighs four times as much, delivering 970 calories—including 300 calories from the white-flour tortilla alone. As Nutrition Action Healthletter illustrates in its <a href="http://cspinet.org/nah/articles/supersized.html" target="cspi">September issue</a>, Chipotle and other chain restaurants are reprogramming Americans’ expectations of what a “serving” of a food is. Fortunately, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201003211.html" target="cspi">calorie counts</a> are soon coming to chain restaurant menu boards, thanks to the federal health care reform law now being implemented. And, from the article, here are 4 other examples of how far an actual serving exceeds the official serving size: <img src="/images/blueberrymuffin.jpg"> <img src="/images/panerasandwich.jpg"> <img src="/images/steak.jpg"> <img src="/images/starbuckscookie.jpg"> “Chain restaurants have helped dissolve any sense of perspective when it comes to what a reasonable serving of food is,” said Bonnie Liebman, nutrition director at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, Nutrition Action’s publisher. “When 300-calorie bagels and 1,000-calorie burritos became the norm, it’s easy to understand why two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a> is the largest-circulation health newsletter in North America, with 850,000 subscribers. Introductory subscriptions are $10 in the U.S. and $15 in Canada. 2010-08-30 Largest Egg Recall in History Exposes Cracks in Egg Oversight http://cspinet.org/new/201008191.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalIt is truly ironic that the largest <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">egg recall</a> in history has unfolded just the month after long-awaited egg regulations went into effect. This outbreak will likely grow over the coming weeks, as at least 10 states are investigating outbreak clusters. Jurisdiction over <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/eggtimeline.pdf" target="cspi">eggs</a> has been scrambled between numerous government agencies for the last 20 years, resulting in enormous delays in addressing the hazard posed by Salmonella enteriditis, a pathogen that infects the ovaries of chickens, causing their eggs to be internally contaminated. Today, FDA claimed that it did not have jurisdiction to inspection this facility until last month when the egg regulation finally took effect. This outbreak demonstrates the need for a food safety cop-on-the-beat. FDA needs a strong inspection force with the tools to mandate recalls, impose civil and criminal penalties, and require testing at farms and production facilities. The agency should be able to impose fines for violations when they find them, detain and recall food, and impose enhanced criminal penalties when companies intentionally violate the law, resulting in harm to the public. The Senate should move immediately to pass <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201005062.html" target="cspi">S. 510</a> and Congress should move a bill that incorporates the strongest enforcement provision of each bill promptly to the President's desk for signature. 2010-08-19 CSPI to Drop Litigation Over Coke's Faded "Enviga" http://cspinet.org/new/201008171.html Sales Reportedly Plummeted After State Attorneys General Won Labeling ConcessionsWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest will not appeal a federal appeals <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/envigadecision.pdf" target="cspi">court decision</a> blocking a New Jersey woman’s lawsuit over false weight-loss claims made by Coca-Cola for Enviga. Enviga is a line of artificially sweetened green tea-based soft drinks whose labeling and advertising claims that the drink “burns calories.” Launched with considerable fanfare in 2006, Enviga has since faded into obscurity. Under a February 2009 settlement agreement reached with 27 states and the District of Columbia, Coca-Cola agreed to pay $650,000 and to stop making overt weight-loss claims for Enviga. Coke (and partner Nestlé) agreed to add language to labels and marketing materials stating that the product will not promote weight loss without diet and exercise. Three months later, the trade publication New Nutrition Business reported an Enviga “sales collapse.” The Court of Appeals decision this week hinged on whether the plaintiff had documented her weight loss or gain, and not on the merits of CSPI’s allegations about Enviga’s deceptive claims. “We believe that the Court of Appeals erred in not letting a consumer pursue her claim about the demonstrably false advertising and labeling on these expensive and fraudulent drinks,” said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">litigation</a> director Steve Gardner. “But since the attorneys general cracked down and have since won modest labeling concessions, we won’t appeal. Consumers seem to have gotten the message that Coca-Cola does not have the science to back up its laughable ‘calorie burning’ claims for Enviga.” The taste of Enviga might also be partly to blame for its decline. Tasters at Bevnet.com, an online site that covers the beverage industry, were generally unkind. The Wild Berry flavored Enviga “tastes pretty artificial and saccharine.” The Peach flavor, now discontinued, “is a bit too acidic, and allows some of the chemical sweeteners to intervene, creating something of an unpleasantly fuzzy mouthfeel.” The Green Tea flavor fared better but Bevnet wondered whether its “strong, tangy flavor” is “going to be too much” for dieting consumers. CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="cspi">lawsuit</a> sought an injunction barring Enviga from making deceptive claims. “It’s ironic that Coke, a company that has been a major promoter of weight gain, is now pretending that it is coming to the rescue of overweight people,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson when the lawsuit was filed in 2006. “They should have called this drink ‘Fleece,’ since that’s what they’re trying to do to consumers. Plain old tap water has zero calories, five calories fewer than Enviga, but unlike Enviga, tap water doesn’t cost 15 bucks a gallon.” Besides maintaining the Enviga doesn’t contain “negative calories,” CSPI is concerned about the caffeine levels in Enviga. The marketing materials urged consumers to drink three cans a day to achieve a maximum calorie burning effect. At 100 milligrams per can, three cans of Enviga would have the caffeine of nine cans of Coke. And that is at the upper limit of what experts consider safe for pregnant women or women who may become pregnant. “If you want to lose weight, drink less Coke, not more Enviga,” said Jacobson. Enviga aside, CSPI is moving full-speed ahead with a class action lawsuit against Coca-Cola over deceptive claims associated with its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201007231.html" target="cspi">Vitaminwater</a> line of drinks. The company makes a wide range of dramatic—and according to CSPI, false—claims, including that its drinks variously reduce the risk of chronic disease, reduce the risk of eye disease, promote healthy joints, and support optimal immune function. Vitaminwater has 33 grams of sugar per bottle, but no juice from any of the fruits mentioned on the labels of its several flavors. The names of the drinks, along with other statements on the label, “have the potential to reinforce a consumer’s mistaken belief that the product is comprised of only vitamins and water,” wrote U.S. District Court Judge John Gleeson, denying Coca-Cola’s motion to dismiss. 2010-08-17 CSPI Warns of More Recalls Linked to Beef, Lettuce http://cspinet.org/new/201008161.html Statement of CSPI Staff Attorney Sarah A. KleinAs August grilling season marches on and consumers top their burgers with lettuce, the unfortunate parade of outbreaks and recalls linked to contaminated food continues. USDA and FDA have each recently announced <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">significant recalls</a> of ground beef contaminated with E. coli and bagged lettuce contaminated with Listeria. Valley Meat Company is recalling approximately one million pounds of frozen ground beef patties and bulk ground beef products that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7. At least seven consumers have already been sickened. E.coli 0157:H7 can cause severe illness with lifelong medical repercussions, or death. Consumers should check their freezers for meat labeled with any of the product names or codes listed here: <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_048_2010_Release/index.asp" target="cspi">http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_048_2010_Release/index.asp</a>. In addition, consumers should always cook ground beef to at least 160 degrees, using a meat thermometer in the thickest part of the patty to determine this. Consumers should also be careful when thawing and handling ground beef to avoid cross-contamination on cutting boards, utensils, and kitchen surfaces. Fresh Express has recalled nearly 3,000 cases of Veggie Lovers salad because it may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes. Listeria is particularly dangerous for pregnant women, and can cause miscarriage, still-birth, or severe birth defects. Consumers are advised to check their refrigerators for this product, labeled with a Product Code of I208 and Use-by Date of August 10, 2010. Unfortunately, re-washing bagged lettuce does not remove pathogens and may spread contamination around the kitchen. Consumers who suspect they may have contracted a foodborne illness should seek medical care and contact their local health department. 2010-08-16 Most "All Natural" Ben & Jerry's Flavors Have Unnatural Ingredients http://cspinet.org/new/201008121.html Alkalized Cocoa, Hydrogenated Oil, Fake Vanilla Among Them, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—At least 48 out of 53 flavors of Ben & Jerry’s “All Natural” ice cream and frozen yogurt contain alkalized cocoa, corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, or other ingredients that either don’t exist in nature or that have been chemically modified. Calling products with unnatural ingredients “natural” is a false and misleading use of the term, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Today, CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/benandjerrysunileverletter.pdf" target="cspi">urged Ben and Jerry’s</a> to drop the claim or else the nonprofit watchdog group will take its concerns to the Food and Drug Administration and state attorneys general. Founded in 1978 by Vermonters Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, Ben & Jerry’s is now a unit of the Anglo-Dutch consumer product conglomerate Unilever, which besides owning familiar food brands such as Hellman’s and Lipton, also makes Vaseline, Dove soap, and Axe deodorant. Thanks to the ice cream company’s concerns about the environment, the company has garnered consumer trust and a reputation for social responsibility—but that image risks being sullied by the allegations of misleading labeling. <img src="/images/ChubbyHubby.JPG">The label claims the ice cream is all natural, but it contains cocoa processed with alkali, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, and corn syrup. In 2002, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200207301.html" target="cspi">CSPI alerted the FDA</a> and the company to Ben & Jerry’s deceptive use of the “All Natural” claim, but neither took action, and the problem seems to have only gotten worse, according to CSPI. The consumer group says that the deceptive labeling is as unfair to competitors as it is to consumers. For instance, “All Natural” Chubby Hubby ice cream contains three non-natural ingredients: alkalized cocoa, partially hydrogenated soybean oil, and corn syrup. Dublin Mudslide contains alkalized cocoa and anhydrous dextrose. A list of all the improperly labeled flavors and their ingredients is included in <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/benandjerrysunileverletter.pdf" target="cspi">CSPI’s letter</a>. “These ingredients are safe—only a small amount of partially hydrogenated oil is used—but it’s a stretch to call any of them ‘natural,’” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Ben & Jerry’s sylvan labels notwithstanding, these ingredients come from the factory, not the farm. And slapping an ‘all natural’ label on the products certainly implies that the products are top quality and deserve to fetch a higher price.” Cocoa processed with alkali is the most frequently used unnatural ingredient as it used in 36 Ben & Jerry’s flavors. Treating cocoa with an alkalizing agent changes the chemical structure, taste, and appearance of cocoa and reduces its acidity and flavonol content. Flavonols are antioxidants with possible health benefits. Indeed, Unilever itself recently sponsored research to investigate an association between flavonol intake and the <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dietary-flavonol-intake-may-lower-stroke-risk-98227739.html" target="cspi">incidence of stroke</a>. In addition, the Hershey Center for Health and Nutrition (part of the candy company) <a href="http://www.hersheys.com/nutrition-professionals/cocoa-powder/composition/natural-alkalized.aspx" target="cspi">specifically distinguishes </a> alkalized cocoa powder from natural cocoa powder. Corn syrup and corn syrup solids are created by chemically or enzymatically converting cornstarch into sugar and short chains of sugar molecules. They occur in 28 flavors. Other artificial ingredients in Ben & Jerry’s frozen desserts include dextrose and maltodextrin (both are chemically or enzymatically converted from cornstarch) and vanillin (a synthetic vanilla flavor). Although the FDA does not have a formal definition of the word natural, the agency’s acting director of regulatory guidance explained in a letter that the agency has “consistently discouraged the use” of the term “because its meaning is ambiguous and may unjustifiably imply to consumers that foods labeled as ‘natural’ are inherently superior to other foods…” Later, the agency wrote that the term natural means “that nothing artificial or synthetic … has been included in, or has been added to, a food that would not normally be expected in the food.” In any event, emphasized CSPI, the biggest problem with Ben & Jerry’s ice creams is saturated fat—a major promoter of heart disease. A one-scoop (half-cup) serving of a typical flavor has about half-a-day’s worth of saturated fat. 2010-08-12 Senate Adopts Historic Improvements for School Foods http://cspinet.org/new/201008051.html Junk Foods Out, Good Foods In, as Child Nutrition Reauthorization Passes in SenateThe United States Senate achieved a rare, bipartisan consensus this afternoon as it passed by unanimous consent child nutrition legislation in advance of the food programs' September 30 expiration date. The legislation, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, increases reimbursements to school systems for lunches, provides more training to help schools serve healthier meals, and strengthens school wellness policies on nutrition and physical activity. Passage of the bill also signals an eventual removal of junk foods from school vending machines, hallways, and elsewhere on the school grounds as it requires the U.S. Department of Agriculture to set science-based nutrition standards for foods that may be sold. "The Senate bill changes the school food landscape in ways that are all positive," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Put simply, it will get junk food out of, and put more healthy food into, America's schools. It preserves the free and reduced-cost meals that many families depend on in an economic downturn. And it supports farmers by improving farm-to-school programs. Chairman Blanche Lincoln and Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss deserve credit for forging a bipartisan agreement on the bill and for fighting to secure a vote despite a crowded Senate schedule." According to CSPI, First Lady Michelle Obama made an important, last-minute push for the bill with a <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/01/AR2010080103291.html">widely noticed op-ed</a> in the Washington Post on Monday, reflecting on her work with children in the White House garden and the Let’s Move campaign to reduce childhood obesity. "The last thing parents need or want is to see the progress they're making at home lost during the school day," Mrs. Obama wrote. "Right now, our country has a major opportunity to make our schools and our children healthier. It's an opportunity we haven't seen in years, and one that is too important to let pass by." CSPI and other members of a broad coalition of health groups are urging the House to pass <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201007152.html">its version of the legislation</a>, and then to have the two bills conferenced, before the programs expire on September 30. 2010-08-05 CSPI Urges Congress to Address Child Nutrition Before August Recess http://cspinet.org/new/201007291.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanCongress has a lot on its plate this legislative session, but it needs to address what's on kids' plates: now! Renewal of the Child Nutrition programs has been delayed for a year. Our children can't wait any longer. The <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s3307pcs.txt.pdf" target="cspi">Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act</a> (S. 3307) is a much needed step to address child nutrition and obesity. It would remove junk food from school vending machines, increase school lunch reimbursements, and provide more training to help schools serve healthier meals. Unlike the many controversial issues in Washington, this bill is bipartisan, won't add to the deficit, and is popular with voters. It should take no more than a day of the Senate's time. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell need to bring the child nutrition bill to the Senate floor for a vote before they go home for summer recess, and kids go back to school. A day is not much to ask for our kids' health and well being. 2010-07-29 Lawsuit Over Deceptive Vitaminwater Claims to Proceed http://cspinet.org/new/201007231.html Court Finds Coke in Violation of Various FDA Regs and Denies Its Motion to Dismiss the LawsuitWASHINGTON—A federal judge has <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/order_on_m-dismiss_doc_44.pdf" target="cspi">denied Coca-Cola’s motion</a> to dismiss a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901151.html" target="cspi">lawsuit</a> over what the Center for Science in the Public Interest says are deceptive and unsubstantiated claims on the company’s “vitaminwater” line of soft drinks. The company claims that vitaminwater variously reduces the risk of chronic disease, reduces the risk of eye disease, promotes healthy joints, and supports optimal immune function, and uses health buzz words such as “defense,” “rescue,” “energy,” and “endurance” on labels. <img src="/images/vitaminwater2.JPG">Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin Vitaminwater is hardly a health drink with 33 grams of sugar in each 20-ounce bottle. Besides denying Coca-Cola’s motion to dismiss, the ruling contains other bad omens for the company. Judge John Gleeson of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York found that the company’s use of the word “healthy” violates the Food and Drug Administration’s regulations on vitamin-fortified foods. The FDA’s so-called “Jelly Bean” rule prohibits companies from making health claims on junk foods that only meet various nutrient thresholds via fortification. The judge also found that vitaminwater’s claim on the “focus” flavor of vitaminwater that it “may reduce the risk of age-related eye disease” runs afoul of FDA regulations. The judge also took note of the fact that the FDA frowns upon names of products that mention some ingredients to the exclusion of more prominent ingredients such as, in the case of vitaminwater, added sugar. The names of the drinks, along with other statements on the label, “have the potential to reinforce a consumer’s mistaken belief that the product is comprised of only vitamins and water,” Gleeson wrote. “In sum, plaintiffs’ allegations sufficiently state a claim that defendants have violated FDA regulations by making health claims about vitaminwater even though it does not meet required minimum nutritional thresholds, by using the word ‘healthy’ in implied nutrient content claims even though vitaminwater’s fortification does not comply with FDA policy, and by using a product name that references only two of vitaminwater’s ingredients, omitting the fact that there is a key, unnamed ingredient [sugar] in the product,” Gleeson continued. “For too long, Coca-Cola has been exploiting Americans’ desire to eat and drink more healthfully by deceiving them into thinking that vitaminwater can actually prevent disease,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “In fact, vitaminwater is no more than non-carbonated soda, providing unnecessary added sugar and contributing to weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other diseases. We look forward to representing all Americans whom Coke has deceived.” The judge also rejected Coke’s argument that disclosing sugar content on Nutrition Facts labels eliminates the possibility that consumers may be misled into thinking the product has only water and vitamins, and little or no sugar. Gleeson cited a similar case involving deceptive fruit imagery on packages for <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901021.html" target="cspi">Gerber’s Fruit Juice Snacks</a>, which are mostly corn syrup and sugar. That court held that “reasonable consumers should [not] be expected to look beyond misleading representations on the front of the box to discover the truth from the ingredient list in small print on the side of the box.” Vitaminwater has 33 grams of sugar in each 20-ounce bottle. The judge excluded one group of New Jersey-based plaintiffs from the case but otherwise rejected Coke’s arguments to dismiss on jurisdictional grounds, paving the way for the plaintiffs’ lawyers to ask to take depositions of Coca-Cola executives, to ask for discovery of key vitaminwater marketing documents, and to seek certification as a class action. Besides CSPI’s litigation unit, Reese Richman LLP and Whatley Drake & Kallas, LLC are representing the plaintiffs. Michael Reese of Reese Richman and CSPI’s Gardner argued in court for the plaintiffs. CSPI is also on the verge of suing <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201006221.html" target="cspi">McDonald’s</a> over its use of toys to market unhealthful foods directly to young children. In previous cases, CSPI has won a major pre-lawsuit settlement agreement improving the nutritional quality of the foods <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">Kellogg</a> markets to children, and a settlement refunding millions of dollars to consumers who were deceived by the marketing of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808142.html" target="cspi">Airborne</a>, a dietary supplement. CSPI is also in court in another case against Coca-Cola over deceptive claims by the company that its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="cspi">Enviga</a> green-tea-flavored soft drink has “negative calories,” thus promoting weight loss. 2010-07-23 In Europe, Dyed Foods Get Warning Label http://cspinet.org/new/201007201.html Products with Yellow 5, Red 40, Other Dyes “May Have an Adverse Effect on Activity and Attention in Children”WASHINGTON—Starting today in the European Union, most foods that contain artificial food dyes must bear <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=EN&type=IM-PRESS&reference=20080707IPR33563" target="cspi">warning labels</a> stating that the food “may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children.” As a practical matter, it’s unclear exactly how many foods will have to use that language on labels, since dyes were never as widely used in Europe as in the United States. Also, the British government asked companies to remove most dyes by last December 31st. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> says it hopes the European labeling rule gets the attention of officials at the Food and Drug Administration, which to date has not shown interest in protecting American consumers from the controversial dyes, as well as American companies—including those that are not using dyes in Europe. <img src="/images/chinesecoloring.jpg"> Photo Credit: Michael Jacobson Companies should replace Red 40, Yellow 5 and other synthetic dyes with natural colorings like these. British consumers enjoy food products free of most food dyes, but the same can't be said for Americans. Synthetic food dyes have been suspected of triggering behavior problems in children since the 1970s, when <a href="http://www.feingold.org/" target="cspi">Dr. Ben Feingold</a>, a San Francisco allergist, reported that his patients improved when their diets were changed. Numerous controlled studies conducted over the next three decades proved that some children’s behavior is worsened by artificial dyes. A 2004 meta-analysis concluded that artificial dyes affect children’s behavior, and two recent studies funded by the British government found that mixtures of dyes (as well as the preservative sodium benzoate) adversely affect kids’ behavior. In 2008, CSPI filed a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/petition-food-dyes.pdf" target="cspi">regulatory petition</a> that called on the FDA to ban dyes because of the problems documented in children. “At this point, American food manufacturers and regulators alike should be embarrassed that we’re feeding kids foods with chemicals that have such a powerfully disruptive impact on children’s behavior,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “European officials are taking the issue much more seriously, and are moving toward a safer food supply as a result.” Because the FDA hasn’t encouraged food manufacturers to switch to safer natural colorings, many American food companies use the chemicals in the United States products but not in the U.K. equivalents. For example, the topping for a McDonald’s Strawberry Sundae sold in the United States contains Red 40. In the U.K., the topping’s color comes from strawberries. Representative Louise Slaughter, Chairman of the House Rules Committee and the only microbiologist serving in Congress, has written the FDA twice expressing concern about the widespread use of artificial dyes in food. “This is a sensible policy and a smart move to help protect the health and well being of children in Europe,” Slaughter said. “For too long, studies have raised questions about the impact food dyes are having on the development of children and the possible link between dyes and behavior. I have been troubled by the lack of solid data on this issue for more than a decade. It’s my hope that the Food and Drug Administration reviews the abundance of science on this issue and considers implementing a similar restriction or outright ban.” Besides being linked to behavior problems in children, food dyes are also inadequately tested and may pose cancer risks as well, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201006291.html" target="cspi">according to a CSPI</a> report—Food Dyes: Rainbow of Risks—published last month. 2010-07-20 House Education and Labor Committee Approves Child Nutrition Reauthorization Bill http://cspinet.org/new/201007152.html Statement of CSPI Director of Nutrition Policy Margo G. WootanThe Center for Science in the Public Interest congratulates Chairman George Miller and strongly supports his <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h5504ih.txt.pdf" target="cspi">Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act</a> (H.R. 5504), which passed out of the House of Representatives Education and Labor Committee today. This bill includes a landmark provision to get soda and junk food out of school vending machines, which is supported not only by parents, health groups, and the Administration, but also by leading food and beverage companies. The bill also would provide resources and training to improve the nutritional quality of school lunches, expand nutrition education for children, and strengthen school nutrition and physical activity wellness policies. The bill’s passage will hopefully give a nudge to the Senate to pass its child nutrition bill, the <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s3307pcs.txt.pdf" target="cspi">Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act</a> (S. 3307). That bill passed unanimously out of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201003242.html" target="cspi">Senate Agriculture Committee</a> in March, but has yet to be brought to the Senate floor for a vote. To be sure, there’s a lot on the Senate’s plate. But unlike a lot of truly contentious issues, passing of child nutrition bill would only require about a day of Senate floor time, and is bipartisan. The clock is ticking. Congress has less than three weeks left until they go home for summer recess and then, kids go back to school. Both the House of Representatives and Senate need to make our children’s health their next priority and vote on child nutrition as soon as possible. 2010-07-15 Should Taxpayers Subsidize Soda? http://cspinet.org/new/201007151.html Scientists Question Whether Federal Nutrition Assistance Funds Should Be Used to Buy Obesity-Promoting Sugar-Sweetened BeveragesWASHINGTON—The soft drink industry receives a $4 billion subsidy from taxpayers each year, according to an <a href="http://ajph.aphapublications.org/first_look.shtml" target="cspi">editorial published today</a> in the American Journal of Public Health. According to the paper, that’s about how much carbonated soda is purchased with money from the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), the program formerly known as Food Stamps. And that total doesn’t include non-carbonated soft drinks. Considering that the overconsumption of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">sugar-sweetened beverages</a> is helping fuel an epidemic of obesity that disproportionately affects low-income people, the authors raise the question of whether it is time to exclude soda or other junk foods from the SNAP program in the same way that alcohol, tobacco, dietary supplement pills, and hot prepared foods are already excluded. To be sure, efforts to limit SNAP purchases to healthier foods would draw intense opposition, writes Jonathan D. Shenkin, clinical assistant professor of the Boston University Henry M. Goldman School of Dental Medicine and Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. SNAP participants appear to purchase at least 40 percent more carbonated soft drinks than other consumers do. At one major supermarket chain, SNAP participants bought 4.3 percent of carbonated soft drinks even though they only represented 1.8 percent of transactions. At another large chain, carbonated soft drinks accounted for 6.19 percent of the grocery bills of SNAP participants. “The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is intended to help low-income families buy the foods they need to promote good health. It’s time to question whether the program should support the purchase of foods that promote disease,” said Shenkin. If disallowing the use of SNAP funds to buy sugar-sweetened beverages proved to be politically unfeasible, as the authors acknowledge it might, a less controversial option might be to provide SNAP participants with a financial incentive to purchase the healthiest foods. Recipients’ Electronic Benefit Transfer cards could be credited with 30 additional cents for every dollar spent on fruits, vegetables, or whole grains, for example. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, for every 10 percent decrease in the price of fruits or vegetables, SNAP recipients would increase their purchase by 6 or 7 percent. The federal government’s largest nutrition education program is also funded by SNAP. Called SNAP-Ed, the program gives almost $400 million in matching grants to states to encourage low-income consumers to adopt healthier diets. But Shenkin and Jacobson point out that the USDA actually prohibits the use of SNAP-Ed grants for campaigns that steer people away from junk foods. USDA stopped health officials in the city of San Francisco, and the states of Maine, California, and Wyoming from using federal money for programs aimed at reducing soda consumption. CSPI has called on the Obama administration to end what it calls a “gag rule” instituted during the Bush administration. “The federal government should be doing everything it can to reduce the consumption of soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages, which promote tooth decay, weight gain, obesity, diabetes, and other diet-related diseases,” said Jacobson. “SNAP should be oriented toward increasing the consumption of good, healthy food. None of the $65 billion invested in nutrition assistance in 2010 should end up paying for Coke, Pepsi, or Mountain Dew.” Shenkin and Jacobson also say that Congress should fund an Institute of Medicine review of the goals, successes, and limitations of the SNAP and SNAP-ed programs. Such a report could identify ways that the programs could foster healthier diets and provide an authoritative basis for Congress to make changes. The authors point out that another powerful means of discouraging soft drink consumption is taxation. A federal excise tax of 12 cents per 12 ounces could raise upward of $15 billion a year and decrease consumption by about 10 percent. Taxes on that order have been proposed in New York State, Philadelphia, and nationally, but have been beaten back by well-funded industry lobbying and advertising campaigns. At least 24 states and the city of Chicago have special sales or excise taxes on soda that raise substantial revenues, but aren’t large enough to decrease consumption. Though excluding sugar-sweetened beverages from the SNAP program is controversial, setting nutrition standards for government food programs is hardly new. The school lunch and breakfast programs administered by USDA comply with strict nutrition standards that exclude soda and junk food, as does the Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program, which is geared to pregnant and breastfeeding women and young children. “Soda is already one of the cheapest things in the supermarket, and it promotes expensive-to-treat diseases and stark health disparities,” Jacobson said. “Short of cigarettes and alcoholic beverages, it’s hard to imagine a product less worthy of a government subsidy than soda. It’s time to put the ‘N’ back in SNAP.” 2010-07-15 Food Frauds on Sale at FDA Headquarters! http://cspinet.org/new/201007071.html CSPI Says Federal Labeling Cops Should Raid Their Own CafeteriaWASHINGTON—On a recent visit to the sprawling new Food and Drug Administration headquarters in the White Oak area of Silver Spring, Md., a lawyer from the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest stopped for a quick, healthy lunch. Hiding in plain sight in the FDA cafeteria—quite literally under the noses of the officials tasked with policing misleading labels—were at least three beverages with illegal claims on their labels. The contraband drinks included: <ul><li>Purity.Organic Functional Drinks Pomegranate Blueberry. Its label claims it has “Ginkgo Biloba to enhance your memory and keep you thinking straight,” but government-funded studies show ginkgo has no effect on memory and does not lower incidence of Alzheimer’s or dementia, either. Ginkgo may have been “grown by monks for millennia” as the web site claims, but it isn’t Generally Recognized as Safe (or GRAS) as a food additive, according to FDA. (Plus, this product has more added sugar than it has pomegranate or blueberry juice.)</li> <img src="/images/drinks.JPG"> Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin These drinks, all with illegal claims on the labels, were found in the FDA cafeteria. <li>Crystal Light Immunity Berry Pomegranate. This bright purple beverage’s label pictures blueberries and a pomegranate, yet the drink has no juice of any kind. Natural flavoring accounts for less than 2 percent of the product, and only an unknown fraction of that comes from the named fruits. The color comes from Red 40 and Blue 1 and the artificial sweetness comes from sucralose and acesulfame potassium. Vitamins A, B, C and E are listed on the ingredients list, but there is no evidence to support the implication that this drink will ward off colds or diseases, which is what is implied by the use of the word “immunity.” CSPI urged the FDA to take enforcement action against this product in 2008. (Plus, the bottle CSPI found in the FDA cafeteria was long past its “Best before 26 December 2007” expiration date.)</li> <li>SoBe Lifewater B-Energy Black Cherry Dragonfruit. Again, this drink has no black cherry or dragonfruit juice, but it does have guarana and ginseng (neither considered GRAS by FDA although the food industry considers them safe) and added vitamins. Using the word “energy” in the name and claiming that its B vitamins “help your body unlock the energy in foods,” implies that the drink will make one feel more energetic. But while B vitamins do help to convert protein, fat, and carbohydrates into energy, they don’t provide an energy boost that can be felt by the body. The “all natural” claim is unjustified because Lifewater contains added citric acid. And those without magnifying glasses might miss the fact that the bottle (described improbably as 2.5 servings) will supply 62.5 milligrams of caffeine, more than what you’d find in a 12-ounce can of Coke. </li> “To be fair, the FDA under the Obama Administration has done more to crack down on deceptive <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodlabeling" target="cspi">food labeling</a> in the last 12 months than the Bush FDA did in eight years,” said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. “But the fact that we were able to find so many labeling problems in the FDA’s own cafeteria neatly illustrates why the agency needs to issue industry-wide rules, not just send warning letters to individual companies.” Last December, CSPI sent the FDA a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/food_labeling_chaos_report.pdf" target="cspi">158-page report</a> documenting more than 50 false or misleading claims, ingredient obfuscations, and other labeling shenanigans that it found in supermarkets. CSPI recommended that FDA establish a systematic regulatory framework to prohibit misleading health-related claims, and require that nutrition information be based on realistic serving sizes—something that the drinks CSPI found in the FDA cafeteria fail to do. “Consumers who want to ensure that they’re getting enough vitamins and minerals should focus on eating a wide variety of fruits and vegetables first,” Silverglade said. “No one should believe that the added vitamins, herbs or other ingredients in these flavored waters are going to ward off disease, improve memory, or make one more energetic. The FDA should frog-march these products into the food label penitentiary.” 2010-07-07 High-Risk Consumers First Victims of Florida Budget Cuts http://cspinet.org/new/201007011.html Florida Ends Food Safety Inspections in Day Cares, Hospitals, and Nursing HomesWASHINGTON—State budget cuts have led to yet another fatality—the death of food safety inspections at facilities serving the state’s most vulnerable populations. A sweeping budget bill signed by Governor Charlie Crist last month eliminates food safety inspections at hospitals, day cares, and nursing homes—facilities feeding those people who are already most at-risk from <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">foodborne illness</a>. Three state agencies are responsible for food inspections, but House Bill 5311 means that none of these agencies will have the authority or the mandate to inspect these facilities from now on. Foodborne illnesses linked to these facilities have sickened hundreds of Florida consumers in at least 15 separate outbreaks since 1995. “Florida politicians were clearly not thinking about their young children or their aging parents when they passed this bill,” says Sarah Klein, a staff attorney at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “These consumers—and anyone who is immuno-compromised—are already at greater risk of being hospitalized from foodborne illness. Ending food safety inspections in the kitchens that feed those populations is like taking seatbelts out of their cars and hoping no one has an accident.” News of the change to Florida’s inspection policy comes on the heels of a recommendation by the Institute of Medicine, urging the Food & Drug Administration to delegate more food facility inspections to the states. Consumer groups have criticized the recommendation, in part because state health departments are already understaffed and underfunded. Florida’s action provides more evidence that at least some states are unequipped to accept any additional inspection duties. “Florida consumers deserve more from their legislature than budget cuts to critical public health services,” says Klein. “A budget savings on the front end, by eliminating inspections, can lead to huge costs later—when people get sick from foodborne illness. And if it’s your child, or parent, or sick loved one…you can bet those savings weren’t worth it.” Inspections at restaurants and prisons will continue. 2010-07-01 CSPI Says Food Dyes Pose Rainbow of Risks http://cspinet.org/new/201006291.html Cancer, Hyperactivity, Allergic ReactionsWASHINGTON—Food dyes—used in everything from M&Ms to Manischewitz Matzo Balls to Kraft salad dressings—pose risks of cancer, hyperactivity in children, and allergies, and should be banned, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/food-dyes-rainbow-of-risks.pdf" target="cspi">new report</a> by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. A top government scientist agrees, and says that food dyes present unnecessary risks to the public. The three most widely used dyes, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, are contaminated with <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/dyes-problem-table.pdf" target="cspi">known carcinogens</a>, says CSPI. Another dye, Red 3, has been acknowledged for years by the Food and Drug Administration to be a carcinogen, yet is still in the food supply. Despite those concerns, each year manufacturers pour about 15 million pounds of eight synthetic <a href="http://www.iatp.org/brainfoodselector/" target="cspi">dyes into our foods</a>. Per capita consumption of dyes has increased five-fold since 1955, thanks in part to the proliferation of brightly colored breakfast cereals, fruit drinks, and candies pitched to children. “These <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes/" target="cspi">synthetic chemicals </a> do absolutely nothing to improve the nutritional quality or safety of foods, but trigger behavior problems in children and, possibly, cancer in anybody,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, co-author of the 58-page report, “Food Dyes: A Rainbow of Risks.” “The Food and Drug Administration should <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="cspi">ban dyes</a>, which would force industry to color foods with real food ingredients, not toxic petrochemicals.” Blue 1, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6 have long been known to cause allergic reactions in some people. CSPI says that while those reactions are not common, they can be serious and provide reason enough to ban those dyes. Furthermore, numerous studies have demonstrated that dyes cause <a href="http://cspinet.org/fooddyes/testimony.html" target="cspi">hyperactivity</a> in <a href="http://cspinet.org/cgi-bin/fooddyes/fooddyes.cgi" target="cspi">children</a>. But the biggest concern is cancer. Back in 1985, the acting commissioner of the FDA said that Red 3, one of the lesser-used dyes, “has clearly been shown to induce cancer” and was “of greatest public health concern.” However, Secretary of Agriculture John R. Block pressed the Department of Health and Human Services not to ban the dye, and he apparently prevailed—notwithstanding the Delaney Amendment that forbids the use of in foods of cancer-causing color additives. Each year about 200,000 pounds of Red 3 are poured into such foods as Betty Crocker’s Fruit Roll-Ups and ConAgra’s Kid Cuisine frozen meals. Since 1985 more than five million pounds of the dye have been used. Tests on lab animals of Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6 showed signs of causing cancer or suffered from serious flaws, said the consumer group. Yellow 5 also caused mutations, an indication of possible carcinogenicity, in six of 11 tests. In addition, according to the report, FDA tests show that the three most-widely used dyes, Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, are tainted with low levels of cancer-causing compounds, including benzidine and 4-aminobiphenyl in Yellow 5. However, the levels actually could be far higher, because in the 1990s the FDA and Health Canada found a hundred times as much benzidine in a bound form that is released in the colon, but not detected in the routine tests of purity conducted by the FDA. “Dyes add no benefits whatsoever to foods, other than making them more ‘eye-catching’ to increase sales,” said James Huff, the associate director for chemical carcinogenesis at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences’ National Toxicology Program. “CSPI’s scientifically detailed report on possible health effects of food dyes raises many questions about their safety. Some dyes have caused cancers in animals, contain cancer-causing contaminants, or have been inadequately tested for cancer or other problems. Their continued use presents unnecessary risks to humans, especially young children. It’s disappointing that the FDA has not addressed the toxic threat posed by food dyes.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a>’s report notes that FDA’s regulations mandate a stricter standard of safety for color additives than other food additives, saying that there must be “convincing evidence that establishes with reasonable certainty that no harm will result from the intended use of the color additive.” The standard of “convincing evidence” does not apply to preservatives, emulsifiers, and other additives. CSPI charges that the FDA is not enforcing the law in several regards: <ul><li>Red 3 and Citrus Red 2 should be banned under the Delaney amendment, because they caused cancer in rats (some uses were banned in 1990), as should Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6, which are tainted with cancer-causing contaminants.</li> <li>Evidence suggests, though does not prove, that Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Red 40, and Yellow 6 cause cancer in animals. There certainly is not “convincing evidence” of safety.</li> <li>Dyed foods should be considered adulterated under the law, because the dyes make a food “appear better or of greater value than it is”—typically by masking the absence of fruit, vegetable, or other more costly ingredient. </li></ul> In a letter sent today, CSPI urged the FDA to ban all dyes because the scientific studies do not provide convincing evidence of safety, but do provide significant evidence of harm. A ninth dye, Orange B, is approved for coloring sausage casings, but in 1978 the FDA proposed banning it because it was found to be toxic to rats. The industry has not used Orange B in more than a decade. Also, the International Agency for Research on Cancer has labeled Citrus Red 2 a carcinogen, and the FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives said “this color should not be used as a food additive.” However, it poses little risk because it is approved only for coloring the skins of oranges. Because of concerns about dyes’ impairment of children’s behavior, the <a href="http://www.food.gov.uk/safereating/chemsafe/additivesbranch/colours/hyper/" target="cspi">British government</a> asked companies to phase out most dyes by last December 31, and the <a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2008:354:0016:0033:en:PDF" target="cspi">European Union</a> is requiring, beginning on July 20, a warning notice on most dyed foods. CSPI predicted that the label notice—“may have an adverse effect on activity and attention in children”—likely will be the death knell for dyes in all of Europe. The greater government oversight and public concern across the Atlantic results in McDonald’s Strawberry Sundae in Britain being colored with strawberries, but in the United States with Red dye 40. Likewise, the British version of Fanta orange soda gets its bright color from pumpkin and carrot extract, but in the United States the color comes from Red 40 and Yellow 6. Starburst Chews and Skittles, both Mars products, contain synthetic dyes in the United States, but not in Britain. Fortunately, says CSPI, many natural colorings are available to replace dyes. Beet juice, beta-carotene, blueberry juice concentrate, carrot juice, grape skin extract, paprika, purple sweet potato or corn, red cabbage, and turmeric are some of the substances that provide a vivid spectrum of colors. However, CSPI warns that “natural” does not always mean safe. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901055.html" target="cspi">Carmine and cochineal</a>—colorings obtained from a bright red insect—can cause rare, but severe, anaphylactic reactions. Annatto, too, can cause allergic reactions. “Food Dyes: Rainbow of Risks” was written by Sarah Kobylewski, a Ph.D. candidate in the Molecular Toxicology Program at the University of California, Los Angeles, and Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Jacobson is author of Eater’s Digest: The Consumer’s Factbook of Food Additives (Doubleday, 1972). 2010-06-29 Gulf Coast Oysters Unsafe (But Not For the Reason You Think) http://cspinet.org/new/201006241.html Deadly Vibrio Vulnificus Bacteria, Not Oil, Contaminate Gulf Oysters Every SummerWASHINGTON—Gulf Coast politicians are tripping over themselves to assure consumers that seafood from the Gulf is safe to eat. And to be sure, some shrimp and finfish may not be contaminated by the petroleum gushing from the Deepwater Horizon spill. But those statements from officials obscure the real danger presented to some consumers by Gulf Coast oysters—nearly all of which are contaminated with deadly Vibrio vulnificus bacteria during warm summer months, according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. CSPI is calling on federal and state government officials to remind consumers that the normal risks associated with Gulf oysters are still present. “We’ve seen several reassuring statements that seafood from the Gulf on the market is safe,” said David W. Plunkett, a CSPI staff attorney. “While some Gulf oysters may be ‘safe’ from oil contamination, that doesn’t mean they are ‘safe’ to eat,” he explained. At risk populations should not eat raw oysters from the Gulf, Plunkett said. Vibrio vulnificus is a common bacterium that thrives in warm Gulf waters in the spring and summer and contaminates Gulf oysters. While it may cause mild illnesses in healthy individuals, it can kill people who have diabetes, liver disease, hemochromatosis or compromised immune systems. Last year, serious Vibrio vulnificus infections from eating raw oysters claimed 26 victims, 10 of whom died, according to the Centers for Disease Control. In any year, half the people who develop serious symptoms die, and many of those who survive live with the scars from the skin debridement or amputation that may have been necessary to keep them alive. It is especially shocking to see statements on the Food and Drug Administration’s website that shellfish harvested from areas unaffected by the spill are safe to eat, Plunkett said. Only <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910191.html" target="cspi">last fall</a>, Mike Taylor, Deputy Commissioner for Foods at FDA, called Vibrio vulnificus a significant hazard, saying that “seldom is the evidence on a food safety problem and solution so unambiguous,” and announced plans to require post-harvest processing of Gulf oysters to destroy the bacteria. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911091.html" target="cspi">FDA</a> eventually backed down from its plans under pressure from Members of Congress who responded to industry posturing over potential job losses. To date, only California has implemented an effective control plan to protect its consumers, according to CSPI. “While everyone wants to support people in the Gulf right now, government statements that ignore well-known risks only mean that more could suffer unnecessarily,” Plunkett said. 2010-06-24 CSPI to Sue McDonald's If It Continues Using Toys to Market Junk Food to Children http://cspinet.org/new/201006221.html Using Toys to Promote “Happy Meals” Is Unfair, Deceptive & Illegal, Group Says, Citing State LawsWASHINGTON—Tell it to the judge, Ronald: A nutrition watchdog group will sue McDonald’s if the fast-food chain continues to use toys to promote Happy Meals. According to the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, using toys to lure small children into McDonald’s is unfair and deceptive marketing and is illegal under various state consumer protection laws. CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mcdonalds-demand-062210.pdf" target="cspi">today served McDonald’s a notice </a> of its intent to sue, fulfilling a legal requirement of several states in which CSPI might bring the lawsuit. “McDonald’s is the stranger in the playground handing out candy to children,” said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. “McDonald’s use of toys undercuts parental authority and exploits young children’s developmental immaturity—all this to induce children to prefer foods that may harm their health. It’s a creepy and predatory practice that warrants an injunction.” <img src="/images/mcdtoy1.jpg"> Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin CSPI will sue McDonald's if it continues to use toys to market directly to small children. McDonald’s is currently offering children toys related to Dreamworks’ latest Shrek movie. (CSPI’s action is unrelated to the recent recall of McDonald’s Shrek drinking glasses contaminated with the toxic heavy metal cadmium.) While Shrek may appear on packaging for low-fat milk and Apple Dippers, when children or parents order Happy Meals they are given French fries 93 percent of the time, according to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808041.html" target="cspi">CSPI study</a>. In 2007, McDonald’s made a pledge to an industry-funded self-regulatory group not to advertise to children meals that have more than 600 calories and no more than certain percentages of fat and sugar. Thus, the brief glimpses of actual food in McDonald’s youth-directed advertising, show Apple Dippers and low-fat milk as part of either a 4-piece Chicken McNuggets Happy Meal or a Hamburger Happy Meal. But toys, a powerful temptation for kids, are included with all Happy Meals, regardless of nutrition. Of the 24 possible Happy Meal combinations that McDonald’s describes on its web site, all exceed 430 calories (430 is one-third of the 1,300- calorie recommended daily intake for children 4 to 8 years old). A Happy Meal of a cheeseburger, French fries, and Sprite has half a day’s calories and saturated fat (640 and 7 grams, respectively), about 940 milligrams of sodium, and about two days’ worth of sugar (35 grams). And even that meal might have come with a toy related to Star Wars, iCarly, How to Train Your Dragon, Night at the Museum, or, of course, Shrek. Getting children accustomed to eating burgers, fries, and soda puts them at greater risk of developing obesity, diabetes, or other diet-related diseases over the course of their lifetimes, according to CSPI. "But regardless of the nutritional quality of what’s being sold, the practice of tempting kids with toys is inherently deceptive,” said CSPI executive director <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mcdonalds-lawsuit-threat-mfj.pdf" target="cspi">Michael F. Jacobson</a>. “I’m sure that industry’s defenders will blame parents for not saying ‘no’ to their children. Parents do bear much of the responsibility, but multi-billion-dollar corporations make parents’ job nearly impossible by giving away toys and bombarding kids with slick advertising.” “We know from scientific research that young children—and even older ones—do not have the ability to understand how marketing has been designed to influence them,” said Kathryn Montgomery, professor of communication at American University and an expert on media and children. “In the era of digital marketing, these vulnerabilities are magnified even further. McDonald’s use of these techniques raises troubling questions, for health professionals, parents, and policy makers.” The practice of using toy promotions to promote fast-food to children is under scrutiny elsewhere, too. In May, the Santa Clara County, Calif., Board of Supervisors passed an ordinance preventing McDonald’s and other restaurants from including toys or other kid-oriented incentives with the purchase of unhealthy meals. And the Federal Trade Commission may have something to say about toy promotions when it releases a set of voluntary standards for food marketers later this year. According to a 2008 report from the FTC, food companies spend more than $350 million on toy giveaways each year. “McDonald’s makes my job as a parent more difficult,” said Sheila Nesbitt, 36, a project manager from Champlin, MN, and a parent of a six-year-old boy and a three-year-old girl. “They market cheap toys that appeal to kids and it works. My kids always want to go to McDonald’s because of the toys. I try my best to educate my kids about healthy eating but it's hard when I am competing against the allure of a new Shrek toy.” “McDonald’s marketing has the effect of conscripting America’s children into an unpaid drone army of word-of-mouth marketers, causing them to pester their parents to bring them to McDonald’s,” wrote Gardner in a notice letter to McDonald’s vice chairman, CEO, and president Jim Skinner, and McDonald’s USA president Jan Fields. CSPI’s notice letter says that McDonald’s toy-related promotions violate state consumer protection laws in Massachusetts, Texas, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and California. CSPI’s letter gives McDonald’s 30 days to agree to stop the practice before a suit is filed. CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">litigation unit</a> has taken on food marketing to children before. In 2006, CSPI notified Kellogg that it would be sued for marketing sugary cereals and other junk food directly to children. After negotiating for more than a year, CSPI and Kellogg reached a historic <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">settlement agreement</a> that set nutrition standards for the foods the company may advertise on media with young audiences. Since then, Kellogg only advertises to young audiences if a serving of the food has no more than 200 calories, zero grams of trans fat and no more than 2 grams of saturated fat, no more than 230 milligrams of sodium, and no more than 12 grams of sugar. In previous fast-food litigation, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606121.html" target="cspi">sued KFC </a> for using partially hydrogenated oil, which made KFC’s chicken very high in trans fat. CSPI dropped that lawsuit when the company agreed to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="cspi">phase out</a> partially hydrogenated oils. KFC chicken is now trans-fat-free. This is the first time that CSPI has planned to take McDonald’s to court. 2010-06-22 New York City Passes Restaurant Grading http://cspinet.org/new/201006152.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Attorney Sarah KleinCongratulations to the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene for enacting restaurant food-safety grading. Beginning in July, consumers will finally be able to see how a restaurant fared on its most recent health inspection, simply by glancing at the letter grade in the front window or vestibule. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/dirtydining/index.html" target="cspi">Foodborne illness</a> sickens 76 million Americans each year, and 40 percent of those illnesses are linked to restaurant food. With a greater emphasis on food safety in restaurant kitchens, we hope to see a lot fewer sick consumers in the New York City. Los Angeles has been doing restaurant grading for over 10 years with great results—including a documented 20 percent decrease in hospitalizations due to foodborne illness. With cities on both coasts now providing this import food safety information to consumers, the only question remaining is: Why aren’t all cities doing restaurant grading? 2010-06-15 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee Releases Report http://cspinet.org/new/201006151.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanBasic nutrition advice hasn't changed much over the 30 years that the Dietary Guidelines for Americans has been published. That key report has long advised people to eat less unhealthy fats, salt, and added sugars and more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains—and, for the most part, that advice has been ignored by individuals and institutions. The new Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee <a href="http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-DGACReport.htm" target="cspi">report</a>, at long last, recognizes that what is most needed is an unprecedented effort to help people follow the Dietary Guidelines, including changes in policy and the food environment. The report wisely recommends that USDA and HHS develop a national strategy to help people eat better, including ramping up nutrition education, expanding access to fruits and vegetables, and getting industry to provide more healthful products. 2010-06-15 House Child Nutrition Bill Promotes Good Nutrition for Kids http://cspinet.org/new/201006101.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe Center for Science in the Public Interest applauds Chairman George Miller for pulling together a <a href="http://edlabor.house.gov/blog/2010/06/house-democrats-to-introduce-n.shtml">strong child nutrition bill</a>. The bill would do much to help support and promote healthy eating by children. Like the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201003242.html">Senate child nutrition bill</a>, it is the beginning of the end for junk food and sugary drinks in schools. There also are a number of provisions to increase resources, technical assistance, and training to improve the nutritional quality of school meals. The bill would expand nutrition education in schools and strengthen school nutrition and physical activity wellness policies. The clock is ticking for child nutrition. While Congress has a lot on its plate, it needs to address what's on children's plates—and soon. In order to ensure that the strong reforms in the House and Senate child nutrition bills reach children as soon as possible, the full Senate needs to pass the bipartisan bill that was unanimously passed out of the Senate Agriculture Committee. The House also should move quickly to pass Chairman Miller's child nutrition package. Both the House and Senate child nutrition bills contain a historic agreement between health groups and food and beverage companies to improve the nutritional quality of foods sold out of vending machines and other venues outside of school meals. Getting junk food out of schools is important for improving children's diets and ensuring that those so-called competitive foods don't undermine the school lunch program. 2010-06-10 IOM Report Offers Useful Guidance for FDA, With One Major Exception http://cspinet.org/new/201006081.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalToday’s <a href="http://www.nationalacademies.org/morenews/20100608a.html">report from the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council</a> offers several strong recommendations for improving food safety under the Food and Drug Administration, and serves as yet another call to Congress to pass critical food safety reform legislation. Many of the recommendations made in the report are contained in the food safety legislation pending in the Senate. Among the improvements IOM suggests are the creation of a centralized risk-based analysis and data management center, and the development of a specialized food safety inspection workforce. The data center envisioned by IOM, which resembles that of the European Food Safety Authority, could be a useful model for FDA. IOM’s recognition of the need for a specialized food safety inspection workforce is a welcome suggestion, recognizing that inspectors cannot be cross-trained adequately in food safety, drugs, and medical devices. Unfortunately, the report also recommends that FDA pursue delegating additional responsibility for food inspections to the states—an experiment destined to increase the number of food safety <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html">failures we have already experienced</a>. One need only look to the Peanut Corporation of America for evidence that states are ill-equipped to provide the level of inspection required. States and local governments have responsibility for food safety inspections of all <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808071.html">restaurants</a>, hospitals, nursing homes, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200701301.html">schools</a>, and day care centers—responsibilities that are already taxing state governments. Instead of tasking overburdened and underfunded agencies with additional responsibilities, FDA should create a more efficient federal inspection force, including by utilizing other federal agencies. The IOM also recommends moving toward a single unified food safety agency, a plan championed by CSPI and used with success by other countries. 2010-06-08 Most Companies Replace Trans Fat with Healthier Fats, Study Finds http://cspinet.org/new/201005261.html WASHINGTON—When food manufacturers and chain restaurants reduced or eliminated artificial trans fat, the reformulated foods almost always ended up lower in their total amount of trans and saturated fat. That finding, published in the May 27 issue of the <a href="http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/362/21/2037" target="cspi">New England Journal of Medicine</a>, effectively disproves speculation that food manufacturers would merely replace partially hydrogenated oils—the source of artificial trans fat—with saturated fat from butter, lard, or palm oil. And, it means that getting rid of artificial trans fat usually resulted in foods that are healthier for hearts, according to the researchers. In the largest survey of its kind ever done in the United States, researchers identified 83 brand-name packaged and restaurant foods that had been made with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">trans fat </a> prior to 2007, but then were reformulated to largely eliminate the trans fat. The study found that the overall content of both fats combined was reduced in 90 percent (52 of 58) of the supermarket products and 96 percent (24 of 25) of the restaurant products, with average total reductions of 1.2 and 3.9 grams per serving, respectively. The study was conducted by Dariush Mozaffarian of Harvard Medical School and Harvard School of Public Health and Michael F. Jacobson and Julie S. Greenstein of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. “This study should alleviate concerns that most food manufacturers and restaurants would simply switch to a shortening high in saturated fat when they reformulated their products without trans fat,” Mozaffarian said. “In only a small handful of baked goods, more saturated fat was added than trans fat subtracted following reformulation. Still, because a gram of trans fat is more harmful than a gram of saturated fat, even those changes represented relative improvements. In the majority of products, trans fat was reduced or eliminated without corresponding increases in saturated fat. In the case of reformulated restaurant foods, not only was trans fat largely eliminated, but saturated fat also was reduced—making for a much healthier food.” For example, a large order of McDonald’s French fries used to have 13 grams of saturated and trans fats, but ended up with only 3.5 grams. The total amount of trans and saturated fats in Gorton’s Crunchy Golden Fish Sticks declined from 7 grams to 4 grams. In one of the exceptions, an Entenmann’s frosted doughnut, which started with 5 grams of saturated fat and 5 grams of trans fats, ended up with no trans fat, but 12 grams of saturated fat. The authors note that some foods, such as pie crusts and pastries, may need a small amount of hard fat, like butter or palm oil, to have a flaky texture. “This paper demonstrates that the U.S. food industry has been generally responsible in replacing partially hydrogenated oils with more healthful oils,” Jacobson said. “That should pave the way for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to eliminate partially hydrogenated oils from the food supply. The agency could do that quite easily by stating that it no longer considers partially hydrogenated oil to be ‘generally recognized as safe,’ and give companies a year or two to switch to healthier oils.” 2010-05-26 And the Envelope, Please: The 2010 Xtreme Eating Awards Go To... http://cspinet.org/new/201005251.html Nutrition Action Healthletter Exposes 9 Caloric HeavyweightsWASHINGTON—Would you top a Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizza with six Taco Bell Crunchy beef Tacos? And then eat the whole thing? Well, pass the Pepto-Bismol, please: The nutrition and food safety watchdogs at the Center for Science in the Public Interest today conferred its <a href=" http://www.cspinet.org/nah/articles/xtremeeating2010.html" target="cspi">Xtreme Eating awards</a> on nine items from seven American restaurant chains. “One might think that chains like Outback Steakhouse and The Cheesecake Factory might want to lighten up their meals now that calories will be required on their menus, courtesy of the health care reform law signed in March,” said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But these chains don’t promote moderation. They practice caloric extremism, and they’re helping make modern-day Americans become the most obese people ever to walk the Earth.” <img src="/images/outbacksteaklamb.jpg"> Photo Credit: Melissa Pryputniewicz The Outbeak Steakhouse New Zealand Rack of Lamb plus the sides has 1,820 calories, 80 grams of saturated fat, and 2,600 milligrams of sodium. Most people wouldn’t think to order two orders of deep-fried steak and eggs for breakfast at a casual chain like Bob Evans. But if you order Bob Evans’ Cinnamon Cream Stacked & Stuffed Hotcakes, you’ll be getting 1,380 calories and 34 grams of bad fat—about what you’d get in two country-fried steaks and four eggs. But the hotcakes are worse because seven grams of their bad fat comes from trans fat—more than one should get in three and a half days. Syrup adds another 200 calories for every four-tablespoon serving. Pancakes, which are usually lightly fried white flour topped with sugary syrup, have never been a healthy breakfast. But Bob stuffs his hotcakes with cinnamon chips made of sugar and fat; adds a layer of cream-cheese-flavored filling; and tops them with sugary "cream" sauce, whipped topping, and powdered sugar. And that makes the item one of CSPI’s top Xtreme Eating dishonorees for 2010. To put these numbers into context, keep in mind that the average American should consume about 2,000 calories per day, and consume no more than 20 grams of saturated fat. Others examples of Xtreme Eating include: <ul><li>California Pizza Kitchen Tostada Pizza with Grilled Steak. With 1,680 calories,1½ day’s worth (32 grams) of saturated fat, and more than 2 day's worth (3,300 mg) of sodium ordering the single-serve pizza is like eating a Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizza topped with six Taco Bell Crunchy beef Tacos. </li> <li>Five Guys Bacon Cheeseburger. At McDonald’s, most people probably wouldn’t opt for a second Quarter Pounder (410 calories each). But at one of the trendy Five Guys’ 550 outlets, one Bacon Cheeseburger sans toppings has 920 calories and a day-and-a half’s worth (30 grams) of saturated fat. A large order of French fries at Five Guys has 1,460 calories—about triple the calories of a large order of fries at McDonald’s. (Famous Five Guys <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1TxMKaYHYA" target="cspi">patrons</a> please <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/02/first_lady_michelle_obama_lunc.html" target="cspi">take note</a>.)</li> <li>P.F. Chang’s Double Pan-Fried Noodles Combo. You could eat 10 egg rolls and not top the 1,820 calories in this dish. “They fry these noodles to make them hard and crunchy, while you end up soft and flabby,” says CSPI nutrition director Bonnie Liebman. If this noodle dish does indeed have the 7,690 milligrams of sodium to which the chain confesses, that would be about three teaspoons of salt—a five-day supply. </li> <li>The Cheesecake Factory Pasta Carbonara with Chicken. When CSPI first dubbed fettuccine Alfredo a “heart attack on a plate,” it was because CSPI’s lab tests found it had 1,500 calories and 48 grams of saturated fat. But, according to the company, this dish—with four cups of white-flour pasta, smoked bacon, chicken, and Parmesan cream and butter sauce—has 2,500 calories and more saturated fat (85 grams) than one should consume in four days. It’s like eating the chain’s onion-ring-topped Grilled Rib-Eye Steak with French Fries, and a slice of Tiramisu Cheesecake. </li> <li>The Cheesecake Factory Chocolate Tower Truffle Cake. A tower of any food is rarely a good idea. This six-inch-long, three-quarter-pound slab of cake has 1,670 calories and two-and-a-half days’ worth (48 grams) of artery-clogging saturated fat. Feel like eating 14 Hostess Ho Hos for dessert? </li> </ul> The full list of the 2010 Xtreme Eating Awards is published in the June issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>. “I wouldn’t accuse California Pizza Kitchen or P.F. Chang’s of being a threat to national security, but with a quarter of young Americans too heavy to join the military, these and other chains ought to get the extremes off their menus,” said Liebman. “At a minimum, they should disclose calories on menus now, even before federal regulations make it mandatory.” Packaged-food manufacturers recently made a commitment to slash a trillion calories from the foods they produce by 2012. But the <a href="http://www.healthyweightcommit.org/" target="cspi">Healthy Weight Commitment Foundation </a> includes only one restaurant company, Darden, the parent company of Olive Garden and Red Lobster. And none of the companies involved in the initiative are revealing any details on how calorie reductions will be achieved. CSPI noted that, while a trillion calories sounds like a lot, it represents only a drop in the bucket of the more than 350 trillion calories that Americans consume every year. “For all the industry’s rhetoric about providing consumers with ‘choice,’ the choices at restaurants mostly range from bad to terrible,” Jacobson said. “The healthy choices are largely afterthoughts and Xtreme Eating reigns supreme. If chain restaurants want to practice corporate responsibility, they should substitute fruits, vegetables, and whole grains for white flour, sugar, salt, and fat.” The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201003211.html" target="cspi">health-reform law</a> enacted in March gives the Food and Drug Administration a year to propose a regulation specifying how restaurant chains with 20 or more outlets should disclose calories on menus and menu boards. The law will also require chains to make information about saturated fat, carbohydrates, sodium, and other nutrients available to diners upon request. 2010-05-25 Council Urged to Put DC School Kids Ahead of Special-Interest Opponents of Soda Tax http://cspinet.org/new/201005131.html Cheh Proposal Would Provide for Healthier School FoodsWASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter_to_councilmembers_-_final.pdf">today called on members of the District of Columbia Council</a> to support a proposal by Council Member Mary Cheh to levy a penny-per-ounce tax on soda to help pay for healthier school meals. The nonprofit nutrition and food-safety group is aiding a petition drive in support of the proposal along with Save the Children, Earth Day Network, and other organizations at <a href="www.supporthealthyschools.org">www.supporthealthyschools.org</a>. Cheh's Healthy Schools Revenue Act would provide $6.5 million a year to fund the Healthy Schools Act. Together, the acts would improve school nutrition, provide free breakfast in all District schools, eliminate the reduced-price copayment for lunch, and triple the amount of physical and health education. An additional $6 million would fund healthy food access, faith-based anti-obesity programs, and programs to improve the diets and wellness of the elderly in the District. "Soda consumption in the District is fueling an expensive epidemic of diet-related disease, including obesity, diabetes, and other health problems," said CSPI executive director and District resident Michael F. Jacobson. "A modest tax on this nutritionally worthless, disease-promoting product would give our seniors and children greater access to fresh fruits, vegetables, and other health-promoting foods." Residents of Washington, DC, collectively spend about $472 million on the medical costs of obesity alone, Jacobson wrote in a letter delivered today to Council Members. Fifty-five percent of District adults and 35 percent of children are obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and sugar-sweetened drinks are the only foods or beverages that have been shown to increase the risk of overweight and obesity. One study found that for each additional sugared drink consumed per day, the likelihood of a child becoming obese increases by 60 percent. A <a href="http://www.nodcbevtax.com/">web site</a> set up by soda tax opponents lists a number of liquor stores and fast-food outlets that oppose the Cheh proposal. United Medical Center, the hospital formerly known as Greater Southeast Community Hospital, also appears on that list, apparently without authorization. The hospital told CSPI that it would ask to be taken off the list. "I'm not surprised that Coke, Pepsi, liquor stores, and fast-food chains would object to a soda tax," Jacobson said. "But their concerns must take a back seat to the health of our students and seniors." 2010-05-13 CSPI Applauds IOM Recommendations to Strengthen Standards for Health-related Claims for Foods and Dietary Supplements http://cspinet.org/new/201005121.html Statement of CSPI Legal Affairs Director Bruce SilvergladeThe <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/Evaluation-of-Biomarkers-and-Surrogate-Endpoints-in-Chronic-Disease.aspx" target="cspi">Institute of Medicine report</a> gives the Food and Drug Administration a basis to establish a regulatory framework for health-related claims on foods and dietary supplements labels. While the FDA has recently begun a case-by-case crackdown on misleading food labeling claims, the agency lacks a comprehensive regulatory framework for many types of labeling claims. Misleading health-related claims on food labels are an industry-wide problem and need an industry-wide solution. We support the IOM conclusion that when foods or dietary supplements claim to provide drug-like benefits, they should be held to rigorous scientific standards. Right now, FDA policies are riddled with loopholes that let companies make phony promises on weak scientific evidence. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> petitioned the FDA in 2002 to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for foods with added ingredients that claim special health benefits. The IOM report now gives the agency a firm scientific basis to act. Right now the supermarket is a jungle of unsupported health-related claims. We hope that the IOM report will provide the basis for fundamental change of how food labeling claims are regulated. 2010-05-12 White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity Praised http://cspinet.org/new/201005111.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/05/10/take-a-look-our-action-plan-solve-problem-childhood-obesity" target="cspi">White House</a> has laid out a <a href="http://www.letsmove.gov/tfco_fullreport_may2010.pdf" target="cspi">comprehensive strategy</a> that if made a national priority and implemented should reduce obesity. From urging companies to improve restaurant children’s meals and reduce unhealthy food marketing to getting good food in and junk food out of schools, the recommendations are bold, yet achievable. Straight away, Congress could deliver on many of the <a href="http://www.letsmove.gov/taskforce_childhoodobesityrpt.html" target="cspi">Task Force </a> recommendations by completing the child nutrition reauthorization. With one day’s attention, the Senate could pass the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201003242.html" target="cspi">Agriculture Committee’s bill</a>, which would provide a historic increase in school lunch funding, get junk food out of vending machines, and help schools implement stronger nutrition and physical activity wellness policies. 2010-05-11 USDA's New Performance Standards Promise Safer Poultry; Need Strong Enforcement Powers from Congress http://cspinet.org/new/201005101.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe newly announced <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/usdadocket.pdf" target="cspi">performance standards</a> for Salmonella and Campylobacter—the most common hazards in the meat and poultry supply—represent the most significant food-safety development from the <a href="http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/!ut/p/c4/04_SB8K8xLLM9MSSzPy8xBz9CP0os_gAC9-wMJ8QY0MDpxBDA09nXw9DFxcXQ-cAA_2CbEdFAEUOjoE!/?contentidonly=true&contentid=2010%2F05%2F0246.xml" target="cspi">U.S. Department of Agriculture</a> in 15 years. USDA has cut the target levels for Salmonella in poultry by over 60 percent, and set the first-ever performance standard for Campylobacter. These long-awaited changes will push poultry processors to improve the safety of their products. When HACCP was first adopted in 1996, USDA promised it would continuously update its performance standards, but the agency never delivered on this promise, until now. Performance standards are the metric for measuring whether a company is maintaining control over the pathogens that are often present on poultry, and which cause millions of illnesses each year. Beginning in July, poultry processors will be operating under a stricter testing standard for Salmonella, and for the first time, the same products will be evaluated for Campylobacter, the most common foodborne pathogen in poultry. These standards could have a greater impact on consumers than any food safety measure since 1996. Chicken and turkey will be safer once they are implemented, especially if retailers avoid companies that are named by USDA as needing improvement. Unfortunately, USDA still lacks authority to enforce these standards by closing failing plants—an authority stripped away in 2001 by a federal court in Supreme Beef, Inc. vs. USDA. For consumers to fully realize the benefits of the improved standards, Congress should reinstate USDA’s authority to enforce its performance standards. 2010-05-10 Lettuce Recalled Due to E. Coli: Another Reason Senate Should Take Up Food Safety Bill http://cspinet.org/new/201005062.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalIf members of the United States Senate need another reason to bring the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911181.html" target="cspi">food safety bill</a> to the floor, may I recommend tomorrow’s newspapers? Once again, lettuce contaminated with dangerous bacteria, in this case, E. coli O145, is implicated in a multistate outbreak that has hospitalized at least 12 people so far and may be responsible for three cases of Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome (HUS). New York State identified the pathogen during testing of unopened bagged lettuce from Ohio-based Freshway Foods, and the Food and Drug Administration issued a recall of products from the Freshway plant. While consumers wait for Congress to pass food safety legislation, the plants that process and bag lettuce and the farms that grow it are operating under an industry honor system which clearly failed in this case. The FDA can’t tell us when it last had inspectors in the plant where this lettuce was processed. Congress urgently needs to give the FDA the resources and authority from the farm forward, transforming it from a reactive agency to an agency focused on preventing contamination. Freshway is conducting this recall on a voluntary basis, because – even with the presence of this serious food safety hazard – FDA lacks the ability to order a recall. Giving the FDA mandatory recall authority is another reason why the Senate should bring S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, to the floor without further delay. In the meantime, consumers should check <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm211131.htm" target="cspi">FDA’s web site</a> for specific information about this recall. Reports from FDA indicate that the recalled lettuce was intended for food service establishments, including some supermarket salad bars, but not bagged lettuce for retail sale. 2010-05-06 Safeway May Face Lawsuit for Failing to Alert Purchasers of Recalled Food http://cspinet.org/new/201005061.html Unlike Other Chains, Safeway Won’t Use Club Card Data to Notify Members of Recalls, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Even though it collects phone numbers and email addresses from its Club Card members, Safeway won’t use that data to contact people who bought contaminated food. The nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/safewayletter.pdf" target="cspi">notified Safeway</a> that CSPI will file a lawsuit against the grocery chain if it fails to adopt a policy to notify Club Card members who purchased contaminated food subject to recalls. Many other leading retailers do use customer contact information generated by their bonus card programs to notify consumers when they’ve purchased recalled food. In 2009, as thousands of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200902031.html" target="cspi">peanut-containing products</a> tainted with deadly Salmonella bacteria were being recalled, chains such as Costco sent <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/costcoletter.pdf" target="cspi">letters</a> or automated <a href="http://cspinet.org/audio/CliffBarRecall.mp3" target="cspi">phone calls</a> out to people who bought those foods. That was also the practice of Giant, Harris Teeter, Price Chopper, ShopRite, Wegman’s, and other chains. Even though that outbreak sickened hundreds and claimed nine lives, Safeway did not contact its Club Card shoppers during that or other recalls. “It shocks the conscience that a major retailer would sit on its hands, even though it has easy access to the emails, addresses, and phone numbers of those who have purchased food that might be contaminated,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “Perhaps Safeway saves a few pennies by remaining silent. But why would you knowingly risk letting your customers fall ill, or worse, die?” Unless Safeway makes a commitment to notify consumers of Class 1 recalls—those recalls of products “that predictably could cause serious health problems or death”—CSPI will file a lawsuit aimed at compelling the company to do so, the group said in a letter to Safeway chairman and CEO Steven A. Burd. In the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/safewayletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter</a>, CSPI says that Safeway’s failure to notify consumers that they’ve bought potentially dangerous products violates state consumer protection laws in Texas, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and California. According to the privacy policy on Safeway’s web site, Club Card data “may be used to help make Safeway’s products, services and programs more useful to its customers.” And, the company reserves the right to “disclose personal information to our related companies and third parties.” Yet, even when it has sold foods that might have been contaminated with E. Coli, Salmonella, botulism, or other deadly hazards, Safeway does not use its Club Card information to prevent customers from eating that food, according to CSPI. 2010-05-06 New York City Action on Salt Reduction Praised http://cspinet.org/new/201004262.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonNew York City’s Department of Health and Mental Hygiene has once again proven why it is the most effective health department in the country. The <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/portal/site/nycgov/menuitem.c0935b9a57bb4ef3daf2f1c701c789a0/index.jsp?pageID=mayor_press_release&catID=1194&doc_name=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nyc.gov%2Fhtml%2Fom%2Fhtml%2F2010a%2Fpr179-10.html&cc=unused1978&rc=1194&ndi=1" target="cspi">goals announced today</a> by the city-led National Salt Reduction Initiative will encourage major companies to begin cutting sodium. While I’m glad that 16 companies have chosen to participate in the initiative, too many companies—including giants such as PepsiCo, ConAgra, McDonald’s, and Burger King—have chosen to skip it. The limited participation indicates the need for federal health agencies to set mandatory national limits on the amount of sodium allowed in packaged and restaurant food. Previously, under the leadership of prevention-oriented health commissioners and public-health advocate Mayor Michael Bloomberg, New York has <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="cspi">taken the lead</a> on putting calories on menus and menu boards of chain restaurants, phasing artificial trans fat out of restaurant foods, and mounting creative campaigns against smoking and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201004141.html" target="cspi">soft drinks</a>. The city’s leadership of the National Salt Reduction Initiative will help put American consumers back in charge of their <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201004201.html" target="cspi">salt intake</a>, and lead to longer, healthier lives for millions of people in New York and beyond. 2010-04-26 Attack of the Zombie Trans Fat! http://cspinet.org/new/201004261.html Bob Evans, White Castle, & Long John Silver’s Still Using Heart-Stopping Artificial Trans Fat, Despite Known DangerWASHINGTON—Just when you thought that artificial trans fat was dead, it staggers zombie-like out of the culinary graveyard: Bob Evans, White Castle, and Long John Silver’s are all still using artificial trans fat in French fries, onion rings, hotcakes, and other foods. But this nutritional zombie isn’t out for your brains; it’s after your heart. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">Artificial trans fat</a> is such an uncommonly powerful promoter of heart disease that it has been dropped by the largest fast-food chains; it has been forced out of restaurants in New York City, California, and other jurisdictions; and has been increasingly hard to find in supermarkets since trans fat labeling went into effect in 2006. But while McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, Starbucks, and other big chains have phased out their use of partially hydrogenated oil (the source of artificial trans fat), America’s chain-restaurant B-Listers have yet to get the memo, according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. “Bob Evans, White Castle, and Long John Silver’s are now the roguish outliers among the restaurant industry,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Many Americans might have thought that the era of artificial trans fat was over. At these chains, it lives tragically on.” The three chains, with total sales of $3 billion a year, range between the 39th- and 51st-biggest in the country. Trans fat promotes heart disease by raising one’s LDL, or “bad” cholesterol, which clogs arteries, while lowering one’s HDL, the “good” cholesterol that guards against heart attacks. The Institute of Medicine recommends consuming as little trans fat as possible, while still eating a healthy diet, and the American Heart Association advises people to limit trans fat to no more than 2 grams per day. Since small amounts of trans fat occur naturally in milk and beef, that doesn’t leave much room for trans fat from artificial sources, according to CSPI. At Bob Evans, the fries aren’t the problem; it’s the pancakes: An order of Stacked & Stuffed Caramel Banana Pecan Hotcakes has 7 grams of trans fat; a standard order of three unadorned Bob Evans Buttermilk Hotcakes has 9 grams. At White Castle, even Harold and Kumar might look askance at the French fries, onion chips, and onion rings, which have between 2 and 10 grams of trans fat per order, depending on the product and the size, says CSPI. CSPI said it was particularly disappointed to find that zombie trans fat still lurks at Long John Silver’s. That chain, owned by Yum! Brands, the parent company of KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, knows better, according to the group. KFC phased trans fat out of its fried foods in 2006, four months after <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="cspi">CSPI filed a lawsuit</a> against the chain. Taco Bell also phased out artificial trans fat several years ago. Nevertheless, at LJS, battered fish and shrimp has between 2.5 and 4.5 grams of trans fat; a side order of cryptic “Crumblies” has 4 grams; and every single meal on the chain’s Dollar Stretcher menu has artificial trans fat, ranging from the Small Golden Fries (2.5 grams) to the Two Jr. Fish and Fries (7 grams). “The FDA has all the scientific evidence and legal authority it needs to send partially hydrogenated oil to the chemical boneyard quickly and permanently, but it has failed to do so,” Jacobson said. “Banning it would save thousands of lives annually.” 2010-04-26 Institute of Medicine Recommends Quick Government Action to Reduce Salt in the Food Supply http://cspinet.org/new/201004201.html CSPI Urges FDA and USDA to Set Limits on SaltWASHINGTON—Legislators and public health groups today praised a <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2010/Strategies-to-Reduce-Sodium-Intake-in-the-United-States.aspx" target="cspi">long-awaited report</a> from the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine that calls for urgent, government action to reduce salt in packaged and restaurant foods. “Limiting salt in packaged and restaurant foods is perhaps the single most important thing that the Food and Drug Administration could do to save hundreds of thousands of lives and save billions of dollars in health-care expenses,” said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA and U.S. Department of Agriculture should quickly implement the Institute of Medicine’s recommendations, starting with mandatory limits on salt, which could be phased in gradually over time.” For more than 30 years, CSPI has been pressing the federal government to take steps to reduce salt in packaged and restaurant foods. A <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="cspi">2005 regulatory petition</a> filed by CSPI asks the Food and Drug Administration to treat salt as a food additive, subject to reasonable limits. CSPI supports limits, since the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/" target="cspi">high levels of salt</a> in the American diet promote high blood pressure, which in turn promotes stroke and heart disease. Senator Tom Harkin and Representative Rosa DeLauro also joined CSPI in support of limits on salt. “As this report points out, Americans’ salt intake has continued to increase since the early 1970s, and thus so have our taste preferences,” said DeLauro. “The problem is, we have reached a point where our sodium intake is endangering our health, and we are paying a heavy price in heart attacks, strokes, and hypertension. The public health implications of this are really astounding. According to the IOM, reducing salt intake could prevent more than 100,000 deaths a year. The FDA should set national standards for sodium content in foods.” “Removing the barriers to healthy living leads to longer, healthier lives and lower health care costs down the road,” said Harkin. “It is difficult for Americans to control the amount of sodium they consume when dangerously high amounts are being added to processed foods. Nearly 80 percent of our daily sodium intake isn’t added at the table or during cooking—it’s added in processing plants before it ever gets to us. When sodium is so clearly linked to heart disease and strokes, it’s time to give Americans more information and better control over their daily intake. This is good common sense and it is a wise investment in our public health too.” “As the Institute of Medicine report unambiguously points out, 40 years of voluntary initiatives on the part of manufacturers have failed to reduce salt intake,” Jacobson said. “But we call on food manufacturers and restaurant chains to step up their efforts at salt reduction while the FDA and USDA implement the IOM’s recommendations.” Jacobson noted that 20 percent of Americans’ salt intake actually comes from the meat- and poultry-containing products regulated by the USDA. Seventy percent of the population—a group that includes the elderly, African Americans, and people with existing high blood pressure—should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day, according to the federal government. Everyone else should limit themselves to 2,300 mg per day. But according to CSPI, average sodium intake is actually north of 4,000 mg per day. And some <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/top_ten_salty_foods__restaurant_.pdf" target="cspi">restaurant meals </a> are capable of providing even more than that in a single meal. At Chili’s, a meal made of Buffalo Chicken Fajitas and a bowl of Black Bean Soup contain 7,770 mg of sodium—more sodium than is safe for most people to consume in five days. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905111.html" target="cspi">Admiral’s Feast</a> with a Caesar Salad, a Cheddar Bay Biscuit and a Light Lemonade at Red Lobster has 5,925 mg of sodium. In 2009, CSPI sued restaurant chain <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907231.html" target="cspi">Denny’s</a> to disclose sodium levels on its menus and include warnings for high sodium content. Even foods <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/top_ten_salty_foods__packaged.pdf" target="cspi">purchased at the grocery store </a> have unsafe levels of salt, says CSPI. A Swanson Hungry Man frozen dinner of Grilled Bourbon Steak Strips in sauce with rice and green beans contains 1,990 mg of sodium. Even foods intended for children, like an Oscar Mayer Lunchables with Lean Ham and Cheddar Cracker Stackers has more than 1,000 mg of sodium—nearly an entire day’s worth for kids aged four to eight. “Outrageously <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/articles/salt.html" target="cspi">high salt levels</a> are turning Americans hearts and brains into ticking time bombs. It’s about time for policymakers at all levels of government to bring salt levels back down to safer, more reasonable levels,” Jacobson said. According to CSPI, intervention by the British government to reduce sodium has succeeded in bringing many packaged foods’ sodium levels below the levels of comparable foods sold in the United States. 2010-04-20 Health Advocates Cheer Decline in Soda Drinking http://cspinet.org/new/201004141.html Taxes, Media Campaigns, Warning Labels Could Reduce Consumption Further, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Health advocates see an encouraging trend in the fight against obesity and diet-related disease: Americans are drinking less soda pop. Per capita consumption of carbonated soft drinks has declined for 11 straight years, according to data from Beverage Marketing Corporation. Per capita consumption of sugary soft drinks is 22 percent below its peak in 1998, according to the trade publication <a href="http://www.beverage-digest.com/pdf/top-10_2010.pdf" target="cspi">Beverage Digest</a> and calculations by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. To be sure, even with the declines in consumption in recent years, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Dr. Pepper Snapple, and other companies produced 9.4 billion cases of sugary soda and energy drinks in 2009. At the 1998 peak, when CSPI first published its Liquid Candy report, companies were producing 638 8-ounce servings of non-diet soft drinks per person. By 2009, that figure was down to 543 8-ounce servings. Still, that’s about 140 empty calories a day, for every man, woman, and child in the United States. “The recognition that soda pop promotes weight gain and disease is gaining traction, contributing to the steady decline in soda consumption,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Ten years from now, it would be great to see that Americans are drinking a can and a half a week, instead of a can and a half a day.” Besides concern over obesity, Jacobson said that the growing popularity of bottled water, the low-carb Atkins and South Beach diets, bans on soft drinks in schools, and rising unemployment rates are all partly responsible for the decline in soda consumption. According the United States Department of Agriculture and Beverage Digest, the proportion of carbonated soft drinks that are non-caloric diet drinks increased from 23 percent to 30 percent between 1998 and 2009. CSPI and other health advocates are urging state legislators to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">increase soda taxes</a> where they already exist, or to institute them for the first time. A state such as California, which already imposes a small sales tax on soft drinks, could raise nearly $2 billion each year if the state added a penny-per-ounce excise tax on soda. The state could put some of that money toward the state’s share of the $10 billion in medical expenses incurred each year by obese Californians. The revenues could also fund programs to encourage healthy eating and physical activity, such as <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-F4t8zL6F0c" target="cspi">media campaigns</a> to discourage the consumption of sugary beverages. “Reasonable taxes could help drive down consumption a bit more, particularly among children,” Jacobson said. “And if those taxes could fund hard-hitting media campaigns, like the one being run in New York City, that’s even better. The goal should be to restore sugary soda to what it once was—an occasional treat in a reasonable portion, not the every-day super-sized tub.” Another policy approach would be to require health notices on soft-drink containers, something that in 2005 <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200507131.html" target="cspi">CSPI petitioned</a> the Food and Drug Administration to do. CSPI proposed “The U.S. Government recommends that you drink less (non-diet) soda to help prevent weight gain, tooth decay, and other health problems,” as one such notice. The FDA hasn’t yet acted on that proposal. 2010-04-14 Half-Empty Food Packages Harm Consumers, Environment http://cspinet.org/new/201004051.html CSPI Calls on FDA, State Attorneys General to Crack Down on “Slack Fill”WASHINGTON—A biggish box of Hamburger Helper only half full of food. A giant box of Ginger Snaps half full of air. A solitary chicken quesadilla in a Lean Cuisine box that could easily fit two. The food industry calls it "slack fill." But the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> calls it a form of deception—and an environmental nightmare to boot. The nonprofit nutrition and food safety watchdog group is urging the Food and Drug Administration and state attorneys general to crack down on illegal slack fill in food packages. <img src="/images/gingersnaps.JPG"> Photo Credit: Stephen Schmidt What seems like a full bag of ginger snaps before opening the box is actually a half-full combination of food and air— what the industry calls "slack fill." CSPI calls it deception. The federal government already has regulations on the books regarding slack fill, which is defined as the difference between the capacity of a container and the volume of product inside. Those rules are meant to restrict slack fill to those situations where some air in the packaging actually helps protect the contents, or where some settling of the product makes a little slack fill unavoidable. But according to CSPI, food manufacturers and the regulators who oversee them don’t seem overly concerned with the spirit of those regulations. "It would be disheartening, even shocking, if it weren’t so commonplace," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "But as consumers we’ve almost come to expect that our food packages will be half full of food and half full of air. Slack fill is just one trick that food marketers employ to make us thing we’re getting more for our money than we are." A box of Betty Crocker Wholesome Hamburger Helper is roughly 19 centimeters tall, 12 cm wide, and three-and-a-half cm deep. If it were filled to the very top, it could accommodate nearly 800 cubic cm of food. Instead, a small plastic bag of macaroni and a flat packet of sauce mix take up only about half of the package. The box does include the 5.8 ounces of food described on the label, but would the company dare do this if the package were see-through, asks CSPI? And what of the environmental cost of shipping half-full containers around the country and world? "If food companies cut packages of Ginger Snaps or Hamburger Helper in half, what now takes two trucks to ship would only take one," Jacobson said. "Some of us might appreciate some extra space in our cupboards, too. I wish the Food and Drug Administration or state attorneys general would take steps to ensure that consumers are getting their money’s worth at the grocery store." <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/memo_-_slack_fill.pdf" target="cspi">"Cut the Slack"</a> is the lead editorial in the April issue of CSPI’s flagship publication, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>. Introductory subscriptions are $10 a year. 2010-04-05 Child Nutrition Bill Advances in Senate http://cspinet.org/new/201003242.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanAmerica’s schools are one step closer to being junk-food-free today. Congratulations to Senators Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) for passing a strong child nutrition bill out of the Senate Agriculture Committee. This bipartisan bill contains numerous important steps to improve child nutrition and address childhood obesity, including a historic agreement between health groups and food and beverage companies to improve the nutritional quality of foods sold out of vending machines and other venues outside of school meals. Getting junk food out of schools is important for improving children’s diets and ensuring that those so-called competitive foods don’t undermine the school lunch program. Although USDA regularly adjusts school meal reimbursement rates for inflation, this is the first time in four decades that Congress would provide an additional increase in funding. The reimbursement rate increase is supported by several other provisions that expand financial resources, increase technical support to schools, and strengthen compliance with school meal nutrition standards to ensure healthier school meals for children. 2010-03-24 Nearly Half of States Need to Improve Outbreak Reporting, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201003241.html Better Reporting of Foodborne Illness Outbreaks Could Speed Recalls and Save LivesWASHINGTON—The <a href="http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/wwwpewtrustsorg/Reports/Produce_Safety_Project/PSP-Scharff%20v9.pdf?n=1136" target="cspi">national cost</a> of foodborne illness has been estimated at the astronomical sum of $152 billion annually, but the information on who is getting sick and what is causing those illnesses is part of a state-by-state surveillance system that shows mixed results around the country, raising important new questions about how to improve state outbreak reporting. In 2006, more than 200 people fell ill and 5 died after eating <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200609151.html" target="cspi">spinach</a> contaminated with deadly E. coli bacteria. So in 2007, which also saw several nationwide outbreaks, state and local public health agencies should have been on full alert to investigate illnesses and report outbreaks to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). According to an analysis of 2007 <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/statereport2010.pdf" target="cspi">outbreak reporting data</a> by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, outbreak <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/reportedoutbreaks.pdf" target="cspi">reporting varied widely</a> from state to state: nine states reported 10 to 15 outbreaks per million people, but many others reported only one. If states’ reporting performance during 2007 (the most recent year when such information is available) is any indication, at least 23 states need to make dramatic improvements in their surveillance and reporting systems, according to CSPI. “State and local health departments are our first line of defense when it comes to identifying the food that causes an outbreak,” said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety </a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “But some states may not have enough investigators or the money to train and equip their staff, which can lead to lower-quality investigations and lower rates of reporting.” Oregon and Minnesota are well-recognized as having strong programs for foodborne outbreak surveillance, investigation, and reporting. Those states, which have excellent laboratory facilities and which quickly interview people who test positive for dangerous pathogens, each reported 10 outbreaks per million people in 2007. CSPI considered that a baseline for its analysis, and found that 7 states had even better reporting records, including Maine, Kansas, Wyoming, Vermont, Alaska, Hawaii and North Dakota. Those states generated more reports and provided CDC with better information to prevent future outbreaks. On the other end of the spectrum, twelve states reported just one outbreak of foodborne illness per million people, and 11 states had reporting rates almost as low. Because there is no reason to think that those states would have such low incidences of outbreaks, CSPI is concerned that this variability in reporting reflects a failure to identify, fully investigate, and report outbreaks. The 23 states with the lowest reporting rates in 2007 were Delaware, Georgia, Pennsylvania, New York, and Massachusetts, each with three outbreaks per million; Missouri, New Jersey, Virginia, Alabama, West Virginia, and Kentucky, each with two outbreaks per million; and Texas, North Carolina, Indiana, Louisiana, Nebraska, Utah, Arkansas, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Mississippi, and Oklahoma, each reporting just one outbreak per million. In September of 2007, 19-month-old Isabelle Reinert of Sauk Rapids, MN, became violently ill with unrelenting diarrhea and a 104-degree fever. Her diarrhea persisted for nearly six weeks, and her mother Amy Reinert told the Associated Press that it “was the worst thing I’ve ever experienced as a parent.” Epidemiologists working for the state of Minnesota were eventually able to identify the source of the Salmonella that sickened Isabelle and others that year: Banquet Turkey Pot Pies. That link between the outbreak and ConAgra’s pot pies led to a recall of over 3 million pot pies and new package cooking instructions, including advice that the pies should be cooked to 165 degrees F. Legislation that passed the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">House of Representatives</a> would help improve state reporting, according to CSPI. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911181.html" target="cspi">FDA Food Safety Modernization Act</a>, now pending in the Senate, would require FDA to improve coordination between federal, state and local surveillance systems; develop a national network of laboratories; and improve epidemiological tools available to the states. The bill would also integrate foodborne illness surveillance with other bio-surveillance capabilities. “State outbreak reporting is a vital piece of our national food safety system, and the information gathered in the course of outbreak investigations can reduce the impact of outbreaks and prevent future ones. Action on Senate bill would help strengthen both federal and state food safety programs,” DeWaal said. According to recent research done by <a href="http://www.safetables.org/index.cfm" target="cspi">S.T.O.P.</a>—Safe Tables Our Priority, a number of factors may also explain the variation in state investigations. “States’ systematic differences in response to foodborne illness case reporting may also explain variations in rates,” said S.T.O.P’s public health specialist, Susan Vaughn Grooters. “Time differences in surveying cases of foodborne illness and lack of integrated data collection may also affect how well states accurately capture data.” DeWaal will present CSPI’s findings today at a food safety conference in Atlanta cosponsored by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and NSF International. 2010-03-24 Health Care Reform to Deliver Calorie Counts to Chain Restaurant Menus Nationwide http://cspinet.org/new/201003211.html CSPI Celebrates "Huge Victory for Consumers" After 7-Year FightWASHINGTON—Tucked neatly inside the health reform legislation headed to the Oval Office for a presidential signature is language that will require <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/healthreformmenulabeling.pdf" target="cspi">calorie labeling </a> on chain restaurant menus, menu boards, and drive-through displays, as well as on vending machines. The legislation applies to chains with 20 or more outlets, and requires them to provide additional nutrition information on request. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_map.pdf" target="cspi">Similar measures </a> are already in effect or are awaiting implementation in California, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Oregon, New York City, Philadelphia, and a dozen other localities. The federal standard will supersede the varied state and local requirements. <img src="/images/subway.jpg"> This Subway in New York City has posted calorie information for all menu items since the implementation of the local menu-labeling law in 2007. Soon all chain restaurants with 20 or more outlets nationwide will be required to post this information on menus, menu boards, drive-through displays and vending machines. "Coffee drinks can range from 20 calories to 800 calories, and burgers can range from 250 calories to well over 1,000 calories," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "With the health reform legislation passed today, Congress is giving Americans easy access to the most critical piece of nutrition information they need when eating out. While it’s a huge victory for consumers, it’s just one of dozens of things we will need to do to reduce rates of obesity and diet-related disease in this country." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> began pressing for <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="cspi">nutrition labeling</a> at chain restaurants in 2003. In past sessions of Congress, stand-alone menu labeling bills were introduced by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT). New York City became the first jurisdiction to enact menu labeling, via regulations issued by the city’s Board of Health, in 2006. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed California’s menu labeling law in 2008, after vetoing a similar measure the year before. The National Restaurant Association dropped its longstanding objection to menu labeling last year, and actually supported the language passed by Congress today. "The historic legislation that President Barack Obama will sign will do so much to give more Americans access to health care, but it also does much to help prevent disease in the first place," Wootan said. "Menu labeling at restaurants will help make First Lady Michelle Obama’s mission to reduce childhood obesity just a little bit easier." The bill exempts small businesses, and does not apply to daily or temporary specials and customized orders. It requires the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to propose specific regulations not later than one year from now. Those regulations will be finalized through a formal rulemaking process, and the FDA must make quarterly reports on its progress to Congress. 2010-03-21 Bipartisan Agreement Likely Means USDA Will Set Nutrition Standards for Vending in Schools http://cspinet.org/new/201003181.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanIn an otherwise contentious time in Washington, it's good to know that Republicans and Democrats can come together for the sake of child nutrition and health. The agreement that Chairman Blanche Lincoln and Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss have forged, along with the support of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nsns_senate_letter.pdf" target="cspi">industry leaders</a> and health groups, will allow the U.S. Department of Agriculture to ensure that the federal investment in healthy school meals isn't undermined by foods that harm kids' health. USDA is currently updating the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910201.html" target="cspi">school meal standards</a>; now Congress is poised to allow USDA to take care of the rest of school foods. The current national nutrition standards for foods sold out of school vending machines and a la carte lines in cafeterias are 30 years out of date and no longer make sense. They don't address key nutrition problems like calories, fats, salt, and sugar. USDA needs to update its nutrition standards for school foods sold outside of meals, and apply those standards to the whole campus, the whole school day. We're pleased that industry leaders like Mars, Nestlé, Coke, and Pepsi see the need for this as well. There has been an absolute sea change when it comes to parents' expectations for the foods that are available in schools. Many cities, states, and companies have already begun to improve the nutritional quality of foods they sell in school. However, two-thirds of states still have weak or no school nutrition standards. When Congress passes the <a href="http://www.schoolfoods.org/" target="cspi">child nutrition reauthorization bill</a>, it will help get all junk food out of every school once and for all. 2010-03-18 Start Spreading the News! New York City Passes Food Safety Letter Grades for Restaurants http://cspinet.org/new/201003171.html CSPI Urges Other Jurisdictions to Do the SameWASHINGTON—New York City's trailblazing Department of Health and Mental Hygiene voted yesterday to require the city’s restaurants to post letter grades reflecting the establishment's cleanliness. That move was applauded today by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which has been calling on cities and state legislatures to adopt such measures. Letter grades have been used in Los Angeles County restaurants for the past 11 years, and that popular measure is credited with reducing the number of hospitalizations due to foodborne illness there. A <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808071.html" target="cspi">2008 CSPI review </a> of 539 restaurant inspections in 20 cities found that two-thirds of restaurants had troubling critical food safety violations. That report, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/dirtydining/index.html" target="cspi">Dirty Dining</a>, contained harrowing accounts of chicken salad stored at a bacteria-friendly 50 degrees, mouse droppings in ice machines, and roaches scampering across cutting boards. CSPI found that many of those inspection reports were hard for the public to obtain; CSPI investigators had to pry reports from some secretive health departments with formal requests made under the Freedom of Information Act. "When some said it was impossible to get artificial trans fat out of restaurant food, New York City proved them wrong," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety</a> attorney Sarah Klein. "When others said that calorie counts on menus were impractical, New York City made it look easy. L.A. was the first to put food safety letter grades in restaurant windows. But with 24,000 restaurants representing virtually every cuisine on Earth, <a href="http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/16/city-health-board-agrees-to-require-letter-grades-for-restaurant-cleanliness/" target="cspi">New York City</a> can show that if you can make it happen there, you can make it happen anywhere." Klein will represent CSPI at the Conference on Food Protection in Providence, RI, next month. That conference brings together food industry stakeholders, consumer groups, and food-safety officials from state, local, and federal agencies, and makes recommendations to the Food and Drug Administration on updating its model food code. That code forms the scientifically sound technical and legal basis for regulating retail food sales, and is then typically adopted by state and local agencies. CSPI wants it to include letter grades for restaurants. "Of course, we also want to prevent food from being contaminated before it even enters a restaurant, which is why Congress needs to give the FDA the authority and resources it needs to do that job," Klein said. The Senate is expected have a vote on final passage of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911181.html" target="cspi">FDA Food Safety Modernization Act</a> this spring. 2010-03-17 CSPI Applauds Pepsi for Making World-Wide Commitment Not to Sell Sugary Soft Drinks in Schools http://cspinet.org/new/201003161.html Coca-Cola Will Still Target High School Kids in Most CountriesWASHINGTON—PepsiCo CEO Indra Nooyi has announced that the company will phase out full-sugar carbonated soft drinks from all schools around the world. The move followed from the <a href="http://www.dumpsoda.org/" target="cspi">Global Dump Soft Drinks Campaign</a> led by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. The group proposed negotiations in 2008, which were led by the Geneva-based World Heart Federation with PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, and the International Council of Beverage Associations. PepsiCo's <a href="http://www.pepsico.com/PressRelease/PepsiCo-Sets-Industry-Standard-By-Establishing-the-First-Consistent-Global-Appro03162010.html" target="cspi">policy</a> will still allow the sale in high schools of non caloric drinks and sports drinks such as Gatorade that have about half the calories of regular carbonated soft drinks, and the policy will not limit the portion sizes of fruit juice. <a href="http://origin.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/global_school_beverage_guidelines.html" target="cspi">Last week Coca-Cola</a>, the world’s largest purveyor of what CSPI calls <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">“liquid candy,”</a> announced a policy, which also springs from the negotiations, that the company will “not offer our beverages for sale in primary schools.” But the policy then states that if school authorities request drinks “to meet hydration needs, we will endeavor to meet those requests.” The Coke policy explicitly allows the sale of its sugary soft drinks in high schools. Smaller regional and national companies represented by the International Council of Beverage Associations, and others not represented by the association, did not make any commitments to change their policies. "We applaud PepsiCo for its global commitment not to sell carbonated sugary soft drinks in schools," said Bruce Silverglade, legal affairs director of CSPI and president of the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations, which represented CSPI and other consumer groups in the talks. "But shame on Coca-Cola for insisting on targeting high school students in most countries around the world. Childhood obesity is a world-wide problem and high school students everywhere deserve the same help as American high schoolers." The new policies come on the heels of a study by the American Beverage Association that shows that in the United States the industry has made very <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/201003081.html" target="cspi">significant progress in getting high-calorie sodas out of all schools </a> as a result of state and local pressure to remove soft drinks, a threat of litigation, and a 2006 agreement with health groups. That study found that non-diet soda, sports drinks, diluted fruit drinks, and ice teas have decreased dramatically over the past five years. When the school lunch and other child nutrition programs are reauthorized by Congress this year, health advocates expect that the bill will require the U.S. Department of Agriculture to update the nutrition standards for foods sold in vending machines and a la carte programs in cafeterias, presumably excluding soda and other high-calorie drinks. Pepsi's new policy takes effect on January 1, 2011, and the company says it hopes to have full compliance by January of 2012. The company says that in some countries, parts of the distribution chain are out of its control. Coca-Cola's policy does not go into effect until 2013 when the company says its existing beverage contracts with schools will expire. The International Diabetes Federation was also represented in the negotiations leading up to PepsiCo’s and Coca-Cola’s announcements. 2010-03-16 Retailers Could Use Bonus Card Data to Alert Buyers of Recalled Foods http://cspinet.org/new/201003111.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Attorney Sarah KleinNow that the <a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5g9LcUIAg-72ZFn6tDkvVdKaKirogD9EC5ON00">CDC has shown </a>that customer loyalty cards provided crucial information to pinpoint the items that sickened nearly 250 people in 44 states, this valuable tool should be used by all retailers to alert their customers when they purchase food products that are later recalled. A year ago, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200902031.html">CSPI called on retailers</a> to use the information generated by bonus cards to contact consumers who have purchased recalled products. That’s already the practice of Costco, Wegman’s, and Price Chopper. These cards which speeded identification of the contaminated salami and prevented another giant outbreak are a valuable tool. This get other grocery chains thinking about how they can protect their customers when the next dangerous outbreak hits. The bonus cards swiped at grocery stores can do more than just save consumers money and generate powerful marketing databases for retailers. If a retailer knows the address, phone number, or email address of someone who has purchased contaminated peanut butter, spinach, or salami, the company should take advantage of that opportunity to prevent future illnesses from recalled products. 2010-03-11 Most Food & Entertainment Companies Get Failing Grade for Policies on Marketing Food to Children http://cspinet.org/new/201003091.html Few Have Any Policies in Place at All, According to CSPI Report CardWASHINGTON—Most food and entertainment companies have received Fs from the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/marketingreportcard.pdf" target="cspi">issued a report card</a> that rates 128 companies’ policies with regard to food marketing aimed at children. Three-quarters of companies are getting an F, either for having weak policies or for failing to have any policies whatsoever. CSPI's highest grade, a B+, went to Mars, Inc., though the group emphasized that the grade is not for the foods Mars sells, but rather for its policy on marketing to children. Mars' policy excludes <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/statement_report_card.pdf" target="cspi">marketing to children</a> under 12 and covers most of the key marketing tactics used to reach children. The entertainment company given CSPI’s highest grade, a B, is Qubo, a family-friendly children's television channel delivered nationwide over ION Media Networks 59 local digital television stations. Qubo’s policy is comprehensive, applying reasonably good nutrition standards to its full range of programming, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a>. One food company (Procter & Gamble, which makes Pringles) received a B, six got a B-, 17 got a C, and 7 a D. Ninety-five companies received an F. <img src="/images/chucktoy.JPG"> Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin The Most Disappointing Toy Ever? At first glance it resembles the classic Easy Bake, but the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mostdisappointingtoy.pdf" target="cspi">Chuck E. Cheese's</a>® EZ-2 Make!™ Pizza Maker doesn't even have a heating element; it’s just a cheap plastic shell. "Despite the industry's self-regulatory system, the vast majority of food and entertainment companies have no protections in place for children," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "If companies were marketing bananas and broccoli, we wouldn’t be concerned. But instead, most of the marketing is for sugary cereals, fast food, snack foods, and candy. And this junk food marketing is a major contributor to childhood obesity." According to the Institute of Medicine, TV commercials affect children's food choices, food purchase requests, diets, and health. And the mere act of watching commercial television is linked to obesity CSPI gave restaurant chain Denny's an F for marketing to children through its children's menu, which includes many nutritionally poor items; games on its Web site; and a kid's birthday club. Lucasfilms received an F for not having a policy. Presently, Lucasfilms is licensing Star Wars toys as a premium to go with McDonald's Happy Meals, many of which are nutritionally poor. Candy company Topps also got an F. That company makes, among other things, Baby Bottle Pop, a powdered candy sold in a miniature baby bottle, eaten by dipping a candy nipple in a sugary powder and licking it off. Over the years Topps has retained the services of the Jonas Brothers and Clique Girlz singing groups to convince children to purchase that infantilizing product, whose 140 calories all come from sugar. Companies spend about $2 billion each year marketing foods and beverages to children. Food manufacturers and restaurants more often had policies for television, radio, print, Internet, and product placement than for digital marketing, like cell phones, iPods, and social networks, characters, games, and contests on food packages, toy give-aways with children's meals at fast-food restaurants, or branded marketing programs for schools. Half of the entertainment companies with policies, like the Cartoon Network, apply nutrition standards to the licensing of their characters, but few have policies for their television advertising or Web site, which are the primary ways they market to children. In 2006, the Council of Better Business Bureaus announced a self-regulatory program called the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200909221.html" target="cspi">Childrens Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative</a>. Sixteen major food and restaurant companies, representing about 80 percent of television food advertising expenditures, have joined the program and announced that they will not market foods to children under 12 that don’t meet companies’ individual nutritional standards. But those standards often are carefully tailored and still allow a considerable volume of junk-food advertising to reach young kids, according to CSPI. The group's analysis of advertising on <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911241.html" target="cspi">Nickelodeon</a>, conducted in November, found that 80 percent of food ads on the popular children's network were for junk food. While 64 percent of food manufacturers that advertise to children have marketing policies, only 24 percent of restaurants and 22 percent of entertainment companies do. For Qubo’s part, the company says its nutrition policy reinforces an overall message about healthy living and providing children with the foundations for self-esteem that the company promotes in popular kids’ programs such as Turbo Dogs, Willa's Wild Life and Babar. "Shortly after the launch of the Qubo kids' channel in 2007, we established very stringent nutritional guidelines for advertising only healthy foods to children," said Brandon Burgess, chairman and CEO of ION Media Networks, the parent company of the Qubo Channel. "We were responding to the alarming increase in childhood obesity and the seminal work established by the FCC's Task Force on Media and Childhood Obesity. Then and now, we were happy to work with policymakers, CSPI, and our industry colleagues to fight childhood obesity and provide children with important educational building blocks in making healthy lifestyle choices." In the next few weeks, the Federal Trade Commission together with other federal agencies is expected to propose a set of nutrition criteria and other standards for foods marketed to children that, when finalized in July, the agency hopes companies will adopt on a voluntary basis. "If food, toy, and media companies fail to adopt those voluntary standards, they will be clanging the death knell for their self-regulatory initiative and inviting strong government involvement in food marketing aimed at kids," Wootan said. 2010-03-09 Study Shows Progress Made Removing Sugary Sodas from Schools http://cspinet.org/new/201003081.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanWe congratulate the beverage industry for working to <a href="http://www.ameribev.org/nutrition--science/school-beverage-guidelines" target="cspi">remove sugary sodas</a> from schools. Together with stronger state laws and local school wellness policies, the country is making good progress in getting sugary drinks out of schools. But, there is still much work to be done. According to the industry study, unhealthy full-calorie sodas, sports drinks, imitation fruit drinks, and ice teas have decreased from three-quarters to one-third of the beverages sold in high schools over the past five years. We're pleased that the beverage industry and many snack food companies support having Congress address school beverages and snacks through this year's reauthorization of the school lunch and other child <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy" target="cspi">nutrition</a> programs. It’s time to pass national legislation to finish getting sugary drinks out of schools and to also address junk foods. 2010-03-08 Foods With Contaminated Hydrolyzed Vegetable Protein Recalled http://cspinet.org/new/201003041.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Attorney Sarah KleinThe massive voluntary recall announced today by Basic Food Flavors, Inc.—of products containing a widely used flavor enhancer,<a href="http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/HVPCP/"> hydrolyzed vegetable protein,</a>—is yet more proof that the Food and Drug Administration needs more authority, more inspectors, and more resources to ensure that our food supply is safe. Fortunately, this recall has been started before any illnesses have been linked to this strain of Salmonella. Most Americans would be stunned to learn that FDA doesn't even have the authority to make recalls like these mandatory. And it's worth asking: When was the last time an FDA inspector visited this particular facility in Nevada? This is why the <a href="https://secure2.convio.net/cspi/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=901" target="cspi">Senate must act now</a> to pass the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, so that the agency can help prevent contamination in the first place, rather than chase down tainted products long after they've left the manufacturer. 2010-03-04 FDA Crackdown on Misleading Food Labels Praised http://cspinet.org/new/201003031.html Statement of CSPI Legal Affairs Director Bruce SilvergladeThe FDA's coordinated enforcement actions today against 16 food manufacturers, including Gerber, Beech-Nut, Gorton's, Sunsweet, Nestlé, Pom, and Diamond, should send a loud and clear signal to industry that time is running out on misleading health-related claims on labels. For far too long, manufacturers have exaggerated the healthfulness of their products, or even implied that their products contain special "functional" ingredients that provide drug-like protection against various diseases. The previous administration tolerated such shenanigans, but I hope that the party is now over. While today's action is the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/default.htm" target="cspi">largest crackdown </a> on deceptive food labeling in more than a decade, the FDA must now turn its individual enforcement actions into binding regulations. Some companies highlighted in CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200912291.html" target="cspi">recent report</a> found themselves targets of FDA action today, while others apparently escaped scrutiny. The FDA dodged some issues, like not cracking down on false claims that Ocean Spray Cranberry Juice and other foods help strengthen your immune system. And the agency should have banned misleading "0 grams trans fat" claims for foods high in saturated fat, instead of just instructing companies to add a disclosure like "see nutrition panel for saturated fat information." FDA also needs to set standards for claims such as "made with whole wheat" by specifying that the percentage of whole grains appear on the label in conjunction with the claim. In addition to issuing industry-wide regulations to halt misleading claims, the FDA should update the 20-year-old <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200912071.html" target="cspi">Nutrition Facts label</a> and improve the readability of ingredient lists. The FDA currently is studying various schemes for providing key pieces of nutrition information prominently on front labels. The warning letters sent by FDA today are a welcome step. But unless the FDA uses its authority to issue new, industry-wide regulations to prevent such abuses, the agency will forever be playing a game of Whac-A-Mole with companies that use deceptive labeling. 2010-03-03 Salt-Water-Soaked Chicken Not at all Natural, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201002241.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonChicken, salt, and water all are natural, but when you combine the three what you get is chicken that is anything but "all natural." When Americans take their hard-earned dollars to the supermarket, they want the most value for their money. And when they see labels like "100 percent natural," they assume that the foods really are. Unfortunately, too many unscrupulous poultry producers, with the regrettable acquiescence of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, have drained the meaning from those words. <img src="/images/chicken.jpg"> A 4 oz. serving of this chicken has 550 mg of sodium, a major promoter of high blood pressure, stroke, heart disease, and other ailments. Reducing sodium to recommended levels would save about 100,000 deaths a year. The practice of pumping up poultry with salt water is basically a hidden tax of up to 15 percent that extracts about $2 billion from American consumers each year. This isn’t about "enhancing" chicken, it's about enhancing profits. Think of it this way. You think you’re buying 7.5 pounds of chicken, if 15 percent is water weight; you're really getting less than six and a half pounds of chicken and more than one pound of added water. Harm to our pocketbook would be bad enough, but adulterated chicken is also harmful to our health. Sodium chloride, or <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">salt</a>, is probably the single most harmful ingredient in the food supply. It’s a major promoter of high blood pressure, stroke, heart disease, and other ailments. Most adults should not consume more than about 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day, yet the average adult is consuming closer to 4,000 milligrams a day. Researchers have estimated that reducing sodium to recommended levels would save on the order of 100,000 deaths a year. One of the practices that has made our food supply so dangerously high in sodium is the adulteration of chicken with a salty broth. Just three days ago the Institute of Medicine called for sharply lower sodium levels in our food supply. Salted chicken would be one good place to start. 2010-02-24 Government Health Agency Urged to Drop Coca-Cola as Heart-Health Partner http://cspinet.org/new/201002161.html Like Allowing Philip Morris to Sponsor Anti-Smoking Campaign, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute should not partner with Coca-Cola to raise awareness of heart disease among women, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nhlbicokeletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to the NHLBI</a>, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest says overweight and obesity are prime risk factors for heart disease, and the agency shouldn't be bolstering the dismal reputation of the Coca-Cola Company, the world’s biggest manufacturer of obesigenic soft drinks. "It is as inappropriate as it would be to allow Philip Morris to sponsor NHLBI's anti-smoking efforts," wrote <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a>'s executive director Michael F. Jacobson and nutrition policy advocate George A. Hacker, in a letter to NHLBI director Susan B. Shurin. On the NHLBI web site, <a href="http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/educational/hearttruth/partners/corporate-partners.htm" target="cspi">Diet Coke is listed first and most prominently</a> among several pages of corporate sponsors for The Heart Truth campaign. Supermodel Heidi Klum is described on the government web site as the "Diet Coke heart health ambassador." "Though Diet Coke is the ostensible sponsor, it is the entire Coca-Cola product line that is basking in the credibility conferred by a government heart-health agency and a slender supermodel, when in fact Coca-Cola promotes heart disease by marketing drinks that contribute to obesity," Jacobson said. "Coke has <a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-soda-tax7-2010feb07,0,3512680,full.story" target="cspi">long</a> sought to affiliate with or <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200303041.html" target="cspi">co-opt </a> health groups, and associate its brand with <a href="http://www.livepositively.com/six_pack_athletes/a_ohno" target="cspi">athletes</a> and <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsWRgxMYvOQ" target="cspi">models</a>. I fervently hope that NHLBI officials understand that letting Coke bask in their agency’s good reputation does American hearts far more harm than good." Last week, President Barack Obama signed an <a href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/presidential-memorandum-establishing-a-task-force-childhood-obesity" target="cspi">executive order</a> directing a number of cabinet agencies, including NHLBI's parent agency, the Department of Health and Human Services, to develop a coordinated strategy to solve the childhood obesity problem within one generation. The order pointedly notes that heart disease is one of several obesity-related health problems. In addition to Coke, the NHLBI Heart Truth Web site publicizes two other corporate sponsors: Snyder's of Hanover, which CSPI describes in its letter as "a major producer of snack foods made largely of white flour and salt," and Sara Lee, which "is famous for its artery-clogging cheesecakes, salty Ball Park hot dogs, and Jimmy Dean sausages." Those foods, like Coke and other <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy/" target="cspi">soft drinks</a> sugary, are exactly the kinds of foods that the Dietary Guidelines for Americans advises people to eat less of, according to CSPI. "Promoting the corporate image of Coca-Cola Co. and other junk-food makers undermines the advice in the government's Dietary Guidelines for Americans, and is contrary to the spirit of the executive order signed by the President just last week," Jacobson said. 2010-02-16 Childhood Obesity Initiative Announced by First Lady Michelle Obama http://cspinet.org/new/201002091.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanFor far too long, the nation's response to childhood obesity has been underwhelming, considering obesity’s massive impact on the nation's physical and fiscal health. The First Lady has the clout and visibility to change that and <a href="http://letsmove.gov/">mobilize the nation's resources to address the problem</a>. Helping to support parents’ efforts to feed their children well and get them engaged in physical activity will require not only working cooperatively with food and entertainment companies, but also calling on them to do better for our children. Beverage companies have taken some notable steps to get sugary sodas out of schools, but Mrs. Obama should call on beverage and food companies to support Senators Tom Harkin and Lisa Murkowski and Representative Lynn Woolsey in their bipartisan effort to update the disco-era national standards for school vending machines and get junk food and all sugary beverages out of schools once and for all. Entertainment conglomerates like <a href="www.cspinet.org/new/200911241.html">Nickelodeon</a> and Disney are limiting the use of their characters on junk foods and running PSAs, but should be pressed to remove junk-food advertising from their television channels and other media. This year, Congress must <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cnr_recommendations_2010.pdf">reauthorize the school lunch and other child nutrition programs</a>--a key opportunity to improve the diets and health of millions of American children. The First Lady can help by working with Congress to fund the full $1 billion per year recommended in the President's budget and urging them to move the bill quickly, so new reforms can be in place for the next school year. 2010-02-09 Coke to Fleece America by Charging More for Less, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/201001291.html $8.50 a Gallon for Small Cans of Water & High Fructose Corn Syrup?WASHINGTON—In <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cokeminiad2.pdf" target="cspi">recent</a> ads, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cokeminiad1.pdf" target="cspi">Coca-Cola</a> cheerfully congratulated itself for introducing a new, 7.5-ounce can of soda. While calorie counters may appreciate the convenience of a 90-calorie can, dollar counters may be in for sticker shock: On an ounce-for-ounce basis, the new cans cost 50 to 140 percent more than 12-ounce cans. In Washington, D.C., 12-packs of 12-ounce cans have been available for between $4 and $5.99 at Giant and Safeway stores. Both stores charge $3.99 for 8-packs of the new 7.5-ounce cans. So while the bigger cans have been selling for between $0.89 and $1.33 per quart, the new cans sell for $2.13 a quart, or about $8.50 a gallon. So far, the vaunted 7.5-ounce cans are only available in some New York City and Washington, D.C., retail outlets. The company says they'll be available nationwide in April. Sandy Douglas, the president of Coca-Cola North America, claims the new mini can is an "innovation" that "reinforces the Company's support for healthy, active lifestyles." But attentive shoppers may wonder what all the fuss is about. Coca-Cola has sold 8-ounce cans and bottles of Coke for years (again, at significantly inflated prices). "The only 'innovation' here is that Coke is charging more money for less product," Jacobson said. "Then again, these are the same folks who are ripping off Americans with expensive frauds like the 'calorie-burning' <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="cspi">Enviga</a>. And 'endurance peach mango' <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901151.html" target="cspi">VitaminWater</a>, which, besides doing nothing for one's endurance, contains no peach or mango. Now, the company wants a pat on the back for selling little cans of water and high-fructose corn syrup for $8.50 a gallon." Recently, New York Governor David Paterson proposed a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/201001191.html" target="cspi">penny-per-ounce excise tax</a> on <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">soda</a> to help pay for health programs. An angry <a href="http://www.ameribev.org/news--media/news-releases--statements/more/177/" target="cspi">press statement</a> issued by the soda industry's top lobbyist called the proposal a "money grab, pure and simple," and patronizingly reminded the Governor that New Yorkers "continue to struggle through a tough economy with double-digit unemployment rates." Yet the price difference (a "convenience tax" perhaps?) assessed by Coca-Cola on the 7.5-ounce cans is bigger than Paterson's proposed tax—about two or three cents per ounce. 2010-01-29 New York City to Nudge Food Companies to Lower Salt Nationwide http://cspinet.org/new/201001111.html CSPI Praises Move and Urges Industry to CooperateWASHINGTON—The single most dangerous ingredient in the food supply is salt, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which today <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/pr2010/pr002-10.shtml" target="cspi">praised New York City</a> health officials for pressuring food companies to reduce salt levels in packaged foods and restaurant meals by 25 percent over the next five years. CSPI called New York's program "smart, sophisticated, and timely." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">Too much salt</a> in the diet is a major contributor to hypertension, stroke, heart and kidney disease, and other ailments. Starting in 1978, CSPI has been urging the Food and Drug Administration to use its regulatory authority to treat salt, or sodium chloride, as a food additive, as opposed to classifying it as an ingredient that is "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS. CSPI filed lawsuits against the FDA in 1982 and in 2005 to try to compel it to take action, and later in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="cspi">2005</a> filed a regulatory petition which asked the agency to set maximum levels of salt in various categories of food. The agency held a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200711271.html" target="cspi">public hearing</a> in 2007 but hasn’t taken any action since. "Reducing sodium levels in packaged and restaurant foods could save thousands of lives a year in New York City alone," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Food companies should cooperate with New York City authorities and set achievable targets to reduce salt nationwide. If companies don't cooperate, they can certainly expect other state and local governments, and perhaps at long last, the Food and Drug Administration, to begin regulating in this area." Seventy percent of the population—a group that includes the elderly, African Americans, and people with existing high blood pressure—should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day, according to the federal government. Everyone else should limit themselves to 2,300 mg per day. But according to CSPI, average sodium intake is actually north of 4,000 mg per day. In May CSPI identified a number of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905111.html" target="cspi">popular chain restaurant meals</a> that provide 5,000, 6,000, or 7,000 mg of sodium. Reducing sodium by 25 percent over the next 5 years could also save the federal government billions in direct medical expenditures, according to CSPI. New York City similarly helped spur nationwide changes in the food industry when it became the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200609262.html" target="cspi">first jurisdiction</a> to require <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org/" target="cspi">calories</a> on chain restaurant menus, and to phase out the use of artificial <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">trans fats</a> in all restaurants. 2010-01-11 CSPI Urges FDA Crackdown on False & Misleading Food Labeling http://cspinet.org/new/200912291.html New Report Makes Case for Ending Food Labeling ChaosWASHINGTON—Can orange juice really help prevent or treat arthritis? That's the implication on the label of a Minute Maid orange juice fortified with glucosamine hydrochloride "designed to help protect healthy joints." And it’s exactly the kind of misleading health claim that the Center for Science in the Public Interest wants the federal government to stop. Today the group is sending the Food and Drug Administration a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/food_labeling_chaos_report.pdf" target="cspi">158-page report </a> that documents some of the most egregious examples of false claims, ingredient obfuscations, and other labeling shenanigans. Though under the Obama Administration the FDA is sending more warning letters to food manufacturers about misleading labeling, many major companies, including Coca-Cola, Kellogg, Kraft, General Mills, and Nestlé, continue to confuse or defraud consumers about the health effects, ingredients, or "natural"-ness of their products. Some notable offenders include: Kellogg: On labels for Smart Start Strawberry Oat Bites cereal, the company deliberately misreads a report from the Institute of Medicine to claim, falsely, that consumers can eat 125 grams—more than half a cup—of added sugars per day. CSPI says FDA should establish a Daily Value for added sugars, require its disclosure on Nutrition Facts panels, and provide definitions for terms such as "low sugar." Nestlé: Labels for the company's Carnation Instant Breakfast misleadingly claim that its antioxidants "help support the immune system." While it is true that serious deficiencies in vitamins A, C, and E and other antioxidants can lead to serious health problems, consuming this or other products that make this common claim won’t help ward off colds, the flu, or other maladies. Kashi: A Kellogg-owned brand, Kashi falsely claims that the green tea in its Heart to Heart Instant Oatmeal will "support healthy arteries." The FDA does have a so-called qualified health claim for green tea that relates to cancer but has not agreed that green tea can protect arteries or fend off heart disease. Glacéau: The Coca-Cola-owned product bears a confusing double-column Nutrition Facts label that gives the impression that a 20-ounce bottle of VitaminWater contains multiple servings. Yet the company knows full well that the product is typically consumed by one person on a single occasion, delivering 125 calories, not the 50 in a "serving." CSPI says the dual-column format should be barred. Edy's: Labels for Dibs Bite Sized Snacks boast "0g trans fat!"—giving the impression that the product is heart-healthy. Yet a serving of this ice cream snack has 16 grams of saturated fat—80 percent of the daily value. CSPI says the FDA should prohibit companies from boasting of "0 grams trans" on foods with more than 1 gram of saturated fat per serving. FDA already has similar limits on "cholesterol free" and "healthy" claims. Thomas': Labels for Thomas' Hearty Grains English Muffins claim that the food is "made with the goodness of whole grain” and “made with whole grains." Yet the primary ingredient is "unbleached enriched wheat flour," meaning white flour. The product has more water than whole wheat flour, which is the third ingredient. Gerber: Labels for Gerber Graduates Juice Treats—a product intended for pre-schoolers—picture an abundance of fruit: oranges, grapes, peaches, cherries, pineapple, and raspberries. Yet there is no cherry, orange, or pineapple in the product, and less than 2 percent is raspberry and apple juice concentrate. The main ingredients are corn syrup and sugar, providing 17 grams—or about four teaspoons—of refined sugars per serving. <img src="/images/gerber.jpg"> The main ingredients are corn syrup and sugar, not the abundance of fruit shown on the package, providing 17 grams—or about four teaspoons—of refined sugars per serving. Minute Maid: The words "all natural" appear on Minute Maid's Cranberry Apple Cocktail. Yet the product contains added citric acid—meaning citric acid that didn’t occur naturally in the juice. FDA has long held that adding citric acid disqualifies a company from claiming the food is all natural. This product also contains high-fructose corn syrup—the end result of a highly complex series of chemical changes whereby corn starch is converted to glucose and fructose. FDA should disallow "all natural" claims on food that contain HFCS, according to CSPI. "For far too long, some of the world's biggest food manufacturers have designed their labels either to exaggerate the amount of healthy ingredients, or to imply that the food has magical, drug-like qualities that could prevent or treat various health problems," said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. "The Bush Administration gave manufacturers more and more license to deceive. But the party’s over—or at least it should be." In May, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905121.html" target="cspi">FDA instructed </a> General Mills to drop exaggerated heart disease and cancer claims on labels and its web site for its Cheerios cereal. And in October, FDA expressed concern over the industry-wide <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910202.html" target="cspi">Smart Choices</a> front-of-packaging labeling program. Both moves were praised by CSPI and were seen as a sign that the agency will more aggressively police food labeling. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> wants the agency to prohibit qualified health claims for foods. Unlike "health claims," which must meet a "significant scientific agreement" standard, qualified health claims include disclaimers explaining that the scientific evidence is uncertain. CSPI also wants the FDA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to prohibit misleading "structure/function" claims that a given food will "support" or "maintain" healthy immune systems, joints, vision, and so on. Consumers simply can't distinguish between stringently regulated health claims, which require FDA approval, and structure/function claims, which don’t, according to CSPI. "Consumers need honest labeling so they can spend their food dollars wisely and avoid diet-related disease," said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Ringel Heller, co-author of the report. "Companies should market their foods without resorting to the deceit and dishonesty that's so common today. And, if they don't, the FDA should make them." 2009-12-29 CSPI Finds a Troubling Decline in Foodborne Outbreak Investigations by State Health Officials http://cspinet.org/new/200912231.html WASHINGTON—In a troubling trend, state health departments completed fewer foodborne outbreak investigations in 2007 than in the previous decade, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "The decline in fully-investigated outbreaks could reflect a serious gap in state public health spending," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety</a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "Fewer outbreaks were fully investigated by state public health departments in 2007 than in any of the previous 10 years—and a smaller percentage of outbreaks were fully characterized than in any of the previous 7 years." The trend showed up in the latest <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report_2009.html" target="cspi">Outbreak Alert! report</a> by CSPI. It found that states reported 33 percent fewer fully investigated outbreaks to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 2007 than in 2002. This doesn't mean that outbreaks aren't occurring, DeWaal stressed. Nearly 1,100 outbreaks were reported in 2007 to CDC, but in only 378 cases did states identify both a food and the pathogen (the mark of a complete investigation). Outbreaks are first investigated at the local and state level. To provide the most useful data for controlling food safety problems, those investigators need to identify both the pathogen and the specific food responsible for the outbreak, and then state departments of health need to report the outbreaks to CDC. Fewer completed investigations mean that less information is available to the CDC and other federal health agencies—affecting their ability to identify problems in the food safety system or issue recalls to protect the public. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> has been tracking foodborne outbreak reports for over 10 years and publishing the data in its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">Outbreak Alert!</a> report and on its website. CSPI analyzes state reports compiled by CDC, sorts them by food category, and makes the aggregated data available to federal policymakers to guide priority setting, to the industry to address production problems, and to the public. CSPI says that a food safety bill passed several months ago by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">U.S. House of Representatives</a> and another bill that is pending in the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911181.html" target="cspi">Senate</a> would greatly enhance the government’s surveillance systems and ensure better coordination between state officials and the CDC. Most important, the legislation would create a food-safety system focused on preventing contamination in the first place, by requiring food processors to prepare food safety plans and requiring the FDA to inspect food processing facilities more frequently. "Congress should pass legislation to dramatically reduce the numbers of needless deaths and expensive hospitalizations caused by contaminated food," said CSPI senior staff attorney David Plunkett. "Americans deserve food safety legislation early in the new year." CSPI analyzed a total of 4,638 outbreaks of illness linked to specific foods, involving 117,136 individual illnesses that occurred between 1998 and 2007. An "outbreak" involves two or more people sickened by the same food. The food categories (other than "multi-ingredient") most commonly linked to outbreaks during this ten-year period were: <ul><li>Seafood: 838 outbreaks involving 7,298 cases of illness</li> <li>Produce: 684 outbreaks involving 26,735 cases of illness</li> <li>Poultry: 538 outbreaks involving 13,498 cases of illness</li> <li>Beef: 428 outbreaks involving 9,824 cases of illness</li> <li>Pork: 200 outbreaks involving 4,934 cases of illness</li></ul> Foods regulated by the FDA, such as seafood, produce, eggs, and dairy products, were associated with more than twice as many outbreaks as foods regulated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees meats and poultry. The data also show several changes in food trends. For instance, in this 10-year analysis of the data, eggs dropped out of the top five causes of outbreaks, probably due to the implementation of safety programs by egg producers, programs recently made mandatory by FDA. Also, dairy outbreaks increased dramatically after 2004 due to the increased availability of unpasteurized dairy products. The outbreaks in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak/pathogen.php" target="cspi">CSPI's database</a> represent just the tip of a much larger problem. The CDC estimates that contaminated foods kill thousands and sicken up to 76 million Americans each year. The vast majority of foodborne illnesses are undiagnosed and most are never reported to state officials. For those that come to their attention, state officials may lack the resources to track down the cause of most illnesses and outbreaks, and are not required to report foodborne illness outbreaks to CDC. 2009-12-23 Proposed Federal Standards for Foods Marketed to Kids Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200912151.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe federal government is headed in exactly the right direction with the draft nutrition standards proposed for foods that are marketed to children. If adopted, the landscape of kids’ food advertising would shift quite dramatically in favor of foods that promote health, and away from foods that promote obesity and disease. If these standards are adopted, it would be one of the most significant developments in this area in 30 years. Food marketers, and their self-regulatory body, the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, should adopt these standards on a voluntary basis. Rather than trying to weaken these standards, I hope that the industry sees the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ftcnewstandards.pdf" target="cspi">Interagency Working Group's recommendations </a> as a wake-up call, and soon phases out the discredited practice of marketing junk food to kids altogether. 2009-12-15 General Mills' Move to Reduce Sugar in Cereals Advertised to Children Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200912091.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanGeneral Mills—which has included whole grains in all its cereals—is taking another important step in the right direction by pledging to cut the sugar in the cereals it advertises to children. As sugary cereal is one of the top products marketed to children, we hope the company swiftly implements these changes and that Kellogg, Post Foods, and other competitors quickly follow General Mills' lead. 2009-12-09 Food Label Makeovers Proposed by CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200912071.html Designs for New Nutrition & Ingredient Facts Labels Unveiled in Nutrition Action HealthletterWASHINGTON—Nutrition Facts labels on packaged foods have helped guide Americans' food choices for 15 years. But in that time, companies have cooked up a number of schemes to trick consumers about what's in—or isn't in—packaged foods. Today, the Center for Science in the Public Interest—the group that campaigned for the 1990 law requiring nutrition labeling—<a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/special_report_-_label_makeover.pdf" target="cspi">exposes some of the tricks</a> that occur on the front of the label, and unveils makeovers of the Nutrition Facts panel and ingredient lists to last for the next 15 years. One innovation <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> has long urged is the use of symbols on the fronts of packages to give shoppers a quick snapshot of the key nutrients. (The packaged-food industry, under pressure from the Food and Drug Administration, recently halted its own recently adopted system, Smart Choices, which allowed some junk foods like Froot Loops to use the program's logo.) The FDA recently announced that it will conduct some <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/newfoodlabels.pdf" target="cspi">preliminary tests</a> to see which front-label system helps consumers the most. CSPI is also calling on the FDA to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910202.html" target="cspi">crack down on deceptive claims</a> ("Strengthens your immune system," "Helps Protect Healthy Joints!" and others) and to tighten up industry-loosened definitions of "fiber" and "all natural." Companies shouldn't be able to brag about having “0 grams trans fat!” if the item contains significant amounts of saturated fat, says the group. And companies that boast that their foods are "made with whole grain" should be required to disclose how much of that grain is whole. It's often less than half, according to CSPI. "So many packaged foods are little more than white flour, fat, sugar, salt and additives in various combinations, yet they are marketed as modern-day medical miracles, offering vague benefits for virtually every part of the body," said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. "The FDA has recently challenged some especially egregious health claims, such as the exaggerated cholesterol-reduction claims on Cheerios. But the agency should put a permanent stop to a wide range of other deceptive claims." CSPI's reimagined Nutrition Facts label puts a greater emphasis on calories, and indicates when a food is high in saturated fat, trans fat, cholesterol, sodium, or added sugars ("added" means sugars that do not occur naturally in fruit and milk). Only fiber from whole grains, beans, fruits, and vegetables, and not faux fibers such as polydextrose and maltodextrin, would be considered to be fiber on the nutrition label. CSPI also would like to see ingredient lists presented as clearly as the Nutrition Facts panel is, as opposed to the condensed, all-caps type often used. The new Ingredient Facts panel also would separate the major ingredients from minor ones. And for foods with several forms of sugar scattered around the ingredients list, those sugars would be combined so that they would show up higher on the list of ingredients. Percentages of key ingredients would be disclosed. "Food marketers bring their graphic design firepower to bear on the front of food packages, but then go to great lengths to make their ingredient lists almost indecipherable," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "The fine print shouldn’t taketh what the big print giveth." CSPI illustrates how food labels can trick consumers and shows <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/beforeafterlabel.pdf" target="cspi">"before" and "after"</a> Nutrition labels in the December issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action</a>. 2009-12-07 Most Food Ads on Nickelodeon Still for Junk Food http://cspinet.org/new/200911241.html Self-Regulation Proving Insufficient to Protect Children, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Nearly 80 percent of food ads on the popular children's network Nickelodeon are for foods of poor nutritional quality, according to an <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pledgereport.pdf" target="cspi">analysis conducted</a> by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. That represents a modest and not quite statistically significant drop from 2005, when CSPI researchers found that about 90 percent of food ads on Nick were for junk food. Between the 2005 and 2009 studies, the food industry instituted a self-regulatory program through the Council of Better Business Bureaus, the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI). CSPI also examined the practices of the food companies that participate in that self-regulatory program. Of the 452 foods and beverages that companies say are acceptable to market to children, CSPI found that 267, or nearly 60 percent, do not meet CSPI's recommended nutrition standards for food marketing to children, such as General Mills' Cookie Crisp and Reese’s Puffs cereals, Kellogg Apple Jacks and Cocoa Krispies cereals, Kellogg Rice Krispies Treats, Campbell's Goldfish crackers and SpaghettiOs, Kraft Macaroni & Cheese, and many Unilever Popsicles. "While industry self-regulation is providing some useful benchmarks, it's clearly not shielding children from junk food advertising, on Nick and elsewhere," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "It's a modest start, but not sufficient to address children’s poor eating habits and the sky-high rates of childhood obesity." Of the foods companies say are appropriate to market to children, no puddings, cookies, or fruit-flavored snacks meet CSPI's nutrition standards, but 73 percent of yogurts did. Other foods that meet CSPI's standards include Nabisco Teddy Grahams, Kellogg Frosted Mini-Wheats, Kellogg Eggo Waffles, and several Kid Cuisine frozen dinners. Most beverages (64 percent), such as fruit drinks with little fruit juice, sports drinks, and high-fat milk, didn't meet CSPI’s nutrition standards. None of the 10 products PepsiCo says are appropriate to market to children actually are according to CSPI’s standards. Only three of 47 Kraft-approved products, one of eight McDonald’s-approved meals, and 22 of 86 General Mills-approved products met CSPI's standards. Burger King only identified one meal as appropriate to market to children at the time of the study—a Kids Meal with Kraft Macaroni & Cheese, apple fries with caramel sauce, and a Hershey's 1 percent milk, which also met CSPI's standards. Four companies that belong to the CFBAI (Coca-Cola, Hershey's, Mars, and Cadbury Adams) state that they do not advertise any products to children (according to the CBBB definition). Of the food ads on Nickelodeon, a fourth were from companies that don't participate in the industry's self-regulatory program. Almost none of those ads were for foods that met CSPI's nutrition standards, and only 28 percent of the ads from companies in the CBBB Initiative met them. In 2006, the National Academies' Institute of Medicine recommended that food and media companies shift the mix of foods marketed to youth toward healthier foods within two years. Currently, an Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children, including representatives from the Federal Trade Commission, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, is developing nutrition standards for foods marketed to children. Those are expected in July of 2010, and CSPI is urging the Council of Better Business Bureaus to adopt them for the CFBAI. CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200807291.html" target="cspi">also has urged</a> Chuck E. Cheese's, IHOP restaurants, Topps Candy, Yum! Brands (which owns KFC, Taco Bell and Pizza Hut) and Perfetti van Melle (maker of Air Heads candy) to join the CFBAI. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809231.html" target="cspi">Nickelodeon</a> and other media companies should also have comprehensive policies covering all their food marketing aimed at children. "Nickelodeon should be ashamed that it earns so much money from carrying commercials that promote obesity, diabetes, and other health problems in young children," Wootan said. "If media and food companies don't do a better job exercising corporate responsibility when they market foods to children, Congress and the FTC will need to step in to protect kids’ health." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/marketingguidelines.pdf" target="cspi">CSPI's nutrition standards</a> include reasonable limits on saturated and trans fats, sodium, and added sugars and encourage the presence of key vitamins, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. CSPI says that ideally, companies would market only the most healthful foods to children, but that its guidelines strike a practical balance between that ideal and the current food marketing climate. 2009-11-24 'Two Thumbs Down' for Movie Theater Popcorn http://cspinet.org/new/200911182.html New Lab Tests of Movie Theater Popcorn Show It’s Still the Godzilla of SnacksWASHINGTON—It's hard to picture someone mindlessly ingesting three McDonald's Quarter Pounders with 12 pats of butter while watching a movie. But according to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nahpopcorn.pdf" target="cspi">new laboratory analyses</a> commissioned by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, that food is nutritionally comparable to what you’d find in a medium popcorn and soda combo at Regal, the country’s biggest movie theater chain: 1,610 calories and three days’ worth—60 grams—of saturated fat. (Nutrition aside, that combo costs $12—for raw ingredients that must cost Regal pennies.) "Regal and AMC are our nominees for Best Supporting Actor in the Obesity Epidemic," said CSPI senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley. "Who expects about 1,500 calories and three days’ worth of heart-stopping fat in a popcorn and soda combo? That’s the saturated fat of a stick of butter and the calories of two sticks of butter. You might think you’re getting Bambi, but you’re really getting Godzilla." <img src="/images/combo.jpg">Photo Credit: Stephen Schmidt A medium combo at Regal has 1,610 calories and 60 grams of saturated fat. That's roughly the saturated fat of a stick of butter and the calories of two sticks of butter. Regal says that its medium popcorn has 720 calories and that its large has 960. But CSPI's lab tests found that those numbers were understated. Regal’s medium and large sizes each had 1,200 calories and, thanks to being popped in coconut oil, 60 grams of saturated fat. (The large size looks bigger, thanks to its titanic tub, but it costs a dollar more and comes with a free refill.) A "small" at Regal has 670 calories and 34 grams of saturated fat. That’s about as many calories as a Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizza—except the popcorn has three times the saturated fat. Even shared with another person, that size provides nearly an entire day’s worth of the kind of fat that clogs arteries and promotes heart disease. And every tablespoon of "buttery" oil topping adds another 130 calories. Asking for topping is like asking for oil on French fries or potato chips, according to CSPI. AMC, the second largest theater chain, also pops in coconut oil but has smaller serving sizes. Its large popcorn has 1,030 calories and 57 grams of saturated fat. That's like eating a pound of baby back ribs topped with a scoop of Häagen-Dazs ice cream—except that the popcorn has an additional day’s worth of saturated fat. A medium has 590 calories and 33 grams of saturated fat; and a small has 370 calories and a day’s worth—20 grams—of saturated fat. (Like Regal, AMC reports calorie counts lower than those returned in CSPI's lab tests.) Third-largest Cinemark pops in heart-healthy canola oil. A large has 910 calories with 4 grams of saturated fat; a medium has 760 calories and 3 grams of saturated fat; and a small has 420 calories and 2 grams of saturated fat. Though popping in canola gives this chain’s popcorn far less saturated fat than its competitors, it's almost as high in calories and has the most sodium—about twice as much as Regal or AMC. With 1,500 milligrams of sodium—a day's worth of sodium for most people—a large popcorn without topping from Cinemark will be less likely to clog your arteries but more likely to elevate your blood pressure. And while Cinemark uses a "buttery" oil topping similar to the toppings used at Regal and AMC, at some outlets, particularly in the West, it uses a topping made with real butter. That version has 9 grams—half a day’s worth—of saturated fat per tablespoon. CSPI also took a look at the sodas and candies sold at the movies. A small non-diet soda ranges from 150 calories at Cinemark to 300 calories at Regal. Mediums have 300 calories at AMC and Cinemark and 400 calories at Regal. With 33 teaspoons of sugar in nearly 2 quarts—54 ounces—Regal has the most outsized large soda, with 500 empty calories. <img src="/images/reeses.jpg">Photo Credit: Stephen Schmidt Eating an 8-ounce bag of Reese's Pieces is like eating a 16-ounce T-bone steak and a buttered baked potato. The oversized boxes and bags (four to five ounces) of candy sold at movie chains are universally high in calories. A 5-ounce bag of Twizzlers has 460 calories and 15 teaspoons of sugar. A 7-ounce box of Nerds has 790 calories and 46 teaspoons of sugar. Chocolate candies like Butterfinger Minis, Raisinets, Sno-Caps, or M&M's have between 400 and 500 calories and at least a half day’s worth of saturated fat. An 8-ounce bag of Reese's Pieces is just a cup of candy. But with 1,160 calories and 35 grams of saturated fat, it's like eating a 16-ounce T-bone steak plus a buttered baked potato. "Sitting through a two-hour movie isn't exactly like climbing Mt. Everest," Hurley said. "Why do theaters think they need to feed us like it is?" The study, published as the cover story in the December issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, updates a famous exposé the group conducted 15 years ago. For Regal and AMC, CSPI tested samples from theaters in the Washington, D.C., area. For Cinemark, samples came from Texas, Illinois, and Maryland. 2009-11-18 Bipartisan Food Safety Bill Poised for Floor Vote http://cspinet.org/new/200911181.html Food Safety Reform Legislation Clears HELP CommitteeWASHINGTON—Americans may soon be able to enjoy their peanuts, peppers, spinach and cookie dough with greater confidence that those foods are safe to eat if the full Senate passes the food safety legislation that cleared a key committee today. The <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s510is.txt.pdf" target="cspi">FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510)</a>, offered by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Tom Harkin (D-IA), was passed unanimously in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. Food safety advocates are calling on the full body to pass the bill before the end of the year. Similar legislation passed the House in July. "Americans expect the businesses that grow, fish, process and handle our food are following the best practices to ensure it is safe," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety </a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "This bill gives FDA needed new authorities to manage food safety from farm to table, through improved standards and more frequent inspections." The bill calls on food processors to register with the government periodically, implement food safety plans, meet FDA performance standards, and verify that the food they import complies with U.S. law. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">House-passed bill </a> also requires more frequent risk-based inspections of food processing facilities and microbial testing for dangerous pathogens like Salmonella or E. coli O157:H7. Under the current system, food manufacturing facilities might only receive visits from an FDA inspector once every five or 10 years. Both bills also give the FDA authority to issue mandatory recalls of contaminated foods. "Senator Durbin and Senator Harkin have been championing food safety for years, and they deserve enormous credit for crafting a bill with such broad bipartisan support," said DeWaal. "We’re also grateful for the cosponsorship of Ranking Member Mike Enzi and Senators Judd Gregg and Richard Burr and the rest of the Republicans who joined the Democrats in advancing this legislation." The bill is widely supported by a diverse coalition of consumer and health groups, including the American Public Health Association, Consumer Federation of America, Consumers Union, Safe Tables Our Priority, the Pew Charitable Trusts, and Trust for America's Health. The <a href="http://www.makeourfoodsafe.org/" target="cspi">Make Our Food Safe coalition</a> will continue to seek some strengthening amendments to the legislation, but urge rapid passage in order to restore consumer confidence, which has been shaken by numerous outbreaks of food-borne illness. 2009-11-18 Public Health Loses Out to Politics in Oyster Decision http://cspinet.org/new/200911132.html Statement of David Plunkett, Senior Staff AttorneyPublic health lost out to the politics of special interests with <a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm190513.htm" target="cspi">FDA's announcement today </a> that it may delay a requirement for processing Gulf Coast oysters to destroy the deadly bacteria Vibrio vulnificus, pending the findings of a feasibility study. A group of Gulf Coast Senators and Representatives weighed in on the side of a small but vocal industry in their states and won. Unfortunately this political victory for the Gulf Coast oyster industry is a health tragedy for their customers, and the action condemns scores of consumers to serious illness and death from this potent pathogen. This small portion of the shellfish industry should not have a free pass from FDA to sell adulterated and potentially deadly oysters to the public. 2009-11-13 FDA Investigation of Safety & Legality of Caffeinated Alcoholic Drinks Praised by CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200911131.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policy Director George A. HackerWe strongly support the investigation announced today by the Food and Drug Administration into the safety and legality of <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Food/FoodIngredientsPackaging/ucm190366.htm" target="cspi">caffeinated alcoholic "energy" drinks</a>. For many years, federal regulators have stood mutely by as these <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/obrien.pdf" target="cspi">potentially dangerous products</a>, which resemble non-alcoholic energy drinks in many ways, gained in popularity among young people. No studies exist that demonstrate the safety of alcohol and caffeine or other stimulants combined in any quantity, much less the high levels of each found in products like Joose and Four Loko. In fact, emerging research suggests that the young consumers of these products are more likely to be the perpetrator or victim of sexual aggression, to ride with an intoxicated driver, or to become otherwise injured. Our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806261.html" target="cspi">negotiations with Anheuser-Busch</a>, our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809082.html" target="cspi">lawsuit against MillerCoors</a>, and, importantly, the actions taken by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200812182.html" target="cspi">state attorneys general</a> helped get the biggest manufacturers out of this category. We hope the FDA’s move today will result in enforcement action that represents the beginning of the end of the category as a whole. Along with cracking down on unsupportable health claims on cereal, pushing for the elimination of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907071.html" target="cspi">salmonella in eggs</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200911091.html" target="cspi">Vibrio bacteria in oysters</a>, and enforcing a ban on candy-flavored cigarettes, this is one of several moves that indicates the new leadership at FDA is serious about protecting public health. 2009-11-13 Make Our Food Safe Coalition Urges Congressional Support for FDA Action on Tainted Shellfish http://cspinet.org/new/200911091.html Protections for Gulf Coast Shellfish Industry Would Increase Death TollWASHINGTON—The <a href="http://cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> was joined today by <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/vibrioletter.pdf">victims, consumer advocacy, and public health organizations</a> in urging Congress to support the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) efforts to protect consumers from contaminated oysters that each year cause scores of <a href=" http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/vv_victim_stories.pdf">serious illnesses and deaths</a>. The blood infection caused by <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nationwidevibrioillnesses.pdf" target="cspi">Vibrio vulnificus</a> bacteria in oysters is one of the most deadly foodborne illnesses, killing half of the people infected. Those who survive can have painful lesions and fluid-filled blisters all over their bodies, sometimes requiring limbs to be amputated. Four methods of post-harvest processing have proven effective at destroying the bacteria without harming the texture or flavor of the oysters. But fearing the loss of jobs in the state, Florida Senator Bill Nelson and Representative Allen Boyd don't want the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200910191.html" target="cspi">Food and Drug Administration (FDA)</a> to implement this life-saving measure and have instead proposed legislation putting the convenience of a tiny industry ahead of the lives and health of those who enjoy eating oysters. The <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h4022ih.txt.pdf" target="cspi">Gulf Oyster Protection Act </a> by Rep. Boyd and a similar bill by Senator Nelson are in response to FDA’s announcement last month that it will no longer tolerate the interstate sale of Gulf Coast oysters infected with the bacteria Vibrio vulnificus. Starting in 2011, oysters harvested from the Gulf of Mexico will have to be treated to destroy the bacteria in warm months when water and temperature conditions indicate it may be most prevalent. "The lives snuffed out prematurely by contaminated oysters should not be coldly dismissed by the shellfish industry or by their allies in Congress as the 'cost of doing business,'" said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> senior staff attorney David Plunkett. "The industry has known for years how to prevent these deaths with readily available post-harvest processing techniques. Over 250 people have become ill and half of those have died since 2001, and if this industry-supported legislation passes, the toll of preventable death and disease caused by contaminated oysters will continue to rise." The Gulf Coast oyster industry is fighting the new requirements, claiming they will affect jobs while only saving the lives of 15 to 20 people each year. The Gulf oyster harvest was valued at $60 million in 2008, including processed and unprocessed oysters. FDA meanwhile estimates that three-fourths of the Gulf Coast harvest won’t even be affected by the new requirement. "Instead of speculating on lost jobs, Gulf Coast communities should expect that companies engaged in treating oysters would expand their business in the Gulf in anticipation of the new rules going into effect." Plunkett said. For many years, the FDA allowed the shellfish industry to essentially police itself, in the form of the Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference, which is dominated by representatives from industry and coastal states. But that system has failed to prevent <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907021.html" target="cspi">contaminated oysters </a> from killing almost a score of people each year, according to CSPI. In September, an Ohio man honeymooning in Panama City, Florida ate oysters at a beach-side oyster bar and became infected with Vibrio vulnificus. According to a report published in the Dayton Daily News, Darrell Dishon, who has diabetes, had to have his legs amputated in order to save his life. He told the paper that Florida used to be one of his favorite places but that he will never return: "Now it reminds me I’ll never have legs again. I don’t need to be reminded about that. I just have to look down to know about that." "The FDA does not want to ban oysters, it wants to eliminate Vibrio vulnificus contamination in oysters," Plunkett said. "Advising high-risk consumers to avoid Gulf Coast oysters may have reduced overall demand for oysters, but has unfortunately done nothing to reduce the toll of deaths and illnesses. Making Gulf Coast oysters significantly safer will increase consumers' willingness to buy them, and will benefit all segments of the industry." 2009-11-09 Too Many Farmers Growing Genetically Engineered Corn Not Complying with Key Environmental Requirements http://cspinet.org/new/200911051.html CSPI Urges EPA Not to Re-Register Products Unless Compliance ImprovesWASHINGTON—One out of every four farmers who plants genetically engineered (GE) corn is failing to comply with at least one important insect-resistance management requirement. That increases the likelihood that pesticide-resistant bugs will threaten the future of biotech crops and some of their non-biotech neighbors. That finding comes in a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complacencyonthefarm.pdf" target="cspi">report released today</a> by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which is calling on the Environmental Protection Agency to not renew registrations of the GE corn varieties unless compliance rates improve. In 2008, 57 percent of the corn acreage in the United States was planted with corn spliced with genes from the Bacillus thuringiensis bacterium, or Bt. Those crops produce natural toxins that are harmless to humans but will kill corn rootworms and corn borers, which otherwise reduce crop yields. Farmers who plant such crops are supposed to plant a refuge of conventional corn in, adjacent to, or near the GE crop. That refuge is designed to reduce the risk that pests that survive the toxin will breed with each other and produce resistant offspring. Resistant offspring would not only reduce yields of the Bt crops, but could also threaten organic or conventional farmers who use natural Bt-based pesticides on non-GE crops. Depending on the location of the crop and the pests targeted by the strain of corn, farmers have varying requirements specifying the size of the refuge and its distance from the GE crop. According to industry surveys submitted to EPA in 2008: <ul><li>Only 78 percent of growers planting corn-borer-protected crops met the size requirement, and only 88 percent met the distance requirement. </li></ul> <ul><li>Only 74 percent of growers planting rootworm-protected crops met the size requirement, and 63 percent met the distance requirement.</li></ul> <ul><li>Only 72 percent of farmers growing stacked varieties of GE corn—corn protected against both corn borer and rootworm—met the size requirement and 66 percent met the distance requirement.</li></ul> Those compliance rates are down, in some cases sharply, from 2003 to 2005, when compliance rates were often above 90 percent. Though compliance assessments made on the farm tend to show higher compliance rates than the surveys, those rates also decreased in the last three years, according to CSPI. "Given the tremendous growth in the acreage given over to genetically engineered corn since its introduction, it is intolerable for farmers not to be meeting their refuge requirements," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/biotech" target="cspi">biotechnology</a> director Greg Jaffe. "Given the stakes, regulators should insist on compliance rates much closer to 100 percent to prevent insect problems that threaten all farmers, not just those planting biotech crops." In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/epaletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter sent today</a> to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, CSPI said that the agency should not re-register the existing varieties of Bt corn until the companies demonstrate higher levels of compliance. But, if the EPA does re-register the products, registrants such as Monsanto, Pioneer Hi-Bred, Syngenta, and Dow AgroSciences should be subject to severe fines or seed sales restrictions if noncompliance rates remain high, according to the letter. Those biotech companies should also provide farmers with incentives to meet their obligations. CSPI also wants the EPA to obtain more reliable data by requiring biotech companies to pay for independent, third-party assessments of farmer compliance with refuge requirements, and to require labeling on bags of biotech seed corn to specify refuge requirements. 2009-11-05 Senate HELP Committee Weighing FDA Reform Legislation http://cspinet.org/new/200910221.html CSPI Urges Quick Action, With More Frequent Inspections & TestingYes, the United States Senate is focused on health care reform. But if legislators want to save 5,000 lives and prevent 325,000 unnecessary and expensive hospitalizations each year, they should fix food safety too, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. And the chance that the Senate will act this year on legislation that would reform the nation’s creaky and outdated food safety laws got a boost with a key hearing held on the topic today. "Consumers would rather pay at the check-out counter for safer foods than at the emergency room. In fact, unsafe foods pose a huge burden both to individuals and society at large, with estimates of the financial toll ranging from $40 billion to well over $100 billion annually," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">CSPI food safety </a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal, who <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/summary_help_testimony_on_s._510_final.pdf" target="cspi">testified today</a> before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee. "Outbreaks over the last few years are the clear consequence of an antiquated legal system that limits the Food and Drug Administration's ability to ensure the safety of the food supply." Senators are considering the <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:s510:" target="cspi">FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (S. 510)</a>, sponsored by Assistant Senate Majority Leader Richard Durbin (D-IL). Like legislation passed in July by the House, S. 510 requires that food processors register with the government periodically, implement food safety plans and meet performance standards, and verify the food they import complies with U.S. law. While CSPI urges the Committee to move the bill forward to passage, CSPI also asked on behalf of the <a href="http://www.makeourfoodsafe.org/" target="cspi">Make Our Food Safe</a> coalition that the bill is amended to require more frequent and risk-based inspection of food processing facilities. The bill should also require more microbial testing for pathogens and other contaminants, as well as require government-to-government certification to help assure the safety of imports. Many in the food industry support FDA reform legislation also. Besides CSPI, representatives from the Food Marketing Institute and the United Fresh Produce Association testified at the Senate hearing. "It is rare to see the level of consensus reflected among such diverse consumer and industry organizations on the need to fix our national food safety system," DeWaal testified. "Congress can, with simple changes, take action this year to make food safer for American consumers." The hearing comes on the heels of a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200910061.html" target="cspi">CSPI report detailing the ten riskiest foods regulated by the FDA</a>. That list that included a number of healthy foods that the group recommends Americans should be consuming more of, like leafy greens, tomatoes and berries. Despite the outbreaks linked to those products, CSPI's advice to consumers remains the same: Eat your veggies. "Just wash them first, and ask your Senators to reform the FDA," DeWaal said. 2009-10-22 Family Doctor Group Squanders Credibility by Taking Tainted Coke Cash http://cspinet.org/new/200910211.html Coke "Philanthropy" Buys Friends, Silences Critics, and Advances Anti-Health Extremism, According to CSPIWASHINGTON—The American Academy of Family Physicians, which claims its mission is "to improve the health of patients, families and communities," is coming under fire for a controversial new partnership with Coca-Cola, the world's leading producer of obesity-promoting soft drinks. The six-figure payment from Coke will fund "consumer education content related to beverages and sweeteners" on the group’s web site. Today a number of leading physicians, nutritionists, and health experts are <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/aafp-coke-letter.pdf" target="cspi">calling on the AAFP</a> to return the money. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> says that the AAFP should be urging patients and consumers to avoid sweetened soft drinks—which promote obesity, diabetes, tooth decay, and other health problems—and not helping Coca-Cola advance its anti-health agenda in Washington. "Because of the kinds of products it markets, Coca-Cola Co. is desperate to burnish its soiled reputation ... which is why it is paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to have a relationship with your organization," the health advocates wrote in a letter to AAFP leaders. "The AAFP web site should be criticizing beverages sweetened with sugars in the strongest language … But with Coca-Cola providing funding, the AAFP simply cannot do that." Besides paying for web content about soft drinks, the incoming president of the AAFP said that the money will help the group engage in federal advocacy efforts on health care reform. Presumably, says CSPI, the AAFP’s lobbying efforts won't depart sharply from those of its generous new benefactor, which is spending a lot of time and money trying to convince legislators not to include taxes on soda to help pay for health care reform. This is hardly the first time that Coca-Cola has used its grant-making power to win new friends among health professionals. In 2003, the American Academy of Pediatric Dentists took a $1 million payment from Coca-Cola. Before the payment, the dentists' group acknowledged the connection between sugary drinks and dental disease. But after the payment, the president of the AAPD told reporters that the "scientific evidence is certainly not clear" on the role soft drinks play. "Coke wields its 'philanthropy' with all the subtlety of a baseball bat," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "In some cases, it can buy useful friends; in other cases, it might be purchasing the silence of a potential critic. Elsewhere, it funds anonymous front groups to do real p.r. dirty work, as when it <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/12/business/yourmoney/12food.html?sq=melanie%20warner%20center%20for%20consumer%20freedom%20coca%20cola&st=cse&adxnnl=1&scp=2&adxnnlx=1256137224-tSOdYAxzdbFK/qihiKKkJA" target="cspi">pays the Center for Consumer Freedom</a> to deny that obesity is a problem." Besides Jacobson, other signatories on the letter to AAFP include Henry Blackburn of the University of Minnesota, George A. Bray of the Louisiana State University, Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr., of the Cleveland Clinic Wellness Institute, Joan Gussow of Columbia University, Lisa R. Young of New York University, and Carlos A. Camargo, Jr., Meir Stampfer, Walter Willett, and Grace Wyshak of the Harvard School of Public Health. In September, a soda industry lobby group ran <a href="http://www.nofoodtaxes.com/ads/" target="cspi">print and television advertisements</a> under the rubric of "Americans Against Food Taxes," urging Congress not to adopt a soda tax. The ad lists some predictable supporters, like the Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the right-wing Institute for Liberty, which promoted the "tea party" protests that became notorious for their <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/12/taxpayer-march-on-washing_n_284477.html" target="cspi">inflammatory</a>, and sometimes <a href="http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/9/14/779699/-912-Teabaggers-in-their-own-words" target="cspi">racist</a>, rhetoric and signage. But the ad listed some surprising supporters, including a number of Latino organizations, ranging from obscure (the <a href="http://www.hapinstitute.net/Board.aspx" target="cspi">Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity</a>) to the well known (the <a href="http://www.lulac.org/programs/corpall.html" target="cspi">League of United Latin American Citizens</a>). The ad also listed a number of unlikely groups that don’t ordinarily get involved in issues of taxation or health care reform, like the <a href="http://www.hispanicarts.org/sponsors.htm" target="cspi">National Hispanic Foundation for the Arts</a> and the <a href="http://www.hacu.net/hacu/2008_Partners_EN.asp?SnID=88682164" target="cspi"> Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities</a>. Those seemingly improbable signatories to the soda industry's ad list Coca-Cola and/or PepsiCo as donors on their web sites. "The stakes are so high in the health care debate, yet I fear that these groups, some of which are well respected, are selling out at such bargain-basement prices," Jacobson said. "Low-income people, Latinos, and African Americans disproportionately suffer from obesity, diabetes, and diet-related disease and have the most to gain from health care reform. I hope that the leadership of these organizations, as well as the AAFP, comes to realize that Coke isn't advancing their interests. Coke just wants to sell more liquid candy." 2009-10-21 FDA To Scrutinize "Smart Choices" & Other Front-of-Label Nutrition Symbols http://cspinet.org/new/200910202.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonSimplified nutrition information on the fronts of food packages could be very helpful in enabling consumers to choose healthier packaged foods and have healthier diets. Unfortunately, though, a growing number of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200611301.html" target="cspi">privately devised</a>—and sometimes inconsistent—labeling systems may be confusing, not enlightening, some consumers. After all, foods like General Mills' Cocoa Puffs or Kellogg's Froot Loops belong more in our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/10_09/rsfp.pdf" target="cspi">"food porn"</a> category than a better-for-you category. Consider Kraft's Strawberry Bagel-ful, which is a mostly white-flour bagel stuffed with cream cheese and strawberry purée that is sweetened with sugar and colored with red dye 40. It's exactly the kind of food we should be eating less of, but it gets the Smart Choices logo. The American Heart Association's well-intentioned labeling program is also flawed, considering that the heart-check logo is on Uncle Ben's instant white rice and a number of other relatively poor dietary choices. In 2006, the Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/healthy_symbol_petition.pdf" target="cspi">petitioned the FDA</a> to implement a national front-of-package labeling system, and more recently CSPI urged Congress to fund Institute of Medicine research to identify the optimal system. Fortunately, <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Food/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/ucm187208.htm" target="cspi">the FDA</a> recognizes the potential value of labeling and the deception that is now occurring. Ideally, the end result of FDA's initiative, and the parallel Institute of Medicine study, will be one national, mandatory system that will truly help consumers choose healthier diets. 2009-10-20 School Meals to Get Nutritional Makeover http://cspinet.org/new/200910201.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe school lunches and breakfasts eaten by tens of millions of American kids are due for a nutritional makeover thanks to strong <a href="http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2009/School-Meals/School%20Meals%202009%20%20Report%20Brief.ashx" target="cspi">new recommendations</a> from the Institute of Medicine. The recommendations, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture will write into regulations, will increase the amounts of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains in school meals; reduce the content of sodium and trans fat; and ensure that the milk is low or no fat. Those important changes will help to address the biggest problems in children’s diets and foster healthier eating habits. However, the IOM unfortunately didn’t recommend limits on added sugars. Schools shouldn't wait for USDA’s final regulations to implement IOM’s sensible new school meal standards. USDA should help schools work toward the new standards, so by the time they are required schools are already most of the way there. And when Congress reauthorizes <a href="http://www.schoolfoods.org" target="cspi">child nutrition legislation</a>, it also should give USDA and school districts the resources and support they need to make these <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/schoolmeals.html" target="cspi">healthier meals</a> appeal even to the most finicky of young eaters. To do that, Congress should provide adequate and consistent funding for USDA's Team Nutrition Network in the upcoming Child Nutrition Reauthorization to provide technical assistance for schools and nutrition education for students. Few things are more important than the food we feed our kids and funding healthier school meals is an investment worth making. 2009-10-20 FDA Acts to Protect Consumers from Vibrio in Oysters http://cspinet.org/new/200910191.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalFor 15 years, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> has been <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/oysters.html" target="cspi">urging</a> the Food and Drug Administration to protect consumers from Vibrio vulnificus—the deadly bacteria found in almost all <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907021.html" target="cspi">Gulf Coast oysters</a> harvested in warmer months. The FDA announced this weekend that the agency will now require those oysters shipped to other states to be processed to kill the pathogen. That's a major advance for public health, one that will prevent <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nationwidevibrioillnesses.pdf" target="cspi">10 to 25 needless deaths</a> each year. Technology to kill these dangerous bacteria has existed for many years, but the shellfish industry has steadfastly opposed requirements that it be used. Numerous plans to address the hazard have been tried, but they have ultimately proved ineffective. One plan was effective, but it was only available to the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/vibroban.pdf" target="cspi">citizens of California</a>. When the state of California banned the sale of untreated Gulf Coast oysters deaths plummeted from about five a year to zero. As the FDA's Mike Taylor said over the weekend, seldom is the evidence of a food safety problem and its solution so unambiguous. This is the approach being adopted for consumers nationwide by the new FDA policy. More broadly, this move by the new leadership at the FDA is yet another signal that the agency is reasserting its vital public health and consumer protection mission. This long-awaited action on tainted oysters follows FDA’s action to require on-farm controls for <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907071.html" target="cspi">Salmonella</a> in eggs. 2009-10-19 FDA and USDA Not Kept in the Loop on Food Imports, Says GAO http://cspinet.org/new/200910151.html CSPI Says Gaps in Import Safety Controls Identified are TroublingWASHINGTON—Multiple agencies share responsibility for ensuring the safety of the increasing volume of imported food, including the Food and Drug Administration, the Agriculture Department's Food Safety and Inspection Service, and Homeland Security's Customs and Border Protection division. But in a <a href="http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09873.pdf" target="cspi">report made public yesterday</a>, the Government Accountability Office found that those agencies' efforts are hampered by what the GAO said are gaps in enforcement and collaboration. The report was released at a Global Food Safety Forum on Capitol Hill convened by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> and co-hosted by the Waters Corporation, a leading manufacturer of equipment for testing the safety of food and water. The GAO found that while importers report information about food shipments to the Customs agency, that agency's computer system does not notify FDA or FSIS when shipments arrive at the border, increasing the risk that contaminated food passes through border checkpoints undetected. The report found that Customs and FDA do not use an unique identification number for importers, making it difficult for FDA to track high-risk imports and importers. The report also found that FDA lacks the authority to fine importers who don't comply with its regulations. As a result, importers can ignore rules against selling food shipments before they are cleared by FDA. "A high and growing portion of the American food supply is imported, so it is essential that those foods meet U.S. safety standards," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety </a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "Border inspection provides an important – and sometimes the only – food safety checkpoint. GAO describes a food safety framework for imports that doesn’t keep the regulators 'in the loop' to the extent that they can inspect risky products before they are released to the public." Besides CSPI and Waters, Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), FDA senior advisor Mike Taylor, and representatives from the GAO, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Cargill, and Consumers Union made presentations at the policy forum. In July, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">House of Representatives </a> passed the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906172.html" target="cspi">Food Safety Enhancement Act</a> with broad, bipartisan support. That measure would give FDA the authority to require food processors to design and implement food safety plans, provide specific safety standards that growers would have to meet, establish and pilot test tracking systems for foods, and require FDA to visit inspect food facilities regularly. It also addresses problems identified in the GAO report. The House bill calls for closer collaboration between the Customs and Border Protection and the FDA, requires each importer to have and use an unique identification number that is registered with FDA, and gives FDA authority to impose civil fines. In the Senate, <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s510is.txt.pdf" target="cspi">similar legislation</a>, sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), is pending. 2009-10-15 Leafy Greens, Eggs, & Tuna Top List of Riskiest FDA-Regulated Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200910061.html CSPI Urges Senate to Pass Food Safety Modernization ActWASHINGTON—Leafy greens, eggs, and tuna are on the top of a list of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspi_top_10_fda.pdf" target="cspi">10 riskiest foods</a> regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. Those and seven other foods account for nearly 40 percent of all foodborne outbreaks linked to FDA-regulated food. That's no reason to forgo the occasional salad Niçoise, says the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which authored the report, nor need one pass up tomatoes, sprouts, and berries, even though those foods are also on the list. But the nonprofit watchdog group says the presence of so many healthy foods on such a list is exactly why the United States Senate should follow the House and pass legislation that reforms our fossilized food safety laws. The FDA is responsible for regulating produce, seafood, egg and dairy products, as well as typical packaged foods such as cookie dough and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901221.html" target="cspi">peanut butter</a>—nearly 80 percent of the food supply. More than 1,500 separate, definable outbreaks were associated with the top 10 riskiest FDA-regulated foods, causing nearly 50,000 reported illnesses. Since most foodborne illnesses are never reported, these outbreaks are only the tip of a large, hulking iceberg. "Outbreaks give the best evidence of where and when the food safety system is failing to protect the public," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">CSPI staff attorney</a> Sarah Klein, the lead author of the report. "It is clearly time for FDA's reliance on industry self-regulation to come to an end. The absence of safety plans or frequent inspections unfortunately means that some of our favorite and most healthful foods also top the list of the most risky." CSPI identified 363 outbreaks linked to iceberg lettuce, romaine, spinach, and other leafy greens, variously contaminated with E. coli, Norovirus, or Salmonella, and causing 13,568 cases of illness. Manure, contaminated irrigation water, or poor handling practices are all possible culprits in those outbreaks. The FDA does not currently require farms and processors to have written food safety plans, nor does it provide specific safety standards for even the largest growers to meet. Eggs were linked 352 outbreaks and 11,163 illnesses; tuna to 268 outbreaks and 2,341 cases of illness, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907021.html" target="cspi">oysters</a>—despite their limited consumption—to 132 outbreaks causing 3,409 illnesses. Outbreaks involving potatoes don’t seem to make headlines, but nevertheless they are linked to 108 outbreaks and 3,659 cases of illness. Cheese, ice cream, tomatoes, sprouts, and berries round out the top 10 list. The data come from <a href="http://cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">CSPI's Outbreak Alert! Database</a>, which includes outbreaks from 1990 to 2006, using data collected from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other sources. In July, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907301.html" target="cspi">House of Representatives </a> passed the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906172.html" target="cspi">Food Safety Enhancement Act</a> with broad, bipartisan support. That measure would give FDA authority to require food processors to design and implement food safety plans, provide specific safety standards that growers would have to meet, and require FDA to visit high-risk facilities every 12 months or less, and most other facilities every 3-4 years. In the Senate, <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:s510is.txt.pdf" target="cspi">similar legislation</a>, sponsored by Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL), is pending. "As consumers, we don't have the power to check on these products," said Kathleen Chrismer, whose 9-year-old daughter Rylee Gustafson was hospitalized for a month after becoming seriously ill from eating spinach salad contaminated with E. coli O157:H7. "Without a better system to protect us, we are totally at the mercy of the next outbreak." 2009-10-06 Bayer Sued Over Unsupported Prostate Cancer Claims on One A Day http://cspinet.org/new/200910011.html Drug Giant Tries to Silence CSPI With Threat of Libel SuitWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bayercomplaint.pdf" target="cspi">has sued</a> the German drug company Bayer for falsely claiming that the selenium in Men’s One A Day multivitamins might reduce the risk of prostate cancer. The lawsuit is filed in the Superior Court of California in San Francisco. CSPI first <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906181.html" target="cspi">contacted Bayer in June</a> to demand that the drug maker alter its marketing of <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTDgofjwcXE" target="cspi">Men's One A Day</a> because the largest prostate cancer prevention trial ever conducted found eight months earlier that selenium supplementation does not prevent prostate cancer. More alarmingly, that study and another found that selenium supplements may increase the risk of diabetes. A day after CSPI contacted Bayer, the FDA issued a letter containing qualified health claim language for use on labels that said, in part, that it was "highly unlikely that selenium supplements reduce the risk of prostate cancer." That forced Bayer to alter much of its marketing, but it pointedly refused to recall existing packages bearing the false claims. The company also refused to remove all false prostate claims from some marketing for Men's One A Day, and failed to put in writing that it will not make those claims in the future. <img src="/oneaday1.jpg">Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin “Bayer continued to run deceptive ads even after SELECT found that selenium supplements weren’t helping and might even be hurting,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Given Bayer's long history of wrongdoing in other cases, CSPI is acting to ensure that Bayer is permanently stopped from deceiving consumers about selenium," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">CSPI litigation</a> director Stephen Gardner. The largest prostate cancer prevention <a href="http://cme.nci.nih.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/SELECTJAMAresults2008" target="cspi">trial</a> ever conducted found that the mineral selenium was no more effective in reducing prostate cancer risk than a placebo. That trial, the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial, known as SELECT, was halted early when it became clear that the men were not benefiting from selenium and may have developed more cases of diabetes than men in the control group. Another study of selenium and prostate cancer found an alarming three-fold increased risk of diabetes among men taking selenium. Writing about the SELECT trial in the Journal of the American Medical Association, <a href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/2008.863" target="cspi">Dr. Peter Gann </a> of the University of Illinois at Chicago cautioned that "physicians should not recommend selenium or vitamin E—or any other antioxidant supplements—to their patients for preventing prostate cancer." Hopes that selenium might be beneficial to the prostate were further dashed when a 2009 study of men with prostate cancer found more aggressive cases of the disease in men with high selenium blood levels and a common genetic trait shared by three out of four men. "Bayer has been giving American men false hope about the selenium in One A Day multivitamins," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Bayer continued to run deceptive ads even after SELECT found that selenium supplements weren’t helping and might even be hurting." In a recent letter to CSPI, Bayer threatened to sue CSPI for libel for calling attention to Bayer’s selenium claims. Much of Bayer's courtroom experience, however, comes as a criminal or civil defendant. In 2001, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2001/01/24/us/bayer-to-pay-14-million-to-settle-charges-of-causing-inflated-medicaid-claims.html" target="cspi">Bayer paid $14 million to U.S. and state governments</a> to settle allegations that the company's actions helped health care providers submit inflated Medicaid claims for drugs. In 2003, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/17/business/17DRUG.html" target="cspi">Bayer pleaded guilty to a criminal charge</a> and paid $257 million in fines and penalties after a whistleblower exposed a scheme by the company to overcharge for the antibiotic Cipro. Media accounts at the time described it as the biggest recovery for Medicaid fraud. In 2004, <a href="http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/press_releases/2004/204602.htm" target="cspi">Bayer pleaded guilty to a criminal charge</a> and paid a $66 million fine after a Justice Department investigation into Bayer’s role in a price-fixing conspiracy involving a chemical used to make rubber products. Two Bayer executives separately pleaded guilty and were sentenced to prison for their role in the scandal. In 2007, Bayer paid $8 million to resolve allegations by <a href="http://www.atg.wa.gov/pressrelease.aspx?&id=11916" target="cspi">state</a> attorneys <a href="http://www.ksag.org/page/attorney-general-morrison-announces-30-state-settlement-with-bayer-corporation" target="cspi">general</a> that the company failed to warn physicians and consumers about safety issues surrounding its cholesterol-lowering drug Baycol, which is no longer on the market. Bayer has even gotten into hot water with the federal government in the past over its One A Day marketing. In 2007, it paid a $3.2 million civil fine as part of a <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2007/01/weightloss.shtm" target="cspi">consent decree</a> reached with the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice. The case centered on weight-loss claims that the FTC said violated an earlier order requiring that all health claims for One A Day be supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. CSPI says that Bayer's prostate claims for Men’s One A Day violate the consent decree, which could compound the company's legal problems. And this year, Bayer was required to run a $20-million corrective advertising campaign about its birth control pill Yaz, and to submit its ads for FDA approval, as part of a legal settlement secured by a number of <a href="http://www.illinoisattorneygeneral.gov/pressroom/2009_02/20090209.html" target="cspi">state</a> attorneys <a href="http://www.oag.state.md.us/Press/2009/020909.htm" target="cspi">general</a> and the FDA. "Bayer's threat to sue CSPI is clearly designed to have a chilling effect on free speech and to intimidate us into silence," Jacobson said. "I'm confident, however, that the FTC, the FDA, and the courts will all take careful note of the facts of this case, as well as Bayer's long history of flouting the law. It takes a lot of chutzpah for a company with such a long record of corporate malfeasance to level libel charges against a nonprofit organization." CSPI is suing on behalf of itself and its members, and is represented by its in-house litigators Stephen Gardner and Katherine Campbell, alongside Harry Shulman of The Mills Law Firm of San Rafael, Calif., and Washington, D.C.-based lawyers Steven N. Berk and Chris Nidel. 2009-10-01 Taxing Soda Could Trim State Deficits (and Waistlines), Says Report http://cspinet.org/new/200909301.html "I actually think it's an idea that we should be exploring.There's no doubt that our kids drink way too much soda.” — President Barack Obama to Men’s HealthWASHINGTON—Even as 48 states and the District of Columbia are facing grim budget shortfalls, only 25 states currently impose special taxes on soda and other beverages with added sugar, and all of those taxes are very small. And according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/state_budget_report_-_sugar_tax.pdf" target="cspi">new paper</a> from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, states could generate a total of more than $10 billion per year by levying a tax of 7 cents per 12-ounce can of Coke or Mountain Dew. If implemented by Congress in the form of a national excise tax, that $10 billion could make an important contribution toward paying for health coverage for all Americans. Plus, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906171.html" target="cspi">says CSPI</a>, the decrease in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">soda consumption</a> due to a higher price would help reduce the incidence of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sdtaxes_obesity_factsheet.pdf" target="cspi">obesity</a>, diabetes and other costly chronic diseases. Americans spend approximately $147 billion a year on medical expenditures related to obesity, of which half is paid with Medicare and Medicaid dollars. CSPI's <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/state_budget_report_-_sugar_tax.pdf" target="cspi">report</a> comes shortly after seven prominent nutrition experts made the case for a tax on soda in a separate paper published in the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/soda_-_nejm2_-_9-09.pdf" target="cspi">New England Journal of Medicine</a>. Earlier this month, the prestigious Institute of Medicine included soda taxes as one of several policies that should be adopted to help reduce obesity, and a Brookings Institution committee on health reform, led by former Medicare and Food and Drug Administration director Mark McClellan, issued a report that called for a soft-drink tax. President Obama's interview with Men’s Health magazine is further renewing interest in soda taxes, according to CSPI. "President Obama is exactly right when he say kids are drinking too much soda," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Soda is dirt cheap and promotes expensive and debilitating diseases, which in turn run up health-care costs at all levels of government. Federal, state, and even local governments would be wise to institute or increase taxes on a product that causes so much medical and financial harm." Also recently, a joint statewide study from the <a href="http://www.sacbee.com/822/story/2188612.html" target="cspi">California</a> Center for Public Health Advocacy and the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research confirmed that soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages are one of the largest—if not the largest—contributors to obesity. According to the <a href="http://healthpolicy.ucla.edu/pubs/publication.asp?pubID=375#download" target="cspi">study</a>, the 24 percent of adults who drink one or more non-diet sodas a day are 27 percent more likely to be overweight than adults who don't drink soda. On its web site, CSPI has a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy" target="cspi">Liquid Candy Calculator </a> that enables legislative staffers or citizens to calculate the revenue their state could raise from sales or excise taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages. The Senate Finance Committee raised the prospect of soda taxes and higher alcohol taxes when it released a policy options paper on health care reform in May. Such taxes were not included in the <a href="http://baucus.senate.gov/newsroom/details.cfm?id=317894&&" target="cspi">draft legislation </a> released by Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) yesterday, nor have they been offered in an amendment during the committee’s ongoing markup, but CSPI and other health groups are still urging members of both houses of Congress to include soda taxes in the final legislation. "About half of the states have small soda taxes and there certainly hasn't been any outrage over them," said Jacobson. "If the Senate Finance Committee decides to leave these billions and billions of dollars on the table, I suspect more state legislatures will tap soda taxes to help pay for their own prevention efforts. In fact, more states could do what New York City is doing, and fund an <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/pr2009/pr057-09.shtml" target="cspi">ad campaign </a> designed to discourage soda consumption." 2009-09-30 Food Industry Seeks to Maintain Junk-Food Marketing in Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200909221.html Bill Introduced Today Seeks Thorough Study of School-Based MarketingWASHINGTON—Despite rising public concern over childhood obesity, food companies, through an industry-funded self-regulatory group, have proposed a set of "principles" by which the companies can use a variety of approaches to market junk food to children in schools. The nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> today urged the industry group to go back to the chalk board and consider whether Ronald McDonald truly belongs in the classroom. Also today, a bill introduced in Congress would require the Department of Education to conduct a thorough assessment of school-based food marketing. The industry document at issue is a <a href="http://www.bbb.org/us/storage/0/Shared%20Documents/ESFactSheetFinalWord.pdf" target="cspi">"Fact Sheet on the Elementary School Advertising Principles"</a> released by the Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, which is funded by industry and administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus. Members of the initiative include Burger King, Coca-Cola, General Mills, Hershey Company, McDonald's, Campbell Soup Company, and other major food companies. The fact sheet begins with an introduction stating that the member "companies agree that they will not advertise any food or beverage in elementary schools," and lists coupons, food samples, posters, and book covers among several other forms of prohibited advertising. That sounds promising, but the document then spends much of the following 10 pages describing what food marketing it does not include, such as marketing on vending machine exteriors, label-collection programs, branded display racks, tray liners that promote food sold in schools, and menu boards, many of the techniques that are used most widely in schools. The self-regulatory scheme also allows companies to sponsor curricula, other educational materials, and public service announcements. "Spokescharacters" like Ronald McDonald or Tony the Tiger are allowed, as is the sale—by students—of low-nutrition foods in fundraisers. It even omits the most common form of in-school marketing: the sale of the food itself. Although some of the CFBAI-participating companies have pledged to address school food sales through an agreement with the Clinton Foundation and American Heart Association, the majority of companies have not. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cbbletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to Elaine Kolish</a>, the initiative’s director, CSPI also expressed concern that the guidelines only cover elementary schools (K-6). At the very least, the guidelines should cover middle schools, where the average 6th grader is 11 years old. Nor do the guidelines apply during after-school activities. "These principles are a sham, written more to protect the commercial needs of food marketers than the health of children," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "It's bad enough that <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/DecreaseMarketingToChildren.html" target="cspi">junk food </a> is still available for kids to buy in schools. But who wants their son or daughter to be enlisted in an unpaid, drone army actually selling junk food?" <a href="http://www.bookitprogram.com/" target="cspi">Pizza Hut's Book It! Program </a> is an example of an in-school marketing program that is allowed under the principles outlined in the industry fact sheet, since the Pizza Hut logo is small compared to other text on the materials. Logo aside, it is the prospect of free Pizza Hut pizza that really captures children's attention. (Yum! Brands [Pizza Hut’s parent company], Chuck E. Cheese's, Topps Candy, and a number of other major marketers to children have not joined the self-regulatory program.) "Schools should teach the joys of reading," said Wootan. "Programs like Pizza Hut's turn reading into a commercial proposition that, unfortunately, ends up promoting obesity and disease in children." Experts warn against using food as a reward, which can instill in children lifetime habits of rewarding or comforting themselves with unhealthy food behaviors. CSPI says that without a substantial expansion of the marketing principles the food industry's self-regulatory system won’t adequately protect kids’ health. "With a new Administration, a re-animated Federal Trade Commission, and more city and state governments interested in aggressively tackling the problem of childhood obesity, we’re likely to see reforms that far surpass what the industry is willing to do voluntarily," Wootan said. The legislation introduced today, sponsored by Representatives Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) and Todd Platt (R-PA), would require the U.S. Department of Education, along with the Division of Adolescent and School Health at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, to assess the nutritional quality of foods available in schools and the forms of food marketing in schools. The legislation is supported by a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter_of_endorsement_mccarthy_bill.pdf" target="cspi">broad coalition</a> of national and state health groups, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Diabetes Association, the American Heart Association, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, and the Trust for America’s Health. 2009-09-22 Makers of Quorn, the Chicken-Flavored Fungus, Sued for Not Disclosing Dangerous Reactions http://cspinet.org/new/200909171.html Vat-Grown Mold Tastes Like Chicken but Makes Some Violently IllWASHINGTON—An Arizona woman has filed a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complaint_and_summons_final_draft_091609.pdf" target="cspi">class action lawsuit</a> accusing Quorn Foods of not disclosing on labels the fact that some people have serious allergic reactions to the main ingredient in its Quorn line of meat substitutes. That ingredient happens to be a fungus—mold, actually—discovered in the 1960s in a British dirt sample. The company grows the fungus in vats and processes it into a fibrous, proteinaceous paste. But more than a thousand people have <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/victims.html" target="cspi">reported</a> to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> that they have <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/medical_research.html" target="cspi">suffered adverse reactions</a>, including nausea, violent vomiting, uncontrollable diarrhea, and even life-threatening anaphylactic reactions after eating the patties, cutlets, tenders and other products made with Quorn's fungus. <img src="/images/quorn2.jpg">Photo Credit: Stacey Greene "I was vomiting so hard," said Kathy Cardinale, who ate these Quorn patties. The nonprofit food safety and nutrition watchdog group is serving as co-counsel in the case. Connecticut State Marshals are serving the company, whose U.S. headquarters are in that state, with the suit today. The case is filed in Superior Court in the Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk. Kathy Cardinale, a 43-year-old advertising executive, ate Quorn’s Chik’n Patties on three separate occasions in 2008. Each time, within two hours of eating the product, Cardinale became violently ill. Thinking she had had a stomach virus, Cardinale didn’t realize that she was reacting to the Quorn until the third time she ate one of the patties, after which she vomited seven or eight times within two hours. "I felt like the soles of my feet were going to come out of my mouth, I was vomiting so hard," said Cardinale. "Once I began to research Quorn online I realized I wasn’t alone and that other people had similar stories. It was unbelievable to me that the company knew this was going on and wasn’t warning consumers about these problems." <img src="/images/quorn3.jpg">Photo Credit: Stacey Greene Clockwise from upper left: Quorn’s shape-shifting fungus takes the form of "chik’n", "turk’y", or unspecified "grounds." Quorn Foods, which is British-owned, markets its signature organism as being related to mushrooms, truffles, and morels, since all of those are fungi. While that’s true, it's as misleading as claiming that humans are related to jellyfish since they’re both animals, according to CSPI. Quorn's fungus is named Fusarium venenatum—"venenatum" is Latin for "venomous." As early as 1977, a study found that some people have adverse reactions to Fusarium venenatum. That unpublished study conducted by Quorn's developer found that 10 percent of 200 test subjects who ate the fungus experienced nausea, vomiting, or other gastrointestinal symptoms, compared with five percent in a control group. The company claims the rate of illness is trivial, though a 2005 telephone survey of consumers in Britain—where the products have been marketed longer and more widely than in the United States—commissioned by CSPI found that almost five percent of Quorn eaters experienced adverse reactions. That was a higher percentage of people than that of those who reported allergies to shellfish, milk, peanuts or other common food allergens. Since 2002, more than 1,400 British and American consumers have filed adverse reaction reports on a website maintained by CSPI, <a href="http://www.quorncomplaints.org/" target="cspi">quorncomplaints.org</a>. "It's almost unheard of for a company to market something as healthy when it actually makes a significant percentage of its customers sick within minutes or hours," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. "It is the company's legal obligation to warn consumers about these serious adverse reactions, and getting the company to meet that obligation is the purpose of this lawsuit." "Quorn Foods should either find a fungus that doesn’t make people sick, or place prominent warning labels about the vomiting, diarrhea, breathing difficulties, and other symptoms Quorn causes in some consumers," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration does not disagree that Quorn products cause sometimes-severe allergic reactions, the agency still considers the Quorn ingredient to be "generally recognized as safe." "At a time when the public and doctors are deeply concerned about the rise in food allergies, it is deeply distressing that the FDA knowingly permitted a powerful new allergen into the food supply," said Jacobson. "We call on the FDA to revisit its policy." CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">litigation department </a> has, since its founding in 2004, sued a number of leading national food companies and has secured agreements improving food labeling, marketing, or product formulation with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806261.html" target="cspi">Anheuser Busch</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601041.html" target="cspi">Frito-Lay</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">Kellogg</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200606121.html" target="cspi">KFC</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200701081.html" target="cspi">Kraft</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200807212.html" target="cspi">Sara Lee</a> and other companies. CSPI's litigation activities helped spur the removal of <a href="http://cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">artificial trans fat</a> from restaurant food and helped return millions of dollars to consumers from makers of the dietary supplement <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803032.html" target="cspi">Airborne</a>. Daniel Blinn of the Connecticut firm Consumer Law Group is serving as co-counsel in the case alongside CSPI’s litigation unit. 2009-09-17 Domino's Fat-on-Carb-on-Carb Food Porn: BreadBowl Pastas http://cspinet.org/new/200908271.html WASHINGTON—Most people wouldn't consider eating an entire medium hand-tossed cheese pizza from Domino's in one sitting. And these days, most folks are carb-concious enough not to order pizza as a side order to pasta, or vice-versa. So why is Domino's trying to turn back the nutritional clock with its 1,300- to 1,500-calorie BreadBowl Pastas—white-flour penne, sauce, cheese, and other toppings entombed in Frisbee-sized white-bread crusts? Domino's BreadBowl Pastas are the most recent <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/septemberfoodporn.pdf" target="cspi">Food Porn</a> exposed in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, the popular publication of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. "White-flour pasta with cream-cheese sauce can be a nutritional nightmare on its own," said CSPI senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley. "The last thing it needs is an 800-calorie white-bread pizza-crust bowl." Savvy eaters will remember that more than a decade ago CSPI famously called fettuccine Alfredo a "heart attack on a plate." Domino's executives seem to have forgotten since the infamous cream sauce tops three out of the five BreadBowl Pastas—the Chicken Alfredo, the Chicken Carbonara and even the innocently named Pasta Primavera. There is also an Italian Sausage Marinara (with Provolone cheese) and Three Cheese Mac-N-Cheese. The items range from 1,340 to 1,480 calories and more than a day's worth of saturated fat (22 to 28 grams) and sodium (1,820 to 2,840 milligrams). "Topping a pizza crust with an order of macaroni and cheese is probably the most discouraging mac-and-cheese innovation since The Cheesecake Factory decided to ball it up and toss it in the deep-fryer," Hurley said. "What's next, wrapping it in a <a href="http://www.hulu.com/watch/1447/saturday-night-live-taco-town" target="cspi">giant blueberry pancake?</a>" <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a> spotlights a Food Porn in each issue alongside a Right Stuff, recommendation. Past Food Porns include Starbucks' Salted Caramel Hot Chocolate, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905011.html" target="cspi">Cold Stone Creamery's Oh Fudge! shake</a>, and Hardee's Thickburger. Introductory subscriptions to Nutrition Action are $10 per year. 2009-08-27 Cookie Dough is Last Straw for Congress http://cspinet.org/new/200907301.html Food Safety Reform Legislation Passes House, Heads to SenateWASHINGTON—After years of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">outbreaks</a> of foodborne illness connected to everything from <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901221.html" target="cspi">peanuts</a> to peppers to pet food, and most recently, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906191.html" target="cspi">cookie dough</a>, legislation to reform the nation's food safety system has passed the House of Representatives and is headed to the Senate. The nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> hailed the House passage of the <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h2749ih.txt.pdf" target="cspi">Food Safety Enhancement Act </a> as an urgently needed step to help restore Americans' confidence in the food supply. Under the current system, food manufacturing facilities might be visited by an inspector from the Food and Drug Administration only once every five or 10 years. The bill that passed the House today increases food inspections dramatically: every six to 12 months for high risk facilities; every 18 months to three years for low-risk facilities; and every five years for warehouses. The bill requires companies to identify hazards particular to the foods they produce, and to implement written food safety plans to control those hazards. The bill also gives the FDA authority to issue mandatory recalls of contaminated foods and provides for tougher penalties for negligent processors. "Consumers want safe foods, and we are tired of having to ask whether the healthy foods we're buying for our families are contaminated with deadly bacteria," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">CSPI food safety</a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "FDA has been operating under the same law for 70 years and can do little more than respond to outbreaks after the fact. This bill gives the FDA more authority and real enforcement teeth to help prevent more outbreaks, illnesses, and deaths." The bill is widely supported by a diverse coalition of consumer and health groups and is expected to come before the Senate in the fall. 2009-07-30 Unsafe Sodium Levels at Denny's Prompt Class Action Lawsuit http://cspinet.org/new/200907231.html Denny's Meals, With Several Days' Worth of Salt, Promote Heart Disease, Stroke, Risk of Early DeathWASHINGTON—Most Denny's meals are dangerously high in sodium, putting the restaurant chain's customers at greater risk of high blood pressure, heart attack and stroke, according to a class action <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complaint_denny_s.pdf" target="cspi">lawsuit filed today</a> by a New Jersey man with the support of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. The lawsuit was filed in Superior Court of New Jersey in Middlesex County, and seeks to compel Denny's to disclose on menus the <a href="http://cspinet.org/salt" target="cspi">amount of sodium</a> in each of its meals and to place a notice on its menus warning about high sodium levels. CSPI is working with the New Jersey firms of Galex Wolf, LLC and Williams Cuker Berezofsky. Most Americans should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams of sodium per day, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. But at Denny's, the great majority of its meals contain more, and in some cases, several times more. Some meals at Denny's provide more than 4,000 or 5,000 mg of sodium—more than most adults should consume in three days. Diets <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905111.html" target="cspi">high in sodium</a> are a major cause of high blood pressure, which in turn is a major cause of heart disease and stroke, the first- and third-leading causes of death in the United States. <img src="/images/spicy.jpg">Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin A Spicy Buffalo Chicken Melt with regular fries would have 4,120 mg of sodium; with seasoned fries instead (shown) it has 4,880 mg. Start off this meal with clam chowder and it would have 6,700 mg of sodium. "Denny's is slowly sickening its customers," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "For those Americans who should be most careful about limiting their sodium, such as people middle-aged and older, African-Americans, or people with existing high blood pressure, it's dangerous to eat at Denny's. Denny's customers deserve to be warned about the considerable health risk posed by many of these meals." The plaintiff, Nick DeBenedetto, is a 48-year-old resident of Tinton Falls, NJ, who has eaten for many years at Denny’s restaurants in East Brunswick and Brick, NJ. DeBenedetto takes a prescription medication to control his high blood pressure and at home does not cook with salt or use the salt shaker. Some of his favorite Denny's items, such as Moons Over My Hammy or the Super Bird turkey sandwich, contain far more than 1,500 mg of sodium—even without soup, salad, fried onion rings, or other side dishes. "I was astonished—I mean, literally floored—to find that these simple sandwiches have more salt than someone in my condition should have in a whole day," DeBenedetto said. "It's as if Denny's is stacking the deck against people like me. I never would have selected those items had I known." Moons Over My Hammy, a ham, egg, and cheese sandwich, has 2,580 mg of sodium by itself—more than even a healthy young person should consume in a day. It's served with hash browns (adding 650 mg of sodium) or grits (an additional 840 mg). The Super Bird sandwich, served with regular French fries, has 2,610 mg of sodium—more than twice what someone with high blood pressure should consume in a day. Denny's Meat Lover’s Scramble, which has two eggs with chopped bacon, diced ham, crumbled sausage, Cheddar cheese, plus two bacon strips, two sausage links, hash browns, and two pancakes has 5,690 mg sodium, or 379 percent of the advised daily limit. A full meal at Denny's consisting of a bowl of clam chowder, a Spicy Buffalo Chicken Melt, and a side of seasoned fries contains an alarmingly high 6,700 mg of sodium. It's a big meal, to be sure, with about 1,700 calories. But that’s more sodium than what 70 percent of Americans should consume in four and a half days. Even many of the smaller meals advertised for children and seniors have inappropriately high sodium levels. Many health experts consider high dietary sodium levels to be one of the nation's top health threats. Dr. Stephen Havas, adjunct professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine, says that reducing the sodium content of packaged and restaurant foods by half would save at least 150,000 lives per year. For some people, particularly Denny’s elderly patrons, getting several days' worth of sodium in a single meal might be enough to trigger congestive heart failure. "As a physician, I have grave concerns about the sodium levels at Denny's, and grave concerns about an elderly person or someone with hypertension eating even one such meal," Havas said. "The body can have a hard time getting rid of that much salt, potentially leading to fluid retention and accumulation in the lungs. Consuming that much sodium can have severe consequences." Denny's describes itself as the largest full-service family restaurant in the United States, with more than 1,500 restaurants and annual sales of $2.4 billion. "By concealing an important material fact about its products—namely, that that these foods have disease-promoting levels of sodium—Denny's is failing its responsibility to its customers and is in violation of the laws of New Jersey and several other states," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. Denny's and CSPI had been in private negotiations over sodium, but those talks ended earlier this year. Shortly thereafter, the chain made small sodium reductions in a handful of items, like cheese sauce, shrimp skewers and kids' meals, but the chain did not make the kind of broad sodium reductions or menu disclosures urged by CSPI. CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">litigation department</a> has, since its founding in 2004, sued a number of leading national food companies and has secured agreements improving food labeling, marketing, or product formulation with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806261.html" target="cspi">Anheuser Busch</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601041.html" target="cspi">Frito-Lay</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">Kellogg</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200606121.html" target="cspi">KFC</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200701081.html" target="cspi">Kraft</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200807212.html" target="cspi">Sara Lee </a> and other companies. CSPI's litigation activities helped spur the removal of <a href="http://cspinet.org/transfat" target="cspi">artificial trans fat</a> from restaurant food and helped return millions of dollars to consumers from makers of the dietary supplement <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803032.html" target="cspi">Airborne</a>. The lawsuit filed today against Denny's is CSPI's first sodium-related lawsuit against a food company. Separately, CSPI has <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="cspi">petitioned the Food and Drug Administration</a> to regulate salt as a food additive and to restrict sodium levels in various categories of food. 2009-07-23 Obama Administration Takes Welcome Actions on Food Safety http://cspinet.org/new/200907071.html Working Group Advances E. Coli, Salmonella ProtectionsWASHINGTON—The food safety working group created by President Barack Obama has directed the various government agencies involved in food safety to place new emphasis on preventing contamination—a move that the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> says bodes well for the reform legislation moving through Congress. And, says CSPI, it's an important sign that the current administration sees a more active role for government in ensuring the safety of food than previous ones. For starters, the FDA announced that a long-awaited rule governing the safety of shell eggs has finally hatched. "This is a good beginning for the Obama Administration when it comes to food safety," says <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">CSPI food safety</a> director <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/house_science_testimony_-_apr_09.pdf" target="cspi">Caroline Smith DeWaal</a>. "But it faces many tests of how quickly the administration can fix a weakened federal food safety structure and reverse course on policies wrongly decided under the Bush Administration. Congress must pass the Food Safety Enhancement Act to give the FDA the statutory foundation needed as well as increased financial resources to restore Americans' confidence in the safety of our food supply." The <a href="http://www.foodsafetyworkinggroup.gov/" target="cspi">working group</a> proposed a series of <a href="http://www.foodsafetyworkinggroup.gov/FSWG_Key_Findings.pdf" target="cspi">specific activities</a> to reduce the risk of Salmonella and deadly E. coli in the food supply. The recommendations cover FDA- and USDA-regulated foods including eggs, chicken, turkey, beef, leafy greens, melons, and tomatoes. The working group was chaired by Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. Under the proposal, the two agencies will provide guidance to increase traceability in the food supply in advance of legislation requiring it. The working group also proposed steps to increase the effectiveness of outbreak surveillance among federal, state and local agencies in addition to using web-based social media to notify consumers of food safety problems. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/hamburg_letter__july_1_09.pdf" target="cspi">letter to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg</a> last week, CSPI urged the agency to reinstate a zero-tolerance policy for the lethal Listeria monocytogenes bacteria, which can grow in refrigerated soft cheeses, smoked seafood, and lunch meats; to require the shellfish industry to treat all Gulf Coast oysters harvested during warmer months to kill the deadly <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200907021.html" target="cspi">Vibrio vulnificus</a> bacteria; and to strengthen its advice to vulnerable consumers on eating fish with high levels of methylmercury. CSPI had long urged the FDA to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/eggruletimeline.pdf" target="cspi">finalize the egg rule</a> announced today. That rule will require on-farm controls and expanded microbial testing to eliminate Salmonella Enteriditis in shell eggs. A version of that rule languished for years since CSPI first petitioned the FDA in 1998 to issue such a regulation. In June, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906031.html" target="cspi">Food Safety Enhancement Act</a> cleared a key hurdle in the House of Representatives when it was voted unanimously out of the Energy and Commerce Committee. The bill, spearheaded by Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Chairman Emeritus John Dingell (D-MI), requires food processors to identify potential hazards and develop written action plans to prevent contamination. It also requires the FDA to conduct more frequent inspections of food processors and importers, and gives the agency the authority to issue mandatory recalls of contaminated food. "For far too long, FDA has not had the staff, funding, or even the legal authority to get the job done," said DeWaal. "Things have gotten so bad that even the food industry is clamoring for reform, which is not surprising as consumer confidence in the food industry has fallen to less than 20 percent. But most important, American consumers face a never-ending stream of food- safety failures that result in having to avoid tainted fruits, vegetables, peanut butter, even cookie dough. The time for modernizing our federal food safety system is long overdue." 2009-07-07 Governors Urged to Block Sale of Untreated Gulf Coast Oysters http://cspinet.org/new/200907021.html Deadly Vibrio Bacteria Common in Summer MonthsWASHINGTON—The nation's governors are <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/vibriogovernorletter.pdf" target="cspi">being called upon</a> to ban the sale of untreated oysters from the Gulf Coast since they are often contaminated with the deadly Vibrio vulnificus bacteria. For people with liver or kidney disease, AIDS, cancer, diabetes or other conditions that can compromise the immune system, Vibrio vulnificus kills half the people it infects. It has been causing about 15 deaths a year for many years. In 2003, California banned the sale of untreated Gulf Coast oysters harvested in summer months and saw the number of vibrio-related deaths plummet from about 6 per year to zero in the five years since. Many safety-conscious retailers, such as Legal Sea Foods and Costco, only sell Gulf Coast oysters that have been processed with cold pasteurization, hydrostatic pressure, or another technology that can kill Vibrio vulnificus without affecting taste. Those and similar processes cost merely pennies per oyster. "Letting untreated Gulf Coast oysters reach consumers this summer will needlessly sentence several of them to death," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">CSPI</a> staff attorney Sarah Klein. "Unfortunately the Food and Drug Administration has abdicated its responsibility to ensure shellfish safety and instead lets the industry police itself with minimal oversight. That’s proven to be a deadly mistake." For the past eight years the FDA has relied on the <a href="http://www.issc.org/" target="cspi">Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference</a> to monitor food safety in shellfish. That group includes representatives of the FDA and other government agencies, but also includes representatives of the shellfish industry. It does not require that processors kill Vibrio vulnificus during the dangerous summer months. Under the ISSC framework, more than 125 people have died agonizing deaths from contaminated oysters and another 125 people suffered serious illnesses. Despite the failure of the ISSC to control Vibrio, FDA is poised to grant a three-year extension while the industry tries other techniques—such as changing refrigeration temperatures—rather than making effective changes. "The Gulf Coast oyster industry has privately acknowledged that it has the capacity to perform post-harvest processing on 100 percent of their oysters, but refuse to do so until demand for treated product is clear," wrote Klein to 49 governors and the mayor of the District of Columbia. "We urge you to require that only safe oysters be sold in your communities, an approach that will reduce medical costs and save lives." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> says untreated oysters harvested from Gulf Coast waters from April to October should be subject to state bans and, meanwhile, consumers should avoid consuming such oysters. 2009-07-02 CSPI Urges FDA to Seize Stockpiles of Bayer One A Day for Men http://cspinet.org/new/200906291.html New Evidence Undermines Bayer’s Prostate Health ClaimsWASHINGTON—For most men with prostate cancer, the dietary supplement selenium may promote more aggressive cases of the disease, according to a <a href="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/JCO.2008.18.8938v1" target="cspi">new study</a>. Besides being bad news for men who have taken selenium in the hope of avoiding prostate cancer, the study comes at an inconvenient time for Bayer Healthcare, which was <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200906181.html" target="cspi">notified recently</a> that it will be sued if it continues to claim that the selenium in its One A Day vitamins for men reduces risk of the disease or otherwise benefits the prostate. Today, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> filed a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bayer-fda-letter.pdf" target="cspi">formal complaint with the Food and Drug Administration</a> over the various prostate claims on One A Day's labeling. The claim that the selenium in One A Day Men's Health Formula reduces the risk of prostate cancer gives the product the status of an unapproved drug, and is therefore illegal. Even the more general claim Bayer uses to promote that and another men's supplement that selenium "supports prostate health" is deceptive and illegal since it is unsubstantiated by scientific evidence and implies that the product can reduce the risk of prostate cancer. No published studies have investigated whether selenium helps or hurts when it comes to the only other common prostate problem, benign prostatic hyperplasia, or enlarged prostate. CSPI says the FDA should seize existing stockpiles of the deceptively labeled products until the company corrects the labels. Coincidentally, on June 19, the FDA authorized a very negatively worded "qualified health claim" which Bayer is unlikely to use, according to CSPI. It reads: <blockquote>Two weak studies suggest that selenium intake may reduce the risk of prostate cancer. However, four stronger studies and three weak studies showed no reduction in risk. Based on these studies, FDA concludes that it is highly unlikely that selenium supplements reduce the risk of prostate cancer.</blockquote> Even if Bayer wanted to use that new claim, it could not since it only applies to a certain form of selenium, selenomethionine. Bayer uses the selenate form of the mineral in One A Day pills. To prevent consumers from being misled, CSPI said that FDA must halt not only the claim that selenium reduces the risk of cancer, but also the milder claim about supporting prostate health. CSPI says that "supports prostate health" is deceptive because there's no good evidence to support it. On June 18, besides notifying Bayer of a potential lawsuit, CSPI filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission over Bayer's advertising. Some of the leading prostate cancer researchers in the country wrote the FTC in support of CSPI's complaint. Bayer has yet to respond to CSPI's demand letter, but <a href="http://www.tampabay.com/features/consumer/article1013770.ece" target="cspi">news reports</a> indicate that the company may already be retreating from claiming selenium reduces risk of prostate cancer, but has not promised to remove the more generally deceptive claims concerning "prostate health." In the <a href="http://jco.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/JCO.2008.18.8938v1" target="cspi">latest study</a>, published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, researchers at the University of California at San Francisco looked at men with localized or locally advanced prostate cancer, and found more aggressive cases of cancer in men with high selenium blood levels and the V genotype for an antioxidant enzyme found in most cells. Seventy-five percent of men have the V genotype; only 25 percent of men have the AA genotype which seems to reduce their risk of aggressive prostate cancer. The findings "indicate caution against broad use of selenium supplementation for men with prostate cancer," the authors wrote. Yet <a href="http://circoutcomes.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/CIRCOUTCOMES.108.831552v1" target="cspi"> another study</a>, this one published this month in the journal Circulation: Cardiovascular Quality and Outcomes, found that men with higher blood selenium levels were more likely to have hypertension than men with lower blood selenium levels. The most ambitious examination ever conducted to see if selenium prevents prostate cancer, the Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT), was actually halted early when researchers discovered that besides not preventing prostate cancer, selenium supplements might have been causing diabetes in the men assigned to take it. "Bayer must be stopped from promoting its selenium-containing products as a means of reducing prostate cancer risk and promoting prostate health," said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. "Not only does selenium not prevent cancer, supplementation with selenium may be harmful." Bayer is a repeat offender when it comes to misleading claims on labeling and advertising, according to CSPI. In 2007, it paid a $3.2 million fine as part of a consent decree reached with the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice over weight-loss claims made in connection with another One A Day product. Bayer is also running a $20-million corrective advertising campaign about its birth control pill Yaz at the behest of the FDA and a number of state attorneys general. "By violating the terms of the FTC consent decree, Bayer could be held in contempt of court," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. "The FTC should penalize Bayer substantially, and require corrective advertising. In addition, the FDA should coordinate with the FTC to stop all claims that fall within its jurisdiction." In separate letters, today, the CSPI urged <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mlbletter.pdf" target="cspi">Major League Baseball</a> and the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/milken-bayer-letter.pdf" target="cspi">Prostate Cancer Foundation</a> to stop lending their names to a <a href="http://www.oneaday.com/strikeout_challenge.html" target="cspi">promotional campaign</a> for Bayer One A Day. Bayer and MLB jointly contribute $10 to the foundation for every strikeout thrown by a major league pitcher. The amount of money that the charity stands to gain in a typical season, then, would be in the $350,000 ballpark, in all likelihood a small fraction of the profits that Bayer rakes in from the deceptive labeling and advertising. 2009-06-29 President Urged to Form "Healthy Weights, Healthy Lives Commission" http://cspinet.org/new/200906221.html Physicians and Health Groups Ask for Bold Action to Reverse Obesity EpidemicWASHINGTON—Some of the country's leading physicians, health organizations, and nutrition experts are asking President Barack Obama to create a Presidential Commission on Healthy Weights, Healthy Lives focused on combating obesity. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/obesity-letter-obama.pdf" target="cspi">letter to the President</a>, the experts say that the broad and well-funded approach of the United Kingdom's <a href="http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_082378" target="cspi">anti-obesity strategy</a> could serve as a model for a similar effort here. The authors of the letter say that reducing obesity would be a powerful way of reducing health-care costs, and that a presidential commission would help stimulate and coordinate the activities of the Departments of Health and Human Services, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and other agencies involved in food and health policy. "The increased rates of obesity will negate many of our nation's investments in health-care and could actually condemn youths to shorter life spans than their parents," the letter states. "Each year, obesity causes tens of thousands of premature deaths and tens of billions of dollars in avoidable medical costs. Obesity also leads to heart-wrenching psychosocial problems, such as difficulty making friends, stigmatization, and discrimination in employment." Signatories to the letter include the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which organized the effort, the American Diabetes Association, American Public Health Association, National Consumers League, Partnership for Prevention, Shape Up America, Trust for America's Health, United Fresh Produce Association, and a number of state-level organizations. Individuals on the letter include Kelly Brownell of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University, Christopher Gardner of the Stanford Prevention Research Center, Lewis Landsberg of the Northwestern University Comprehensive Center on Obesity, and Barry Popkin of the University of North Carolina School of Public Health. "Both the President and the First Lady have been enthusiastic proponents of healthy eating, gardening, and improving school foods, and the Administration is sending so many of the right signals with regard to appointments," said CSPI executive director Michael Jacobson. "Their challenge is to harness the new national excitement about nutrition and translate that into government policies that actually promote health. Unfortunately, the Obama Administration has inherited a lot of policies that promote obesity and that need reversing." <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sdtaxes_obesity_factsheet.pdf" target="cspi">Obesity</a> is a risk factor for heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, and certain types of cancer. Obesity leads to about $95 billion a year in medical expenditures, half of which are paid through Medicare and Medicaid. Those costs are fueled by obesity rates that have increased in both children 6 to 19 and adults by 50 percent in the last 20 years. 2009-06-22 And Now Cookie Dough? http://cspinet.org/new/200906191.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Attorney Sarah KleinIf there was anyone left in America who didn’t realize we need to reform the food safety functions at the Food and Drug Administration, this latest recall of Nestle Toll House Cookie Dough provides a sobering wakeup call. For too long the agency has lacked the authority and the resources it needs to inspect food processing facilities, issue mandatory recalls, and punish violators. Once again the agency is forced to react after illnesses are already occurring, when the focus should be on preventing contamination in the first place. We urge the House to pass the Food Safety Enhancement Act now. Everyone should take care to follow the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm167908.htm" target="cspi">FDA's guidance</a> and dispose of any of the various prepackaged, refrigerated cookie dough products produced by Nestle until further notice. 2009-06-19 Bayer Ads Misleading Men About Prostate Cancer, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200906181.html Watchdog Group Notifies Bayer of Intent to Sue and Files Complaint with the Federal Trade CommissionWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest has <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspilettertobayer.pdf" target="cspi">notified Bayer Healthcare</a> that it will sue the company if it continues to claim that the selenium in its One A Day vitamins may reduce men’s risk of prostate cancer, the health group announced today. <a href="http://cspinet.org/Bayer_ad.mp3" target="cspi">Advertisements</a> and labels for One A Day Men’s 50+ Advantage and One A Day Men’s Health Formula multivitamins claim that "emerging research" suggests that selenium may reduce the risk of prostate cancer. "Did you know that there are more new cases of prostate cancer each year than any other cancer?" intones the narrator one such radio ad. "Now there is something you can do." <img src="/oneaday1.jpg">Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin There is little evidence to prove the selenium in One A Day Men's Health Formula vitamins reduce the risk of prostate cancer. But <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bayer-ftc-letter-scientists.pdf" target="cspi">leading prostate cancer researchers</a> say there is scant evidence to support such a claim and have joined CSPI in <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspibayerftcletter.pdf" target="cspi">urging the Federal Trade Commission</a> (FTC) to put an immediate stop to the <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-f-jacobson/packaged-deceit-how-dieta_b_217388.html" target="cspi">deceptive claims</a>. "Bayer is exploiting men's fear of prostate cancer just to sell more pills," said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. "The largest prostate cancer prevention trial has found that selenium is no more effective than a placebo. Bayer is ripping people off when it suggests otherwise in these dishonest ads." A seven-year, $118-million <a href="http://cme.nci.nih.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/SELECTJAMAresults2008" target="cspi">study funded by the National Institutes of Health </a> found last year that selenium does not prevent prostate cancer in healthy men. The Selenium and Vitamin E Cancer Prevention Trial (SELECT) involving 35,000 U.S. and Canadian men was halted in October when researchers determined that selenium was not protecting the men from prostate cancer and may have been causing diabetes in some of them. The only study to find that selenium might prevent prostate cancer in men was the <a href="http://www.selenium.arizona.edu/HIST2results.htm" target="cspi">Nutritional Prevention of Cancer (NPC) trial</a>, which unexpectedly found in 1996 that selenium supplementation seemed to prevent prostate cancer in men with a history of skin cancer. However, two later analyses of the NPC results determined that only a small minority of men may have benefited from selenium supplementation and that selenium almost tripled the risk of developing diabetes. That led to a dramatic warning from the American College of Physicians that "long-term selenium supplementation should not be viewed as harmless and a possibly healthy way to prevent illness." In an <a href="http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/2008.863" target="cspi">editorial</a> accompanying publication of the SELECT study results in the Journal of the American Medical Association, Peter Gann of the University of Illinois at Chicago urged that "physicians should not recommend selenium or vitamin E—or any other antioxidant supplements—to their patients for preventing prostate cancer." Yet, Bayer still touts selenium’s promise in preventing unspecified prostate "issues" and in reducing prostate cancer risk. "With these indefensible claims, Bayer is thumbing its nose at the Food and Drug Administration, the FTC, and any number of state consumer protection laws," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. "A courtroom would be treacherous territory for Bayer, whose executives would be committing perjury just by reciting their ads under oath." In recent years <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="cspi">CSPI’s litigation department</a> has negotiated settlements or voluntary changes to marketing practices with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803032.html" target="cspi">Airborne</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806261.html" target="cspi">Anheuser-Busch</a>, Frito-Lay, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="cspi">Kellogg</a>, Pinnacle Foods, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200704171.html" target="cspi">Quaker Oats</a>, and others. Besides announcing its intention to sue Bayer, CSPI also filed a complaint today with the FTC. That complaint states that because Bayer's ads have for so long reinforced the false notion that selenium prevents prostate cancer—and because selenium may actually increase the risk of diabetes—the company should be required to run a corrective advertising campaign. (Bayer is now running corrective advertising at the behest of the Food and Drug Administration and state Attorneys General about yet another one of its products, its birth control pill Yaz.) CSPI says the prostate cancer claims for One A Day supplements for men violate a consent decree the company signed with the FTC in 2007. That year Bayer paid a $3.2 million fine related to weight-loss claims made on behalf of One A Day multivitamin WeightSmart, and agreed not to make unsubstantiated claims in the future. Separately, some of the most prominent prostate cancer researchers in the United States wrote to the FTC in support of CSPI's complaint about Bayer’s advertising. The SELECT trial "was the largest individually randomized cancer prevention trial ever conducted, and, given its high rates of adherence and its statistical power, it is unlikely to have missed detecting a benefit of even a very modest size," wrote the researchers. "Bayer Healthcare is doing a disservice to men by misleading them about a protective role for selenium in prostate cancer." Signatories include Peter Gann and Maarten Bosland of the University of Illinois at Chicago, Ed Giovannucci of the Harvard Medical School, Alan Kristal of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, William Nelson of the Johns Hopkins Medical School, Tim Byers of the University of Colorado, Larry Kushi of Kaiser-Permanente in Oakland, Lawrence Kolonel of the University of Hawaii, and Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society. 2009-06-18 Food Safety Reform Bill Advances in House http://cspinet.org/new/200906172.html New Muscle and Resources Will Help FDA Prevent Contaminated Food, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Historic legislation to reform food safety at the Food and Drug Administration moved a step closer to becoming a reality today as the Food Safety Enhancement Act was voted out of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The bipartisan bill, spearheaded by Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Chairman Emeritus John Dingell (D-MI), has the support of the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> and a broad coalition of consumer and public health groups. <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h2749ih.txt.pdf" target="cspi">The bill</a> includes many measures that food safety experts have urged for years, including a requirement for food companies to identify the risks associated with their products and to institute preventive control measures. It also would require the FDA to conduct more frequent inspections of food processing facilities, and gives the agency the authority to order companies to recall contaminated food. Small new registration fees imposed on food processing facilities would help pay for the more frequent inspections. "Americans are sick and tired of outbreaks of foodborne illnesses and recalls of tainted foods," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">food safety</a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "This long-overdue legislation refocuses FDA on preventing problems, rather than reacting to each new food crisis. Consumers have lost confidence in the safety of our food, and Congress can help restore it by passing this important bill without delay." The bill comes in the wake of several years' worth of high-profile cases of contaminated FDA-regulated foods, including spinach, tomatoes, peppers, peanuts, pistachios, and even pet food. The Food Safety Enhancement Act is the culmination of at least 24 hearings in the House and the Senate in recent years, and decades of lobbying by food safety advocates. "In addition to Chairman Waxman and Representative Dingell, Representatives Frank Pallone, Diana DeGette, and Bart Stupak all played critical and constructive roles in moving this legislation forward," said DeWaal. "They deserve thanks from all of us who enjoy eating safe, wholesome food." 2009-06-17 Soda Taxes Can Help Fund Health Coverage and Prevention Programs, Say Experts http://cspinet.org/new/200906171.html Plus, Reducing Consumption Can Help Curb Rising Obesity RatesWASHINGTON—Federal and state governments should levy excise taxes on soda and other sugary drinks both to raise revenues to pay for health coverage and prevention programs, and also to decrease consumption of products that promote obesity, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> said today. The nutrition and food safety watchdog group launched a web-based <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy/" target="cspi">Liquid Candy Tax Calculator</a> to show policymakers, activists and media exactly how much money states and the federal government could raise in this way. For instance, a new federal excise tax of one penny per 12-ounce soda could generate more than $1.5 billion dollars per year, according to the calculator. A steeper tax of one penny per ounce could raise roughly $16 billion a year—an amount that would make a serious down payment on a comprehensive health care reform bill. CSPI estimates that taxing soda at that amount would also reduce consumption by 13 percent overall and perhaps more among children, which would help slow the obesity and diabetes epidemics. The state of Massachusetts, which is weighing a sales tax of 8 percent on sugary drinks, could raise $105 million. "Soda and non-carbonated soft drinks are basically liquid candy, providing nothing of positive benefit to the diet, just empty calories," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "It’s cheaper than dirt, we consume too much of it, and it causes expensive health problems. The question is why has it gone untaxed for so long at the federal level?" Also today, leading health care and nutrition advocates are urging Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-MT) to tax soft drinks to help fund health reform. "While many factors contribute to weight gain, soft drinks are the only food or beverage shown to have a direct link to obesity, which in turn can lead to hypertension, strokes, heart attacks, diabetes, cancer, and arthritis, and other health and psychosocial problems," the advocates wrote in a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/softdrinktaxletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to Baucus</a>. "In addition, consumption of sugary beverages can cause tooth decay and dental erosion." Besides CSPI, groups signing on to the letter include the American Public Health Association, the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, Consumers Union, Partnership for Prevention, Shape Up America!, and Trust for America’s Health. Individuals signing include Kelly Brownell of the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity at Yale University and Walter Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health. Separately, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has previously endorsed a tax on soft drinks to help pay for health-care reform. In April, Brownell and former New York City Health Director Dr. Tom Frieden published a much-discussed paper in the New England Journal of Medicine making the case for a tax on sugared beverages. (Frieden is now director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.) The forward to the paper quoted Adam Smith, the father of free-market economics, thusly: "Sugar, rum, and tobacco are commodities which are nowhere necessaries of life, which are become objects of almost universal consumption, and which are therefore extremely proper subjects of taxation." CSPI's calculator also displays the rates of overweight and obesity in the United States. and in each state, as well as the costs of medical care due to adult obesity. Of the $95 billion cost to treat obesity-related disease nationwide, about half is borne by Medicare and Medicaid. Though a federal tax on soda would be new, more than a dozen states already have taxes on soda and other snack foods, including Arkansas, California, New York, and West Virginia. In May, CSPI's Jacobson <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mikejacobsontestimony.pdf" target="cspi">testified before the Senate Finance Committee</a> urging a new federal tax on sugary drinks, as well as long-overdue increases in federal excise taxes on alcohol, to help pay for health coverage for all Americans. When the committee released a <a href="http://finance.senate.gov/press/Bpress/2009press/prb051809.pdf" target="cspi">list of possible funding mechanisms</a> for health care reform, it did include raising alcohol taxes and a new tax on sugary drinks. 2009-06-17 USDA Urged to Reverse Bush-Era Gag Rule that Prevented Criticism of Soda http://cspinet.org/new/200906121.html Bush Administration Blocked States from Using Federal Funds to Discourage Soda ConsumptionWASHINGTON—Bush-era rules at the U.S. Department of Agriculture prohibit states from using federal nutrition education funds for discouraging soda consumption, and the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> is urging <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/foodstampvilsackletter.pdf" target="cspi">Secretary Tom Vilsack </a> to reverse them. The Bush Administration’s policy was adopted shortly after the soft drink industry complained to state officials <a href="/HealthyMainePartnershipsAd.wmv" target="cspi">running campaigns</a> that urged consumers to cut back on soft drinks, according to CSPI, and is out of sync with the federal government's <a href="http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/dietaryguidelines.htm" target="cspi">Dietary Guidelines for Americans</a>. "Soft drinks are the only food or beverage directly linked to obesity," said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. "Yet under the Bush Administration, USDA gagged state health officials and blocked important nutrition education efforts. We hope the Obama Administration will quickly reverse course and instead actively support state campaigns aimed at reducing soda consumption and obesity" The policy has its roots in a 2003 USDA memorandum prohibiting the use of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funds for disparaging or criticizing any food, issued after the state of Maine ran an ad campaign encouraging people to cut back on soda. In March 2009, the USDA restated the gag rule in a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/snap-ed.pdf" target="cspi">guidance document</a> for state health officials. In 2008, USDA told California officials the state could not use federal funds to run a "Soda-Free Summer" campaign. To obtain funding, California had to change the campaign motto to the milder "Rethink your Drink." Just last month USDA’s western regional office objected to the state's "Be Sugar Savvy & Soda Free Summer Campaign." That campaign is not even funded with federal funds, but regional USDA officials believed it was "disparaging" to soft drinks and objected because they feared it might appear to be funded by the federal government. USDA blocked similar campaigns conducted by the state of Wyoming. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, published jointly by USDA and the Department of Health and Human Services, advises people to "choose and prepare foods and beverages with little added sugars or caloric sweeteners," and USDA's Food Guide recommends that people who consume a reasonable amount of fat and calories to consume no more than 8 teaspoons of added sugars a day— which is less than the amount of sugar found in a typical 12 ounce can of soda. "This is just a matter of permitting states to run nutrition education programs that are consistent with the federal government's own dietary advice, so this should really be a no-brainer," stated Ilene Ringel Heller, CSPI senior attorney. 2009-06-12 Menu-Labeling Legislation Gains Support from Chain Restaurants http://cspinet.org/new/200906101.html National Restaurant Association Joins CSPI in Support of Legislation Requiring Calories on Menus, Menu BoardsWASHINGTON—Legislation that would require calories on chain restaurant menus and menu boards now has the support of the restaurant industry as well as health groups thanks to an agreement struck among senators who were previously supporting separate labeling bills. Besides requiring calories on menus, menu boards and drive-through displays, the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/menulabelingbill.pdf" target="cspi">new legislation</a> would require chains with 20 or more outlets to provide additional nutrition information upon request. That language is included among other prevention measures in the <a href="http://help.senate.gov/Maj_press/2009_06_09.pdf" target="cspi">draft health reform legislation</a> released last night by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee. Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), the lead sponsor of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905141.html" target="cspi">Menu Education and Labeling (MEAL) Act</a> that has been long supported by the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> and other health groups, brokered the agreement with Senators Tom Carper (D-DE) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), sponsors of a separate bill backed by industry. "Calories on menus will allow Americans to exercise responsibility for what they eat and what they order for their children," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "Whether you're concerned about managing your weight or about getting your money's worth at chain restaurants, calorie counts are critical pieces of information. We're delighted to be working with the restaurant industry on legislation that will ensure that calories be listed on their menus and menu boards" If enacted, the compromise bill would cover all chains of 20 or more restaurants; small businesses would be exempt. Custom orders and temporary specials would be exempt from the calorie labeling requirement, as would items not listed on menus or menu boards, such as condiments. Like the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act that requires Nutrition Facts labeling on packaged foods, the legislation would require national uniformity. Similar <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_map.pdf" target="cspi">bills</a> or regulations have been <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_bill_summaries_09.pdf" target="cspi">adopted</a> in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200609262.html" target="cspi">New York City</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200811061.html" target="cspi">Philadelphia</a>, Massachusetts, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809301.html" target="cspi">California</a> and a number of major counties. This month bills in Oregon, Maine and Connecticut passed their state legislatures and are awaiting final action. 82 percent of those <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_review_fact_sheet.pdf" target="cspi">surveyed in New York City</a> after its calorie-labeling rule went into effect said seeing calories on menus affected their choices. And Starbucks, Cosi and other restaurants have <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/reformulation_fact_sheet.pdf" target="cspi">reformulated menu items</a> to bring down the calories. CSPI pointed out that companies are required to provide information on the fuel-efficiency of cars, care instructions for clothing, and energy and water consumption of certain home appliances. "It seems more important that people be able to watch their calorie intake to avoid diabetes or heart disease than to know how to wash a blouse," said Wootan. "Putting calories on menu boards is a common-sense prevention measure that will help reduce Americans' risk of heart disease, diabetes and other expensive-to-treat chronic diseases made more prevalent by rising obesity rates." American adults and children consume, on average, one third of their calories from <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/lit_rev-eating_out_and_obesity.pdf" target="cspi">eating out</a>. Studies link eating out with obesity and higher caloric intakes. For example, children eat almost twice as many calories when they eat a meal at a restaurant compared to a meal at home. Meals at chain restaurants can be unexpectedly high in calories, with appetizers, entrées and desserts sometimes providing an entire day's worth of calories on a single plate. 2009-06-10 New Legislation Should Be Passed Quickly, Food Safety Advocates Urge http://cspinet.org/new/200906031.html Bill Gives FDA New Power and Resources to Prevent Contaminated FoodWASHINGTON—Food safety advocates, led by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, say that rapid passage of the Food Safety Enhancement Act is the best hope for making America's food safer. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety" target="cspi">CSPI food safety</a> director Caroline Smith DeWaal <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/housee_ctestimonyjune3.pdf" target="cspi">testified in support of the legislation today</a>, on behalf of the consumer and public health groups that are members of the <a href="http://www.makeourfoodsafe.org/" target="cspi">Safe Food Coalition</a>. The legislation responds to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">series of nationwide outbreaks and recalls</a> involving <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200901221.html" target="cspi">peanut butter</a>, pet food, spinach, hot peppers, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200904081.html" target="cspi">other foods </a> regulated by the Food and Drug Administration. These outbreaks have caused a serious drop in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200902031.html" target="cspi">consumer confidence</a> over the last few years, according to the testimony of the groups. <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h2749ih.txt.pdf" target="cspi">The Food Safety Enhancement Act</a> includes many measures that food safety experts have urged for years, including a requirement for food companies to conduct hazard analysis programs and to institute preventive control measures. It also would require the FDA to conduct more-frequent inspections of food processing facilities. While today FDA inspects food factories only about once every ten years, the Food Safety Enhancement Act would require inspections for high-risk facilities every six to 18 months and all facilities, including warehouses, every four years. The bill also would give the FDA something that most consumers probably think the agency already has: the authority to order companies to recall potentially contaminated food. And it provides the FDA with a much broader range of criminal and civil penalties to punish unscrupulous processors who knowingly allow tainted foods onto supermarket shelves. "Fixing food safety at FDA is long overdue," DeWaal said. "The agency is trying to regulate food from all over the world with a 100-year-old toolbox. This bill gives both the food industry and the government new responsibilities for assuring that the food consumers eat won’t make them ill." The bill, however, does not accomplish some of the structural changes urged by CSPI and others, such as dividing the FDA into two separate agencies, one focused on food and another on medical products. CSPI hopes Congress and the Obama Administration will do that after the bill is passed. The Safe Food Coalition is also asking Congress to strengthen the legislation in several ways, including: <ul><li>a clearer mandate for testing and reporting of test results to FDA and stronger mandates for the agency to set performance standards;</li></ul> <ul><li>a definition of "risk-based" inspection that covers the entire food supply; and</li></ul> <ul><li>that meat and seafood regulated by FDA face the same regulatory oversight as those products regulated by USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service.</li></ul> The groups are also recommending stricter oversight of food additives, some of which are declared "generally recognized as safe" without FDA review even though they can cause life-threatening allergic reactions or heart disease. Similarly, consumer groups are urging legislators to limit the use of antibiotics in agriculture to control the growth of antibiotic-resistant pathogens in foods. 2009-06-03 Xtreme Eating Awards 2009 http://cspinet.org/new/200906021.html Chain Restaurants Engaged in Obesity-Promoting "Waist Race"WASHINGTON—Xtreme appetizers, entrées, and desserts at America's chain restaurants are making Americans fatter and sicker, and the trendy thing for chains to do is to make already bad foods even worse, according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. Bacon cheeseburgers come nestled inside quesadillas. Half racks of ribs are promoted as side orders to steak. Golf-ball-size blobs of macaroni and cheese are tossed in the deep-fryer and served with creamy marinara sauce and even more cheese. Welcome to the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/x-treme_eating.pdf" target="cspi">Xtreme Eating Awards for 2009</a>. Welcome back, actually. CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702262.html" target="cspi">first Xtreme Eating report</a> shocked the nation in 2007 with nutritional train wrecks like Uno Chicago Grill's 2,000-calorie Pizza Skins. Since the restaurant industry is showing few signs of restraint or responsibility in the face of America's epidemic of obesity and diet-related disease, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="cspi">Nutrition Action</a> will make these awards an annual affair. <img src="/images/friedmacandcheese.jpg"> The Cheesecake Factory's Fried Macaroni and Cheese. With 1,570 calories and 69 grams of saturated fat, you'd be better off eating an entire stick of butter. "Would you like an entrée with your entrée?" is how CSPI senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley imagines the logic behind items like Olive Garden's Tour of Italy, where diners can pile Lasagna, Chicken Parmigiana, and Fettuccine Alfredo onto one very large dinner plate. "It's a race to the bottom, and there's no end in sight." Keep in mind that most people should limit themselves to about 2,000 calories, 20 grams of saturated fat, and 1,500 mg of sodium per day. And the envelopes please… <ul><li>Red Lobster Ultimate Fondue: This retro item is also making comebacks at Olive Garden, Uno Chicago Grill, and at a chain that sells nothing but fondues, The Melting Pot. Red Lobster’s Ultimate version, "shrimp and crabmeat in a creamy lobster cheese sauce served in a warm crispy sourdough bowl," is crammed with 1,490 calories, 40 grams of saturated fat, and 3,580 mg of sodium. That's two days' worth of both artery-clogging fat and blood-pressure-spiking sodium.</li></ul> <ul><li>Applebee's Quesadilla Burger: Here Applebee's inserts a bacon cheeseburger into a quesadilla. Two flour tortillas, two kinds of meat, two kinds of cheese, pico de gallo, lettuce, and a previously unknown condiment called Mexi-ranch sauce, plus fries, gives this monstrous marriage 1,820 calories, 46 grams of saturated fat, and 4,410 mg of sodium. Bonus heart-stopper: Applebee's actually invites customers to top the fries with chili and still more cheese.</ul></li> <ul><li>Chili's Big Mouth Bites: This is four mini-bacon-cheeseburgers served on a plate with fries, onion strings, and jalapeno ranch dipping sauce. ("Mini" is relative: each one is like a Quarter Pounder.) Like the "sliders" available at other chains, Chili's Big Mouth Bites can be an appetizer or an entrée (these numbers are for the latter). 2,350 calories, 38 grams of saturated fat, and 3,940 milligrams of sodium.</ul></li> <ul><li>The Cheesecake Factory Chicken and Biscuits: Nutrition Action calls it "discomfort food." If you wouldn't eat an entire 8-piece bucket of KFC Original Recipe plus 5 biscuits, you shouldn’t order this. But unless you live in a city with menu labeling, you wouldn’t know that this dish has 2,500 calories. The rest of the winning—or rather, losing—appetizers, entrées, and desserts are in the June issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="cspi">Nutrition Action</a>.</ul></li> According to CSPI, 2009 should be the year that Congress clues diners in by passing a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/" target="cspi">menu labeling</a> measure similar to the ones <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_map.pdf" target="cspi">enacted</a> in Nashville, New York City, Philadelphia, Portland, OR, California, Massachusetts, and several counties. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_bill_summaries_09.pdf" target="cspi">Bills</a> in Oregon and Connecticut have passed and are awaiting Governors' signatures. And two weeks ago, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) and U.S. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) introduced the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200905141.html" target="cspi">Menu Education and Labeling (MEAL) Act</a>, which would require big restaurant chains to post calories on menu boards and list calories, saturated plus trans fat, carbohydrates, and sodium on printed menus. It would apply to the standardized items at restaurants with more than 20 outlets, and not to custom orders or daily specials. "Ultimately, Americans bear personal responsibility for their dining choices," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "But you can’t exercise personal responsibility if you don’t have nutrition information when you order. Who would expect 2,800 calories in a dessert?" Menu labeling has proven popular and useful in the jurisdictions that have implemented it, according to CSPI. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_review_fact_sheet.pdf" target="cspi">survey of New Yorkers</a>, 82 percent of respondents said that seeing the numbers affected their choices. Though the industry tried to challenge New York's menu labeling law in court, it lost, and its prospects for challenging other laws may become dimmer still: One of the federal appellate judges that let the New York law stand is Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama's nominee for a seat on the Supreme Court. 2009-06-02 Lawmakers to Introduce Federal Menu-Labeling Bill http://cspinet.org/new/200905141.html MEAL Act Would Require Calorie Labeling on Chain-Restaurant Menus and Menu BoardsWASHINGTON—Eating out would be a whole lot easier for nutrition-conscious customers in chain restaurants, if <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/meal_act.pdf" target="cspi">legislation introduced today</a> by <a href="http://harkin.senate.gov/pr/col.cfm?id=222102" target="cspi">Senator Tom Harkin</a> (D-IA) and <a href="http://delauro.house.gov/release.cfm?id=1137" target="cspi">Representative Rosa DeLauro</a> (D-CT) becomes law. The Menu Education and Labeling (MEAL) Act would require fast-food and other chain restaurants to post calories on menu boards and food display tags and calories, saturated plus trans fat, carbohydrates, and sodium on printed menus. The bill has the strong support of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which has led the national campaign for menu labeling, including measures passed in New York City, California, Massachusetts and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ml_map.pdf" target="cspi">other jurisdictions</a>. The MEAL act would apply to chains with 20 or more outlets and would exclude small mom-and-pop restaurants and custom orders or temporary menu items at chain restaurants. <img src="/images/starbucksboard.jpg"> This Starbucks in New York City posts calories on its menu boards. "Consumers play an impossible guessing game trying to make healthier choices in restaurants," said CSPI <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org/" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo Wootan. "Who would guess that a large chocolate shake at McDonald's has more calories than two Big Macs or that a multigrain bagel at Dunkin' Donuts has 140 more calories than a jelly donut?" Americans get a third of their calories from, and spend half of their food dollars on, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/lit_rev-eating_out_and_obesity.pdf" target="cspi">meals outside the home</a>. At table-service chains like Ruby Tuesday, Macaroni Grill, and Chili's, it's easy to find 1,000-calorie appetizers, 1,000-calorie entrees, and 1,000-calorie desserts. Not surprisingly, about two-thirds of American adults and a third of children and adolescents are overweight or obese, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. "Access to nutrition information at restaurants is more important than ever, particularly given that a number of studies link eating out with higher caloric intake and obesity," DeLauro said. "With few restaurants providing easy-to-use and easy-to-find nutrition information, the MEAL Act represents an incremental step toward combating increasing obesity rates." Restaurant industry lobbyists have tried to capitalize on the popularity of menu labeling by writing a competing bill called the LEAN Act. But far from promoting menu labeling, that bill would nullify the state and local measures already in effect and preempt others from being enacted in the future. Health groups oppose it. Labeling on packaged food, which was implemented 15 years ago this month, gives consumers nutrition information for foods eaten at home. It’s high time consumers have a few nutrition facts when eating out, Wootan said. "Overweight, poor nutrition and diet-related diseases are public health threats of the first order – contributing to numerous chronic health conditions, including heart disease, cancer, diabetes and stroke," Harkin said. "But the issues aren't just medical – they also affect our economy. We spend almost $2 trillion annually on health care in the United States, 75 percent of which goes for treating and managing chronic diseases that are, in many cases, preventable. It is time to take preventative action and give consumers the tools they need to take better control of their diet and health." In New York City, prior to the implementation of its menu labeling policy, only 4 percent of restaurant customers saw nutrition information at restaurants that provided it (generally on websites, tray liners, posters, or brochures). <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_review_fact_sheet.pdf" target="cspi">After menu labeling</a>, 90 percent of New Yorkers have read the nutrition information on menus in chain restaurants, and a remarkable 82 percent say menu labeling has affected what they order. "Nutrition information on web sites, tray liners and other inconvenient places doesn't work," Wootan said. "If people are going to be able to use nutrition information, it has to be at the point of ordering, not on a poster back by the bathroom or after they’ve ordered the food." 2009-05-14 FDA Cracks Down on Cheerios' Misleading Cholesterol Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200905121.html Move Applauded by CSPIThe Food and Drug Administration took long-overdue action by demanding that General Mills halt its grossly exaggerated and misleading health claims for Cheerios cereal. The company claims that Cheerios can reduce "bad" cholesterol levels by 4 percent in just 6 weeks and ward off heart disease and cancers of the colon and stomach. The claims are plastered on Cheerios packages, the General Mills web site, and are even announced on supermarket public address systems. The FDA has approved a more general health claim that eating diets low in saturated fat and cholesterol, and high in fiber-containing fruit, vegetable, and grain products may reduce the risk of heart disease. But the claims for Cheerios portrayed the mentioned diseases not included in the FDA-authorized claim and failed to mention the importance of eating a diet low in saturated fat and cholesterol. "This is the strongest action taken by the FDA against misleading health claims for foods in almost a decade," said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. "I hope the FDA is signaling the entire food industry that the Bush era policy of lax enforcement has come to an end. The FDA should also stop misleading claims for so-called 'whole grain' products that are mostly made with white flour and foods claimed to be made with fruit when they only contain trivial amounts of juice." 2009-05-12 "Heart Attack Entrées and Side Orders of Stroke" http://cspinet.org/new/200905111.html Overly Salty Restaurant Meals Present Long-Term Health Risks for All, and Immediate Danger for SomeWASHINGTON—Unsafe levels of sodium chloride, or salt, in chain restaurant meals increase one's chance of developing hypertension, heart attacks, strokes, and kidney disease according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/index.html" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. The nonprofit food safety and nutrition watchdog group today is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspirestaurantsaltreport.pdf" target="cspi">exposing chain restaurant meals with dangerously high levels of sodium </a> and is renewing its call on industry and government to lower sodium levels in foods. <img src="/images/saltpresconf.jpg">Photo Credit: CSPI Ahoy, matey! Red Lobster's Admiral's feast, with creamy lobster topped mashed potato, Caesar salad with dressing, just one of the complimentary Cheddar Bay Biscuits, and a lemonade: At 7,106 mg of sodium, it is one of the saltiest restaurant meals in America. People with high blood pressure, African Americans, and people middle-aged and older—70 percent of the population—should consume no more than 1,500 milligrams (mg) of sodium daily, according to the government’s dietary advice. Others should consume no more than 2,300 mg of sodium per day. Yet it is almost impossible to get restaurant meals with reasonably safe levels of sodium. A lifetime of eating much more than the recommended amounts of sodium presents an increased risk of disease in the long term. But for some, particularly the elderly, consuming 4,000 mg or more of sodium in a single meal can present an immediate risk of heart failure or other serious problems. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> researchers examined 17 chains and found that 85 out of 102 meals had more than a day's worth of sodium, and some had more than four days' worth, including these: <ul><li>Red Lobster Admirals' Feast with Caesar Salad, Creamy Lobster Topped Mashed Potato, Cheddar Bay Biscuit, and a Lemonade: 7,106 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Chili's Buffalo Chicken Fajitas (with tortillas and condiments) and a Dr Pepper: 6,916 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Chili's Honey-Chipotle Ribs with Mashed Potatoes with Gravy, Seasonal Vegetables, and a Dr Pepper: 6,440 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Olive Garden Tour of Italy (lasagna) with a Breadstick, Garden Fresh Salad with House Dressing, and a Coca-Cola: 6,176 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Olive Garden Chicken Parmigiana with a Breadstick, Garden Fresh Salad with House Dressing, and Raspberry Leonade: 5,735 mg</li></ul> "Who knows how many Americans have been pushed prematurely into their graves thanks to sodium levels like those found in Olive Garden, Chili's, and Red Lobster?” asked CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "These chains are sabotaging the food supply. They should cut back and give consumers the freedom to decide for themselves how much salt they want." "More than 70 percent of older Americans have hypertension and are especially vulnerable," said Dr. Mel Daly, a geriatrician who is Medical Director of the Subacute Unit at Greater Baltimore Medical Center and an associate professor of medicine at Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine. "Many elderly eat frequently at these restaurants because of convenience and cost. But the high sodium levels in many of these meals can lead to a spike in blood pressure and even precipitate heart failure in some individuals." Children eating at chain restaurants don’t fare much better than their parents or grandparents. According to the Institute of Medicine, children aged 4-8 should consume no more than 1,200 mg of sodium per day. These meals that have one or two days' worth of sodium: <ul><li>Red Lobster Chicken Fingers, Biscuit, Fries, Raspberry Lemonade: 2,430 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Chili's Country Fried Chicken Crispers with Rice and 1% milk: 2,385 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>KFC Popcorn Chicken with Macaroni and Cheese, Teddy Grahams, and 2% milk: 2,005 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Jack in the Box Chicken Strips Grilled, Buffalo Sauce, Fries, and 1 % milk: 1,980 mg</li></ul> <ul><li>Olive Garden Chicken Fingers, Fries, and Raspberry Lemonade: 1,835 mg</li></ul> "Parents already have enough to worry about with the increasing incidence of obesity and diabetes among children. The restaurant industry should not add to these problems by raising kids’ blood pressure as well," said Dr. Stephen Havas, an adjunct professor of preventive medicine at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and a former vice president for science, quality, and public health of the American Medical Association. He noted that a 2006 meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials in children found that reducing children's salt intake lowered their blood pressure, and that if lower blood pressure were maintained into adulthood, it would reduce the incidence of cardiovascular disease. Since 1978, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/index.html" target="cspi">CSPI</a> has been <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200812041.html" target="cspi">urging</a> the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200711271.html" target="cspi">Food and Drug Administration</a> to press for lower <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/saltreport.pdf" target="cspi">salt levels</a> in <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/saltupdatedec08.pdf" target="cspi">processed </a> and restaurant foods. In 2005 the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200502242.html" target="cspi">group sued the FDA</a> and then petitioned the agency to regulate salt as a food additive, subject to reasonable limits in a given category of food. (Currently, the FDA considers salt to be "generally recognized as safe" and does not put any limits on its use.) Havas and other hypertension experts have estimated that reducing sodium levels in restaurant and packaged foods by half could prevent at least 150,000 premature deaths per year in the United States. CSPI hopes that new leadership in the Obama administration will look to sodium reduction and other prevention measures as means of making health care reform affordable. Since the Bush administration did nothing to encourage sodium reduction, some city public health departments, particularly New York City's, have begun to press the food and restaurant industries to cut the sodium in their products. Requiring chain restaurants to disclose sodium on menus would help consumers regulate their salt intake and would likely nudge the industry to provide more low-sodium choices, according to CSPI. "Americans spend north of $15 billion to treat high blood pressure, and many billions more on expensive heart procedures, yet the government spends peanuts improving Americans' diets," said Jacobson. "Getting the food and restaurant industry to use less salt would be one way the Obama Administration could help prevent chronic disease and make health coverage more affordable." Tomorrow, before the Senate Finance Committee, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/senate-finance-5-11-09.pdf" target="cspi">Jacobson will testify</a> that reducing sodium consumption by just 25 percent over the next 10 years could <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/health-graphs-may-11-09.pdf" target="cspi">save the government $9 billion a year</a> in direct medical costs. 2009-05-11 A 2,000-Calorie Snack? No Fudgin' Way, Says Nutrition Action http://cspinet.org/new/200905011.html Cold Stone’s Oh Fudge! is Food PornWASHINGTON—If the obesity epidemic needed a stimulus package, it would look much like the 24-fl.-oz. Oh Fudge! shake from Cold Stone Creamery, which sends a 1,920-calorie deposit of chocolate ice cream, milk, and fudge syrup into the bellies of those willing to pay $5.50 or more. To withdraw that from your daily calorie bank, you’d have to spend more than four hours on the step machine or nearly seven hours doing water aerobics. In other words, it's Food Porn. The gory details are published in the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/coldstonefoodporn.pdf" target="cspi">May issue</a> of Nutrition Action Healthletter, published by the Washington-based watchdog group, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. "If you really need an Oh Fudge! shake, find a Cold Stone Creamery that’s ten miles away from you, walk there, and then drink it on your ten-mile walk back," said CSPI senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley. "Even if calories are of no concern to you, the large Oh Fudge! shake has 69 grams of saturated fat—the kind of fat that clogs arteries and causes heart attacks. It’s like slurping up two pounds of T-bone steak and a buttered baked potato through a straw." The smaller-sized Oh Fudge! shakes, with 1,250 or 1,660 calories, still dwarf the bigger burgers at most fast food chains (a Burger King Double Whopper with Cheese is a dainty 1,000 calories by comparison). <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a> spotlights a Food Porn in each issue alongside a Right Stuff, or healthy, recommendation (which this month is Quaker's new whole-grain Oatmeal Pancake Mix). Nutrition Action's past Food Porns include Starbucks' Salted Caramel Hot Chocolate, Chili’s Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie, Sara Lee Bites and DiGiorno's Ultimate Focaccia Pizza. Introductory subscriptions are $10 for ten issues. 2009-05-01 Momentum Grows for Push to Expel Junk Food from Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200904301.html WASHINGTON—Foods sold in schools will get a long-overdue nutritional makeover if legislation introduced today by Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) gets wrapped into this year's updates to the child nutrition programs, according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>. The group says that the pizza, sodas, so-called "energy drinks," chips, and candy abundantly available in schools are helping to fuel an epidemic of child obesity and diabetes. <a href="http://harkin.senate.gov/pr/p.cfm?i=310801" target="cspi">Harkin</a>, long a proponent of getting more fresh fruits and vegetables into schools, wants to update nutrition standards for the foods sold alongside school meals in the cafeteria, as well as foods sold in vending machines and school stores. Narrow nutrition standards were last set during the Carter Administration and only apply in the cafeteria during mealtimes. Harkin's bill would apply everywhere on campus during the whole school day. "In all but a handful of cities and states, junk food is still out of control in schools," said CSPI <a href="http://www.schoolfoods.org/" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "The federal government spends billions on the school lunch program, but that investment is undercut by the sale of soda and other junk foods. Parents want to know the money they send their son or daughter to school with will be spent on healthy foods, not disease-promoting junk." Current law only prohibits the sale of <a href="http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/menu/fmnv.htm" target="cspi">"foods of minimal nutritional value"</a> in the cafeteria during meal times. But standards for those foods, crafted in 1979, were drafted with an eye toward ensuring that school foods had a modicum of certain nutrients, such as protein and calcium. As a consequence, school's can’t sell calorie-free seltzer water, but pizza, doughnuts, and cheeseburgers can be sold without limits on calories, saturated or trans fat, or sodium. And because the nutrition standards only apply in the cafeteria, most vending machines can sell virtually anything. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/2007schoolreport.pdf" target="cspi">Two-thirds of states</a> still rely on the outdated national standards. "Poor diet and physical inactivity contribute to growing rates of chronic disease among children. One-third of American children born today will develop type II diabetes at some point and rates of obesity are skyrocketing," said Harkin. "Our legislation requires common-sense nutrition standards for the foods and beverages that are sold in school vending machines and similar outlets. Otherwise, junk food will continue to undermine the $11 billion that taxpayers pay for nutritious school meals." <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1324ih.txt.pdf" target="cspi">Similar legislation</a> was introduced in the House in March by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200903051.html" target="cspi">Representative Lynn Woolsey</a> (D-CA) and is cosponsored by 128 other House members. Agriculture Secretary <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/21/AR2009042100876.html" target="cspi">Tom Vilsack</a> has voiced <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/02/10/ST2009021002624.html" target="cspi">support for healthy school food</a>. And advocates for improving school food are confident that they have another ally at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue: As a senator, Barack Obama introduced his own bill to get junk food out of schools. "It's a myth that schools have to rely on junk-food sales to balance their budgets. Happily, schools that switch out junk foods for healthier drinks and snacks don't usually lose revenue," said Wootan. "Given the ability of schools to make money selling healthy foods, the political shifts in Washington, and the childhood obesity epidemic, the time is ripe for strong national legislation supporting healthy food for healthy kids." 2009-04-30 Federal Trade Commission Stops Kellogg from Claiming Frosted Mini-Wheats "Improve Kids' Attentiveness" in School http://cspinet.org/new/200904201.html Statement of CSPI Legal Affairs Director Bruce SilvergladeThe astonishing claims made by Kellogg that its Frosted Mini-Wheats improved <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/kellogg_screen_shot.pdf" target="cspi">children's attentiveness</a> by <a href="http://fmw.kelloggcompany.com/_res/docs/articles/studyhall/attentiveness-and-memory.pdf" target="cspi">20 percent</a> were laughable on their face and never should have surfaced in an advertising campaign by a major food manufacturer. The <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/04/kellogg.shtm" target="cspi">settlement announced today </a> by the Federal Trade Commission is a strong sign the false advertising cop is back on the beat, and the agency will no longer tolerate misleading health claims. We hope this is the just the beginning of a coordinated new effort to rein in dishonest advertising and marketing by food companies. The FTC could require much stronger remedies, such as corrective advertising. In addition, Congress should expand the FTC’s authority to level civil penalties. Incidentally, if Kellogg sincerely wanted to improve children's attentiveness, it would phase out the use of Blue 1, Blue 2, Red 40, and any other <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes" target="cspi">synthetic food dyes</a> that show up in some varieties of Mini-Wheats. Those dyes exacerbate some children's hyperactivity and behavioral problems, and have no place in foods aimed squarely at children. 2009-04-20 Pistachio Recall Shows FDA Needs to Shift from Voluntary Guidance to Food Safety Mandates for the Nut Industry http://cspinet.org/new/200904081.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pistaschio_recall_fact_sheet.pdf" target="cspi">latest recall of a popular</a> nut—pistachios—is expanding to include all nuts processed by Setton Farms in 2008. This recall, coming on the heels of a peanut recall affecting over 2,000 products, is another blow to farmers, nut processors, and consumer confidence. It proves the Food and Drug Administration urgently needs to institute mandatory process controls for all tree nuts and peanuts. The FDA should immediately require processors to institute process controls that would ensure safe product. <img src="/images/planters.jpg">Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin Following a recall of more than 2,000 peanut-butter products, Pistachios are the latest victim of salmonella contamination. FDA is being proactive, initiating the recall and working with Setton Farms to get potentially harmful products off the market even before any illnesses have been reported. But the agency didn't act fast enough to prevent the eight other outbreaks from peanuts or mixed nuts since 2001. The agency should not go company-by-company when it is clear that process controls are warranted for the nut industry overall. Other nut processors may be making the same mistakes that resulted in the Setton plant and the Peanut Corporation of America shipping millions of pounds of tainted nuts across the country. FDA officials say they intend to issue "guidance" to the pistachio industry, but this is an inadequate response. Guidance is voluntary; regulations are law. We can’t rely on industry honor systems to protect us. Without mandates and enforcement, Americans' protection from food safety illnesses and future scares is paper thin. 2009-04-08 NCAA Could Survive Without Beer Ads, Data Shows http://cspinet.org/new/200904031.html Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV Urges NCAA to Eliminate Beer AdsWASHINGTON—Beer advertising during NCAA basketball games is big, but not so big that the league couldn’t replace most of it with ads for products that don't contribute to alcohol problems on campus and elsewhere. Increasingly, that's the message being sent to NCAA officials by its own member schools, coaches, and athletic directors, as well as the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/index.htm" target="cspi">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/myles_brand._april_2009.pdf" target="cspi">letter to NCAA President Myles Brand</a>, the campaign again urged the NCAA to eliminate beer advertising during the tournament to reduce harmful exposure to college students and younger people. The NCAA claims its alcohol advertising policy is the most "conservative and restrictive of any televised sport." In reality, the league allows 60 seconds of beer ads per hour (which could be as many as four distinct ads), or 120 seconds total per game. That makes the concentration of beer-ad spending on NCAA games more than two-and-a-half times what it is during other television programming, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a>. Current NCAA policy prohibits advertising for tobacco products, gambling and other alcoholic beverages, but makes an exception for beer. According to data from TNS Media Intelligence for the 2008 NCAA Men's Basketball Tournament, the beer category, which includes the Anheuser-Busch and Miller brands, bought a combined $42.8 million—or about 7 percent—of $643 million in total revenue collected by CBS for the tournament. With an increase of 24 percent in total revenue since 2007, the tournament generates advertising rates second only to the Super Bowl. The profitable tournament has attracted some 300 advertisers in the past ten years promoting a wide-range of products, and aired an astonishing 140 ads during the final game of the 2008 tournament (ten were for beer). Ads for cars, movies, cell phones, electronics, financial services, food, razors, network television programs, and the U.S. military have all been major advertisers on NCAA games. "With the tournament's popularity and ability to attract other advertisers, the NCAA can clearly make a handsome profit <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ajc_oped_apr2009.pdf" target="cspi">without beer ads</a>," said George A. Hacker, director of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/alcohol/" target="cspi">CSPI's alcohol policies project</a>. "There's absolutely no reason to allow beer advertisements when so many other advertisers are willing to place their message in front of the attentive, young audience the NCAA enjoys." Increasing evidence shows a strong link between exposure to televised beer ads and heavier, more frequent adolescent drinking, especially during college sporting events. CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/index.htm" target="cspi">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a> seeks to reduce youth exposure to beer advertising on televised college sports to limit harmful beer consumption. Since 2005, 372—more than one-third— NCAA-member colleges and 16 athletic conferences have signed the "College Commitment" pledge to eliminate beer advertisements from college sports telecasts. 2009-04-03 And Now Pistachios? Take Action to Urge Your Representative in Congress to Improve the Safety of Our Food Supply http://takeaction.cspinet.org/campaign/foodsafetyact Urge Your Representative in Congress to Cosponsor The Food Safety Modernization Act of 2009. Go to http://www.cspinet.org/takeaction/index.html to take action! 2009-03-31 Consumers Warned of Web-Based Açai Scams http://cspinet.org/new/200903231.html Companies Use Fake Blogs, Fake Endorsements, Fishy Science, and Hard-to-Cancel Credit Card Transactions to Bilk ConsumersWASHINGTON—The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> is warning consumers not to enroll online in supposedly free trials of diet products made with the trendy Brazilian berry açai (pronounced a-sigh-EE). There's no evidence whatsoever to suggest that açai pills will help shed pounds, flatten tummies, cleanse colons, enhance sexual desire, or perform any of the other commonly advertised functions. And thousands of consumers have had trouble stopping recurrent charges on their credit cards when they cancel their free trials. Even web sites purporting to warn about <a href="http://www.acaiberrywarning.net/" target="cspi" rel="nofollow">açai-related scams</a> are <a href="http://www.acaiberryexam.com/index.php?t202id=71786&t202kw=acai" target="cspi">themselves</a> perpetrating <a href="http://www.theacaiberriesreview.com/?aid=5048843&KW=acai" target="cspi" rel="nofollow">scams</a>, according to CSPI. "If Bernard Madoff were in the food business, he’d be offering 'free' trials of açai-based weight-loss products," said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt, who authored an <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fraud_alert_-_internet_scams.pdf" target="cspi">exposé of the scam</a> in the April issue of CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="cspi">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>. "Law enforcement has yet to catch up to these rogue operators. Until they do, consumers have to protect themselves." <img src="/images/acai pills 009.jpg">Photo Credit: Jeff Cronin Acai companies are scamming consumers with hard-to-cancel credit-card charges. There is also no scientific evidence supporting the supposed health benefits of these products. CSPI says that if—despite the total lack of evidence that the product works—you still want to take advantage of a "free" trial of açai, use a prepaid credit card with a low credit limit or a virtual credit card that shields your real credit card number from unscrupulous online vendors. Visit the web site of the Better Business Bureau, <a href="http://www.bbb.org/us/article/8493" target="cspi">which in January</a> announced that it had received thousands of açai-related complaints. Look for the BBB seal on e-commerce sites and click on the seal to confirm its legitimacy, CSPI advises. Açai began attracting attention in 2005 on the belief that its juice was especially high in antioxidants. In truth, açai juice has only <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18220345?ordinalpos=2&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum" target="cspi">middling levels of antioxidants</a>—less than that of Concord grape, blueberry, and black cherry juices, but more than cranberry, orange, and apple juices. Even so, the extent to which antioxidants by themselves promote health is a matter of some debate. No credible evidence suggests antioxidants promote weight loss. In early 2008, Açai got a jolt of publicity when Dr. Mehmet Oz included açai among tomatoes, blueberries, broccoli, and other healthy foods in a segment on <a href="http://www.oprah.com/article/health/nutrition/20090105_orig_acai" target="cspi">Oprah</a>. A guest on Rachael Ray also discussed an açai beverage. Since then, ads on Google, Facebook, and major news media web sites have misleadingly steered consumers to sites with names like <a href="http://oprah-best-acai.com/" target="cspi" rel="nofollow">Oprah-best-acai.com</a> , <a href="http://oprahsamazingdiet.com/" target="cspi" rel="nofollow">OprahsAmazingDiet.com</a>, <a href="http://drozmiracle.com/" target="cspi" rel="nofollow">DrOzMiracle.com</a>, <a href="http://rachaelray.drozdiet-acaiberry.com/" target="cspi" rel="nofollow"> rachaelray.drozdiet-acaiberry.com</a> and dozens of others. OprahsAmazingDiet.com links to a blog post by a woman who supposedly lost 57 pounds using Oprah-endorsed products, and displays authoritative-looking biographies of Oprah and Dr. Oz. It then links to an offer for AcaiBurn, sold by a company that lists an address in Cyprus as its headquarters. Other sites link to FWM Laboratories of Ft. Lauderdale and Hollywood, Fla., which has an F rating from the Better Business Bureau and scores of horror stories about it on <a href="http://www.complaintsboard.com/complaints/fwm-laboratories-acai-berry-c162479.html" target="cspi">Internet complaint forms</a>. Oprah Winfrey, Mehmet Oz, and Rachael Ray have all publicly disassociated themselves from the açai sites that make unauthorized use their names. "When I logged on to my Hotmail account, I saw an ad about how Oprah lost weight on this diet, and I enrolled in what I thought would be a free trial," said M Chanel Pinkett, a graduate student from Gaithersburg, Md. who signed up for a free trial at <a href="http://www.acaiberrydetox.com/offer/acaiberrydetox/" target="cspi" rel="nofollow">AcaiBerryDetox.com</a>, a site run by FWM Laboratories. Pinkett's "free" trial actually cost $174.26. After posting a complaint on complaintsboard.com, which has thousands of açai-related complaints, she told her story to Washington's WJLA-TV. "There are no magical berries from the Brazilian rainforest that cure obesity—only painfully real credit card charges and empty weight loss promises," said Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal. "Aggressive Acai berry pitches on the Internet entice countless consumers into free trials promising weight loss, energy and detoxification. These claims are based on folklore, traditional remedies and outright fabrications—unproven by real scientific evidence. In reality, consumers lose more money than weight after free trials transition into inescapable charges. We will investigate these allegedly misleading or deceptive nutrition and health claims and take action under our consumer protection statutes—as we have done with other food products." FWM Laboratories, Advanced Wellness Research, and other acai companies benefit from dozens of fake diet blogs that steer unsuspecting consumers to sites plugging free açai trials. The woman depicted on Tara's Diet Blog, Olivia's Weight Loss blog, <a href="http://www.aliciasweightloss.com/?cat=1" target="cspi">Alicia's Diet Blog</a>, Becky's Weight Loss blog, and at least 75 other blogs is a <a href="http://www.istockphoto.com/file_closeup/people/4749461-casual-woman.php?id=4749461" target="cspi">German model named Julia</a> who has nothing to do with acai or any weight-loss product. The German photographer who made the original photos of her available on Istockphoto.com said the pill companies manipulated some of the "after" images to give the impression of weight loss. The fake blogs were first uncovered by a real blog, wafflesatnoon.com, written by an ad-industry insider. "These diet 'bloggers' are just a mirage," Schardt said. "Their weight loss is courtesy of Photoshop, not açai." Other açai companies with F ratings from the BBB include Pure Acai Berry Pro (Advanced Wellness Research), AcaiBurn, Acai Berry Maxx (FX Supplements), and SFL Nutrition. One of several online purchases of açai attempted by CSPI was blocked when the fraud department of the credit card’s issuing bank called the group, flagging the charge as suspicious. The reason? The funds would have been routed to an overseas bank. Of course there's good reason why some Internet supplement scammers might want to stay safely outside the U.S.: The company behind <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409221.html" target="cspi">Enzyte</a>, an herbal "male enhancement" pill advertised on late night television with grating "Smiling Bob" commercials, similarly charged consumers' credit cards after free trials ended. Company founder Steve Warshak is now serving a 25-year sentence in federal prison. 2009-03-23 Congress to Tackle Junk Food in Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200903051.html Legislators, Health Groups Aim to Update Carter-Era Nutrition StandardsWASHINGTON—Buoyed by a President and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2009/02/10/ST2009021002624.html" target="cspi">Secretary of Agriculture</a> who have voiced their support for healthier school foods, health groups say this is the year Congress should take action. Today, Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/house_nutrition_standards_bill.pdf" target="cspi">introducing a bill</a> that would get junk foods out of schools once and for all. The bill is likely to be addressed when Congress <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cnr_recommendations_2009.pdf" target="cspi">reauthorizes the Child Nutrition Act</a>, which expires this year. Current federal law only prohibits the sale of narrowly defined <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/school_nutrition_standards_fact_sheet_2009.pdf" target="cspi">"foods of minimal nutritional value"</a> in the cafeteria during meal times. But the nutrition standards for those foods haven't been updated in 30 years, during which time obesity rates in children have tripled. The Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act would have the U.S. Department of Agriculture update the nutrition standards for foods sold alongside school meals in cafeterias, vending machines, school stores, and elsewhere. Those standards would apply throughout the school day, and everywhere on campus—important reforms in an era where "multi-purpose rooms" are replacing cafeterias and vending machines line hallways. While the typical school lunch is reasonably balanced, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a>, children may replace it with, or add to it, sugary sports drinks, pizza, French fries, Snickers bars, Cheetos, or other nutritionally poor choices from a la carte, vending, and other sources. "Despite pockets of progress in some states and school systems, most schools make junk food readily available to children," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/index.html" target="cspi">nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "But junk food in schools helps fuel an epidemic of obesity and diabetes in children. And, it undercuts the considerable federal investment we make in the healthy school lunch program." "Current nutrition standards keep some junk food out of our schools but let other junk food in through the back door. Today, doughnuts are allowed but lollipops are not. Cookies are fine, but breath mints are banned. This doesn’t make any sense," Woolsey said. "It undermines the federal nutrition standards for meals if students spend their money on unhealthy options. It also undermines the role of parents who give lunch money to their children expecting them to eat something wholesome and nutritious and their money is spent on unhealthy options instead. That’s why I introduced this legislation, and I look forward to working with my colleagues to get it signed into law." <a href="http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/menu/fmnv.htm" target="cspi">USDA’s definition of foods of minimal nutritional value</a> hasn't changed since 1979. The Carter Administration's definition was focused on making sure foods sold in schools had five percent or more of the recommended daily intake levels of protein, vitamin C, calcium, and other nutrients. However, that definition included no maximum amounts for calories, saturated fat, or sodium—all of which children now consume too much of. As a result, innocuous products like seltzer water or breath mints are forbidden, while ice cream bars and doughnuts are perfectly acceptable. "Look, you can see how officials 30 years ago might have been concerned about whether our children were getting enough riboflavin or niacin," Wootan said. "Today, we need to reorient food policies toward preventing obesity, diabetes, and other diet-related diseases that might result in this generation of children living shorter lives than their parents." "Many of the foods being sold to our students on school grounds undermine federal investment in healthy school meals, nutrition education, and the lifelong lessons that parents teach their children about healthy eating habits," said National PTA President Jan Harp Domene. "Families and local leaders have successfully advocated to remove unhealthy alternatives from some schools, but it is time for national leadership on this issue." Besides CSPI and the National PTA, the legislation is backed by a powerful coalition of medical, health, and children’s advocacy groups including the American Dental Association, American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association, Partnership for Prevention, Save the Children, and School Nutrition Association. The bill has 88 cosponsors. When in the Senate, President Obama had his own bill to get junk food out of schools, and his proposed budget announced last week includes a <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSTRE51P4Q420090226" target="cspi">$1-billion-a-year increase</a> for child nutrition, which includes the school lunch and breakfast programs and WIC. That's on top of $100 million included in the economic stimulus package to upgrade equipment in school cafeterias, which in many cases means replacing fryolators with ovens, or better refrigeration to accommodate more fresh fruits and vegetables. Some states and localities have acted on their own to improve school foods, and voluntary agreements, like one brokered in 2006 by former President Bill Clinton, have helped further. Still, the majority of drinks and snacks sold in schools are of poor nutritional quality and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200711281.html" target="cspi">two-thirds of states</a> have weak or no policies on school nutrition. 2009-03-05 Maryland Bills Would Require Nutrition Info on Chain Restaurant Menus and Phasing Out Artificial Trans Fat http://cspinet.org/new/200903031.html ANNAPOLIS—Two pieces of legislation introduced in the Maryland General Assembly would make it much easier for the state's restaurant patrons to manage their weight and avoid heart disease. The first, sponsored by Senator David Harrington (D-47) and Delegate Doyle Niemann (D-47) would require calorie counts on fast-food chains' menu boards, and expanded nutrition information on chain restaurants' printed menus. The second, introduced by Delegate James Hubbard (D-23A), would require all restaurants to phase out their use of partially hydrogenated oil—the source of artery-clogging artificial trans fat. The House Health and Government Operations Committee will hold a hearing on both measures this afternoon. Both are strongly supported by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, which has helped <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200609262.html" target="cspi">New York City</a>, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809301.html" target="cspi">state</a> of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200807251.html" target="cspi">California</a>, and other jurisdictions adopt similar <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/" target="cspi">menu labeling</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat/index.html" target="cspi">trans fat</a> requirements. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/" target="cspi">menu labeling</a> bill, <a href="http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/bills/hb/hb0601f.pdf" target="cspi">HB 601</a>, would require calories on menu boards used by fast-food chains, and calories, saturated plus trans fat, carbohydrates, and sodium on printed menus at sit-down chain restaurants with at least 15 outlets. "Customers need calorie information at the point-of-ordering to make informed decisions," said Michelle Forman, government affairs manager at CSPI. "How else would one know that a plain bagel—without cream cheese—at Dunkin' Donuts has 120 more calories than a jelly-filled donut? Or that a large chocolate shake at McDonald's has more calories than three hamburgers?” "This bill doesn’t force anyone to do anything; it just makes sure that they know the price associated with what they do," Niemann said. "Just as no one would seriously think it wise to hide the dollar cost of a menu item, it is hard to imagine a reason to hide the nutritional price for the same item." Americans eat out twice as often as in 1970 and obtain a third of their calories from restaurant meals. Studies also link dining out to higher caloric intakes and overall body weights. Children, for example, eat significantly more calories from a typical restaurant meal than one at home—770 versus 420 calories. Posting nutrition information on menus and menu boards will promote healthier eating and encourage restaurants to compete on the basis of nutrition, according to CSPI. "Menu labeling will give Marylanders the information necessary to make smart choices," Harrington said. "Web sites, posters, and tray liners are just not working, so restaurants need to post nutrition information right on the menu where people can see and use it. It is just common sense." Delegate Hubbard's legislation, <a href="http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/billfile/HB0567.htm" target="cspi">HB 567</a>, would phase out artificial trans fat in all Maryland restaurants by October 2010. The city of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803181.html" target="cspi">Baltimore</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200705151.html" target="cspi">Montgomery County, Md.</a>,have already passed curbs on artificial trans fat. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat/index.html" target="cspi">Artificial trans fat</a> is increasingly hard to find in supermarket foods, where labeling requirements have encouraged most manufacturers to switch to healthier natural fats. Though most national chains have already gotten rid of it or are on the verge of doing so, many holdouts—especially among small and mid-size restaurants—remain. Trans fat is uniquely harmful because it raises one's LDL "bad" cholesterol that promotes heart disease and simultaneously lowers one's HDL "good" cholesterol that guards against it. "Partially hydrogenated oil belongs in history books, not cook books," said CSPI deputy director for health promotion Julie Greenstein. "Getting rid of it is an inexpensive and easy way for state, or for that matter, federal legislators to prevent heart attacks and hold down medical costs. As we've seen in Montgomery County, no one misses it once it’s gone." "Artificial trans fat no longer has a place in our diet, and phasing it out is the next step towards better health for Marylanders," Hubbard said. 2009-03-03 FDA Can't Protect Americans from Dangerous Dietary Supplements, GAO Says http://cspinet.org/new/200903022.html Beleaguered Agency Doesn’t Know Who, or What, It's RegulatingWASHINGTON—Add dietary supplements to the growing list of products the beleaguered Food and Drug Administration is failing to regulate. Today, the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/final_gao_dietary_supplements_report.pdf" target="cspi">Government Accountability Office</a> will report to Congress that the FDA does not have even the most basic information to protect the public from hazardous supplements. It doesn't have an accurate inventory of the supplement ingredients on store shelves. It doesn't have a firm handle on the number and nature of serious adverse reactions to dietary supplements. In fact, the GAO found, the agency doesn't even have a list of the names and locations of herbal supplement manufacturers. And several substances banned overseas are readily available on the Internet and in retail stores all over the U.S. even though they are variously linked to kidney damage, liver damage, seizures, and death. "When it comes to dietary supplements, it's like the Wild West, and the bad guys know they don’t have to take the sheriff seriously," said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. "Even when confronted with people dying from a dangerous substance like ephedra, the FDA has limited authority to get the product off the market." It took the FDA nearly 10 years to ban ephedra, also known as ma huang. Ephedra-containing dietary supplements, often marketed as weight-loss aids and performance enhancers, were linked to numerous deaths and thousands of adverse reactions, including irregular heartbeat and stroke. The herbal ingredients kava, lobelia, and supplements containing aristolochic acid are all banned in some countries, but FDA has taken no action short of issuing public warnings. Meanwhile, such products are available to consumers. St. John's wort, often marketed as an herbal anti-depressant, may interfere with birth control pills, a medicine used to treat HIV, and other prescription medications. While the FDA has issued alerts to that effect, it hasn't required warning labels on the products. As a result, some brands bear warnings while others do not. Similarly, GAO pointed out that although such popular supplements as garlic, ginkgo biloba, ginseng, and Vitamin E may cause blood thinning and result in life-threatening complications during surgery, consumers are not warned of such risks. A CSPI market survey of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/supplements_warning_list.pdf" target="cspi">warning labels</a> on Vitamin E and other popular supplements found that such leading supplement manufacturers as GNC, Nature's Plus, and Rite Aid do not warn of the risks associated with Vitamin E. "The supplement industry operates in a gray area where the loopholes loom larger than the law," Silverglade said. "Congress should close those loopholes by requiring that ingredients be reviewed for safety and effectiveness and that cautionary information appear on product labels." Under current law, dietary supplements sold before 1994 are presumed safe, and manufacturers of new dietary ingredients only need to notify the FDA 75 days before marketing new products. The vast majority of the claims on the labels, like the substances themselves, do not require any FDA approval. The GAO also found that the boundaries between dietary supplements and foods that contain herbal ingredients are not clear. The food industry often markets teas and other energy drinks as supplements to take advantage of weaker safety laws. "This report highlights significant gaps in FDA’s ability to ensure the safety of dietary supplements," said Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-CA), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. "Because of limitations on FDA’s authority and its lack of resources, consumers don’t have the assurance they should that all supplements are safe." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">CSPI</a> has repeatedly <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612051.html" target="cspi">urged the FDA</a> to take enforcement action against supplements that contain ingredients the agency has told the industry are not recognized as <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bmj_functional_foods.pdf" target="cspi">safe for use in foods</a>, including echinacea, ginkgo biloba, ginseng, chromium picolinate, guarana and gotu kola. Foods containing such ingredients include Arizona Rx Iced Teas, Snapple Awaken, and SoBe Lifewater Zingseng. In addition, Mars continues to sell its Cocoa Via candy bars despite the fact FDA told the company that folate is not recognized as safe for use in candy. Fuze Black and Green Tea with Acai Berry also contains added folate in violation of FDA rules. Excess consumption of folate masks the presence of anemia in persons with a vitamin B12 deficiency. The GAO pointed out the FDA lacks statutory authority to keep potentially hazardous supplement ingredients off the market and the resources to study adverse reaction reports or inspect manufacturing facilities. As with contaminated foods, the agency lacks mandatory recall authority. In comments supplied to GAO, the FDA stated it generally agreed with the report's recommendations for improving regulation of the industry, which in 2007 had more than $23 billion in sales. 2009-03-02 Maine to Consider Putting Calories on Chain Restaurant Menus and Menu Boards http://cspinet.org/new/200902241.html Today Maine House Speaker Hannah Pingree introduced a bill to require menu labeling at chain restaurants. Below is a statement by CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. Wootan.I hope this year Maine will join <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="cspi">New York City</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200811061.html" target="cspi">Philadelphia</a>, Portland, OR, and the state of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809301.html" target="cspi">California</a> in passing menu labeling for chain restaurants. If McDonald's, Subway, and Applebee's can provide New Yorkers with nutrition information, shouldn't they do the same for Mainers? People should be provided the nutritional price for what they're ordering as well as the financial price. Otherwise how can they know that a bagel with cream cheese has more calories than two jelly donuts at Dunkin’ Donuts? Menu labeling is a popular, low-cost way to help make a dent in the obesity epidemic and save valuable health dollars in these tough economic times. It now seems hard to believe that not long ago Nutrition Facts labels weren't required on food packages in the grocery store. Similarly, a few years from now, it will be hard to imagine that standardized nutrition information was absent from chain restaurant menus. 2009-02-24 http://cspinet.org/new/200902241.html Today Maine House Speaker Hannah Pingree introduced a bill to require menu labeling at chain restaurants. Below is a statement by CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. Wootan.I hope this year Maine will join <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="cspi">New York City</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200811061.html" target="cspi">Philadelphia</a>, Portland, OR, and the state of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809301.html" target="cspi">California</a> in passing menu labeling for chain restaurants. If McDonald's, Subway, and Applebee's can provide New Yorkers with nutrition information, shouldn't they do the same for Mainers? People should be provided the nutritional price for what they're ordering as well as the financial price. Otherwise how can they know that a bagel with cream cheese has more calories than two jelly donuts at Dunkin’ Donuts? Menu labeling is a popular, low-cost way to help make a dent in the obesity epidemic and save valuable health dollars in these tough economic times. It now seems hard to believe that not long ago Nutrition Facts labels weren't required on food packages in the grocery store. Similarly, a few years from now, it will be hard to imagine that standardized nutrition information was absent from chain restaurant menus. 0-00-00 Michael Eisner's Second Act: Junk Food Magnate http://cspinet.org/new/200902181.html Topps Urged to Stop Using Young Girls to Market “Baby Bottle Pop”WASHINGTON—The Topps candy company has signed a musical trio of twelve- and fourteen-year-old girls to sell Baby Bottle Pop—a powdered candy sold in a miniature baby bottle, eaten by dipping a candy nipple in a sugary powder and licking it off. The nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> is calling on the owner of Topps—former Disney CEO Michael Eisner—to scuttle that deal and join an industry-wide self regulatory group which monitors the way foods are marketed to children. In late January, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/arts/music/28cliq.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=clique%20girls&st=cse" target="cspi">The New York Times</a> reported that Topps signed a not-yet-widely-known music group called the Clique Girlz to appear on Baby Bottle Pop packaging and in commercials on Nickelodeon, the Cartoon Network, and Toon Disney. A previous Topps arrangement with the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opydx7sWm9w" target="cspi">Jonas Brothers</a> is credited with catapulting that group on to the Disney Channel, according to the paper. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/eisnerletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to Eisner</a>, CSPI said too much candy and other junk food puts young children at greater risk of obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay, and the company's behavior stands in stark contrast to his former employer. Under Eisner's successor, Robert Iger, Disney conducted a top-to-bottom review of its food marketing practices, instituting reforms at its theme parks and limiting the use of its licensed characters to foods that meet nutrition standards, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610162.html" target="cspi">winning praise from CSPI</a> and other health advocates. <img src="/images/babybottlepop.jpg">Eisner's Topps hires underage girl group to market Baby Bottle Pop, above. Photo credit: Jeff Cronin "This is food porn," said CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/index.html" target="cspi">CSPI nutrition policy</a> director Margo G. Wootan. "I think I speak for millions of parents when I say: Mr. Eisner, please keep your candy nipples out of our children’s mouths. It’s gross for Topps to use young kids to peddle junk food to young kids." The first three ingredients listed on a Baby Bottle Pop obtained by CSPI are sugar, dextrose, and corn syrup or, in other words, sugar, sugar, and sugar. After those ingredients come unspecified artificial flavors, citric acid, buffered lactic acid, and the artificial colors Blue 1, Yellow 5, Red 40, and Red 3. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="cspi">CSPI urged the Food and Drug Administration</a> to ban those and several other synthetic food dyes because they <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes/form.html" target="cspi">promote hyperactivity and behavior problems in some children</a> promote hyperactivity and behavior problems in some children. CSPI also urged Eisner to enroll Topps in the Council of Better Business Bureau's Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative—an industry program that encourages voluntary standards for children's food advertising and manages pledges from 15 member companies, including Coca-Cola, General Mills, Kellogg, McDonald's, Nestle, Mars, and PepsiCo. Topps is one of the few major advertisers to children that is not a member of the initiative, along with Chuck E. Cheese, Subway, and YUM! Brands, the parent company of Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, and KFC. Topps is the North Korea of the food industry," said Wootan. "They've isolated themselves from the community of responsible food marketers. They're a rogue player that maintains the lowest standards of conduct." Baby Bottle Pop containers are just small enough for <a href="http://topps.com/candy/" target="cspi">Topps</a> to avoid disclosing calories on Nutrition Facts labels, but if they were labeled, parents would learn that the product has 120 calories, all from sugar. The product CSPI obtained had 31 grams of candy inside, and cost $1.09, which means that Eisner and colleagues are basically selling sugar for about $15.95 a pound. Considering that sugar retails for as little as 65 cents per pound, it doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how Eisner might recoup the $385 million he and his business partners paid for the Topps company last year. Topps also sells other candies, like Bazooka Gum, and trading cards, including the recently released Barack Obama Commemorative Series. A packet of six cost $1.99. Since the Times article appeared, other published reports indicate that one of the Clique Girlz has left the group and that the Girlz' label is looking for a new member. 2009-02-18 Absolut Mistake http://cspinet.org/new/200902093.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George Hacker on Absolut Vodka’s Ads on CBSWhat's next? Chivas Regal ads on Hannah Montana? Sunday night, in a craven act of bad judgment and greed, alcoholic beverage conglomerate Pernod Ricard and CBS settled on a Grammys award broadcast featuring <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=511DtHBbEIY" target="cspi">16-year-old Miley Cyrus, 19-year-old Taylor Swift</a>, the Jonas Brothers, and other young performers to air the first prime time ad for Absolut vodka. <img src="/images/taylormiley.jpg">Miley Cyrus and Taylor Swift perform Swift's song, "Fifteen," at the 2009 Grammy Awards on February 8. We note with dismay the remarks of an Absolut spokesman that there will be "many more" such ads and the company "will continue to push the media landscape." Given the inauspicious debut of this campaign, we suspect the liquor industry wants to push this "landscape" to reach ever younger audiences on our public airwaves. I hope this alarming lack of restraint demonstrated by Pernod Ricard—and also by CBS—invites new scrutiny of hard liquor advertising on the part of the Federal Trade Commission and Congress. Considering the magnitude of alcohol problems among young people, we need less advertising of all alcoholic beverages, not more. 2009-02-09 Groups Urge the NBA to Ban Courtside Booze Ads http://cspinet.org/new/200902092.html Ads promote consumption, send harmful message to underage sports fans, says CSPIWASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and dozens of health, youth advocacy, and other organizations are <a href="http://takeaction.cspinet.org/campaign/nbaliquorads" target="cspi">urging the National Basketball Association</a> to reverse its decision to allow courtside hard-liquor advertisements and other alcohol promotions on team web sites, retail locations, and inside arenas. To increase revenue, team owners recently voted to lift the ban of these ads, which would add to the deluge of beer ads that already air on NBA telecasts. For the first time, the ads would promote drinking liquor to thousands of underaged fans and link professional basketball to drinking liquor, according to CSPI. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nbaletter.pdf" target="cspi">letter to NBA Commissioner David J. Stern</a>, CSPI and dozens of other groups, including the American Society of Addiction Medicine, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA), and the Society for Adolescent Medicine, urged the NBA to reconsider its decision and ban all alcohol advertising, including beer, during its telecasts. Allowing liquor advertising is a break with a long-standing ban and part of an ominous trend toward expanding the advertising of all alcoholic beverages during programs that attract young and underage viewers. "The NBA congratulates itself on its youth-outreach and community programs, yet it is poised to increase its profits by exposing young fans to more ads for rum, whiskey, vokda, and of course, beer," said Tracy Downs, manager of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/index.htm" target="cspi">CSPI’s Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>. "Granted, the league has some hefty salaries, but is that really a sufficient excuse to encourage young people to start drinking liquor earlier?" With its Jr. NBA and Jr. WNBA programs, the NBA has a strong relationship with young fans through summer camps, tournaments, skill clinics, and other activities. Promoting alcohol consumption during telecasts also contradicts the NBA’s public relations and community-building activities, specifically the <a href="http://www.nba.com/nba_cares/" target="cspi">NBA CARES</a> program, which addresses social issues in the United States and worldwide. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/alcohol/" target="cspi">Alcohol</a> plays a significant role in the four leading causes of death among peoples ages 10 to 24, including motor-vehicle crashes, unintentional injuries, homicide, and suicide. Studies link teens' exposure to alcohol advertising with more frequent and heavier drinking. Alcohol use by young people may cause long-term harm to their developing brains. CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/index.htm" target="cspi">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV </a> seeks to reduce youth exposure to alcohol advertising on televised college sports. Since 2005, 372—more than one-third—NCAA-member colleges and 16 college athletic conferences have signed the campaign's pledge to help eliminate alcohol advertisements from college sports telecasts. 2009-02-09 Maryland Legislators Eye Prohibition on Behavior-Disrupting Food Dyes http://cspinet.org/new/200902061.html School Foods in Particular Should be Free of Controversial Colorings, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Maryland may become the first state in the country to protect children—and their families—from Red 40, Yellow 5, and other artificial food dyes that worsen hyperactivity and other behavior problems in some children. <a href="http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/billfile/SB0101.htm" target="cspi">One bill</a> introduced by Senator Norman Stone (D-Baltimore County) would require warning labels on foods that contain the dyes and then prohibit their use after 2012, and <a href="http://mlis.state.md.us/2009rs/billfile/SB0100.htm" target="cspi">another bill</a> would prohibit dyed foods in Maryland schools. Two hearings on the measures are scheduled for Wednesday, February 11 in Annapolis. Bethesda resident David Schardt, CSPI’s senior nutritionist, will testify in favor of the bills at the hearings. Health experts have been concerned about the impact of food dyes on learning and behavior since the 1970s. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="cspi">In 2008</a>, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest called on the Food and Drug Administration to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes/" target="cspi">ban artificial food dyes</a> in the wake of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bateman.pdf" target="cspi">two</a> British <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mccann.pdf" target="cspi">studies</a> demonstrating the dyes promote increased hyperactivity and related behavior problems in children. CSPI today announced its strong support for the legislation introduced by Senator Stone. "Evidence linking Red 40, Yellow 5, and other synthetic food dyes to behavioral problems in children has been mounting for 30 years," said Schardt. "The Food and Drug Administration should have banned the dyes years ago and responsible manufacturers could have stopped using them voluntarily. But since they haven't, state legislatures have an opportunity and responsibility to protect children from these chemicals. I hope Senator Stone’s legislation is adopted and inspires other state legislatures to similarly put the interest of children ahead of the convenience of junk-food companies." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200810221.html" target="cspi">In Europe</a>, regulators and industry have made considerable progress toward eliminating artificial dyes from food products, though American versions of the very same products continue to get their colors from synthetic dyes. For instance, the syrup in a strawberry sundae from a McDonald's in the U.K. gets its red color from strawberries; in the U.S., the red color comes from synthetic Red 40. In the U.S., <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/10_08/fooddyes.pdf" target="cspi">synthetic food dyes</a> are common in brightly colored foods popular with children, including candies, soft drinks, breakfast cereals, and snack foods. Sometimes the sunny synthetic colors are designed to simulate fruits or vegetables, as in the case of a "Guacamole Dip" produced by Kraft, which gets its green color not from avocados but from Yellow 5, Yellow 6, and Blue 1. The "artificially flavored blueberry bits" in Aunt Jemima Blueberry Waffles are blue thanks to Red 40 and Blue 2, not blueberries. "These dyes may be cheaper than real food ingredients, but given the troubling evidence concerning their impact on our children, I do not see how we can continue to justify their use," said Schardt. "Parents and educators have a hard enough time addressing attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and behavioral conditions in children. The chemicals in the foods served to our children should not exacerbate these problems." S.B. 101 would require the following warning label on any food products containing Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Orange B, Red 3, Red 40, Yellow 5, or Yellow 6: "Warning: The color additives in this food may cause hyperactivity and behavior problems in some children." After 2012, the sale of foods containing the dyes would be prohibited in the state of Maryland. S.B. 100 would prohibit the availability of foods with any of the eight dyes in schools or child care facilities, unless provided for a child by a parent. CSPI collects <a href="http://cspinet.org/fooddyes/form.html" target="cspi">adverse behavioral reports </a>from parents who suspect that food dyes make matters worse. 2009-02-06 Supermarkets Urged to Use Loyalty Card Info to Notify Consumers Who Purchased Recalled Products http://cspinet.org/new/200902031.html Chains Have Obligation to Help Contain Outbreak, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Besides helping consumers save a little money on their grocery purchases, retail loyalty card programs help supermarket and drugstore chains assemble gigantic databases on the shopping preferences of their customers. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest is urging retailers that collect this kind of information to use it to notify consumers when they purchased tainted peanut-butter products or other items subject to a food safety recall. Costco, which requires a membership, and Wegmans Food Markets and Price Chopper, which run bonus card programs, have all used their data to notify consumers who purchased recalled items. In fact, Costco made over 1.5 million <a href="http://cspinet.org/audio/CliffBarRecall.mp3" target="cspi">automated phone calls</a> and mailed even more <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/costcoletter.pdf" target="cspi">letters to customers </a>in the current recall alone. But most chains, including CVS, Food Lion and Safeway, that collect purchasing data do not notify their customers. "Supermarkets enjoy using purchasing data for marketing purposes," said CSPI staff attorney Sarah Klein. "We're calling on supermarkets to also use that information to protect their customers' health by alerting them to identify and return tainted foods. Several major chains are already doing that, and every other chain should do the same." In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter_to_retailers.pdf" target="cspi">letter to retailers</a> that use bonus cards, CSPI said that the companies have a responsibility to assist their customers in returning contaminated foods. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="cspi">current outbreak</a> due to Salmonella-tainted peanut-butter products, which have killed eight and sickened well over 500 people, makes a compelling case for a bonus-card recall notification system, the group says. Peanut butter is an inexpensive ingredient used in thousands of products, and peanut butter's long shelf life means many such products might linger on supermarket shelves and in kitchen cupboards for many weeks or months. The Food and Drug Administration's <a href="http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/peanutbutterrecall/PeanutButterProducts2009.pdf" target="cspi">list of recalled peanut products</a> has grown to nearly 900. "Peanut butter is obviously popular with children, including very young children who are particularly at risk of serious complications or death if they contract a foodborne Salmonella infection,"said Klein. "It would be outrageous if some of the deaths in this latest outbreak could have been prevented had a supermarket just used the phone numbers and addresses in its database to notify its customers." Of those sickened in the current Salmonella outbreak, 20 percent are under age five and 50 percent are younger than 16. According to the <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/salmonella/typhimurium/update.html" target="cspi">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention</a>, 76 million people are hospitalized each year due to foodborne illnesses and 5,000 die. "It's not enough just to take the tainted products off the supermarket shelf," Klein said. "Wherever possible, supermarkets should reach out to their customers and help get contaminated food products out of their homes." 2009-02-03 PA Gov. Urged to Ignore Findings of Trans Fat Panel http://cspinet.org/new/200902022.html Rendell, Assembly Urged to Phase Out Artificial Trans FatWASHINGTON—Health advocates are urging Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and the state's General Assembly to ignore a report from a task force on trans fat that recommended against a legislative phase-out of the harmful food ingredient. The Washington-based <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/gov-rendell-letter.pdf" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> says the state should instead adopt legislation requiring restaurants to phase out <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat/index.html" target="cspi">artificial trans fat</a>—the heart-attack-inducing fat that comes from partially hydrogenated oil. Restaurants can easily replace artificial fat with heart-healthy soybean, canola, or other vegetable oils, or, in certain baked goods, with solid fats such as butter, palm oil, or lard, according to the group. Artificial trans fat has already been successfully phased out in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200804241.html" target="cspi">New York City</a> and similar measures have been enacted in the state of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200807251.html" target="cspi">California</a>, the cities of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806041.html" target="cspi">Boston</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200710051.html" target="cspi">Philadelphia</a>, and other jurisdictions. In those places and in supermarket aisles, foods that have been reformulated without partially hydrogenated oil almost always end up lower in saturated fat as well. In the rare event that saturated fat replaces trans fat gram for gram, that would still be an improvement, albeit a small one, according to CSPI. "The report of this task force might have been credible were it written ten years ago, when the science on trans fat was less certain and the supplies of alternative oils less abundant," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "But it ignores the example of New York City, whose prohibition on using partially hydrogenated oils has proven so successful. Philadelphia restaurants have already emptied its deep fryers of partially hydrogenated oil, as required by that city’s law." Though most major restaurant chains have already eliminated artificial trans fat, many smaller chains and independent restaurants and bakeries still market foods with trans fat. A statewide phase-out would require those companies to make the switch also. Besides several government representatives, the task force included one representative from the Tasty Baking Company, two representatives from the Pennsylvania Restaurant Association, three representatives from Sweet Street Desserts, Inc., and other representatives from Utz potato chips and the food service giant Aramark. Two of the members, including the chairman, work for the Penn State Center for Food Innovation, which describes itself as a "unique, cooperative research venture between food industry and academia," and which counts among its numerous "corporate members" Hershey Foods, the convenience store chain Sheetz, Cargill, Dairy Queen, Nestle, Sysco, and others. "Though several government employees were on the panel, its recommendations almost certainly would have been supportive of public health had bakeries, restaurant lobbyists, and other food industry officials not been so overly represented," said Jacobson. "The line-up reads more like the attendees list for a trade show than an objective task force." The task force said in its report that the materials to educate restaurants about a legislative ban could be costly. But it simultaneously relayed the offer of the Center for Food Innovation to provide educational materials to restaurants and the public about trans fat. "Such materials could be easily modified to educate the food industry if trans fat were banned, or the state simply could have adapted New York City’s materials," wrote Jacobson in a letter to Governor Rendell. 2009-02-02 Food Porn Alert: Chili's "Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie" http://cspinet.org/new/200901271.html 1,600-Calorie Dessert Equivalent to One and a Half Racks of Chili’s Original Baby Back RibsWASHINGTON—After a full restaurant meal, would you order a rack of baby back ribs for dessert? How about a rack and a half? That would be roughly equivalent to Chili's Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie—the latest Food Porn exposed in Nutrition Action Healthletter. That dessert provides 1,590 calories (about three-quarters of a day's worth), 37 grams of saturated fat (almost two days' worth), and surprisingly, for a dessert, 910 milligrams of sodium (more than half a day’s worth). (The nutrition data have shifted very slightly since Nutrition Action went to press.) Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie is a bar containing chocolate chips, walnuts and coconut, underneath vanilla ice cream, hot fudge and caramel toppings. <img src="/nah/images/chocoparadisepie.gif">Chili's Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie contains 1,590 calories, 37 grams of saturated fat and 910 milligrams of sodium. "It's quite easy to find appetizers and entrées north of 1,000 calories at Chili's, so who knows what damage has already been done by the time dessert hits the table," said CSPI senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley. "But even if you split the Chocolate Chip Paradise Pie with someone else, it still would have more calories than the chain’s cheesecake. This kind of food porn helps explain America's epidemic of obesity, heart disease and diabetes. It also makes a compelling case why calorie counts belong right on the menus, not just buried on corporate web sites." <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="cspi">Nutrition Action</a>, published by the nonprofit nutrition watchdog group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, spotlights a Food Porn on the back page of every issue. Other recent Food Porns include Starbucks' Salted Caramel Hot Chocolate, Sara Lee Cheesecake Bites, and DiGiorno's Ultimate Focaccia Pizza. In its <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/back_cover_-_right_stuff___food_porn.pdf" target="cspi">January/February issue</a> CSPI gives its Right Stuff ranking to Eden Organic No Salt Added Beans—canned beans that come without added sodium (and whose cans come without the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/bpa.html" target="cspi">controversial</a> chemical <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nahbpa.pdf" target="cspi">BPA</a>). 2009-01-27 Long Shelf Life May Mean Continuing Hazard from Peanut Products http://cspinet.org/new/200901221.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe tragic outbreak from peanut butter has already sickened hundreds of people and killed more people than the infamous 1993 Jack in the Box outbreak or the 2006 spinach outbreak. Given the long shelf life of these peanut products, this outbreak may sicken and kill many more if the Food and Drug Administration does not act to effectively remove contaminated products from stores and facilities that may have them. Yet, without mandates for recall and few inspectors, the agency's ability to protect the public is minimal. This latest outbreak proves again that FDA is woefully inadequate to the task of protecting American consumers from unsafe food. It presently inspects low risk peanut butter plants rarely, or not at all, leaving the job to state inspection agencies. Although FDA is responsible for the safety of more than 80 percent of the food supply, the commissioner must divide his or her attention among drugs, medical devices, foods, and cosmetics. While additional funding could help, with food responsibilities divided between three centers within the FDA, there is no food safety expert in charge of both the policies and enforcement staff to implement needed changes. There is also no credible voice communicating to the public and the industry what can be done to prevent future outbreaks. The Center for Science in the Public Interest calls on Congress to enact and President Obama to sign legislation to bring the food safety program at the Department of Health and Human Services into the 21st century. One bill sponsored by Representative Rosa DeLauro would create a new Food Safety Administration at HHS. That approach would bring the program elements together and put an expert in charge. Other bills being introduced in both the House and the Senate would create greater food safety authorities while keeping the same fragmented program in the FDA. President Obama promised a "government that works." When it comes to food safety, fixing FDA's food safety program is an example of a "shovel ready" regulatory reform that could be done quickly and that would bring real benefits to American consumers. 2009-01-22 Outgoing Bush Administration Issues Last-Minute Reg on Iffy Health Claims on Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200901152.html The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest objected today to a "midnight" attempt by the outgoing Bush Administration to institutionalize a Food and Drug Administration practice permitting so-called "qualified health claims" on food labels. Such claims can be based on flimsy scientific evidence. The FDA first began permitting them on food labels in 2002. Prior to the Bush years, such claims were only allowed on dietary supplements. An example of these claims would be,"Very limited and preliminary scientific research suggests that eating one-half to one cup of tomatoes and/or tomato sauce a week may reduce the risk of prostate cancer. FDA requires that the claim be followed by the statement, "The FDA concludes that there is little scientific evidence supporting this claim." Congress urged the FDA in last years appropriations bill to end the labeling policy for foods until a report from the Government Accountability Office on the issue was completed. "Fortunately, the FDA action today is in the form of a 'Guidance' document that can, and should be immediately rescinded by the next FDA Commissioner," stated Bruce Silverglade. "FDA's own surveys show that consumers are misled by qualified health claims." 2009-01-15 Coke Sued for Fraudulent Claims on Obesity Promoting "VitaminWater" http://cspinet.org/new/200901151.html vitamins + water + sugar + hype = soda - bubblesWASHINGTON—The Coca-Cola Company has been served notice of a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/vitaminwater_filed_complaint.pdf" target="cspi">class action lawsuit</a> filed over what the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says are deceptive and unsubstantiated claims on its VitaminWater line of beverages. Coke markets VitaminWater as a healthful alternative to soda by labeling its several flavors with such health buzz words as "defense," "rescue," "energy," and "endurance." The company makes a wide range of dramatic claims, including that its drinks variously reduce the risk of chronic disease, reduce the risk of eye disease, promote healthy joints, and support optimal immune function. In fact, according to CSPI nutritionists, the 33 grams of sugar in each bottle of VitaminWater do more to promote obesity, diabetes, and other health problems than the vitamins in the drinks do to perform the advertised benefits listed on the bottles. CSPI's litigation department is serving as co-counsel in the suit, filed yesterday in United States District Court in the Northern District of California. The other law firms involved in the case are Reese Richman LLP and Whatley Drake & Kallas, LLC. <img src="/images/vitwater.JPG">VitaminWater contains between zero and one percent juice despite product names such as “endurance peach mango” and “focus kiwi strawberry.” "When I bought VitaminWater, frankly I thought I was doing myself a favor health-wise," said the plaintiff, San Francisco, California, resident James Koh, who used to purchase and drink VitaminWater after working out at the gym. "I was attracted by the prospect of getting extra vitamins. But I had no idea that I was actually getting almost a Coke’s worth of sugar and calories. There’s no way I would have spent money on that, had I known." <a href="http://www.glaceau.com/" target="VitaminWater's website">VitaminWater's website</a>, marketing copy, and labels claim that VitaminWater is healthy, claiming, for example, that "balance cran-grapefruit" has "bioactive components" that promote "healthy, pain-free functioning of joints, structural integrity of joints and bones" and that the nutrients in “power-c dragonfruit" "enable the body to exert physical power by contributing to the structural integrity of the musculoskeletal system." While it is true that vitamins do play various roles in the human body, the statements on VitaminWater labels go far beyond even the loose, so-called "structure/function claims" allowed by the Food and Drug Administration and cross the line into outright fraud, according to CSPI. Moreover, VitaminWater contains between zero and one percent juice, despite the full names of the drinks, which include "endurance peach mango" and "focus kiwi strawberry," and "xxx blueberry pomegranate acai," among others. A press release for the "xxx" drink claims its antioxidants makes the drinker "last longer" in some unspecified way; in any event, it has no blueberry, pomegranate, or acai juice, nor do the others have any cranberry, grapefruit, dragon fruit, peach, mango, kiwi, or strawberry juice. According to documents filed in 2007 with the Securities and Exchange Commission, Coke acknowledged that "obesity and other health concerns may reduce demand for some of [its] products," and that "increasing public awareness" about health experts’ concerns over sugar-sweetened beverage could affect the company's profitability. That year, Coke acquired VitaminWater's parent company, Glaceau. Also in 2007, CSPI sued Coke and its partner Nestlé over an artificially sweetened green-tea-based drink called Enviga. The companies claim Enviga burns more calories than it consumes, resulting in weight loss—a claim that CSPI says is not supported by the small number of studies on the drink's ingredients. "Coke fears, probably correctly, that they’ll sell less soda as Americans become increasingly concerned with obesity, diabetes, and other conditions linked to diets too high in sugar," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. "VitaminWater is Coke's attempt to dress up soda in a physician's white coat. Underneath, it’s still sugar water, albeit sugar water that costs about ten bucks a gallon." VitaminWater typically retails for about $1.49 for a 20-ounce bottle. "My advice to consumers is to get your vitamins from real food," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "If you have reason to believe you have a shortcoming of one vitamin or another, perhaps take an inexpensive supplement. But don't seek out your vitamins in sugary soft drinks like Coke’s VitaminWater." Since 2005, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation/" target="cspi">CSPI's litigation project</a> has, on its own or in cooperation with private law firms, negotiated settlements or voluntary changes to marketing practices with Anheuser-Busch, Airborne, Kellogg, Frito-Lay, Quaker Oats, Pinnacle Foods and others. Whatley, Drake & Kallas, LLC is a 35-lawyer firm with offices in Birmingham, New York City, and Boston which concentrates on complex class action and derivative litigation, including consumer, healthcare, insurance, employee benefits, antitrust, securities, and mass tort litigation. Reese Richman LLP handles commercial litigation with a focus on consumer, antitrust, and securities class actions. 2009-01-15 Subway Urged to Set Nutrition Standards for Foods Marketed to Children http://cspinet.org/new/200901141.html Large Fast-Food Chain is Missing From Industry Self-Regulatory Program, Says CSPI and Other GroupsWASHINGTON—Though it has more healthy choices for children than other fast-food chains, Subway is conspicuously absent from the self-regulatory initiative that has collected commitments from 15 other food companies regarding which foods are marketed to kids and how. Today Subway was urged to join the Council of Better Business Bureau's Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative (CFBAI) by the nonprofit <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/final_subway_letter_09.pdf" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> (CSPI) and more than 30 other national and local health advocacy groups and experts. "Self-regulation will only work and be an acceptable alternative to government regulation if all marketers participate," the groups wrote. "Pledging to market only healthier foods to children should be relatively easy for Subway given the number of healthy items and meals the company already makes and markets to children." In a 2008 <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/kidsmeals-report.pdf" target="cspi"> investigation of kids' menus</a> conducted by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808041.html" target="cspi">CSPI</a>, Subway had the healthiest choices for children. The 10,000-outlet chain is the only one that doesn't offer soda as the default choice in its kids' meals and about two-thirds of its possible kid combos did not exceed CSPI's 430-calorie threshold. Founded in 2006, the CFBAI was designed to shift the mix of companies' youth-targeted food marketing toward healthier foods. To date the Initiative includes pledges from 15 of the largest food marketers in the country, including Coca-Cola, General Mills, Kellogg, Kraft, McDonald's, and most recently, Nestle, and Dannon. Other notable holdouts include Chuck E. Cheese's, Yum! Brands (KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut), and candy makers Perfetti Van Melle and Topps. "Working through the CBBB framework would add credibility and transparency to Subway's efforts to support parents in feeding thir children healthfully," the groups wrote. Concurrently, Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA), member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee also <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/markey_letter_to_subway_-_1-14-09.pdf" target="cspi">called on Subway</a> to join the kids marketing Initiative. Other signatories to the CSPI letter include the American Academy of Pediatrics, the National PTA, the Consumer Federation of America and the Prevention Institute. 2009-01-14 Health Experts Urge President-elect Obama to Take Bold Action to Reverse Obesity Epidemic http://cspinet.org/new/200901091.html Hundreds of Thousands of Lives, Tens of Billions of Dollars at Stake, Experts SayWASHINGTON—Bold action is needed to stem the obesity epidemic, or else today's children might be the first generation of Americans ever to lead shorter life spans than their parents. That's the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/obama_letter.pdf" target="cspi">urgent message delivered today</a> to President-elect Barack Obama by 49 of the nation’s most prominent health and medical organizations and 44 prominent physicians and nutrition experts. The obesity epidemic is harming Americans' health just as global warming is harming the planet, the experts write in a letter to the next President, and requires the coordinated effort of the Departments of Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Transportation and other government officials. "What is lacking is not well-conceived ideas for policies and programs, but a national commitment to wage a comprehensive campaign to prevent and reverse overweight and obesity, a war that should begin in the womb and infancy, extend to schools, then include workplaces, doctors' offices, and the general community," the letter states. Organized by the nonprofit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="cspi">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, the groups pressing President-elect Obama to take vigorous action include the <a href="http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=1200000" target="cspi">American Heart Association</a>, <a href="http://www.apha.org/" target="cspi">American Public Health Association</a>, <a href="http://www.shapeup.org/" target="cspi">Shape Up America!</a>, <a href="http://www.obesity.org/" target="cspi">The Obesity Society</a>, <a href="http://www.prevent.org/" target="cspi">Partnership for Prevention</a> and <a href="http://healthyamericans.org/" target="cspi">Trust for America's Health</a>. Individuals signing the letter include George L. Blackburn of Harvard Medical School, Carlos A. Camargo of Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Kenneth H. Cooper of the Cooper Aerobics Center/Cooper Clinic in Dallas, Marion Nestle of New York University, and Walter Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health. In a confirmation hearing yesterday before the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, former Senator Tom Daschle, the Secretary-designate for HHS, spoke in support of several policies advocated by CSPI and other health advocates. "We aren’t going to address obesity and prevention and wellness unless we make better school lunches, and unless we take the junk food out of schools, and unless we put physical exercise back into the school curriculum," Daschle said. "The harms caused by obesity are well-known and considerable: hypertension, heart attacks, strokes, diabetes, cancer, arthritis and many others," the letter to President-elect Obama continued. "Together those maladies contribute each year to as many as several hundred thousand deaths and tens of billions of dollars in medical and other costs.” "The numerous possible approaches to reversing the obesity epidemic are well known, so they’re not itemized in the letter," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, a signatory to the letter. "What has been missing, particularly by officials in the Bush Administration, is the commitment to actually tackle the problem." According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over the past three decades, rates of obesity have roughly doubled in adults and tripled in children, while almost two-thirds of American adults are overweight or obese. Obesity costs families, businesses and government about $117 billion each year in health care and related costs. 2009-01-09 Nomination of Dr. Sanjay Gupta as Surgeon General Supported by CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200901071.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonQuick—-can you name the Surgeon General? Okay, that's a trick question. We've actually had an <a href="http://www.surgeongeneral.gov" target="cspi">"acting" Surgeon General</a> for more than a year. A good rule of thumb might be that if you don't know who the Surgeon General is, he or she is probably not doing a whole lot. The fact is, it has been a long time since we've had a Surgeon General who had a major national impact, such as Dr. C. Everett Koop, who took on the tobacco industry. Certainly no one could accuse any Surgeon General in the last eight years of tackling tough health problems. CSPI welcomes news of the nomination of Dr. Sanjay Gupta to be Surgeon General of the United States. Gupta, a neurosurgeon, happens to be a skilled medical communicator. But more than that, he has the brains and energy to be an integral part of the administration's health-policy brain trust. If confirmed, we hope Dr. Gupta will use his bully pulpit both to encourage Americans to make important lifestyle changes and to advocate policies aimed at preventing health problems. Obviously, like other federal appointees, Dr. Gupta will need to make full disclosure of any financial ties he may have had with industry. Those relationships, should there be any, certainly warrant scrutiny during the confirmation process. One matter that certainly should be at the top of his agenda is stemming the obesity epidemic, which may lead today's children to have shorter lives than their parents. Gupta would need to meld individual, corporate, and governmental actions—education, regulations, and laws at the local, state, and national levels—into one coordinated and effective campaign. 2009-01-07 Labeling of Bug-Based Food Colorings Will Help Some Consumers http://cspinet.org/new/200901055.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonAfter a decade-long gestation period, the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/FDA-1998-D-0032-nfr.pdf" target="cspi">Food and Drug Administration has finally ordered</a> that food and cosmetics manufacturers that color their products with carmine and cochineal list them by name in ingredient lists. Until now, these colorings, extracted from the dried bodies of the <a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22cochineal%20insect%22&btnG=Google+Search&sa=N&tab=wi" target="cspi"> tiny cochineal bug</a>, have been hidden under the terms "artificial colors" or "color added." Naming those ingredients on labels will help people who suffered allergic reactions determine if the colors were the culprits. That's useful progress. But, ideally, FDA <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605011.html" target="cspi">should have exterminated</a> these critter-based colorings altogether. The only way people can determine that they are sensitive to them is to suffer repeated reactions, including potentially life-threatening anaphylactic reactions. Also, the FDA <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601271.html" target="cspi">should have required labels</a> to disclose that carmine and cochineal are extracted from insects, which many consumers—including vegetarians, Jews, and Muslims—would be interested to know. CSPI petitioned the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/carmine_8_24_98.htm" target="cspi">FDA in 1998</a> to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/carmine_letter.pdf" target="cspi">require labeling</a> after a study by a <a href="http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=1760" target="cspi">University of Michigan allergy expert</a> who discovered that carmine was the cause of an allergic reaction in one of his patients. Subsequently, CSPI received <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/carmine_reactions.pdf" target="cspi">adverse-reaction reports</a> from several dozen consumers. Yet carmine and cochineal extract remain in dozens of reddish-colored foods and beverages, including fruit drinks, ice creams, yogurts, and candies. 2009-01-05 Govt. Science Panels Skewed Toward Industry, Says Report http://cspinet.org/new/200901054.html CSPI Urges Legislation to Restore BalanceWASHINGTON—The National Coal Council issues reports with titles such as "Coal: America's Energy Future" and "The Urgency of Sustainable Coal." And while its web site loads, Aaron Copeland's "Fanfare for the Common Man" streams triumphantly over the image of an American bald eagle. Coal boosterism from a K Street lobby shop? In fact, the National Coal Council is an official government science panel charged with advising the Secretary of Energy on the feasibility of clean coal technology. Not surprisingly, the panel has at least 15 members with financial ties to coal companies, whose fate depends on the technology's favorable review. According to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/twisted_advice_final_report.pdf" target="CSPI"> an investigation released today</a> by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, the National Coal Council is similar to other unbalanced science panels across the government that give industry inappropriate influence over federal regulatory policy. Government advisory committees that deliver policy recommendations are supposed to be comprised of members that represent a wide range of stakeholders, including representatives of regulated industries, consumers, and community groups. Government advisory committees that advise agencies on scientific issues are supposed to be made up of scientists without financial ties to industry who can render independent, objective advice. Both types of committee are plagued with problems, according to CSPI. One committee with a clear scientific mandate is the Wind Turbines Guidelines Advisory Committee at the Department of Interior's Fish and Wildlife Service. It exists in part to recommend "scientific tools and procedures" for assessing the risk of wind turbines to wildlife. Instead of being comprised of scientists without financial interests in the panel's work, the committee is stacked with stakeholder representatives from the energy industry. Another example is the National Organic Standards Board at the Department of Agriculture, which determines what foods and substances can be called organic. Despite the scientific mandate of the board, the committee is mostly populated with representatives from stakeholder groups, including corporations. (A General Mills representative was designated as representing "scientists" until consumer groups complained.) "Over the course of the Bush Administration, government science panels have become increasingly influenced by industry," said CSPI lead investigator Kristin Stade, who authored the report. "Though existing law requires balance, scientists without ties to industry are becoming endangered species on many of these important panels." Perhaps in response to reports from the Government Accountability Office, which in 2004 and 2008 <a href="http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08640.pdf" target="CSPI">criticized agencies for naming industry representatives to science panels</a>, the Department of Energy improperly reclassified industry representatives as special governmental employees (SGEs)—the classification normally used for scientists on the panels. On the Energy Department's Nuclear Energy Advisory Committee, several members with ties to the nuclear power industry (as well as the sole representative from an environmental group) were improperly reclassified as SGEs. Not surprisingly, the committee wound up supporting a controversial industry-favored nuclear fuel reprocessing program, according to the report. Indeed, CSPI found a number of policy committees that suffered from a lack of balance though they should have been comprised of representatives from various stakeholder groups. A Sporting Conservation Council, for instance, is dominated by representatives from hunting and big game organizations. And at Agriculture, the Fruit and Vegetable Industry Advisory Committee and the Grain Inspection Advisory Committee are almost exclusively composed of members affiliated with those industries. On science panels, agencies may grant waivers to panelists with conflicts of interest if "the need for the individual's services outweighs the potential for a conflict of interest," but CSPI found waivers are often not issued. That was especially the case for Interior and Energy department panels, where numerous conflicts of interest went undocumented but apparently were informally waived. To restore the integrity of the federal advisory committee system, CSPI supports legislation that would correct many of the chronic problems regarding balance, conflict of interest screening and transparency. Similar legislation passed the House in 2008 but died in the Senate. That legislation needs to be strengthened, reintroduced and approved, the group says. "The hundreds of federal agency advisory committees whose deliberations affect the health and safety of the American people face growing scrutiny by Congress, public interest organizations, and members of the public," according to the report. "The new administration should act immediately to address longstanding deficiencies in the advisory committee system." In addition to legislation, CSPI says an executive order from incoming President Barack Obama could clarify and strengthen the existing Federal Advisory Committee Act. 2009-01-05 Court Scolds Gerber for Marketing Candy as "Fruit Juice Snacks" http://cspinet.org/new/200901021.html Lawsuit Against Company to Move ForwardWASHINGTON—The Gerber Products Company, owned by Nestleì, has drawn harsh criticism from a U.S. Court of Appeals for using pictures of real fruit to market a gummi-bear-like candy formerly called "Fruit Juice Snacks." The Court said that consumers would likely be deceived because the package depicts images of oranges, cherries and strawberries, though the leading ingredients are corn syrup and sugar. The case brought against Gerber by a private citizen was initially dismissed by a Federal District Court in California, but then reinstated by the <a href="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0A0516DECE91EC8B882575270062DF2F/$file/0655921.pdf?openelement" target="U.S. Court of Appeals">U.S. Court of Appeals</a> for the 9th Circuit on December 22. Gerber argued that consumers could avoid being misled by turning the package around and reading the ingredient list. But the Court stated that consumers should not be "expected to look beyond misleading representations on the front of the box to discover the truth from the ingredient list in small print on the side of the box." "The Court’s decision is a warning to all companies that try to make junk food look healthy by depicting nutritious fruits, vegetables, and whole grains on the labels of sugary, high-calorie snacks," said Bruce Silverglade, CSPI director of legal affairs. Gerber has since renamed the product "Juice Treats," but continues to sell it alongside its baby and toddler food instead of at the candy counter. With corn syrup and sugar as the major ingredients, the product contains far more refined sugar than fruit juice concentrate. CSPI will serve as lead counsel when proceedings resume. 2009-01-02 State Attorneys General Negotiate End of Caffeinated "Sparks" Beer http://cspinet.org/new/200812182.html Statement of CSPI Director of Litigation Steve GardnerIt was a bad idea that never should have gotten as far as it did—adding caffeine to sweetened, high-alcohol-content malt beverages and marketing them to young people via word-of-mouth and infantile web sites. Marketing caffeinated beer demonstrated a disturbing lack of restraint on the part of major companies like MillerCoors, and it put millions of young Americans in harms way. That's why we sued the company in September. Thankfully, the Youth Access to Alcohol Committee of the National Association of Attorneys General, led by Maine Attorney General Steve Rowe, launched an investigation into these ill-advised products many months ago. And with the announcement today that the AGs and the City Attorney of San Francisco have forged an agreement with MillerCoors to end the Sparks line of caffeinated alcohol, this investigation comes to a successful end. Now that Anheuser-Busch and MillerCoors have each agreed separately to discontinue caffeinated alcoholic drinks, this entire niche of products is all but shut down. The historic agreement negotiated by the Attorneys General, which also includes curbs on MillerCoors' marketing to youth, means fewer instances of alcohol poisoning, fewer sexual assaults, and fewer young lives snuffed out in car crashes or acts of violence. The smaller companies still operating in this space would be well advised to follow suit. 2008-12-18 FDA Issues Midnight Go-ahead for Potentially Harmful Stevia Sweetener http://cspinet.org/new/200812181.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonShame on the Food and Drug Administration for its midnight decision to accept industry's contention that rebaudioside A, a sweetener extracted from the herb Stevia, is "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS. That "general recognition" of safety certainly doesn't extend to the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/stevia-report_final-8-14-08.pdf" target="UCLA scientists">UCLA scientists</a> who concluded that rebaudioside A is inadequately tested in terms of cancer and caused mutations in some laboratory tests. It is far too soon to allow this substance in the diet sodas and juice drinks consumed by millions of people. It looks like this is President Bush's parting gift to the soda industry. If President-Elect Obama's transition team is making a list of last-minute Bush Administration regulatory actions that warrant reversal on January 20, this needs to be added to the list. The FDA has had a poor track record when it comes to allowing companies to market dubious ingredients, such as the stomach-churning fake-fat olestra and the anaphylaxis-causing Quorn mycoprotein. The FDA's refusal to regulate BPA, the apparent endocrine-disrupting substance in some plastics, is another example. Congress and the Obama Administration should strengthen the law that allows companies to simply declare on their own that new additives are "generally recognized as safe" and just start marketing them, even without notifying the FDA and public. Those decisions are reviewed too casually by the all-too-passive FDA. 2008-12-18 Stevia: What's the Rush? http://cspinet.org/new/200812152.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonCargill and Coca-Cola are sticking their thumbs in the Food and Drug Administration's eyes by rushing to market novel sweeteners based on the stevia plant. Cargill has been marketing its Truvia product as a table-top sweetener for several months, and, according to media reports this week, Coca-Cola will start marketing <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122929850588005213.html?mod=googlenews_wsj" target="stevia-sweetened drinks">stevia-sweetened drinks</a>. So far, the other main producer, Merisant, and user, PepsiCo, of a stevia-based product have held back. A small company, Wisdom Natural Brands, put SweetLeaf sweetener on the market several months ago. Stevia and rebaudioside A may well turn out to be entirely safe. But until more tests have been conducted and analyzed, it is reckless for food companies to begin adding it willy-nilly to the food supply and equally reckless for the FDA to stand by mutely. The FDA should immediately order those products off the market until all the safety testing has been done. Though small amounts of stevia have been consumed in various dietary supplements over the years, apparently without incident, too few safety tests have been done to warrant more general use. For starters, as two UCLA toxicologists <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/stevia-report_final-8-14-08.pdf" target="emphasized in a report">emphasized in a report</a> to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200808281.html" target="Center for Science in the Public Interest">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> last summer, the FDA normally requires food additives to be tested for two years on rats and mice. The extremely sweet chemical—rebaudioside A—in stevia has only been tested on rats. Also, several, though not all, tests indicate that rebaudioside A causes DNA damage and mutations. That raises the troubling prospect that it could cause cancer. Remarkably, it is perfectly legal for companies to market whatever food ingredients they want without even informing, let alone getting approval from, the FDA. Wisdom Natural Brands has pointedly said that it did not notify the FDA before marketing Sweetleaf. Last May, both Cargill and Merisant notified the FDA that they considered their products to be "generally recognized as safe," but the FDA has not yet said whether it agrees. 2008-12-15 Consumer Groups Call on Obama Administration to Take Action on Food Safety During First 100 Days http://cspinet.org/new/200812121.html IOM Recommendation to Move Meat and Poultry to FDA QuestionedWASHINGTON—The Institute of Medicine today stated that the Food and Drug Administration's food safety system remains ill-equipped to meet emerging challenges, and the legal authority underlying all government inspection programs should be updated to emphasize prevention of foodborne illness. The IOM further suggested there would be benefits to creating a new focused food safety entity within the <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/" target="Department of Health and Human Services">Department of Health and Human Services</a> rather than continuing at FDA. Consumer Federation of America and the Center for Science in the Public Interest endorsed that action and today are urging President-Elect Barack Obama to act quickly to advance it. The groups are puzzled, though, that the IOM recommended moving well-functioning <a href="http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usdahome" target="U.S. Department of Agriculture">U.S. Department of Agriculture</a> programs into the dysfunctional <a href="http://www.fda.gov/" target="FDA">FDA</a>. While consumer groups and numerous members of Congress have supported consolidating all food safety functions in a single independent agency, moving meat and poultry inspection to FDA would undermine the strengths of meat and poultry inspection and overwhelm the food safety apparatus in HHS. It is also true that Congress has consistently refused to consider moving the Food Safety and Inspection Service's inspection programs to HHS. That recommendation from the IOM is dead on arrival on Capitol Hill, and it should be, according to CSPI and CFA. Instead, the groups urged the Obama Administration to take immediate steps to re-invigorate the federal food safety effort, reduce the risk, and restore consumer confidence in the ability of the government to assure the safety of the food supply. The groups said that the President, within the first 100 days in office, should: <ul><li>Issue an executive order re-establishing the White House Food Safety Council to provide him an overall view of food safety needs, and direct the council to manage strategic coordination of all food safety efforts and create a long-term budget plan for food safety agencies. <li>Direct the Food Safety Council to work with Congress to establish a commission made up of government officials, industry and consumer leaders, and food safety experts to develop a proposal to bring together the various federal food safety efforts into a single agency charged with protecting the public from food-related illnesses. <li>Instruct the Secretary of Health and Human Services to combine under a single HHS official, program and budget responsibility for all HHS food safety activities. The official should be directly accountable to the Secretary and responsible for leading food safety activities at FDA, including setting preventive safety standards for all FDA-regulated foods and assuring FDA inspection activities are carried out effectively. The secretary should also direct this official to lead the effort to establish a Food Safety Administration within HHS, consisting of the food-related activities now undertaken by the FDA operating under a modernized food safety statute.</li></ul> "These steps will go a long way toward putting our food safety regulatory system back on track," said Chris Waldrop, director of the Food Policy Institute at Consumer Federation of America. "This is an opportunity for the new administration to greatly improve the safety of America's food supply." "The safety of America's food supply has suffered from malign neglect under the Bush Administration," said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Comprehensive food safety reform is the kind of change we need. The status quo, after all, is killing about 5,000 and sickening tens of million Americans a year." "The President cannot alone fix the organizational problems that make Americans uncertain about the safety of our food but, by acting quickly to do what he can, he will help restore confidence that government is working to address the problems," added Carol Tucker-Foreman, distinguished fellow at CFA. 2008-12-12 Next Ag Secretary Should Have Food Safety, Nutrition, and Environmental Focus, Groups Say http://cspinet.org/new/200812111.html USDA Concerned With More Than Maximizing Commodity Production, According to Consumer CoalitionWASHINGTON—Much of the media speculation on who the next Secretary of Agriculture will be focuses on candidates lacking experience with food safety, nutrition, or environmental issues—issues which are at the heart of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's mission. Consumer advocates and other public interest groups are <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/consumer_letter_re_usda_secretaryfinal.pdf" target="today urging President-Elect Barack Obama">today urging President-Elect Barack Obama</a> to appoint an individual who appreciates the diversity of programs administered by the $95-billion-a-year department, as opposed to a candidate whose primary experience involves large-scale agricultural production. "USDA's food assistance programs are vital to helping millions of Americans survive in this time of high unemployment and high food prices," the groups wrote. "Considering the contribution of the American diet to obesity, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer, and other health problems, USDA must be more aggressive in promoting healthier diets." The groups further pointed out that the Government Accountability Office had recently identified food safety as one of <a href="http://www.gao.gov/press/press-transition-release2008nov06.pdf" target="13 "urgent issues"">13 "urgent issues"</a> needing the attention of the next Administration. "USDA has a responsibility for assuring the safety of the nation's meat, poultry, and processed egg supply and the Secretary must lead the way in addressing this urgent issue," the groups wrote. The groups, which included the <a href="http://www.consumerfed.org/" target="Consumer Federation of America">Consumer Federation of America</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="the Center for Science in the Public Interest">the Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, <a href="http://www.consumersunion.org/" target="Consumers Union">Consumers Union</a>, <a href="http://www.safetables.org/" target="Safe Tables Our Priority">Safe Tables Our Priority</a>, <a href="http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/" target="Food & Water Watch">Food & Water Watch</a>, <a href="http://www.foodborneillness.org/" target="the Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention">the Center for Foodborne Illness Research & Prevention</a>, <a href="http://www.whistleblower.org/template/index.cfm" target="the Government Accountability Project">the Government Accountability Project</a>, and <a href="http://ucsusa.org/" target="the Union of Concerned Scientists">the Union of Concerned Scientists</a>, also cited agriculture's contribution to global climate change and urged that the next Secretary pay attention to soil and water conservation issues. "President Lincoln, who established the USDA, referred to it as the ‘people’s department,'" said Carol Tucker-Foreman, Distinguished Fellow at Consumer Federation of America's Food Policy Institute. "Unfortunately, USDA has lost its way. It is now dominated by a collection of special interests, far removed from the people it is supposed to serve. Given the pressing issues of hunger, food safety and the environment, we urge President-Elect Obama to honor Lincoln’s vision and choose a leader who can restore the mantle of “people’s department." "The next agriculture secretary should be someone who wants to promote the consumption of safe and healthy diets—and diets that minimally harm the environment," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, a signatory of the letter. "Regrettably, current USDA policies fall far short of that goal." 2008-12-11 Naughty Brewers Sully Santa in Beer Promos http://cspinet.org/new/200812091.html St. Nick Used to Promote Beer, Despite Prohibition in Industry CodeWASHINGTON—MillerCoors and Anheuser-Busch have been very, very naughty this holiday season, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The watchdog group says that the companies deserve lumps of coal—if not subpoenas—in their stockings for using the iconic image of Santa Claus to promote binge drinking events in Atlanta, Boston, Washington, and other cities. Though the events are ostensibly charitable, they run afoul of the beer industry's voluntary advertising and marketing code, which has a very specific prohibition on the use of St. Nick's likeness: a Santa clause, if you will. CSPI today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/santa_bar_promos_dec_2008.pdf" target="filed a complaint">filed a complaint </a> with the <a href="http://www.beerinstitute.org/index.asp" target="Beer Institute">Beer Institute</a>, the Washington, D.C.-based lobbying group that monitors <a href="http://www.beerinstitute.org/tier.asp?bid=249" target="compliance with the voluntary code">compliance with the voluntary code</a>. The complaint was copied to representatives of the Federal Trade Commission, the companies involved, and the North Pole. Coors Light is sponsoring <a href="http://www.runningofthesantas.com/" target=""Running of the Santas">"Running of the Santas"</a> bar tours in several cities this month. Billed as the "world's naughtiest pub crawl," the events are promoted on Facebook and MySpace. Drinkers in the Atlantic City "Running of the Santas" are promised they will be "escorted by the wonderful girls from Hooters." Bud Light is sponsoring a "Santa Pub Crawl" this week in Atlanta, which it similarly promotes on MySpace. "These tacky promotional events once again raise the question of whether the beer industry's voluntary marketing and advertising code is worth the paper it's printed on," said George A. Hacker, director of CSPI's alcohol policies project. "How realistic is it to let the beer industry's lobbyists write and enforce the rules if not even Santa is safe? Besides, everyone knows Santa prefers milk—skim, actually." CSPI is asking the Beer Institute's Code Compliance Board to advise <a href="http://www.millercoors.com/AgeVerification.aspx" target="MillerCoors">MillerCoors</a> and <a href="http://www.anheuser-busch.com/" target="Anheuser-Busch">Anheuser-Busch</a> to withdraw from the Santa-related promotional events. 2008-12-09 GAO Calls for Greater Coordination, Monitoring of Genetically Engineered Crops http://cspinet.org/new/200812051.html Statement of CSPI Biotechnology Director Gregory JaffeThe Center for Science in the Public Interest supports all of the recommendations in today's <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/d0960.pdf">Government Accountability Office report on genetically engineered crops</a>. The federal government established a coordinated framework for the regulation of GE crops more than 20 years ago. Yet, as pointed out by GAO, the three regulatory agencies--USDA, FDA, and EPA--still do not adequately coordinate their regulation of the food safety or environmental consequences of these crops. The incoming Obama Administration should implement all of the GAO recommendations, especially one requiring post-approval monitoring for unintended environmental and food safety consequences. The federal government's response to that recommendation by GAO is inadequate and short-sighted, as resources spent on post-market monitoring would protect consumers, the environment, and our trading partners. The FDA should also meet its commitment to the public made several years ago to publish on the Internet the results of its early food safety assessments of experimental GE crops. Lack of resources and having other safety priorities is not an excuse. Uploading decision documents to the web should simply be normal operating procedure. 2008-12-05 Industry Not Lowering Sodium in Processed Foods, Despite Public Health Concerns http://cspinet.org/new/200812041.html A Few Companies Actually Hike Salt Levels Dramatically in Some Products, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Health experts have been ringing alarm bells about the amount of sodium, or salt, in processed foods for years. But according to discouraging <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/saltupdatedec08.pdf" target="new data published by the Center for Science in the Public Interest">new data published by the Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>, most food companies aren't listening. The average sodium content of 528 packaged and restaurant foods stayed essentially the same between 2005 and 2008, increasing by under one percent. But considering the food industry's acknowledgment that sodium levels are too high, the lack of progress is disturbing, said CSPI. The medical community has long agreed that diets high in sodium are a major cause of strokes and heart attacks. For some products, though, the spikes in sodium content are alarming: Hardee's French fries, for instance, contain three times as much sodium as they did in 2005. Wal-Mart's cream cheese nearly doubled in sodium. Jimmy Dean's Regular Premium Pork Sausage, salty enough in 2005 with 280 milligrams of sodium per serving, has 60 percent more in 2008. Some 109 products increased by 5 percent or more and 29 products increased by 30 percent or more. On the other hand, sodium in 114 products declined by 5 percent or more and 18 products declined by 30 percent or more. The rest remained about the same. "The food industry is knowingly overusing a chemical that can cause crippling disease or early death," CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson said. "Despite 30 years of unkept promises from food companies, nothing has changed. The average sodium content remains dangerously high. The next Administration can't sit by incuriously as chain restaurants and food manufacturers recklessly turn Americans' brains and hearts into ticking time bombs." Health officials see lower-sodium diets as a major public health goal, because current levels promote high blood pressure, which, in turn increases the risk of heart attacks and strokes. In 2004, the director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institutes, and two colleagues estimated that cutting sodium in foods by 50 percent would save about 150,000 lives annually. The American Medical Association, American College of Cardiology, and many other health groups have urged that industry gradually achieve that 50-percent reduction over a ten-year period. While some companies maintain that current levels are necessary for purposes of taste or preservation, CSPI found large brand-to-brand differences in numerous categories of foods. That indicates that some companies could easily lower sodium levels and still have perfectly marketable products. For instance: Arby's French fries have three times as much sodium as McDonald's fries. Bumblebee white albacore canned tuna has 70 percent more sodium than Crown Prince. And Kraft's Classic Caesar salad dressing has almost twice as much sodium as Annie's Natural version. Products that have less sodium in 2008 than they did in 2005 include Contadina Roma Style Tomato Paste, Pepperidge Farm's Hot Dog and Hamburger Buns, and Hungry Man Boneless Fried Chicken Frozen Dinner. The sodium in processed foods comes mostly from salt, but also from monosodium glutamate (MSG), baking soda, sodium nitrite, and a myriad of other additives. About 10 percent of the sodium that people consume occurs naturally in foods. In 2005, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html">CSPI petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration</a> to change the “generally recognized as safe” status that salt enjoys in order to limit the amounts in various categories of food. New York City, Los Angeles, Wisconsin, Boston, and others have all endorsed that measure. FDA held a hearing on CSPI's petition in September 2007, but has done nothing since. “The sixth edition of the <a href="http://www.health.gov/DietaryGuidelines/">Dietary Guidelines for Americans</a> was published in 2005, the base year of our survey,” Jacobson said. "And for the sixth straight time the government urged that sodium consumption be cut. Apparently, most food manufacturers just aren't listening." In contrast to the FDA’s decades-long inactivity on salt, over the several years the British government has waged a major campaign to persuade companies to lower sodium levels and consumers to choose lower-sodium products. The government's goal is to lower sodium consumption by one-third over five years. Consumption is already down by 10 percent, which Graham MacGregor, Professor of Cardiovascular Medicine at St. George's University of London, estimates is saving 6,000 lives there annually. 2008-12-04 Nestlé Agrees to Curb Children's Marketing http://cspinet.org/new/200812021.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanWe applaud Nestlé for setting nutrition standards for the products it advertises to children under 12. Switching from promoting Wonka candy to 100 percent juice and low-fat chocolate milk will be better for children and make it easier for parents to feed their children healthfully. <a href="http://us.bbb.org/WWWRoot/SitePage.aspx?site=113&id=1869d6a9-82aa-49a1-8419-40a8251fa916&art=8059" target="Nestlé">Nestlé</a> had been one of the biggest food companies missing from the Council of Better Business Bureaus' Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806091.html" target="In June">In June</a>, over 30 health organizations wrote to Nestlé, urging it to change its marketing to children and join the initiative. But for the initiative and self-regulation to work, more major food marketers need to stop marketing junk food to kids. A number of top marketers have refused to join the initiative and make a public pledge to improve their marketing, including Chuck E. Cheese's, Subway, Yum Brands (KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, sponsor of the Book It! Program for schools), Perfetti Van Melle (maker of Airheads candies), and Topps (maker of Baby Bottle Pop and other candies). When the new Congress reconvenes in January, it should take a fresh look at whether this voluntary initiative is sufficient to protect children from obesity-promoting advertising. 2008-12-02 Eating as if Your Life Depends on It http://cspinet.org/new/200812012.html Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson to speak at the 92nd Street Y in New York CityMichael F. Jacobson, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, will speak about eating healthfully as food costs continue to rise at the 92nd Street Y in New York City on Tuesday, December 9th. Who: Michael F. Jacobson, Executive Director, Center for Science in the Public Interest What: As part of the Y’s "To Your Health" series, Dr. Jacobson’s will discuss ways to eat healthfully to manage weight and avoid chronic diseases, such as heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure as food prices continue to rise. His talk, "Eating as if Your Life Depends on It," will demonstrate how eating healthy can be simple and inexpensive after navigating through food marketers' misleading claims. Dr. Jacobson will also update the audience on CSPI’s advocacy efforts and answer questions. When: Tuesday, December 9, 2008 at 6:30 p.m. Tickets can be <a href="http://www.92y.org/shop/event_detail.asp?category=fitness+%2D+health%2C+fitness%2C+sports+and+aquatics888Fitness+%2D+Events888Lectures+and+Conversations%3A+Health+and+Wellness888&productid=T%2DHL5TH04" target="ordered online">ordered online</a> and are $18 for the public or $8 for members of the Y’s May Center. Where: <a href="http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=1395+Lexington+Avenue,+New+York,+NY+10128&sll=40.686816,-73.958295&sspn=0.01139,0.019226&g=1395+Lexington+Avenue,+New+York,+NY+10128&ie=UTF8&ll=40.783125,-73.95288&spn=0.005687,0.009613&z=17&iwloc=addr" target="92 St. Y, 1395 Lexington Ave., New York City ">92 St. Y, 1395 Lexington Ave., New York City </a> Why: With the implementation of calorie labeling on fast-food menus and the elimination of trans fat in all restaurants, New York City is ahead of the curve in terms of nutrition. Dr. Jacobson will provide additional tools to maintain a healthy life in these tough economic times. 2008-12-01 Fish & Shellfish Top CSPI Outbreak List http://cspinet.org/new/200811251.html As Thanksgiving Approaches, Group Urges Obama Administration to Make Food Safety Top PriorityWASHINGTON—Outbreaks involving produce, including E. coli on spinach, and Salmonella on jalapeno peppers and fresh tomatoes grabbed headlines this year and last. But when you look at relative rates of outbreak-related illnesses caused by various foods, fish and shellfish turn out to cause more sicknesses per bite than any other category. Turkey is linked to three times as many illnesses as chicken—no doubt in part because many harried holiday cooks might not as be as familiar with how to safely thaw and cook a whole big bird, or to store the leftovers "While many food safety disasters in the home can be avoided with careful handling, those coming to the table from farms and factories here and abroad have become far too frequent over the last few years," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety for the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Instead of relying on recalls and warnings, the Food and Drug Administration should focus on preventing these problems from ever reaching consumers." According to the foodborne-illness data crunched by CSPI in its annual <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/outbreak_alert_2008_report_final.pdf" target="Outbreak Alert! report">Outbreak Alert! report</a>, a pound of fish and shellfish is 29 times more likely to cause illness than the safest food category, a pound of dairy foods. After dairy, produce is the second safest category of food, followed by pork. <img src="/foodsafety/outbreak/images/Servingchart.jpg"> Even when not adjusted for consumption, CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak/pathogen.php" target="Outbreak Alert! database">Outbreak Alert! database</a> has more seafood outbreaks, 1,140, than for any other category of food. Fin fish, such as tuna, grouper, mahi mahi, and salmon, were linked to 694 of those outbreaks; mollusks, including oysters, clams, and mussels were linked to 175 outbreaks; and the rest linked to shrimp, lobster, or foods such as crab cakes and tuna burgers. While Vibrio bacteria and noroviruses contributed to those, naturally occurring toxins such as scombrotoxin and ciguatoxin account for a plurality of seafood outbreaks. "Our food safety system is based on antiquated laws, including ones that are more than a hundred years old," DeWaal said. "A hundred years ago we weren’t importing millions of pounds of seafood from Asia, nor were we repacking Mexican tomatoes and shipping them to 50 states. Modernizing this system should be an urgent priority of the Obama administration, to reduce outbreaks and illnesses from food and restore consumer confidence." Outbreak Alert! includes nearly 5,800 outbreaks that occurred between 1990 and 2006 for which both the food and the pathogen are identified. The data set has been published by CSPI for the last 10 years, and can be reviewed on CSPI's website. Because foodborne illness is dramatically underreported, because much foodborne illness does not occur in outbreaks, and because it is so difficult to prove which food caused an outbreak, CSPI's data represents just the tip of a very large iceberg: Each year, according to the CDC, foodborne illness sickens 76 million and kills 5,000 Americans. CSPI reminds home cooks to allow plenty of time to thaw whole turkeys in the refrigerator—about 24 hours for every four to five pounds—and to not let germs on the turkey grow by thawing on the counter. Cook whole turkeys to 165 degrees F as measured by a meat thermometer inserted into the thickest part of the thigh and be sure to refrigerate leftovers within 2 hours after cooking to keep them safe. 2008-11-25 Longer Tests on Lab Animals Urged for Potential Carcinogens http://cspinet.org/new/200811172.html WASHINGTON— Current government regulatory agencies typically require that industrial chemicals, including food additives and environmental pollutants, be administered to lab rodents beginning shortly after birth and ending after two years to test whether those substances might cause cancer in humans. But a new <a href="http://www.ehponline.org/members/2008/10716/10716.html" target="peer-reviewed paper">peer-reviewed paper</a> published in Environmental Health Perspectives argues that those tests sometimes understate human risks and should start in utero and continue as long as three years, the approximate life spans of rats and mice. The longer, more sensitive tests would provide a more reliable picture of the risk that various chemicals pose to humans throughout their lifespan, the authors say. The authors charged that practically all rodent tests submitted to regulatory agencies are insufficiently sensitive. "We must test animals to determine whether a substance causes cancer," said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and co-author of the paper. "Given the prevalence of so many chemicals in our cupboards, our workplaces, and in the environment at large, government regulatory agencies must change the way they do business and require companies to conduct animal tests from before birth to near the end of their natural lifetimes. Needless to say, chemical manufacturers prefer tests that are less expensive and less likely to find problems," said Jacobson. "Waiting for proof of human harm before acting to prevent risk is unethical and treats people like animals in an uncontrolled experiment," added co-author Devra Davis of Pittsburgh's Center for Environmental Oncology. All known human carcinogens also cause cancer in animals. About a third of known human carcinogens were first uncovered in animal testing. The paper highlights rodent tests on several chemicals that did not appear to be carcinogenic after two years, but did so in longer studies. For instance, two-year rat tests on the artificial sweetener aspartame did not detect any tumors, but two tests, one of which began in utero, that monitored rats until they died showed increased lymphomas, leukemias, and kidney and other tumors. Two-year rat tests of the metal cadmium, which is used in batteries and other products, did not find the substance to be a carcinogen, but a two-and-a-half-year study found lung tumors. Similarly, two-year testing in rats of the solvent toluene did not detect cancer. But significant numbers of cancers did appear in animals exposed to toluene for two years and then allowed to live an additional six months. "Since exposure to many chemicals occurs before birth, tests on rodents should begin in utero, particularly for chemicals that may interfere with the endocrine and reproductive systems," Jacobson said. (The Food and Drug Administration normally requires such tests on potential food additives.) The paper cited bisphenol A, or BPA, as an example of a chemical that should be tested on animals before and after birth. BPA is widely used in plastic bottles and in the lining of metal cans, and has been increasing in the diets of infants and children. Fetuses are particularly sensitive to chemicals like BPA, which is an endocrine disruptor. Several governments have recently acted to restrict its use. The authors recommend that government agencies involved in testing, including the Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Consumer Product Safety Commission, and National Toxicology Program compare the results of two-year and longer-term animal studies and then revise their "best practices." James Huff, an animal carcinogenesis expert at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, which publishes Environmental Health Perspectives, co-authored the paper. 2008-11-17 CSPI's Director of Litigation Named Advocate of the Year http://cspinet.org/new/200811131.html WASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest is pleased to announce Stephen Gardner, director of its litigation project, was named Advocate of the Year by the National Association of Consumer Advocates (NACA). That organization presented the award at its annual meeting in Portland, Oregon on Oct. 25. CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation/" target="litigation project">litigation project</a>, led by Gardner since its founding in 2004, has negotiated settlements or voluntary changes in marketing practices with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806261.html" target="Anheuser-Busch">Anheuser-Busch</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606011.html" target="Frito-Lay">Frito-Lay</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200704171.html" target="Quaker Oats">Quaker Oats</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html" target="Pinnacle Foods">Pinnacle Foods</a>, and others. Gardner's negotiations with representatives of soda companies led to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605031.html" target="industry’s 2006 voluntary agreement">industry’s 2006 voluntary agreement</a> with former President Clinton to remove most soda from schools. CSPI's litigation project also forged an agreement with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="Kellogg">Kellogg</a> agreed to adopt nutrition standards for foods advertised to young children, and prompted <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="KFC">KFC</a> to accelerate its switch from artificial trans fat to healthier oils for deep-frying. After earning a law degree from the University of Texas, Gardner served as director for several nonprofits, assistant attorney general in New York and Texas, a visiting assistant professor of law and later assistant dean of clinical education at Southern Methodist School of Law. Prior to joining CSPI, he practiced privately and for the National Consumer Law Center, the nation's leading advocates for low-income consumer justice. Gardner is the author and co-author of several law-related publications, such as "Lost in the Supermarket: Consumer Confusion and Marketing Mania" and "The Practice of Consumer Law." 2008-11-13 How Should the Next Administration Address Genetically Engineered Food Animals? http://cspinet.org/new/200811071.html Audio and Transcript Now AvailableWASHINGTON—The Center for American Progress and the Center for Science in the Public Interest held a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/biotech/panel.html" target="moderated panel discussion">moderated panel discussion</a> on the commercialization of genetically engineered animals on Monday, November 10, 2008 at the National Press Club in Washington. Who: <ul><li> Rick Weiss, Senior Fellow, Center for American Progress (moderator) <li>Scott J. Eilert, V.P. and Director, Meat Technology Department, Cargill <li> Michael Greger, Director, Public Health and Animal Agriculture, The Humane Society of the United States <li>Gregory Jaffe, Director, CSPI Biotechnology Project <li>John Phillips, Emeritus Professor, University of Guelph and Enviropig developer <li>Michael Taylor, Research Professor of Health Policy, George Washington University <li>Jamie Jonkers, Ph.D., Director, Regulatory Affairs, National Milk Producers Federation </li></ul> What: Representatives of the biotechnology industry, the food industry, and consumer groups discussed what the next Administration, Congress, and consumers should know about the coming commercialization of genetically engineered animals. When: 1:00-2:30 p.m. EST on Monday, November 10, 2008 Where: National Press Club, Holeman Lounge, 529 14th St., N.W., Washington, DC Why: What are the potential risks and benefits of applying genetic engineering to animals, such as the so-called "Enviropig" or the fast-growing transgenic salmon? How should they be regulated—and by whom? How will American consumers and our international trading partners react to these high-tech animals and their entry into the food supply? 2008-11-07 Philadelphia Passes Strongest Nutrition Labeling Requirements for Chain Restaurant Menus http://cspinet.org/new/200811061.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanPhiladelphia now joins <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200804161.html" target="New York City">New York City</a> , several counties, and the state of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809301.html" target="California">California</a> in passing a strong menu labeling requirement for chain restaurants. Beginning on Jan. 1, 2010, chain restaurants with more than 15 outlets will have to disclose calories on menu boards, and calories, saturated and trans fat, sodium and carbohydrates on printed menus. The measure passed today by the Philadelphia City Council is the strongest in the nation so far, and we hope it is used as a model for other jurisdictions. There's no reason that consumers shouldn't see the nutritional price for what they're ordering as well as the financial price. While it's no magic bullet, menu labeling is an easy thing that cities, counties and states can do to help their citizens eat healthfully, manage their weight, and avoid diet-related disease. It's also a useful incentive to the restaurant industry to expand the number and variety of healthy choices on their menus. We expect that the members of the incoming Congress and next Administration are taking note of the popularity of these low-cost menu labeling measures, which can help make a dent in the obesity epidemic and save valuable public health dollars. It now seems hard to believe that not long ago Nutrition Facts labels weren't required on food packages in the grocery store. Similarly, a few years from now, it will be hard to imagine that standardized nutrition information was absent from chain restaurant menus. Congratulations to the Philadelphia City Council, particularly councilmember Blondell Reynolds Brown, for helping to lead the charge. 2008-11-06 Brits Get Treats, Americans Get Tricks From Food Companies, Says Nutrition Action Healthletter http://cspinet.org/new/200810221.html Pumpkin, Annatto, & Strawberry Color Foods There, Synthetic Petrochemicals Fill In HereWASHINGTON—British consumers enjoy products made by General Mills, Kellogg, Kraft and McDonald's that are free of synthetic food dyes, but American customers lack such royal treatment, according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/10_08/fooddyes.pdf" target="October issue">October issue</a> of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="Nutrition Action Healthletter">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>. Despite evidence linking food dyes to hyperactivity and other behavior problems in children, companies continue to use the controversial dyes in American product lines while substituting natural colorings in the United Kingdom. In the U.K., Fanta orange soda gets its bright color from pumpkin and carrot extract, but in the U.S. it comes from Red 40 and Yellow 6. Starburst Chews and Skittles, which are both Mars products, also contain synthetic food dyes in the U.S. but not in the U.K. Similarly, in the U.S., McDonald’s strawberry sundaes are colored with Red 40 but—amazing as it might sound—real strawberries in the U.K. "British candy has all the sugar of American candy, and it’s certainly not health food," said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, Nutrition Action’s publisher. "But as Halloween approaches, it's a shame that American kids trick-or-treat for candy dyed with discredited chemicals while British families have many of the same foods, minus the dyes." Americans consume five times as much food dye as they did 30 years ago, according to data from the Food and Drug Administration. But in the wake of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bateman.pdf" target="two">two</a> British <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mccann.pdf" target="studies">studies</a> that found food dyes (and possibly the preservative sodium benzoate) impair the behavior of many children, the British government pressured companies to switch to safer, natural colorings and the European Parliament approved a warning label for foods that still contain the dyes. In June <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="CSPI urged the FDA">CSPI urged the FDA</a> to ban Red 40, Yellow 5 and six other synthetic dyes. The group wants parents of children sensitive to the chemicals to file reports online at <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes" target="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes">http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes</a>, which CSPI will then forward to the FDA. 2008-10-22 GAO Says FDA Fails to Ensure Accuracy and Truthfulness of Food Labels http://cspinet.org/new/200810101.html FDA Urged to Develop Simple, Front-Label Nutrition SymbolWASHINGTON—A <a href="http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08597.pdf" target="new report">new report</a> from the Government Accountability Office gives federal food regulators failing marks when it comes to preventing false and misleading labeling. The GAO report found that while the number of food firms and products has increased dramatically, the Food and Drug Administration’s oversight and enforcement efforts “have not kept pace.” The FDA is supposed to conduct label reviews when it inspects foreign food firms, but in 2007 only inspected 95 firms overseas (there are tens of thousands) and in only 11 countries (out of 150 that export food to the U.S.) According to the report, the FDA has not done random sampling to test the accuracy of Nutrition Facts labels since the 1990s—and the agency has only conducted very limited non-random nutrition testing on products whose labels were suspected of being inaccurate. The most serious enforcement actions FDA can take—seizures, injunctions, and import refusals—are rare for labeling violations. The report further found that the FDA lacks a system for tracking the enforcement activities of its field offices. “The findings of this latest GAO investigation that the FDA seems incapable of preventing companies from providing false or misleading information to consumers are very troubling,” said representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), chairwoman of the House Appropriations Subcommittee in charge of the FDA’s budget. "These findings by the GAO seem to point to another example of how FDA mismanagement is failing consumers. As Congress moves next year toward reforming FDA's food safety responsibilities, this is another area that warrants close examination and potentially a major overhaul.” “Americans rely on food labels for accurate nutrition information to improve their diets and reduce their risk of heart disease, cancer, and diabetes,” said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. “These disturbing findings basically show that the FDA is looking the other way while consumers are being misled.” “It’s astounding that FDA lacks reliable mechanisms to ensure that the Nutrition Facts label is accurate and that health-related claims are trustworthy,” said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Ringel Heller. “FDA needs to reorganize its labeling division and be given a new mandate from Congress to modernize food labels. Millions of Americans are counting on label information to protect their health.” GAO called on the FDA to “better leverage” its resources and to develop “detailed information on how new [legal] authorities would help address the shortcomings identified in this report.” CSPI regularly files formal complaints with the FDA urging it to stop misleading labeling claims, but the labeling violations have often continued unabated. Recent deceptive claims include: <ul><li>Kraft’s Crystal Light Immunity Berry Pomegranate drink falsely claimed that its vitamins A, C, and E will “help maintain a healthy immune system.” The FDA said it would consider placing the issue on its work plan for next year. <li>Mars Cocoa Via Brand Heart Healthy Snacks claimed that it “Promotes a healthy heart,” and “reduce[s] bad cholesterol.” The chocolate candy contains significant amounts of saturated fat, which can raise bad cholesterol. The company has ignored an FDA warning to halt the claim, and the agency has failed to follow-up its demands in court. <li>Land O Lakes has claimed that “Omega-3 All Natural Eggs” are a “good source of heart healthy nutrition,” despite the fact that the eggs contain too much heart-unhealthy cholesterol to make health claims under FDA rules. The FDA has failed to act on a CSPI complaint urging the agency to stop the claim. <li>Nestle Crunch Ice Cream Bars have claimed “0g Trans Fat,” but contain 11 grams of saturated fat, which also raises cholesterol levels. The FDA failed to act on a CSPI complaint over the issue. <li>Capri Sun beverages were labeled as “All Natural” even though they were made with high-fructose corn syrup (when contacted by CSPI, the company said it was modifying the label). The FDA has failed to formally define the term. <li>Gerber Graduates for Toddlers Fruit Juice Snacks depicted fruits on the label and suggested that the product is made from fruit. But the product’s predominant ingredients are corn syrup and sugar. CSPI, but not the FDA, is challenging the claim in federal court. <li>Thomas’ Hearty Grains Double Fiber Honey Wheat Muffins label has boasted that the product is “made with whole grain,” but the predominant ingredient is white flour. The FDA issued a weak policy pronouncement on the issue, but has taken no enforcement action. </ul> The GAO report also called on the FDA to collaborate with other federal agencies and stakeholders to “evaluate labeling approaches and options for developing a simplified, empirically valid system that conveys overall nutritional quality to mitigate labels that are misleading consumers.” CSPI formally petitioned the FDA in 2006 to develop a universal front-of-label symbol that would communicate nutritional value and has advocated funding for an Institute of Medicine study to identify the best system of label symbols. The FDA held a public hearing on the issue in 2007, but has not taken any further action. 2008-10-10 Yum! Brands Praised for Adding Calorie Counts to KFC, Pizza Hut, and Taco Bell Menu Boards http://cspinet.org/new/200810011.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonYUM! Brands' <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2008-09-30-menu-calorie-pizza-taco-kfc_N.htm">groundbreaking announcement</a> that it will add calorie counts to menu boards at KFC, Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, and Long John Silver's is fabulous news for health-conscious consumers. Talk about thinking outside the bun! YUM! is leaping ahead of all its competitors by providing the one piece of nutrition information that consumers most want, calories. We applaud this move and encourage McDonald's, Starbucks, Applebee's, and other major chains to follow this bold example. YUM! has gone an important step further by voicing its support for legislation that would require restaurants to list calories on menus and menu boards. Of course, this is, in part, because several major cities and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809301.html">one state</a> have passed laws that require differing forms of nutrition disclosures. But it is also because YUM! recognizes that many of their customers value this information and that it's practical for chain restaurants to provide it. I never thought I'd say this, but I salute Colonel Sanders! 2008-10-01 California First State in Nation to Pass Menu Labeling Law http://cspinet.org/new/200809301.html Schwarzenegger Signs Historic Measure Putting Calories on Menu BoardsWASHINGTON—California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger today signed <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/sen/sb_1401-1450/sb_1420_bill_20080903_enrolled.html">landmark legislation</a> that will put calorie counts on chain restaurant menus and menu boards. Though enacted in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="New York City">New York City</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707201.html" target="Seattle">Seattle</a>, and several other jurisdictions, California is the first state in the country to pass such a measure. "Ten years from now, it will probably seem strange that once upon a time, chain restaurants didn't list calories on menus and menu boards for everyone to see," said Margo G. Wootan, nutrition policy director at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has been spearheading the menu labeling movement nationwide. "We hope that what California legislators and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger have done is replicated in many other state capitals, and that it eventually goes nationwide." The California menu labeling bill (SB 1420), sponsored by Senators Alex Padilla and Carole Midgen, applies to fast-food and other chain restaurants having 20 or more outlets in California and only to standardized menu items, not daily specials or customized orders. The bill goes into full effect in 2011, though between now and then restaurant chains will be required to make brochures with nutrition information available in their restaurants. The bill preempts cities and counties from enacting competing menu labeling provisions, as San Francisco and Santa Clara County have, though the bill’s advocates consider that a price worth paying given how many more people will now have access to calorie information. "Restaurant diners in California will no longer have to guess when it comes to selecting meals for themselves and their children," Wootan said. "And California chain restaurants will have an incentive to add a wider range of healthy choices to their menus. It's great news for consumers." 2008-09-30 Despite Pledges, Nickelodeon Still Marketing Nutritionally Poor Food http://cspinet.org/new/200809231.html WASHINGTON—Despite its public statements and pledges to help combat childhood obesity, the overwhelming majority of foods marketed by the children's media giant Nickelodeon are of poor nutritional quality, according to an analysis conducted by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. CSPI first analyzed Nickelodeon food marketing in 2005, and found that 88 percent of foods marketed to children were nutritionally poor. Despite the threat of litigation, an industry-wide self regulatory initiative, and new interest in food marketing on the part of Congress and the Federal Trade Commission, the company has improved its practices only marginally: <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nickelodeon_fact_sheet_2008.pdf" target="In 2008">In 2008</a>, 79 percent of the foods it markets to children are foods like sugary cereal, candy, sugary drinks with little or no fruit juice, and fast food. And the percentage of food packages sporting Viacom characters such as SpongeBob SquarePants, Dora the Explorer, and Shrek contain increasingly unhealthy foods. Today Nickelodeon executive <a href="http://www.iom.edu/Object.File/Master/24/712/0.pdf" target="Marva Smalls">Marva Smalls</a> will defend its practices in testimony before a joint Senate Appropriations subcommittee meeting convened by Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Sam Brownback (R-KS). In 2005 Smalls told the Federal Trade Commission that Nick would use its characters to promote spinach, oranges, and other health foods, but advertisements for those foods are totally absent from the company’s airwaves and magazine ads. "Nickelodeon is something of a pariah in that they haven’t set any basic nutrition standards for the foods it will expose children to via its television or magazine advertising or its licensed characters," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "There is literally no food, no matter how junky, that Nickelodeon won’t advertise on its airwaves or in its magazine or slap one of its characters on. Just relying on the food industry’s own initiative to improve practices has only made a small difference at Nick." CSPI reviewed 28 hours of children’s television programming on Nickelodeon, during which 819 commercials and public service announcements were shown. Of the 185 food ads, 177 had nutrition information available, and 138, or 78 percent, of those were for foods of poor nutritional quality, including Apple Jacks, Cookie Crisp cereal, Airhead candy, artificial fruit-flavored snacks, and Chuck E. Cheese's, where 89 percent of its menu items are nutritionally poor. Some of the healthier foods advertised included yogurts and pasta. Similarly, 77 percent, or 24 of 31 food ads published in Nickelodeon magazine were for junk foods like SweetTarts, Gummy Bugs, Laffy Taffy, Yogos Bits, or Burger King meals. During the study period, three fast-food restaurants were running tie-ins with Viacom, Nickelodeon's corporate parent: McDonald's with The Spiderwick Chronicles, Subway with The Naked Brothers Band, and Chuck E. Cheese's with Bee Movie. In 2006, the Council of Better Business Bureaus convened 10 major food companies to join a <a href="http://us.bbb.org/WWWRoot/SitePage.aspx?site=113&id=dba51fbb-9317-4f88-9bcb-3942d7336e87" target="Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative">Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative</a> in which companies pledge to shift their advertising and marketing to healthier foods. Today Dannon will announce that it is joining the initiative, bringing the Initiative's ranks to 15 major food companies, including Coca-Cola, Nestle, General Mills, Kellogg, Kraft, McDonald's, and Unilever. The pledges, which each have different nutrition standards and marketing policies, have yet to take full effect but should by the end of 2008. "Despite the sky-high rates of childhood obesity, Nickelodeon continues to bombard children with junk-food marketing," said Wootan. "Media companies such as Nick are gatekeepers, and should set their own standards for marketing food to children." 2008-09-23 FDA to Announce Rules for Engineered Animals http://cspinet.org/new/200809181.html Statement of CSPI Biotechnology Director Gregory JaffeToday the government formally acknowledged that genetically engineered animals need <a href="http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/oc/ohrms/advdisplay.cfm" target="regulation and oversight">regulation and oversight</a>. It may seem strange to consumers that the Food and Drug Administration wants to treat genetically engineered animals as "new animal drugs." But if FDA implements what it has proposed, the agency will at least have to determine whether these newly designed foods are safe to eat. Although FDA's announcement is a good first start, it does not address the risks that GE animals might pose to the environment. Would it be the FDA that would determine whether fast-growing genetically engineered salmon would endanger native salmon populations? In addition, FDA's post-market regulatory authorities are limited and may be insufficient to deal with any problems that might arise after an engineered animal is commercialized. FDA's proposal also does not indicate what information the public will be provided about the safety of GE animals. The safety assessments of new animal drugs are confidential, and FDA makes safety decisions behind closed doors. If the FDA evaluates GE animals in secret, consumers will be leery of the safety of these foods. 2008-09-18 FDA Web Site on Drug Ads Developed by Drug Industry PR Firm http://cspinet.org/new/200809152.html Should Pharma PR Pros Write the Government’s Advice to Consumers?WASHINGTON—Drug ads can be confusing and often deceptive, so it makes sense that the Food and Drug Administration would develop a <a href="http://www.fda.gov/Cder/ethicad/index.htm" target="web site">web site</a> aimed at helping consumers separate fact from fiction. But to develop such a site the FDA turned to a nonprofit front group erected by <a href="http://www.shawscience.com/" target="Shaw Science Partners">Shaw Science Partners</a>, a public relations firm that specializes in launching new drugs such as Viagra, Celebrex, Zoloft, Cymbalta and the now-withdrawn Rezulin. CSPI today called on the FDA to scuttle the web site, to terminate its relationship with the drug companies' PR. firm, and to seek out advice from leading physicians, pharmacists, or consumer groups before publishing a new site aimed at educating consumers. The connection between the FDA site and the Big Pharma PR firm was reported this morning in Integrity in Science Watch, published by the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The website, "Be Smart About Prescription Drug Advertising: A Guide for Consumers," was developed by <a href="http://ethicad.org/" target="EthicAd">EthicAd</a>, a non-profit run by Atlanta-based Shaw Science Partners. According to Integrity in Science Watch, Shaw Science partners and other members of EthicAd’s board underwrite the group's expenses, which enables it to donate its services to the FDA. "All members do work for industry; if not all, almost all," company founder Michael Shaw said. The skimpy site contains examples of correct and incorrect drug ads—advice seemingly more geared to pharmaceutical copywriters than to consumers. For instance, a page showing an ad for a fictional asthma drug offers this jargon-filled critique: <blockquote>To be a help-seeking ad, the text cannot recommend a specific drug as a treatment because it directs the reader to ask about a specific drug we would consider the ad a product claim ad. Directing the reader to ask a healthcare provider about symptoms is appropriate. To be a help-seeking ad, it could say, "Ask your healthcare provider what you can do."</blockquote> That kind of clunky stemwider isn't going to be useful to consumers, according to Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science Project at CSPI. "It's not that any of the information presented on this web site is wrong, per se," said Goozner. "But if the goal were to educate consumers about drug ads, the site is a dismal failure. Nowhere are consumers encouraged to view drug ads with any kind of skepticism. Nowhere are consumers urged how to evaluate messages about side effects. The agency basically invited an industry-funded front group to write the advice. Not surprisingly, they delivered a turkey." EthicAd is not registered as a nonprofit with the Internal Revenue Service, though Georgia law allows nonprofits to incorporate there without doing that. Records show that the nonprofit, which shares the same physical address as Shaw Science Partners, is nominally chaired by famed surgeon Michael DeBakey, who died in July at age 99. Shaw himself is identified on the EthicsAd web site not as the head of the PR firm, but as a former medical advisor to the National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health, a post he held for three years nearly three decades ago. Integrity in Science Watch is published every Monday and is delivered via email. 2008-09-15 MillerCoors Drops Offensive Sparks Ads on Heavy.com http://cspinet.org/new/200809121.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Director George A. HackerThe Beer Institute has notified CSPI that MillerCoors has decided to eliminate its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200809111.html" target="offensive, degrading, and ill-intentioned ad campaign">offensive, degrading, and ill-intentioned ad campaign</a> for Sparks on the <a href="http://www.heavy.com/" target="Heavy.com web site">Heavy.com web site</a>. But that move does not merit praise. Like a mugger taking a day off, MillerCoors is probably just taking a breather before testing new ways of exploiting the youth market with ads for a dangerous product. Sparks is formulated specifically to mask the intoxicating effects of its alcohol content, and is still marketed with unacceptable techniques designed to appeal to the youngest of drinkers. Today,our lawyers are instructing MillerCoors to preserve any documents related to the Heavy.com/Tiny Entourage ad campaign since those documents will likely figure prominently as evidence when our <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complaint_millercoors.pdf" target="lawsuit">lawsuit</a> against the company proceeds to trial. 2008-09-12 MillerCoors Under Fire for Raunchy, Soft Porn Ads for Controversial "Sparks" Energy Brew http://cspinet.org/new/200809111.html Sponsored Videos on Heavy.com Aimed at 18+ Violate Industry’s Voluntary Advertising CodeWASHINGTON—Megabrewer MillerCoors is coming under fresh fire for advertising its caffeinated alcoholic drink Sparks with web videos that portray drug use, explicit sexual content, misogyny, and that otherwise exude general raunchiness. The company was already under investigation by state attorneys general and the target of a civil <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complaint_millercoors.pdf" target="lawsuit filed earlier this week">lawsuit filed earlier this week</a> by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The video series, which casts men with dwarfism in a parody of HBO’s Entourage, is sponsored by Sparks, framed by ads for Sparks, and has cans of Sparks placed throughout two of the three episodes available on the <a href="http://www.heavy.com" target="Heavy.com">Heavy.com</a> web site. CSPI today notified the <a href="http://www.beerinstitute.org/" target="Beer Institute">Beer Institute</a> and the <a href="http://www.ftc.gov" target="Federal Trade Commission">Federal Trade Commission</a> that the "Tiny Entourage" ads violate the letter of the <a href="http://www.beerinstitute.org/BeerInstitute/files/ccLibraryFiles/Filename/000000000384/2006ADCODE.pdf" target="industry's voluntary marketing code">industry's voluntary marketing code</a> and will serve as an important test of how, or whether, the industry can continue to self-regulate. <img src="/images/sparksscreenshots-1.jpg">Video series featured on heavy.com. <img src="/images/sparksscreenshots-2.jpg"> "Either this patently offensive ad campaign survives or self-regulation of beer advertising survives, but not both," said CSPI alcohol policies project director George A. Hacker. "This cynical, vulgar, and sexually explicit marketing campaign is an exercise in self-immolation on the part of MillerCoors. The only bright side is that it is likely to hasten the demise of this particularly dangerous niche of alcoholic drinks." Earlier this week CSPI sued MillerCoors over Sparks, which has more alcohol than regular beer and contains unapproved additives, including the stimulants caffeine and guarana and the chicken-feed additive taurine. The lawsuit points to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/obrien.pdf" target="research">research</a> that shows that drinkers of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/alcospeed_fact_sheet.pdf" target="caffeinated alcoholic drinks">caffeinated alcoholic drinks</a> are more likely to binge drink, ride with an intoxicated driver, become injured, or be taken advantage of sexually than drinkers of non-caffeinated alcoholic drinks. Heavy.com is an advertising company founded in 1999 that specializes in ads aimed at men in their late teens and early 20s, according to a Heavy.com client quoted in a 2006 New York Times article. The site seamlessly incorporates advertising into short, youth-oriented video clips and cartoons with titles such as "Douche Off" or "Show Me Your Genitals 2." Another product-related series on the site features bikini-clad models promoting the "Axe Detail Shower Tool," a sponge designed to get "man parts" clean, according to <a href="http://www.adweek.com/aw/content_display/news/nontraditional/e3i999ebd327d1b0f723c455465bdb6d590" target="AdWeek">AdWeek</a>. The Times paraphrases one of the company's founders as maintaining that young people see no difference between entertainment and advertising. Starbursts Gummi Bursts are also advertised at the site, further hinting at the site’s intended demographic, according to CSPI. CSPI's lawsuit previously indicated that Sparks' own juvenile <a href="http://sparks.com/home.jsp" target="web site">web site</a>, offers a recipe for a drink called a "Lunchbox" and hints at Sparks as breakfast food. The formulation of the drink itself, which has a tart, candy-like taste, seems designed to appeal almost exclusively to young drinkers, according to CSPI. Sparks contain 6 to 7 percent alcohol by volume, as opposed to regular beer, which typically has 4 or 5 percent alcohol. In October, MillerCoors plans to release Sparks Red, which will have 8 percent alcohol by volume. "MillerCoors has reached new levels of irresponsibility in its marketing of caffeinated alcoholic beverages that put young people at risk for serious health and safety problems," Hacker wrote to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sparks_final_kiely_letter.pdf" target="MillerCoors CEO W. Leo Kiley">MillerCoors CEO W. Leo Kiley</a>. "We call on you to act immediately to clean up advertising for Sparks and pull these noxious concoctions off the market." The Beer Institute’s voluntary advertising code has text prohibiting "language or images that are lewd and indecent," which would seem to specifically prohibit the Sparks ads, which use words and phrases such as "f---," "b--- j--," and "fat w----." Besides the Federal Trade Commission and the Beer Institute, CSPI copied its letter to the National Association of Attorneys General and to MillerCoors' parent companies, U.K.-based SABMiller and Molson Coors. 2008-09-11 CSPI Sues to Stop MillerCoors' "Sparks" Alcoholic Energy Drink http://cspinet.org/new/200809082.html Caffeinated Booze Linked to Binge Drinking, Drunk Driving, and AssaultsWASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complaint_millercoors.pdf" target="filed suit ">filed suit</a> against MillerCoors Brewing Company, formerly Miller, over its alcoholic energy drink, Sparks. The product has more alcohol than regular beer and contains unapproved additives, including the stimulants caffeine and guarana. The lawsuit is asking the Superior Court of the District of Columbia to stop MillerCoors from selling the controversial drink, which is also under scrutiny from state attorneys general. Drinkers of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/alcospeed_fact_sheet.pdf" target="caffeinated alcoholic drinks ">caffeinated alcoholic drinks </a> are more likely to binge drink, ride with an intoxicated driver, become injured, or be taken advantage of sexually than drinkers of non-caffeinated alcoholic drinks, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/obrien.pdf" target="2007 study ">2007 study </a> conducted at Wake Forest University. Sparks products contain 6 to 7 percent alcohol by volume, as opposed to regular beer, which typically has 4 or 5 percent alcohol. Also unlike beer, Sparks’ appeal to young people is enhanced by its sweet citrusy taste, redolent of SweeTarts candy, and the bright color of orange soda. (Sparks Light also contains the artificial sweetener sucralose). In October, MillerCoors plans to release Sparks Red, which will have 8 percent alcohol by volume. "MillerCoors is trying to hook teens and ’tweens on a dangerous drink," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. "This company’s behavior is reckless, predatory, and in the final analysis, likely to disgust a judge or a jury." Sparks’ juvenile <a href="http://sparks.com/home.jsp" target="web site">web site </a> and guerilla marketing appeal to young consumers, according to CSPI. The web site offers a recipe for a drink called a "Lunchbox," consisting of half Miller beer and half Sparks, and elsewhere, the site proposes consuming Sparks for breakfast alongside omelets. The company also hosts give-aways of Sparks at house parties, sponsors events unrelated to beer such as art shows, and engages in other unconventional marketing practices, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. CSPI’s court filing notes that private gatherings such as house parties do not have the same licensing or other safeguards as public establishments that prevent minors from accessing alcohol. "Mix alcohol and stimulants with a young person’s sense of invincibility and you have a recipe for disaster," said George A. Hacker, director of CSPI’s alcohol policies project. "Sparks is a drink designed to mask feelings of drunkenness and to encourage people to keep drinking past the point at which they otherwise would have stopped. The end result is more drunk driving, more injuries, and more sexual assaults." According to a 2006 study, the stimulants in these products do not reduce alcohol’s negative effects on motor skills and reaction times but do impair people’s perception of intoxication. As a result, drinkers may engage in risky behavior, such as driving, because they feel less drunk but in reality are too intoxicated to get behind wheel. CSPI's lawsuit also contends that it is illegal to use caffeine, guarana, ginseng, and taurine in alcoholic beverages. The federal agency with primary responsibility for regulating alcoholic beverages, the Treasury Department's Tax and Trade Bureau, says alcoholic beverages may contain only ingredients considered General Recognized as Safe, or GRAS, by the Food and Drug Administration. But the FDA has given only very narrow approval for caffeine and guarana—with no allowance for alcoholic drinks—and no approval for ginseng in any food or beverage. Taurine is only approved for use in chicken feed, not human food. In February, CSPI notified Anheuser-Busch and Miller of its intent to sue both companies over caffeinated alcoholic drinks. In June, Anheuser-Busch entered into separate agreements with CSPI and 11 state attorneys general in which the brewer agreed to take caffeine and other unapproved additives out of its two alcoholic energy drinks, Bud Extra and Tilt. Anheuser-Busch paid the 11 states $200,000 to reimburse them for the cost of the investigation and called on other brewers and distillers not to market pre-packaged caffeinated alcoholic drinks. That agreement with Anheuser-Busch was the first alcohol-related accomplishment for CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation/" target="litigation project">litigation project</a>. Since its founding in 2005, CSPI’s litigation unit has, on its own or in cooperation with private law firms, negotiated settlements or voluntary changes to marketing practices with Airborne, Kellogg, Frito-Lay, Quaker Oats, and others. 2008-09-08 Lab Tests Point to Problems with Trendy New Stevia Sweetener http://cspinet.org/new/200808281.html CSPI Urges More Testing Before Stevia Extract is Used in Food, DrinksWASHINGTON—Coca-Cola and Pepsi are planning to introduce new drinks made with rebiana, an extract of stevia leaves that is 200 times sweeter than sugar. But according to a new 26-page report by toxicologists at the University of California, Los Angeles, several, though not all, laboratory tests show that the sweetener causes mutations and DNA damage, which raises the prospect that it causes cancer. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/stevia-cspi-cover-letter-8-4-08.pdf" target="letter to the Food and Drug Administration">letter to the Food and Drug Administration</a>, the Center for Science in the Public Interest says the agency should require additional tests, including a key animal study, before accepting rebiana as Generally Regarded as Safe, or GRAS. "A safe, natural, high-potency sweetener would be a welcome addition to the food supply," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "But the FDA needs to be as sure as possible that rebiana is safe before allowing it into foods that would be consumed by tens of millions of people. It would be tragic if the sweetener turned out to cause cancer or other problems." One key animal study has not been conducted, according to the UCLA experts and CSPI. The FDA's guidelines advise testing prospective major new food additives on two rodent species, usually rats and mice. The new sweetener has only been tested on rats, but not mice. The toxicologists' report said that because several studies found mutations and DNA damage, a lifetime mouse study designed to evaluate the risk of carcinogenicity and other health problems was particularly important. The <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/stevia-report_final-8-14-08.pdf" target="new report">new report</a> was prepared for CSPI by Sarah Kobylewski, a graduate student in the Department of Molecular Toxicology, and Curtis D. Eckhert, Ph.D., a professor of Environmental Health Sciences and Molecular Toxicology, at UCLA. They were assisted by Professor Joseph R. Landolph, Jr., Ph.D., of the Department of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, and Pathology, Keck School of Medicine, and the School of Pharmacy at the University of Southern California. The UCLA toxicologists emphasized the need for more genotoxicity tests, because of the evidence that derivatives of stevia that are closely related to rebiana damage DNA and chromosomes. Their report noted that much of the recent research on rebiana was sponsored by Cargill and urged the FDA to obtain independently conducted tests to ensure that corporate biases don't influence the design, conduct, or results of the tests. Rebiana is shorthand for rebaudioside A, a component of stevia. It is obtained from the leaves of a shrub native to Brazil and Paraguay. Coke, Pepsi, and other companies are excited about rebiana, because it supposedly tastes better than crude stevia, which is sold as a dietary supplement in health-food stores. After all the controversies pertaining to saccharin, aspartame, and other artificial sweeteners, the food industry expects many calorie-conscious consumers to eagerly opt for this natural sweetener. Two companies—Cargill and Merisant—have told the FDA that rebiana should be considered GRAS, a category given less scrutiny by the FDA than ordinary food additives. A third company, Wisdom Natural Brands, has declared that its stevia-based sweetener is GRAS and will market it without giving evidence to, or even notifying, the FDA. That company gave CSPI only a heavily redacted report prepared by scientists it hired to declare its stevia derivative, which is of unknown purity, is safe. Stevia is legal in foods in Japan and several other countries, but the United States, Canada, and the European Union bar stevia in foods because of older tests that suggested it might interfere with reproduction. New tests sponsored by Cargill did not find such problems. "I am not saying that rebiana is harmful, but it should not be marketed until new studies establish that it is safe," Jacobson said. Cargill's version of rebiana is called Truvia and would be used by Coca-Cola. Pepsi’s version is called PureVia and is produced by Merisant’s Whole Earth Sweetener division. Merisant is best known for marketing the Equal brand of aspartame. CSPI has not questioned the safety of two artificial sweeteners, sucralose (Splenda) and neotame, but says that suggestive evidence indicates that saccharin, aspartame (Equal, NutraSweet), and acesulfame-K pose small risks of cancer. "The whole issue of what gets GRAS status needs to be reviewed by Congress," Jacobson said. "It’s crazy that companies can just hire a few consultants to bless their new ingredients and rush them to market without any opportunity for the FDA and the public to review all the safety evidence." Two of the most harmful ingredients in the food supply are considered GRAS: <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/index.html" target="salt">salt</a>, which raises blood pressure and causes thousands of unnecessary heart attacks and strokes every year, and partially hydrogenated oil, which is the source of artery-clogging artificial trans fat. CSPI has long campaigned to get partially hydrogenated oil out of the food supply and to reduce salt to safe levels. 2008-08-28 Local and State Governments Call for Federal Action to Reduce Salt Levels in Food http://cspinet.org/new/200808251.html Cutting Salt Could Save 150,000 Lives Each Year, Officials SayWASHINGTON—With high-salt diets increasingly being recognized as a major cause of high blood pressure, heart attacks, and strokes, health officials from around the country have called on the Food and Drug Administration to press food manufacturers and restaurants to cut back on salt. The comments were made in response to the FDA’s request for public input on a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_salt_petition.pdf" target="petition filed by the Center for Science in the Public Interest">petition filed by the Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> urging the agency to revoke the "generally recognized as safe," or GRAS, status of salt and to limit sodium levels in various food categories. The comments included: • Los Angeles County Department of Public Health’s commissioner Jonathan Fielding, M.D., reported that the prevalence of diagnosed high blood pressure in the county increased from 18 percent in 1997 to 25 percent in 2005. "Action by the FDA and others is urgently needed to prevent unnecessary deaths and illnesses due to excessive salt in our diet," said Fielding. "We strongly urge that the FDA remove salt from the GRAS list and support efforts to implement a national program to reduce salt consumption." • The National Association of County & City Health Officials, which represents approximately 2,850 local health departments, said it “strongly urges the Food and Drug Administration to examine carefully and thoroughly how its policies can reduce the sodium content of food and to act accordingly.” • The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO), which represents state and territorial public health agencies of the United States, the U.S. territories, and the District of Columbia, wrote: "The amount of salt consumed by Americans is a major public health issue. As the major source of excess dietary sodium is found in processed foods, ASTHO urges the FDA to consider ways to encourage food manufacturers to limit the amount of sodium added during food processing." • The Alameda County, Calif., Public Health Department wrote: "The FDA has the responsibility to ensure the safety of the food supply, but has done little with regard to salt." The letter, signed by Diane Woloshin, Nutrition Services Director of the county, cited health experts’ estimate that 150,000 lives could be saved annually if sodium levels in packaged and restaurant foods were cut in half….and that that "would save tens of billions of dollars in health care costs." • Chicago’s Commissioner of Health, Terry Mason, M.D., supported a 50-percent reduction in sodium over ten years. He endorsed public education campaigns by government and voluntary action by industry, but noted: "In the absence of voluntary sodium reduction, a regulatory approach would become necessary including the development of a mandatory national warning label system to inform consumers of high sodium content foods." • The Boston Public Health Commission’s executive director, Barbara Ferrer, expressed her "deep concern about the harm being caused by excessive amounts of sodium in the American diet" and applauded the FDA for holding its hearing last November. She supported CSPI’s proposals to revoke the GRAS status of salt and limit sodium levels in packaged foods. • Baltimore’s commissioner of health, Joshua M. Sharfstein, M.D., advised the FDA that nutrition labeling of foods hasn’t been sufficient to reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease and urged the agency "to develop a strategy to support a more healthy diet and save lives." • Commissioner Joshua Lipsman, M.D., of the Westchester, NY, County Department of Health told the FDA about the vigorous efforts of the British government to lower sodium levels and said that "salt reduction should be a top health priority of our government also….I urge the FDA to take further steps by implementing the proposals outlined in the CSPI petition and improve the diet and health of the American public." • Also citing the British experience was Henry A. Anderson, M.D., Wisconsin’s State Health Officer. He emphasized that "The United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency (FSA) has made sodium reduction a top priority….The FSA is also exerting strong pressure on the food and restaurant industries to gradually lower sodium levels by about one-third over five years. Sodium in our food supply should be a top health priority of our government." Graham MacGregor, of St. George’s Hospital Medical School in London, perhaps the world’s leading campaigner to reduce sodium consumption, told the FDA that the British government’s salt initiative has already lowered sodium consumption by 10 percent, and that that "is calculated to have reduced the number of strokes and heart attack deaths in the UK by approximately 6,000 a year." The FDA’s request for comments on salt reduction was a follow-up to the agency’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200711271.html" target="November 2007 hearing on CSPI’s salt petition">November 2007 hearing on CSPI’s salt petition</a>. At that time, New York City health department officials urged the FDA to require warning labels on high-sodium foods and said that "recommended maximum limits of sodium in processed foods must be established and formalized as recommended targets for industry." If industry did not achieve those targets, said the health officials, "a regulatory strategy addressing sodium content should be implemented." New York City led the nation in phasing out trans fat from restaurants and requiring calorie labeling on the menus and menu boards of chain restaurants. As another indication that local health officials are no longer waiting for the FDA to act on salt, Baltimore’s city health department announced the convening of a Salt Task Force to "review and make recommendations to address excessive salt consumption in the city." The task force is part of the city’s efforts to prevent cardiovascular disease, especially among African Americans, who have the highest rates of high blood pressure. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/" target="CSPI">CSPI</a> has pressed since 1978 for government action to lower sodium consumption. The following year, an FDA advisory committee concluded that there was insufficient evidence to consider salt to be GRAS, but the FDA has taken no action. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/saltreport.pdf" target="CSPI’s 2005 publication Salt: The Forgotten Killer">CSPI’s 2005 publication Salt: The Forgotten Killer</a> has helped galvanize concern about Americans’ high sodium intake. CSPI recently cosponsored, with <a href="http://www.naccho.org/" target="NACCHO">NACCHO</a> and <a href="http://www.astho.org/" target="ASTHO">ASTHO</a>, a meeting of state and local health officials interested in reducing sodium levels to prevent cardiovascular disease. 2008-08-25 FDA Approves Irradiation for Spinach, Lettuce http://cspinet.org/new/200808212.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalFDA's announcement today that it will allow food processors to irradiate some leafy greens (spinach and iceberg lettuce) may not be the futuristic cure-all the agency is looking for. Irradiation is a treatment used at the end of production. While it may be safe and effective in treating some pathogens, it is not—and should not be mistaken for—a silver bullet. CSPI has urged FDA to adopt a series of preventive measures starting at the farm that could control foodborne pathogens. Our suggestions, outlined in a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_produce_petition.pdf" target="2006 petition to FDA">2006 petition to FDA</a>, include common-sense food safety control measures: 1. Farmers and processors should be required to keep a written food safety plan specific to the environmental conditions on that particular farm. 2. FDA should develop uniform standards to evaluate those plans, for water quality, worker sanitation, and manure use and management. 3. Written plans should be audited once per season, either by FDA or a 3rd party auditor (whose audits should be reviewed by FDA). With the approval of irradiation on spinach and lettuce, FDA should also specify that these products should be clearly labeled with the radura symbol and the words "treated with irradiation." This labeling—required for other irradiated products—provides consumers with the information to make choices about the food they purchase. It is clear that produce safety must become a priority for FDA, starting at the farm. Congress should also act to ensure that the agency has the authority and the resources to fulfill its critical public health mandate. 2008-08-21 Parents Urged to Report Children's Reactions to Food Dyes http://cspinet.org/new/200808211.html Watchdog Group Wants Ban on Yellow 5, Red 40, and Other Artificial Food Dyes Linked to Hyperactivity, Behavior ProblemsWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest is asking America's parents for help in its campaign to convince the Food and Drug Administration that synthetic dyes, such as Yellow 5 and Red 40, don't belong in foods, especially those consumed by children. The dyes are being phased out in European countries because of important new evidence showing that the dyes, and perhaps the preservative sodium benzoate, cause hyperactivity and other behavior problems in children. CSPI is urging parents who believe their children are harmed by food dyes to file reports online at <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes/form.html" target="http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes">http://www.cspinet.org/fooddyes/form.html</a>. The nonprofit nutrition and food-safety watchdog group will periodically forward the reports to the FDA, which denies that dyes cause any problem whatsoever. CSPI wants to hear from parents who believe that food dyes impair their children's behavior, as well as parents whose kids' behavior improved when food dyes were eliminated from their diets. "Considering the problems that have been demonstrated with these dyes, along with the fact that they are easily replaced with natural colorings, it's sad that the FDA is doing nothing to get them out of food," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Meanwhile, doctors are prescribing powerful drugs like Ritalin and Adderall to undo the damage being done, in part, by the increasingly unnatural food supply." Consumption of food dyes has increased five-fold over the past 30 years, according to FDA data. In the 1970s, scientists first realized that food dyes might cause behavioral problems when allergist <a href="http://www.feingold.org/" target="Benjamin Feingold">Benjamin Feingold</a> reported that many of his young patients improved when artificial food dyes, preservatives, and certain natural foods were removed from their diets. Many parents who put their children on the Feingold Diet, which screens out those substances, report fewer tantrums, more focused school work, and other welcome changes. In the past several years, <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15155391?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum" target="two British">two British</a> studies <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17825405?ordinalpos=1&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DiscoveryPanel.Pubmed_Discovery_RA&linkpos=1&log$=relatedarticles&logdbfrom=pubmed" target="found that">found that</a> food dyes, together with the preservative sodium benzoate, impair the behavior of many children. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/petition-food-dyes.pdf" target="CSPI filed a regulatory petition in June ">CSPI filed a regulatory petition in June </a> that called on the FDA to ban Yellow 5 and 6, Red 3 and 40, Blue 1 and 2, Green 3, and Orange B. Most multinational food companies are already phasing those dyes out of foods in the United Kingdom and elsewhere in Europe—even though American versions of the very same products continue to get their colors from synthetic dyes. The syrup in a strawberry sundae from a McDonald's in the U.K. gets its red color from strawberries; in the U.S., the red color comes from 2-naphthalenesulfonic acid, 6-hydroxy-5-((6-methoxy-4-sulfo-m-tolyl)azo)-, disodium salt, a coal-derived chemical otherwise known by its less unappetizing name, Red 40. Similarly, a Betty Crocker yellow cake mix is colored in the United States with Yellow 5 and Yellow 6, but in Britain with safe natural colorings. "The food industry won’t fix its American foods until the FDA tells them to," said Jacobson. "Unfortunately, the FDA asserts, on the basis of its misreading of a 25-year-old report, that there is ‘no evidence’ that dyes affect behavior. If companies like Mars, Kellogg, and McDonald’s were responsible, they would immediately begin switching to safe, natural colorings in the United States." This isn’t the first time that CSPI has collected adverse reaction reports on food additives. It has been collecting and analyzing reports filed about the diarrhea-inducing synthetic fat <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/olestra/" target="olestra">olestra</a>, or Olean, and a fungus-based meat substitute known as <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/" target="Quorn ">Quorn </a> that can cause projectile vomiting and anaphylactic reactions. 2008-08-21 FTC Settles With Nationally-Recognized Maker of Healthy Remedy http://cspinet.org/new/200808142.html Statement of CSPI Director of Litigation Stephen GardnerThe <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803032.html" target="FTC's crackdown on Airborne">FTC's crackdown on Airborne</a> is welcome news and should serve as a template for similar actions against many other companies. CSPI represents Airborne purchasers in the private class action in California that has <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/airbornesettlement.pdf" target="settled and awaiting court approval">settled and awaiting court approval</a>. If the court approves the settlement, victimized Airborne purchasers will get millions of dollars, perhaps as much as $20 million, in refunds. The <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2008/08/airborne.shtm" target="FTC settlement">FTC settlement</a> adds up to an additional $6.5 million to that recovery. Of greater significance for future practices, the FTC settlement also addresses one important thing that was deliberately not part of the class action settlement — restrictions on Airborne's practices in the future. After the class action suit had been pending for some time, CSPI learned last year that the FTC was also investigating Airborne. We decided to defer to the FTC on seeking restrictions on Airborne's future practices to avoid conflicting results. We had faith that the FTC would impose at least as many restrictions, if not more, as we could achieve in the private litigation. That faith was justified—the FTC consent order prohibits Airborne from claiming that it can prevent or cure the common cold. The FTC expressly noted that there is "no credible evidence that Airborne products, taken as directed, will reduce the severity or duration of colds, or provide any tangible benefit for people who are exposed to germs in crowded places." This is exactly what CSPI had determined in 2006 and was the basis for the private class action. The settlement announced today represents an excellent example showing the importance of public and private enforcement of consumer protection laws. This decision gives the potential for additional millions of dollars to Airborne's customers, preceded by the class action settlement that achieved one of the largest, indeed perhaps the single largest, settlement providing cash refunds to retail customers of any product. Consumers seeking refunds for purchases of Airborne can obtain a claim form by writing to the Airborne Class Action Settlement Administrator, PO Box 1897, Faribault, MN 55021-7152, calling 1-888-952-9080, or by visiting <a href="http://www.airbornehealthsettlement.com/" target="www.AirborneHealthSettlement.com">www.AirborneHealthSettlement.com</a>. 2008-08-14 CSPI Praises Senators for Bipartisan Food Safety Bill http://cspinet.org/new/200808141.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe bipartisan <a href=" http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/food_safety_modernization_act.pdf" target="FDA Food Safety Modernization Act">FDA Food Safety Modernization Act</a> would help refocus the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on preventing, rather than just reacting to, food-borne disease outbreaks. Senators Richard Durbin, Judd Gregg, Christopher Dodd, Richard Burr, Tom Harkin, and Lamar Alexander have developed constructive legislation in a bipartisan manner, proving that the safety of the food we serve our families is not a partisan political issue. The bill would require domestic and foreign food companies to assess potential hazards, develop food safety plans, and take steps to prevent contaminated foods from being marketed. It also would require FDA to issue regulations for ensuring safer fresh produce. Those are positive reforms that CSPI identified in its "White Paper on Building a Modern Food Safety System for FDA Regulated Foods" as being essential to reforming the nation’s food safety system. The bill could be strengthened by modernizing FDA’s outdated 1938 enforcement tools with stronger civil penalties, better traceability and oversight, and broader recall authority. The bill also needs to provide for new resources to implement these programs and hire more inspectors at the FDA. Hopefully, these issues will be addressed in legislation currently being drafted in the House of Representatives. Passage of comprehensive legislation to modernize FDA’s food safety authorities this year would be an important step to modernizing our nation’s food safety system. It is only the first step however. In the next Administration, Congress should enact legislation that will bring our entire food regulatory system into the 21st century by creating a unified food agency with a single leader and a firm budgetary foundation. The FDA Food Safety Modernization Act is an important step towards this goal. 2008-08-14 CSPI Blasts NCAA Decision to Keep Beer Ads http://cspinet.org/new/200808081.html Statement of George Hacker, CSPI’s Director of Alcohol PoliciesThe NCAA continues to put profit over principle by continuing to embrace advertising for beer—the number-one cause of alcohol problems—during its popular sports telecasts. In contrast, the NCAA rejects advertising for distilled spirits, most wine, sports wagering, gambling, nightclubs, firearms and weapons, and NC-17-rated motion pictures, among others. The NCAA's decision came at the annual meeting of its executive committee yesterday. The NCAA's rationale for keeping beer ads in its basketball championship and other telecasts comes right out of the beer industry's playbook. It reveals an organization with its head firmly stuck in its wallet. This week's action rebuffs the efforts of hundreds of NCAA college coaches, athletic directors, and college presidents and ignores the best interests of higher education and student athletics. The support for eliminating alcohol advertising from college sports has grown dramatically in the past year, and CSPI's Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV will continue to encourage colleges, college athletic conferences, and the NCAA to reform policies that result in the promotion of beer to underage viewers and the subversion of colleges' attempts to prevent and reduce costly and tragic alcohol problems. 2008-08-08 Dirty Dining: Restaurants Need Food Safety Letter Grades, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200808071.html Inspection Reports Hard to Find in Many CitiesWASHINGTON—In Atlanta, chicken salad stored at a balmy 50 degrees. Inadequate hand washing in Boston. Mouse droppings in a Minneapolis ice machine. A live roach scampers across a Pittsburgh cutting board. These are some of the gory details uncovered <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ddreport.pdf" target="in an analysis by the Center for Science in the Public Interest">in an analysis by the Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> of 539 restaurant inspection reports from 20 cities. Two-thirds of restaurants had these and other high-risk food safety violations. Today CSPI, the nonprofit nutrition and food-safety watchdog group, is calling on state and local governments to require restaurants to display food safety letter grades in their front windows. Letter grades have been used in Los Angeles county restaurants for the past 10 years, and that popular measure is credited with reducing the number of hospitalizations due to foodborne illness. Las Vegas and St. Louis have adopted similar measures recently. Over 40 percent of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/restaurant_outbreak_fact_sheet.pdf" target="outbreaks of foodborne illness ">outbreaks of foodborne illness </a> were linked to restaurant foods, while only 22 percent were linked to food prepared in private homes, according to CSPI’s Outbreak Alert! database. CSPI’s new review of restaurant inspection reports—which typically covered 6- or 12-month periods—found that 26 percent of restaurants surveyed had contaminated food contact surfaces; 22 percent had improper food holding temperatures, and 16 percent had inadequate hand-washing by employees. Thirteen percent of restaurants had rodent or insect activity documented in their inspection reports. "A letter grade in the window has proven to be one of the most powerful incentives for restaurants to perform well on inspections," said CSPI staff attorney Sarah A. Klein. "Who wants to eat at a 'C' restaurant if a restaurant next door gets an 'A'? Unfortunately, in many of the cities we looked at, not only are there are no letter grades, but the actual inspection reports are nearly impossible for citizens to obtain or understand." In Pittsburgh and Washington, DC, restaurant inspection reports are only made available when consumers lodge written requests under those jurisdictions' Freedom of Information Acts. In some cases, CSPI researchers had to make several requests, by mail and telephone, and wait six months to receive the requested reports. In Atlanta and San Francisco, restaurateurs are at least required to keep the most recent inspection report on hand and show it to anyone who asks. Boston, Chicago, Denver, and Philadelphia are beginning to post inspection reports or scores online, but few consumers dig down into their city or county health department’s web site before going out for a sandwich. CSPI began its review by asking 20 cities for 30 inspection reports each, distributed among equal numbers of high-end, medium-range, and fast-food restaurants. CSPI then ranked the cities by assigning a weighted score depending on the severity of the violations it found. Austin, Boston, Milwaukee, Colorado Springs, and Kansas City had the highest weighted score. St. Louis, Seattle, Philadelphia, San Francisco, and Tucson were the five with the lowest. Of course, these cities all have varying inspection protocols and complete their reports with varying degrees of detail. And some cities (Austin and Milwaukee, for instance) reported more severe violations, but those cities have a smaller number of food establishments per inspector, indicating that inspectors might be able to be more thorough. Though rats and roaches are the most unappetizing violations, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention counts improper holding temperatures, lack of hand washing, improper cooking, contaminated surfaces, and unsafe food sources as the top disease-related factors. Improper hand washing, which might be indicated by a lack of hot water at a sink, can spread Hepatitis A, Shigella, or norovirus to diners. Foods not held at the proper temperature can foster the growth of dangerous bacteria such as Clostridium perfringen or Staphylococus aureus. Salmonella or E. Coli O157:H7 can sicken diners when meat or poultry is undercooked, or when raw foods are placed on unclean food surfaces. "The results of our grading system in Los Angeles have been very positive, with improved restaurant sanitary practices, reduced rates of severe food-borne illness, and high consumer confidence in this key public health regulatory system," said Dr. Jonathan Fielding, director of public health for Los Angeles County. "We appreciate the work of CSPI to encourage greater adoption of this important food safety improvement that can benefit everybody who eats out." Besides recommending that cities and states adopt the posting of inspection grades, CSPI says the Food and Drug Administration should revise its model food code to include easy-to-understand inspection forms and grading cards. State and local governments use the model food code as the basis for their restaurant inspection practices. "Americans are eating outside the home and entrusting their health to restaurant workers more than ever before," said Klein. "We want to work with state legislators, city councilors, and public health officials around the country to implement these consumer-friendly letter grades. They’d go a long way toward preventing unnecessary illnesses." For more information on restaurant grading <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/dirtydining" target="click here">click here</a>. 2008-08-07 Pressure Grows to Expel Beer Advertising from NCAA Basketball http://cspinet.org/new/200808051.html College Presidents, Athletic Directors, and Coaches Appeal to NCAAWASHINGTON—When the executive committee and Division I board of directors of the National Collegiate Athletic Association meet for their annual gatherings in Indianapolis on August 7, it is likely they will have to take a hard look at the organization’s policies on advertising alcoholic beverages during the "March Madness" national championship basketball tournament. This week, 60 Division I college presidents, 240 college athletic directors, and 101 football and basketball coaches from around the nation <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/coaches_letter_to_myles_brand.pdf" target="urged the NCAA and its president">urged the NCAA and its president</a>, Myles Brand, to end beer advertising on NCAA sports telecasts. Since 2005, more than one-third (358) of the colleges in the NCAA have endorsed a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/college_commitment_form.pdf" target="“College Commitment” pledge ">"College Commitment" pledge</a> to eliminate alcohol advertising in televised college sports. "It’s refreshing to see so many college presidents, athletic directors, and coaches standing up for what’s best for their institutions, sports programs, and student athletes," said George A. Hacker, director of the Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "Even officials at many major sports powerhouses, which derive some revenue from beer advertising, recognize the hypocrisy and illogic of the NCAA’s sell-out to beer peddlers." Former U.S. Representative Tom Osborne, past head football coach and current Athletic Director at the University of Nebraska, has been a strong proponent to add beer advertising to the list of products that are not allowed during broadcasts of NCAA sporting events. In a letter to NCAA president Myles Brand, Dr. Osborne stated support for curtailing beer advertisements based on the "overwhelming evidence that alcohol is harmful to college students and young people in general." In their <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ad_letter_to_ncaa_executive_committee.pdf" target="letters">letters</a>, the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/div_i_presidents_letter_to_president_barker.pdf" target="college officials">college officials</a> asserted that current NCAA policy <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/ncaa_oped.pdf" target="allowing beer ads is inconsistent with the mission and values of higher education and sports and undermines colleges' efforts">allowing beer ads is inconsistent with the mission and values of higher education and sports and undermines colleges’ efforts</a>to prevent and reduce alcohol problems among college students and underage youth. Those problems are among the most costly and persistent issues facing college administrators today. More than 40 percent of college students binge drink—consuming five or more drinks on at least one occasion in the past 30 days. Among college students between the ages of 18 and 24, alcohol is involved in approximately 599,000 injuries, 696,000 assaults, 97,000 sexual assaults, and 1,700 deaths from unintentional injuries, including from car crashes, each year. The coaches' letter to Myles Brand, which included signers from Florida State University, University of Memphis, Georgetown University, The Ohio State University, Tulane University, The Citadel, Stanford University, the United States Air Force Academy, the University of Virginia, and the University of Washington, expressed concern about the prominence of alcohol advertising in televised college sports and stated that "student athletes competing in NCAA sporting events should not be associated with the very product that causes them the most harm and is clearly not in their best interests." According to TNS Media Intelligence, two beer marketers—Anheuser-Busch and Miller Brewing—spent nearly $30 million to advertise during the 2007 NCAA national basketball championships. Both were among the top five advertisers, and the beer category was the second-leading advertiser behind automobiles. Nonetheless, expenditures on beer advertising account approximately for no more than five percent of total broadcast revenues to the NCAA. The NCAA’s advertising policy on its face excludes "those advertisements and advertisers … that do not appear to be in the best interests of higher education and student athletes" and specifically prohibits ads for cigarettes, sports wagering, gambling, nightclubs, firearms and weapons, athletic recruitment services, and depictions of any student-athlete group in a degrading, demeaning or disrespectful manner. "Impermissible" ads also include NC-17-rated motion pictures, television programming or interactive games, and alcoholic beverages. But, ads for malt beverages, beer, and wine products that do not exceed six percent alcohol by volume are excepted, with limitations. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/ncaapolicy.pdf" target="CSPI says">CSPI says</a> that that exception for beer makes no sense, because beer is the most popular and most problematic alcoholic drink among college students. 2008-08-05 Obesity on the Kids' Menus at Top Chains http://cspinet.org/new/200808041.html CSPI Investigation Reveals Kids’ Meals at Restaurants Usually Too High in Calories, and Good Options Hard to FindWASHINGTON—Nearly every single possible combination of the children's meals at KFC, Taco Bell, Sonic, Jack in the Box, and Chick-fil-A is too high in calories, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which today released the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/kidsmeals-report.pdf" target="results of an investigation">results of an investigation </a> into the nutritional quality of kids’ meals at 13 top restaurant chains. Ninety-three percent of 1,474 possible choices at the 13 chains exceed 430 calories—an amount that is one-third of what the Institute of Medicine recommends that children aged four through eight should consume in a day. Chili’s has 700 possible kids’ meal combinations, but 658, or 94 percent, of those are too high in calories, including one comprised of country-fried chicken crispers, cinnamon apples, and chocolate milk (1,020 calories) and another comprised of cheese pizza, homestyle fries, and lemonade (1,000 calories). Burger King has a "Big Kids" meal with a double cheeseburger, fries, and chocolate milk (910 calories), and Sonic has a "Wacky Pack" with 830 calories worth of grilled cheese, fries, and a slushie. KFC has a wide variety of side items, but there are few meal combinations that keep a reasonable ceiling on calories, according to the study. One example of a high-cal combo KFC kid’s meal (the chain calls them "Laptop Meals") has popcorn chicken, baked beans, biscuit, Teddy Grahams, and fruit punch, which has 940 calories. (KFC has since dropped Baked Cheetos from its kids’ meals, and some outlets vary the number of chicken strips or sides.) Most of the kids’meals (93 percent) at McDonald’s and Wendy’s are too high in calories, as are the possibilities at Burger King (92 percent), Dairy Queen (89 percent), Arby's (69 percent), and Denny's (60 percent—though its kids' meals don’t include drinks). (Since CSPI’s study was completed, Burger King has introduced one new children's meal with macaroni and cheese, apple "fries," and 1 percent milk, which has a reasonable 420 calories.) Subway's kids' meals came out on top. Only a third of its Fresh Fit for Kids meals, which include a mini-sub, juice box, and one of several healthful side items (apple slices, raisins, or yogurt), exceed the 430-calorie threshold. Subway is the only chain that doesn’t offer soft drinks with kids’ meals. "Parents want to feed their children healthy meals but America’s chain restaurants are setting parents up to fail," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "McDonald's, Burger King, KFC, and other chains are conditioning kids to expect burgers, fried chicken, pizza, French fries, macaroni and cheese, and soda in various combination at almost every lunch and dinner." Besides being almost always too high in calories, 45 percent of the kids' meals at the 13 chains studied by CSPI are too high in saturated and trans fat, and 86 percent are too high in sodium. That’s alarming, according to CSPI, because a quarter of children between the ages of five and ten show early signs of heart disease, such as high LDL (the "bad" cholesterol) or elevated blood pressure. "People may not get a heart attack until their 50s or 60s, but arteries begin to clog in childhood," said Wootan. "Most of these kids’ meals appear to be designed to put America’s children on the fast-track to obesity, disability, heart attack, or diabetes." Though the overwhelming majority of chain restaurant kids' meals are nutritionally poor, calorie counts on menus and menu boards would help parents assemble healthier meals for their children. If Arby’s kids' meals had calorie counts, parents could see that substituting a fruit cup and a juice box for fries and a soda would cut a popcorn chicken meal from 720 calories to 420. If Denny’s listed calories on menus, parents could see the surprising difference between the calories in Big Dipper French Toastix (770) and Smiley-Alien Hotcakes (without meat, 370). CSPI has advocated laws or regulations that require chain restaurants to list calories on menus and menu boards. They've already begun appearing in New York City. San Francisco, King County (Seattle), WA., Multnomah County (Portland), OR, and Santa Clara County, CA, also have passed menu labeling policies. Similar policies have been introduced in over 20 other states and localities over the last two years. California’s legislature may be on the verge of passing a statewide menu labeling bill, which lobbyists for the chain restaurant industry are fighting tooth and nail. The California Center for Public Health Advocacy, an advocacy group leading the fight for menu labeling legislation in that state, collaborated with CSPI on the study released today. CSPI only scrutinized the chains that have dedicated children’s menus (19 out of the top 25 chains) and that provide nutrition information on their web sites or elsewhere (13 chains). Applebee’s, T.G.I. Friday’s, Outback Steakhouse, Olive Garden, Red Lobster, and IHOP do not disclose nutrition information for most menu items even upon request. 2008-08-04 Federal Trade Commission Issues Report on Food Marketing to Kids http://cspinet.org/new/200807291.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe <a href="http://ftc.gov/os/2008/07/P064504foodmktingreport.pdf" target="new FTC study ">new FTC study </a>shows that there is a lot of marketing aimed at children, and let’s be perfectly clear it was not spent urging kids to eat fruits, vegetables, and whole grains. The food industry spent a billion and a half dollars urging children to eat fast food, sugary cereals, soft drinks, and other unhealthy foods. As a mom and nutrition professional, what strikes me is the disconnect between the food industry’s talking points and what we actually see on television during children’s programming. While it’s encouraging that food companies have developed pledges to cut back on junk-food marketing, the pledges are carefully tailored with loopholes to let in foods like Kellogg’s Rice Krispies Treats and General Mill’s Cookie Crisp cereals. All food and entertainment companies need to adopt a strong set of national nutrition standards and apply them to all their marketing. Also, Nickelodeon, Disney, Cartoon Network and other entertainment companies and still-absent food companies, Chuck E. Cheeses, Subway, Dannon, Topps Candy, and Yum Brands (KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut) need to join the Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative. Companies are starting to address marketing to children but if they don’t step up their efforts, Congress and the next administration will need to do it for them. 2008-07-29 California Terminates Artificial Trans Fat! http://cspinet.org/new/200807251.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThat great big sucking sound you hear is the sound of partially hydrogenated oil leaving the American food supply. With the stroke of a pen this afternoon, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will make California the first state in the nation to make its restaurant foods free of artificial trans fat. It’s a bold move that will prevent thousands of heart attack deaths in that state and save millions of health care dollars. Burger King, the biggest chain with no firm plans to switch, should finally see the handwriting on the wall and change its frying oil nationwide. I hope more states, more cities, and more counties similarly pass measures to protect the public health by prohibiting the use of artificial trans fat in food. New York City, Boston, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and other local governments have passed trans fat bans in the past two years. Though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has proven to be impervious to embarrassment, perhaps California’s move today will at long last shame the agency into getting rid of artificial trans fat nationwide. It has the authority to do, but has been stalling on taking action on a regulatory petition we filed with the agency four years ago. Assemblyman Tony Mendoza and Senator Elaine Alquist deserve a great deal of credit for patiently steering this bill through the legislature and for pointing their state and the country to a trans-fat-free future. 2008-07-25 "Thin Mint Blizzard" Merits a Badge of Shame for Girl Scouts of the USA and Dairy Queen, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200807241.html WASHINGTON—Everyone knows that Girl Scout cookies aren’t health food. But even the trained nutritionists at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest were shocked to see just how bad a new Thin Mint Cookie Blizzard from Dairy Queen is. The large, which weighs more than a pound, has more than 1,000 calories, 31 teaspoons of sugars, and provides more than a day’s saturated fat. It’s like drinking two Big Macs, according to CSPI. <table align="left"> <tr><td align="left" valign="top"> <img src="/images/girl scout picture copy.jpg" The Girl Scouts of the USA partnered with Dairy Queen to create the high-calorie Thin Mint Cookie Blizzard.</td> </tr> </table> CSPI said today that the Girl Scouts of the USA should have thought twice before lending (renting, actually) its good name to the ice cream chain. “Our partnership with Dairy Queen enables us to reach the public in new and unexpected places,” said Laurel Richie, who holds the position of “chief marketing officer” of the Girl Scouts of the USA, in a press release. Those “unexpected places” will include the waistlines and coronary arteries of at least 10 million people by the end of the month if the company meets its projections. Dairy Queen is on track to sell that many Thin Mint Blizzards by the end of July it told USA Today, but the chain and the Girl Scouts are both mum on how much money has changed hands. “Selling cookies door to door is one thing,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But renting out its nonprofit brand name to a junk-food chain is a major badge of shame for the Girl Scouts. It runs counter to the Girl Scouts’ mission, and this product and its marketing campaign deliver a very unhealthful message to young girls and others. If you were designing a product with the intent of promoting obesity and type-2 diabetes in girls, it would look exactly like the Thin Mint Blizzard.” A Thin Mint Cookie Blizzard is soft-serve mint and vanilla ice cream combined with Thin Mint cookies and topped with a creme-de-menthe flavored syrup made out of high-fructose corn syrup and containing the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200806022.html" target="controversial artificial food dyes">controversial artificial food dyes</a> Yellow 5 and Green 3. Even a small size has the calories (540) and a little more saturated fat (12 grams) than a Big Mac. Minneapolis-based Dairy Queen is owned by Warren Buffet’s wildly successful holding company Berkshire Hathaway. 2008-07-24 FDA Finds Salmonella Strain on Jalapeno Pepper http://cspinet.org/new/200807213.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalMore than 1,200 Americans have gotten sick and two people have died after eating produce contaminated with Salmonella Saintpaul. With an investigation spanning many weeks, food safety regulators have had a challenging time trying to track suspected tomatoes and peppers up or down the supply chain, hampered by paper records and repacking practices that effectively hide the identity of produce in the distribution chain. Today FDA announced an important breakthrough in the case: A Jalapeno pepper from a Mexican farm -- repacked at a Texas distribution facility -- has been found with the identical strain fingerprint of Salmonella as the human victims. Though we still do not know where or how the contamination occurred, what we do know is traceability tools that Congress adopted in the 2002 Bioterrorism Act were significantly watered down by the Bush Administration. In fact, in 2003, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409291.html" target="food industry lobbyists had special behind-closed-doors access">food industry lobbyists had special behind-closed-doors access</a> when the Bush Administration was vetting new anti-bioterrorism regulations aimed at protecting the food supply from intentional contamination. Provisions stripped from the regulations, like requirements for distributors to record lot or code numbers, and requirements for record availability in 4 to 8 hours, might have been helpful nailing down this Salmonella outbreak much earlier. At the time, the industry complained that strong provisions were overly burdensome, and the Administration watered down the regulations in response. Those complaints must seem quaint compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars this one outbreak has cost American growers, processors, and retailers. It’s time for Congress to step in and enact meaningful FDA reform legislation. Though time is short, Congress should act before another outbreak occurs to give FDA strong traceback authority, mandatory process control systems all the way back to the farm, and mandatory recall. The Bush Administration has consistently failed to put public health ahead of the complaints of industry lobbyists. Congress should not wait for more evidence that the agency doesn’t have the tools it needs. 2008-07-21 Sara Lee to Make Clear its "Made with Whole Grain White Bread" is 30 Percent Whole Grain http://cspinet.org/new/200807212.html CSPI Withdraws Intent to Sue as Part of SettlementWASHINGTON—Labels for Sara Lee’s “Soft & Smooth Made With Whole Grain White Bread” will make clear that the product is 30 percent whole grain as part of a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sara_lee_settlement-letter-072108.pdf" target="settlement agreement">settlement agreement</a> the company has reached with the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Last December, the nonprofit nutrition watchdog group <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200712171.html" target="threatened to sue the company">threatened to sue the company</a> over the bread’s labeling, which, at the time, suggested that it had as much fiber as 100 percent whole wheat bread. Government guidelines recommend that consumers make at least half their grains whole, so Sara Lee’s disclosure that this particular bread is just 30 percent whole grain will help consumers put it into that context. As part of the agreement, Sara Lee will add copy to the label stating that two slices have 10 grams of whole grain, and that USDA recommends consumption of 48 grams of whole grains daily. “Consumers who want the health benefits of whole grains should look for bread that is labeled ‘100 percent whole wheat,’ or failing that, a bread where whole wheat flour, not just ‘wheat flour,’ is the first ingredient,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “This settlement will help consumers comparison shop among breads: plain white bread, breads like Sara Lee’s with 30 percent whole grains, and 100 percent whole wheat bread.” Sara Lee says its “Soft & Smooth Made With Whole Grain White Bread” is meant to be a transitional product, designed to get consumers who are used to the taste and texture of white bread to consume more whole grains. Plenty of food companies try to give consumers the impression that their white-flour-based products are “made with whole grain” even if there is only a small amount. Kraft uses phrases like “good source of whole grain” or “excellent source of whole grain” on labels even if the product is mostly refined white flour. (Kraft Supermac & Cheese, for instance, is advertised as a “good source” of whole grain, even though its first ingredient is white flour.) General Mills, to its credit, according to CSPI, recently began transitioning away from those types of source claims in favor of indicating the amount of whole grains in grams. The distinction between white flour and whole wheat flour is an important one nutritionally. When whole wheat is refined into white flour, most of the fiber and key nutrients are lost. Though some nutrients are added back in when white flour is “enriched,” studies show that whole grain foods might be useful in reducing risk of heart disease and diabetes. White flour does not have anywhere near the same beneficial effects, according to nutrition experts. “It’s time to take the whole grain halo off of foods made primarily with white flour,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “Companies that use the phrase ‘whole grain’ absolutely have the legal responsibility under state consumer protection laws to disclose exactly how much whole grain is there. We are pleased that Sara Lee has agreed to do that.” 2008-07-21 U.S. Food Safety Programs Lag Behind Other Countries, Says GAO http://cspinet.org/new/200807151.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalToday’s <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/gao_import_insights_june_08.pdf" target="report from the Government Accountability Office">report from the Government Accountability Office</a> is a welcome addition to the growing outcry for a more comprehensive food safety reform here in the U.S. Many lessons can be learned from the food safety systems used in other countries. Instituting traceback procedures and mandatory recall authority are two things Congress could do to reform our antiquated multi-layer food safety system. The GAO report also shows that creating a unified food safety program is technologically and economically feasible, and most important, effective in helping to reduce foodborne illness. The FDA lacks farm-to-table tracing systems, which can help accelerate the identification of an outbreak source, such as the still unknown source of the current Salmonella Saintpaul outbreak. Canada, Japan and the EU also have mandatory animal identification systems, another system lacking in the United States. We applaud Senator Dick Durbin and Congresswomen Rosa DeLauro for requesting this study from GAO, as it has provided even more evidence that a comprehensive, proactive, and modern food safety system is well within reach of the U.S. We applaud the European community and the other countries studied for their commitment to prioritizing food safety, and we call on Congress and the Bush Administration to make the same commitment to food safety in this country. American consumers deserve no less. 2008-07-15 Medical & Science Journals Urged to Adopt Common Policy on Disclosing Financial Conflicts of Interest http://cspinet.org/new/200807111.html Uniform Rules Would Aid Compliance, Editors and Bioethicists SayThe Center for Science in the Public Interest today urged editors of journals of science and medicine to adopt a common standard for disclosing financial conflicts of interest among their authors, editors, and peer reviewers. The nonprofit watchdog group, whose Integrity in Science Project monitors corporate influence on science, developed <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/20080711_a_common_standard_for_conflict_of_interest_disclosure__final_for_conference.pdf" target="a model disclosure policy">a model disclosure policy</a> with Barnett S. Kramer, Thomas F. Babor, and Wendy Cowles Husser, respectively of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, the journal Addiction, and the Journal of the American College of Surgeons; and bioethicists Arthur Caplan and Jonathan Moreno, both of University of Pennsylvania. Scientists’ undisclosed financial ties to drug or medical device companies have been a major embarrassment for medical journals in recent years. For instance, a <a href="http://content.nejm.org/cgi/reprint/355/17/1763.pdf" target="2006 study">2006 study</a> on using CT scans to screen for lung cancer, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, failed to disclose that the researchers received funding from a nonprofit entirely funded by a tobacco company. And just this month, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/08/health/08well.html" target="controversial guidelines">controversial guidelines</a> on cholesterol management in children, published in the journal Pediatrics, did not carry any disclosure statements, though CSPI quickly found that at least two of those guidelines’ authors have ties to food companies that make products with ingredients the guidelines claimed lowered cholesterol. The model policy announced today would require authors to disclose any financial relationship of any size from the previous three years. That would include any kind of employment, grant funding, consulting, travel, or paid testimony, as well as patents, stock ownership, or membership on private sector or other advisory boards. In addition to relationships with companies, authors should disclose ties to nonprofit organizations that receive 50 percent or more of their funding from corporate sources. Examples of that include a drug-industry funded group (with a respectable sounding name) called the Center for Medicine in the Public Interest, and the Foundation for Lung Cancer Detection, Prevention and Treatment, funded by a tobacco-funded company. “No disclosure policy will be of help in the rare case of a researcher who wants to actively conceal a relationship she or he has with a corporate entity,” said Merrill Goozner, director of CSPI’s Integrity in Science program. “But clarifying the rules with a uniform policy would help authors and editors avoid embarrassing oversights.” The policy also outlines an enforcement mechanism for willful violations of disclosure rules. “Journals should make it their policy not to publish authors who have previously failed to disclose their ties to industry,” Goozner said. A <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200407123.html" target="2004 CSPI investigation">2004 CSPI investigation</a> of leading medical and environmental journals found a consistent pattern of failures to disclose conflicts of interest. In the past four years, the Integrity in Science Watch newsletter of CSPI’s Integrity in Science Project, numerous press accounts and Congressional investigations have turned up many more instances. In the wake of these scandals, several journals, including the Journal of the American Medical Association and Environmental Health Perspectives, have acted to improve their conflict-of-interest disclosure policies. In 2004, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200407123.html" target="EHP instituted a three-year ban">EHP instituted a three-year ban</a> on publication on anyone who fails to disclose conflicts, and in 2006 JAMA began requiring industry-funded authors to submit data to independent reviewers prior to publication. At 3:30 p.m. Friday afternoon, CSPI’s Goozner will moderate a panel discussion on journals’ disclosure policies comprised of Addiction’s Babor, EHP editor-in-chief Hugh A. Tilson, Tufts University’s Sheldon Krimsky, and Jeremy Theobald, chairman of the Committee on Publication Ethics in the United Kingdom. The panel discussion is part of <a href="http://cspinet.org/integrity/conflictedscience_conf.html" target="CSPI’s day-long conference">CSPI’s day-long conference</a> at Washington’s Ronald Reagan International Center on rejuvenating public sector science. 2008-07-11 Emergency Regs Needed for Tracking Produce, Food Groups Say http://cspinet.org/new/200807031.html Traceability Would Help Officials Respond More Quickly to OutbreaksFood safety and consumer watchdogs at the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the Consumer Federation of America are today making an <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/von_eshenbach_traceability_letter.pdf" target="urgent plea to Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach">urgent plea to Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach</a>, commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration: Protect Americans from unsafe food by implementing emergency regulations requiring traceability for produce. The groups say that if fruits and vegetables can be tracked back up through the supply chain back to the farm, investigators would have an easier time nailing down the source of outbreaks of Salmonella, E. coli, and other dangerous pathogens. “Effective traceability labeling must encompass the multiple steps along the path from farm to table, including farm-of-origin, packer, distributor, and retailer,” the groups wrote in a letter to von Eschenbach. “Such a system should use a standardized code for all FDA-regulated items to streamline investigations and ensure effective record-keeping by all entities along the production chain.” Major players in the produce business already know how to use the basic technology needed for traceability: little stickers on fruits and vegetables. The industry already has standard price look-up codes, or PLUs, that retailers can use at the register. Tomatoes that bear a sticker with the number 4087 are red Roma tomatoes, for instance. But similar standardized codes could let retailers, food safety investigators, or even curious consumers know exactly what farm a given bunch of asparagus or bag of spinach hails from. <img src="/images/producedisplay-7.3.08conference.JPG">Fresh produce on display at today's press conference in Washington, D.C. Photo credit: Jeff Cronin. “Each outbreak causes huge losses, both for the consumers who become severely ill and for the growers, who often can’t sell their products,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “Unfortunately, as this investigation has dragged on, the produce industry is reaping what it sowed when it sought and received special exemptions that allowed the industry to avoid the country of origin labeling requirements Congress passed in 2002. While new requirements are scheduled to go into effect later this year, FDA needs to go beyond country of origin labeling and give public health officials the ability to trace produce from the fork back to the farm.” Although the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control are casting a wider net to locate the food source responsible for the current Salmonella outbreak, CSPI says the public should still follow the FDA’s <a href="http://www.fda.gov/oc/opacom/hottopics/tomatoes.html" target="current advice">current advice</a> which tomatoes to eat and which to avoid. “If FDA had put a traceability system in place two years ago following the spinach outbreak, this current investigation might be moving more quickly,” said Chris Waldrop, Director of the Food Policy Institute at Consumer Federation of America. “This latest outbreak demonstrates very clearly the need for the federal government to quickly and easily trace an implicated food to its source.” The letter from CFA and CSPI also urges the agency to require growers and packers to implement written food safety plans, similar to the hazard control plans that have proved successful in reducing bacterial contamination of fresh meat and poultry. CSPI has been encouraging the FDA to require such plans since 2006. “Traceability is essential to a 21st century food safety system,” said House Energy and Commerce Committee Vice Chair Diana DeGette (D-CO). “It is possible to trace the origins of our foods. Most of our food products already have labels, many companies already know their suppliers, and the technology already exists. Unfortunately, we have a broken food safety system in this country that cannot determine the source of tainted foods while consumers continue to get sick. Traceability will allow us to quickly identify the source of contamination while protecting the American consumer and industry’s bottom-line.” When distributors mix and match produce from different sources, a practice called “repacking” in the industry, they should be required to maintain the identifying marks or labels that would allow FDA to determine the origin, according to the food safety groups. Since 1990, CSPI has tracked over 700 outbreaks of foodborne illness linked to produce items, including two dozen outbreaks linked to tomatoes that have caused more than 3,000 illnesses. While 869 have been sickened in the current outbreak, foodborne illness is dramatically underreported, so the actual number of illnesses is likely many times higher. Today’s letter to von Eschenbach is signed by DeWaal, Waldrop, and CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. 2008-07-03 California Senate Votes to Phase-out Artificial Trans Fat from Restaurants http://cspinet.org/new/200807022.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe passage today in the California State Senate of a measure to phase out the use of artificial trans fat in restaurants puts the state on track to being the first in the nation to adopt this life-saving measure. The bill, which Assemblyman Tony Mendoza and Senator Elaine Alquist have skillfully steered through the legislative process, represents the longest nail yet in the coffin of artificial trans fat, which has been a major cause of heart disease. Californians know a thing or two about food, and the vast majority of them want to get partially hydrogenated oil—the source of trans fat—out of restaurant foods once and for all. It’s easily done—several cities and counties have already done it. But some major chains, including Burger King, still use partially hydrogenated oil everywhere in the country except where they’re required not to. Artificial trans fat belongs in history books, not recipe books. We hope this bill passes (once again) in the Assembly and is enthusiastically signed by Governor Schwarzenegger. 2008-07-02 Kraft, General Mills, Dole, & Others Ripping Off Consumers with Bogus Immunity Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200807011.html CSPI Urges Feds to Crack Down on Food FraudsKraft’s Crystal Light Immunity Berry Pomegranate drink falsely claims that its vitamins A, C, and E will help “maintain a healthy immune system,” charges the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The nonprofit nutrition watchdog <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fdacomplaint.pdf" target="today urged"> today urged</a> the Food and Drug Administration to crack down on that and other deceptive “structure/function” claims increasingly appearing on food labels. When companies claim their products will “maintain a healthy immune system,” consumers believe this means those products will help ward off disease. But while vitamins A, C, and E are important for the functioning of just about every system in the human body, there’s little evidence to suggest that drinking Crystal Light will have any impact on the average person’s immune system. Consider vitamin A. There is no consistent evidence that supplementing with A is beneficial for the immune function of adults, and it might even worsen respiratory illnesses among children, according to researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health. And the Crystal Light drink has only 500 IU—just a small fraction of what one would find in a typical multivitamin. (In fact, says CSPI, there’s not much berry or pomegranate in this drink either; less than 2 percent of it is unspecified “natural flavor,” and the rest is water, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, and food dyes.) Another Kraft product, Fruit2O Immunity Nutrient Enhanced Water Beverage, also bears a bogus “help maintain a healthy immune system” claim. (Its Berry Pomegranate flavor is just as bereft of berries and pomegranates as Crystal Light as well.) “Food manufacturers know that they can get away with this kind of consumer deception because the Bush FDA is letting the industry play by many of the same loosely-goosey rules followed by dietary supplement manufacturers,” says CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. “The result is that the deception that is commonplace on dietary supplement labels has now spread to the much larger food industry.” Even some foods that are perfectly healthy in their own right—bags of frozen fruit or vegetables—bear silly label claims touting magical immunity-boosting properties. For instance, Green Giant Immunity Boost, a General Mills product, consists of frozen broccoli, carrots, pepper strips, and seasoning. While it’s a perfectly healthful food, there is no evidence to support the claim that the product “supports a healthy immune system,” or provides the promised “immunity boost.” In an informal survey of 1,000 health-oriented consumers conducted by CSPI, 49 percent thought this product would help prevent colds and the flu. <img src="/images/greengiant.jpg">The makers of Green Giant claim this product boosts immunity but with no scientific evidence to prove it. Photo credit: Wendi Hausfeld. Dole’s Wildly Nutritious Tropical Fruit—frozen sliced pineapple, mango, kiwi fruit, papaya, and strawberries—is another decent food. But the marketing copy on the label makes it sound like nothing short of a medical miracle, whose vitamins variously maintain, support, or even enhance “white blood cell function” and the cells lining the “airway, urinary, and digestive tracts,” and can “protect the body against viruses and bacteria.” “Sometimes a pineapple is just a pineapple,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “Consumers should eat their fruits and vegetables, by all means. But save your money by watching out for weasel words like ‘support,’ ‘maintain,’ or ‘enhance,’ which often imply that a specific brand name food can prevent disease.” Express disease prevention claims on food labels must be approved by the FDA prior to marketing. But food companies do not need the FDA’s permission to claim that various nutrients allegedly play in the normal structure or functioning of the body. Thus, while the makers of Welch’s Fiber 100% Grape Juice may not claim that that product—with its added fiber—relieves irritable bowel syndrome, they can state that it “support[s] a healthy digestive system.” But in this case, the fiber comes from maltodextrin, not fruit, and there’s no evidence that the amount of maltodextrin in the grape juice has any effect on digestion. In a formal complaint filed today with the FDA, CSPI says the agency should stop the bogus claims and set new rules for food companies requiring them to base future claims on solid scientific evidence and make only FDA-approved claims. CSPI’s complaint to the FDA also criticized claims that products supposedly “help nourish your brain” (Minute Maid Enhanced Juice Blend Omega-3 DHA Pomegranate Blueberry Flavored Blend of 5 Juices), “keep your digestive system healthy” (Sunsweet PlumSmart for Digestive Health Plum Juice Extra with Fiber), and “protect cartilage and joints” (Minute Maid Enhanced Juice Active 750 mg Glucosamine HCL). Several prominent researchers with expertise in nutrition and immunity, David C. Nieman, John D. Potter, and Neli Ulrich, also today urged FDA to suspend its approval of immunity-related structure/function claims on food labels. “Many, if not most, consumers associate the immune system with protection from disease,” the researchers wrote. “There is little or no evidence that these products can provide that protection.” 2008-07-01 Anheuser-Busch to Stop Caffeinating Alcoholic Beverages http://cspinet.org/new/200806261.html Brewer Enters Into Settlement Agreements with CSPI, State AGsWASHINGTON—Anheuser-Busch will remove the caffeine, guarana, and ginseng from its flavored malt beverages Tilt and Bud Extra, and is calling on its competitors in the industry to similarly stop making pre-packaged caffeinated alcohol beverages. The move comes as part of <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/settlementagreement.pdf " target="agreements reached with the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest">agreements reached with the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest</a>(CSPI), which in February <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200802281.html" target="threatened to file suit against">threatened to file suit against</a> the company over the drinks, and a group of 11 state <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/agagreement.pdf" target="Attorneys General">Attorneys General</a>, which has separately been investigating the company. Miller Brewing Co., which markets caffeinated alcoholic drinks under the brand name <a href="http://www.sparks.com/home.jsp" target="Sparks">Sparks</a>, is not a party to the settlement agreements and is increasingly likely to face litigation over the beverages. The young consumers of caffeinated alcoholic drinks are at greater risk of binge drinking, injury, drunk driving, or sexual assault than are drinkers of conventional alcoholic drinks, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/obrien.pdf" target="according to research">according to research</a> conducted at Wake Forest University. “We are pleased that Anheuser-Busch has agreed to take the caffeine and other stimulants out of its alcoholic drinks, and that it was not necessary to formally proceed with litigation,” said CSPI alcohol policies project director George A. Hacker. “We particularly appreciate the call that Anheuser-Busch is making to distillers and other brewers to likewise reformulate these ill-conceived products.” Anheuser-Busch will also take down the web site for Bud Extra while it removes the stimulants from the products, and will replace the Tilt website altogether with a new address once the reformulation is complete. CSPI had raised a number of concerns with some of the marketing statements on the sites which the group said were designed to appeal to young people, or to give the impression that one could drink more of these particular beverages without becoming intoxicated. Those youth-oriented appeals remain in abundance on the web site of Miller’s Sparks web site. The site, which sometimes displays text on school-notebook-like lined paper, offers a recipe for a drink called a “Lunchbox” which consists of half Miller beer and half Sparks. A juvenile video on the web site proposes consuming Sparks for breakfast, alongside omelets; elsewhere coupons offer “free high-fives” with purchase of Sparks. CSPI says that such carefully calibrated appeals to very young people are irresponsible, especially considering the research that suggests the Sparks formulation is risky in the first place. (In addition to the stimulants, Sparks contains more alcohol than typical beers, six or seven percent.) CSPI’s litigation director, Steve Gardner, credited the Attorneys General for their investigation into the products. “Not for the first time, state Attorneys General have filled a gaping void left by disinterested federal officials, who should have cracked down on these particular products long ago,” said Gardner. “Frankly, Miller Brewing is lurching on very thin legal ice if they continue to market these dangerous drinks.” CSPI has previously negotiated settlements or voluntary changes in marketing practices by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target="Kellogg">Kellogg</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606011.html" target="Frito-Lay">Frito-Lay</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html" target="Pinnacle Foods">Pinnacle Foods</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200704171.html" target="Quaker Oats">Quaker Oats</a>, and others. This is the first alcohol-related initiative of <a href="http://cspinet.org/litigation/" target="CSPI’s litigation unit">CSPI’s litigation unit</a>. 2008-06-26 NASA's James Hansen to Deliver Keynote at CSPI Conference on Rejuvenating Public-Sector Science http://cspinet.org/new/200806251.html WASHINGTON—James Hansen, the director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, and Representative Brad Miller (D-NC) will deliver keynote addresses at an upcoming conference on rejuvenating public-sector science, sponsored by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The title for Hansen’s address will be Threat to the Planet: The Dark and Bright Sides of Global Warming. Miller will speak on Preserving Scientific Integrity: The Role of Congressional Oversight. The July 11 event, the fourth such national conference organized by CSPI’s Integrity in Science project, will focus on protecting government scientists and regulators from political and corporate influence. And, in what should of special interest to reporters who plan to cover health care reform, an early afternoon panel will highlight the controversy surrounding the topic of researching the comparative effectiveness of medical treatments. <a href="http://www.regonline.com/Checkin.asp?EventId=606569" target="Registration">Registration</a> is required but free for journalists. What: Conference, Rejuvenating Public Sector Science. Sessions on climate change research, energy policy, endangered species protection, conflicts of interest on advisory committees, and more. Full <a href="http://cspinet.org/integrity/conflictedscience_conf.html" target="agenda">agenda</a>. Who: • Anthony Broccoli, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Rutgers University; • Ezekiel Emanuel, chair, Department of Clinical Bioethics, National Institutes of Health; • James Furnish, former Forest Service deputy chief; • James Hansen, director, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies; • William Hubbard, former Food and Drug Administration associate commissioner; • David Michaels, director, Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy; • Representative Brad Miller (D-CA), Chairman of the Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight, Committee on House Science and Technology • Gail Wilensky, Project Hope • <a href="http://cspinet.org/integrity/conflictedscience_conf.html" target="Full list of speakers">Full list of speakers</a>. When: 9:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on Friday, July 11, 2008 Where: Ronald Reagan International Center, 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 2008-06-25 Corn Refiners' Ad Campaign Called Deceptive http://cspinet.org/new/200806231.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe Corn Refiners Association’s <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121416915596395063.html" target="slick new advertising">slick new advertising</a> is deceptive in stating that high-fructose corn syrup “has the same natural sweeteners as table sugar.” HFCS consists almost entirely of glucose and fructose, but not a single molecule of sucrose. Sugar is 100 percent sucrose. It is true that adding a water molecule to sucrose and splitting it in half yields one molecule each of glucose and fructose—but that is not the same as saying that HFCS and sugar contain the same sweeteners. It is also deceptive to imply that HFCS is natural. HFCS starts out as cornstarch, which is chemically or enzymatically degraded to glucose (and some short polymers of glucose). Another enzyme is then used to convert varying fractions of glucose into fructose. High fructose corn syrup just doesn’t exist in nature. That said, the special harmfulness of HFCS has become one of those urban myths that sounds right, but is basically wrong. Nutritionally, HFCS and sucrose may be identical, but that’s no excuse for this deceptive advertising campaign. * Subsequent ads from the Corn Refiners Associaiton used less deceptive language to describe high-fructose corn syrup. Though made from corn starch and nutritionally equal to table sugar/sucrose, HFCS does not occur in nature and should be considered an artificial ingredient. 2008-06-23 House Vote for More Food Safety Money Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200806201.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe Food and Drug Administration desperately needs the $150 million in new money approved by the House of Representatives last night, particularly the $67 million designated for the Centers for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. It's good news for consumers, merchants, and restaurateurs, who are sick and tired of outbreaks like the latest one linked to tomatoes, which result in illnesses, wasted food, and a reduction in consumer confidence in our federal food safety programs. While FDA urgently needs even more funding, we're glad that the House leadership and the White House came to agreement on this down payment for restoring credibility to the FDA. Now it is important that Congress put this money to work by enacting the reforms the public needs to keep our food, especially fresh fruits and vegetables, free of deadly bacteria. Growers and all food producers should be required to have written food safety plans, and the FDA should be given clear authority to conduct inspections of farms and food processors. In addition, FDA should be required to conduct more frequent inspections of food processors here and abroad, and should be given mandatory recall authority, a tool most Americans would be surprised to learn it does not yet have. As welcome as this new food safety money is, one can't help but notice how small that sum seems in the context of a $162 billion bill. Clearly in the current budget climate, national priorities— like a safe food supply for Americans— are taking a back seat. 2008-06-20 New Poll Shows Calories Hard for New Yorkers to Guess http://cspinet.org/new/200806111.html 80 Percent Want Nutrition Info on Chain Restaurant Menus StatewideQuick, what at McDonald’s has the most calories? A Big Mac, two Sausage McGriddles, a large chocolate shake, or four hamburgers? If you guessed a Big Mac, you’d be in good company. And you’d also be wrong. According to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nypoll.pdf">new statewide poll</a> commissioned by the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the New York State Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Alliance, that was the top guess of the 900 New York state voters quizzed. But it's the large chocolate shake at McDonald’s that has more calories (1,160, as it happens) than those other menu items. The health groups behind the poll say the results show that most people have a hard time guessing calorie counts of typical restaurant meals. The poll showed that fewer than 15 percent of state residents could guess the lowest or highest calorie menu items at any chain restaurant in the survey. New York Assemblyman Felix Ortiz has reintroduced legislation that would require all New York State restaurants with more than 5 outlets statewide and more than 15 outlets nationwide to post calories on menus and menu boards. The measure is nearly identical to the popular measure enacted by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200801223.html">New York City’s Board of Health</a> with the support of Mayor Mike Bloomberg. The city will begin issuing fines for noncompliant restaurants on July 19th, and already, Starbucks, Chipotle, Subway, and other chains are displaying calories on menu boards. "Most fast food isn’t exactly health food, but the calories can range from modest to astronomical," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "Nobody’s going to guess that a shake could be worse than four burgers. Even professional dietitians get it wrong when they see the food right in front of them. Without nutrition information it’s near impossible to make informed choices." Most New Yorkers guessed that at Quiznos either the Steakhouse Beef Dip or the Baja Chicken with Bacon sub has more calories than the Classic Italian or the Tuna Melt. Only 7 percent guessed the right answer: the Tuna Melt, which has 1,420 calories when it comes with cheese and dressing. The Steakhouse Beef Dip with cheese and dressing actually has the fewest calories, 730. Similarly quizzed, few guessed correctly about items at Burger King (9 percent) and Pizza Hut (15 percent). "Obesity has risen to epidemic levels all over New York and the entire country," said Assemblyman Ortiz. "Rates of cancer, diabetes, hypertension, heart attack, stroke and countless deaths are related to obesity and poor nutrition. Together we can combat the problem of obesity and this legislation is a step in the right direction toward giving people the tools they need to make better food choices," said Ortiz The survey was based on 900 interviews conducted in April among New York State adults and was conducted by Zogby International. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.3 percent. 2008-06-11 Nestlé Nudged by Lawmaker, Health Groups on Marketing Junk Food to Kids http://cspinet.org/new/200806091.html Food Giant Absent from Industry's Child Nutrition InitiativeA key member of Congress and a number of health groups are wondering why self-proclaimed nutrition, health and wellness leader Nestlé is absent from an industry-wide effort limit junk-food marketing to children. In letters to Nestlé CEO Paul Bulcke, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/markeyletter.pdf">U.S. Rep. Edward Markey </a>(D-Mass.) and separately, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nestleletter.pdf">the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and more than 30 other health and child advocacy organizations</a>, are urging the company to join the Council of Better Business Bureau's Children's Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, and set nutrition standards for the foods it markets to kids. Thirteen major food companies already belong to the industry initiative, including Coca-Cola, Kraft, McDonald's, as well as Nestlé's more direct competitors Cadbury Adams, Hershey, and Mars. Nestlé participates in a similar initiative in Canada, but not in the U.S. "Nestlé claims to be 'the world’s leading nutrition, health, and wellness company', but when it comes to food marketing to kids, Nestlé is a laggard, not a leader," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. According to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nestlefacts.pdf">a recent CSPI assessment</a>, 113 of 121, or 93 percent, of Nestlé foods and beverages marketed to children are of poor nutritional quality, such as Willy Wonka candy products like Nerds, Laffy Taffy, and Sweetarts; Nesquik flavored milk drinks and Nestlé chocolate syrups and powders; and Butterfinger candy bars. Six of eight beverages that Nestlé markets in school vending machines, or 75 percent, are of poor nutritional quality (four are made with 1% milk, but are packaged in portion sizes larger than recommended for children). "If Nestlé can pledge to cut back on junk-food marketing in Canada, why not in the United States?" said Rep. Markey. "Given the high rates of obesity in the U.S., American kids need the same protections." Other signatories on the letter to Nestlé include the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, National WIC Association, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, and the Prevention Institute. 2008-06-09 Mass. House Tackles Artificial Trans Fat http://cspinet.org/new/200806041.html Partially Hydrogenated Oils Cause Heart Disease, Health Groups SayArtificial trans fat may soon be vanishing from all Bay State restaurants—just like it will vanish from Boston restaurants this fall. Today the state’s House of Representatives passed <a href="http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/185/ht04pdf/ht04346.pdf">legislation</a> which will require restaurants to discontinue using partially hydrogenated oils. "Though Boston, Brookline, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/transfat/PDF/transfat_state.pdf">other jurisdictions</a> around the country have phased out restaurants’ use of artificial trans fat, Massachusetts could be the first to do it statewide," said Julie Salz Greenstein, deputy director of health promotion policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "That would be a big boost for the heart-health of Massachusetts residents. And it would send a strong wakeup call to the slow-moving officials at the Food and Drug Administration, who have refused to revoke their approval of this heart-attack inducing chemical." The bill was sponsored by Rep. Peter Koutoujian and now heads to the state’s Senate, where it is championed by Sen. Susan Fargo. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200802191.html">Two-thirds of Massachusetts residents support the idea</a> of phasing out artificial trans fat, according to a 7News/Suffolk University poll conducted in February. Artificial trans fat occurs when otherwise healthful vegetable oils are percolated with hydrogen gas, making the fat solid or semi-solid at room temperature. Once thought to be safe, research conducted in the 1990s and 2000s by Harvard professor Walter Willett and others has shown that artificial trans fat is a potent cause of heart disease. CSPI has been urging the Food and Drug Administration, as well as other state legislatures, to phase out artificial trans fat from restaurants. Trans-fat labeling requirements have encouraged most manufacturers of packaged foods to replace partially hydrogenated oils with healthier fats and oil blends. 2008-06-04 CSPI Urges FDA to Ban Artificial Food Dyes Linked to Behavior Problems http://cspinet.org/new/200806022.html Dyes Called "Secret Shame" of Food Industry and RegulatorsYellow 5, Red 40, and six other widely used artificial colorings are linked to hyperactivity and behavior problems in children and should be prohibited from use in foods, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The group today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/petition-food-dyes.pdf">formally petitioned the Food and Drug Administration</a> to ban the dyes, several of which are already being phased out in the United Kingdom. The other six dyes are Blue 1, Blue 2, Green 3, Orange B, Red 3, and Yellow 6. Synthetic food dyes have been suspected of disrupting children's behavior since the 1970s, when <a href="http://www.feingold.org">Dr. Ben Feingold</a>, a San Francisco allergist, reported that his patients improved when their diets were changed. Numerous controlled studies conducted over the next three decades in the United States, Europe, and Australia proved that some children’s behavior is worsened by artificial dyes, but the government did nothing to discourage their use and food manufacturers greatly increased their reliance on them. <img src="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/dyedisplay.jpg">Foods with artificial food dyes on display at a Washington, DC news conference. Photo credit: Moira Donahue. A comprehensive 2004 meta-analysis of the medical literature concluded that artificial dyes affect children's behavior, and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bateman.pdf">two</a> <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mccann.pdf">recent</a> studies funded by the British government found that dyes (as well as the preservative sodium benzoate) adversely affect kids' behavior. Unlike most previous studies, those British studies tested children in the general population, not children whose parents suspected they were sensitive to dyes. As a result, the British government is successfully pressuring food manufacturers to switch to safer colorings. "We spent years trying to figure out the cause of our son's behavioral problems," said Judy Mann, of Silver Spring, Md. "For a long time, we thought the culprit was sugar. But when we started carefully monitoring everything he ate we were able to see that artificial dyes and preservatives were the problem. Since eliminating them the change has been positively stunning." "The continued use of these unnecessary artificial dyes is the secret shame of the food industry and the regulators who watch over it," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "The purpose of these chemicals is often to mask the absence of real food, to increase the appeal of a low-nutrition product to children, or both. Who can tell the parents of kids with behavioral problems that this is truly worth the risk?" Americans' exposure to artificial food dyes has risen sharply. According to the FDA, the amount of food dye certified for use was 12 milligrams per capita per day in 1955. In 2007, 59 mg per capita per day, or nearly five times as much, was certified for use. Dyes are used in countless foods and are sometimes used to simulate the color of fruits or vegetables. <a href="http://www.kraftfoods.com/kf/Products/ProductInfoDisplay.htm?SiteId=1&Product=2100061389">Kraft's Guacamole Dip</a> gets its greenish color not from avocados (there are almost none) but from Yellow 5, Yellow 6, and Blue 1. The blue bits in Aunt Jemima Blueberry Waffles are blue thanks to Red 40 and Blue 2, not real blueberries. Artificial dyes are particularly prevalent in the sugary cereals, candies, sodas, and snack foods pitched to kids. For instance, General Mills' Fruit Roll-ups and Fruit-by-the-Foot flavored snacks get their fruity colors from Yellow 5, Yellow 6, Red 40, and Blue 1. General Mills' Fruity Cheerios, Lucky Charms, and Trix also contain several of the problematic dyes, as do Kellogg's Froot Loops and Apple Jacks and Post's Fruity Pebbles. More than a dozen American varieties of Kraft's Oscar Meyer Lunchables kids' meals contain artificial food dyes, but not so the British versions. Starburst Chews, Skittles, and M&M candies—all Mars products—contain the full spectrum of artificial colors in the U.S., but not in the U.K., where the company uses natural colorings. Even foods that aren't particularly brightly colored can contain dyes, including several varieties of macaroni and cheese and mashed potatoes. Betty Crocker's Au Gratin "100% Real" Potatoes are partly not real, colored as they are with Yellow 5 and Yellow 6, both derived from coal tar. Remarkably, in Britain, the color in McDonald's strawberry sauce for sundaes actually comes from strawberries; in the U.S. it comes from Red 40. "The science shows that kids' behavior improves when these artificial colorings are removed from their diets and worsens when they’re added to the their diets," said Dr. David Schab, a psychiatrist at Columbia University Medical Center, who conducted the 2004 meta-analysis with his colleague Dr. Nhi-Ha T. Trinh. "While not all children seem to be sensitive to these chemicals, it's hard to justify their continued use in foods—especially those foods heavily marketed to young children." Americans need not travel to Britain to find kid-friendly food without artificial food dyes, though. Everything with a Trader Joe's label sold at the supermarket and all products at Whole Foods are free of the controversial chemicals. "I can't imagine why the Food and Drug Administration still allows these artificial colors in food, knowing what we know," said Beth Tribble, a Fairfax County, VA parent of two boys, whose youngest is sensitive to food dyes. "It's almost impossible for parents to eliminate these chemicals from their kids' diets on their own. The FDA could make life a lot easier for parents and children by just getting rid of them." "Banning these synthetic chemicals is certainly a far less drastic step than putting so many children on Ritalin or other potentially dangerous and sometimes-abused prescription stimulants," said Jacobson. "The food industry has known about this problem for 30 years, yet few companies have switched to safer colorings. We hope today is the beginning of the end for Yellow 5, Red 40, and these other dubious dyes." CSPI's petition asks the FDA to require a warning label on foods with artificial dyes while it mulls CSPI's request to ban the dyes outright. CSPI also wants the FDA to correct the information it presents to parents on its web site about the impact of artificial food dyes on behavior. Joining CSPI's call are 19 prominent psychiatrists, toxicologists, and pediatricians who today co-signed letter urging members of Congress to hold hearings on artificial food dyes and behavior, and to fund an Institute of Medicine research project on the issue. Those doctors include L. Eugene Arnold, professor emeritus of psychiatry at Ohio State University; Bernard Weiss, professor of environmental medicine at the University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry; and Stanley Greenspan, Clinical Professor of Psychiatry and Pediatrics at George Washington University Medical School. 2008-06-02 Coke, Pepsi's New Global Commitment on Advertising to Kids Called Weak http://cspinet.org/new/200805201.html Statement of CSPI Legal Director Bruce SilvergladeCoke and Pepsi are proving that it's hard to adopt a strong anti-obesity policy when your core products are major causes of obesity. The <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/1d2224a4-2607-11dd-b510-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1" target="global commitment announced today">global commitment announced today</a> by Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and other soft drink companies to stop targeting advertising to children under 12 is based on a weak policy followed in the United States, which suffers from one of the highest childhood obesity rates in the world. Coke and Pepsi never did heavy-duty direct advertising to kids under 12 in the U.S., but instead marketed to American children through other means such as advertising on TV programs viewed by families. The results have been disastrous for childhood obesity rates in the U.S. Instead of mimicking the U.S. policy worldwide, the companies should have agreed to the stricter curbs demanded by the British government and to an International Code of Marketing of Foods and Beverages to Children that has been proposed by consumer organizations world-wide. CSPI is leading a <a href="http://www.dumpsoda.org/" target="Global Dump Soft Drinks Campaign">Global Dump Soft Drinks Campaign</a> that encourages consumer groups and governments to reduce the consumption of soda, the only food or beverage shown to promote obesity. In addition to stopping advertising to children, the campaign advocates smaller container sizes, reduced accessibility, warning notices, calorie labeling on restaurant menu boards and vending machines, and small taxes on soda that would fund health campaigns. 2008-05-20 Senate Move on FDA Funding Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200805081.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalAlong with my colleagues in the Alliance for a Stronger FDA, I stand in strong support of Senator Herb Kohl's move to include $275 million in new funding for the Food and Drug Administration in the pending emergency supplemental appropriations bill. Virtually no one, inside or outside Congress, believes that the FDA has the resources necessary to assure the safety of Americans' food, drugs, and medical devices. The proof hits home for American consumers every day. How many more Americans must come down with a dangerous foodborne illness before Congress acts? How many more nationwide recalls or outbreaks will it take before the FDA is given the resources it needs to keep consumers safe? We urge all members of the Appropriations Committee and the leadership of both chambers of Congress to support Senator Kohl's amendment. The need for this new funding is critical. 2008-05-08 Brewers Urged to Stop Marketing Beer Shirts to Young Girls http://cspinet.org/new/200804292.html Miller, Guinness, and Foster’s Logos Used on Tees at Popular Teen Retailer ‘Forever 21’WASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest today urged <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/millerf21.pdf " target="Miller Brewing Co.">Miller Brewing Co.</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fostersf21.pdf" target="Foster’s">Foster’s</a>, and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/guinnessf21.pdf" target="Diageo">Diageo</a>, the parent company of Guinness, to stop allowing logos for those beers to be used on tee shirts sold at Forever 21, a retailer popular with teenage girls. CSPI says that the arrangement is in violation of the beer industry’s voluntary advertising and marketing code. Though it is administered by the Washington, D.C., lobby group the Beer Institute, the code explicitly states that no beer brands or logos “should be used or licensed for use on clothing …intended for use primarily by persons below the legal drinking age.” Forever 21 claims it is among the top three teen shopping brands nationwide. “Adolescent and teenage girls hardly need further inducements to drink,” wrote George A. Hacker, director of the alcohol policies project at CSPI. “Heavy drinking imposes special risks for girls, due to their lower body weights and different metabolisms and the contributing role of alcohol in sexual assaults, date rape, and unwanted and unplanned pregnancies.” CSPI is forwarding copies of its letters to the brewers to the Federal Trade Commission, which has begun applying greater scrutiny to the marketing practices of alcoholic-beverage makers. CSPI also called on the retailer to remove all beer or alcohol-themed tee shirts from its web site and approximately 400 outlets around the country. In addition to carrying shirts bearing Miller, <a href="http://www.forever21.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=FOREVER21&category%5Fname=casual+tops&product%5Fid=2048720859&showBACK=OK" target="Foster’s">Foster’s</a>, and Guinness logos, the chain sells shirts that read <a href="http://www.forever21.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=FOREVER21&category%5Fname=casual+tops&product%5Fid=2051220105&showBACK=OK" target="“I’m awesome at beer pong,”">“I’m awesome at beer pong,”</a> <a href="http://www.forever21.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=FOREVER21&category%5Fname=casual+tops&product%5Fid=2049004917&showBACK=OK" target="“beer is my anti-drug,”">“beer is my anti-drug,”</a> and <a href="http://www.forever21.com/product.asp?catalog%5Fname=FOREVER21&category%5Fname=casual+tops&product%5Fid=2048721246&showBACK=OK" target="“save water, drink beer.”">“save water, drink beer.”</a> 2008-04-29 Which Food Additives Are Safe? Which Aren't? http://cspinet.org/new/200804291.html Nutrition Action Healthletter Revisits “Chemical Cuisine,” the Classic A-to-Z GuideWASHINGTON—Would you like some butylated hydroxytoluene with that? If a waiter offered you some BHT in a restaurant, you’d probably decline. Yet that chemical is one of scores of hard-to-pronounce additives that routinely show up in the fine print on packaged foods’ ingredients lists. Is BHT safe? For the record, food manufacturers use it to keep oils from going rancid, but animal studies differ on whether in promotes or prevents cancer. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, publisher of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="Nutrition Action Healthletter">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, says it warrants caution. Nutrition Action’s revised “Chemical Cuisine,” its classic guide to food additives, is the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/additives.pdf" target="cover story in the May issue">cover story in the May issue</a>. “Just because an additive is artificial doesn’t necessarily mean it’s unsafe,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, who began researching food additives in 1971. “That said, the Food and Drug Administration hasn’t done nearly enough to police the preservatives, dyes, emulsifiers, stabilizers, thickeners, sweeteners and other chemicals many of us eat every day.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm" target="Chemical Cuisine">Chemical Cuisine</a> ranks additives as “safe,” “cut back,” “caution,” “certain people should avoid,” and “everyone should avoid.” Some additives that fall in the latter category include: • Acesulfame potassium, Aspartame, Saccharin. Those artificial sweeteners are either unsafe or poorly tested. The only artificial sweetener to get a “safe” grade is sucralose (Splenda). • <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm#phvo" target="Partially hydrogenated oil">Partially hydrogenated oil</a>. This is one artificial food ingredient that CSPI has asked the FDA to get out of the food supply, since its trans fat component is a potent cause of heart disease and possibly other health problems. Yet Burger King and many other restaurants still deep fry with it; many manufacturers of frozen foods par fry with it; and some manufacturers, restaurant chains, and bakeries still use it in pie crusts, pastries, and other foods. • Potassium bromate. This chemical strengthens dough, and most of it breaks down harmlessly. But bromate itself does cause cancer in animals, and isn’t worth the small risk it poses to humans. Many bakers have stopped using bromated flour. An example of an additive that “certain people should avoid” is: • <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm#quorn" target="Mycoprotein">Mycoprotein</a>. Fortunately, this substance—a vat-grown fungus—is only in the Quorn line of meat substitutes. Several percent of people who eat it will experience nausea, severe vomiting, or dangerous anaphylactic reactions. (If you are one of them, report your symptoms <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/" target="here">here</a>.) Despite CSPI’s warnings, FDA refuses to take it off the market or require labeling. CSPI says these food additives are safe: • Maltodextrin. This thickening agent and sweetener is made from starch. You might find it in canned fruit, salad dressings, and instant puddings. • Sodium Carboxymethyl-Cellulose. This thickening and stabilizing agent prevents sugar from crystallizing and is used in ice cream, beer, pie fillings, icings, diet foods, and candy. Studies indicate it is safe. • Thiamin Mononitrate. Scary name, perfectly safe ingredient. It’s a form of vitamin B-1 used to fortify cereals and flour. • Sucralose. Don’t believe the manufacturer’s claim that this sweetener is “natural” or “tastes like sugar since it’s made from sugar.” But also don’t believe the Internet conspiracy theories that it’s toxic; it appears to be safe. Used as a tabletop sweetener (Splenda) and in some baked goods, frozen desserts, and diet soft drinks. Unfortunately, it’s often used with acesulfame. Jacobson says that while it’s important to pay attention to the presence of many of these food additives, one shouldn’t fetishize them at the expense of several ingredients whose presence we take for granted in foods, namely sugar—in both its naturally occurring forms and in high-fructose corn syrup—and salt. “Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and high blood pressure are such problems in this country in part because Americans are eating way much more sugar and salt than our bodies can handle,” said Jacobson. “They’re both perfectly ‘natural’ ingredients but everyone should cut back.” CSPI’s web site has an expanded version of Chemical Cuisine. Introductory <a href="https://www.cspinet.org/cgi-bin/subscribe.cgi" target="subscriptions">subscriptions</a> to Nutrition Action, which has more than 900,000 subscribers in North America, and Canada, are $10 ($15 in Canada). 2008-04-29 Maine Taxes on Soda, Beer & Wine Applauded http://cspinet.org/new/200804181.html Similar Increases Could Help Reduce Health Care Costs by Funding Prevention, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—Governors, state legislators, and members of Congress interested in simultaneously bridging budget gaps and improving public health should look north to Maine. There, <a href="http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=181922&ac=PHnws" target="the legislature passed and Governor John Baldacci signed ">the legislature passed and Governor John Baldacci signed </a>a package of tax increases on soda, beer and wine to help pay for a state health insurance program for small businesses and the self-employed. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which has long supported modest increases in taxes on soda and alcoholic beverages if the revenues are used to promote public health, today applauded Maine policy makers. “The fact of the matter is that if we raised taxes on soda by a penny or two a can, it could raise billions of dollars that could be used to promote public health,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Larger increases on alcoholic beverages, which are long overdue at both the federal level and in most states, would have the added benefit of reducing underage drinking. Existing taxes on beer, wine, and liquor don’t even begin to cover the health care, public safety, and law enforcement costs of problem drinking.” In Maine, excise taxes on beer will increase from 25 cents per gallon to 54 cents per gallon; wine excise taxes go from 30 cents to 65 cents per gallon; the syrup used to make soda will be taxed at $4 per gallon, and bottled soda will be taxed at 42 cents per gallon. The new revenues will be used to help fund a state health insurance program, Dirigo. (“Dirigo,” Latin for “I lead,” is also the Maine state motto.) Other states might find it useful to use revenues from a tax increase on soda or other junk foods to help reduce health care costs by <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/prevention.pdf" target="preventing">preventing</a> obesity, diabetes, and heart disease, according to CSPI. Programs that foster physical activity, promote increased consumption of fruits and vegetables, and decrease smoking and alcohol abuse—all worthwhile for their own sake—could all put sizable dents in stressed state health budgets. Smoking, poor diet, physical inactivity, and alcohol abuse account for about 38 percent of all deaths. Yet only 2 or 3 percent of health care dollars are spent on prevention, according to CSPI. “Here’s an idea that Democrats and Republicans alike should get behind,” said Jacobson. “Use small taxes on soda and booze to fund inexpensive interventions that improve diet, encourage physical activity, and otherwise prevent disease. Before too long we’d eventually spend billions less mopping up the mess with angioplasties, bypasses, statins, and other expensive surgeries and drugs.” 2008-04-18 House to Consider Comprehensive FDA Reform Bill http://cspinet.org/new/200804172.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalAfter numerous foodborne illness outbreaks and scores of hearings on Capitol Hill, House Energy and Commerce Chairman John Dingell, together with Representatives Frank Pallone, Bart Stupak, and Diane DeGette, has introduced today a package of urgently-needed <a href="http://energycommerce.house.gov/FDAGlobalAct-08/041708.DiscDraft.Memo.pdf" target="FDA reforms">FDA reforms</a> that, if enacted, will go a long way toward restoring Americans' confidence in the safety of our food supply. Until the massive spinach outbreak of 2006, most Americans probably assumed our food safety system was strong. But with recalls and outbreaks occurring every month, consumer confidence has dramatically eroded. <a href="http://energycommerce.house.gov/FDAGlobalAct-08/Dingel_60AXML.pdf">Dingell's FDA reform package requires</a> written food safety plans at FDA-regulated food processors. The bill requires safety standards to help keep fresh fruits and vegetables free of harmful contaminants, like E. coli 0157:H7 and Salmonella. Imported foods get increased scrutiny and country-of-origin disclosure is required on processed foods and produce. The package also gives FDA mandatory recall authority and civil penalties. The Dingell bill contains common sense reforms comprising modern tools that most Americans would be surprised to learn that the agency doesn't have today. As written, the bill only requires that FDA-regulated facilities get a visit from an inspector once every four years. While that's certainly an improvement over the status quo, the FDA needs the resources to visit these farms and factories at least once every year. The FDA has been on a starvation diet for far too long. 2008-04-17 With Calories Hard to Guess, Washington Voters Want Answers on Menus http://cspinet.org/new/200804171.html King County and Other Menu Labeling Policies Needed in StateOLYMPIA, WA—Quick, what at McDonald's has the most calories? A Big Mac, two Sausage McGriddles, a large chocolate shake, or four hamburgers? If you guessed a Big Mac, you’d be in good company. And you’d also be wrong. According to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/wapoll.pdf">new statewide poll</a> commissioned by the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the American Heart Association in Washington that was the top guess of the 500 Washington voters quizzed. But the large chocolate shake at McDonald’s has more calories (1,160, as it happens) than those other menu items. The health groups behind the poll say the results show that most people have a hard time guessing calorie counts of typical restaurant meals. The poll showed that fewer than 10 percent of Washingtonians could identify the lowest or highest calorie menu items at popular chain restaurants. About 60 percent of those surveyed support the <a href="http://www.metrokc.gov/Health/boh/">King County Board of Health's</a> ordinance that requires fast-food and other chain restaurants to list calories on menus and menu boards, and about the same number would like to see a menu labeling policy adopted statewide. The groups say that the poll results should reassure policy makers of public support for menu labeling in King County as well as support from Washingtonians statewide. "Almost everyone failed this quiz," said Lucy Culp, government affairs director the American Heart Association in WA. "Restaurants don't make customers guess when it comes to prices; they show them on the menu. There's no reason to keep vital nutrition information from consumers, and many good reasons to provide it." Most Washington voters guessed that at Quiznos either the Steakhouse Beef Dip or the Baja Chicken with Bacon sub has more calories than the Classic Italian or the Tuna Melt. Only 4 percent guessed the right answer: the Tuna Melt, which has 1,420 calories when it comes with cheese and dressing. The Steakhouse Beef Dip with cheese and dressing actually has the fewest calories, 730. Similarly quizzed, few guessed correctly about items at Burger King (5 percent) and Pizza Hut (11 percent). "Most people know that much of what's sold in fast-food chains isn’t health food," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "But who would think a shake could be worse than four burgers, or that a steak sub turns out to be lower in calories than the tuna? Without access to nutrition information, it's impossible to make informed choices when eating out." Under pressure from restaurant lobbyists, the state legislature pressed King County to enter into a compromise with the restaurant industry and amend their menu labeling policy. That compromise is expected to be adopted today by the Board of Health. The compromise measure will keep nutrition information primarily on or in menus and on or near menu boards. The new policy will greatly increase King County residents' access to nutrition information, though is not as strong as the policy originally passed by the board, which required nutrition information to be directly on menus and menu boards. The survey was based on 500 interviews conducted last week among likely Washington State voters and was conducted by the firm of Grove Insight. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.4 percent. 2008-04-17 Judge Upholds NYC Law Requiring Calories on Menus & Menu Boards http://cspinet.org/new/200804161.html Ruling Paves the Way for More Cities, States to Give Restaurant Diners Nutrition InformationWASHINGTON—U.S. District Judge Richard J. Holwell today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nycdecision.pdf" target="denied a motion">denied a motion</a> filed by chain restaurant lobbyists to block New York City’s requirement that chains disclose calories on menus and menu boards. The court had previously <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200709112.html" target="blocked the city">blocked the city</a> from enforcing the regulation, but today found that the city’s redrafted rule put to rest any questions about whether it was preempted by federal nutrition labeling laws. The judge also roundly rejected the industry’s argument that requiring calories on menus somehow violated chain restaurant’s First Amendment rights. Advocates of similar menu labeling measures say the ruling paves the way for other local governments to pass them. Thus far, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803261.html" target="San Francisco">San Francisco</a> and Washington’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707201.html" target="King County">King County</a>, which includes Seattle, have also enacted menu labeling laws. “New York City’s health department and Mayor Mike Bloomberg deserve a heck of a lot of credit for looking out for the health of the city’s residents and visitors, all of whom get a lot of calories from eating at restaurants,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. “And it’s clear that New York City has also inspired a great deal of interest among health departments and legislators across the country.” "Judge Holwell’s decision sets helpful precedent that public health officials can look to as they draft similar regulations or legislation," said Public Citizen attorney Deepak Gupta, who filed a brief and made oral arguments on behalf of his group, CSPI, and other supporters of New York City’s regulation. "Consumers need this type of nutrition information so they can make healthy decisions when they dine out." Over 20 states, cities and counties have introduced measures that require nutrition information on menus and menu boards, including California, Philadelphia and Westchester County, New York. While most big restaurant chains were otherwise busy fighting New York City’s health department in court, others are complying with the rule and providing calorie information to their customers on menu boards. New York City’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/index.html" target="Subway">Subway</a> outlets have been using menu boards with calories on them since last year. Pretzel chain <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/boards6.html" target="Auntie Anne’s">Auntie Anne’s</a> and burger restaurant Johnny Rockets have also complied, despite the industry’s legal wranglings. Some Starbucks, Jamba Juice, Chipotle, and Quiznos outlets in the city have recently added calorie counts to their menu boards. New York City’s chain restaurants that have more than 15 outlets must include calories on menus and menu boards by April 22, but the city will not begin enforcing in earnest until June 4. “It’s a shame that the restaurant industry has been fighting in courthouses and state capitols around the country to delay this important health information from reaching their customers,” Wootan said. 2008-04-16 College Presidents Urge Elimination of Alcohol Advertising on NCAA Sports http://cspinet.org/new/200804091.html NCAA Exceeding its Own Limits on Beer Ads During Final Four and Championship Basketball Games, According to CSPI AnalysisWASHINGTON—More than one hundred college presidents and athletic directors today called on the National Collegiate Athletic Association to end “embarrassingly prominent” beer ads during televised NCAA basketball tournaments. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ncaaletter.pdf" target="letter">letter</a> to NCAA President Myles Brand, the presidents urged the NCAA’s Division I Board of Directors and Executive Committee to formally review its policies on alcohol advertising, which were last examined in 2005. “Given the persistent problems caused by underage and excessive college drinking, much of it in the form of beer, we find it inconceivable that the NCAA’s profiting from beer promotion during the telecasts of college basketball games comports with the best interests of higher education, sports or student welfare,” the officials wrote. “NCAA allowance of beer advertising serves to enrich broadcasters unnecessarily at the expense of the values of sports and higher education.” <object width="425" height="350"> <param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/BtonGT4Yq3w"> </param> <embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/BtonGT4Yq3w" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"> </embed> </object> According to CSPI’s analysis of broadcasts of the semifinal and championship basketball games, the NCAA is exceeding the limits on beer ads <a href="http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/NCAA/Legislation%20and%20Governance/Committees/Assoc-wide/Executive%20Committee/Docs/2005/2005-10/s01_minutes.htm" target="it set for itself in 2005">it set for itself in 2005</a> of not more than 60 seconds per hour or not more than 120 seconds in any telecast. During the UCLA versus Memphis broadcast, CBS aired 200 seconds of beer advertising comprised of 15-, 20-, and 30-second spots for Bud Light, Bud Light Lime, and Miller Lite. During the North Carolina versus Kansas semifinal broadcast, CBS aired 240 seconds of beer ads. During the final on Monday night, 270 seconds of beer ads aired—more than twice what the NCAA says it allows. And none of those totals include several showings each night of Bud Light and Miller Lite sponsorship banners on the screen for five or six seconds at a time. “Allowing sixty seconds of beer advertising per hour of collegiate sports is bad enough,” said Tracy Downs, manager of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/index.htm" target="Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>, a project of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “That’s sixty seconds too much. But exceeding that limit shows that the NCAA has a cavalier, ‘devil may care’ attitude about exposing kids to beer ads. They don’t even care enough to enforce their own policy.” The presidents’ letter cites TNS Media Intelligence data showing that beer was the second-ranked advertising category among the top five advertisers during the 2007 NCAA men’s basketball tournament, and that spending for ads for Anheuser-Busch and Miller Brewing Company’s beers ranked fourth and fifth among all advertisers. The data also show that demand for advertising time during the tournament is high and that more than 300 different advertisers have supported the game telecasts since 1998. While NCAA policies specifically forbid advertising for alcoholic beverages, they make an exception for beverages with alcohol content of six percent or less, which includes most beers. Since 2005, 285 NCAA-member colleges and nine college athletic conferences have endorsed a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/schools.htm" target="pledge to eliminate alcohol ads">pledge to eliminate alcohol ads</a> from college sports. This group includes large Division I schools such as Ohio State, Texas Tech, and the universities of Florida, Minnesota and Nebraska, in addition to many Division II and III schools. “Those schools recognize the hypocrisy of airing commercials for the very product that causes college administrators, coaches, and parents so much distress,” the college presidents wrote. “Alcohol ads demean the NCAA, student athletes, college prevention efforts, and help put young people at risk.” The Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV’s national advisory council includes Tom Osborne, University of Nebraska athletic director and former U.S. Representative (R-NE); Dean E. Smith, former University of North Carolina basketball coach; and Andy Geiger, former athletic director at Ohio State. In March, Osborne separately urged Brand to exclude beer ads from televised sports. “Over my 36 years of coaching, most of the really negative occurrences that I had to deal with in regards to student-athletes involved alcohol and invariably the alcohol chosen was beer,” wrote Osborne, who noted that alcohol contributes to 70,000 sexual assaults and 1,700 deaths on college campuses each year. “College administrators and local law enforcement are really struggling to control the violence, vandalism, and health problems fueled by binge drinking on campus,” said George Hacker, director of the Alcohol Policies Project at CSPI. “It’s time for the NCAA to stop pouring gasoline on the fire and stop airing these ads.” 2008-04-09 Americans and Europeans Want Tougher Action on Childhood Obesity and Diet-Related Disease http://cspinet.org/new/200804022.html U.S. and E.U. Consumer Advocates Meet in Washington Next WeekWASHINGTON—Eighty-two percent of Americans believe that food companies should do more to reduce the fat, sugar, and salt in their products, 78 percent want fast-food and other chain restaurants to disclose calories and key nutrition information on menus and menu boards, and just 36 percent of Americans think that food companies are doing enough to limit junk food advertising to children, according to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/tacdsurvey.pdf" target="new survey research">new survey research</a> released today. The poll, conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation, was commissioned by the <a href="http://www.tacd.org/index2.htm" target="Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue">Transatlantic Consumer Dialogue</a>, a consultative forum of American and European consumer advocacy organizations that represent consumer interests to E.U. and U.S. policy makers. The Center for Science in the Public Interest co-chairs the TACD’s food policy group. Strong majorities in the U.S., U.K., Spain, and Hungary think governments should take more action to help deal with childhood obesity and other diet-related health problems. Fifty-seven percent of Americans said government should be taking more action. Public opinion in Europe was even stronger. Sixty-eight percent of consumers in the U.K. want their government to take more action to deal with childhood obesity, as do 76 percent of respondents in Spain and 61 percent in Hungary. The poll comes as consumer organizations belonging to the TACD are poised to meet next week in Washington with U.S. and E.U. government officials and leading nutrition experts at the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200803171.html" target="Generation Excess"> Generation Excess</a> conference on combating obesity and diet-related disease. Journalists who wish to attend the conference on April 8 may <a href="http://cspinet.org/generation_excess_reg_form.html" target="register online">register online</a>. “U.S. based food companies are complying with government initiatives in Europe that curb junk food advertising to kids, limit fat and salt content in processed foods, and call for nutrition information on the fronts of food packages, but are opposing such steps in the U.S.— in effect treating European consumers better than Americans” said Bruce Silverglade, legal affairs director for CSPI. One reason for the discrepancy is that the Food and Drug Administration, the Federal Trade Commission, and other U.S. agencies are much less aggressive than their European counterparts. Last year, the U.K. cracked down on television advertising of junk foods on TV programs appealing to children, but in the U.S., the FTC has opted for self-regulation based on a weak set of industry-written nutrition standards. The world’s largest food company, Nestlé, complies with the British advertising curbs but does not even participate in the latest U.S. self-regulatory initiative by the food industry. While the U.K. and France set targeted reductions for the salt content of processed foods, and Denmark phased out use of artificial trans fats, the FDA has remained on the sidelines, according to CSPI. “The Food and Drug Administration has lost its leadership role and we are falling behind other countries that are taking more aggressive steps to combat childhood obesity and diet-related disease,” Silverglade said. “The health of Americans will suffer as a result.” About three-quarters of Americans favor <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200611301.html" target="front-of-package nutrition symbols ">front-of-package nutrition symbols </a>signifying whether a food is high, medium, or low in calories, fat, sugar, or salt. Such symbols have been developed in the U.K., where red, yellow, or green traffic-light symbols convey that information. A panel at next week’s conference will discuss how to provide consumers with that kind of nutrition information, and will include officials from the <a href="http://www.fda.gov" target="FDA">FDA</a>, the <a href="http://www.food.gov.uk/" target="British Food Standards Agency">British Food Standards Agency</a>, the <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm" target="European Commission">European Commission</a>, and a representative from the Maine-based <a href="http://www.hannaford.com/guiding_stars/index.htm" target="Hannaford supermarket chain">Hannaford supermarket chain</a>, which awards one, two, or three stars to healthier products based on their nutritional makeup. “Rates of obesity and diet-related disease remain high, but governments aren’t acting with enough urgency to shield children from junk-food advertising, or to give consumers better nutrition information,” said Sue Davies, E.U. co-chair of TACD’s food policy group. “Clearly, relying on voluntary action by the food industry isn’t working.” The poll’s findings are based on telephone surveys with 1,003 individuals each in the U.S., Great Britain, and Spain, with a margin of error of 3 percent and a 95 percent confidence level. Data from Hungary was collected from a representative sample of 1,058 individuals in face-to-face interviews. 2008-04-02 CSPI Says Parents May Want to Avoid BPA-lined Cans http://cspinet.org/new/200804021.html Nutrition Action Healthletter Asks Hard Questions About a Hard PlasticWASHINGTON—Women who are pregnant or breastfeeding may want to consider reducing their exposure, and that of their infants and young children, to the controversial chemical bisphenol A (BPA) by avoiding most canned soups and drinks and many hard-plastic reusable water bottles. That advice comes from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit group that publishes Nutrition Action Healthletter, which asks <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nahbpa.pdf" target="“Hard Questions About a Hard Plastic”">“Hard Questions About a Hard Plastic”</a> in its April issue. To be sure, there are conflicting studies about the effects of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/bpa.html" target="BPA">BPA</a> on humans. One government-funded expert panel linked the endocrine-disrupting chemical to increased rates of breast and prostate cancer and reproductive problems. A second panel found fault with the first, though both expressed concerns about the impact of BPA on behavior in animal studies and what that might mean for children. BPA is coursing through the bloodstream of almost every American. Government scientists say that almost all of that comes from the tiny amounts that are leached out of Nalgene-type polycarbonate water bottles or metal cans lined with an epoxy resin made from BPA. Unfortunately, that means almost all metal cans that contain food or drink. “We don’t want to tell people not to eat canned beans or tomatoes,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “But at the same time, it makes sense for all parents, and especially pregnant and nursing women, to minimize the exposure of their kids’ developing bodies and brains to BPA. The food industry could make life easier by phasing it out entirely. Why roll the dice and assume that all the studies finding problems with BPA are wrong?” At least one brand of canned goods, Eden, uses a BPA-free lining for its cans, and several manufacturers use aseptic cardboard boxes free of BPA. Several brands of tuna and salmon come in pouches, instead of in BPA-lined cans, and most canned vegetables also come frozen. Soda drinkers could minimize exposure to BPA by choosing plastic bottles, almost all of which are made with easily recyclable and BPA-free polyethylene terephthalate. Parents can help kids minimize exposure by avoiding toddler sippy cups and infant formula bottles made with polycarbonate plastic, according to CSPI. 2008-04-02 San Francisco Mayor Signs Menu Labeling Bill http://cspinet.org/new/200803261.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanNo one expects to learn the price of your restaurant meal by checking online in advance or by finding out only after you've ordered. And at chain restaurants, where menu items are so carefully calibrated and standardized, it would be easy for chains to put calories right on menu boards and even more nutrition information on printed menus. That's why residents of and visitors to San Francisco owe a debt of gratitude to the Board of Supervisors for passing a common-sense menu labeling ordinance, and to Mayor Gavin Newsom for signing it last night. It's not a magic bullet, and cities, states, and the federal government still need to do much more to help Americans prevent obesity and diet-related disease. Giving people key <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling" target="nutrition information">nutrition information</a> at chain restaurants--where Americans are consuming more and more of their calories--will be a huge help to those of us who want to make healthful choices for ourselves and our families. San Francisco now joins New York City, which goes into effect March 31, 2008, and Washington State's King County, which includes Seattle, in passing menu labeling requirements. We hope that these bold city and county steps inspire states to enact menu labeling laws statewide. In particular, we hope San Francisco's move prompts Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to reconsider his unfortunate veto of a statewide bill in California. Menu labeling policies would pass easily if the restaurant industry stopped its aggressive lobbying to keep this important health information from their customers. It's hard to imagine that not many years ago, packaged foods in the supermarket did not have to bear the standardized, easy-to-read Nutrition Facts labels. We're optimistic that twenty years from now, it will be hard to believe that calorie counts were confined to web sites and tray liners, and absent from menus and menu boards. 2008-03-26 Getting Creamed at the Office? http://cspinet.org/new/200803242.html Nutrition Action Healthletter Weighs Coffee CreamersWASHINGTON—The nutrition label on the powdered Coffee-mate in your office kitchen might list 10 calories and just a half a gram of saturated fat. Those sound like reassuringly low levels of both. But use a more realistic tablespoon-size serving instead of the miserly teaspoon the Food and Drug Administration allows—and unround the rounded down numbers on the label—and you’re looking at 45 calories and three grams of heart-harmful saturated fat. Have three of four servings of your office coffee thusly “creamed” and you’ve stealthily consumed half a day’s saturated fat. But the liquid version of Coffee-mate—flavored or Original—is worse. Instead of using the coconut and palm kernel oils Nestlé employs in the powdered version, the liquid versions use partially hydrogenated soybean or cottonseed oil. Three mugs of coffee with that (and without Nestlé’s innovative arithmetic) delivers 1.86 grams of saturated fat , not to mention the 2.76 grams of trans fat—which is more than an entire day’s worth of the kind of fat that raises your bad cholesterol and lowers your good cholesterol. A <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/coffeecreamers.pdf" target="review of coffee creamers ">review of coffee creamers </a>entitled “Are You Getting Creamed?” appears in the April issue of the 900,000-circulation Nutrition Action Healthletter, published by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Anyone glancing at the Nutrition Facts label for most of these coffee creamers would have a false sense of security,” said CSPI nutrition director Bonnie Liebman. Several iterations of Coffee-mate and other brands are lower in saturated and trans fat. But <i<Nutrition Action’s only “Best Bite” ratings go to International Delight Fat Free and Silk liquid creamers, as well as plain old fat-free, 1%, 2%, or even whole milk, and the successful fat-free half & half made by Land O’Lakes and some store brands. 2008-03-24 NEWS ADVISORY: Generation Excess III http://cspinet.org/new/200803171.html Conference Will Review Transatlantic Approaches to Tackling Obesity and Diet-related DiseaseWASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and leading European consumer organizations will convene policy makers, nutrition experts, and public health officials from the United States and Europe for “Generation Excess III,” a conferences on public policy approaches to childhood obesity and related diet and health problems on April 8 in Washington, D.C. The conference is being organized under the auspices of the <a href="http://www.tacd.org/index2.htm" target="Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue">Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue</a>, an advisory group of consumer organizations established by the European Commission and the U.S. Department of State and follows two previous <a href="http://www.tacd.org/events/ge2/index.htm" target="conferences">conferences</a> held in Europe. Who: Officials from the governments of the U.S., U.K., France, Denmark, Spain, and other nations; leading consumer organizations from both sides of the Atlantic; U.S. keynote speaker <a href="http://steinhardt.nyu.edu/faculty_bios/view/Marion_Nestle" target="Marion Nestle">Marion Nestle</a>, Ph.D.; EU Keynote speaker <a href="http://ec.europa.eu/food/animal/diseases/controlmeasures/avian/bio_madelin.pdf" target="Robert Madelin">Robert Madelin</a>, Director General, Health and Consumer Protection, European Commission. Media are invited to attend all sessions and luncheon, please RSVP by March 28. What: Conference will examine transatlantic approaches to tackling obesity and diet-related disease, including restricting junk-food advertising aimed at children, phasing out artificial trans fats, improving nutrition labeling, and reducing salt content in processed foods. New survey research data assessing consumer support for stronger action by government and industry will be released. See <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/tacdagenda.pdf" target="Agenda">Agenda</a>. When: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. EDT on Tuesday, April 8, 2008 Where: Marriott Washington Hotel, 1221 22nd Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20037. Register: Registration is complementary, but capacity is limited, so act now to secure your place. To register, complete the <a href="http://cspinet.org/generation_excess_reg_form.html" target="registration form">registration form</a>. Registration closes March 28, 2008. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is a nonprofit health-advocacy group based in Washington, D.C., that focuses on nutrition, food safety, and pro-health alcohol policies. CSPI is supported largely by the 900,000 U.S. and Canadian subscribers to its Nutrition Action Healthletter and by foundation grants. The Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD) is a forum of more than 60 U.S. and E.U. consumer organizations which develops and agrees to joint consumer policy recommendations to the U.S. government and the European Union. TACD regularly issues policy statements and recommendations on important food, e-commerce, intellectual property and trade issues. 2008-03-17 Bay State Restaurants Still Using Artificial Trans Fat Despite Health Risks http://cspinet.org/new/200803131.html New Test Results Indicate Need for Statewide Phase-out, Says CSPIBOSTON—Even though artificial trans fat promotes heart attacks and early deaths, major chains—including Massachusetts-based Friendly's—are still serving foods containing partially hydrogenated oil—the only artificial source of trans fat. But chains as diverse as McDonald's, Legal Sea Foods, and Uno Chicago Grill use healthful oils for deep-frying, which, the Center for Science in the Public Interest says, shows that any chain could easily serve foods free of artificial trans fat. CSPI says that the trans fat levels found in fried foods at Burger King and Friendly's make a compelling case for cities and state legislatures to pass measures that would require restaurants to phase out their use of artificial trans fat. The city of Boston's health department is holding a hearing on a citywide trans-fat phase-out today, and a <a href="http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/185/ht04pdf/ht04346.pdf">statewide bill</a>, sponsored by Rep. Peter Koutoujian (D-Waltham), is pending. Brookline passed a prohibition on restaurants' use of artificial trans fat in June. Elsewhere, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html">New York City</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702081.html">Philadelphia</a>, and several counties have required restaurants to stop serving foods with significant amounts of artificial trans fat. According to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/finaltrans.pdf">independent laboratory tests</a> commissioned by CSPI, a 5.5-ounce serving of French fries from Friendly's has a decidedly unfriendly two grams of trans fat—an entire day's worth. The fries highest in trans fat were found at Burger King: 6 grams of trans fat in a 4.6-ounce large order, according to both CSPI's test results and the company web site. The trans fat could come from frying oil used in the restaurant, the par-frying oil used by the chains' suppliers, or both. "With all the medical evidence we have about artificial trans fat and heart disease, and with supplies of natural trans-fat-free oils and shortenings in such abundance, there is truly no excuse for Burger King, Friendly's, and other chains to be using this dangerous substance," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "One advantage it has is that it can be used over and over again in the deep-fryer without being changed as often. But considering that it clogs arteries and shortens lives, it's just not worth it." Massachusetts voters seem to agree, according to a recent <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/transsurvey.pdf">7News/Suffolk University poll</a>. That poll found that two-thirds of Massachusetts voters are concerned about artificial trans fat and favor the bill to phase it out of the state's restaurants. "The tide is definitely turning toward the use of healthier cooking oils, with many restaurants voluntarily making the switch to healthier alternatives," Koutoujian said. "Massachusetts residents understand that by forgoing the use of artificial trans fats, we can live healthier lives without negatively affecting the taste of any foods." Artificial trans fat is more dangerous than any other fat in food because, like saturated fat, it raises one's LDL, the "bad" kind of cholesterol that promotes heart disease, but unlike saturated fat, it also lowers one's HDL, the "good" kind of cholesterol that guards against heart disease. For that reason, leading trans-fat researcher Walter Willett, professor of epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard School of Public Health, calls trans fat a "metabolic poison." Federal rules now require trans fat to be listed on food labels, a move that has spurred most large makers of packaged foods to switch oils. Rep. Koutoujian’s bill, like others pending around the country, only applies to the trans fat that comes from artificial sources and not the small amounts that occur naturally in some foods. Among the big three national burger chains, Burger King is the only one that has not released a timeline for phasing out artificial trans fat. A King-size order of onion rings has 6 grams of trans fat, according to the company. A meal of a regular-size order of Chicken Tenders with a large order of French fries would have eight grams of trans—or more trans fat than should safely be consumed in four days. CSPI's litigation unit is <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200802252.html">suing Burger King</a> in Washington, D.C., to seek an injunction preventing the company from using partially hydrogenated oil. 2008-03-13 Airborne Agrees to Pay $23.3 Million to Settle Lawsuit Over False Advertising of its "Miracle Cold Buster" http://cspinet.org/new/200803032.html Company Now Under Scrutiny By FTC & 24 State Attorneys GeneralWASHINGTON—The makers of Airborne—a multivitamin and herbal supplement whose labels and ads falsely claimed that the product cures and prevents colds—will refund money to consumers who bought the product, as part of a $23.3 million class action <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/airbornesettlement.pdf" target="settlement agreement">settlement agreement</a>. The company will pay for ads in Better Homes & Gardens, Parade, People, Newsweek, and many other magazines and newspapers instructing consumers how to get refunds. Concocted by second-grade teacher Victoria Knight McDowell and her screenwriter husband Thomas Rider McDowell, Airborne promised to “boost your immune system to help your body combat germs” and instructed users to “take it at the first sign of a cold symptom or before entering crowded, potentially germ-infested environments.” The company’s folksy “created by a school teacher!” slogan and insistence that the product be stocked with real cold, cough, and flu medicines instead of with dietary supplements, helped turn the company into an overnight success, as did an appearance by Victoria Knight McDowell on the Oprah Winfrey Show. But in February 2006, <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/OnCall/story?id=1664514&page=1 " target="ABC News">ABC News</a> revealed on Good Morning America that Airborne’s much-touted lone clinical trial was actually conducted without any doctors or scientists, just a “two-man operation started up just to do the Airborne study.” Soon after the plaintiff notified Airborne of his intent to file suit in March 2006, the company stopped mentioning the study and began toning down the overt cold-curing claims in favor of vague “immunity boosting” language. Next, in 2007, the Federal Trade Commission and a group of state attorneys general began investigating the various “cold busting” claims that Airborne has made since its launch in 1999. Those investigations are continuing. Airborne’s basic formula contains Vitamins A, C, and E, as well as other nutrients common in multivitamins; the amino acids glutamine and lysine, and an “herbal extract proprietary blend.” CSPI cautions that Airborne may provide too much vitamin A, since just two pills provide 10,000 IU—the maximum safe level for a day—and the package directs customers to take three per day. In addition to several flavors of the original formula, other Airborne products include “Power Pixies,” an artificially sweetened powder version for children; Airborne Seasonal, which is described as a “non-drowsy formula containing a nutritional blend which promotes normal histamine levels”; Airborne On-the-Go; and Airborne Nighttime. “There’s no credible evidence that what’s in Airborne can prevent colds or protect you from a germy environment,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation/pdf/airborne_NAH.pdf" target="who reviewed Airborne’s claims">who reviewed Airborne’s claims</a>. “Airborne is basically an overpriced, run-of-the-mill vitamin pill that’s been cleverly, but deceptively, marketed.” Consumers seeking refunds for purchases of Airborne can obtain a claim form by writing to the Airborne Class Action Settlement Administrator, PO Box 1897, Faribault, MN 55021-7152, calling 1-888-952-9080, or by visiting <a href="http://www.airbornehealthsettlement.com" target="www.AirborneHealthSettlement.com">www.AirborneHealthSettlement.com</a>. The class plaintiff was represented by California law firms which asked the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest’s litigation project to join as co-counsel in late 2006 for its expertise in nutrition and labeling lawsuits. U.S. District Court Judge Virginia A. Phillips of the Central District of California gave preliminary approval to the settlement on November 29. “This was a great opportunity for CSPI to participate in a major lawsuit against one of the biggest supplement frauds in the country,” said CSPI’s Litigation Director Stephen Gardner. Created in 2005, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/litigation" target="CSPI’s litigation unit">CSPI’s litigation unit</a> has successfully negotiated settlements that have resulted in improved food marketing and labeling practices. In June, CSPI struck a settlement agreement with Kellogg that resulted in nutrition standards for the foods that company markets to young children. CSPI has negotiated settlements that resulted in improved labeling or marketing of products made by Frito-Lay, Pinnacle Foods, Procter & Gamble, Quaker Oats and others. CSPI is currently pursuing litigation against Coca-Cola over its so-called “calorie burning” drink Enviga; Burger King, over its use of artificial trans fat; and Anheuser-Busch and Miller over their illegal marketing of alcoholic “energy” drinks. 2008-03-03 Court Rebuffs Burger King in Trans Fat Case http://cspinet.org/new/200802252.html CSPI's Lawsuit to be Heard in D.C. Superior CourtWASHINGTON—Lawyers for Burger King failed to have a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200705161.html" target="lawsuit">lawsuit</a> over the company’s use of artificial trans fat dismissed. The Center for Science in the Public Interest sued the chain in May 2007 because it is the only one of the three top burger chains not to promise to phase out its use of partially hydrogenated frying oil. CSPI sued in Superior Court for the District of Columbia, but Burger King transferred the case to a federal court and then asked for it to be dismissed, insisting, ironically, that CSPI’s claims did not belong in federal court. On February 19, a federal judge rejected each of Burger King’s legal arguments and sent the case back to D.C. Superior Court—setting the stage for what CSPI hopes will be a trial that results in an injunction stopping the chain from using the discredited ingredient or, at the very least, requiring prominent signage warning of trans fat in BK’s fried foods. “Burger King’s argument was similar to that of the kid who kills his parents and then asks for leniency because he’s an orphan—it transferred the case to a court where it did not belong, and then asked that court to dismiss the case,” said CSPI’s Litigation Director Stephen Gardner. “It is increasingly clear that the proper way for Burger King to make this case go away is to stop using oils with artificial trans fat in its deep-fryers.” Wendy’s and McDonald’s are each phasing out their use of partially hydrogenated oil. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200704302.html" target="KFC">KFC</a> stopped using it for deep-frying in 2007 after CSPI sued the company, though it still uses it in biscuits and pot pies. <a href="http://www.bk.com/Nutrition/PDFs/brochure.pdf" target="Fried foods from Burger King">Fried foods from Burger King</a> are alarmingly high in trans fat, according to CSPI. A regular-size order of Chicken Tenders with a large order of French fries has 8 grams of trans—more than someone should consume in four days. 2008-02-25 Consumers Still At Risk, Despite Recall http://cspinet.org/new/200802201.html Americans Still Wondering: “Where’s the Beef?”WASHINGTON—Millions of consumers could unknowingly dine on recalled beef because meat sold by Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. went to grocery stores or was processed by other companies not named in the recall, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The U.S. Department of Agriculture refuses to release the names of retail establishments that sell recalled meat to the public because of fears that companies won’t share information with USDA under its voluntary recall system. “When a recall is undertaken, big buyers are told that meat they purchased is part of the recall, but those buyers aren’t required to notify their customers,” said CSPI staff attorney Sarah Klein. “Consumers hearing of the recall may not realize that the ground beef in their freezer is the recalled product just sold with a different label.” USDA requested that Hallmark/Westland voluntarily recall affected beef following an investigation triggered by a <a href="http://video.hsus.org/?fr_story=b2dfefe0f02221333c5fb942f4879218cf9448e6&rf=bm&source=gaba89" target="hidden-camera video">hidden-camera video</a> shot by the Humane Society of the United States. The video showed plant workers tormenting downer cows to get them to stand and walk in order to pass USDA’s inspection procedures. The 143,000,000-pound Hallmark/Westland recall notice issued by USDA states that the recall covers bulk packages of beef shipped to wholesalers that are not available for direct purchase by consumers. This creates confusion by suggesting the recalled products did not reach consumers. In fact, the bulk packages being recalled may have ended up on retail shelves under different brand names. So consumers may still be buying beef from sick cows. USDA has a policy of not identifying a recalling firm’s immediate purchasers. That means that wholesalers and retailers who repackaged the meat for consumers are not identified in the recall notice. Nor will labels for such products bear the “336” establishment number highlighted in <a href="http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?contentidonly=true&contentid=2008/02/0046.xml" target="USDA’s press release">USDA’s press release</a>. The agency considers the names of repackagers to be confidential and not subject to disclosure, even under the Freedom of Information Act. As a result, unless the recall covers a brand-name product, consumers may not know they have purchased recalled meat. “While consumers know where and when they bought beef, this information rarely links up with the information in USDA’s press releases,” Klein said. “It is time to do away with the myth that recalls are a commercial event between big buyers. Recalled meat and poultry potentially affect consumers’ health and their willingness to buy those products. Commercial information should not take precedence over the consumer’s right to know where the products were sold.” In 2003, CSPI initiated a campaign to force USDA to release the names of retailers selling recalled meat. CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200408051.html" target="“Where’s the Beef”">“Where’s the Beef”</a> campaign started in 2004 after a mad cow scare. For recalls occurring in 2004, CSPI filed Freedom of Information Act requests to identify the stores where the recalled meat was sold, but USDA always denied these requests. Recently, Food Safety and Inspection Service Undersecretary Richard Raymond announced plans to change the agency’s policy on identifying retail purchasers, but the proposed rule is languishing between USDA and the Office of Management and Budget. In January, national retailer Wegman’s Food Markets Inc. telephoned consumers who may have purchased previously recalled products, using information gleaned from consumers’ frequent-shopper discount cards. Wegman’s is the only large retailer known to be proactively alerting consumers about previously purchased recalled products. "Kudos to Wegman's for alerting consumers in past recalls," said Klein. "We hope they set an example for grocery stores and other retailers. Consumers with beef in their freezers will be happy to be alerted if products were or were not part of this recall." 2008-02-20 Mass. Voters Favor Ridding Restaurants of Artificial Trans Fat http://cspinet.org/new/200802191.html Bill Would Phase Out Use of Partially Hydrogenated Oils in Bay StateBOSTON—Two-thirds of Massachusetts voters are concerned about heart-attack-promoting artificial trans fat and favor a <a href="http://www.mass.gov/legis/bills/house/185/ht04pdf/ht04346.pdf" target="bill">bill</a> to phase it out of the state’s restaurants, according to a new <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/transsurvey.pdf" target="7News/Suffolk University poll">7News/Suffolk University poll</a> . Only 24 percent of those surveyed opposed phasing out artificial trans fat—meaning the partially hydrogenated oils sometimes used for deep-frying and baking. A whopping 81 percent say that restaurants that still use the discredited ingredient should disclose that fact on menus. Legislation sponsored by State Rep. Peter Koutoujian (D-Waltham), the co-chairman of the legislature’s Joint Committee on Public Health, would require Bay State dining establishments to replace most of the partially hydrogenated oils with any of the widely available natural oils. “The tide is definitely turning toward the use of healthier cooking oils, with many restaurants voluntarily making the switch to healthier alternatives,” Koutoujian said. “This poll demonstrates that Massachusetts residents understand that by forgoing the use of artificial trans fats, we can live healthier lives without negatively affecting the taste of many foods.” Similar measures have passed in Brookline, Mass., as well as in New York City, Philadelphia, and other cities and counties. “Massachusetts has the opportunity to be the first state in the country to protect its citizens’ health by removing this one uniquely harmful and unnecessary ingredient from restaurant food,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Many big chains have already either eliminated or sharply reduced their use of artificial trans fat, and of course, many small family-owned businesses never used it to begin with. Getting rid of trans fat would be an easy and inexpensive way to simultaneously save lives and health-care dollars.” Artificial trans fat is more dangerous than any other fat in food since, like saturated fat, it raises one’s LDL, the “bad” kind of cholesterol that promotes heart disease, and lowers one’s HDL, the “good” kind of cholesterol that guards against heart disease. Federal rules now require trans fat to be listed on food labels, a move that has spurred most large manufacturers to switch oils. Rep. Koutoujian’s bill, like others pending around the country, only applies to the trans fat that comes from artificial sources, and not the small amounts that occur naturally in some foods. The 7NEWS/Suffolk University poll was conducted Friday, Feb. 1, through Sunday, Feb. 3, 2008, and surveyed a total of 800 likely voters. 2008-02-19 Unlikely Duo Opposes San Francisco Soft Drink Tax Plan http://cspinet.org/new/200802061.html Corn Refiners and CSPI Agree That High-Fructose Corn Syrup No Worse Than SugarWASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest has long supported small taxes on soft drinks to help pay for bike paths, nutrition education, and other obesity-prevention programs. But CSPI opposes a measure proposed by San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom because it would tax only drinks made with high-fructose corn syrup and not drinks made with other forms of sugar. Less surprisingly, the Corn Refiners Association also opposes the measure, but the two groups cosigned an unusual <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/newsom.pdf" target="joint letter">joint letter</a> to Mayor Newsom urging him to reconsider his plan. “We respectfully urge that the proposal be revised as soon as possible to reflect the scientific evidence that demonstrates no material differences in the health effects of high-fructose corn syrup and sugar,” wrote CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson and Corn Refiners Association president Audrae Erickson. “The real issue is that excessive consumption of any sugars may lead to health problems.” The letter goes on to explain that high-fructose corn syrup and sucrose, or table sugar, are similar in composition and that several studies have shown that the two types of sugars are similarly metabolized by the body. On its website, CSPI says that the idea that high-fructose corn syrup is more harmful than sugar is an “urban myth” and that there would be no health benefit whatsoever if companies switched from high-fructose corn syrup to sugar. “If Mayor Newsom wants to make his tax proposal fair, science-based, and pro-public health he would assess a penny or two tax per can on all non-diet soft drinks regardless of whether they’re sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup or regular sugar,” said Jacobson, separately. 2008-02-06 Bush Food Protection Initiative Fails to Nourish a Starving FDA http://cspinet.org/new/200802042.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaal Following a year when the FDA's food program was characterized as "high risk" by the Government Accountability Office and cited by <a href="http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/07/briefing/2007-4329b_02_01_FDA%20Report%20on%20Science%20and%20Technology.pdf" target="FDA's own Science Board">FDA's own Science Board</a> as an agency that "does not have the capacity to ensure the safety of food for the nation," the Bush Administration's "food protection" initiative is little more than shadow boxing against unsafe imports. A $32 million increase proposed for fiscal year 2009 for the agency's food science and inspection programs translates into a bare-bones increase of only $2 million when adjusted for the agency's typical inflationary cost (6 percent). And while food safety is highlighted as an important area, if the agency has shortfalls elsewhere, it will likely move this money from foods to drugs or devices. The 2009 President's budget fails to reverse the history of starving this critical public health agency of essential resources. 2008-02-04 Junk Food Marketing Prevalent in Montgomery County Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200801311.html Study Shows Food Companies Target Captive School AudienceWASHINGTON—Junk-food and soda makers directly market to young children right in their schools, according to a new <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/mcpssurvey.pdf" target="survey">survey</a> of public schools in Montgomery County, Maryland. Conducted at the request of <a href="http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/csltmpl.asp?url=/content/council/index.asp" target="Montgomery County Council">Montgomery County Council</a> Member George Leventhal, chair of the Health and Human Services Committee, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) found that the most prevalent forms of marketing in schools are signs on the exteriors of vending machines, food sales in vending machines, posters, and school fundraisers. Eighty-three percent of schools have posters or signs with food or beverage marketing messages (such as posters for Rich’s ice cream or Little Debbie snack cakes), and less than half (42 percent) of those signs market healthier categories such as dairy. Vending machines are a major source of marketing through product sales and advertising on the machine’s exterior. The county has strong nutrition standards for food sold in schools. While schools are working to reduce junk-food sales, many vending machines are still stocked with soda, juice drinks, iced tea, candy, cookies and chips. Eighty-two percent of the vending machines have some marketing messages on their exteriors—most commonly, the images are of branded sodas, snacks, juice or water. All high schools and middle schools surveyed have vending machines, with an average of 21 vending machines in each high school. All of the high schools, half of the middle schools, and 30 percent of the elementary schools hold fundraisers with candy, baked goods, soda or fast food and other restaurant food. “Food marketing influences children’s food choices, and ultimately their health,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan, co-author of the study. “Foods and beverages marketed in schools should meet the county’s own nutrition standards. Our public schools should be starting kids out on a lifetime of healthy eating habits. Permitting junk-food marketing in schools is like pouring gasoline on the fire of the obesity epidemic, when what we need is a bucket of water.” One way chain and other restaurants market their products to school children is through fundraising nights, which drum up business on slow nights and associate their brands with the school. Four out of five Montgomery County Public Schools participate in such fundraising nights, often at restaurants such as McDonald’s, Chuck E. Cheese, or Ledo’s Pizza. Food marketing in the form of product sales, advertising on scoreboards, school publications, and corporate-sponsored educational materials are common. Several elementary schools participate in Pizza Hut’s Book It program, which provides certificates for free Personal Pan Pizzas as rewards for reaching reading goals. (Each Personal Pan Pizza has 620 calories, half a day’s saturated fat and more than half a day’s sodium.) “Junk food marketing confuses the line between education and promotion,” said CSPI child health project manager and study co-author Ameena Batada. “The modest rewards to schools are not worth the long-term costs to children’s health and well-being.” “Thirty percent of Maryland children ages 10 to 17 are overweight or obese,” Councilmember Leventhal said. “Parents have a big enough challenge guiding their kids’ food choices and promoting healthy choices. School policies should support parents, and not let junk-food marketers go around parents’ backs directly to young children.” Wootan and Batada will present the findings of the survey at a hearing convened today by the County Council’s Health and Human Services Committee. CSPI recommends that the County’s Board of Education strengthen its policy of limiting marketing of low-nutrition foods in schools. CSPI also recommends that schools seek out healthy fundraising techniques as opposed to relying on candy sales or fast-food restaurant nights. CSPI published a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702141.html" target="report">report</a> last year giving examples of successful fundraisers that don’t include junk food, such as exercise-a-thons, cell phone recycling programs, book fairs, and gift cards. Elsewhere around the country, Maine passed a law limiting in-school food marketing to only food allowed under the state nutrition standards for food sales. California will be considering a bill on food marketing in schools. 2008-01-31 New York City Board of Health (Again) Votes to Put Calories on Chain Restaurant Menus and Menu Boards http://cspinet.org/new/200801223.html Restaurant Industry Lawsuit Against Previous Proposal BackfiresWASHINGTON—The New York City Board of Health today unanimously voted to require the city’s chain restaurants with more than 15 units nationally to list calories on menus and menu boards. A <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200709112.html" target="previously passed regulation">previously passed regulation</a> was blocked by a federal judge who found that by only applying the regulations to restaurants with existing public nutrition information, the measure was preempted by federal law. The <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/pr2008/pr008-08.shtml" target="rule passed today">rule passed today</a> addresses the judges concerns and avoids conflicting with federal law. Chains must comply by March 31. “It’s going to get a lot easier to make <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="informed choices">informed choices</a> at New York City’s chain restaurants this spring,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “At fast-food burger chains like McDonald’s and Burger King, and at table-service chains like Olive Garden and Applebee’s, consumers will have one key piece of nutrition information, calories, to help them make the right choices for themselves and their families. We expect that many more cities, counties, and states will require menu labeling once they see how easy it is for these chains to list calories on menus.” Today’s vote comes as something of an embarrassment for the New York State Restaurant Association, whose bungled legal strategy set the stage for a broader regulation that now includes chains that presently make no nutrition information available to their customers, such as such as TGI Friday’s and Outback Steakhouse. Several chains, including Chipotle, Quiznos, Wendy’s, and White Castle had actually pulled nutrition information from websites or posters in an attempt to avoid complying with the city’s previous regulation. But now they will have to comply since they each have more than 15 units nationally. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html" target="Subway">Subway</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/boards6.html" target="Auntie Anne’s">Auntie Anne’s</a> have been using menus with calories since last summer when New York City’s first menu labeling regulations were to take effect. Philadelphia, San Francisco, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200708022.html" target="Maryland’s Montgomery County">Maryland’s Montgomery County</a>, New York’s Nassau and Westchester Counties, and Oregon’s Multnomah County, which includes Portland, are working on menu labeling proposals this year. 2008-01-22 Labels on Alcoholic Drinks Should Include Calories, Ingredients & Alcohol Content, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200801221.html Not Protein, Fat and Carbs as Bush Administration ProposesWASHINGTON—Consumers would benefit from information about calories, serving size, ingredients, and alcohol content on labels for beer, wine, and hard liquor, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. But a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/summaryofproposedrule.pdf" target="rule proposed">rule proposed</a> by federal alcohol regulators at the Treasury Department would let manufacturers omit alcohol content from the proposed information panel, and instead include line items for fat and protein, nutrients not in the vast majority of alcoholic drinks. In <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/alclabcomments.pdf" target="comments ">comments </a>filed with the Treasury Department’s Tax and Trade Bureau today, CSPI urged the agency to go back to the drawing board and conduct real-world consumer research about how a new uniform alcohol label would help consumers measure and moderate their drinking. “These labels should benefit consumers, not industry,” said CSPI alcohol policies director George A. Hacker. “Consumers need information about calories, to help watch their weight; alcohol content, to help measure their drinking; and ingredients, to help comparison shop on the basis of quality and allergens.” In 2003, CSPI, the National Consumer League, and others <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/031216IngLabelingPetition.pdf" target="called on TTB">called on TTB</a> to develop an easy-to-read, standardized Alcohol Facts label, similar to the popular Nutrition Facts labels on packaged foods. In 2007, TTB responded by <a href="http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/E7-14774.pdf" target="proposing a “Serving Facts” label">proposing a “Serving Facts” label</a> which would include calories, fat, carbs, and protein, but which would let manufacturers disclose alcohol content elsewhere, and presumably in much smaller print, on the label. The TTB proposal also would not require disclosure of ingredients, nor would it require a statement communicating the government’s advice on moderate drinking. In fact, one of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ttbproposedlabel.pdf" target="TTB’s proposed Serving Facts label">TTB’s proposed Serving Facts label</a> is eerily similar to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/diageo.pdf" target="2005 Diageo advertisement">2005 Diageo advertisement</a> in USA Today for Seagram’s 7 whiskey, neatly illustrating the industry’s influence over the bureau, says CSPI. The TTB proposal also suggests that the agency is trying to simultaneously accommodate brewers on the one hand, who would prefer not to disclose alcohol content on labels at all, and distillers on the other, who would look forward to portraying liquor as Diageo did in the Seagram’s ad—as a virtual diet drink with zero carbs, zero fat, zero protein, and, if alcohol is only expressed in terms of fluid ounces per serving, even that looks low (0.6 fl oz). “That,” says Hacker, “makes zero sense. It’s clear that the Treasury Department conducted absolutely no real-world consumer research to justify its proposal.” Another objective of the liquor industry is to promote the idea that the alcohol content of a drink of hard liquor is equivalent to that of a glass of wine or a can of beer—an idea that the industry hopes will make it more likely that liquor eventually gets to play by beer’s rules when it comes to issues like taxation, distribution, and advertising. “While it’s good news that the Bush Administration has begun a rule-making on alcohol labeling, it’s a shame that it’s proposed a confusing scheme that advances the public relations objectives of the industry more than it does the public’s health or the convenience of consumers,” said Hacker. “And that mostly boils down to rank politics, pure and simple.” The comment period closes on January 27. For more information on CSPI's efforts to improve alcohol labeling, visit <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/iss_ingred_label.htm" target="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/iss_ingred_label.htm">http://www.cspinet.org/booze/iss_ingred_label.htm</a>. 2008-01-22 Polluters Drilling for Respect on Campus, Says Report http://cspinet.org/new/200801211.html CSPI Says Universities Endanger Academic FreedomWASHINGTON—American universities may be jeopardizing their academic integrity by giving oil, gas, and other polluting industries unprecedented influence over the research those companies fund on campus, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bigoilu.pdf" target="report">report</a> released today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. CSPI surveyed nine major universities that recently inaugurated industry-funded research programs on biofuels or other aspects of global warming. In return for accepting grants from industry, the universities are variously letting corporate representatives sit on governing boards (six out of nine universities), giving companies first rights to intellectual property (five), or letting companies review and possibly delay publication of studies (five). In some cases, such as Georgia Tech and the University of California-Davis, the universities give corporations a direct role in deciding which specific research projects are funded. And while industry enjoys the green patina that sponsoring university research into global warming confers, companies actually spend very little on research and development, particularly that relate to clean alternative energy technologies. “It’s a cheap subterfuge for carbon-emitting companies,” said Merrill Goozner, director of the CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/" target="Integrity in Science Project">Integrity in Science Project</a>. “They get the prestige of associating themselves with major respected universities, yet can control the direction of research and get first rights to intellectual property while delaying any finding that doesn’t help the bottom line. Meanwhile, the p.r. blitz surrounding these programs masks the fact that the carbon-emitting industries actually are spending much less on research and development than they did 10 or 15 years ago.” Among the grants highlighted in CSPI’s report, Big Oil U.: • University of California at Berkeley, the University of Illinois, and Lawrence Berkeley Laboratories: To manage British Petroleum’s grant of $500 million over 10 years to these institutions, Berkeley’s <a href="http://www.energybiosciencesinstitute.org/" target=" Energy Biosciences Institute">Energy Biosciences Institute</a> set up a 10-member panel, which includes two scientists from BP, to review all grant proposals. That group’s final list of potential grantees is then submitted to an 8-member governance board made up of four BP officials and four university officials, effectively giving either BP or the university veto power over the direction of the program. • Stanford University’s 10-year, $225 million <a href="http://gcep.stanford.edu/" target="Global Climate and Energy Project">Global Climate and Energy Project</a>, funded by ExxonMobil, Toyota, General Electric, and oil services giant Schlumberger, gives an exclusive, five-year right to a royalty-free license to the companies that fund any research that leads to a university-patented invention. Researchers at 20 universities outside Stanford have applied for grants from the program, thus extending this perk far beyond Stanford’s walls. • The Georgia Institute of Technology’s 5-year, $12 million grant from Chevron Corp. for biofuels research eschews open competition for grants and gives the company officials the final review for every project funded by the program. “It’s their money,” said Roger Webb, a retired professor of electrical engineering who runs the program at Georgia Tech. • University of California at Davis: Chevron’s 5-year, $25 million grant to U.C. Davis, also for biofuels research, gives the company an unusually long period of three to four months to review research results to remove confidential business information and to identify potential intellectual property worthy of filing for patents. According to CSPI, the industry-academic partnerships highlighted in Big Oil U. represent a strategic shift for the industry. Instead of discrediting the science behind global warming, companies increasingly want to be seen as part of the solution. Between 1998 and 2005, Exxon gave more than $19 million to groups that promoted the idea that global warming was a hoax. Yet beginning in 2006, ExxonMobil ads proudly touted the company’s funding of the Stanford program: “Today an energy company and a leading university share a common goal. The common good.” Another ExxonMobil ad bore the Stanford University seal. But David Ritson, emeritus professor of physics at Stanford, calls the program a fig leaf: “It does play into the hands of the Bush administration’s view that if we just leave it up to industry and the private sector, everything will be fine.” At some programs, corporate sponsors may be able to influence the direction of research by evaluating proposals before school officials decide which projects receive funding. Corporate sponsors have also been given exclusive rights to commercialize any inventions that result from the program’s research, which has the appearance of transforming the university from a bastion of independent scholarship into a contract research organization for industry. ExxonMobil and other corporate sponsors are given the right to delay publication of research while they finalize patent applications for such inventions. CSPI also examined corporate sponsored energy programs at Princeton, MIT, Rice, Caltech, and Carnegie Mellon. Princeton, whose <a href="http://www.princeton.edu/~cmi/" target="Carbon Mitigation Initiative">Carbon Mitigation Initiative</a> is supported by BP and Ford, has strong no-strings-attached funding policies to ensure the academic freedom of its researchers, according to CSPI. MIT has strong policies in place, but, coincidence or not, the latest reports from its <a href="http://web.mit.edu/globalchange/www/" target="Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change">Joint Program on the Science and Policy of Global Change</a> have supported coal and nuclear power. CSPI recommends that universities accepting corporate funding adopt policies to protect their autonomy and preserve their researchers’ autonomy. Those recommendations include: • Prohibiting representatives of corporate donors from sitting on research programs’ governing boards; • Prohibiting industry donors from controlling the content and direction of research programs; • Eliminating “first rights” intellectual property clauses from donor agreements; and • Ensuring that company representatives cannot make substantive editorial changes in manuscripts or delay their publication. 2008-01-21 Consumer Groups in 20 Countries Urge Coke, Pepsi to Limit Soft Drink Marketing to Children http://cspinet.org/new/200801031.html Cola Promotion in Elementary School Physical Activity Program CitedWASHINGTON—Consumer organizations in 20 countries today urged the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cokeletter.pdf" target="Coca-Cola">Coca-Cola</a> Company and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pepsiletter.pdf" target="PepsiCo">PepsiCo</a> to limit soft drink marketing and help stem the global tide of childhood obesity. The letters are the latest salvo in the <a href="http://www.dumpsoda.org" target="Global Dump Soft Drinks">Global Dump Soft Drinks</a> Campaign launched last fall. The international effort, spearheaded by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), is being supported by the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations, Corporate Accountability International, the International Baby Food Action Network, and other world-wide consumer networks. Representatives from both Coca-Cola and Pepsi have expressed an interest in meeting with CSPI to discuss the campaign’s goals. Consumer groups around the world have recently launched national campaigns. In New Delhi, the Indian Federation of Consumer Organizations announced a campaign on December 24 (National Consumers Day in India); in Malaysia, the Consumers Association of Penang announced a campaign at a press conference on December 14; and in Stockholm, the Swedish Consumers Coalition commenced a campaign on December 10. National campaigns have also been kicked off in Mexico, Australia, Uganda, and Canada. “Mexico finds itself in second place in the world, after the United States, in terms of overweight and obesity,” said Alejandro Calvillo, director of the Mexican advocacy organization El Poder del Consumidor, or Consumer Power. “It is not surprising that Mexico also finds itself in second place, after the United States, in the consumption of soft drinks.” The group, at a press conference in Mexico City on December 10, exposed an <a href="http://www.dumpsoda.com/Mexico%20Coke%20Childrens%20promotion.pdf" target="elementary school nutrition campaign">elementary school nutrition campaign</a> sponsored by Coke that portrays Coca-Cola as one of several beverages that can be used for hydration after physical activity. The campaign’s organizers are urging consumers around the world to alert them to similarly misleading marketing efforts by Coca-Cola or PepsiCo in other countries. “Obesity rates in Japan are relatively low but Coca-Cola is promoting sugary teas and other pre-sweetened beverages that threaten traditional dietary patterns,” said Natsuko Kumasawa, director of the Global Dump Soft Drinks campaign for Japan and East Asia. “We want to stop this trend before more serious problems occur.” The consumer groups are urging the companies to consistently limit marketing in each of the countries in which they do business. Last year in the U.S., Coke and Pepsi actually supported legislation that would have removed non-diet soft drinks from schools. Coca-Cola has agreed to front-label disclosure of calorie content in Australia. But advances like those are often confined to just one country, in response to national political pressures. “We want Coca-Cola and Pepsi to adhere to best practices on a world-wide basis. These are global companies and their marketing policies should be consistent around the globe,” said Bruce Silverglade, CSPI director of legal affairs. The consumer organizations’ letters called on Coca-Cola and PepsiCo to cease all marketing of sugar-laden or caffeinated beverages to children under 16; stop selling sweetened beverages, including sports drinks and non-carbonated fruit-flavored beverages and teas in all public and private elementary, middle, and high schools; prominently display the calorie content per serving on the front labels of containers; include rotating consumer alert messages on the labels of sugary beverages such as “High sugar—drink only occasionally”; and limit sponsorships promoting physical activity and health to blind trusts overseen by government agencies. The letters also called on the companies not to oppose small taxes on soft drinks, the revenues from which could be used for physical activity and nutrition programs. Soft drinks are already taxed in some jurisdictions in the United States and Canada. 2008-01-03 Louisville, KY Passes Trans Fat Measure http://cspinet.org/new/200712211.html Home of Yum! Brands to go Trans-Fat-Free?Yesterday the Louisville Metro Council passed a resolution directing its public health department to conduct an education campaign about the dangers of consuming products that contain trans fats, and to consider regulations on the use of trans fat in restaurants. The health department's director told the <a href="http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071220/NEWS01/712200424/1008">Louisville Courier-Journal</a> that he believes eliminating trans fat is a logical step. According to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Council's move is yet another strong signal to the food industry that artificial trans fat—or the trans fat that comes from partially hydrogenated oil—is on its way out. Louisville is home to Yum! Brands, parent company of KFC, Taco Bell, Pizza Hut, Long John Silver's, and A&W. KFC largely stopped using artificial trans fat for frying (after a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html">CSPI lawsuit</a>), and Taco Bell also sharply reduced its use of the artery-clogging oil. Long John Silver's and A&W on the other hand, still deep fry in partially hydrogenated oil. Two pieces of battered fish and a large order of French fries at Long John Silver's has 14 grams of trans fat—more than one should consume in seven days. "Yum Brands knows how to get rid of artificial trans fat and it knows that it should," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "The company has no excuse for using this discredited artificial ingredient at two of its chains. I hope they hear the Louisville Metro Council’s message loud and clear." Louisville Metro Councilman Dan Johnson has spearheaded the Council’s trans fat efforts and the measure to give the health department the authority to regulate. "We have taken the politics out of the discussion and put the public health and safety in the forefront," Johnson said. Earlier this week officials in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200712202.html">Westchester County, NY</a>, voted to phase out the use of artificial trans fat, joining New York City; Nassau County, NY; King County, Wash., which includes Seattle and its suburbs; Montgomery County, Md.; Philadelphia; and several other jurisdictions. 2007-12-21 Congress Tells FDA to Tighten Standards for Health Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200712203.html WASHINGTON—The just-passed omnibus spending bill urges the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) not to permit so-called “qualified health claims” for foods until a Government Accountability Office report on the controversial program is completed. The step, first approved by the House of Representatives last August, has prompted the FDA to <a href="http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/07n-0464-n000001.pdf" target="announce today">announce today</a> that it is commencing a scientific review of several health claims previously permitted by the agency. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest welcomed the move. Qualified health claims are often based on tenuous scientific evidence and are informally reviewed, but not officially approved by the FDA. They have triggered numerous misleading labels and advertisements ranging from claims about green tea and cancer to statements that adding almonds to desserts can reduce the risk of heart disease. The FDA, since 1993, mandated that health claims be based on “significant scientific agreement” and required companies to obtain formal approval. However, under pressure from the Bush Administration and the food industry, the FDA reversed course in 2003 and began allowing food companies to make claims based on much weaker evidence. The report for the 2008 appropriations bill criticized the FDA for devoting “literally thousands of hours of staff work to this undertaking at a time when the agency’s ability to carry out its public health responsibilities are severely stretched.” “We look forward to working with the FDA for a moratorium on new qualified health claims and an orderly shut down of the program after the GAO investigation is complete,” said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. “The FDA’s own consumer research shows that qualified health claims mislead consumers,” said CSPI senior attorney Ilene Ringel Heller. “It’s time that the FDA terminate what is no more than a food industry marketing gimmick and restore the integrity of the food label.” The measure was championed by Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA), chairman of the House Government Reform Committee. A coalition of medical, health, and consumer groups including the American, Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, AARP, the American Dietetic Association, the Association of American Medical Colleges, the American Public Health Association, the Society for Nutrition Education, the American College of Preventive Medicine, Consumers Union, and the Alliance for Retired Americans urged Congress to take action. 2007-12-20 Artificial Trans Fat to Leave Westchester County, NY http://cspinet.org/new/200712202.html Health Board Unanimously Makes Phase-out Mandatory After Voluntary Effort StallsThe Westchester County, NY, Board of Health voted unanimously today to require restaurants to phase out their use of artificial trans fats, or partially hydrogenated oils, for deep-frying. The county joins New York City; Nassau County, NY; Philadelphia; King County (Seattle), Wash.; Montgomery County, Md.; and Brookline, Mass., in passing measures to get rid of what health experts say is a dangerous and unnecessary substance in the food supply. The Westchester move follows months of efforts by county officials to encourage restaurants to switch to natural, healthier oils voluntarily. However, unlike those other jurisdictions, Westchester didn’t address the trans fat in cookies, cakes, pie crusts, and other non-fried foods—however the easiest changes and the biggest benefits come from changing the frying oil. “There is really no excuse to deep-fry foods in chemically altered artificial trans fats when heart-healthy frying oils are plentiful and the switch is so easy to make,” said Julie Greenstein, CSPI’s deputy director of health policy. “Westchester County deserves a lot of credit for trying to get restaurants to switch voluntarily, but dinosaurs like Burger King, as well as many local independent restaurants, are stuck in the past. As long as the federal government fails to act, New York and other states should act on their own to get rid of artificial trans fat.” Though small amounts of trans fats do occur naturally in some foods, most trans fat in the American diet comes from industrially produced partially hydrogenated oils. McDonald’s, KFC, Wendy’s, and other chains have already abandoned them for deep-frying, or are at least finalizing their plans to switch to healthier oils. CSPI asked the Food and Drug Administration to phase out artificial trans fats in 2004 but the agency has taken no action. 2007-12-20 Produce and Poultry Top Causes of "Illnesses Linked to Outbreaks" http://cspinet.org/new/200712201.html Beef and Dairy Outbreaks Show Slight Rise in Latest Outbreak Alert! ReportWASHINGTON—While produce outbreaks grabbed the headlines in 2006 with E. coli 0157:H7 in spinach and Salmonella in tomatoes, in 2007, recalls due to E. coli 0157:H7 contamination in beef have surged. Between June and November 2007, at least 30 million pounds of beef were recalled by 20 different companies. CSPI’s updated <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report_2007.html" target="Outbreak Alert!">Outbreak Alert!</a> report, which includes 2005 data from the Centers for Disease Control, puts these events into context by showing food outbreak trends over 16 years. According to CSPI’s data, also now available in an <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak/pathogen.php" target="online database">online database</a>, outbreaks declined overall in 2005, with some exceptions. Beef and dairy foods were the only two categories that saw an increase in outbreaks that year. CDC is nearly two years behind in releasing outbreak data to the public, which makes CSPI’s data the best overall source for trend data linked to specific food products. “Outbreak reporting is critical to understanding new risks in the food supply,” said Caroline Smith DeWaal, CSPI’s food safety director. “If better data came in from the states and information was reported by CDC promptly, perhaps consumers could avoid the kind of produce and beef outbreaks we’ve seen lately.” CSPI’s updated Outbreak Alert! report and online database now includes an additional 415 outbreaks and 8,970 illnesses reported in 2005. Outbreak data from the CDC is carefully reviewed by CSPI, and included in the database if it reflects a known pathogen and an identifiable food vehicle. Only 58 percent of outbreaks reported to CDC in 2005 were investigated fully enough to make it into CSPI’s database. CSPI research shows that the CDC’s reporting system for food outbreaks has gotten better in recent years, but is entirely dependent on thorough investigations at the state level. “State and local health departments must be adequately equipped to investigate outbreaks,” said Farida Bhuiya, principal researcher on Outbreak Alert! “CDC should focus efforts to improve outbreak surveillance at the state level, because it would allow the states and CDC to respond more quickly and perhaps reduce the size and public health impact of foodborne illness outbreaks.” In this year’s Outbreak Alert!, CSPI highlights several hot topics in food safety: • Disparities in funding. Outbreaks from FDA-regulated foods account for two-thirds of outbreaks in CSPI’s database from 1990-2005, but FDA’s food safety expenditures are only about a third of the federal food safety budget. • Virus-caused outbreaks. Foodborne illnesses caused by viruses have quadrupled in recent years. They accounted for just seven percent of outbreaks between 1990 and 1997, but 30 percent of outbreaks between 1998-2005. Eighty-eight percent of virus outbreaks are caused by the Norovirus, which can cause vomiting and acute diarrhea. • Produce-related outbreaks. CSPI identified the most common food/pathogen combinations in outbreaks linked to fruits and vegetables. Norovirus and Salmonella were the two most prevalent pathogens, with Norovirus most often affecting salad greens and fruits, and Salmonella showing up on sprouts, salad greens, melons and potatoes. • Unpasteurized dairy. “Raw” dairy products, even though they represent a tiny fraction of the market, were associated with 30 percent of dairy-related outbreaks, including 70 percent of milk outbreaks. CSPI is leading an effort to urge Congress to modernize food safety laws, including consideration of legislation to establish a unified, independent food-safety agency with increased authority to recall foods and penalize violating companies. CSPI is partnering with the Grocery Manufacturers of America and other consumer and industry groups in the <a href="http://www.fdacoalition.org/" target="Alliance for a Stronger FDA ">Alliance for a Stronger FDA </a>(formerly the Coalition for a Stronger FDA), which is lobbying for increased funding for the agency. “U.S. food safety laws are antiquated and were never designed to deal with modern issues such as escalating imports, bioterrorism, or tainted produce,” DeWaal said. “The recent outbreaks serve as a reminder that more funding and a modern law are needed to protect the food supply.” 2007-12-20 Sara Lee Accused of Whole Grain Whitewash http://cspinet.org/new/200712171.html CSPI Litigation Unit Serves Notice of Intent to Sue Over “Whole Grain” White BreadWASHINGTON—On several Sara Lee web sites, the company muses about how consumers are likely to mistakenly believe that many “whole grain” breads are actually more like whole wheat bread than white bread, and chides its competitors for not being “100-percent whole-grain.” Yet Sara Lee helps foster that confusion by marketing a “Soft & Smooth Made with Whole Grain White Bread” and falsely claiming that it is as nutritious as whole wheat bread. Today the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest served the company with <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/saralee.pdf" target="formal notice">formal notice</a> that it will file suit against the company if the misleading claims continue. Sara Lee claims that its Whole Grain White Bread has “the taste and texture of white bread with the goodness of whole grain,” and “whole grain goodness with all the mouthwatering pleasure of scrumptious, soft, white bread.” By claiming “an exciting innovation” in white bread, the repeated “whole grain goodness” claims are particularly misleading because some new breads are in fact, made with a <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2005-03-16-white-wheat_x.htm" target="white whole-wheat flour">white whole-wheat flour</a> that is, in fact, whole wheat. And one version of a label for the Sara Lee product at issue made the patently false statement that “Sara Lee Soft & Smooth Made with Whole Grain White [bread] = 100% Whole Wheat.” “This ‘whole grain’ bread is mostly refined white flour, the kind of flour that health authorities recommend Americans eat less of,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Sara Lee is attempting to put a whole grain halo on a bread that is not whole wheat. I call that a whole grain whitewash.” On <a href="http://www.breadrules.com/index.html" target="breadrules.com">breadrules.com</a>, a web site operated by Sara Lee, a <a href="http://www.breadrules.com/news/nr_12-29-06.html" target="press release">press release</a> for a genuinely 100 percent whole wheat Sara Lee bread regretfully ruminates that “seven out of 10 consumers mistakenly believe their wheat bread is 100% whole wheat,” and that “50 percent of traditional wheat bread consumers mistakenly believe their bread is the best nutritional choice.” Another Sara Lee site, <a href="http://www.thejoyofeating.com/home.html" target="thejoyofeating.com">thejoyofeating.com</a>, lets consumers test breads by Arnold, Nature’s Own, Pepperidge Farm, on a <a href="http://www.thejoyofeating.com/wholegraingiveaway/grain-o-meter.html" target="“Whole-Grain-o-Meter”">“Whole-Grain-o-Meter”</a> to see if the product is 100 percent whole grain or not. While the meter rates several Sara Lee breads, its Whole Grain White Bread is tellingly absent. A patronizing <a href="http://www.thejoyofeating.com/wholegraingiveaway/switcheroo.html" target="pledge form">pledge form</a> on that site gives the impression that switching to a Soft and Smooth whole grain bread is an act of nutritional virtue. But in fact, only 30 percent of the grain in Sara Lee’s Soft and Smooth Whole Grain White Bread is whole grain, and the rest is refined white flour, according to <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/08/09/health/main767800.shtml" target="news reports">news reports</a>. In fact, there is more water in this product than whole grain. “It would be more accurate to say that this Sara Lee product is brimming with the wholesome goodness of white flour and water,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “The intent is to confuse consumers, who are denied the nutrition they think they are paying for. It’s hard to see how a judge or jury would let a company get away with such an obvious fraud.” CSPI’s notification to Sara Lee says it wants the company to stop the misleading whole grain claims and to donate to charity the profits it has received from “Soft & Smooth Made with Whole Grain White Bread” that it has earned since its introduction in 2005. Sara Lee has 30 days to respond to CSPI’s settlement offer. According to Gardner, the supermarket is replete with breads, bagels, crackers, and frozen pancakes and waffles that pretend to be whole grain. CSPI’s litigation project has successfully negotiated binding legal settlements with other food companies over misleading labeling. As a result of CSPI’s negotiating, Cadbury-Schweppes will no longer call its high-fructose-corn-syrup-sweetened 7Up and Snapple products "natural," Aunt Jemima blueberry waffles are now labeled to make it clear that the blueberries are artificial, and Quaker Oats agreed to tone down exaggerated claims about the cholesterol-lowering abilities of oatmeal. CSPI withdrew a lawsuit it filed against KFC after that chain announced it would switch to trans-fat-free frying oil, and negotiated with Kellogg a historic pact that changed the way that company markets food to young children. 2007-12-17 CSPI Urges Stronger FDA and Modernized Food Safety Law http://cspinet.org/new/200712052.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalJust like we wouldn't send the cavalry to fight a modern war, we should not allow the FDA to use out-of-date tools to manage a global food supply. The latest <a href="http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/07/briefing/2007-4329b_02_01_FDA%20Report%20on%20Science%20and%20Technology.pdf" target="report">report</a> from the FDA Science Board says that FDA's food program is in critical condition. It "cannot sufficiently monitor either the tremendous volume of products manufactured domestically or the exponential growth of imported products," according to these scientific advisors to FDA. The proof of the report is in the number of food outbreaks and recalls over the last 16 months. Preventing illnesses and outbreaks takes money. Without it, millions of consumers are at increased risk of becoming ill from something they eat. Working with the <a href="http://www.fdacoalition.org/" target="Coalition for a Stronger FDA">Coalition for a Stronger FDA</a>, CSPI is urging the Bush Administration to give FDA a realistic budget request for 2009 that will address this urgent shortfall, and to support the need for a multi-year effort to at least double the FDA's budget within 5 years. FDA needs an increase for next year in the hundreds of millions of dollars. Anything less will fail to address the on-going crisis in consumer confidence, as Americans realize that the FDA is unable to address pressing food safety problems. CSPI also plans to work with Senator Durbin, Senator Kennedy, Senator Harkin and other members of Congress over the next year to develop legislation that will <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fswhitepaper.pdf">modernize</a> the food safety mandate at FDA and address structural deficiencies. We are happy to work with members of the food industry and others to develop a plan to address the systematic deficiencies at FDA, but providing immediate and adequate funding to the agency in the near term is critically important. 2007-12-05 Cancer Warning Urged for Beta-Carotene Supplements http://cspinet.org/new/200712051.html Pills Put Smokers at Even Higher Risk for Lung CancerWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/betacarotene.pdf" target="today asked">today asked</a> the Food and Drug Administration to require manufacturers of dietary supplements that contain large doses of synthetic beta-carotene to warn smokers or people exposed to asbestos of an increased risk of lung cancer if they take these supplements. "Though there is a lot of wishful thinking about antioxidants preventing cancer, the evidence connecting high-dosage beta-carotene supplements to increased rates of lung cancer in smokers is compelling," said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. "Obviously, quitting smoking is the most important thing one can do to avoid lung cancer. But smokers and former smokers alike should absolutely not take supplements containing high-potency synthetic beta-carotene. Warning labels would help drive that message home." The Food and Nutrition Board of the Institute of Medicine, a panel of the National Institutes of Health, and the United Kingdom’s Food Standards Agency have all separately determined that beta-carotene supplementation isn’t necessary for the general population and is especially risky for smokers and the asbestos-exposed. Last month, a major <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/wcrf.pdf" target="report">report</a> on diet and cancer by the World Cancer Research Foundation and the American Institute for Cancer Research found that the evidence linking beta-carotene to cancer in smokers is “convincing.” CSPI’s letter says that for regulatory purposes, beta-carotene supplements with high levels of beta-carotene should be considered “adulterated” and “misbranded,” because lacking warning labels, they pose a significant risk to smokers. CSPI says supplements with more than 5,000 IU, or 3 mg, should bear warning notices and that FDA should take enforcement action against companies that market the pills without the warnings. Nature’s Made, Nature’s Bounty, Source Naturals, Vitamin Shoppe, GNC, and others market pills with 25,000 IU, or 15 mg, of beta-carotene. Most multivitamins have 5,000 or less IU of beta-carotene but a few have more and should also bear a warning for smokers, says CSPI. 2007-12-05 Despite Official Spin, Report Shows FDA Can Easily Find Experts Without Conflicts of Interest http://cspinet.org/new/200712032.html Science Groups Urge Agency to Adopt Restrictions on Conflicted Experts<a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2007/NEW01744.html" target="Two weeks ago">Two weeks ago</a>, the Food and Drug Administration claimed a <a href=" http://www.fda.gov/oc/advisory/ERGCOIreport.pdf" target="new report">new report</a> prepared by the Eastern Research Group (ERG) showed it would be difficult to create advisory committees free from conflicts of interest and that advisers granted conflict-of-interest waivers have greater expertise than those without conflicts of interest. However, an independent analysis of the data in the study shows just the opposite, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), who, with other prominent science and consumer groups, is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/coi_fda_12.3.pdf" target="today">today</a> urging the FDA to adopt the conflict-of-interest guidelines the agency published last March. Those guidelines would ban anyone with greater than $50,000 a year in financial ties to industry from advisory committees and deny a vote to anyone with lesser conflicts. For each of the four advisory committees analyzed in the study, it would have taken a single FDA official just one week to replace all the advisers who had conflicts of interest with experts who do not have conflicts of interest, according to CSPI's analysis of the ERG data. Moreover, the FDA would be able to choose from nearly two potential unconflicted experts for every open slot. And, based on the same criteria for the expertise of potential committee members used in the study, these easily identifiable unconflicted experts would be more qualified than the ones eventually chosen, whether they had conflicts of interest or not. CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/watch/200712031.html#1" target="analysis">analysis</a> of the ERG report was first published in its Integrity in Science Watch newsletter. "The FDA's study shows what consumer groups have been arguing all along: When setting up advisory committees, the FDA is ignoring many of the nation's most highly qualified experts who do not have conflicts of interest," wrote the groups, which included CSPI, Consumers Union, Union of Concerned Scientists, Center for Medical Consumers, the National Physicians Alliance and U.S. PIRG, in a letter to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach. "While the FDA's proposed conflict-of-interest guidance doesn't go far enough, its own study shows that those barred or restricted from voting under its limited provisions could be easily replaced," said Merrill Goozner, director of CSPI's Integrity in Science Project. "Choosing well-qualified advisers without conflicts of interest instead of conflicted experts will strengthen the nation's food and drug safety system." 2007-12-03 NBC Affiliate in NYC Urged To Reconsider Liquor Ads http://cspinet.org/new/200711301.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George A. Hacker<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/30/business/media/30adco.html" target="WNBC's acceptance">WNBC's acceptance</a> of liquor commercials is bad news for parents and bad news for those working to prevent and reduce alcohol consumption among underage persons. Although the ads will air only after 11 p.m., when audiences are mostly adult, substantial numbers of young people will be exposed to those additional inducements to drink. There is reason for concern, given that <a href="http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/160/1/18#top" target="recent research">recent research</a> has documented the association of increased exposure among teenagers to alcohol advertising and an increased likelihood of heavy drinking. The addition of more advertising for alcoholic beverages can only contribute negatively to public health and safety. Alcohol use is the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States, and is associated with approximately 75,000 deaths per year. Underage drinking accounts for some 20 percent of all alcohol consumed in the United States, and in 2004, there were over 142,000 alcohol-related emergency rooms visits by underage youth. We hope WNBC reconsiders this move and that other stations and networks don't get in the business of hawking hard liquor to youngsters. 2007-11-30 Two-thirds of States Get Poor Grades on School Food Report Card http://cspinet.org/new/200711281.html Lack of Progress Indicates Need for Strong Federal Action, Says CSPI (Updated 2/7/08)WASHINGTON— Kentucky and Oregon top the nation in healthy school foods policies, but two-thirds of states have no or weak nutrition standards to limit junk-food and soda sales out of vending machines, school stores, and other venues outside of school meals, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/2007schoolreport.pdf" target="school foods report card">school foods report card</a> from the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “Over the last ten years, states have been strengthening their school nutrition policies,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at CSPI. “But overall, the changes, while positive, are fragmented, incremental, and not happening quickly enough to reach all children in a timely way.” No states received an A grade, though two states (Kentucky and Oregon) received an A-; seven states received a B+ (Mississippi, Nevada, Alabama, Arkansas, California, Washington and New Mexico); nine states earned a B or B-; five states and the District of Columbia received Cs; seven states got Ds; and 20 states got Fs. Most improved honors go to Oregon, which upgraded from an F in last year’s report card to an A-, and Washington state, which moved from an F to a B+. Since <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200606201.html" target="CSPI’s last report card in 2006">CSPI’s last report card in 2006</a>, Oregon passed a comprehensive school snack and beverage policy which limits calories, saturated and trans fat, and sugars in snacks in K-12 schools and limits the sale of most sugary beverages in schools. Both states previously had no guidelines beyond USDA’s bare-bones rules. “You would think that with all the concern about childhood obesity that getting junk food and soda out of schools would be easy. But, it took us six years of hard work to pass our school nutrition legislation,” said Mary Lou Hennrich, executive director of the Community Health Partnership: Oregon's Public Health Institute, who led Oregon’s effort to improve school foods. “We welcome national action to build on what we and other states have done and ensure that all children go to school in junk-food-free environments.” CSPI found that only 12 states have comprehensive food and beverage standards that apply to the whole campus, the whole school day, for all grade levels. Fourteen states limit portion sizes for snacks, and only 12 states limit portion sizes for beverages. Sixteen states limit the saturated-fat content of school snacks, and only eleven address trans fat. Just five states set limits on sodium in school foods. “The majority of states still rely on the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s outdated school nutrition standards,” said Wootan. “Those national standards limit only the sale of jelly beans, lollipops, and other so-called ‘foods of minimal nutritional value.’ Those standards don’t address calories, saturated and trans fat, sodium, or other key nutrition concerns for children today.” CSPI based its grades on five key considerations: • Beverage nutrition standards • Food nutrition standards • Grade levels to which policies apply • Time during the school day to which policies apply • Locations on campus to which policies apply Over the last 20 years, obesity rates have tripled in children and adolescents, and only 2 percent of children eat a healthy diet, according to key nutrition recommendations by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Despite that, about a third of elementary schools, 71 percent of middle schools, and 89 percent of high schools sell items such as sugary drinks, snack cakes, candy, and chips out of vending machines, school stores, or a la carte lines in the cafeteria, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/shpps/2006/factsheets/pdf/FS_FoodandBeverages_SHPPS2006.pdf" target="2006 School Health Policies and Programs Study">2006 School Health Policies and Programs Study</a>. Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA), chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, which has jurisdiction over school foods, and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) have <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/school_nutrition_amendment.pdf" target="legislation">legislation</a> that would require USDA to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fedfactsheet.pdf" target="update its standards">update its standards</a> for foods sold through vending machines, a la carte in the cafeteria, school stores, and elsewhere on the whole campus for the whole school day. Senators Harkin and Murkowski plan to offer their school nutrition bill as an amendment to the Farm bill. Notably, the soft drink industry and many major food manufacturers are supporting, not opposing, the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nutrition_amendment_fact_sheet.pdf" target="Harkin-Murkowski amendment">Harkin-Murkowski amendment</a>. The amendment also is supported by <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/amendsupport.pdf" target="100 organizations">100 organizations</a>, including the American Medical Association, American Public Health Association, American Dental Association, National PTA, American Association of School Administrators, and the American Federation of Teachers. The Harkin-Murkowski amendment would exclude sugary drinks from all schools at all times, but would allow low- or no-calorie drinks in high schools. So-called sports drinks such as Gatorade would be confined to athletic areas in high schools. The amendment also would set limits for calories, sodium, saturated fat and trans fat in school snacks. “After years of fighting us, the food and beverage industry are now working with us on strong national standards for school foods and beverages,” Wootan said. “We hope that Congress will listen to parents, health organizations, and the food and beverage industry and strengthen the national nutrition standards for school foods this year. Given the rising rates of childhood obesity, Congress can’t afford to wait any longer.” 2007-11-28 FDA to Hold Hearing on Regulating Salt Content in Food http://cspinet.org/new/200711271.html Move is in Response to CSPI Petition from 2005WASHINGTON—For almost three decades, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the nonprofit nutrition watchdog group, has been urging the Food and Drug Administration to do something—anything—to help Americans avoid high blood pressure, stroke, and heart disease by reducing dietary <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/" target="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/">salt</a> consumption. CSPI first petitioned the FDA in 1978 and sued FDA in federal court for its food-dragging in 1983. Then in 2005, CSPI filed a second <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/salt_lawsuit.pdf" target="lawsuit">lawsuit</a> against the FDA, accusing it of not making good on its Reagan-era promises to press food companies to voluntarily reduce salt content in foods. Later that year, CSPI filed another formal <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/fda_salt_petition.pdf" target="petition">petition</a> with the agency urging it to regulate salt. On Thursday, the FDA will, at long last, hold its first <a href="http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~lrd/fr071023.html" target="public hearing">public hearing</a> on whether and how to limit or otherwise reduce the salt content in processed foods. CSPI says the hearing may represent a long-overdue recognition by the agency that it has a role to play in reducing sodium consumption. The hearing was announced last month at a historic <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/gma_cspi_salt.pdf" target="conference">conference</a> cosponsored by seemingly unlikely partners: CSPI and the Grocery Manufacturers Association. The American Medical Association says that 150,000 lives could be saved in the U.S. annually if salt in processed foods and restaurant foods were cut in half. “Very few people dispute that Americans get way too much salt from processed and restaurant foods, and that that excess promotes hypertension, stroke, heart attacks, kidney failure, and early death,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “While the FDA has historically declined to challenge companies to lower high sodium levels, it is increasingly hard for FDA officials to ignore the calls to action made in recent years by the medical community.” Though the Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend that Americans limit themselves to 2,300 milligrams of sodium per day, half the population—African-Americans, middle-aged or elderly people, and those with preexisting hypertension—are advised to consume even less, more like 1,500 mg. Yet the average sodium intake is about twice the recommended maximum, around 4,000 mg. Very little sodium actually comes from the salt shaker or home-cooking: Most, about 77 percent according to one small study, comes from processed and restaurant foods. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/hsrestaurant.html" target="CSPI’s analyses">CSPI’s analyses</a> found that many restaurant dishes supply more than one or two days’ worth of sodium on a single plate, such as a Lumberjack Slam Breakfast from Denny’s (4,460 mg), a typical Reuben sandwich (3,270 mg), or an order of beef and cheese nachos with sour cream and guacamole (2,430 mg). Among processed foods, some frozen entrées are extremely high in sodium, such as the Swanson’s Hungry Man XXL Roasted Carved Turkey, with 5,410 mg of sodium, or Marie Callender’s Classic One Dish Chicken Teriyaki (2,200 mg). As high as those numbers are, Americans get substantial sodium from many types of food not thought to be particularly salty—bread and cheese are the two biggest individual sources, contributing 10.7 and 5.5 percent, respectively. At McDonald’s, one might think that French fries are saltier than burgers, but the reverse is actually true: A large order of fries has about 330 mg of sodium; a small burger has 520. A <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/updated_saltreport.pdf" target="CSPI survey">CSPI survey</a> conducted in 2005 shows dramatic variations in the sodium content of different brands of similar foods. For instance, Bumble Bee canned tuna has 137 percent more salt than Crown Prince Natural Solid tuna and Jamestown Hardwood bacon has 65 percent more sodium than Safeway Select’s Naturally Smoked bacon. Similarly wide ranges, as seen with everything from soups to tortilla chips to turkey breast, show that countless brands with the higher levels of sodium could easily lower the amounts substantially, according to CSPI. International comparisons of the same products also show there’s room for improvement in many U.S. foods. For instance, an order of McDonald’s Chicken McNuggets in the United States contains more than twice as much sodium as the United Kingdom version. Kellogg’s Special K has 58 percent more sodium in the United States than the United Kingdom. In the United Kingdom and Finland, where public health agencies have made salt reduction a top priority, the food industry has responded by marketing products with less salt in those nations. Jacobson will testify at the November 29 hearing, held at the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition facility in College Park, Md., as will representatives from food companies, medical groups, and other organizations. 2007-11-27 New Food Import Safety Recommendations Issued http://cspinet.org/new/200711062.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Staff Attorney Sarah KleinFor too long, this administration has resisted giving FDA mandatory recall authority, so it's good news that the <a href="http://www.importsafety.gov/report/actionplan.pdf">Interagency Working Group on Import Safety</a> wants to reverse course on that front. Already, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200710301.html">several pieces of FDA-reform legislation</a> pending before Congress would give FDA that authority. But when it comes to improving the traceability of food imports, this report is woefully short on specifics. It's hard to recall tainted food if you don't know where it came from, or where it has ended up. It's also very disappointing that the panel did not address the absurdity of the status quo, where two separate food safety agencies, under two separate cabinet secretaries, each run two separate and unequal import programs. That type of stovepiping hasn't served us well when it comes to ensuring the safety of domestic or imported food. Blandly calling for "enhanced cooperation" between FDA, USDA, and other agencies is unlikely to bring about the same kind of efficiency that a single strong food safety agency would. 2007-11-06 Hold on to Your Wallet: CSPI Flags 8 Food Frauds http://cspinet.org/new/200711061.html Dishonest Labels and Marketing Crowd Store ShelvesMade with whole grains! Real Fruit! Strengthen your body’s defenses! Food marketers are seemingly stopping at nothing to convince consumers that fairly ordinary products like waffles, green tea, and jam hold the secret to better health. But according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), these claims are often misleading, and are popping up all over the grocery store, from the chip aisle to the dairy case. Not even the baby food aisle is safe from fraudulent health claims, says the group. “These days, companies will say just about anything to give their product a ‘health halo,’” said Bonnie Liebman, CSPI’s nutrition director. “Consumers need to know how to read the labels to get the whole story—and even then it’s not always clear.” The nutrition watchdogs behind CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a> have compiled a list of eight of the most egregious rip-offs, including the following: • Kellogg says its Special K Fruit and Yogurt cereal “combines the crunch of whole grain goodness, the smooth creaminess of yogurt and the sweet taste of berries,” yet the cereal has no berries or real yogurt, and barely any whole wheat. • The package for Gerber Graduates for Toddlers Juice Treats is decorated with pictures of fruit, but the only fruit-like ingredient (listed after corn syrup and sugar) is white grape juice concentrate. • A serving of Multigrain Tostitos has more sugar than any of its “four wholesome grains.” • Sara Lee Fruits of the Forest Deep Dish Pie looks packed with flavorful apples, rhubarb, strawberries, raspberries and blackberries “simmered in their own juices.” What the front of the package doesn’t tell you is that the dessert has more partially hydrogenated oil and sugar than any of the fruits except apples. More Food Frauds are <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/foodfrauds.html">here</a>. Nutrition Action Healthletter is published 10 times per year. Introductory <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah">subscriptions</a> are $10. 2007-11-06 A 3,000-Calorie Dinner? Belly-ssimo! http://cspinet.org/new/200710311.html CSPI Inspects Olive Garden & Romano’s Macaroni GrillWASHINGTON—Nothing’s more American than “Italian” entrées like lasagna, ravioli, and spaghetti with meatballs. And Olive Garden and Romano’s Macaroni Grill, with 568 and 238 units in the United States respectively, are selling a combined $3.4 billion worth of fried calamari, chicken marsala, and other foods each year. The Center for Science in the Public Interest—the nutrition watchdogs who famously called fettuccine Alfredo a “heart attack on a plate” when they first looked at Italian food in 1994—commissioned independent lab tests (for Olive Garden) and examined company-provided data (for Macaroni Grill). <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/italian.pdf" target="Their picks and pans are published">Their picks and pans are published</a> in the November issue of the group’s Nutrition Action Healthletter. “If you wanted to enjoy the health benefits of the traditional Mediterranean diet, you’d eat mostly fruits, vegetables, beans, whole grains, and fish,” said CSPI nutrition director Bonnie F. Liebman. “But the heaping portions of meat, cheese, pasta, and cream sauces served up at Italian-style American chain restaurants are about as far from the ideal Mediterranean diet as you can get.” <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MtgOmChwAm4"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MtgOmChwAm4" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="425" height="350"></embed></object> The bottom line is that just about every plate of pasta at Olive Garden or Macaroni Grill is piled with more than 1,000 calories, according to CSPI. Only a few dishes—like grilled chicken or salmon with a side of vegetables—keep the calories down around 500. But some virtuous-sounding chicken or veal dishes at Macaroni Grill hover in the 1,200-calorie range and provide at least a day’s worth of saturated fat, sometimes two days’ worth. In most cases, you’re getting an meal that’s roughly equal to a 16-oz. trimmed T-bone steak with a sour-cream-topped baked potato and a Caesar side salad at a typical steak house. Some of CSPI’s pans (and picks) include: <c>OLIVE GARDEN</c> • Lasagna Classico. 1,060 calories and 28 grams of bad fat (saturated plus trans fat— but the trans fat at both chains is naturally occurring and minimal). It’s like eating a BK Quad Stacker from Burger King, which has four beef patties, four slices of cheese, and eight strips of bacon. • Five Cheese Ziti al Forno. 1,190 calories and 26 grams of bad fat. You might as well just order two McDonald’s Quarter Pounders with Cheese or two Pizza Hut Personal Pan Pepperoni Pizzas. • Spaghetti & Meatballs. You can expect 1,260 calories and a day’s worth of saturated fat (19 grams). That’s equal to the calories in three McDonald’s Quarter Pounders. If that seems like a lot to swallow, it’s half what you’d get in Macaroni Grill’s version. • Olive Garden Picks: CSPI’s lab tests found 790 calories in the Linguine alla Marinara—more than the 550 calories the chain reports. Capellini Pomodoro, pasta with tomatoes, garlic, basil, and olive oil, also had more calories that the company stated (990 as opposed to 640). But both dishes had only 2 grams of saturated fat. “Garden Fare” items such as Venetian Apricot Chicken (450 calories), Shrimp Primavera (690 calories), and Pork Filettino (if ordered with vegetables, not potatoes, just 340 calories) are among the best choices. <c>ROMANO’S MACARONI GRILL</c> • Fettuccine Alfredo. Macaroni Grill’s version lives up to the “heart attack on a plate” reputation with 1,130 calories and 53 grams of saturated fat—more than 2½ days’ worth. (Olive Garden’s version had a few more calories but “only” 1½ days’ worth of bad fat.) People who wouldn’t dream of eating a pound of prime rib might not guess that Fettuccini Alfredo is roughly equivalent. • Spaghetti & Meatballs with meat sauce. The following nutrition numbers are not typos: Romano’s rendition of this classic dish provides more than an entire day’s calories (2,430) and nearly three days’ worth of saturated fat—an astonishing 57 grams. If you like meat, you could eat two Macaroni Grill Tuscan Rib-Eye steak dinners and inflict less damage. Or you could eat six Quarter Pounders for the same effect on your waistline. • New York Cheesecake or Tiramisu. Order a 1,000-calorie slice of cheesecake or tiramisu and you might as well finish off your meal with an untrimmed 16-ounce T-bone steak with five pats of butter. The cheesecake and tiramisu each have about 2 days’ worth of saturated fat; the deep-fried “Dessert Ravioli” has 1,630 calories and 1½ days’ bad fat. • Romano’s Macaroni Grill Picks: Two grilled entrées—Pollo Magro “Skinny Chicken” and Simple Salmon—come with broccoli and asparagus and have a modest 330 and 590 calories, respectively. Each is deemed “Sensible Fare” on the menu. “Keep in mind that these numbers don’t include any of Macaroni Grill’s peasant bread or Olive Garden’s unlimited breadsticks and salad,” said Liebman. “Nor do they include 1,000-calorie appetizers like fried calamari. If you want pasta, go with tomato sauce instead of cream sauces or anything stuffed, and take home at least half for tomorrow. If it’s not under a layer of cheese, grilled chicken or fish with a side of veggies is a good choice.” Consider a hypothetical couple who dines at Romano’s Macaroni Grill: They share the calamari and the complimentary peasant bread. He orders the Penne Rustica; she the Chicken and Shrimp Scaloppine. They split the tiramisu. The damage? They’ve each had more than three days’ worth of saturated fat and sodium. And they’ve each had on the order of 2,800 calories—about a day-and-a-half’s worth. And those aren’t even the unhealthiest choices on the menu. “You’d have to walk briskly for 11 hours or jog an entire marathon to burn off 2,800 calories,” said Liebman. “But frankly, the only activity most people can devote that kind of time to is sitting in front of a television or computer. No wonder so many Americans are now the shape of a meatball.” 2007-10-31 Congress Needs to Build a Modern Food Safety System, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200710301.html CSPI Urges Congress to Enact Comprehensive Farm-to-Table ReformWASHINGTON—Import legislation under consideration by the House Energy and Commerce Committee (H.R. 3610, the Food and Drug Import Safety Act) would be valuable, but would still only partially solve the food safety problems threatening Americans, according to a new <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fswhitepaper.pdf" target="white paper">white paper</a> published today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. In it, CSPI reviews a dozen food safety bills being considered by Congress. While the majority of bills introduced so far in Congress address import inspection and include mandatory recall authority and civil penalties, many do not include mandatory process controls and government-enforced performance standards for both domestic and imported foods. CSPI maintains that legislation should also address safety issues on American farms, provide for frequent inspection of FDA-regulated American food processors, and require greater traceability for foods that pose hazards. “In a year with an unnerving number of huge outbreaks and recalls, we urge Congress to give consumers a full loaf when it comes to food safety,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “Consumer confidence in the safety of foods has fallen dramatically and it will only be restored when Congress delivers top-to-bottom reform. We deserve a system that ensures all our food is safe to eat, whether it’s imported or domestic, animal or vegetable, or regulated by USDA or FDA. That would benefit both consumers and industry.” CSPI outlined the essential elements that are needed to modernize food safety programs: • Process controls systems, such as the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) system, should be mandatory for all food processors regulated by the FDA. HACCP is already required for meat, poultry, seafood, and juice processors. • Government agencies should establish and enforce meaningful public-health based performance standards, including limits on the incidence or levels of contamination. • Inspections of high-risk products should be frequent and intensive, and there should be a minimum inspection frequency for other foods, as currently required for drugs and medical device manufacturers. (FDA currently inspects the average food-manufacturing facility only once a decade, whereas USDA inspects every single beef or chicken carcass.) • Imported food should be produced under safety systems at least as strong as those in the U.S., and the FDA should begin certification of food safety programs and facilities in foreign countries. • Research and education mandates should be broad and well-funded enough to help solve a wide range of food safety problems. • On-farm programs should begin with written food safety plans for every farmer. • Enforcement should include mandatory recall authority, greater civil and criminal penalties, product traceback and detention, and whistleblower protection. Funding disparities between USDA and FDA should be also addressed, according to CSPI. While the FDA regulates 80 percent of the food supply, its food safety budget is half that of the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service, which regulates the remaining 20 percent of the food supply. The most comprehensive bill pending before Congress, the Safe Food Act, is sponsored by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT). It includes every element of CSPI’s platform for modernizing food law and would create a single food safety agency from the current units within FDA, USDA, and other agencies. Representative DeLauro also announced her intent to file a more modest bill that would create an independent Food Safety Administration within the Department of Health and Human Services, leaving meat, poultry, and egg inspections under USDA. Representative Frank Pallone (D-NJ) has also introduced comprehensive legislation, the Consumer Food Safety Act. As many as 5,000 Americans die each year from foodborne illness, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Another 325,000 are hospitalized, and 76 million become ill from unsafe food. These illnesses and deaths are almost entirely preventable, with appropriate safeguards from farm to the kitchen. 2007-10-30 New York State Assembly to Hold Hearing on Food Additives, Children's Behavior http://cspinet.org/new/200710293.html Some Food Dyes & Preservatives Linked to HyperactivityLegislators in New York state are exploring the links between certain artificial food additives and behavioral problems in children. Those links have been ignored by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), despite the evidence from more than a dozen studies over the past three decades that artificial flavorings and colorings used in food affect some children’s behavior. The New York Assembly’s Standing Committee on Mental Health, Mental Retardation, and Developmental Disabilities is holding a hearing on the topic Tuesday in New York City. In <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyadditives.pdf" target="testimony">testimony</a> prepared for the committee, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) executive director Michael F. Jacobson says that the Assembly should urge the food industry to phase out the use of certain dyes and preservatives, particularly in candies, soft drinks, breakfast cereals, and other foods marketed to and consumed by children. He recommended that New York bar foods containing potentially harmful additives from schools and other facilities that receive government assistance. “On the one hand, it is surprising that artificial dyes and preservatives are so widely used in children’s foods, given the longstanding concerns about their impact on behavior,” said Jacobson. “But then again, the FDA and other health authorities have shown no interest whatsoever in protecting children—and assisting parents—by mandating, or even encouraging, the use of safer ingredients.” In a recent British <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/06/AR2007090601263.html" target="study">study</a>, published in the medical journal The Lancet, groups of children displayed greater degrees of adverse behavior after consuming a drink containing common food dyes, such as Red 40 and Yellow 5, and the preservative sodium benzoate. Children given a drink without those substances displayed fewer problems. That study spurred the chair of the British Food Standards Agency to express her “astonishment that industry has not moved more quickly to remove these artificial colors from their products.” CSPI first published a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/diet.html" target="guide">guide</a> to Diet, ADHD, and Behavior in 1999. 2007-10-29 Groups Announce Global "Dump Soda" Campaign http://cspinet.org/new/200710291.html An international coalition of consumer organizations announced the formation of the Global “Dump Soda” Campaign to call attention to the marketing of sugary soft drinks and other high calorie beverages linked to the world-wide childhood obesity crisis. The campaign, aimed at transnational giants Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, is calling on government officials to require the companies to: 1. Cease all marketing of sugar-laden beverages to children under 16, including print and broadcast advertising, product placement, the Internet, mobile phones, athletic event sponsorship, signage, packaging promotions, merchandising, and other means. 2. Stop selling sweetened beverages, including sports drinks and fruit flavored beverages and teas, in all public and private elementary, middle, and high schools; acceptable beverages in schools include water, seltzer (carbonated) water, and fruit juice in container sizes of 250 ml or less. (Ideally, schools should have free, convenient drinking fountains.) 3. Limit sponsorships promoting physical activity and health to contributions to “blind” trusts overseen by government agencies which use such funds for programs that do not feature corporate logos, brands, or other proprietary information. 4. Increase the promotion of new lower-sugar products and sell existing high sugar products in smaller portions. 5. Pay a modest value added tax on soft drinks -- with governments returning the money to consumers through provision of physical activity and nutrition education programs, and through subsidies that reduce the costs of fruits and vegetables. “Multinational giants like Coca-Cola and PepsiCo are flooding the world with beverages that are nothing more than liquid candy,” said Bruce Silverglade, legal director of the US-based Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “As a result, consumers, including children, in all corners of the globe are increasingly developing obesity, type 2 diabetes, and other health problems.” Some lower income countries now suffer a double burden of childhood obesity and malnutrition, according to the World Health Organization. “We hope that consumers around the world can avoid the types of problems that high rates of soft drink consumption has led to in the U.S.,” Silverglade said. The Global Dump Soda Campaign is being announced at the commencement of the Consumers International Congress being held in Sydney, Australia October 29-31. Consumer organizations from more than 50 countries will be attending. The campaign is being spearheaded by CSPI and the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations www.IACFO.org, with the support of Corporate Accountability International, Safe Food International, the International Baby Food Action Network, and other national and international consumer organizations. For more information about the Global Dump Soda Campaign, visit <a href="http://www.dumpsoda.org" target="www.dumpsoda.org"> www.dumpsoda.org</a. 2007-10-29 New York City Health Dept. Proposes That Restaurant Chains with 15+ Outlets List Calories http://cspinet.org/new/200710241.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThanks to the perseverance of the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Commissioner Frieden, and Mayor Bloomberg, diners at chain restaurants with 15 or more outlets nationally may soon see listings of calories on menus and menu boards. The new <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/public/notice-intention-hc-art81-50-1007.pdf" target="proposed regulations">proposed regulations</a> are carefully designed to avoid any potential conflicts with federal food labeling law, and will be compliant with the decision of Judge Holwell in the restaurant industry’s ill-intentioned lawsuit against the city. It’s time for the chain restaurant industry to get over its fear of <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="menu labeling">menu labeling</a>. It’s pathetic to watch these companies go to such thuggish lengths to keep their customers in the dark. Instead of hiring expensive lobbyists and filing court-clogging lawsuits, the industry should take advantage of calorie labeling as a business opportunity and try to compete with each other to offer healthier dishes. 2007-10-24 Consumer and Industry Groups Cosponsor Conference on Salt Reduction http://cspinet.org/new/200710231.html WASHINGTON—Health experts agree that Americans are consuming too much salt. That’s why the nation’s biggest food industry group, <a href="http://www.gmabrands.com/" target="Grocery Manufacturers Association">Grocery Manufacturers Association</a> (GMA), and the nation’s most prominent nutrition advocacy group, the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org" target="Center for Science in the Public Interest">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> (CSPI), brought together food industry leaders, health professionals, and government officials at a conference aimed at helping consumers meet the 2005 Dietary Guidelines goal of 2,300 mg of sodium per day. The two-day conference, Getting to 2,300: Balancing Health with Consumer Preferences and Industry Challenges, held in Washington, D.C., wraps up today. Topics of discussion included industry experience in cutting sodium levels, consumers’ taste expectations, salt substitutes, and research and education needs. Numerous major food companies, food associations, salt and ingredient manufacturers, health organizations, and U.S. government representatives—including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—participated in the conference. “I am proud of the efforts of food manufacturers to reformulate their products and reduce the amount of salt,” said Cal Dooley, GMA President and CEO. “The industry has made great progress and we are committed to continuing our efforts to provide consumers with great tasting and lower sodium products that help them reach dietary goals and live healthy lives.” “Reducing the amount of salt in processed foods and restaurant foods is perhaps the single most important thing we could do to reduce blood pressure and the incidence of heart attacks and strokes in this country and around the world,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “It’s something that the food industry and government regulators are taking increasingly seriously.” Next month, the FDA will hold a public hearing on salt reduction. The Nov. 29 hearing is in response to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html" target="2005 petition by CSPI">2005 petition by CSPI</a> that asked the FDA to use its regulatory authority to lower sodium levels in the food supply. 2007-10-23 Menu Labeling Veto a "Giant, Greasy Stain" on Schwarzenegger Health Record http://cspinet.org/new/200710151.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThis <a href="http://gov.ca.gov/pdf/press/SB%20120%20veto%20message.pdf">veto</a> is a giant, greasy stain on the Governor’s health record. By giving into lobbying by McDonald’s, Burger King, and other big restaurant chains, Governor Schwarzenegger has turned his back on the <a href="http://www.publichealthadvocacy.org/menulabelingpoll.html">vast majority</a> of Californians who want to know what they’re eating at chain restaurants. The menu labeling bill could have helped Californians avoid obesity, heart disease, and many other deadly diet-related diseases, all of which account for more and more of the state’s health dollars. The Governor claims that restaurants are already providing nutrition information. But the truth is that half of chains don’t provide a single shred of nutrition information to their customers. The restaurants that do generally provide it on inconvenient websites, hard-to-find brochures, or tray liners that people don’t see until after they order. You don’t see Burger King putting their food prices only on a website or poster near the restrooms. Nutrition information needs to be where other information about what to order is: on the menu or menu board. Putting nutrition information on chain restaurant menus isn’t the sole answer to curbing the obesity epidemic. But given the link between eating out and obesity and the huge portions at restaurants, it’s needed to let Americans exercise personal responsibility for themselves and to raise healthy families. The Governor is single handedly keeping Californians in the dark when it comes to restaurant nutrition. Without calories on menu boards, you might as well throw darts. People may order the tuna sandwich (720 calories) thinking it’s a better choice than the roast beef sandwich (560 calories) at a typical deli, or parents may not realize that the chicken tenders have 200 more calories than the ribs on the kids’ menu at Chili’s. 2007-10-15 Philadelphia Council Urged Not to Open Trans Fat Loophole http://cspinet.org/new/200710051.html Even Butter is Far Better than Using Artificial Trans Fat in Baked Goods, Says CSPIThe Philadelphia City Council did exactly the right thing in February when it unanimously <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702081.html" target="voted to phase out">voted to phase out</a> the use of artificial trans fat in restaurants, and health advocates say it should not open a new loophole for baked goods. On Tuesday the council will hold a hearing on a proposal advanced by operators of several bakeries, which would give them a special exemption to continue to use partially hydrogenated oil in cakes, pastries, and other foods. But according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, this is one squeaky wheel that shouldn’t get the (ahem) grease. “Philadelphia restaurants that deep-fry, from big fast-food chains to small cheesesteak shops, have already gotten the artificial partially hydrogenated oils out of their deep-fryers,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, who on Wednesday will testify at a committee hearing on the amendment. “Bakeries and other restaurants have been given an extra year to replace artificial trans fat in baked goods, even though healthier oils, shortenings with zero grams of trans fat, and good old-fashioned butter are perfectly abundant.” The artificial trans fat that the City Council voted to phase out comes only from partially hydrogenated oil. Partially hydrogenated oil was first produced about 100 years ago when chemists were looking for a cheap substance for making candles. Because it resembled lard in appearance but cheaper than lard or butter, it caught on for baking. Though once believed to be healthier than butter, researchers now know that the artificial trans fat in partially hydrogenated oil promotes heart disease by raising bad cholesterol and lowering good cholesterol. One Philadelphia bakery has complained that it was impossible to make its pound cake without partially hydrogenated shortening. But most recpies for pound cake don’t even call for that artificial ingredient, according to CSPI. Traditionally, pound cake is made with flour, butter, sugar, and eggs—ingredients that may not be health foods, but that at least are rooted in tradition. In fact, CSPI found that of 30 recipes for pound cake on the popular Epicurious.com web site, none call for artificial trans fat. “In our bakery, we wouldn't dream of using artificial trans fats,” said Rebecca Michaels, owner and pastry chef at the Flying Monkey Patisserie at the Reading Terminal Market in Philadelphia. “Traditional baking was designed to use ingredients that come from nature, which quite simply yield a tastier and healthier product.” “The idea that partially hydrogenated oil is some kind of artisanal ingredient, passed down through the ages in secret family recipes, is ludicrous,” said Jacobson. “It’s an artificial ingredient that was used to replace natural ingredients because it was cheap. And as it turns out, it’s more harmful than any fats that occur in nature. If we’re going to be nostalgic about the recipes of yesteryear, we should be nostalgic for the foods that came from farms, not factories.” “We have a strong commitment to using all natural ingredients,” said Amy Beth Edelman, owner of the Night Kitchen Bakery, which has outlets in Philadelphia and Doylestown, PA. “The high quality of our products has made our reputation as one of the best bakeries in the city. More people are beginning to understand that a higher out of pocket cost can mean a lower cost to their health and well-being.” Small independent bakeries aren’t the only restaurants shunning artificial trans fats in favor of natural fats, according to CSPI. Starbucks went trans-fat-free earlier this year, and in August Dunkin’ Donuts eliminated most of the artificial trans fat in its products. McDonald’s is using trans-fat-free oil for deep-frying in Philadelphia, New York City, and in many other markets and anticipates rolling it out nationwide later this year. 2007-10-05 Omega-3 Madness: Fish Oil or Snake Oil? http://cspinet.org/new/200710011.html Stick with fish or fish oil for best heart-health benefits, says Nutrition ActionWASHINGTON—Omega-3 claims are popping up in everything from cereal to mayonnaise, but are those foods the panacea that marketers would have you believe? According to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/omegas.pdf" target="cover story">cover story</a> in the October issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="Nutrition Action Healthletter">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, certain omega-3s may reduce the risk of heart disease and might even help protect against cancer, Alzheimer’s, and vision problems. But many foods making claims have little or none of those omega-3s, and labels don’t have to reveal how much or which omega-3 fat the foods contain. DHA and EPA, the omega-3s found in salmon, trout, other fish, and algae, are linked to a lower risk of heart disease. Another omega-3, ALA, found in flaxseed and to a lesser extent, canola and soy, may not have the same benefits. But that doesn’t stop companies from loading products with ALA and bragging about their omega-3 content. “The good news is that omega-3s from fish oil can reduce the risk of heart attack, and the research is building on other health benefits,” said Center for Science in the Public Interest senior nutritionist David Schardt. “But get your omega-3s from fatty fish like salmon, or take fish oil or algal oil capsules. Many foods with omega-3 claims have only or mostly ALA, which may not prevent anything.” CSPI says the Food and Drug Administration should require labels with omega-3 claims to disclose the amount and type of each omega-3 in the food. Until they do, consumers should be wary of generic omega-3 claims. Here are a few examples of tricky labeling: • Breyer’s Smart! Yogurt doesn’t say that each serving has just 32 mg of DHA—as much as you’d get in three-quarters of a teaspoon of salmon. And Breyer’s vague “boost your brain” claim needs no evidence. • Silk Soymilk Plus Omega-3 DHA’s label boasts that each cup of milk has “400 mg of beneficial Omega-3,” but only the most diligent label readers will notice that the soy milk only contains 32 mg of DHA per serving—again, the amount in just a bite of salmon. The remaining omega-3s are ALA (which just about everyone gets enough of, thanks to soy and canola oil). • Kashi Go Lean Crunch! Honey Almond Flax cereal advertises 500 mg of omega-3, but doesn’t specify whether it’s ALA, DHA or EPA. Unless the label promises EPA or DHA (and lists fish, fish oil or algal oil on the ingredient label), it’s safe to assume that any omega-3 claim refers to ALA—especially when the product contains flax, soybean oil, or canola oil. • Land O Lakes Omega-3 All-Natural Eggs' label states “Contains 350 mg of omega-3 fatty acids per serving.” However, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706211.html" target="tests">tests</a> by an independent laboratory found that less than half of this omega-3 is DHA and EPA. Schardt recommends eating fatty fish like salmon twice a week to average 500 to 1,000 mg a day of DHA plus EPA. (The American Heart Association recommends 1,000 mg a day of DHA plus EPA omega-3s for people with heart disease.) A six-ounce serving of Atlantic salmon has more than 3,000 mg of DHA and EPA, over 100 times what you’d get in a serving of DHA-fortified yogurt, milk, or soy milk. “If your omega-3s are not from fish, algae, or fish oil, you’re likely paying extra for snake oil,” said Schardt. For a review of the current research on the health benefits of omega-3s and more on omega-3 fortified products, see the full Nutrition Action article "<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/omegas.pdf" target="Omega Medicine? Is fish oil good for what ails you?">Omega Medicine? Is fish oil good for what ails you?</a>” 2007-10-01 Coca-Cola's Fuze Beverage Makes False Claims of Reducing Risk of Cancer, Heart Disease, Flu, Kidney Infection, More http://cspinet.org/new/200709261.html CSPI Says Fuze Quacks Like a Duck and Urges FDA to Take AimWASHINGTON—To hear Coca-Cola tell it, the tea and fruit drinks it sells under its <a href="http://www.drinkfuze.com" target="Fuze">Fuze</a> brand will help you avoid cancer, heart disease, colds, flu, and infections of the lungs and kidneys. The Center for Science in the Public Interest says those claims are unfounded and illegal and today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fuze.pdf" target="urged">urged</a> the Food and Drug Administration to take enforcement action against the company. Labels for Fuze Vitalize blackberry grape claim that its Vitamin A “helps reinforce resistance to colds, influenza & infections of the kidneys, bladder and lungs.” Fuze Oolong Tea claims that “regular consumption of Polyphenols are associated with reduced risk of developing cardiovascular disease and certain cancers.” The vitamin B3 in the four flavors of Fuze Refresh is “known to improve circulation and reduce the cholesterol level in the blood,” according to the Fuze web site. None of those claims have been approved by the FDA. “Fuze drinks won’t do anything for your kidneys, your lungs, or your heart; nor will they lower your cholesterol or prevent you from catching a cold,” says CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “Fuze quacks like a duck, and the Food and Drug Administration should be shooting these wacky claims out of the sky.” Some Fuze drinks are sweetened with crystalline fructose, which researchers believe is a significant contributor to obesity. (Incredibly, labels for Fuze Oolong Tea boast “no high fructose corn syrup,” yet it has crystalline fructose, which is likely worse. That same label claims it has as much “antioxidant capacity as 3 servings of vegetables.”) Some Fuze drinks actually have up to 25 grams of sugars per 8-ounces, making those Fuzes about as caloric as typical sodas. Some have the artificial sweeteners sucralose and/or acesulfame potassium. Some have skim milk; some have 1 percent to 5 percent fruit juice or purees; all have some vitamins or minerals in various amounts; some have herbs such as ginseng or guarana. Schardt and CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner urged the FDA to take Fuze off the market until the company complies with federal food labeling law. Coca-Cola purchased Fuze earlier this year as part of its campaign to sell drinks with a more healthful aura. Coca-Cola is no stranger when it comes to unsubstantiated health claims on drinks. CSPI is suing Coca-Cola over claims that its new green-tea flavored soda <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="Enviga ">Enviga </a>“burns calories,” “speeds metabolism,” and promotes weight loss. CSPI publishes <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="Nutrition Action Healthletter">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, which in its November issue examines immunity-related claims on Fuze and other similarly situated products. 2007-09-26 FDA Reform Bill Passes House & Senate http://cspinet.org/new/200709211.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Director Merrill GooznerThe <a href="http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/nation/bal-te.fda21sep21,0,2275298.story" target="FDA reform bill">FDA reform bill</a> that passed the House on Wednesday and the Senate last night represents a step forward in protecting scientific integrity at the Food and Drug Administration. However, given the magnitude of the problems in drug and food safety that have come to light in recent years, the bill falls far short of spurring the dramatic changes that the public needs and deserves. The bill caps— at the current level— the number of waivers that the agency can grant to scientists and physicians who have conflicts of interest and who are appointed to advisory panels. The bill gradually reduces that number over the next five years. That mild limitation doesn’t go far enough. The FDA certainly could find scientists without ties to industry if it truly wanted to, and we will continue to push for ending a practice that gives drug and food companies undue and unseemly influence over the regulatory process at the FDA. We congratulate the Congress for including other provisions in the bill that will enhance the integrity of science at the agency. One measure is a requirement that all clinical trials and their results get posted in a publicly available web-based database managed by the National Institutes of Health. And we are glad that scientists at the FDA will gain greater protections to speak out and publish. 2007-09-21 Food Safety Act Calls For Inspections on Produce Farms http://cspinet.org/new/200709201.html Bill Comes One Year After Massive Spinach RecallWASHINGTON—<a href="http://agriculture.senate.gov/news2/record.cfm?id=283764" target="Legislation introduced today">Legislation introduced today</a> by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman <a href="http://demradio.senate.gov/actualities/harkin/harkin070920.mp3" target="Tom Harkin">Tom Harkin</a> (D-IA) would establish a national program to assure the safety of fresh produce. The introduction of the Fresh Produce Safety Act comes one year after the biggest recall of fresh produce in American history, when spinach contaminated with E. coli O157:H7 sickened 205 people. More than 100 of those were hospitalized, and at least three people died. And just this week, Dole is recalling romaine salad mix after Canadian tests came back positive for E. coli. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest says that after a year’s worth of hearings in both the Senate and the House, it is time for Congress to act. “Americans should be consuming more fresh fruits and vegetables; instead we are scanning our refrigerators looking for bags to discard,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “These continuing outbreaks and recalls are eroding Americans’ confidence in fresh produce. It’s time for a food safety system that applies the same scrutiny to our farms as we have for other high-risk products like meat and poultry.” The bill would require the Food and Drug Administration, which regulates produce, to assess farms and processing facilities on the basis of risk, and require producers to maintain written hazard control plans. High-risk facilities would be inspected at least once a growing season—a sharp increase from the status quo, where a facility that washes and bags salad greens might only be inspected once every 5 or 10 years. The FDA would also develop standards and practices for manure application, irrigation water, and for excluding domestic animals from fields where produce is grown. According to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak/pathogen.php" target="CSPI database">CSPI database</a> of more than 5,000 outbreaks of foodborne illness, produce causes more illnesses than any other category of food. While seafood causes more outbreaks, those outbreaks tend to be much smaller than produce outbreaks. Spinach, tomatoes, berries, lettuces, melons, and many other categories of fruits and vegetables have all been linked to outbreaks of E. coli, Salmonella, or other pathogens— many of which are linked back to animal agriculture. While consumers can certainly help themselves by peeling or washing produce, in many cases, fruits or vegetables are too contaminated and the damage can’t be undone, according to CSPI. “The primary responsibility for food safety has to begin on the farm,” DeWaal said. “The voluntary, self-regulatory efforts of the produce industry have been helpful, but not sufficient. Fortunately, many companies and industry trade groups are now <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/washington/16regulate.html?_r=1&oref=slogin" target="welcoming ">welcoming </a>better government regulation in this area.” 2007-09-20 What's Making Us Sick? http://cspinet.org/new/200709174.html New Online Resource From CSPI Offers Researchers, Journalists & Consumers the Best Data on Outbreaks of Foodborne IllnessWASHINGTON—Tainted spinach. Filthy beef. Chili with beans ... and botulism. Recent outbreaks of foodborne illness have shocked Americans and spurred calls for reform of the nation’s fossilized food safety laws. Now a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak/pathogen.php" target="new online database">new online database</a> will help policymakers, reporters, and home cooks alike answer the central question: What, exactly, is making us sick? CSPI has long maintained an offline database of foodborne illness outbreaks, compiled largely from the data issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s surveillance unit. For the early years, CSPI added data culled from state health departments, peer-reviewed medical journals, and verified media reports. (In the past, CDC did not make outbreak data public, but that changed when CSPI started filing Freedom of Information Act requests for it. Now CDC releases data about two years after the outbreaks occurred.) CSPI’s database includes all outbreaks (where two or more individuals got sick from eating the same food) for which both the food source and the pathogen have been identified. The database released today covers the years 1990 to 2004. Additional data on 2005 is available from CSPI, and will be released later this year. The new online database lets individuals search by food, by pathogen, or by state. And the results aren’t pretty. Take poultry. The database includes 541 outbreaks and 16,280 associated illnesses. A search on produce reveals 639 outbreaks and 31,496 associated illnesses. Multi-ingredient items—sandwiches, salads, pasta, and other foods—were linked to 948 outbreaks and 27,812 associated illnesses. “While food safety authorities address once crisis after another, from peanut butter to pet food, from ground beef to spinach, one has to ask why no one is really in charge,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “Over the last year, we have seen a real disaster in food safety, and a plunge in consumer’s confidence in the food supply. Congress gives USDA funding to inspect meat plants on a daily basis, while FDA has far fewer inspectors and visits plants rarely – about one every 5 years. The outbreak data clearly shows that FDA’s high risk foods, like seafood and produce, need equal attention in our federal food safety system.” That said, some foods might be out of the reach of reform. Meals of moose soup (at a potluck supper!), cougar jerky, polar bear meat, and beaver tail were each responsible for an outbreak or two in CSPI’s database. In addition to the database and CSPI’s annual <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="Outbreak Alert!">Outbreak Alert!</a> report, CSPI’s staff researchers can run custom searches for journalists who need trendlines or historic information about foodborne illness. The database is regularly featured in poster sessions at the International Association of Food Protection, which <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/FoodProtTrends.pdf" target="published">published</a> the methodology used to manage the database in its Food Protection Trends journal. CSPI is working with members of Congress on legislation to modernize federal food safety laws. In addition, to help the FDA reduce the burden of foodborne outbreaks on consumers, CSPI and food industry groups have joined a <a href="http://www.fdacoalition.org/" target="Coalition for a Stronger FDA">Coalition for a Stronger FDA</a>, which is lobbying Congress for more funds for staffing and inspections at the beleaguered agency. 2007-09-17 CSPI Urges FDA to Facilitate Adverse Reaction Reporting for Dietary Supplements http://cspinet.org/new/200709173.html Industry Opposing Consumer Alert on LabelsWASHINGTON – The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is under pressure from the dietary supplement industry to weakly implement a law intended to prevent a repeat of the difficulties the agency faced in its nine year effort to ban ephedra, during which time the supplement was linked to 155 deaths and thousands of serious injuries. For much of that time, the, FDA lacked sufficient data to justify a ban in court partly because adverse reactions to ephedra were not reported. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/aerimplementation.pdf" target="letter">letter</a> to the FDA, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) said the agency should encourage dietary supplement and over-the-counter drug manufacturers to clearly label packages with information on how to report adverse reactions. The Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act, passed by Congress last year, requires companies to provide a telephone number or an address that consumers can use to report serious adverse reactions, which then must be turned over to the FDA. The FDA is preparing a guide for industry on how to comply with the new law -- FDA officials have stated that the agency may encourage companies to include a clear statement on labels alerting consumers that adverse reactions can and should be reported by calling the telephone number or writing to the mailing address on the package. The Council for Responsible Nutrition and the American Herbal Products Association, while previously supporting enactment of the law, are now opposing FDA’s plans to encourage companies to include a consumer alert on labels. “The FDA is depending on the public to report adverse reactions, but without a clear label statement alerting consumers to call or write, it is possible that many adverse reactions may never be reported and the FDA will not have the data it needs to protect the public from dangerous products,” said Bruce Silverglade, CSPI’s director of legal affairs. “Reporting adverse reactions is especially important for dietary supplements, because unlike over-the-counter drugs, the safety and efficacy of supplements have not been thoroughly reviewed by the FDA.” Under the law, FDA must make a decision on how to advise companies to label products by September 22, 2007. 2007-09-17 Study Shows Progress in Getting Soft Drinks out of Schools, Still Two-Thirds of School Beverage Sales are Sugary Drinks http://cspinet.org/new/200709171.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe good news is that <a href="http://schoolbeverages.com/index.aspx" target="soft drinks sales are declining in schools">soft drinks sales are declining in schools</a>. The bad news is the majority of school beverages are still sugary drinks. We applaud the soft drink industry for coming over to the right side of this issue last year when it struck a deal with President Clinton and the American Heart Association to help shift the beverage mix in schools. Soft drinks are the number one source of calories in teens’ diets and the only individual food directly linked to obesity. However, it’s likely that mandatory policies adopted by states and local school districts have had more of an impact on drink sales in schools than the industry’s <a href="http://www.schoolbeverages.org/guidelines/guidelines-specific/index.aspx" target="voluntary standards">voluntary standards</a>. Limits on soda sales have been coming into effect over the past few years in Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Kentucky, New Jersey, and other states. Congress required every school district to implement a wellness policy to address vending machines and other school foods by 2006. The increase in bottled water sales is good news. But I’m concerned about the growing share of so-called sports drinks, which are little more than sugar water with added salt. If kids are switching from Coke to Powerade, that’s limited progress; it’s just going from the fire back up into the frying pan. Given that two-thirds of high school beverage sales are still sugary drinks, voluntary industry action and a patchwork of state and local policies are not enough to solve the problem. The time has come for Congress to pass <a href="http://www.schoolfoods.org/" target="Senator Harkin’s bill">Senator Harkin’s bill</a> to update and strengthen the national standards for foods and drinks sold in schools—a bill that the beverage industry seems to finally have dropped its opposition to. But national nutrition standards should clearly exclude so-called sports drinks, as the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200704251.html" target="Institute of Medicine has recommended">Institute of Medicine has recommended</a>. 2007-09-17 Burger King to Reform its Marketing to Children http://cspinet.org/new/200709125.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanIt’s good news that <a href="http://www.bbb.org/alerts/article.asp?ID=798" target="Burger King">Burger King</a> is joining its colleagues in the Better Business Bureau’s <a href="http://www.cbbb.org/initiative/index.asp" target="Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative">Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative</a>. Burger King typically lags behind McDonald’s and Wendy’s on nutrition and other issues, but this move is better late than never. We’re pleased to see Burger King adding new, healthy items to its kids’ meals. Since most fast-food marketing is about getting kids to nag their parents to bring them to the restaurant, this is the most important step restaurants should take. As welcome as the new broiled chicken tenders and <a href="http://www.miamiherald.com/business/story/234366.html" target="French-fry-shaped apple slices">French-fry-shaped apple slices</a> are, many Burger King foods are still high in artificial trans fat. Trans fat is the last thing a “kid-friendly” company should be putting in food, whether it is advertising those specific products to young audiences or not. 2007-09-12 Physicians Urge Kennedy, Dodd to Support Curb on Financial Conflicts of Interest on FDA Advisory Committees http://cspinet.org/new/200709124.html WASHINGTON—Today nine prominent physicians, including two former editors of the New England Journal of Medicine, are <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/coi_fda_letter.pdf" target="calling on">calling on</a> Senators Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) and Christopher J. Dodd (D-CT) to limit the number of industry-connected scientists who may serve on Food and Drug Administration advisory panels. The two Senators are among the conferees trying to reconcile differences in the drug safety bills that have passed each chamber, including differences on how many waivers the FDA can grant of its conflict-of-interest rules. While the House version of the bill limits the FDA to one waiver per committee, the Senate, on a tie vote, defeated an amendment with identical language. Senators Kennedy and Dodd were among those voting no, so the nine doctors are urging the Senators to reconsider their opposition. “Allowing conflicted members of an advisory committee to vote can have serious public health consequences,” wrote the physicians, citing the Vioxx scandal in which 10 of 32 scientists charged with evaluating the safety of Vioxx had ties to manufacturers of that or other Cox-2 painkilling drugs. “It is possible to find unconflicted experts. The FDA could choose its committee members from among the 123,000 faculty at the 125 medical schools in the United States and public health experts at other federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, and the Veterans Administration,” wrote the physicians, who included Dr. Marcia Angell of Harvard Medical School, Dr. Jerome P. Kassirer of Tufts Medical School, and seven others. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest also supports the House-passed limit on conflicts of interest and has separately called on Senators Kennedy and Dodd to support it. 2007-09-12 States, Cities May Require Nutrition Labeling at Restaurants, Judge Finds http://cspinet.org/new/200709112.html Ruling Means New York City May Redraft Its Regulation to Avoid Preemption by Federal LawWASHINGTON—A federal judge has ruled that cities and states are free to require restaurants to provide calorie counts and other nutrition information, but that in one idiosyncratic way <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="New York City’s">New York City’s</a> regulation is preempted by federal law. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and Public Citizen say that the city may avoid such preemption by making menu labeling mandatory for all chain restaurants with 10 or more outlets, such as McDonald’s, and by not making it contingent on whether a restaurant already makes some nutrition information available voluntarily. In December, the New York City Board of Health passed a regulation requiring restaurants to list calories on menus and menu boards. But only restaurants that already made calories available voluntarily on brochures, web sites, or elsewhere were covered by the measure. In order to avoid complying, some chains, notably Wendy’s and Chipotle, took down nutrition information from their web site or stopped making it available in New York City. “The judge provides a road map for cities and states to draft menu labeling regulation so that it doesn’t conflict with federal law,” said CSPI Litigation Director Steve Gardner. “Though it blocks the city from enforcing the regulation that the Board passed, this decision gives cities and states a green light to make nutrition information mandatory at restaurants.” “The court’s narrow finding is very good news for jurisdictions like <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707201.html" target="King County, Washington">King County, Washington</a>, which enacted a menu labeling regulation in July that would not be preempted,” said Deepak Gupta, a lawyer at Public Citizen who wrote a brief in the case. “And the statewide bill that <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200709111.html" target="just passed">just passed</a> in both houses of the California legislature would also be safe from preemption under this ruling.” In July, Public Citizen and CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200707162.html" target="filed a brief ">filed a brief </a>in support of the city’s menu labeling regulation, signed by Representative Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), former FDA commissioner David Kessler, the American Medical Association, the American Diabetes Association, and other prominent public health organizations and nutrition experts. “The majority of state or local regulations—those that simply require restaurants to provide nutrition information—therefore are not preempted,” wrote United States District Judge Richard J. Holwell. “Such regulations impose a blanket mandatory duty on all restaurants meeting a standard definition such as operating 10 or more restaurants under the same name.” 2007-09-11 California Legislature Passes Historic Menu Labeling Bill http://cspinet.org/new/200709111.html Governor Schwarzenegger Urged to Make California First State to Require Nutrition InfoLast night the California Assembly passed a bill requiring calories on fast-food menu boards and additional nutrition information on chain-restaurants’ printed menus. Later today, the state’s Senate will consider separate legislation that would require restaurants to phase out their use of artificial trans fats. Both measures have the strong support of the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, which is calling on Governor Schwarzenegger to sign both bills. California would become the first state in the country to require nutrition labeling on chain-restaurant menus. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200609262.html">New York City</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707201.html">King County, Washington</a>, which includes Seattle and its suburbs, have passed trans fat and menu labeling regulations, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702081.html">Philadelphia's city council</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200705151.html">Montgomery County, Maryland’s county council</a> have also passed trans-fat phase-outs. Menu labeling bills have been introduced in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/" target="20 states and localities">20 states and localities</a> this year. “Without nutrition information at the point of decision-making in chain restaurants, it’s hard for people to make informed choices for themselves and their children,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at CSPI. “Who would expect that some coffee drinks at Starbucks have more calories than a Big Mac, or that a tuna salad sub from Subway has more calories than a roast beef sub?” The menu-labeling bill <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_120&sess=CUR&house=B&author=padilla" target="(SB 120)">(SB 120)</a>, sponsored by Senators Alex Padilla and Carole Midgen, applies only to chain restaurants having 15 or more outlets nationally and only to standardized menu items, not daily specials or customized orders. Fast-food restaurants that use menu boards would be required to display calories in the same size font as the price, and table-service chains such as Applebee’s would be required to list calories, saturated fat, trans fat, sodium, and carbohydrate content next to each menu choice. In New York City, chains such as <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707091.html" target="Subway">Subway</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/johnnyrocketsmenu.pdf" target="Johnny Rockets">Johnny Rockets</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/boards6.html" target="Auntie Anne’s">Auntie Anne’s</a> are now using easy-to-read menu boards or menus that list calories, though the restaurant industry is challenging the requirement in federal court. CSPI recently prepared a mock-up of a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/boards7.html" target="Wendy’s menu board">Wendy’s menu board </a>to show that chain how easily and clearly calories can be displayed. “Governor Schwarzenegger has been vocal about the need to do something about obesity, and here’s an opportunity for him to help Californians exercise their personal responsiblity when ordering for themselves and their children at chain restaurants,” Wootan said. “He should sign it without delay.” 2007-09-11 NFL Linebacker Case Highlights League's Ties to Alcohol Money, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200709042.html League Penalizes Players for Alcohol Abuse While Profiting from Beer SalesWASHINGTON—While the National Football League (NFL) talks a big game about not tolerating substance abuse among its players, it is simultaneously enabling alcohol abuse among its fans by aggressively advertising beer on TV and in stadiums, where it also sells alcoholic beverages, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). This inconsistency was recently noted by Hamilton County (Ohio) Municipal Court Judge John Burlew during a hearing for Cincinnati Bengals linebacker Odell Thurman, who was suspended from the NFL last season. Odell was first suspended for four games after skipping a drug test, and later for the remainder of the season after an arrest for drunken driving. Thurman will face Judge Burlew again tomorrow and could receive jail time for violating probation, according to the <a href="http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/sports/s_523523.html" target="Associated Press">Associated Press</a>. “The allegations are that you had a legal substance—alcohol—in your body, a substance which they advertise and get money from, millions of dollars a year from,” Burlew told Thurman, adding that if the league was serious about alcohol abuse prevention, it would stop alcohol sponsorship and selling alcohol in stadiums. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nflletter.pdf" target="letter">letter</a> to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George Hacker and CSPI’s Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV Manager Tracy Downs pointed out that the positive values children learn from sports should be detached from the promotion of alcohol. <a href="http://www.rand.org/health/feature/2007/070503_collins.html" target="New research">New research</a> on alcohol advertising “suggests that exposure to ads and branded paraphernalia is related to increased quantity and frequency of drinking and intentions to drink among teenagers and adolescents,” Hacker and Downs wrote. “It is troubling that alcohol marketers use sponsorship as a vehicle to reach large numbers of young, impressionable children with messages that indelibly link alcoholic beverages with popular sports such as football,” they added. In May 2007, <a href="http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=2888453" target="Commissioner Goodell extended the league’s ban of alcohol">Commissioner Goodell extended the league’s ban of alcohol</a> in locker rooms to include all team functions and travel and told the 32 NFL teams that by serving alcohol, they impose “significant and unnecessary risks to the league, its players and others." Goodell’s decision sent a strong message that alcohol use can be detrimental to the NFL, but this message is at odds with the NFL’s own alcohol advertising policy, according to CSPI. CSPI urged the NFL to eliminate alcohol ads during telecasts, and weaken the link between alcohol use and sports. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/" target="Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a> seeks to reduce the amount of alcoholic beverage advertising to underage children and young adults who tune into televised sports. 2007-09-04 Menu Labeling Bill Clears Key Hurdle in California http://cspinet.org/new/200708301.html Health Advocates Urge Passage in AssemblyA bill that would require nutrition information on menus in chain restaurants in California cleared a key legislative hurdle today, passing in the state Assembly’s appropriations committee. <a href="http://info.sen.ca.gov/cgi-bin/postquery?bill_number=sb_120&sess=CUR&house=B&site=sen" target="SB 120">SB 120</a>, which passed the full state Senate in June, would require chain restaurants to list calories on menu boards and calories, saturated and trans fat, sodium, and carbohydrates on printed menus. Health advocates are urging passage of the bill when it comes before the full Assembly in early September. “Californians, and indeed all Americans, deserve to know what they’re getting when they’re ordering food at chain restaurants,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “A Double Whopper with Cheese has as many calories in Sacramento as it does in San Diego. Why not make that information available when people are making their decisions?” More than 20 state and local legislatures are considering <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="menu labeling">menu labeling</a> proposals. New York City and King County (Seattle), WA, recently adopted menu labeling requirements. In New York City, chains such as <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707091.html" target="Subway">Subway</a>, Johnny Rockets, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html#auntie" target="Auntie Anne’s">Auntie Anne’s</a> are now using easy-to-read menu boards that include calories, though the restaurant industry is challenging the requirement in federal court. CSPI designers recently photoshopped a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/boards7.html" target="Wendy’s menu board">Wendy’s menu board</a> to show that chain how easily calories can be displayed. “I hope the full Assembly will move quickly to pass SB 120 and make California the first state in the nation to provide menu labeling at chain restaurants," Wootan said. Americans are eating out more and more in restaurants and are not getting the kind of information that is readily available on packaged foods’ Nutrition Facts labels. Such information can literally be lifesaving for people who are trying to treat or prevent weight gain, high blood pressure, diabetes, or heart disease, according to CSPI. 2007-08-30 Nickelodeon Reduces Junk Food Marketing to Kids http://cspinet.org/new/200708161.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonNickelodeon is taking a <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/16/business/16kids.html?ref=business" target="key step">key step</a> toward reducing junk-food marketing to children by agreeing not to license its characters for use on unhealthy foods. The company is following the lead of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610162.html" target="Disney">Disney</a>, Sesame Workshop, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200501125.html" target="Kraft">Kraft</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html" target=" Kellogg"> Kellogg</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707181.html" target="several other companies">several other companies</a> that have adopted nutrition criteria for advertising to young children. In January 2006, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, and two Massachusetts parents <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601181.html" target="threatened to sue Viacom">threatened to sue Viacom</a>, which owns Nickelodeon, and Kellogg for marketing junk foods to kids. Kellogg agreed to negotiate, and a settlement was announced in June. Viacom would not negotiate, but we are pleased that it has taken this responsible step. The new policy, though, may not yield any actual improvements for several years. If it broadens its initiative by also rejecting the marketing of junk foods on television, the Internet, and its kids’ magazine, Nickelodeon will become the family-friendly company it claims to be. 2007-08-16 Consumers Pay Hefty Premium for Air, Packaging in 100-Calorie Packs http://cspinet.org/new/200708141.html Portion-controlled snacks distract from healthier foodsWASHINGTON—Lately, the colorful, chaotic snack aisle at the grocery store has gotten even more cramped. With a deluge of 100-calorie packs of everything from Cheetos to beef jerky, food manufacturers have provided a seemingly healthier alternative to super-sized bags of snacks. While portion control may help consumers control their cravings, it will also lighten their wallets. According to a survey by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, 100-calorie packs cost, on average, about two-and-a-half times as much per ounce as similar products in larger packages. A <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/100cal.pdf" target="comparison">comparison</a> of 30 varieties of 100-calorie packs found that the premium charged for those snacks ranges from a modest 16 percent to a whopping 279 percent. “Hundred-calorie packs are an ingenious way for companies to charge consumers more for less,” said CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson. “Manufacturers get the best of both worlds—they make more money, and they look like they’re helping people control their weight. But consumers could save money by divvying up their regular box of Cheese Nips themselves if they are worried about downing the whole container. Or better yet, they could skip the junk foods altogether and reach for a piece of fruit.” Shoppers may not notice the price differences since most varieties of 100-calorie packs are priced similarly to a box of cookies or crackers, at about $3 per box. However, when comparing the prices per ounce, the original items are by far the better value. For example, a box of Keebler Right Bites Chips Deluxe 100-calorie packs cost $2.50, while a bag of Keebler Chips Deluxe Chocolate Chip Cookies runs $3. But the regular bag weighs four times as much, making the 100-calorie packs three-and-a-half times more expensive per ounce. Similarly, Goldfish 100-calorie packs are triple the cost per ounce of a regular package, and 100-calorie packs of Sun Chips are more than twice as expensive per ounce. While some 100-calorie packs are new concoctions inspired by traditional snack foods, such as Oreos Thin Crisps, others are simply smaller bags of foods like pretzels, almonds, or graham crackers. According to the July 7, 2007 <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/07/business/07snack.html?ex=1341460800&en=db147ef3f8b255b0&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&" target="New York Times">New York Times</a>, sales of 100-calorie packs reached $200 million annually after just three years on the market. 2007-08-14 Menu Labeling Urged for Montgomery County, Md., and DC http://cspinet.org/new/200708022.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson at Joint Press ConferenceI’m pleased to be here with District of Columbia Councilmember Phil Mendelson and Montgomery Council Councilmember George Leventhal to talk about the need for <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="nutrition information at chain restaurants">nutrition information at chain restaurants</a>. I should say at the outset that Phil Mendelson has been championing the idea of putting nutrition information on chain restaurant menus since 2003, long before any other jurisdiction actually enacted such a measure. Though it has not yet come to pass in D.C., this movement that he helped start has spread to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="New York City">New York City</a> on one coast, and to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707201.html" target="Seattle">Seattle</a> on the other. I hope this is the year that your bill, the DC Menu Education and Labeling, or DC MEAL Act, has the full hearing and the fair, up-or-down vote that it deserves. <img src="http://www.cspinet.org/new/images/mcdonalds_080207.jpg" align="center"> The Montgomery County Council, whose Health Committee George Leventhal chairs, was one of the first in the country to protect restaurant diners from secondhand smoke, and recently became the <a href="http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/Apps/Council/PressRelease/PR_details.asp?PrID=3556" target="first county council">first county council</a> in the country to prohibit the use of artificial trans fat in restaurants. We commend Councilmembers Leventhal and also Duchy Trachtenberg for introducing their menu labeling proposal and urge its adoption by the full council. Consider for a moment that the McDonald’s behind me offers some 8 burgers, ranging from a 250-calorie hamburger to a 740-calorie Double Quarter Pounder with Cheese. Drinks range from zero calories for diet soda to 1,160 calories in the case of a Triple Thick Shake. At McDonald’s you can have a 500-calorie meal or a 2,000-calorie meal. (I bet most people wouldn’t have guessed they could eat about two Big Macs for the calories in that shake.) With calorie counts on McDonald’s and others’ menu boards, consumers would at least have that one important piece of nutrition information to compare item to item and make an informed choice. Some in the industry have claimed that there simply isn’t enough room for calorie counts on menu boards. In fact, the industry is actually <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707162.html" target="suing the New York City Board of Health">suing the New York City Board of Health</a> to prevent it from enforcing the new menu labeling rule there, which the city intends to start enforcing in earnest this fall. However, that argument was dealt a rather fatal blow by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707091.html" target="Subway">Subway</a>, which without a lot of fuss was able to design perfectly attractive and uncluttered menu boards that list calories quite clearly. You can see what it looks like <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html" target="here">here</a>. But take Wendy’s. Their burgers may be square, but when it comes to menu labeling, they talk in circles. Recently Wendy’s made the laughable claim that one reason they couldn’t comply with menu labeling in New York is that their food is “made to order.” But of course they list all these numbers on their web site. Heck, on their web site they list that a slice of tomato has 5 calories, but that’s not what these sensible menu labeling proposals are all about. To help put Wendy’s mind at ease we <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/menulabeling/boards7.html" target="Photoshopped calorie counts">Photoshopped calorie counts</a> into a picture of one of their menu boards. As you can see, it’s not that hard to do. A #4 Big Bacon Classic small combo meal is going to have 1,090 calories whether it’s served up at Wendy’s on Georgia Avenue or in Gaithersburg. And I hope diners at chain restaurants everywhere in Washington and in Montgomery County soon will have this important information when they place their orders. 2007-08-02 Burger King and Wendy's Fries Flunk Trans Fat Test in New York City http://cspinet.org/new/200708021.html Lab Tests Show McDonald's Fries are Virtually Trans-Fat-Free in the Big Apple!WASHINGTON—Though New York City now requires restaurants to use trans-fat-free frying oils, Burger King and Wendy’s are still serving New Yorkers French fries with more trans fat than is safe to consume in an entire day, according to new test results. McDonald’s French fries in New York City are virtually trans-free and have the least saturated fat of the three chains as well. <img src="http://www.cspinet.org/images/restaurantfats.gif" align="center>" In mid-July, CSPI purchased large orders of fries from five different McDonald’s, Burger King, and Wendy’s outlets in Manhattan and had an independent laboratory analyze them. McDonald’s had the least trans fat (0.2 grams per serving). Wendy’s had 3.7 grams per serving, and Burger King had 3.3 grams per serving (though Wendy’s serving size was 25-percent larger than Burger King’s). The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, the American Heart Association, and various other health authorities recommend that people consume no more than 2 grams of trans fat per day. That’s about as much as occurs naturally in milk and meat, leaving virtually no room for artificial trans fat from partially hydrogenated vegetable oil. Like saturated fat, trans fat raises “bad” cholesterol that promotes heart disease. But unlike saturated fat, trans fat also lowers the “good” cholesterol that helps guard against heart disease. The new lab results don’t necessarily mean that Burger King and Wendy’s are violating New York City’s new requirement. In fact, the French fries from these two chains have about half as much trans fat as they used to, which suggests that the two chains’ suppliers are still using partially hydrogenated oils to par-fry the fries before they are shipped to individual restaurants. But by July 1, 2008, restaurants will have to limit artificial trans fat to less than half a gram per serving in all foods. “French fries are fried twice, once in the factory and once in the restaurant,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “If these chains want to claim they are switching to trans-fat-free frying oil, they need to switch it at the supplier as well as at the restaurant. Burger King and Wendy’s are really deceiving consumers with the public statements they’ve made about trans fat, which don’t tell the whole story. McDonald’s, on the other hand, has proven that restaurants can truly eliminate artificial trans fat.” In addition to switching to trans-fat-free fries in New York City, McDonald’s has switched in a number of other cities, but isn’t disclosing which. Last spring, after negotiations did not bear fruit, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200705161.html" target="CSPI filed suit against Burger King ">CSPI filed suit against Burger King </a>over its continued use of partially hydrogenated oil for deep-frying and other cooking. Outside New York City and other test markets, a King-size Onion Rings has 6 grams of trans fat. A regular-size order of Chicken Tenders with a large order of French fries has 8 grams of trans. And Burger King’s Sausage Biscuit combined with a large order of Hash Browns has an astounding 18 grams of trans fat—more than someone should consume in 9 days. In June 2006, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606081.html" target="Wendy’s earned praise from CSPI">Wendy’s earned praise from CSPI</a> when the chain announced plans to all but eliminate trans fat from its fried foods. But testing done by Consumers Union in November 2006 found 2.5 grams of trans fat in a large order of fries. CSPI’s new tests—conducted more than a year after the announcement—found even more. “Wendy’s needs to correct the trans fat information it has on its web site and elsewhere, and keep the promise it made last year,” said Jacobson. CSPI has been organizing efforts to phase artificial trans fat out of the food supply, starting with its successful campaign to get trans fat listed on the Nutrition Facts labels of supermarket foods. That spurred many, though not all, food manufacturers to abandon partially hydrogenated oils in favor of healthier oil blends. CSPI has also encouraged cities and counties to adopt regulations requiring restaurants to phase out partially hydrogenated oils in restaurants. So far, New York City, Philadelphia, and at least three counties have done so. CSPI intends to do more trans fat testing, both in jurisdictions that are phasing out artificial trans fat and elsewhere, to monitor restaurant chains’ progress. 2007-08-02 More Teens Choosing Liquor over Beer? http://cspinet.org/new/200707271.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George A. Hacker<a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5629a3.htm" target="Startling research">Startling research</a>, published today by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, shows that more teens are drinking hard liquor than beer. This is a huge victory for liquor marketers. But it is scary and ominous news for parents and public health professionals, who should rightly be concerned by the liquor industry’s successful campaign to make booze more attractive to kids. Think of the dull amber, brown, and clear bottles in liquor stores of yesterday and compare that to the <a href="http://www.badgerwest.com/images/DeKuyperRaspbryPuckerLabel.jpg" target="bright pinks">bright pinks</a>, <a href="http://static.flickr.com/77/197059180_500403755d.jpg" target="neon blues">neon blues</a>, and <a href="http://img.epinions.com/images/opti/96/cc/fddkSpiritsBy_NameAllMidori_Melon_Liqueur-resized200.jpg" target="girly greens">girly greens</a> that characterize hard liquor today. Today’s infantilized liquors are flavored with peach, raspberry, mango, cherry, grape and every other kid-friendly flavor under the sun: <a href="http://static.flickr.com/77/197059180_500403755d.jpg" target="Hypnotiq">Hypnotiq</a>. <a href="http://www.avenuevine.com/archives/SMIRNOFFblueberry-w.jpg" target="Smirnoff Blueberry">Smirnoff Blueberry</a>. DeKuyper Pineapple Coconut, <a href="http://library.bevnetwork.com/bottles/400/20025.jpg" target="Sour Apple">Sour Apple</a>, or Tropical Mango schnapps. <a href="http://www.hiramwalker.com/schnapps/pink_grapefruit.php" target="Pink Grapefruit flavored Hiram Walker">Pink Grapefruit flavored Hiram Walker</a>? Please. And it certainly hasn’t helped that ads for these products are showing up in ever greater numbers on cable television, and not just at night. The convenience and concealability of liquor has always appealed to teens. But let’s face it—hard liquor has gone from country clubs and biker bars to proms and playgrounds. Before companies like Diageo starts putting <a href="http://www.sanrio.com/" target="Hello Kitty">Hello Kitty</a> or <a href="http://barbie.everythinggirl.com/" target="Barbie">Barbie</a> on gin and vodka, federal regulators, Congress, and state legislators need to take a fresh look at the availability, marketing, and taxation of liquor and other alcoholic beverages. 2007-07-27 Important to Heed Warning Presented by Botulism Recall http://cspinet.org/new/200707241.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalNews of the government’s latest mega-recall should not fall on deaf ears. <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/botulism/botulism.htm">Botulism</a> is an extremely potent nerve toxin that can cause paralysis and death, and the pathogen may be present in tens of million of cans of products on store and consumer shelves. CSPI strongly urges all consumers to check their cupboards for any of the various Castleberry’s chili, stew, hash products and dog foods subject to the massive recall underway, and discard them. Some of these foods bear a variety of brand names, including various supermarket labels, including Austex, Big Y, Kroger’s, Piggly Wiggly, and others. Specific brands and products are listed on the web sites of the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2007/NEW01670.html">Food and Drug Administration</a> and USDA’s <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/Recall_033_2007_expanded/index.asp">Food Safety and Inspection Service</a>. Consumers should not have to rely on voluntary recalls to respond to a botulism problem. Proper processing will provide a 100 percent guarantee that this pathogen doesn’t occur in canned foods. This is the kind of hazard that a modernized, well-funded food safety system should not allow to slip through. It’s worth noting that the canned goods that are being recalled now are foods that fall squarely in the middle of our two food safety agencies' regulatory authority. Does it make sense that USDA-regulated plants are inspected daily, and FDA-inspected facilities are looked at rarely? Does it really make sense to have one cabinet secretary in charge of chili with beans and another cabinet secretary in charge of chili with meat? Members of Congress should realize that as serious as the problems originating with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200707171.html">Chinese imports</a> are, our own food safety system has serious gaps that urgently need closing. 2007-07-24 In Seattle, Menu Labeling Is "In", Trans Fat is "Out" http://cspinet.org/new/200707201.html King County, Washington Joins New York City by Passing Bold Public Health MeasuresWASHINGTON—The movement to get rid of artificial trans fat and put nutrition information on chain restaurant menus has spread from the Big Apple to the Emerald City. Last night, the <a href="http://www.metrokc.gov/Health/news/07071901.htm" target="King County, Washington Board of Health ">King County, Washington Board of Health </a>voted to require food service establishments to phase out their use of artificial trans fat and to list nutrition information on chain restaurant menus. The <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="menu labeling">menu labeling</a> rule only affects chain restaurants with 10 or more outlets and that have standardized menu items. Starting in August 2008, those restaurants will be required to list calories on menu boards, and calories, carbohydrates, saturated fat, and sodium on printed menus. Like a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="New York City">New York City</a> regulation adopted last December, King County’s artificial trans fat phase out occurs in two steps. Food service establishments have until May 1, 2008, to switch to trans-fat-free frying oils and shortenings and until February 1, 2009, to remove artificial trans fat from other products. “From coast to coast, cities and counties are starting to take bold steps to help their citizens eat healthfully at restaurants, which are supplying more of America’s calories than ever before,” said <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/index.html" target="CSPI nutrition policy ">CSPI nutrition policy </a>director Margo G. Wootan. “The King County Board of Health is empowering restaurant patrons to make informed food choices for their kids and themselves. I hope chain restaurants respond by putting nutrition information on menus everywhere, not just where they are required to do so by law. Many restaurants are already abandoning partially hydrogenated oil for deep-frying and baking, and the rest need not wait for more of these measures to pass to get rid of it altogether.” Other jurisdictions that have enacted phaseouts on the artificial trans fat that comes from partially hydrogenated oils include Albany County, NY; Brookline, MA; <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702081.html" target="Philadelphia, PA">Philadelphia, PA</a>; and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200705151.html" target="Montgomery County, Md.">Montgomery County, Md.</a> Montgomery County, Md. also held a recent hearing on a menu labeling proposal, and legislation is expected to be introduced there later this month. More than a dozen state legislatures, including California’s, are considering various menu labeling and trans fat proposals, as are a number of city and county councils. 2007-07-20 Food Companies' Marketing Commitments a Positive Development http://cspinet.org/new/200707181.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThat a number of major food companies are <a href=" http://www.cbbb.org/initiative/pledges.asp">setting some basic nutrition standards</a> for the foods they advertise to children is a positive and historic development. It will shield the youngest of kids from the least healthful of these companies’ products on television, kids’ magazines, and the Internet. Kraft deserves a large share of credit for, in 2005, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200501125.html">being the first company</a> to announce a comprehensive policy on food marketing aimed at children. Last month <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200706141.html">Kellogg adopted a strong policy</a>, a product of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/settlementdocument.pdf">settlement agreement</a> we negotiated with the company. Notably, its policy prohibits the use of licensed characters on packages of foods that don’t meet their nutrition standards. Though the policies announced today will reduce the use of licensed characters on advertisements, many will still use these kid-friendly characters on packaging, and that’s a problem. Hershey, Mars, and Coke have long abstained from advertising any products to audiences largely made up of kids under 12, but they should join Kraft and General Mills, and agree not to market unhealthful food to children in middle and high schools. Coke and Pepsi in particular could signal their commitment to kids’ health by agreeing to support the <a href="http://www.schoolfoods.org/">school foods bill</a> sponsored by Senators Tom Harkin, Lisa Murkowski, and others. It is worth noting that Burger King, ConAgra, Nestle, and Chuck E. Cheese's all advertise unhealthy foods to young children. Those companies’ conspicuous absence from this initiative points to the need for much stricter scrutiny of junk food marketing aimed at kids on the part of the Federal Trade Commission and Congress. And broadcasters and entertainment companies shouldn’t rely exclusively on the voluntary policies of food companies. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nickelodeon.pdf">Nickelodeon</a> and others shouldn’t license their cartoon characters to, or accept television advertisements for, foods that promote obesity and other health problems in children. Any company that does do so certainly runs the risk of lawsuits from angry parents. 2007-07-18 Chinese Import Scandal Demonstrates FDA Failings, Congress Told http://cspinet.org/new/200707171.html CSPI Urges New Money for FDA, Ultimately Single Food Safety AgencyWASHINGTON—While all imported meat and poultry products are visually inspected at the border and subject to microbial and chemical testing, 99 percent of imported seafood, produce, animal feeds, and grains pass through U.S. borders uninspected. According to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, that’s because meat and poultry products are regulated by the well funded U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and most other foods are regulated by the woefully underfunded Food and Drug Administration (FDA). CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/house_import_testimony.pdf" target="testifying">testifying</a> before the House Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Investigations and Oversight today, said that even when USDA and FDA are operating at the same port, they don’t share inspectors. DeWaal said that Congress should dramatically increase funding for the FDA and modernize food safety laws that are more than a century old. Ultimately, Congress should create a single unified Food Safety Agency—a proposal championed by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa Delauro (D-CT) and recommended by the National Academy of Sciences. “Our food safety laws are ready for an extreme makeover,” said DeWaal. “When <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-07-10-american-goods_N.htm?csp=34" target="80 percent">80 percent</a> of Americans believe that ‘made in China’ means ‘may be contaminated,’ we clearly have a crisis of confidence on our hands. Consumers are sick and tired of getting sick from unsafe imported and domestic food.” Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI), chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, FDA, and Related Agencies, is proposing $48.4 million in new funding for the FDA, including $21 million to increase inspections and $11 million to develop rapid-response methods. This new funding is the first in a multi-year effort to increase the FDA budget. To increase inspections of FDA-regulated imports to 10 percent would require an additional 1,600 full-time inspectors; increasing inspection to 20 percent of imports would require 3,200 full-time inspectors and significantly more new funding. Imports of FDA-regulated foods have more than doubled in the last 7 years—from 4 million shipments in 2000 to approximately 10 million shipments in 2006. In the last 10 years, the volume of food imports from China have increased by 350 percent, from $880 million worth to about $4 billion. “China’s food regulatory system isn’t ready for the 21st century, but then again, neither is ours,” DeWaal said. “Congress should put a single, well-funded U.S. agency in charge of food safety and not rely solely on other countries to do this job for us.” 2007-07-17 New York City's Fast-Food Calorie Labeling Rule Should Be Upheld, Groups Urge Federal Court http://cspinet.org/new/200707162.html Congressman, Former FDA Commissioner, AMA, Public Health Organizations and Experts Join Public Citizen and CSPI in Support of Rule to Combat Obesity EpidemicWASHINGTON, D.C. – A federal court in New York should reject the state restaurant association’s attempt to strike down New York City’s new requirement that certain fast-food and other chain restaurants disclose calorie information on their menus, according to a brief submitted today by the nonprofit organizations Public Citizen and the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The groups were joined in their brief by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), a former FDA commissioner and a host of prestigious public health organizations and esteemed nutrition experts. The organizations filed a friend of the court brief in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York supporting New York City’s Board of Health against a lawsuit filed in June by the New York State Restaurant Association. The association challenged the city’s groundbreaking new menu labeling ordinance that went into effect July 1. The measure is designed to provide consumers with calories on fast-food menu boards and on printed menus. The rule only applies to restaurants that already publicly disclose the information in some form, such as on their Web sites. The New York State Restaurant Association claims that the city’s ordinance is preempted by federal law and that it violates the First Amendment. Public Citizen and CSPI contend that federal law does not preempt the New York City rule because city authorities stepped into a regulatory gap that Congress intentionally left open to state and local governments when it enacted the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) in 1990. The NLEA requires food manufacturers to provide nutritional information on nearly all packaged foods, but explicitly exempts restaurants. The chief sponsors of the NLEA in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, former Sen. Howard Metzenbaum (D-Ohio) and Rep. Waxman, have both said that the legislation was intended to allow state or local authorities to institute their own nutrition labeling requirements for restaurants. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has echoed this view, as did the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in a 2003 decision. The Public Citizen-CSPI brief is signed by a distinguished list of organizations and experts, including Rep. Waxman, David A. Kessler, MD, who was FDA commissioner when NLEA was signed into law and its key regulations were implemented, the American Medical Association, the American Public Health Association, the American Diabetes Association, the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, the Medical Society of the State of New York, the Trust for America’s Health and professors of nutrition and public health Richard J. Decklebaum of Columbia University, Alice H. Lichtenstein of Tufts University, Marion Nestle of New York University, Barry Popkin of the University of North Carolina, Penny Kris-Etherton of Penn State University, Francine R. Kaufman of the University of Southern California Medical School and Walter Willett and George Blackburn of Harvard University. Separately, the San Francisco City Attorney’s office, joined by several other local governments, also filed an amicus brief opposing the restaurant industry’s lawsuit against New York City. American adults and children consume about one-third of their calories from restaurants and other food-service establishments, and studies link frequent eating out with obesity and higher caloric intakes. Without nutrition information, it is difficult for consumers to make informed choices. In requiring fast-food restaurants to disclose calorie information on their menus, New York City has taken the lead in addressing one of the largest contributors to the nation’s obesity epidemic. The U.S. Surgeon General and the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine have also recommended that chain restaurants provide more nutrition information. “The New York Restaurant Association should visit any <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html#subway" target="Subway">Subway </a>restaurant in New York City to see just how easy it is to present calories on menu boards,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at CSPI. “The restaurant industry isn’t concerned about defending the First Amendment, as its lawsuit laughably claims. It just wants to keep its customers in the dark. People need nutrition information to exercise personal responsibility and to feed their children healthy diets.” “The stakes in this lawsuit are high,” said Deepak Gupta, a lawyer at Public Citizen who wrote the brief. “A victory for New York City’s law could help clear the way for similar laws throughout the country.” More than 20 states, cities and counties are considering legislation or regulations that would require fast-food and other chain restaurants to provide calories and other nutrition information on menus and menu boards. According to CSPI, menu labeling bills or regulations have been introduced this year in state legislatures in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee and Vermont. Local jurisdictions considering similar measures include Washington, D.C.; Chicago; Philadelphia; King County, Wash.; Montgomery County, Md.; and Nassau County, NY. To read the brief, visit <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_amici_brief.pdf" target="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_amici_brief.pdf">http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_amici_brief.pdf</a>. 2007-07-16 Subway First to List Calories on Menu Boards in Country http://cspinet.org/new/200707091.html CSPI Praises Subway for Breaking Away from Industry LaggardsWASHINGTON—<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html#subway" target="Subway">Subway</a> is the first large chain restaurant to list calories on menu boards in its restaurants in New York City, as is required by the city’s groundbreaking <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="menu labeling">menu labeling</a> law. Though July 1 was the effective date of a regulation passed by the New York City Board of Health, McDonald’s, Burger King, Wendy’s, and other fast-food restaurants are refusing to comply while the industry sues the city in federal court. The pretzel chain <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html#auntie" target="Auntie Anne’s">Auntie Anne’s</a> is also complying with the regulation and Johnny Rockets and Arby’s have submitted sample menu boards to the city. The Health Department will begin enforcing the rule in earnest in October. “Subway long has made some nutrition information available in stores, but now they’re really making it easy for their customers to know how many calories they’re getting for everything on the menu,” said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Though industry lobbyists often point to Subway to illustrate the supposed impossibility of putting calories on menus, Subway has shown that menu labeling is perfectly feasible. We congratulate Subway for leading the pack.” According to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nyc_frieden.pdf" target="legal brief">legal brief</a> filed in support of the menu labeling regulation by New York Health Commissioner Thomas R. Frieden, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/menuboards_labeling.html#dunkin" target="Dunkin’ Donuts">Dunkin’ Donuts</a> submitted a menu board designed to prove that calories could not fit. In response, the Health Department’s in-house graphic artist quickly mocked up a version of a Dunkin’ Donuts menu board that easily displayed calories. The restaurant industry claims in its lawsuit that menu labeling regulations would violate restaurants’ First Amendment free speech rights—a novel interpretation of the Constitution that CSPI characterized as “deep fried.” “Subway’s new menu board drives a six-inch sub into the heart of the desperate lawsuit filed by the New York State Restaurant Association,” Wootan said. “Frankly, Subway’s competitors come off like crybabies when they complain that they can’t comply with this sensible regulation.” American adults and children consume about one-third of their calories from restaurants and other food-service establishments. Studies link eating out with obesity and higher caloric intakes. Without nutrition information, it is difficult to compare options and make informed decisions. Few people would guess that a smoked turkey sandwich (930 calories) at Chili’s has more calories than a sirloin steak (540 calories), or that on the children’s menu an order of chicken tenders (590 calories) has more calories than the baby back ribs (370 calories). “It’s shameful that the restaurant industry is working so hard to keep their customers in the dark,” said Wootan. “Between the New York lawsuit and aggressive lobbying against menu labeling policies in California and Seattle you’ve got to wonder what they are trying to hide.” According to CSPI, similar menu labeling bills or regulations have been introduced this year in state legislatures in Arizona, California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Vermont. Local jurisdictions considering similar measures include Washington, DC; King County, Wash.; Montgomery County, Md.; Philadelphia; and Nassau County, NY. 2007-07-09 Egg Producers Deceive Consumers, Violate Law with Bogus Omega-3 Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200706211.html FDA should enforce its own rules, according to CSPIWASHINGTON—Consumers who shell out more money for eggs boasting of omega-3 content and promoting heart health should know that those claims are not all they’re cracked up to be, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/omega3letter.pdf" target="CSPI urged the Food and Drug Administration">CSPI urged the Food and Drug Administration</a> (FDA) to stop seven egg producers from implying that their eggs can reduce the risk of heart disease. In fact, says CSPI, egg producers should not be making heart-healthy claims, because the FDA specifically prohibits such claims on eggs and other foods high in cholesterol or saturated fat. “Egg producers have used the omega-3 buzz word to bilk health-conscious consumers—and so far they’ve gotten away with it,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA should start enforcing its own rules, instead of letting companies hoodwink shoppers with a myriad of misleading and downright inaccurate claims on labels, ads, and Web sites.” Egg producers take advantage of consumers’ limited knowledge of the different types of omega-3s. While the FDA permits claims for a possible reduced risk of heart disease linked to two kinds of omega-3s, DHA and EPA, the agency does not allow such claims for other omega-3s. CSPI commissioned a lab test that found that less than half of the advertised 350 mg of omega-3s in a Land O Lakes egg came from EPA and DHA. Yet, omega-3 eggs generally cost twice as much as regular eggs. “The most beneficial omega-3 fatty acids come from fish, fish oil, and algae,” said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Heller. “Even if eggs had the ‘right’ kind of omega-3s, they still contain significant levels of saturated fat and cholesterol, which increase the risk of heart disease.” Even the eggs with the most DHA and EPA contain no more of those omega-3s than the amount in one and a half teaspoons of salmon, the richest source of omega-3s, according to CSPI. Products named in the CSPI complaint include: • Land O Lakes claims that “omega-3 All-Natural Eggs” are a “good source of heart-healthy nutrition” despite the fact that FDA has not defined the term “good source” for omega-3s and that the eggs contain too much saturated fat and cholesterol to meet FDA’s definition of healthy. • Eggland’s Best uses unapproved nutrient content claims for omega-3s on its carton and on its Web site. In addition, the company claims that its eggs have 25 percent less saturated fat than regular eggs. But that difference is less than half a gram—an amount that the FDA considers trivial for purposes of nutrition labeling. • Safeway Specialty 3 Eggs misleadingly boasts “100 mg of omega-3s” even though the FDA has not set standards for such omega-3 claims. In addition, the principal source of omega-3s in the hens’ diets is likely not a source that may be associated with heart benefits. • Gold Circle Farms claims that its eggs contain “450 mg of omega-3s.” The claims are based on two eggs even though the official FDA serving size for eggs is one egg. • The Country Hen illegally claims “the difference is an egg that is simply healthy” even though the product does not meet regulatory requirements for “healthy,” and also makes its claims based on two eggs. • Full Spectrum Farms boasts that its product has “30 mg” of unspecified omega-3s even though one ordinary egg, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, contains 37 mg of omega-3s, 20 mg of which are DHA and EPA. • Giving Nature asserts that the company feeds its hens flax seed which “has been known to hold high levels of DHA omega-3.” But, according to the Flax Council of Canada and others, the omega-3s that FDA considers healthful (DHA and EPA) are not found in plants such as flax seed. 2007-06-21 Desperate Restaurant Chains Sue NYC Over Diners' Right to Know http://cspinet.org/new/200706151.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonMcDonald's, Burger King, and the members of the New York State Restaurant Association, with their malevolent lawsuit against the New York City Board of Health, are basically telling New Yorkers that they don't have a right to know what they're eating. This lawsuit is served up with a supersized side order of shamelessness, since this is the very same industry that goes hat-in-hand to state legislatures and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200403102.html">Congress asking for special protection </a> from obesity-related lawsuits. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200609262.html">The New York City Board of Health </a>was absolutely right to require certain large restaurant chains to put calorie counts on menu boards. When it goes into effect this measure will be of enormous help to New Yorkers who are watching their weight, or trying to make healthy choices for their children. What does the industry have to fear, other than the fact that some people might get medium sodas instead of large, or regular hamburgers instead of Triple Whoppers? Or, heaven forbid, that restaurants actually compete on the basis of nutrition, and begin to offer more items with fewer calories and more whole grains, fruits, and vegetables? To claim that nutrition labeling is a violation of the First Amendment is to throw the Constitution into a fryolator until it's crispy. I trust that New York City will mount a vigorous defense and that the judge remands Ronald McDonald into custody for contempt of public health. 2007-06-15 Kellogg Company Makes Historic Settlement Agreement, Adopting Nutrition Standards For Marketing Foods To Children http://cspinet.org/new/200706141.html Advocacy Groups and Parents Applaud Efforts, Drop Plans to SueWASHINGTON—Kellogg Company will adopt nutrition standards for the foods it advertises to young children, and the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC), and two Massachusetts parents <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/settlementdocument.pdf">will not proceed with a lawsuit</a> against the company. Foods advertised on media—including TV, radio, print, and third-party Web sites—that have an audience of 50 percent or more children under age 12 will have to meet Kellogg’s new nutrition standards, which require that one serving of the food has: • No more than 200 calories • No more than zero grams of trans fat and no more than 2 grams of saturated fat • No more than 230 milligrams of sodium (except for Eggo frozen waffles) • No more than 12 grams of sugar (excluding sugar from fruit, dairy, and vegetables). Kellogg will continue its practice of not advertising to children under 6. In addition, Kellogg will not: • Advertise to children any foods in schools and preschools that include kids under age 12; • Sponsor product placements for any products in any medium primarily directed at kids under 12; • Use licensed characters on mass-media advertising directed primarily to kids under 12, as a basis for a food form or on the front labels of food packages unless those foods meet the nutrition standards. • Use branded toys in connection with foods that do not meet the nutrition standards. “We are pleased to work collaboratively with industry and advocacy groups to unveil these standards,” said David Mackay, president and chief executive officer, Kellogg Company. “We feel the Kellogg Nutrient Criteria set a new standard for responsibility in the industry.” “By committing to these nutrition standards and marketing reforms, Kellogg has vaulted over the rest of the food industry,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “As a practical matter, this commitment means that parents will find it a little easier to steer their children toward healthy food choices—especially if other food manufacturers and broadcasters follow Kellogg’s lead.” Products that don’t meet the criteria will either be reformulated to meet the Nutrient Criteria or they will no longer be marketed to children under 12 by the end of 2008. The nutrition standard will guide targeted future innovation and product development. Over time, Kellogg will work toward providing consumers even more product choices with enhanced nutritional value. “This agreement represents a significant step toward reducing marketing to children,” said Susan Linn, co-founder of the CCFC. “CCFC is particularly pleased that Kellogg will end in-school advertising to children under 12 and restrict its use of licensed media characters. It’s our hope that other companies will follow suit.” In January 2006, CSPI, CCFC, and two Massachusetts parents, Sherri Carlson and Andrew Leong, announced their <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601181.html" target="intent to sue">intent to sue</a> Kellogg and Viacom, parent company of the Nickelodeon children’s television network. Six weeks before the planned lawsuit was announced, the prestigious Institute of Medicine had released a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200512062.html">landmark report</a> that found that the mix of foods advertised to kids is “at best, a missed opportunity, and, at worst, a direct threat to the health of the next generation.” Viacom is not a party to today’s announcement. “We’re pleased that we were able to work collaboratively with Kellogg and that litigation proved not to be necessary,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner, who along with Steve Skalet of the Washington, D.C., law firm of Mehri and Skalet, PLLC, negotiated for the prospective plaintiffs. Last November the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB), the parent group of the industry-funded Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU), announced an <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200611141.html">initiative developed by 10 large food companies</a>, including Kellogg, to shift their advertising toward healthier choices. The nutrition standards and marketing reforms in Kellogg’s commitment will also form the basis for its pledge to that initiative. “This important agreement represents a rising tide that should lift all boats,” said Jacobson. “I hope other companies adopt commitments that are at least equal to what Kellogg is announcing today.” “We have further strengthened our global commitment to meeting consumers’ health and nutrition needs,” said Mackay. “This initiative builds on Kellogg’s century-long legacy of leadership in health and nutrition.” Over the past year, the company has invested nearly $10 million worldwide in health and nutrition initiatives and is committed to continuing these efforts. 2007-06-14 Food Marketers Rely Less on TV in Favor of Other Marketing, Says CSPI About FTC Report http://cspinet.org/new/200706012.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe new data released today by the Federal Trade Commission show that food advertising on children’s television hasn’t increased. But that’s hardly cause for much celebration. As parents know, television is just a one slice of an ever-expanding pie of food marketing aimed at kids. Once kid-directed food advertising was largely confined to Saturday morning cartoon shows. But next year, when the FTC looks at all of the other forms of food marketing aimed at kids, it will likely show that food advertisers are engaging in a massive, sophisticated multimedia campaign to get kids to eat junk food. It’s a campaign that uses in-school marketing, games on websites, licensed “spokescharacters” on food packages, and other tactics. It’s a campaign that helps fuel the skyrocketing rates of childhood obesity and diabetes. There’s virtually no encouragement at all to eat healthy foods like fruits and vegetables. And that kind of corporate irresponsibility is why parents are increasingly looking to Congress and even the courts to help protect kids’ health. 2007-06-01 Pumped-Up Poultry Not 'Natural,' Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200705221.html Statement of Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonPeople shouldn’t be paying chicken prices for saltwater. But some unscrupulous poultry producers add as much as 15 percent saltwater—and then have the gall to label such pumped-up poultry products “natural.” Some in the industry euphemistically call chicken soaked or injected with salt water “enhanced chicken.” Of course this isn’t really about enhancing chicken, it’s about enhancing profits. Someone’s clucking all the way to the bank. Adding injury to insult is the fact that these “enhanced” products are much less healthy for you than the natural, unenhanced versions, because they contain up to five times as much sodium. Sodium, of course, tends to increase blood pressure and the risk of heart attacks and strokes. Americans consume way too much sodium as it is, and the last thing we need is more sodium tucked surreptitiously into otherwise low-sodium foods. I urge the USDA to put an end to this deceptive-labeling practice and allow consumers to make informed, healthful decisions. I thank Representatives Cardoza and Pickering for focusing their attention on this issue at a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/chicken_advisory.pdf" target="press conference">press conference</a> in Washington today, and for their efforts to help Americans save a little money on their grocery bills. 2007-05-22 Federal Trade Commission Urged to Crack Down on Enviga http://cspinet.org/new/200705212.html CSPI Says “Calorie Burning” and Weight Loss Claims IllegalWASHINGTON—The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) should take enforcement action against Coca-Cola and Nestlé for their unlawful deceptive advertising for Enviga, their green-tea-flavored diet soda, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/enviga_ftc.pdf" target="complaint">complaint</a> filed with the agency today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). At issue is the companies’ claim that Enviga burns more calories than the five calories per can it delivers, which, CSPI says, strongly implies weight loss. CSPI is separately <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="suing">suing</a> Coke and Nestlé in federal court on the same issue but says that shouldn’t stop the FTC from cracking down immediately on the false advertising. The companies deny that Enviga is positioned as a weight-loss product, but the <a href="http://www.enviga.com" target="Enviga web site">Enviga web site</a> tells a different story, according to CSPI. There, Enviga is “much smarter than following fads, quick-fixes, and crash diets” and is “another way to keep those extra calories from building up.” It is described as the “calorie burner” that “invigorates your metabolism” and provides “negative calories.” The companies have largely based those claims on a Swiss study they funded. Subjects in that test were given the equivalent of three cans’ worth of Enviga’s key ingredients: an antioxidant found in green tea called epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), caffeine, and calcium. An initial abstract of the study—which involved only 31 lean subjects and lasted only 72 hours—indicated that, on average, the participants expended extra energy. But surprisingly, the full <a href="http://www.enviga.com/_doc/nestle_clinical_study.pdf" target="study">study</a>, published in the February issue of the journal Obesity, disclosed that six participants actually expended less energy. When the study was published, The Obesity Society, the sponsor of the journal, issued a press release stating, “This was a very small sample demonstrating a very small effect….Far more extensive studies are needed before any claim for efficacy in human weight management can or should be made on the basis of this study.” “If one accepts the companies’ logic at face value, one in every five Enviga drinkers is likely to gain, not lose, weight,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “That’s not to say Enviga will make you fat, but there’s certainly no basis for a weight-loss claim. It’s hucksterism. It’s illegal. And Coca-Cola and Nestle should be made to follow the law.” As weak as the Swiss study is, most of the other studies are even less encouraging, according to CSPI. In two longer studies, the combination of EGCG and caffeine did not increase energy expenditure or body weight any more than a placebo. Because there is inadequate substantiation of the claims in Enviga’s marketing and advertising, the companies should be prohibited from making them and should pay fines and sponsor corrective advertising, says CSPI. “Enviga drinkers are being suckered into paying a premium for calorie-burning benefits they are not receiving,” according to the filing. Enviga costs around $1.39 a can. Though the companies’ claim a calorie-burning effect can be obtained from only one can, elsewhere they indicate that the maximum effect would be gained by drinking three cans, or more than $4 worth, of Enviga per day. The FTC already maintains that claims of weight loss without the need for extra physical activity or consuming fewer calories are inherently deceptive. (One Coke executive made the astonishing <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2007-02-11-enviga-claims_x.htm" target="claim to USA Today">claim to USA Today</a> that Enviga can replace walking up the stairs.) And, in a 2003 report on combating weight-loss fraud, the FTC found that claims that a product causes everyone to lose weight are also deceptive. CSPI says Enviga’s advertising runs afoul of the FTC’s findings on both of those counts. “If you want a lighter wallet, drink Enviga,” said Jacobson. “If you want a lighter you, drink water.” 2007-05-21 Burger King Hit With Trans Fat Lawsuit http://cspinet.org/new/200705161.html CSPI Says Burger King is Biggest Chain Without Firm Plans to Convert to Safer Alternatives to Partially Hydrogenated OilsWASHINGTON—By using partially hydrogenated oil, Burger King is knowingly increasing its customers' risk of heart disease and early death, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bk_complaint.pdf" target="lawsuit">lawsuit</a> filed today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. CSPI is asking a District of Columbia Superior Court judge to order the restaurant chain to stop using the deadly trans-fat-laden ingredient, or at least to require prominent warning notices on Burger King’s menu boards. According to CSPI, Burger King is the biggest restaurant chain that is not fully committed to getting rid of the artificial trans fat found in partially hydrogenated oil. In 2006, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606081.html" target="Wendy’s">Wendy’s </a> became the first big fast-food chain to switch away from trans fat. McDonald’s, which was sued in 2003 for still using artificial trans fat frying oil despite a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html" target="2002 promise">2002 promise</a> to phase it out, has begun using trans-fat-free oil in some cities and plans to complete its conversion by the end of 2008. Starbucks replaced the partially hydrogenated oil in almost all of its pastries after news of a potential CSPI lawsuit was reported. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200704302.html" target="Last month">Last month</a>, KFC announced that it completed its conversion to trans-fat-free deep-frying, a move accelerated in part by a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606121.html" target="CSPI-initiated lawsuit">CSPI-initiated lawsuit</a>, which the group <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="withdrew from">withdrew from</a> after KFC announced its intentions. While Burger King will comply with new requirements in <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="New York City">New York City</a> and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200702081.html" target="Philadelphia">Philadelphia</a> not to use artificial trans fat in those cities, diners in the rest of the country will be subjected to high levels of trans fat. “Despite the moves of its competitors and the well-known dangers of artificial trans fat, it is unfortunate that Burger King is still using partially hydrogenated oil in fried foods and other menu items,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Some of its meals contain three, four, or five times as much trans fat as is safe to consume in an entire day. I hope that this lawsuit will spur Burger King to quickly eliminate the trans fat and, in the meantime, to warn its customers that it’s there.” Numerous fried and non-fried foods at Burger King have <a href="http://www.bk.com/Nutrition/PDFs/brochure.pdf" target="alarming levels of trans fat">alarming levels of trans fat</a>, according to CSPI. A King-size Onion Rings has 6 grams of trans fat. A regular-size order of Chicken Tenders with a large order of French fries has 8 grams of trans. A Sausage Biscuit with a large order of Hash Browns has an astounding 18 grams of trans fat—more than someone should consume in 9 days. Unlike other fats, the artificial trans fats found in partially hydrogenated oil exact a double whammy on arteries by raising the LDL (“bad”) cholesterol and simultaneously lowering the HDL (“good”) cholesterol. Increasing trans fat consumption by just 2 percent of calories is associated with as much as a 23 percent increased risk of developing coronary heart disease, <a href="http://www.medpagetoday.com/PrimaryCare/DietNutrition/tb/3093" target="according to researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health">according to researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health </a>. Both the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee and the American Heart Association recommend getting no more than 1 percent of calories from trans fat, which works out to just two grams of trans fat for someone on a 2,000-calorie daily diet. That two grams is about what one could expect from the smaller amounts of naturally occurring trans fat in milk and meat products, leaving virtually no room for anything partially hydrogenated, according to CSPI. This week, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200705151.html" target="Montgomery County, Md.">Montgomery County, Md.</a>, became the first county in the country to enact regulations phasing out artificial trans fat in restaurants, and <a href="http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=589426&category=ALBANY&BCCode=LOCAL&newsdate=5/15/2007" target="Albany County, N.Y.’s">Albany County, N.Y.’s</a> legislature passed a similar law that is expected to be approved soon by the county executive. Several months ago, New York City and Philadelphia became the first cities to pass laws getting artificial trans fat out of restaurants operating there. New York’s regulation begins to take effect for deep-frying in July. CSPI will be represented in its lawsuit by Stephen Gardner, its litigation director, with Steven N. Berk of the law firm of Chavez & Gertler acting as co-counsel. The suit charges that Burger King is in violation of the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act by selling foods laden with trans fat and by failing to let consumers know—an omission that misleads the public assuming the items are safe. Burger King has more than 7,300 U.S. locations, and global sales of more than $11 billion. “Virtually every major restaurant chain in the country is working overtime to replace artificial trans fats with healthier oils, but Burger King can’t be bothered,” said Gardner. “Litigation has proven to be an effective means at accelerating the pace with which restaurant chains are getting rid of trans fat, and we hope the court brings Burger King to his senses in this case.” 2007-05-16 CSPI Calls on House to Fix FDA Reform Bill by Eliminating Conflict-of-Interest Waivers http://cspinet.org/new/200705093.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Director Merrill GooznerIt is disappointing that with a tie vote today, the Senate did not move toward ending the discredited practice of letting scientists with financial conflicts of interest serve on FDA advisory panels. Permitting experts with financial ties to drug companies to vote in FDA advisory committee meetings can have serious public health consequences. We’re grateful for the leadership of Senators Richard Durbin, Jeff Bingaman, and Barack Obama in offering their amendment today. There is clearly bipartisan support for limiting, if not ending altogether, the FDA’s ability to waive conflict-of-interest rules. And we hope that when the House takes up the FDA reform bill, it will close the door that the Senate has left wide open. We don’t need another Vioxx. 2007-05-09 USDA Wrong Place to Consolidate Food Safety, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200705091.html Agency's Boosterism Role at Odds with Health & Safety, Committee ToldWASHINGTON—The U.S. Department of Agriculture would be the wrong place to consolidate all food safety functions, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. While CSPI does want a unified food safety agency, it says a trial balloon floated by the chairman of the House Agriculture Committee should be popped before it advances. “Consumers cannot trust the USDA to take on the huge responsibility of managing the entire food safety system, when that agency lacks a public health mission and a consistent record of improvement for the meat and poultry it currently regulates,” CSPI wrote today to Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN). CSPI filed written <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/usda_testimony.pdf" target="testimony">testimony</a> with the committee, which is holding a hearing today, urging passage of the Safe Food Act. That bill, authored by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), would consolidate the food safety functions of USDA, FDA, and other government agencies into an independent Food Safety Administration. “A food safety agency should be strong and independent, and that is not what we would get if it were placed at that Department of Agriculture, the nation’s booster club for American agricultural products,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “During the last few years, the Secretary of Agriculture has spent far more time trying to convince Japan to buy U.S. beef then he has on ensuring that that beef is free of contamination.” In the meantime, Congress should give the Food and Drug Administration an equal and proportionate share of food safety dollars to ensure it can more effectively manage the food safety risks from fresh produce, processed food and the imported foods it regulates, says CSPI. While USDA regulates only 20 percent of the food supply, it gets two-thirds of food-safety budget and has ten times the number of inspectors as FDA. FDA regulates 80 percent of the food supply, and these products cause the lion’s share of food safety problems. The Bush Administration’s 2008 budget proposal does nothing to solve the problem by requesting FDA receive only $10.6 million in new money, while USDA gets $268 million in increased funding, including $164 million for the “Food and Agriculture Defense Initiative.” “We need a food safety budget based on science and common sense—and not one based on politics, turf, and laws that predate the Model T,” DeWaal said. 2007-05-09 CSPI Tracks Beer Money in Congress http://cspinet.org/new/200705082.html Industry Seeks Roll Back of Beer TaxesAlcohol Policy Brief: CSPI is maintaining an <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/alcohol/beermoney.html" target="updated list of members">updated list of members</a> of the House of Representatives who are co-sponsoring the “beer tax rollback bill” in the 110th Congress, along with a tally of the contributions each has received in the 2005-2006 election cycle from the two biggest beer-industry donors, the National Beer Wholesalers Association and Anheuser-Busch. 2007-05-08 Memory Supplements Forgettable, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200705041.html Pills’ Science Debunked in Nutrition Action Healthletter [watch video]WASHINGTON—Don’t count on dietary supplements to help protect or improve your memory, despite the appealing claims on dozens of products. There’s no solid science indicating that any of the major ingredients in these pills actually work, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/memory_pills.pdf" target="review">review</a> in the May issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah" target="Nutrition Action Healthletter">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, published by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. With names like Memory Optimizer, Memory Defense, or Brain Advantage, these purported brain boosters often bear the names of prominent figures in alternative medicine. Even Prevention Magazine markets its own Memory Support formula. But CSPI says the science is flimsy on the pills, which can cost up to $70 per month. The irony is that the people who would most benefit from an effective memory enhancer—the elderly—are the most likely to be taken in by these unsubstantiated claims, says CSPI. <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tR0bU8Rs16g&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tR0bU8Rs16g&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> “These unscrupulous companies are ripping off the elderly and other people who might be vulnerable due to cognitive problems,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “These claims just aren’t justifiable—and neither is the expense.” Antioxidants are common ingredients in memory supplements, particularly lipoic acid (Stephen Sinatra’s Memory Defense has it) and the Asian plant bacopa (Shaklee’s Memory Optimizer has it). The single study of lipoic acid’s effect on cognition found that it didn’t help HIV patients with dementia. Of three Australian studies of bacopa, one found that 23 adolescents scored higher on memory tests but two bigger studies of middle-aged and older people found no effect. Neurotransmitters relay signals from one nerve cell to another. Choline, a building block of one such neurotransmitter involved in memory, is used in Prevention magazine’s Memory Support, but studies show that in supplement form choline doesn’t even reach the brain. That doesn’t bode well for the substance DMAE, a building block of choline, used in Dr. Susan Lark’s Memory Answer formulation. No study has found DMAE to be helpful for memory, and several tests have found it not to be useful for Huntington’s or Alzheimer’s patients. B vitamins are included in some products(like BioAdapt’s Memory Formula) because they can lower levels of homocysteine in blood, and high levels of homocysteine are linked to poor cognition. One Dutch study found that folic acid helped more than a placebo in folate-deficient volunteers, but grain-based foods in the U.S. are already fortified with folic acid (the Dutch study looked at folate-deficient volunteers.) Seventeen of the 18 other studies showed no effect of B vitamins on memory. Ginkgo biloba helps increase blood flow, and is included in many memory formulas, including David Williams’ Brain Advantage, yet studies are inconclusive at best. The most recent tests showed ginkgo takers scored better on just one of 14 tests of brain function—a result that may be due to chance. “I suppose these manufacturers are hoping you’ll forget how much you’re paying to try to improve your memory,” Schardt said. CSPI’s Schardt assembled <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/brainteasers.html" target="links">links</a> to some of the key studies mentioned above, and discusses some of his findings in a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/brainteasers.html" target="video">video</a> posted on CSPI’s web site. With 900,000 subscribers in the U.S. and Canada, Nutrition Action Healthletter is the largest-circulation health publication in North America. 2007-05-04 CSPI on the New Food Protection Czar http://cspinet.org/new/200705021.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe appointment yesterday by FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach of David Acheson as the FDA’s food protection czar is a good one. Dr. Acheson is a talented scientist and honest broker, and his presence in the commissioner’s office will give food safety a much higher profile at the top level of the agency. That said, the problems at FDA are not solvable by rearranging the boxes on the agency’s flowchart. In a perfect world, the nation’s food protection czar would occupy the director’s suite of a single, unified food-safety agency—and not some office down the hall. Having one cabinet secretary responsible for the safety of cheese pizza and another responsible for pepperoni pizza isn’t just a quaint curiosity. It’s a recipe for disaster. Such an agency would regulate meat and poultry as well as produce and processed food, and would have enough inspectors to equally ensure the safety of wheat gluten from China, hot dogs from Chicago, or spinach from California. Senators will have an opportunity to at least provide more authority to the FDA as they work on the prescription drug reform bill moving through Congress this week, and I urge them to do so. 2007-05-02 CSPI Salutes KFC for Trans-Fat-Free Chicken http://cspinet.org/new/200704302.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonLast year we wanted to court martial Colonel Sanders but today we salute him. KFC has now completed its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="conversion">conversion</a> from partially hydrogenated frying oil to heart-healthy soybean oil, and now KFC’s fried chicken is trans-fat-free. This is a big, bold move by the company, and whether it’s due in some small part to our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606121.html" target="litigation">litigation</a> or not, we welcome it with open arms. KFC’s fried chicken still has some saturated fat and way too much sodium, but being trans-fat-free, it is much healthier for hearts and arteries. That said, the company needs to get the trans fat out of its pot pies and biscuits, and reduce sodium across the board. I also hope that positive consumer response to this announcement hastens the speed with which Burger King, McDonald’s, and other fast-food companies abandon partially hydrogenated oils in favor of healthy alternatives. If KFC, which deep-fries practically everything on its menu, can make this important change, anyone can—and should. 2007-04-30 Institute of Medicine School Food Recommendations Should Be Law of the Land, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200704251.html Harkin-Murkowski Bill Would Require USDA to Update Old Nutrition StandardsWASHINGTON—The nutrition standards proposed today by the National Academies' <a href="http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3788/30181/42502.aspx" target="Institute of Medicine">Institute of Medicine</a> (IOM) for foods and drinks sold in vending machines, cafeteria a la carte lines, and elsewhere on school grounds are far superior to the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/school_junk_food.pdf" target="current national school food standards">current national school food standards</a>, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). While the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) 30-year-old standards for foods sold alongside the official school meals were designed to make sure American school children got enough of certain vitamins and nutrients, the new IOM standards take into account things children today are consuming too much of, namely calories, saturated and trans fat, sodium, and caffeine. The IOM report adds to the momentum for national legislation to get <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/junkfoodquiz.html" target="junk food">junk food</a> out of schools. “The difference between the current USDA and new IOM school food standards is night and day,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “Congress should support parents and protect kids by having USDA bring its disco-era nutrition standards in line with modern science.” Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) are spearheading <a href="http://www.schoolfoods.org" target="bipartisan legislation (S. 771)">bipartisan legislation (S. 771)</a> which would require USDA to update its school nutrition standards, and apply those standards to the whole school day and everywhere on campus. Current regulations only restrict the sale of soda, jelly beans, and other foods of minimal nutritional value in the cafeteria, and only during mealtimes. The current standards classify seltzer water, a drink CSPI considers a healthy alternative to soda, as a junk food merely because it has no vitamins or minerals. But French fries, chocolate bars, and potato chips are currently considered acceptable, regardless of their serving size, calories, saturated or trans fat, or sodium. If adopted, the IOM recommendations would all but expel soda and sugary drinks from schools. Caffeine-free diet soda could be available in high school only after school, and Gatorade-style sports drinks would only be available to students engaged in sports programs which include more than an hour of vigorous physical activity. “USDA should be encouraging the availability and sale of healthy foods in schools, including fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and reasonable portions of low-fat milk and real fruit juice,” said Wootan. “There’s enough junk food available in society without putting it in schools. Our kids deserve better than junk.” CSPI has an <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/junkfoodquiz.html" target="online quiz ">online quiz </a>that illustrates the arbitrary and obsolete standards the USDA uses for school foods. 2007-04-25 CSPI Urges FDA to Ban Grain Imports from China http://cspinet.org/new/200704241.html American Pets are Serving as "Puppies in the Coal Mine"WASHINGTON—The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should ban imports of wheat gluten, rice protein, and other grain products from China until the agency can certify that the products are free of chemical or microbial contamination, urged the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/chinese_grain_imports.pdf" target="letter">letter</a> to FDA commissioner Andrew C. von Eschenbach, CSPI recommended that FDA should also evaluate whether a ban is needed for other foods or ingredients coming from China—the source of the contaminated gluten linked to the largest-ever recall of pet food. CSPI’s letter comes in the wake of troubling new disclosures that China has denied entry to FDA inspectors investigating the pet food recall. Melamine, the suspected toxin in the pet food, was also recently detected by California authorities in the urine of hogs fed contaminated feed—a development that suggests that the problem could reach the human food supply. “If U.S. pets must serve as the ‘puppies in the coal mine,’ we urge FDA to heed the warning and take action now to ban grains and other grain products until the Chinese government and producers can guarantee that these imports are free of illegal and dangerous substances,” wrote CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson and CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. CSPI recognizes that while closing the borders to these food imports is a serious action, it is a necessary action for FDA, given its current budget shortfall and lack of food inspectors. FDA inspection staff has actually shrunk by 15 percent since 2003. The letter was sent to FDA on the eve of oversight hearings in two House committees. The House Energy and Commerce Committee will start hearings today with victims from various outbreaks and industry representatives. In early May, the House Committee on Oversight and Governmental Affairs will hold a hearing at which former FDA commissioners will discuss the funding gaps and their impact on the agency. Additional hearings will follow. <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=110_cong_bills&docid=f:s654is.txt.pdf" target="Legislation">Legislation</a> has also been introduced by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) to create a unified food agency with modern authorities. Today, unlike the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the FDA does not have programs in place to ensure that exporting countries maintain safety systems equivalent to those in the U.S. USDA also has a far bigger food-safety budget than FDA, even though more people get sick eating FDA-regulated foods. Such disparities are addressed in Durbin and DeLauro’s Safe Food Act by modernizing the food safety laws, which are over 100 years old. 2007-04-24 Quaker Agrees to Tone Down Exaggerated Health Claims on Oatmeal http://cspinet.org/new/200704171.html CSPI Drops Plans to SueWASHINGTON—The Quaker Oats Company has <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter_from_quaker.pdf" target="agreed">agreed</a> to drop certain claims on labels and in advertising that the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says exaggerated the health benefits of eating oatmeal. Quaker will no longer describe its oatmeal as a “unique” whole grain food that “actively finds” cholesterol and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/quaker_1.pdf" target=removes it from the body>removes it from the body</a>, and will no longer display a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/quaker_2.pdf" target="graph">graph</a> that greatly exaggerated the cholesterol-lowering potential of oatmeal. In turn, CSPI will not file a lawsuit that it warned Quaker company about in October. “Oatmeal is a healthy food, but that’s no excuse to give people the impression that it will miraculously remove cholesterol from your arteries or to otherwise exaggerate its benefits,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “We are pleased that Quaker was receptive to our concerns and that actually filing a lawsuit became unnecessary.” <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/new_quaker.pdf" target="New copy on Quaker’s packaging and advertising">New copy on Quaker’s packaging and advertising</a> will read: “as part of a healthy diet, the soluble fiber in oatmeal helps remove cholesterol” and “3 grams of soluble fiber daily from oatmeal may help reduce heart disease risk as part of a heart-healthy diet.” The changes are modest but make the new labels truthful, according to CSPI. The products included in the agreement include Old Fashioned Oats, Instant Oatmeal, Oatmeal Squares cereal, Oatmeal To Go bars, Take Heart, and Sun Country Quick Oats. CSPI’s litigation project, established in 2005, has helped improve food labeling and marketing through settlements with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html" target="Pinnacle Foods">Pinnacle Foods</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606011.html" target="Frito-Lay">Frito-Lay</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200510272.html" target="others">others</a>. In 2006,<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="CSPI dropped a lawsuit"> CSPI dropped a lawsuit</a> it had filed against KFC after that company announced a switch away from partially hydrogenated oil to heart-healthy soybean oil for deep-frying, and also negotiated an agreement with Procter & Gamble to more clearly label the artificial fat substitute olestra on Pringles Light Fat Free potato crisps. This year, CSPI sued Coca-Cola and Nestlé, the makers of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="Enviga">Enviga</a>, a carbonated green tea drink, for marketing the product with deceptive claims about its alleged “calorie burning” properties. “Of course, the Food and Drug Administration should be the one policing food labels, but the agency is so short-staffed and dysfunctional that officials won’t take action even when a neatly wrapped complaint is handed to them with a ribbon around it and a bow on top,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. 2007-04-17 New CDC Data Show Increases in E.coli, Salmonella and Vibrio http://cspinet.org/new/200704121.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s latest <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5614a4.htm" target="report">report</a> shows that infections from E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella, and Vibrio are all on the rise. E. coli cases reported to CDC’s <a href="http://www.cdc.gov/foodnet/" target="FoodNet">FoodNet</a> rose 50 percent since 2004, and Vibrio, another potentially deadly pathogen in shellfish, rose a whopping 78 percent since FoodNet began (1996-1998). The new data show that federal food safety agencies are failing in their job to protect Americans from foodborne illness. In the last six months, huge outbreaks associated with spinach, tomatoes, peanut butter and lettuce shook Americans’ confidence in the safety of the food supply. Even pet food has been recalled after an outbreak affecting thousand of cats and dogs. The Government Accountability Office recently put food safety on the list of high risk programs. Clearly, these programs are failing and need to be fixed. Consider the 78 percent hike reported today in illnesses due to Vibrio, a dangerous, often deadly bacteria found in raw oysters and other raw shellfish. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/vibrio_letter.pdf" target="The Food and Drug Administration leaves it to">The Food and Drug Administration leaves it to</a> an industry-dominated Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference to keep shellfish safe. That approach has obviously failed. Food safety in Washington is a shell game, with one cabinet secretary in charge of E. coli on beef and another cabinet secretary in charge if it shows up on spinach. The food safety programs are under funded and minimally staffed. Vacancies and reductions in force are rampant. CDC’s report clearly shows that the programs aren’t working, and Congress should intervene to provide increased funding to the FDA in the short run and ultimately dismantle this regulatory hodgepodge and create a single, strong agency to ensure the safety of our food. 2007-04-12 World Health Organization Forum Endorses Salt Reduction to Prevent Heart Disease and Stroke http://cspinet.org/new/200704091.html WASHINGTON—A committee convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) has published a <a href="http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/Salt_Report_VC_april07.pdf" target="report">report</a> endorsing population-wide strategies to reduce salt consumption as a cost-effective means of lowering blood pressure; thus preventing heart disease, stroke, and other serious health problems. The report urges governments around the world to reduce average sodium consumption to 2,000 milligrams per day, about half of what Americans consume now. The report stated that “if the agreed goals are not met in a timely way, regulatory approaches should be initiated and enforced. This point may have already been reached in countries where for years voluntary approaches have proved ineffective.” “There is a virtual consensus among physicians and scientists around the world that excessive sodium is one of the greatest health threats in foods,” said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Jacobson participated in the WHO forum, but was not on the report-writing committee. “Unfortunately, there’s much less enthusiasm for salt reduction where it is needed the most—among food industry executives and government public health officials, in the United States and many other nations.” Since 1978, CSPI has been urging the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to take steps to reduce salt in processed and restaurant foods, starting by changing the regulatory status of salt from that of a “generally recognized as safe,” or GRAS, ingredient, to that of a food additive. Several regulatory petitions, two lawsuits, and nearly thirty years later, the FDA has done virtually nothing to encourage the food industry to reduce salt levels or to offer more low-sodium products. Yet experts at the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute have estimated that halving the salt content of processed and restaurant foods would save about 150,000 lives in the U.S. each year. In 2002, the WHO estimated that globally 62 percent of strokes and 49 percent of heart attacks were attributable to elevated blood pressure. The one bright spot is the United Kingdom, where the Food Standards Agency has mounted a vigorous campaign to urge consumers to choose lower-sodium foods and to pressure the food industry to lower sodium levels in their products. Last month, the agency <a href="http://www.foodstandards.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/2007/mar/saltconsumptioncampaign" target="reported">reported</a> that Britons are consuming an average of five percent less salt than they were in 2001. The WHO report springs from an October 2006 meeting in Paris convened as part of the implementation of the WHO’s Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. Meeting participants included national health officials, academic specialists in high blood pressure and heart disease, and representatives from industry and non-governmental organizations. The report also recommended better labeling of sodium content on processed foods, more consumer education, and exploring other ways of providing iodine in the diet besides fortifying table salt. 2007-04-09 Montgomery County Trans Fat Proposal Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200703261.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonPeople who live in the area won’t be surprised to learn that Montgomery County, Maryland is slightly ahead of most of the country in terms of advancing public health. After all, the county was one of the first jurisdictions to protect restaurant patrons from the hazards of secondhand cigarette smoke. And local institutions like the Silver Diner, and the global Marriott, headquartered here, are similarly far ahead of most other food service providers in that they’ve gotten rid of artificial trans fat. Councilmember Duchy Trachtenberg deserves credit and the public’s gratitude for <a href="http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/Apps/Council/PressRelease/PR_details.asp?PrID=3381">proposing</a> that all food service providers in the county phase out partially hydrogenated oils. Let’s be clear that the partially hydrogenated oils at issue here aren’t a true food, as such, but rather an artificial substance created in chemical factories. Natural, heart-healthy fats like canola, soybean, corn, and peanut oils abound, and are perfectly suitable for deep-frying, baking, and for use in processed foods. Though high in saturated fat, even butter, sustainably grown palm oil, and lard are better than partially hydrogenated oils. No one’s going to miss artificial trans fat once it’s gone. I hope that Councilmember Trachtenberg’s proposal inspires another locally headquartered institution, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to take action on trans fat. While the FDA acknowledges that artificial trans fat is a powerful promoter of heart disease, and that it has been contributing to the early demise of tens of thousands of Americans each year, the agency has mostly been a silent spectator while cities like <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html">New York</a> and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200702081.html">Philadelphia</a> have acted on their own to protect their citizens’ health. Happily, when we <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200602061.html">tested French fries from the FDA’s own cafeteria in Rockville</a>, we found that they were virtually trans-fat-free. But I note with some pleasure that Montgomery County’s regulation would apply there also, as well as at Burger King, McDonald’s, and at any other establishment still using this discredited ingredient. I urge the full Council to support this important public-health regulation and I look forward to having yet another reason to go out to eat in Montgomery County. 2007-03-26 Wok Carefully: CSPI Takes a (Second) Look at Chinese Restaurant Food http://cspinet.org/new/200703211.html Too Much Sodium in Otherwise Healthful Food, Says Nutrition Watchdog [video]<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/x-PnNeSZZig&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/x-PnNeSZZig&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> WASHINGTON—Popular Chinese restaurant meals can contain an entire day’s worth of sodium and some contain two days’ worth, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/wok_carefully.pdf" target="new analysis">new analysis</a> by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest. The good news is that Chinese food is often rich in vegetables and the fat comes mostly from heart-safe, trans-fat-free vegetable oils. More good news is that Chinese food hasn’t gotten worse since CSPI first looked—which is something that certainly can not be said about typical <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702262.html" target="American-style restaurant food">American-style restaurant food</a>. Here are some of the findings of Wok Carefully, by CSPI nutritionists Bonnie Liebman and Jayne Hurley, published in the April issue of the group’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm" target="Nutrition Action Healthletter">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>. To put these numbers into context, people eating 2,000 calories a day should limit their daily intake to 20 grams or less of saturated fat and 2,300 milligrams (mg) of sodium. (2,300 mg is equivalent to one teaspoon of salt.) African Americans, anyone middle-aged or older, and people with high blood pressure should consume no more than 1,500 mg of sodium per day. The numbers do not include rice (200 calories per cup). • Appetizers: An order of six steamed pork dumplings has 500 calories, so each one has about 80 calories. (Steaming, as opposed to pan-frying, saves surprisingly few calories, only about 10 per dumpling.) An Egg Roll has twice the calories of a Spring Roll (200 versus 100). An order of four BBQ Spare Ribs has 600 calories, 14 grams of saturated fat, and 900 mg of sodium, making it the unhealthiest Chinese appetizer CSPI analyzed. • Vegetables: Eggplant in Garlic Sauce has 1,000 calories and 2,000 milligrams of sodium. Szechuan String Beans or Stir-Fried Mixed Vegetables, sometimes called Buddha’s Delight, cuts the calories roughly in half (600 and 500 calories, respectively). • Shrimp: Shrimp dishes are among the healthiest choices on Chinese restaurant menus, according to CSPI. Szechuan Shrimp and Shrimp with Garlic Sauce each have about 700 calories; Shrimp with Lobster Sauce has only 400. But like almost everything else on the menu, these dishes have too much sodium, ranging from 2,300 mg to 3,000 mg. • Chicken: Lemon Chicken, which is battered, deep-fried, and served with a sugary yellow sauce, has 1,400 calories and 13 grams of saturated fat. CSPI says that’s like eating three fried McChicken sandwiches plus a 32-oz. Coke at McDonald’s. Chicken with Black Bean Sauce has half the calories (700) but more sodium (3,800 mg) than any other dish CSPI analyzed. • Beef: Orange (or Crispy) Beef has 1,500 calories, 11 grams of saturated fat, and 3,100 mg of sodium. Unfry the beef and add a heaping portion of broccoli, and the dish loses more than a third of its calories. Beef with Broccoli has about a half-pound of broccoli, which helps cut the calories to 900. • Noodles and Fried Rice: Most of these are “a load of greasy, refined carbs,” says CSPI. The group’s test of Chicken Chow Foon (also called Chicken Chow Fun) found that it was fairly similar to the Lo Mein and Fried Rice tested in years past. All weigh in at 1,100 to 1,500 calories and 2,700 to 3,600 mg of sodium. “Many people recall the surprising things we reported in 1993 about Chinese dishes like Kung Pao Chicken and House Lo Mein, and those dishes certainly haven’t gotten any better,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But let’s also give credit where credit is due. Many Chinese entrées are loaded with healthy vegetables and lean shrimp or chicken. However, when it comes to sodium, there’s no real safe harbor on the Chinese restaurant menu.” “My basic advice to diners is this: Stick with the veggie-rich and stir-fried shrimp or chicken dishes, steer clear of the entrées that are basically deep-fried meat or chicken in sauce, and don’t waste your calories on greasy noodles and fried rice,” said CSPI director of nutrition Bonnie Liebman. “Leaving some of the sauce behind on the platter and taking home a doggie bag can further help keep a lid on both the calories and the salt.” Other ways of limiting salt include skipping soups (which typically have about 1,000 mg per bowl), going easy on dipping sauces, and not adding extra soy sauce at the table, according to CSPI. Chinese restaurants are also used to accommodating special requests like serving sauces on the side, or lightly sautéing as opposed to deep-frying chicken in popular items like General Tso’s Chicken. Getting brown rice instead of white rice adds extra nutrients. “In addition to cutting back on sodium, I’d like to see Chinese restaurants more regularly offer brown rice as an alternative to white rice,” said Dr. Frank Hu of the Harvard School of Public Health. “Brown rice is a better source of fiber, vitamins, and minerals.” “Sodium is relatively high in some Chinese food, which increases the risk of hypertension and stroke,” said Dr. Jiang He, chair of the department of epidemiology at Tulane University School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine. “I urge Chinese restaurants to cook with less salt and to offer reduced-sodium soy sauce.” Prominent D.C.-area restaurateur Larry La, whose <a href="http://www.meiwahrestaurant.com" target="Meiwah ">Meiwah </a>restaurant is a favorite of former President Bill Clinton, notes that he offers a selection of steamed or lightly sautéed items served with sauces on the side for those patrons who want to curb calories and salt. La also offers brown rice. “I want to give my customers what they want, and many tell me they are looking for healthy options for their families,” said La. “Providing those options is not only good for my customers, it’s good for my business.” Some of the data in Wok Carefully come from independent laboratory analysis and some from two nationwide chains that make nutrition information available online. 2007-03-21 Surgeon General's Call to Action on Underage Drinking Welcomed http://cspinet.org/new/200703072.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project's Manager of Federal Relations Kimberly MillerThe U.S. Surgeon General’s long-awaited <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2007pres/20070306.html" target="Call to Action">Call to Action</a> on underage drinking amplifies the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine’s report of more than three years ago urging a national strategy to address the nation’s worst youth drug problem. We hope that this declaration from the nation’s top physician will provide a further wake-up call on the seriousness of the underage drinking problem and help inspire a sustained public effort to reduce it. As a first priority, this enhanced federal commitment should have at its centerpiece a hard-hitting, independent media campaign. Such a campaign is needed to reach parents and kids with the facts about underage drinking and balance the ocean of alcohol promotion that encourages it. However, the report omits one of the most effective policies to deter underage drinking—tax increases on alcoholic beverages. And, since 20 percent of drinkers account for about 80 percent of the alcohol consumed, it should come as no surprise that the industry loudly objects to policies that actually reduce heavy consumption. The public health community stands ready to work with state and federal policy makers to implement the Call to Action and develop policies to carry out its goals. 2007-03-07 T.G.I. Friday's "Right Portion, Right Price" is Right Direction, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200703071.html WASHINGTON—T.G.I. Friday’s deserves credit for its new <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/mnr/fridays/27066/" target="“Right Portion, Right Price”">“Right Portion, Right Price”</a> menu, which gives consumers the option of several smaller entreés when they dine out, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Last week, the restaurant chain announced the move and became the first in its category to respond to consumer demand for smaller meals at discounted prices. “In a world where appetizers, entrées, and desserts at a chain restaurant can top 2,000 calories apiece, I’m pleased that T.G.I. Friday’s is listening to their customers and recognizing that it can play a role in improving the public’s health,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Since Americans now get about one-third of their calories from restaurants, the increased availability of healthier, portion-controlled options is a real benefit to calorie-conscious diners.” Although T.G.I. Friday’s is removing trans fat from most of its foods and providing the new portion-controlled menu, the chain still has some catching up to do with its competitors in providing nutrition information to customers. But for a handful of “Better for You” dishes that the menu flags as having roughly 500 calories and 10 grams of fat, the company provides no nutrition information in restaurants or even online. Only two of the new smaller-portion items are in that "Better for You" category. Last month, CSPI’s Nutrition Action Healthletter published "<a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/xtremeeating.pdf" target="X-treme Eating">X-treme Eating</a>,” a report on the gargantuan calorie and fat content of some chain restaurant meals. CSPI advocates <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="menu labeling">menu labeling </a>legislation, which would require calories on fast-food menu boards and expanded nutrition information on chain restaurants’ printed menus. 2007-03-07 Senate Hearing to Debate Junk Food in Schools Tuesday http://cspinet.org/new/200703051.html WASHINGTON—Tomorrow the Senate Agriculture Committee will hold a <a href="http://agriculture.senate.gov/Hearings/hearings.cfm?hearingId=2558" target="hearing"> hearing</a> on school nutrition issues, a move that the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says signals new hope for strong, national action to get junk food out of schools. Senators are expected to discuss the <a href=" http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s2592is.txt.pdf" target="Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act">Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act</a>, sponsored by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), among others, as well as the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)’s fruit and vegetable snack program, long championed by Harkin and which CSPI seeks to expand. "Though many states and local school districts are undertaking heroic efforts to improve the nutritional quality of foods sold in schools, the junk-food industry fights those efforts tooth and nail," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "The industry likes to say school foods should be subject to local controls, yet it strikes back at the efforts of parents and health professionals when they try to act locally. That's why the legislation sponsored by Senators Harkin and Murkowski is so important." The Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act would call on the USDA to update what CSPI says are <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nana_fact_sheet.pdf" target="disco-era nutrition standards">disco-era nutrition standards</a> for school foods from vending machines, school stores, and a la carte in the cafeteria, and would apply those standards throughout the school day and everywhere on school grounds. USDA’s current standards limit the sale of so-called foods of minimal nutritional value and only apply to cafeterias during meal times. Those standards allow candy bars, cookies, and sugary fruit-flavored drinks with very little juice, while disallowing things like seltzer water and breath mints. Among the witnesses Senators will query is Susan Neely, the top Washington, D.C., lobbyist for the soda industry. Her American Beverage Association represents Coca-Cola, Pepsi, and other soft drink companies in their efforts to block local and national legislation to improve school foods. Despite increasing rates of obesity in children and teens, the Senate hasn't held a hearing on the sale of junk foods in schools since at least 2003. 2007-03-05 British Crackdown on Junk Food Ads Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200702232.html CSPI Says Food Companies and Broadcasters Should Comply with Similar Guidelines HereWASHINGTON— Television advertising in the United Kingdom for foods high in fat, salt, or sugar will be reduced by up to 50 percent on programs viewed by children under 16 under <a href="http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2007/02/nr_20070222" target="tough new regulations promulgated by Ofcom">tough new regulations promulgated by Ofcom</a>, that country’s quasi-governmental telecommunications regulator. While U.K. consumer groups will press the British parliament to enact tighter standards, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) urged multinational food companies to behave at least as well in the U.S. as they’ll soon be required to behave in the U.K. “The new British regulations are far <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200611171.html" target="superior">superior</a> to the situation here, where the Federal Trade Commission continues to support a failed self-regulatory system,” said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. “If food companies and the advertising industry can survive under the new British standards, they could certainly survive under similarly tough standards in the United States.” In the U.S., the industry-funded <a href="http://www.caru.org/" target="Children’s Advertising Review Unit ">Children’s Advertising Review Unit </a>enforces a set of narrow technical guidelines, which unlike the new British rules, do not consider the nutritional quality of foods. Notably, CARU’s web site emphasizes that it works to preserve advertisers’ “freedom to direct their messages to young children.” Similarly, the <a href="http://www.narcpartners.org/about/index.asp" target="National Advertising Review Council">National Advertising Review Council</a>, CARU’s parent organization, states that its top goal is to “minimize governmental involvement in the advertising business.” The Council of Better Business Bureaus, which oversees both organizations, is promoting a new initiative that merely requires food companies to pledge that 50 percent of their ads contain a message encouraging healthy diets or physical activity. Since the Federal Trade Commission has indicated it won’t restrict food advertising on children’s television, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601181.html" target="CSPI has threatened litigation ">CSPI has threatened litigation </a>to protect kids from junk-food ads. Last year, CSPI, the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, and two Massachusetts parents announced that they may sue Kellogg and Viacom, owner of the kid-friendly Nickelodeon network, over their marketing practices. The potential plaintiffs are in negotiations with Kellogg, but not Viacom. Litigation is likely if agreeable settlements with one or both parties are not reached. 2007-02-23 Consumer Group Praises Pepsi's Disclosure of Caffeine Content http://cspinet.org/new/200702201.html CSPI Urges Coke and Others to Follow SuitWASHINGTON--<a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/pepsi_label.pdf" target="Cans and bottles of Pepsi">Cans and bottles of Pepsi</a> will now bear an important disclosure-the exact amount of caffeine in each serving. That information on soda containers will help pregnant women, parents, and others concerned about adverse effects of the mildly addictive stimulant drug, which is also found in coffee, tea, chocolate, and other products. Since 1997, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has been calling on the Food and Drug Administration to require disclosure on food labels of caffeine content. The American Medical Association has done the same. Today CSPI applauded PepsiCo's new practice and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/coke_letter.pdf" target="called on Coca-Cola">called on Coca-Cola</a> and other marketers of caffeine-containing products to follow suit. "Every company that adds caffeine to food should tell consumers how much they're getting, so consumers can comparison shop and make their decisions accordingly," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Pepsi deserves credit for voluntarily putting caffeine contents on labels. I don't know why Coke and coffee companies are so jittery about letting their customers know how much they're getting." Plain old Pepsi-Cola lists 25 milligrams of caffeine per 8-ounce serving, so a 20-ounce bottle would have 62.5 mg. Diet Pepsi has 24 mg of caffeine per 8 ounces; Pepsi One and Mountain Dew have more with 36 mg per 8 ounces. Brewed coffee varies, but a 16-ounce cup at Starbucks has around 260 mg, though the company doesn't make that number easy to find. Coca-Cola doesn't disclose caffeine content on Coke cans, but it does disclose caffeine content-100 milligrams per 12 ounces-on labels of a new green-tea-flavored carbonated drink called Enviga. But because Enviga's labels and marketing materials falsely imply that it results in "negative calories" and promotes weight loss, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="CSPI has sued">CSPI has sued</a> Coca-Cola and its partner on Enviga, Nestle, in federal court. 2007-02-20 Congressional Leaders Call for Single Food Safety Agency http://cspinet.org/new/200702143.html CSPI Supports Effort to Modernize Food Safety LawsWASHINGTON—Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) today introduced legislation to put all food safety responsibilities under a single new Food Safety Administrator. The Safe Food Act also would modernize the 100-year old food safety laws, and give the new chief a unified budget. The legislation is supported by the nonprofit food safety and nutrition watchdog group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The government’s finite food safety resources are not equitably split between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Bush Administration’s 2008 budget proposal makes matters worse, according to CSPI. USDA regulates 20 percent of the nation’s food supply, and the Administration proposes giving the department $270 million in new money for food safety and security. FDA regulates 80 percent of the food supply, including fresh vegetables like spinach and lettuce, but it will get only $10.6 million in new food safety money, despite being underfunded already. “The Bush food safety budget defies logic,” said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “While the budget clearly recognizes the need for more funding for food safety, money is being directed at animal health problems and meat and poultry at the expense of preventing outbreaks from fresh produce.” The Safe Food Act would create a Food Safety Administration, similar to the Environmental Protection Agency, that would take responsibility for food safety and labeling from USDA and FDA. The bill would also establish a comprehensive program to protect public health and bolster consumer confidence in the safety of the food supply. Currently, food safety monitoring, inspection, and labeling functions are spread across 12 federal agencies. “It makes no sense to have one agency regulate chickens and another regulate eggs, or to have one agency regulate cows and another to regulate milk,” said CSPI food safety staff attorney Ken Kelly. “When one cabinet secretary is responsible for pepperoni pizza and another is responsible for cheese pizza, you know something’s wrong.” The Safe Food Act would consolidate the activities of various federal agencies responsible for the nation's food supply including USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; the FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; and the Commerce Department’s National Marine Fisheries Service. The bill also includes a traceback provision, gives the new agency recall authority, and requires more frequent inspections to help prevent future E. coli outbreaks. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently designated food safety as one of the high risk federal government programs. Agriculture, including all food production, is about 13 percent of the gross domestic product, and the largest industry in the U.S., according to GAO. Unsafe food poses a significant burden on consumers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 76 million people suffer from foodborne illness each year, resulting in 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths. Children and the elderly are most likely to experience severe cases of illness and death from foodborne pathogens. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html" target="Outbreaks">Outbreaks</a>, like the one that occurred last fall from tainted spinach, can easily exceed $100 million in damages to both victims and the industry. 2007-02-14 Sweet Deals: School Fundraising Can Be Healthy and Profitable, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200702141.html New Report Rates Healthy and Unhealthy School FundraisersWASHINGTON—Schools often rely on fundraisers to bridge budget gaps and help pay for athletic equipment, field trips, and supplies. But even though rates of childhood obesity have tripled in recent years, those fundraisers all too often rely on the sale of calorie-dense, low-nutrient junk food, according to a new <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/schoolfundraising.pdf" target="report">report</a> from the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Fortunately, says the group, schools have a wide range of non-food and healthy-food fundraising options to choose from, and experience shows that these options can raise as much or even more money than junk-food sales. "Health-conscious parents have a hard enough time without schools pressuring their children to buy even more junk food to help pay for their own education," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "Why put parents in that position when there are perfectly good fundraisers that don’t jeopardize children's health?" Unhealthy fundraising options that CSPI recommends avoiding include: • Candy, cookie dough, doughnut, pizza, or pizza kit sales. These are among the most common school fundraisers, but enlisting school children to sell junk-food sends them the wrong message about the importance of healthy eating, according to CSPI. Junk foods are even included in the catalogs of many gift-wrap programs. • Fast-food fundraisers. McDonald’s, Chuck E. Cheese’s, Little Caesars, Krispy Kreme, Burger King, and other chains have school fundraising nights, gift cards, and other programs that encourage families to spend money at the chains. The restaurants enjoy the marketing and the opportunity to bring in more customers on weeknights, but most of the menu options at these chains undermine children’s health. • Label redemption programs. Campbell and General Mills each sponsor popular label redemption programs that are surprisingly unprofitable. To earn a $300 digital camcorder, parents would have to buy 27,850 cans of Campbell’s soup, about $33,000 worth. Twenty-two labels, or $26.40 worth of soup, would be required to earn a single colored pencil. Also, CSPI found that 80 percent of eligible products are unhealthy. • Bake sales. A 2000 report from the Centers for Disease Control found bake sales in two-thirds of schools. Time-strapped parents typically purchase low-nutrition baked goods for the sales, only to send their children to school with money to buy them back. Parents end up paying twice. • Vending machines. Not typically thought of as fundraisers, vending machines are one of the single biggest methods of raising funds in schools. CSPI calculated that the average amount of soft drinks high school students buy from school vending provides an extra 34,000 calories over four years. Happily, schools can make just as much money selling seltzer, juices, low-fat milks, and healthy snacks. "Though perceived as lucrative, we found that school beverage contracts usually raise less than a quarter of one percent of school districts' budgets. That modest amount of money can be replaced," said Wootan. Recently, <a href="http://cspinet.org/beveragecontracts.pdf" target="CSPI, with the Public Health Advocacy Institute, analyzed "> CSPI, with the Public Health Advocacy Institute, analyzed </a> 120 school beverage contracts and found that those beverages raise an average of just $18 per student per year for schools or districts. Some healthier fundraising programs available to schools include: • Physical activity fundraisers. Walk-a-thons, 5Ks, 10Ks, bowl-a-thons, and other sports-related fundraisers promote physical activity for students and can be lucrative for schools. • Book fairs. The publishing company Scholastic sponsors more than 100,000 book fairs per year, which promote literacy as well as raise funds. • Scrip and grocery store fundraisers. Scrip is a gift card for use at local retail stores, which schools purchase at a discount. Many grocery chains have programs that disburse a percentage of shopper’s purchases to a school they designate. The Bonus Bucks program of the Giant Food chain in the mid-Atlantic region disburses $2 million to schools each year with only a little effort by—and at no additional cost to—parents. • Recycling fundraisers. Used cell phones, empty printer cartridges, and even re-usable clothing can all be collected by schools in exchange for cash. Millions of printer cartridges are thrown away each year, yet schools can earn between $.06 and $2.20 per cartridge, depending on the model. • Healthy food sales. Fruit, bottled water, spices, or granola bars can be sold instead of junk foods. “A 5K race and walk has been a fantastic event and a popular fundraiser for our school,” said Juliet Rodman, a parent and registered dietitian who helped organize the successful annual event for the past three years at Walt Whitman High School in Bethesda, MD. The school had tried selling chocolate bars as a fundraiser, but the 5K was more successful at fostering school spirit, promoting exercise, and raising money for school programs, says Rodman. New school wellness policies present an opportunity for parents, teachers, and school administrators to rethink unhealthy fundraisers, set nutrition standards for foods sold in schools, and to encourage physical activity, according to CSPI. Required by Congress in the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004, these policies should require that foods sold through fundraising programs, including vending machines and a la carte lines in cafeterias, meet those standards. CSPI says parents should further spur progress by urging their members of Congress to cosponsor legislation that would require the U.S. Department of Agriculture to update its nutrition standards for all foods sold outside of school meal programs. In the last Congress, the Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act was sponsored by Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who are expected to move similar legislation through Congress this year. "It is time to junk the junk food fundraisers," said Wootan. "As a society we are sure to spend more on the resulting diet-related diseases than we could ever hope to raise selling junk food in schools." A useful resource for time-strapped principals, PTA leaders, school clubs, and parents, CSPI's report, Sweet Deals, contains contact information for 60 companies that provide schools with healthy fundraising programs, and a dozen brief case studies of schools that have improved the nutritional quality of foods and beverages sold in school without losing revenue. Support for this report was provided by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Argosy Foundation. 2007-02-14 Enviga Study Casts Doubt on Calorie Burning & Weight-Loss Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200702121.html Companies' Own Study Shows Many People May Expend Less Energy--Not More--After Drinking New BeverageWASHINGTON—Coca-Cola and Nestlé have claimed that an unpublished Swiss study shows that their new green-tea-flavored soda Enviga burns more calories than it provides, resulting in what sounds like a dieter's Holy Grail: "negative calories." Given the size of the study (just 31 young, lean subjects), its duration (only 72 hours), and the funding of the study (Nestlé itself!), the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) was skeptical enough to file <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200702011.html" target="suit">suit</a> in federal court against the companies earlier this month. But the full study, published today in the journal Obesity, shows that there's even less foundation for the weight-loss properties than Enviga's makers imply in their marketing materials. In the study, 31 young men and women ate strict calorie-controlled diets and drank the equivalent of three cans of Enviga each day for three days. Participants spent the third day in a special chamber that measured how many calories they burned. Most expended slightly more calories after drinking Enviga, but Coca-Cola and Nestlé didn’t disclose publicly that the drink's ingredients had the opposite effect in a significant number of the study participants. Six of the 31 participants actually burned up to 10 percent fewer calories after three days of consuming the ingredients in Enviga. “If you follow Coke's and Nestlé's logic, then about one in five consumers will eventually get fatter from drinking Enviga every day,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. "They've been withholding this information from their customers." The long-term impact of Enviga isn't clear, either. Outside the carefully controlled environment of the laboratory, some people might eat more food or engage in less physical activity and thus negate the benefit of any extra calories expended, according to Schardt. The scientists who conducted Coca-Cola's and Nestlé's research seem to agree that the companies' claims are premature. In the study published today they concluded that "more long-term studies would be necessary" to confirm the benefit of a drink like Enviga for weight control. Coke and Nestlé evidently couldn't wait for that, according to CSPI. Coca-Cola spokespeople have maintained that Enviga isn't marketed as a weight-loss product, while simultaneously claiming that Enviga is "much smarter than fads, quick-fixes, and crash diets," and that it keeps "those extra calories from building up." One Coke official seemed to suggest that Enviga can actually replace some physical activity. "I can choose to walk up the stairs or I can choose to have a can of Enviga," Helen Falco, Coke's director of nutrition and health policy, told USA Today. The editors of Obesity today issued a press release that pointedly states that the Enviga study should not serve as a foundation for weight-control claims. "Increasing metabolism is not the same as causing weight loss or prevention of weight gain," said Eric Ravussin, professor at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center and president of the Obesity Society. "Increases in metabolic rate may be easily offset by increased energy consumption or decreases in energy expenditure. Far more extensive studies are needed before any claim for efficacy in human weight management can or should be made on the basis of this study." Enviga consists of carbonated water, calcium, concentrated green tea extract, unspecified "natural flavors," caffeine, phosphoric acid, and the artificial sweeteners aspartame and acesulfame potassium. The company says its green tea extracts are high in an antioxidant called epigallocatechin gallate, or EGCG. In addition to being the target of a CSPI lawsuit, Enviga is the subject of an investigation launched by the office of Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal. He has demanded any studies that the companies have that relate to its weight-loss claims, which he said might just be "voodoo nutrition." 2007-02-12 Philadelphia Moving Toward Trans-Fat-Free Future http://cspinet.org/new/200702081.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonRestaurants in the city of brotherly love are about to become a lot more lovable, with the news that the Philadelphia city council has unanimously passed an ordinance that would get rid of artificially produced and heart-attack-inducing trans fat. Like <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612052.html" target="New York City's">New York City's</a> similar move, this will further accelerate the pace of partially hydrogenated oil's departure from the food supply, and we hope Mayor John Street promptly signs it into law. These bold public health actions, along with the trans-fat-phaseouts being considered by health departments, city councils, and state legislatures across the country, should be particularly embarrassing to the Food and Drug Administration, which is merely observing all of the action on the playing field from its perch in the bleachers. This is an agency, after all, that took more than ten years just to list trans fat on food labels. Nevertheless, I hope the FDA eventually takes action on the regulatory <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/trans_fat_petition_may_18.pdf" target="petition">petition</a> they've been sitting on since 2004, which would get rid of partially hydrogenated oil altogether and spare the need for cities and states to do this on their own. 2007-02-08 Watchdog Group Sues Coke, Nestlé For Bogus "Enviga" Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200702011.html Green Tea-Flavored Diet Soda Won't Help You Lose Weight, Despite Claims of "Negative Calories"WASHINGTON—The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/enviga_complaint.pdf" target="filed suit">filed suit</a> today against Coca-Cola and Nestlé for making fraudulent claims in marketing and labeling for Enviga, a new artificially sweetened green tea soft drink. Labeled “the calorie burner” on cans, Enviga is marketed as a weight-loss aid, with claims that it has “negative calories” and that it can “keep those extra calories from building up.” Enviga’s web site also says the drink is “much smarter than following fads, quick fixes, and crash diets.” But according to CSPI scientists who reviewed the studies cited by Coke and Nestlé, Enviga is just a highly caffeinated and over-priced diet soda, and is exactly the kind of faddy, phony diet aid it claims not to be. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in New Jersey, part of the region in which the beverage is being introduced. In December, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612041.html" target="CSPI served formal notification">CSPI served formal notification</a> on Coke and Nestlé (and their partnership, Beverage Partners Worldwide) that they would be sued if they continued to use the unsubstantiated calorie-burning and weight-loss claims on Enviga labels and ads, but the company indicated publicly and privately that it had no plans to change the claims. Enviga consists of carbonated water, calcium, concentrated green tea extract, various “natural flavors,” and ingredients typically found in diet soda, such as caffeine (three diet colas’ worth), phosphoric acid, and the artificial sweeteners aspartame and acesulfame potassium. The company says its green tea extracts are high in an antioxidant called epigallocatechin gallate, or EGCG. Many of Enviga’s claims are based on a 72-hour Nestlé-funded study of 31 people who were given a drink containing amounts of EGCG and caffeine equivalent to three cans of Enviga. On average, those subjects expended more energy, according to an abstract of the unpublished study. In any event, none of the 31 were overweight or obese—in fact all were quite lean to begin with. In other words, the company’s test may have detected some slight evidence that it increases calorie burning slightly—but only in a short-term test of thin people who were given a strictly controlled diet. And when the study was presented at a conference of the Obesity Society (publishers of the journal Obesity and also known as NAASO), the society disputed the study’s conclusions, insisting “it is improper to state or imply that the results of this study supports any weight loss” claim. No test of Enviga lasted more than three days. One European study found that EGCG and caffeine did not increase energy expenditure after one month and did not help people lose weight. One longer-term Japanese study did show that a tea fortified with EGCG and caffeine helped people lose more weight than a control tea, but then again, the study was conducted by a tea company and the subjects of the study were 38 of that company’s male employees. Enviga costs between $1.29 and $1.49 per can, and the company suggests that the maximum effect is gained by drinking three cans a day, or about $1,500 worth of the soda per year. “There is no clear evidence that what’s in Enviga will help you control your weight,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “You’d be much better off giving up non-diet soda, which costs nothing to do, or by joining a gym, which is typically less expensive than paying for 3 cans of Enviga a day.” CSPI will be represented by its litigation director Stephen Gardner, and by Mark Cuker and Michael J. Quirk from the firm of Williams Cuker Berezofsky, based in Cherry Hill, N.J. “This deceptive marketing campaign needs to be nipped in the bud before many more millions of Americans get ripped off,” said Cuker. “Enviga burns more money than calories.” CSPI’s litigation unit, formed in 2004, seeks to stop deceptive labeling or marketing campaigns or other practices that harm consumers’ health. It’s a strategy that helped spur KFC to drop artificial trans fats for deep-frying, and has resulted in improved labeling of products made by Tropicana, Quaker, Frito-Lay, Procter & Gamble, Kraft, and Cadbury-Schweppes. CSPI is soon likely to file a major lawsuit aimed at stopping Kellogg and Viacom (parent of the Nickelodeon television channel) from marketing junk food to young children. “If the Food and Drug Administration were at all credible, major corporations like Coca-Cola and Nestlé wouldn’t try to take consumers to the cleaners like this,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Imagine—two of the companies partly responsible for the general fattening of America are now urging us to pay them $4 a day to slim down with Enviga. The chutzpah!” 2007-02-01 CSPI Recommends Avoiding Fried Foods at Burger King & McDonald's Until Frying Oil No Longer Partially Hydrogenated http://cspinet.org/new/200701311.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonWith <a href="http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070131005217&newsLang=en" target="separate">separate</a> <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/29/ap/business/mainD8MV5Q000.shtml" target="announcements">announcements</a> this week, Burger King and McDonald's clearly see the handwriting on the wall: partially hydrogenated oil, which has been causing tens of thousands of fatal heart attacks annually, is on its way out of the food supply. That process will be accelerated by city and state laws, like New York City’s, which bar restaurants’ use of artificially produced trans fat, and possibly by lawsuits, like the one CSPI filed against KFC. Eventually, the Food and Drug Administration may even revoke its approval for partially hydrogenated oil once and for all. Many restaurants have largely eliminated trans fat. Among the big chains, Wendy's has switched to a healthier frying oil, and KFC and Taco Bell will eliminate trans fat from most of their foods by May. It's disappointing that Burger King is only beginning in-store testing and doesn’t expect to begin a national roll-out for almost two years. (Whether the company will stick to even that slow schedule is questionable, considering McDonald's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html" target="misplaced 2002 promise">misplaced 2002 promise</a> to switch to a healthier oil by 2003.) McDonald's is now making faster progress, with well over a thousand restaurants already using trans-free oils, but it won’t complete the change-over in its 12,000 other restaurants for many months. The trans-fat laggards should at least inform their customers through notices on menus and menu boards which foods contain trans fat. The bottom line for consumers is that they should avoid eating deep-fried products at McDonald's, Burger King, and other restaurants unless they know the foods are made with trans-free oils. 2007-01-31 What Danger Lurks in the School Cafeteria? http://cspinet.org/new/200701301.html New CSPI Report Finds School Districts Lagging in Food SafetyWASHINGTON—Conditions in America’s school cafeterias could trigger potentially disastrous outbreaks of food poisoning at any time, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which ranks food service operations in a new <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/makingthegrade.pdf" target="report">report</a> released today. Most of the 29 million meals served in the nation’s school cafeterias each day are nutritious and safe, but some school districts and governments aren’t inspecting school cafeterias frequently enough or are using out-of-date food safety standards, leaving students at risk of food poisoning. Younger children in particular face a higher risk of complications from infections caused by E. coli O157:H7, Salmonella, and other potentially deadly foodborne pathogens. In “Making the Grade,” CSPI analyzed inspection reports from high school cafeterias in 20 jurisdictions across the country and then rated those jurisdictions on the rigor of food-safety inspections, frequency of inspections, and ease of access to the results of cafeteria inspections. Some inspection reports documented unacceptable conditions such as roaches, both dead and alive; rodent droppings; and improper food storage and handling techniques. “Cities, counties, and school districts shouldn’t wait until a major outbreak of Hepatitis A, E. coli, or Salmonella forces them to update their food codes and ramp up inspections,” said Ken Kelly, food safety attorney for CSPI and lead author of the report. “Regrettably, many school cafeterias may be just one meal away from an outbreak.” Of the 20 jurisdictions evaluated, Hartford, Conn., received the lowest score, 37 out of a possible 100. Hartford had the highest number of critical violations, including multiple cases of dirty equipment and utensils, inadequate hand-washing facilities, and poor personnel hygiene. Hartford also had infrequent inspections (on average, one per year, violating the federal requirements for two inspections), poor access to inspection reports, and a weak food code. Other jurisdictions with failing scores include the District of Columbia, with the lowest inspection frequency; Rhode Island; Minneapolis, Minn.; and Hillsborough (includes Tampa) and Dade (includes Miami) counties in Florida. Montgomery County, Md., barely passed, as it has the most outdated food code. Fort Worth, Texas, had the best food safety score, with a score of 80 out of 100. Other top performers overall were King County, Wash. (includes Seattle); Houston; and Denver, Colo. Fort Worth; Maricopa County, Ariz. (includes Phoenix); Farmington Valley Health District, Conn.; Fulton County, Ga. (includes Atlanta); Hillsborough County; and Minneapolis scored well in inspection frequency (even though it failed overall). Maricopa County and Virginia also earned top scores for access to inspection information. CSPI’s Outbreak Alert! database has documented more than 11,000 cases of foodborne illnesses associated with schools between 1990 and 2004. Just one outbreak can have devastating consequences on the health of students, productivity in the classroom, and even on school district’s finances. In 2003, the Washington State Supreme Court upheld a $4.6 million verdict against a school district after 11 children were sickened from E. coli linked to ground beef in tacos. The most common pathogens responsible for school outbreaks include E. coli, Clostridium perfringens, Norovirus, and Salmonella, according to CSPI’s database. Infections from Norovirus and Hepatitis A are often linked to infected food handlers and other critical violations in school cafeterias. Salmonella, which is common on raw poultry, can spread to fresh produce if those foods are stored too closely together. If not cooked to 160 degrees Fahrenheit, hamburgers and other foods containing ground beef can harbor E. coli. To protect school children from food poisoning, CSPI recommends the following measures: • State and local governments should adopt up-to-date safety standards and receive adequate funding to ensure compliance with federal inspection regulations outlined in the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004. • Schools should request timely inspections, employ certified food handlers, and use the best food safety procedures. • Parents should monitor conditions in their child’s cafeteria and advocate for optimal food safety policies. CSPI’s complete report, “Making the Grade,” is on the web at <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/makingthegrade.pdf" target="www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/makingthegrade.pdf">www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/makingthegrade.pdf</a>. 2007-01-30 Glaxo-Affiliated Doctors to Dominate Upcoming NIH Neonatal Herpes Conference http://cspinet.org/new/200701181.html Health Groups, Prominent Physicians Call on NIH to Seek Balance and Prohibit Financial Conflicts of Interest on Guideline-Writing PanelsWASHINGTON—Next month five physicians will lead sessions at a National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) conference that was called to write clinical practice guidelines for preventing neonatal herpes. Four of those doctors have direct financial relationships with pharmaceutical giant GlaxoSmithKline—a company which stands to gain if the conference recommends broader testing of pregnant women for herpes, since Glaxo makes the antiviral drug Valtrex. Today more than 40 physicians and scientists and more than a dozen health organizations <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nih_herpes_letter.pdf" target="called on">called on</a> the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to seek balance when it convenes guideline-writing panels, and to ensure that all panelists are free from financial conflicts of interest like those of the four Glaxo-affiliated doctors. A December 13 front-page article in <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116596951975048320-search.html?KEYWORDS=herpes&COLLECTION=wsjie/6month" target="The Wall Street Journal">The Wall Street Journal</a> documented how Glaxo bankrolls continuing medical education sessions and physician talks aimed at promoting universal herpes screening for pregnant women. Remarkably, two of the doctors whose activities were exposed by the Journal will be among the five presenters at the upcoming February 20 NIH conference. The four presenters with ties to Glaxo are: • Dr. Anna Wald of the University of Washington has received grants and research support for her work on herpes from Glaxo and Roche, and received honoraria from Novartis, all of whom make antiviral drugs for herpes; • Dr. Zane Brown of the University of Washington gives “two to three lectures a week advocating universal herpes testing for pregnant women, earning $1,000 to $2,500 per talk,” and most of those sessions were financed by Glaxo grants to the CME providers, according to the Journal article; • Dr. Laura Riley of Harvard Medical School is secretary/treasurer of the American Herpes Foundation, a “patient advocacy” non-profit run by a for-profit medical marketing firm; its board contains no patients and its $183,000 budget in 2004 was almost entirely funded by Glaxo and Roche; and • Dr. Richard Whitley of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, who serves on the speakers bureaus for Glaxo and Novartis and serves on the board, and receives stock options and compensation from the start-up firm Fermavir, which is developing next-generation drugs aimed at the herpes family of viruses. Moreover, Dr. Whitley carried out these private sector activities while running NIAID’s Collaborative Antiviral Study Group. Obstetricians and gynecologists are sharply divided over whether all pregnant women should be tested for herpes, given that neonatal transmission of herpes is relatively rare, occurring in as few as 200 or as many as 1,250 U.S. births each year, according to sources quoted in the Journal. Articles and letters questioning universal testing, which would almost surely lead to more women being prescribed Valtrex, have recently appeared in the Lancet and leading OB/GYN journals. “Given the controversy surrounding the subject, we were surprised to see the lineup of speakers for the February 20 meeting… The lineup did not reflect the diversity of views on this subject, nor did the invitation reveal the conflicts of interest of virtually every invited presenter,” the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/nih_letter_signers.pdf" target="health organizations and physicians">health organizations and physicians</a> wrote to Dr. Elias Zerhouni, director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the NIAID, which is part of NIH, and other officials. Signatories included Lancet Editor-in-Chief Dr. Richard Horton, former New England Journal of Medicine editors Dr. Marcia Angell and Dr. Jerome P. Kassirer, the Center for Medical Consumers, Consumers Union, and the National Women’s Health Network. This isn’t the first time that NIH has convened guideline-writing panels that had members with ties to companies that stand to lose or gain from the panels’ recommendations, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which organized the letter to NIH. Panels having to do with managing cholesterol, hypertension, and HIV/AIDS have all had large numbers of industry-funded researchers serving on them. “NIH shouldn’t let drug company-affiliated doctors write the rules, and it shouldn’t stack the deck to make it look like there is medical consensus on something when there’s not,” said Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science Project at CSPI, which maintains a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity" target="database">database</a> of industry-funded scientists. 2007-01-18 7UP Drops "All Natural" Claim http://cspinet.org/new/200701121.html CSPI Praises Move and Drops Planned LawsuitCadbury-Schweppes will no longer market 7UP as “All Natural” according to a <a href="http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20070112005490&newsLang=en">statement</a> put out by the company. Rather, the company will highlight ingredients “for which there is no debate” over whether they are natural, which will obviously exclude the controversial factory-made sweetener known as high-fructose corn syrup. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) will drop <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605111.html">a planned lawsuit</a> against the company now that the misleading “all natural” claims will be halted. CSPI notified Cadbury-Schweppes of the possibility of a lawsuit in May and has discussed labeling issues with the company off and on since then. “We are pleased that Cadbury-Schweppes has fixed what was a flawed and deceptive marketing campaign and that this issue was resolved without our actually suing,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “We look forward to seeing exactly which words the company uses to describe its ingredients on labels and on marketing materials, but trust they won’t imply that high-fructose corn syrup is ‘natural.’” High-fructose corn syrup is nutritionally similar to natural table sugar, which comes from sugar cane or sugar beets. But in to contrast to table sugar, high-fructose corn syrup is made through a complex chemical industrial process in which corn starch molecules are enzymatically reassembled into glucose and fructose molecules. CSPI’s litigation unit has encouraged several major food companies, including Quaker, Frito-Lay, Procter & Gamble, Tropicana, and Pinnacle Foods, to halt deceptive labeling or marketing practices. KFC stopped using partially hydrogenated oils after being sued by CSPI, and Cadbury-Schweppes and other soda manufacturers avoided a CSPI-led lawsuit by agreeing to phase sugary sodas out of schools. In coming weeks and months CSPI may file previously announced lawsuits against Coca-Cola and Nestlé (over <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612041.html">Enviga</a>, a deceptively labeled green tea drink positioned as a weight-loss aid) and Kellogg and Viacom (for marketing junk foods to young children). 2007-01-12 Kraft is Sued for Falsely Calling Capri Sun Drink "All Natural" http://cspinet.org/new/200701081.html Update: Kraft got rid of "All Natural" claims; CSPI dropped suit[UPDATE: CSPI dropped its lawsuit after Kraft announced it would abandon "all natural" claims on Capri Sun.] WASHINGTON—Kraft Foods, the maker of Capri Sun—foil pouches filled with a solution of water, high-fructose corn syrup, and small amounts of juice—is being sued by a Florida woman for deceptively marketing the product as “All Natural.” The <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/complaint.pdf" target="suit">suit</a> contends that the company’s deceptive marketing tricks consumers into thinking the product is healthier than it actually is, perhaps encouraging some people to confuse the almost juice-less drink with real fruit juice. Though high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is no more harmful than other sugars, it is a plainly man-made ingredient, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which, alongside the Florida law firm of Varnell & Warwick, is representing the plaintiff in the class action suit. “When I saw ‘All Natural’ on the label, that sounded healthier than soda,” said Linda Rex, a Boynton Beach, Fla., grandmother and the plaintiff in the suit, who purchased Capri Sun for a young relative visiting from Ireland. “But when I got home and got out my glasses, I threw it in the garbage when I realized it contained high-fructose corn syrup and was nearly identical to soda.” It may sound like it comes from corn in the same way sugar comes from sugar cane or sugar beets, but HFCS is created by a complex industrial process performed in refineries using centrifuges, hydroclones, ion-exchange columns, backed-bed reactors and other high-tech equipment. Starch is extracted from corn and then converted by acids or enzymes to glucose. Then some of the glucose is further converted by enzymes into fructose. HFCS has only been widely used in food since the 1980s. CSPI says that while the glucose and fructose in HFCS are identical to naturally occurring glucose and fructose, the fact that chemical bonds are broken and rearranged in their production disqualifies them from being called natural. For instance, while a scientist might be able to produce sugar by rearranging the molecules of any number of things that contain carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen, it clearly wouldn’t be “natural” sugar. “Though Capri Sun claims to be ‘All Natural,’ its main flavoring would more accurately be called ‘Fresh from the Factory,’” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Let’s put it this way: Unless you and your chemist friends are prepared to undertake a little Manhattan Project in your kitchen, you won’t be brewing any high-fructose corn syrup from scratch anytime soon. How typical of a tobacco company, though, to call something like HFCS ‘All Natural.’” Kraft’s parent company, Altria Group, also owns Philip Morris USA, which makes Marlboro, Virginia Slims, Basic, and Parliament brand cigarettes. Altria soon may seek to spinoff Kraft, according to <a href="http://www.forbes.com/markets/economy/2007/01/04/altria-tobacco-legal-markets-equity-cx_rs_0104markets13.html" target="press reports">press reports</a>. Capri Sun is typically sold in boxes of 10 foil pouches. Both the boxes and the pouches use the words “All Natural,” but only the boxes disclose the presence of high-fructose corn syrup in the fine print of the ingredients list. Kraft also makes Capri Sun “All Natural Fruit Rolls,” which similarly contain HFCS. The suit, filed in state court in Palm Beach County alleges that the “All Natural” claims are in direct violation of that state’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, and asks the court to order Kraft to drop the false statements. This isn’t the first time CSPI has challenged a food manufacturer for passing off HFCS as “all natural.” In May, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605111.html" target="CSPI notified soda-giant Cadbury Schweppes">CSPI notified soda-giant Cadbury Schweppes</a> that it would file a lawsuit against the company for rebranding 7UP as “100% Natural,” despite the fact that it includes the factory-made sweetener. CSPI agreed to a request from Cadbury to discuss settlement possibilities before a lawsuit is filed. Those discussions are continuing, but CSPI is likely to sue if the company doesn’t agree to changes in the near future. Also, several years ago CSPI filed a complaint with the Food and Drug Administration about an “all natural” product with artificial ingredients—a line of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200207301.html" target="Ben & Jerry’s">Ben & Jerry’s</a> ice creams—but the agency yawningly responded that it had “other priorities.” “It’s a shame that a major company like Kraft tries to deceive consumers on food labels, and it’s a greater shame still that the FDA lets them get away with it,” said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. “We look forward to hearing Kraft’s lawyers defend their company’s behavior in court.” Since its litigation project was founded two years ago, CSPI has negotiated settlements that result in improved labeling or marketing of products made by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/betterlabeling.html" target="Quaker Oats">Quaker Oats</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html" target="Pinnacle Foods">Pinnacle Foods</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606011.html" target="Frito-Lay">Frito-Lay</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200510272.html" target="others">others</a>. In October, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html" target="CSPI dropped a lawsuit">CSPI dropped a lawsuit</a> it had filed against KFC after that company announced a switch away from partially hydrogenated oil to heart-healthy soybean oil for deep-frying. And, a month ago, Procter & Gamble agreed to more clearly label the artificial fat substitute olestra on Pringles Light Fat Free potato crisps after negotiating with CSPI. Also last month, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200612041.html" target="CSPI notified Coca-Cola and Nestle">CSPI notified Coca-Cola and Nestle</a> that it would sue those companies if they continue marketing Enviga, a new carbonated green tea drink, with deceptive claims about its “calorie burning” and weight management properties. A <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601181.html" target="lawsuit against Kellogg">lawsuit against Kellogg</a> for marketing junk-food to kids that CSPI and others announced last year is expected to be formally filed early this year. 2007-01-08 USDA Urged to Limit Sodium in Meat and Poultry Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200701031.html Americans' Salt Intake Far Exceeds Government RecommendationsWASHINGTON— Too much salt in the diet is a major contributor to high blood pressure, heart attacks and strokes, and almost all Americans consume far much more sodium than is recommended. So today the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sodium_limits_petition.pdf" target="urging">urging</a> the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to establish maximum levels of sodium in various categories of meat and poultry products. According to leading sodium researchers, halving the salt content in processed and restaurant foods would save 150,000 lives a year in the U.S. While fresh beef, pork, chicken and turkey are naturally low in sodium, many processors sell so-called “enhanced” products which are essentially marinated in salt water. While different brands of processed products, such as bacon, sausage, deli meats, hot dogs and frozen dinners, may appear extremely similar, the sodium content often varies widely from brand to brand, according to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/updated_saltreport.pdf" target="2005 analysis by CSPI">2005 analysis by CSPI</a>. Those ranges show that manufacturers of high-sodium products could reduce salt while still marketing safe, tasty and competitive products. For example, a 3-link serving of Johnsonville Original breakfast sausage has 610 mg of sodium, or 95 percent more sodium than Jimmy Dean Pork Original. Tyson Fresh Tenderloin Pork contains 300 milligrams of sodium per serving, or 575 percent more than IBP Supreme Lean Pork (50 mg). Marvel Prime Young Turkey Breast (frozen) has 490 mg, or 780 percent more sodium than Shady Brook Farms Fresh Natural Young Turkey Breast (60 mg). Despite the 1994 requirement that packaged foods disclose sodium content, the average daily intake of sodium has remained at about 3,400 milligrams—far higher than the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) “Daily Value” of 2,400 milligrams and the Department of Health and Human Services’ recommendation of 1,500 milligrams for middle-aged and older adults. “USDA already has extensive regulations governing the makeup of processed meat and poultry products, which set nutritional standards such as limits on fat content for some products, and limits on various preservatives or additives in others,” said CSPI executive director Michael Jacobson, PhD. “The agency should set similar reasonable limits for sodium chloride, which, at the levels consumed, might just be the single most dangerous ingredient in the food supply.” About 65 million Americans have high blood pressure, and some 45 million more have pre-hypertension. Americans now spend more than $15 billion a year on blood pressure medications, but the government spends almost nothing encouraging Americans to cut back on salt or encouraging food manufacturers and restaurateurs to reduce salt levels in foods. In November 2005, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_salt_petition.pdf" target="CSPI petitioned the FDA">CSPI petitioned the FDA</a> to revoke salt’s status as a “generally recognized as safe” ingredient and instead to treat it as a food additive, which are subject to more stringent regulations, including limits on its use. A previous CSPI filing was ignored by the agency for more than 20 years, on the theory that the industry would voluntarily lower salt levels. “Overly salty processed foods are turning Americans’ hearts into ticking time bombs, yet top policymakers at the FDA are doing nothing,” Jacobson said. “USDA should take the lead and not wait for the slowpokes at the FDA, who apparently would rather focus on expediting the latest expensive new drug therapy for high blood pressure, stroke or heart disease, instead of actually preventing those conditions in the first place.” 2007-01-03 2007 to Bring Sharp Reductions in Artificial Trans Fat... http://cspinet.org/new/200612291.html Restaurants Respond to Laws, Litigation, & Consumer DemandTop restaurant chains, which had been lagging far behind food manufacturers in getting rid of artificial trans fat, are finally beginning to replace partially hydrogenated oils with healthier alternatives—both for deep-frying and other applications, according to an analysis conducted by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200606081.html">Wendy’s</a>, the fifth-largest restaurant chain, switched to heart-healthy trans-free frying oils earlier this year, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610301.html">KFC</a> and Taco Bell, the second- and seventh-largest chains, have pledged to largely eliminate trans fat from most of their foods by next spring. Pizza Hut, the fourth-largest chain and, like KFC, a Yum! Brands restaurant, claims it’s working on getting rid of trans (it’s nearly there, partly because pizzas have little or no trans fat). The sixth-largest chain, Subway, never had much to begin with, but got trans fat out of its cookies this year. Eighth-largest Domino’s Pizza is mostly trans-fat-free, though an ill-conceived “garlic dipping sauce” with seven grams of trans fat is clearly made with partially hydrogenated oil. Two of the biggest chains, dozens of medium-sized chains, and thousands of other food-service establishments show no sign of switching, according to CSPI, which says government at all levels should push for elimination of artificial trans fat. McDonald’s, the biggest chain, has been under the gun after <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html">breaking its 2002 commitment to switch to healthier oils</a>, but now says that it has a large-scale test market under way. It has switched to canola or other trans-free oils in much of Europe, as well as in Australia and New Zealand. Its Chicken McNuggets were reformulated to have less trans fat. But its Chicken Selects Premium Breast Strips—a product with a healthier sounding name—actually has more: A 5-piece order has four grams. With a large order of McDonald’s fries, that meal would have 12 grams of trans fat—more trans than a person should consume in six days, according to the recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Burger King, the third-largest chain, serves up trans-free fries, but to get them you’ll have to go to Denmark—which virtually banned artificial trans fat two years ago. It says it has begun testing new oils in the United States. Burger King’s Chicken Tenders have less trans fat that McDonald’s Chicken Selects, but its fries have roughly the same amount. “When trans fat labeling went into effect in the supermarket, large food manufacturers competed against each other to see who could get rid of artificial trans fat the fastest,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But restaurants didn’t have labeling as an incentive to change, so they’ve needed other incentives: a lawsuit here, a municipal phase-out proposal there.” Starbucks (ninth largest) removed trans fat from the one drink that had it and has announced that trans fat will be kept out of seasonal baked goods, though it remains—in high amounts—in some pastries in many stores. Starbucks uses regional bakers whose recipes may vary, so a scone might have zero to four grams of trans fat; some glazed donuts have five grams of trans; some cinnamon rolls have nine grams. Applebee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar, number 10, claims it’s making progress on trans fat. The company says its new menu items are trans-fat-free and that two-thirds of its bakery and bread products are trans-fat-free, but its progress is hard to monitor, since of the top 10 restaurant chains, Applebee’s puts the least amount of nutrition information on its web site. <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/cardio/cardio-transfat.shtml">New York City made history</a> this month by becoming the first U.S. jurisdiction to require restaurants to stop using artificial trans fat by mid 2008. McDonald’s and other top chains have said they’ll be able to comply by then, and the city’s Board of Health will work to educate smaller non-chain restaurants about trans-free fats and oils. In media reports, some smaller restaurateurs have expressed confusion, incorrectly assuming that lard would be excluded by the regulation when it wouldn’t be. Only artificial trans fat—found exclusively in partially hydrogenated oil—would be eliminated. Lard is trans-fat free, and the small amounts of trans-fat in butter, meat or dairy products are not at all affected by New York City’s proposal. Some of the other large restaurant chains that have switched or or are in the process of switching to trans-fat-free vegetable oil for deep frying include Arby’s, Chili’s Grill & Bar, Denny’s, Red Lobster, Olive Garden, Ruby Tuesday and Romano’s Macaroni Grill. Many small ethnic restaurants, diners, and gourmet restaurants have used healthy oils for frying for years, including New York City’s legendary Carnegie Deli, soul food restaurant Sylvia’s and Chicago’s Ina’s Kitchen. Other venues, including Disney theme parks, Loews hotels, and numerous local restaurants and small chains, are eliminating trans fat. Bills to limit artificial trans fat have also been introduced in Chicago, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Philadelphia, and officials in Boston, Cambridge, Mass., Cleveland, Louisville (home to Yum! Brands), Los Angeles, and other cities and states have expressed interest in similar regulations. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200405181.html">CSPI petitioned the Food and Drug Administration (FDA</a>) to revoke its acceptance of partially hydrogenated oil as being “generally recognized as safe,” but the agency has not yet taken action. The FDA recently rejected a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200407221.html">second CSPI petition</a> that called on the agency to require restaurants to post signs indicating the presence of trans fat. CSPI helped further a trans-fat-free future when, in June, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200606121.html">it sued KFC </a>for its use of partially hydrogenated oil. CSPI withdrew from the suit after KFC’s recent announcement that it would switch to non-hydrogenated low-linolenic soybean oil for deep-frying. Further lawsuits are a possibility, according to CSPI. Fortunately, says CSPI, farmers and major edible-oil producers are responding to the growing market for trans-fat-free frying oils. Canola oil, corn oil, peanut oil, and soybean oil are all perfectly suited to deep-frying. A new kind of soybean oil with lower levels of linolenic acid and a canola oil high in oleic acid are also proving to be popular substitutes for partially hydrogenated oil. While some opponents of trans-fat regulations have raised the specter of products becoming higher in saturated fat, most reformulated products actually have a much better fat profile over all. But even in those cases where a gram of trans fat is replaced with a gram of saturated fat, there is a net-plus health benefit. “2007 may well be remembered as the year that partially hydrogenated oil was dispatched to that great big compost heap in the sky,” said Jacobson. “But, considering the inactive Food and Drug Administration, it will surely take more lawsuits and more major cities instituting bans before Americans can say ‘sayonara’ to artificial trans fat for good.” 2006-12-29 FDA Releases Draft Risk Assessment and Management Plan for Cloned Animals http://cspinet.org/new/200612281.html Statement of CSPI Biotechnology Director Gregory JaffeThe FDA’s <a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01541.html" target="draft risk assessment and management plan">draft risk assessment and management plan</a> addressing the food safety issues surrounding cloned animals is better late than never. The agency has been delinquent in waiting five years to begin this public evaluation of cloned animals, requiring consumers to rely on the food industry and cloning companies to voluntarily refrain from introducing cloning animals into the food supply. We hope the FDA’s draft will begin a process in which consumers’ number-one concern about cloned animals, their safety as food, will be addressed in a transparent regulatory process using all available scientific evidence. There are many other controversial issues surrounding animal cloning, including ethical and animal welfare concerns. While those aren’t food safety issues, there should be a governmental forum to explore them and adopt appropriate policies. Congressional hearings might start a robust societal dialogue on those issues. Americans want to know that the food on their plates is safe to eat. If FDA ultimately determines that cloned animals are safe to eat and if those cloned animals provide societal benefits, consumers may feel more comfortable about eating those foods. To date, the cloning industry has not provided the public with any information about why cloned animals are needed in food production, who benefits from their use, and how they might benefit the consumer at all. 2006-12-28 Congress Requires Dietary Supplement Companies to Report Adverse Reactions to FDA http://cspinet.org/new/200612111.html Labels to provide consumer information by 2008WASHINGTON—Within one year, dietary supplement manufacturers will have to list an address or telephone number on product labels that consumers can use to report serious adverse reactions, and companies will have to promptly turn over such information to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The new requirement will also apply to over-the-counter drugs. <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3546es.txt.pdf" target="act">The Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection Act</a> was approved by Congress last week, and the bipartisan legislation is expected to be signed by President Bush. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) campaigned for the bill, which was also supported by major segments of the dietary supplement industry. “Making it simple for consumers to report adverse reactions and requiring companies to turn those reports over to the FDA will make it easier for the FDA to protect the public from hazards,” stated Bruce Silverglade, CSPI’s director of legal affairs. “Under the previous voluntary system, the FDA received less than one percent of all reports of adverse reactions to dietary supplements.” “We hope that Congress now provides sufficient funding so that the FDA can quickly respond to reports of adverse reactions and promptly remove hazardous products from the marketplace,” Silverglade said. 2006-12-11 WHO Committee Calls for Broad Curbs on Children's Food Marketing http://cspinet.org/new/200612072.html WASHINGTON—A World Health Organization (WHO) technical committee <a href="http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/publications/Oslo%20meeting%20layout%2027%20NOVEMBER.pdf" target="report">report</a> calling for broad restrictions on food marketing to children should serve as a blueprint for action by the next Congress, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “Congress should instruct the Federal Trade Commission to reduce the volume of junk food marketing to children,” said CSPI legal affairs director <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/codex/childrensWHO.pdf" target="Bruce Silverglade">Bruce Silverglade</a>, who participated in the WHO meeting leading up to the publication of the report. “This WHO technical report provides a policy blueprint on how that objective can be achieved. The technical report recognizes that self-regulatory programs cannot reduce the overall volume of junk food marketing to children.” The report, Marketing of Food and Non-Alcoholic Beverages to Children, calls for “national action to protect children from marketing by substantially reducing the volume and impact of the commercial promotion” of junk foods, and concluded that “exposure to the commercial promotion of ... foods relatively high in saturated fat, free sugars and salt, and low in essential micronutrients and fiber ... adversely affect children’s nutritional status.” The WHO technical committee set out four regulatory possibilities for the U.S. and other governments to adopt, depending on “cultural, legal and regulatory climates,” and describes how the various approaches have been used in other countries. Those options were: • Prohibiting promotional marketing of energy-dense, micronutrient-poor food products at specified times, in specified settings, using specified techniques or targeting specified age groups; • Prohibiting the commercial promotion of energy-dense, micronutrient-poor foods and beverages to children; • Prohibiting the commercial promotion of all foods and beverages to children (except approved public health campaigns promoting healthy diets); • Prohibiting all commercial promotion of any products to children. WHO says it must review those recommendations “for technical merit, financial implications, and appropriate roles for the Organization.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/food_marketing_to_children.pdf" target="cspi">CSPI</a> has called for legislative and regulatory action in the U.S. based on the first two of these policy options. 2006-12-07 Congress Passes Sober Truth on Preventing (STOP) Underage Drinking Act http://cspinet.org/new/200612071.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George A. HackerPassage of the <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h864eas.txt.pdf" target="STOP Act">STOP Act</a> represents a long-overdue acknowledgement of the need to do more as a nation to address the harm caused by underage drinking. Unlike illicit drugs, for which we have a comprehensive government-wide strategy, there has been no credible national plan to combat alcohol problems, by far the greater health and safety drag on our nation. That is a huge gap that must be filled, and the STOP Act is a step in the right direction. Although the STOP Act is more modest in scope than some of its supporters would have liked, it nonetheless provides an additional $18 million per year for essential prevention purposes, including the seeds of a national media campaign to reduce underage drinking, which CSPI has sought since 1997. We applaud the dedication of the bill’s lead sponsors, Senators DeWine and Dodd and Representatives Roybal-Allard, Wolf, Wamp, DeLauro, and Osborne, who have worked hard to craft a bill that would begin to move our country in the right direction on the nation’s number one youth substance use problem. We also thank the House Energy and Commerce Committee and the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee – especially HELP Committee Chairman, Senator Enzi – for their role in moving the bill. We look forward to working with Congress to fully fund and implement the STOP Act’s provisions, and to tackle unfinished business. 2006-12-07 Schools Getting Raw Deal from Bottlers http://cspinet.org/new/200612061.html Beverage Deals Not Very Lucrative According to Analysis of Beverage ContractsWASHINGTON—Most school beverage deals aren’t very lucrative, raising an average of only $18 per student per year, according to the first-ever multi-state analysis of school systems’ contracts with beverage companies. The <a href="http://cspinet.org/beveragecontracts.pdf">study</a>, conducted by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the Public Health Advocacy Institute (PHAI), analyzed 120 contracts in 16 states and found that the majority (67 percent) of the revenue collected from drink sales goes to beverage companies, not schools. The $18 dollars per student raised represents only one quarter of one percent of the average cost of a student's education, which, according to the National Center for Education Statistics, is about $8,000 per year. The study was supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Argosy Foundation. Annual revenue to schools ranged from $0.60 to $93 per student per year. Schools typically earn commissions on sales and cash advances. Some schools are clearly getting better deals than others, even with the same companies, according to the report. One hundred eleven, or 93 percent of the contracts analyzed, were exclusive, meaning that they permit just one company to sell and market its beverages in schools, allowing them to cultivate brand loyalty. Sixty-four contracts were with PepsiCo, 53 with Coca-Cola, and three with smaller regional manufacturers. A bottler or distributor is typically the contracting party. “Selling sugary drinks in vending machines and elsewhere in schools doesn’t pump money into the community, it drains it,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “It’s not philanthropic behavior on the part of soft drink companies, it’s predatory. When a kid puts a dollar in a soft drink vending machine, the school is lucky to keep 33 cents. And the money comes from parents’ and kids’ pocketbooks.” In addition to simply selling soft drinks, companies negotiate other marketing privileges in schools, including putting their logos on signage, scoreboards, athletic equipment, book covers and the panels of vending machines themselves. Many contracts examined by CSPI and PHAI contain clauses penalizing schools for not meeting sales quotas, which gives school administrators an incentive to encourage soda consumption. CSPI calculations based on sales data from the American Beverage Association (ABA) show that students are purchasing and consuming significant amounts of soft drinks at school. On average, high school students drink the equivalent of about 40 20-ounce bottles of non-diet soft drinks per year, or 8,577 calories’ worth. Middle schoolers drink about 14 20-ounce bottles, or 2,842 calories’ worth. Overall, soft drinks are the single-largest source of calories in teens’ diets. Obesity is more clearly linked to soda consumption than to any other food. A Harvard study found that for each additional soft drink a child consumes per day, the chance of becoming overweight increases by 60 percent. Many studies have further shown that soda consumption displaces healthier beverages, such as low-fat milk and 100 percent fruit juice, from children’s diets. “These contracts apply financial pressure on schools to encourage students to drink more of something that is harmful to their health,” said Wootan. “That’s the last thing schools should be doing, and it’s the last thing parents want when they send their kids off to school.” Voluntary guidelines announced in May by former President Clinton, the ABA, the American Heart Association and leading soda companies would cap portion sizes and restrict soda sales in schools over the next three years. However, schools aren’t a party to that agreement, and it remains to be seen if schools will comply with the guidelines, according to Wootan. CSPI dropped a planned lawsuit against soda companies immediately after those guidelines were announced. Many of the largest school districts in the country have gotten rid of soda, including Boston, Chicago, the District of Columbia, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York City, Philadelphia, San Francisco and Seattle. However, CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/sf_reportcard.pdf">School Foods Report Card</a> shows that the nation has a patchwork of policies addressing soda and junk foods in schools and that two-thirds of states have very weak policies, which were graded as Ds or Fs. Given rising obesity rates and children’s poor diets (only 2 percent of American children eat a healthy diet, according to U.S. Department of Agriculture nutrition recommendations), it’s critical that the foods offered in school lunchrooms and hallways be as healthy as possible. CSPI is working with over 100 organizations, Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), and Representatives Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Christopher Shays (R-CT) for passage of the federal <a href="http://harkin.senate.gov/documents/pdf/schoolfood.pdf"> Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act</a>. The bill would require the USDA to update its nutrition standards for foods sold out of vending machines, school stores, and other school venues. “Schools, state lawmakers and members of Congress, who are considering replacing soft drinks in vending machines with healthier options, should be reassured by our findings,” said Wootan. “Generally, the revenue generated by soft drink sales in schools is modest and could be replaced by the sale of healthier beverages or by alternative fundraisers that don’t undermine children’s diets or health.” 2006-12-06 NYC Trans Fat, Calorie Labeling Initiatives Approved http://cspinet.org/new/200612052.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonCongratulations to the New York City Board of Health, Health Commissioner Tom Frieden and Mayor Michael Bloomberg for <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/pr2006/pr114-06.shtml">adopting</a> these bold new measures to promote the public’s health. When New York City's major chain restaurants comply with these sensible new regulations, I hope they make the changes nationwide. After all, several major chains have already forsaken the artificial trans fat found in partially hydrogenated oils, particularly for deep-frying. And a brief stroll through the supermarket should convince doubters that manufacturers of processed foods and bakery items have been successful getting trans fats out of those items as well. If trans-fat labeling in the supermarket was the beginning of the end of trans fat, New York's move today is the middle of the end of trans fat. The calorie-labeling regulation approved by the board today will be of enormous help to weight-conscious New Yorkers. Many of the big chains already have this information, but many of them only put it on web sites or brochures. There is no practical reason why chains can't include calories right next to the price of the item on menus and menu boards. Most of the industry's arguments against calorie labeling are simply red herrings. The regulations will not apply to daily specials and non-standardized items. Calorie labeling will put consumers back in the driver's seat and let them exercise personal responsibility for themselves and their children. CSPI will be encouraging other cities and states, as well as Congress, to ensure that the rest of the country receives the same kind of protection from trans fat and information about calories as New Yorkers will soon have. 2006-12-05 FDA Urged to Stop Claims for "Energy" Drinks http://cspinet.org/new/200612051.html CSPI Opposes Industry Plan for Weak Regulation of "Functional" FoodsWASHINGTON—The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should enforce stricter standards for “energy” drinks and other so-called functional foods, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Today CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_public_hearing_2006.pdf">testified</a> at a hearing on the controversial foods convened by the FDA. The hearing was spurred in part by a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/funcgaopt_032102.pdf">CSPI petition in 2002</a> urging the FDA to tighten regulations and take enforcement action. “Many so-called ‘functional foods,’ would be more aptly named dysfunctional foods,” said CSPI legal affairs director Bruce Silverglade. “Many ‘energy’ drinks, for example, primarily consist of water, sugar and caffeine. But the food industry is pressuring the Bush Administration to extend already weak standards for dietary supplement ingredients and label claims to these newfangled products. That approach would make functional foods, a potentially useful idea, about as dependable as 19th century snake oil.” CSPI testified that some drinkers mistakenly rely on “energy” drinks to mitigate the effects of alcoholic beverage consumption. Drinkers may experience a placebo effect, and dangerously assume that they can drive a car, or drink even more alcohol without becoming further inebriated. CSPI also told the FDA that medicinal herbs don’t belong in foods like iced tea and that snacks with unhealthful amounts of saturated fat are inappropriate mediums for ingredients that purportedly reduce the risk of heart disease. “To ensure safety and effectiveness, companies should be required to notify the FDA before adding novel ingredients to foods for purported health benefits,” said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Ringel Heller, who also <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/heller_testimony.pdf">testified</a> at the FDA hearing. In 2000, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) strongly criticized the FDA’s failure to protect consumers from unproven ingredients and claims. A GAO report concluded that “FDA’s efforts and federal laws provide limited assurances of the safety of functional foods...” The report made numerous recommendations to the agency, including requiring manufacturers to place warning labels on some products. Despite the passage of more than five years, the FDA has failed to implement any of the GAO’s recommendations. During that time, the annual sales of functional foods have sky-rocketed and now, by industry estimates, exceed $25 billion per year. “When the FDA has warned companies, such as the makers of Mars candy and Arizona Iced Tea, that they were violating the law, the firms largely ignored the agency and have continued to market their products,” said Heller. Products highlighted by CSPI at the FDA hearing included: • Enviga: This new carbonated drink from a Coca-Cola/Nestle partnership claims that thanks to a combination of caffeine and an antioxidant found in green tea, the product burns more calories than the drink provides and implicitly promotes weight loss. CSPI yesterday notified those companies that it will sue them if they continue to make those claims—which are based on inconsistent, short-term and industry-funded studies. • Mars/Masterfoods Cocoa Via candy bars: FDA formally warned the company in May 2006 that the labels on certain of the candy bars illegally claim that the candies could reduce “bad” LDL cholesterol, noting that the products contain unhealthy amounts of saturated fat, which raises serum cholesterol levels. The company, however, has ignored the FDA’s warning and continues to market the products with the same labels. • Rockstar energy drink: The label promises that after drinking the 16-oz. can, one can “party like a rockstar.” The beverage contains an “energy blend” of milk thistle (an herb investigated for treating cirrhosis), two forms of caffeine, ginkgo (an herb investigated for improving memory in Alzheimer patients), and taurine, an amino acid. • DanActive “Immunity” dairy drink: This Dannon product claims to help “strengthen your body’s defenses.” But the only actual study conducted on people found that DanActive didn’t prevent illness, and 25 percent of the participants had to cut their dose in half because they suffered bloating, gas, and nausea. • Monster Energy drink: The beverage contains five types of added sugars (54g per 16-oz. can, about the same as a Coke), two sources of caffeine, and some natural enzymes and digestive acids. The label states “We went down to the lab and cooked up a double shot of our killer energy brew. It’s a wicked mega hit that delivers twice the buzz of a regular energy drink.” • Tab Energy low calorie drink: In an effort to remake this 1960s diet cola, Coca-Cola has added guarana extract (a source of caffeine authorized for use in foods only as a flavoring), vegetable juice (for color), and B vitamins. B vitamins convert protein, fat, and carbohydrate into energy, but do not provide an energy boost that can be felt by the body. The product also contains the amino acid taurine and L-carnitine, a co-enzyme naturally found in the body. 2006-12-05 "Calorie Burning" Enviga Tea Drink a Fraud, Group Says http://cspinet.org/new/200612041.html CSPI to Sue Coke, Nestlé if Weight Loss Claims PersistWASHINGTON—<a href="http://www.enviga.com/">Enviga</a>, a new carbonated green tea beverage, claims that it burns more calories than it provides, resulting in “negative calories.” But the nonprofit food watchdog group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), says that Enviga burns money, and over the long term is more likely to result in a negative bank balance than negative calories. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/enviga_letter.pdf">Today CSPI served notice</a> on Coca-Cola and Nestlé, the companies behind Enviga, that it will sue them if they continue to market the drink with fraudulent calorie-burning and weight loss claims. Enviga is bolstered with epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), an antioxidant that occurs in green tea, and caffeine. The companies claim that those substances speed up metabolism and increase energy use. Enviga’s web site and other advertising further claim that there is a “calorie burning effect from a single can,” that it is “much smarter than fads, quick-fixes, and crash diets,” and that it keeps “those extra calories from building up.” CSPI says that the evidence that Enviga has even a minor effect is weak and inconsistent at best, and that the claims violate federal food law and state consumer protection laws. Enviga is being introduced in test markets in the New York City and Philadelphia metro areas and will launch nationwide in early 2007. It comes in green tea, peach, and berry flavors and costs $1.29 to $1.49 per 12-ounce can. A Coca-Cola corporate press release suggests that drinking three cans of Enviga would burn between 60 and 100 calories. Someone drinking three Envigas a day would need to spend at least $116 a month. “It's ironic that Coke, a company that has been a major promoter of weight gain, is now pretending that it is coming to the rescue of overweight people,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “They should have called this drink ‘Fleece,’ since that’s what they’re trying to do to consumers. Plain old tap water has zero calories, five calories fewer than Enviga, but unlike Enviga, tap water doesn’t cost 15 bucks a gallon.” The short-term studies being used to justify Enviga’s claims are mostly small and short-term, and much of that research was paid for by the companies or another green tea company. CSPI’s lawsuit would seek an injunction prohibiting the deceptive marketing, but CSPI is concerned that Enviga has too much caffeine. The 300 milligrams of caffeine in the recommended three cans of Enviga per day (the caffeine equivalent of nine cans of Coke) is at the very upper limit of what experts consider safe for woman who are pregnant or may become pregnant. The FDA has urged pregnant women to avoid or minimize their intake of caffeine. Enviga is one in a growing class of so-called “functional foods,” which are fortified with herbal supplements or other substances designed to produce a desired benefit in the body. In 1999 CSPI first petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to tighten its regulations on functional foods, and the agency has been criticized by the Government Accountability Office for failing to protect consumers from misleading claims on such products. At an FDA hearing tomorrow, CSPI will again urge the FDA to crack down on claims made by energy drink manufacturers and other marketers of functional foods. The deceptive marketing and oddball ingredients of Enviga reflect the soft drink industry’s desperate efforts to make up for fading sales of regular soft drinks with highly lucrative new drinks, according to CSPI. “If you want to lose weight, drink less Coke, not more Enviga,” said Jacobson. In the past two years, CSPI’s litigation project has sued KFC for using partially hydrogenated oils, PepsiCo for misleading labeling of several Tropicana drinks, Whole Foods Market for selling a meat substitute called Quorn that causes adverse reactions, and other companies. However, as in the case of Enviga, CSPI often chooses to warn a company prior to filing a lawsuit and solve the problem without litigation. In various cases involving labeling or advertising CSPI has reached agreements with Pinnacle Foods, Quaker, Frito-Lay, and others. CSPI withdrew from the KFC lawsuit after the company switched to trans-fat-free cooking oil. 2006-12-04 British Plan to Shield Kids from Junk Food Ads Better than US Approach http://cspinet.org/new/200611171.html UK Regulators to Get Junk-Food Ads off Kids' TVWhile officials at the Federal Trade Commission in Washington are merely observing the debate over junk-food marketing aimed at kids, British regulators are actually doing something about it. The <a href="http://www.ofcom.org.uk/">Office of Communications (Ofcom)</a>, the quasi-governmental agency that has statutory authority to regulate television, telecom, and other communications industries in the United Kingdom, has announced that junk-food marketers will be prohibited from advertising on programming aimed at kids under 16. Though British consumer groups wanted the agency to go even further, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says that effort is far better than the paltry voluntary self-regulatory approaches underway in the United States. “A serious approach to childhood obesity would not allow corporations to appeal directly to children and convince them to eat foods that harm their health—period,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The voluntary measures announced recently in the U.S. are promulgated by advertising- and food-industry groups whose main goals are to forestall serious government action and to generally make life easier for advertisers. Unfortunately the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission are also more oriented to protecting business than helping parents and protecting children.” The <a href="http://www.caru.org">Children’s Advertising Review Unit</a>, which adjudicates complaints about children’s advertising in the U.S. notes on its web site that it works to preserve advertisers' “freedom to direct their messages to young children.” Similarly the <a href="http://www.narcpartners.org/about/index.asp">National Advertising Review Council</a>, CARU’s parent organization, states that its top goal is to “minimize governmental involvement in the advertising business.” The Ofcom <a href="http://www.ofcom.org.uk/media/news/2006/11/nr_20061117">regulations</a>, scheduled to be finalized in January, allow junk-food ads on adult programming. Foods advertised on children’s television will have to meet strict government nutrition criteria, including limits on sugar, salt, and saturated fat. While the FTC, as a result of Congressional action, is <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/os/2006/10/P064504foodindmarketingchildrenFRN.pdf">preparing to formally request</a> that companies turn over information about how they market to children, FTC Chair Deborah Majoras has been a vocal cheerleader for industry self-regulation and had previously said the agency would not consider restricting junk-food advertising on children’s television. “No matter what metrics are applied to measure it, self-regulation of food marketing aimed at children is a proven flop. But the Bush Administration’s strategy is just to clap louder and hope that it helps,” Jacobson said. 2006-11-17 The Best Advice is Free – From Conflicts of Interest http://cspinet.org/new/200611152.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Director Merrill Goozner on S.3807There are three crucial FDA advisory committee meetings coming up in December. One will discuss drug-eluting stents on <a href="http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/E6-17519.htm">December 7-8</a>; one will discuss antidepressant use and adult suicidality on <a href="http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/E6-19248.htm">December 13;</a> and one will discuss the antibiotic Ketek on <a href="http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKETS/98fr/E6-19249.htm">December 14-15</a>. Nothing in <a href="http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:s.03807:">S. 3807</a>, the FDA reform bill sponsored by Sen. Mike Enzi (R-WY) and Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), would require the scientists who will sit on those panels to be free from financial ties to the manufacturers of those products. This is unacceptable. The scientists who advise the FDA should be free of all financial ties to firms whose products are under review. The public’s faith in the integrity of the process will be undermined by any reform legislation that allows physicians and scientists with conflicts of interest to continue serving on these committees. For a copy of CSPI's written testimony submitted to the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on S.3807, click <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/testimony__s.3807.pdf">here</a>. --30-- 2006-11-15 CSPI Petitions FDA to Regulate Manure, Water and Sanitation on Farms http://cspinet.org/new/200611151.html Consumer Groups Excluded from Senate Hearing on Spinach OutbreakWASHINGTON—The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) formally called on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to issue regulations to ensure the safety of fresh fruits and vegetables. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_produce_petition.pdf">petition</a> filed with the agency today, CSPI said that inspections and mandatory standards governing manure, water and sanitation on farms could help reduce the number of food outbreaks linked to produce, such as the recent outbreak of E. coli O157:H7-contaminated spinach that sickened 200 and killed at least <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/leavitt_letter.pdf">four</a>. “You can’t start at the supermarket or even the packing facility if you’re trying to ensure the safety of melons, tomatoes, spinach and other fruits and vegetables. It all starts with safe farming practices,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “It is time for FDA to institute programs to prevent what happened this fall with spinach, instead of rushing in after the fact to alert the public to avoid a hazardous food product.” CSPI’s petition asserts that the FDA already has broad legal authority under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, the Public Health Service Act, and applicable case law that would allow the agency to adopt and enforce regulations governing sanitation on farms. Regulations governing the use of manure, the cleanliness of irrigation water, and ensuring workers have access to bathrooms would all help protect produce from becoming contaminated. Outbreak data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) clearly shows that produce has become the leading cause of food poisoning outbreaks since 2000. Specifically, CSPI says the use of raw manure as fertilizer should be prohibited during the growing season, and that composting practices should be monitored to ensure pathogens are destroyed. Water used for irrigation must be tested and found suitable and only potable water should be used in produce processing facilities, according to the group. Traceability is key in responding to outbreaks, and CSPI says the FDA should ensure that product packaging makes it easy to tell which farm a product came from. CSPI’s filing comes as a lame-duck session of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee holds hearings investigating the spinach outbreak. Though FDA, state officials and several businesses are testifying, consumer groups and victims have been excluded from the committee’s deliberations <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter_to_help_cmte.pdf">despite protests</a> to outgoing Chairman Mike Enzi (R-WY). “The government urges consumers to eat abundant amounts of fruits and vegetables,” DeWaal said. “While that is advice consumers should follow, it increases the responsibility of federal and state governments to implement programs to ensure that these foods are safe for Americans to eat.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610251.html">CSPI recently called on the state of California</a> to exert its regulatory authority on its farms, saying that California could likely act more rapidly than the federal government, which has so many food safety agencies that it is sometimes not clear which one is in charge. CSPI says the states’ role in the recent outbreaks should make it less likely that the lame-duck Senate will take up the so-called <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fact_sheet_on_nufa.pdf">National Uniformity for Food Act</a>, which would roll back more than 200 state and local food laws. Yet some expect the bill’s lead sponsor, Senator Richard Burr (R-NC), might try to ram it through in the waning days of the session. It previously passed in the House. “The Senate shouldn’t consider binding and gagging state food safety officials when they are the ones on the front lines protecting Americans from tainted food,” said CSPI senior attorney Benjamin Cohen. 2006-11-15 New FDA Web Site, Brochure Won't Prevent Obesity Any More Than Old FDA Web Site, Brochure http://cspinet.org/new/200611142.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonObesity and diet-related diseases claim hundreds of thousands of American lives each year. Yet every response from the Bush Administration is so feeble, so flaccid, and so consistently disproportionate to the magnitude of the epidemic. I fear that Secretary Leavitt and Acting Commissioner Von Eschenbach are just delusional if they think yet another web site and brochure will make a dent in the obesity epidemic. Certainly the MyPyramid web site proved to be a <a href="http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?site0=mypyramid.gov&site1=&site2=&site3=&site4=&y=r&z=1&h=300&w=500&range=3y&size=Medium&url=mypyramid.gov">cataclysmic flop</a>. The government only printed a paltry number of brochures to spread the word about the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. It’s hard to see how a new web site and brochure will do any more than the old web site and brochures. Clearly ‘stay the course’ isn’t working. What the Administration should be doing is actually orienting government policies around the Dietary Guidelines. Why hasn’t the Bush Administration lent its support to the bipartisan legislation pending in Congress to get junk food out of schools? Why does the Administration not support requiring calorie counts on fast-food menu boards? The federal government should be getting rid of all things partially hydrogenated, requiring obesity warnings on soft drinks, and shielding kids from junk food advertising. But instead we get another <a href="http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~ear/hwm/labelman.html">web site</a>, another press conference, another round of self-congratulation on a job well done. It’s pathetic and pathological. It’s time to change the course. 2006-11-14 Weak New Voluntary Guidelines on Advertising to Kids Designed to Protect Marketers, Not Parents and Families http://cspinet.org/new/200611141.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonAny junk food advertiser who feared that a rewrite of the Children’s Advertising Review Unit’s <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/11-14-2006/0004473584&EDATE=">voluntary guidelines</a> would force a significant change in the way companies do business can rest easy. While the Council of Better Business Bureaus labored like an elephant, it came forth with a mouse. Regrettably but not surprisingly, advertisers are more interested in preserving what it candidly calls their “freedom to direct their messages to young children” than helping busy parents keep their children healthy. In fact these new guidelines are something of a retreat, in that they fall far short of what several companies, notably <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200501125.html">Kraft</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200610162.html">Disney</a>, are already doing. Of course they fall much further short of what the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200512062.html">Institute of Medicine</a> urged last year. IOM found that kids’ dietary patterns are putting their health at risk, and that those patterns are encouraged and reinforced by the industry’s marketing practices. The IOM called for leadership from the industry, and failing that, congressional action to protect kids’ health. But this announcement today by CARU isn’t leadership; it’s just the advertising industry playing defense. The only changes from the status quo in these guidelines occur at the fringes. Still, the overwhelming majority of food advertised at kids is going to be junk food. These foods can be as high in calories, trans fat, sugar, or sodium and as low in nutrients as companies please. The industry’s definition of “healthy” includes sugary breakfast cereals, for instance. If a “healthy lifestyle message” means that Ronald McDonald is pedaling a bike while peddling junk food, that message still does more harm than good. It’s a joke. CARU and CBBB should scrap this initiative and start from scratch. I hope that next year, leaders in Congress take a fresh look at the industry’s practices. In the meantime, junk food marketers should expect more lawsuits—not praise—from health advocates. 2006-11-14 New Online Quiz from CSPI Compares Restaurant Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200611061.html Highlights Need for Restaurant Menu LabelingWASHINGTON—A new online quiz from the Center for Science in the Public Interest exposes some surprising differences in the calorie content of common restaurant foods. For example, would you have guessed that a large chocolate milkshake (1,160 calories) at McDonald’s has more calories than four hamburgers (1,040 calories)? Or that two jelly donuts (420 calories) at Dunkin’ Donuts have fewer calories than the chain’s sesame bagel with cream cheese (570 calories), medium strawberry banana smoothie (550 calories) or banana walnut muffin (540 calories)? Though Americans get one-third of their calories from away-from-home foods, fewer than half of large chain restaurants provide nutrition information to their customers—and virtually all of that information is tucked away on web sites or difficult-to-read and rarely read posters and brochures or printed on packaging that you see only after you buy your meals. That’s why the Center for Science in the Public Interest is pushing for legislation to require table-service chain restaurants to list calories, saturated plus trans fat, sodium, and carbohydrates on their menus, and fast-food restaurants to list calories on their menu boards (where space is limited). According to Margo Wootan, CSPI’s nutrition policy director, menu labeling is needed to help people make informed choices at the point of purchase. “Customers don’t order meals without knowing the prices, and we can’t expect them to make healthy decisions without knowing the nutritional price as well,” Wootan said. “It’s really a guessing game for people who are watching their weight or trying to follow their doctor’s advice to manage their diabetes or high blood pressure. This quiz offers a glimpse of just how difficult it is.” The quiz is available at <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/restaurant_quiz.html">www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/restaurant_quiz.html</a>. For more information about menu labeling, visit <a href="http://www.menulabeling.org" target="www.menulabeling.org.">www.menulabeling.org.</a> 2006-11-06 Cutting Salt in Kids' Diets Reduces Blood Pressure http://cspinet.org/new/200610311.html New UK Study Makes Strong Case for Reducing Salt Content of Processed and Restaurant Foods, According to CSPIWASHINGTON—A new study shows that reducing salt intake in children quickly lowers their blood pressure. If their blood pressure remains lower, those kids could experience lower rates of heart attacks and strokes as they age. But according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), makers of popular packaged and restaurant foods make it virtually impossible for children not to consume unhealthy levels of salt if they eat them. The <a href="http://hyper.ahajournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/5/861">study</a>, the first-ever meta-analysis of salt-reduction studies in children, was conducted by Feng J. He and Graham A. MacGregor at St. George’s University of London and published in the November issue of the journal Hypertension. It found that curbing salt intake in kids reduced their systolic and diastolic blood pressures by 1 millimeter of mercury (mm Hg) each. Those numbers may sound small, but the authors write that if extended across the population into adulthood, the lower levels would have “major public health implications in terms of preventing cardiovascular disease in the future.” High blood pressure is a major cause of heart attacks and strokes. Given the extremely high sodium content of many processed and restaurant foods—including many foods designed for and marketed to children—the chances of lowering kids’ blood pressure seem remote without major intervention from industry and government, according to CSPI. A normal child aged 4 to 8 typically needs only 1,200 milligrams per day, according to the Institute of Medicine, but the typical child consumes at least 2,800 per day. “Sodium intake is usually perceived as something that middle-aged and older people need to be concerned about,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But middle-aged parents should be equally concerned about the sodium in their kids’ diets, since it is increasingly clear that a child’s blood pressure points to where it will end up in adulthood.” Consider a typical six-year-old’s diet. Perhaps the day begins with Rice Krispies with banana and 1 percent milk. Say lunch is a grilled cheese sandwich, a cup of Campbell’s Goldfish Pasta and Meatballs soup and another glass of milk. Dinner might be a Chicken Strips convenience meal from Kid Cuisine and a glass of apple juice. As far as calories are concerned, that diet’s 1,511 is right on target. But its 3,233 mg of sodium is almost triple what a six-year-old should get in a day. It’s also more than the 1,500 to 2,300 mg of sodium that adults should consume. (Adults consume at least 3,500 mg per day.) In contrast, a healthier diet that included oatmeal, milk, and orange juice for breakfast; a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, a fruit leather, an apple, and milk for lunch; a snack of whole grain Fig Newtons and milk; and a roast chicken drumstick and mashed sweet potatoes for dinner only provides 866 mg of sodium. (See how various sample diets stack up <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sodium_in_kids__foods.pdf"> here.</a>) The authors of the Hypertension study also note that the high salt content of snack food aimed at kids conditions their taste buds to expect saltier foods as adults. CSPI has been urging the Food and Drug Administration to reduce the sodium content of processed and restaurant foods for almost 30 years. In 2005, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200502242.html"> CSPI called on the FDA to regulate salt</a> as a food additive, as opposed to a “generally recognized as safe,” or GRAS, ingredient. In June of this year, the American Medical Association <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/16461.html "> endorsed that call</a> and urged the FDA to work toward a 50-percent sodium reduction in processed and restaurant foods. Achieving that reduction would save an estimated 150,000 lives a year. “Approximately 65 million Americans have high blood pressure. Americans spend more than $15 billion on drugs to lower their blood pressure. Yet, the FDA is doing virtually nothing to encourage consumers to reduce their intake or food processors or restaurants to cut sodium levels in their foods,” according to Jacobson. “It’s bad enough that rates of obesity and diabetes in children have soared, but we’re also putting kids on a path to high blood pressure and heart disease by including so much salt in their diets." Officials at the National Institutes of Health wrote a commentary in Hypertension that stated: “The action needed is to modestly and persistently reduce salt in the food supply, particularly snack foods and fast foods, an increasing staple of the diets of children and youth, as well as many canned and processed foods.” 2006-10-31 Specialty Fruit Juices Taste Like Money to Sellers http://cspinet.org/new/200610271.html But Can We Trust Their Health Claims?WASHINGTON— Pomegranate juice will help you “cheat death.” Mangosteen juice can cure migraines. Noni juice will rid you of diabetes, depression and a host of other ailments. At least that’s what some sellers of those expensive fruit juices would have you believe. But good evidence to back up these claims is nonexistent, according to an article in the November issue of the Nutrition Action Healthletter entitled <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/superfruit.pdf">“Superfruit: Squeezing cold cash out of three ‘hot’ juices.”</a> Here’s a taste of the reality behind some of the claims being made for these juices on company Web sites, in e-mails, in online chat rooms, and in face-to-face meetings with customers: • Marketers of XanGo, a drink made with mangosteen juice that costs $35 for a 25-ounce bottle, claim it may improve joint function and strengthen the immune and respiratory systems. However, the company’s scientific advisor admits that the only study of mangosteen juice in humans was conducted in Singapore in 1932 to treat dysentery. Mangosteen, found in tropical climates, is known as the “queen of fruits” in Asia, but fresh mangosteen is rare in Western countries. • Salespeople for Tahitian Noni juice were caught on camera by a CBS affiliate in Los Angeles, claiming that the tropical juice “does miracles” for lupus, dementia, and macular degeneration, a leading cause of blindness among older Americans. But no good studies have shown that noni, a lime green fruit found in tropical Asia and islands in the Pacific, has any unique benefits. A distributor was also recorded telling new recruits that the juice tastes “just like money.” No kidding—a 32-ounce bottle of Tahitian Noni juice runs $42. • The manufacturer of the POM Wonderful brand of pomegranate juice hinted in ads that the drink—$4 for a 16 ounce bottle—could fight heart disease, premature aging, Alzheimer’s disease, and cancer. Last spring, an advertising industry watchdog group ruled those claims misleading, but the company still touts that their juice “might even save a life. Yours!” Maybe. Unlike manufacturers of mangosteen and noni juices, POM Wonderful has invested significant funds— some $10 million— into research, and they’ve had some positive results. Preliminary research suggests that drinking a glass of pomegranate juice each day may help stabilize prostate cancer in men and help open up arteries in people with cardiovascular disease. However, more carefully controlled studies are needed to confirm these health benefits, according to UCLA nutrition expert Navindra Seeram, who was quoted in Nutrition Action. "Meanwhile, we do know for certain that pomegranate juice contains 160 calories per eight ounces, much more than orange juice or a soft drink,” said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt, who authored the Nutrition Action article. "Adding pomegranate juice to your diet could mean adding calories.” CSPI’s Nutrition Action Healthletter is the largest-circulation health newsletter in North America, with 900,000 subscribers in the U.S. and Canada. 2006-10-27 California Urged to Monitor Farms for Food Safety http://cspinet.org/new/200610251.html States Can Move Faster Than the Federal Government to Implement Standards, Says CSPIWASHINGTON—The state of California should move quickly to adopt regulations governing the production of fruit and vegetables in California since no federal agency has yet adopted standards, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). In a legal petition filed with Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and California Department of Health Services Director Sandra Shewry, CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal said that mandatory regulations governing manure, water and sanitation on farms could help reduce the number of produce-borne food outbreaks, such as the recent outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 traced to California-farmed spinach. “California should implement standards to protect its consumers and its produce industry, instead of waiting for Congress or one of the federal agencies with food safety responsibilities to step in,” DeWaal said. “This is clearly a case where prompt action at the state level could prevent future outbreaks.” CSPI urged the officials to adopt measures similar to the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) standards that meat and poultry producers are required to comply with nationwide. HACCP systems coupled with test and hold programs for ground beef have proven effective in reducing the number of E. coli O157:H7 outbreaks linked to beef. Meanwhile, outbreaks linked to fresh produce have increased in recent years, according to CSPI. In addition to the recent spinach outbreak, tomatoes, lettuces, melons, sprouts, carrot juice and other foods contaminated with E. coli, Salmonella or other pathogens have caused outbreaks. Those pathogens are usually—though not always—linked back to animal agriculture, which CSPI says warrants a particular regulatory focus on manure and water. The same strain of E. coli that sickened 200 and killed at least three in the recent spinach outbreak has been matched with that of cattle manure found near one of the spinach fields at issue. CSPI says that the use of raw manure as fertilizer should be prohibited during the growing season, and that composting practices should be monitored to ensure pathogens are destroyed. Water used for irrigation must be tested and found suitable and only drinkable water should be used in produce processing facilities, according to the group. CSPI’s petition also urges better hygiene and sanitation on farms, and for improved package markings that can be used to track back produce to the farm of origin. “We are reaching a tipping point, where consumers may not trust voluntary industry programs and instead may choose to stop eating foods that are both convenient and vital to good health. I don’t think Salinas County growers can afford to be the cause of another large outbreak,” DeWaal said. “California often takes the lead in health and food safety issues when the federal government is slow to act. The state should exercise its leadership in this instance by giving our food supply a safe start on its farms.” The petition CSPI filed with the state of California is available at <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ca_produce_petition.pdf">http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ca_produce_petition.pdf</a>. In other action, last week CSPI wrote to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt to request that the department do a fair and accurate reporting of the deaths and illnesses linked to the recent spinach outbreak. Specifically, CSPI asked that Leavitt declare June Edith Dunning, an elderly Maryland woman who died September 13 from complications due to E. coli 0157:H7, as the fourth fatal victim of the spinach outbreak that affected consumers in 26 states and further, that Leavitt personally assess the methods being used by CDC to distinguish “official” cases from “suspect” cases and give a full accounting of the public health impact of this outbreak. The letter to Leavitt is available at <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/leavitt_letter.pdf">http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/leavitt_letter.pdf</a>. 2006-10-25 Stars Urged to Rethink "Bud.TV" http://cspinet.org/new/200610191.html Child Protection and Health Advocates Call on Affleck, Damon, Others to Insist on Age-Verification Programs to Shield Underage KidsWASHINGTON—Several top Hollywood actors are being urged to reconsider their participation in Bud.TV—an online video entertainment web site being developed by Anheuser-Busch. Sixty health, safety and child-protection organizations are urging Ben Affleck, Matt Damon, Kevin Spacey and Vince Vaughn to insist that the beer company at least verify the ages of visitors to the site, and to reconsider their participation with the venture in the first place. According to published reports, Anheuser-Busch intends to feature programming developed by production companies associated with those film artists as well as user-generated videos when the site premiers in February 2007. Bud.TV will be aimed at the young people who use video sites like YouTube and social networking sites like MySpace. “The main reason that we’re doing this is that we need to connect to these new beer consumers,” Anheuser-Busch executive Tony Ponturo told the Associated Press. “Willie Sutton robbed banks because ‘that’s where the money is,’” said George A. Hacker, director of the alcohol policies project at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “Anheuser-Busch trolls the Internet because that’s where the young people are. There they can reach out to kids, free from parental interference and government regulators. These actors should rethink whether they want their appeal to young people to be exploited by Anheuser-Busch.” According to research estimates, underage consumers drink as much as 20 percent of all the alcohol consumed in America, and each day 7,000 kids in the U.S. under the age of 16 take their first drink. People who begin drinking by 15 years of age are four times as likely to become alcohol dependent as those who wait until age 21. Alcohol producers, such as Anheuser-Busch, rely on young and heavy drinkers for the majority of their sales. Currently, web sites run by Anheuser-Busch and other alcohol producers merely ask visitors to assert that they are of legal drinking age to enter the site. According to the Center on Alcohol Marketing and Youth at Georgetown University, 13 percent of visits to alcohol-branded sites were initiated by underage consumers and 34 percent of in-depth visitors to Anheuser-Busch’s Bud Light site were younger than the minimum legal drinking age. The groups urged the Hollywood stars to insist that Anheuser-Busch go beyond the honor system and adopt age-verification technologies to help exclude young children. They also asked the stars to reconsider whether the beer site is an appropriate vehicle for the distribution of their creative works. Underage drinking is a major factor in the three leading causes of teenage death in the United States: car crashes, homicides, and suicides. Some 5,000 persons under age 21 die each year from alcohol-related causes, and growing evidence suggests that youthful drinking may result in long-term brain damage, as well as a significantly increased risk of alcohol dependence in adulthood. One of the stars participating in the Bud.TV project, Ben Affleck, was treated for alcoholism in 2001. Besides CSPI, other signers of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/bud.tv_letter.pdf">letters</a> to Affleck, Damon, Spacey, and Vaughn—all of which are identical in content— include the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, National Association of Teen Institutes, National Association for Children of Alcoholics, and the American Osteopathic Association. 2006-10-19 Disney Praised for Helping Kids Eat Healthier Diets http://cspinet.org/new/200610162.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo WootanFew companies are as visible among families with children than Disney, so it is welcome news that the company is setting sound <a href="http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20061016005837&newsLang=en" target="cspi">nutritional guidelines</a> for the food products it helps market with its kid-friendly characters. Parents who take their kids to Disney's theme parks and resorts will benefit from the healthier choices that are being added---and for the trans fat that's being phased out. Those are important and laudable steps, and ones that should be replicated by other media companies, restaurants and food processors. Parents have a hard enough time feeding their kids without having cartoon characters pulling the rug out from under them. Disney's new practices put it in a much more family-friendly position than its competitors, notably Nickelodeon, whose programming is filled with junk food ads and whose characters grace all kinds of junk-food packaging. Disney should take the next step and reexamine the food advertising it accepts on ABC, Toon Disney and elsewhere. Nevertheless, the steps it is taking today put Mickey Mouse head, shoulders and ears above SpongeBob SquarePants. 2006-10-16 Guidelines No Substitute for Legislation to Get Junk Food Out of Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200610061.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo WootanThe <a href="http://www.healthiergeneration.org/engine/renderpage.asp?pid=s042">voluntary guidelines</a> for snacks sold in school vending machines are perfectly reasonable. We applaud former President Clinton and the American Heart Association for their continued work on school foods, and we're glad some segments of the junk-food industry recognize their products' contribution to childhood obesity. But as benevolent as this agreement is, it’s schools and vending machine companies who decide what to stock in school vending machines – and they aren’t parties to this agreement. These voluntary guidelines shouldn't be seen as a substitute for strong federal action to get junk food out of schools. Right now, <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s2592is.txt.pdf">bipartisan legislation</a> is pending in both houses of Congress that would have the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) update its nutrition standards for foods sold out of vending machines, school stores, and other venues outside the nutritionally regulated school lunch program. That bill (S. 2592/H.R. 5167) has growing support on both sides of the aisle. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/dispensing_junk.pdf">Getting junk food out of schools</a> should be a national priority given that obesity rates in kids have tripled over the last two decades. But voluntary guidelines and photo ops, no matter how well intentioned, can't replace national standards backed by Congress and the USDA. 2006-10-06 California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Signs Food Safety Law http://cspinet.org/new/200610031.html California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger last weekend signed into law <a href="http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/bill/sen/sb_0601-0650/sb_611_bill_20060929_chaptered.html">important legislation</a> that would help protect that state’s consumers from tainted food. The bill requires meat and poultry companies whose products are being recalled to tell state health officials which retailers and restaurants received the contaminated products. Two years ago Governor Schwarzenegger vetoed <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200410011.html">similar legislation</a>. The recent outbreak of E. coli infections traced back to contaminated spinach clearly highlighted the need for more public information about food recalls. “Families have a right to know whether or not the chicken or beef in their refrigerator was subject to a food-safety recall,” said Ken Kelly, staff attorney at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “The federal government shouldn’t be handcuffing state health officials, who need to get recall information out quickly to the public.” In 2003, California was one of several states that received meat from a Washington State cow that tested positive for mad cow disease. But because California is one of 12 states that have signed secrecy agreements with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, state health officials were prohibited from identifying stores or restaurants that may have received beef from the infected cow. Since 2004, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200408051.html"> CSPI has been urging</a> USDA not to require state health officials to remain silent as a condition of receiving detailed recall information from the federal government. 2006-10-03 Bold New York City Health Department Proposals Praised http://cspinet.org/new/200609262.html NYC May Require Calories on Menus and Limit Artificial Trans Fat in RestaurantsAll restaurants in New York City would have to remove most artificial trans fat from foods, and the typical fast food restaurant would have to list calories for each item on its menu boards if <a href="http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/html/pr2006/pr093-06.shtml">two new proposed regulations</a> in New York City are adopted. The proposals are winning plaudits from health advocates, including the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which has been urging cities, states, and the federal government to take both of those actions. The proposals, put forward by the city's health commissioner, Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, were announced at a meeting of the city's Board of Health today. The first proposal would limit artificial trans fat—the trans fat that is produced when oil is partially hydrogenated in a factory—in all New York City restaurants and food service outlets. Restaurants could either switch to healthier oils or use partially hydrogenated oils only to the extent that they contribute less than half a gram of trans per serving. Although small amounts of trans fat occur naturally in foods like milk and beef, most trans fat in the American diet comes from partially hydrogenated oil. The American Heart Association recommends that Americans get no more than 1 percent of their calories from trans fat, which amounts to about 2 grams per day. A large order of McDonald's French fries contains about 8 grams—or four days' worth. In contrast, French fries at <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200606081.html">Wendy's</a>, Chili's, and Ruby Tuesday are trans-fat-free since they're fried in healthier vegetable oil blends. "It makes perfectly good sense for health authorities to set limits on the amount of artificial trans fat in foods in the same way they set limits on various dyes, chemicals, or other additives in food," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Fortunately, as Wendy's, Legal Sea Foods, and a few other chains and numerous food manufacturers have found, healthier alternatives to partially hydrogenated oil are available for every kind of food." CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200405181.html">first urged </a>the Food and Drug Administration</a> to revoke its approval of partially hydrogenated oil in 2004. Leading epidemiological researchers estimate that use of partially hydrogenated oil kills roughly 50,000 Americans—including about 1,500 New Yorkers—each year. A Chicago alderman recently proposed getting partially hydrogenated oil out of that city's restaurants, but withdrew the measure in order to give chains more time to switch on their own. CSPI says <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511221.html">restaurants have been much slower </a>to get rid of partially hydrogenated oils than food manufacturers which, spurred by new trans fat labeling requirements, have reformulated many food products that used to include significant amounts of trans fat. The second proposal advanced today by the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene would require all restaurants that currently make available calorie information for standardized menu items to list calories on menus and menu boards. Fast-food chains that have nutrition information on web sites, like McDonald's, Burger King, KFC, and Cosi would have to list calorie counts on their menu boards alongside the menu item and the price in all their New York City outlets. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nutritionpolicy/policy_options.html#NutritionLabeling">Listing calories on menus </a>would help people make more informed choices when eating out, according to CSPI. For instance, people might be surprised to learn that a large shake at McDonald's (1,160 calories) has twice as many calories as a Big Mac (560). At Subway, most people wouldn't assume that a 6-inch tuna sub actually has more calories (530) than a 6-inch roast beef (290). "With people eating more and more of their meals away from home, putting calorie counts on menus and menu boards will help Americans watch their weight and encourage restaurant chains to add a wider variety of options," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "If chains already have this information, they should make it available to their customers when they're deciding what to order instead of hiding it on a web site." CSPI has helped advance similar menu-labeling proposals in about a dozen state legislatures and in Congress. The federal bills are known as the Menu Education and Labeling, or MEAL, Acts. In the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200510271.html">District of Columbia</a>, a menu labeling bill enjoys majority support in the city council but has yet to come up for a vote. The next step for the New York City proposals is a public hearing on October 30. "The Board of Health and the Bloomberg administration deserve enormous credit for putting these urgently needed health measures on the front burner," said Jacobson. "Reducing use of partially hydrogenated oils and putting calorie counts on menus are easy ways to help New Yorkers reduce their risks of heart disease and obesity." 2006-09-26 Coalition for a Stronger FDA Says Agency Needs More Resources http://cspinet.org/new/200609251.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael Jacobson Press Conference Announcing the Coalition for a Stronger FDA Washington, D.C., September 25, 2006 I’m very pleased to be here this morning. I hardly need to point out how unusual this coalition is. Consumer, industry, and patients groups are working arm in arm to help reach a goal that none of those groups could achieve individually. The power of such a coalition was suggested earlier this year when the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the Food Products Association lobbied together to reverse a proposed $30 million cut in the budget of the FDA’s food division, the Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, or CFSAN. While we may not see eye-to-eye on a raft of specific issues, CSPI and the food industry totally agree that it is crucial that the FDA be adequately funded to carry out its wide-ranging and ever-increasing responsibilities to ensure safe and honestly labeled foods and drugs. As it is, the FDA has not had that funding, and public confidence has plummeted. The food division is particularly vulnerable to budget cuts, because it is not bolstered by user-fee laws. Instead, new challenges, including genetically engineered foods, powerful new germs, novel food ingredients, and ever-increasing numbers of products and shipments of imported foods, have stretched the staff beyond the breaking point. CFSAN regulates 80 percent of America’s food supply. And although FDA-regulated foods are linked to two-thirds of food poisoning outbreaks, the FDA only gets 38 percent of the total federal budget for food safety. According to FDA documents, CFSAN is projecting that its budget will have fallen 28 percent behind inflation between 2003 and 2007. Moreover, CFSAN expects that its staffing will have fallen by 14 percent from 2003 to 2007. After 9/11, Congress provided funds for several hundred new inspectors to help thwart acts of bioterrorism—the intentional contamination of food. However, since then, the number of inspectors has declined to about the level before 9/11. The 2,000 or so inspectors need to monitor over 120,000 domestic food-production facilities. The average facility is inspected only once every five or ten years. That’s not to mention the 160,000 foreign facilities that the FDA does not have the authority to monitor. This month, the public—and industry—are being buffeted by an epidemic of spinach-related E. coli poisonings. The number of future outbreaks due to vegetables or fruits or dairy products will likely increase if FDA cannot monitor and guide regulated companies. Today, CFSAN has only four staff members charged with stopping deceptive labeling. FDA officials told us that that is too small a staff to proactively identify deceptive labels. And CFSAN doesn’t even seem to have the resources to be reactive, considering that it has not acted on numerous complaints filed by both CSPI and industry groups. CSPI has also filed numerous petitions with the agency—to prevent the 50,000 or so annual deaths from partially hydrogenated vegetable oil, or the roughly 150,000 deaths due to the dangerously high levels of salt in foods, or the deaths caused by contaminated shellfish, and numerous other issues. FDA action could save lives and money, but the agency simply doesn’t have the resources to tackle the wide range of opportunities before it. We need a strong FDA to promote Americans’ health and pocketbook. While political will is certainly part of the equation, lack of funding hampers all the agency’s activities. CSPI will be working closely with the Coalition for a Stronger FDA to ensure that the Administration and Congress recognize how essential it is to substantially increase the agency’s budget. 2006-09-25 WHO Considering Food Labeling Reforms, Global Phase-out of Partially Hydrogenated Oils http://cspinet.org/new/200609201.html WASHINGTON—A <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_strategy.pdf">World Health Organization (WHO) proposal</a>.to implement its strategy to combat diet-related disease includes a recommendation that governments around the world phase out partially hydrogenated oils if trans-fat labeling alone doesn’t spur significant reductions in their use. The recommendation was put forth by the WHO in a proposed action plan for its food standards rulemaking body, the <a href="http://www.codexalimentarius.net/web/index_en.jsp">Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex)</a> . Codex, funded jointly by the <a href="http://www.who.int/en/">WHO</a> and the <a href="http://www.fao.org/">United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization</a>, develops model regulatory policies for the U.S. and more than 150 other countries. Its regulatory standards and guidelines help govern the $500 billion a year international food trade. The plan also calls for a series of food labeling reforms, including restrictions on “trans-fat-free” claims on foods that are high in saturated fat; consistent rules for health claims in food advertising and labeling; and requirements for food labels to disclose the percentage of fruits, vegetables, whole grains and added sugar when companies make marketing claims about those ingredients. “If implemented, the action plan would be an important step in combating the global epidemic of diet-related disease and obesity,” stated Bruce Silverglade, director of legal affairs for the Center for Science in the Public Interest and President of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/reports/codex/iacfosum.html">International Association of Consumer Food Organizations</a>. “We hope the Bush Administration will support this effort, in contrast to its attempts to water down previous global diet and health initiatives.” Codex will finalize the proposed action plan after accepting comments from governments and recognized representatives of industry and consumer organizations. Codex committees will then draft specific rules implementing the final action plan. The process can take several years. CSPI has petitioned the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to implement several reforms similar to the ones proposed by the WHO. In 2005 CSPI urged the FDA to revoke its approval for partially hydrogenated oils, the leading source of heart-attack-inducing trans fat in the American diet. For many years CSPI has also pressed the FDA to require quantitative ingredient labeling, which would require food companies to disclose the presence of key ingredients. For a product like Smucker’s strawberry “Simply 100% Fruit,” that step would require the embarrassing disclosure on labels that the spread contains only 30 percent strawberries. 2006-09-20 FDA Urges Consumers to Stop Eating Bagged Spinach During Outbreak http://cspinet.org/new/200609151.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalConsumers should heed the advice of the Food and Drug Administration and not eat bagged commercial spinach until the precise source of the outbreak is discovered and until public health authorities indicate it is safe to consume this product again. Infection from E. coli O157:H7 can cause abdominal pain, bloody diarrhea, and in some cases, including in this outbreak, Hemolytic Uremic Syndrome, which causes kidney failure and death. By issuing this alert to the public earlier than in past outbreaks, the FDA has probably prevented even more people from getting sick or dying. But unfortunately, fresh produce is too often contaminated with E. coli, Salmonella, or other potentially deadly pathogens. Contamination can come from use of untreated manure used as fertilizer, irrigation water contaminated with waste from animal agriculture, or cross-contamination during processing. It is vital that the federal government ensure the safety of fresh fruits and vegetables, especially since we want people to eat more of these healthy foods, not less. But regrettably, food-safety responsibilities are divided among the FDA, USDA, and other agencies, with no single agency having primacy from farm to fork. 2006-09-15 Institute of Medicine Releases Progress Report on Childhood Obesity http://cspinet.org/new/200609131.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo WootanDespite isolated pockets of progress, we need bold national policies to stem the tide of childhood obesity. The Institute of Medicine progress report on childhood obesity should end the politicians’ handwringing, and spur strong and swift action. Members of Congress, for instance, should show political courage by standing up to Coke, Pepsi and snack food makers and get soda and junk food out of schools. Senators Harkin and Murkowski have legislation— the <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s2592is.txt.pdf">Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act</a>. — that would give the U.S. Department of Agriculture the authority to do that. Calorie counts on fast-food menu boards would let parents know that the grilled chicken sandwich has as many calories as a Quarter Pounder, and that on children’s menus the chicken tenders have more calories than the baby back ribs. Congress seems more interested in dishing out special legislative favors to the industry—one bill that would block certain lawsuits against restaurants and food manufacturers, and another bill that would nullify state food safety and labeling laws. We need major programs to get kids moving again, yet the Administration zeroed out funding for its youth media campaign, VERB, which has actually been shown to get kids to exercise. We don’t need any new task forces, study groups, or blue ribbon panels. What we need now is the political will to take strong action. 2006-09-13 Good Cup, Bad Cup http://cspinet.org/new/200609051.html CSPI's Nutrition Action Healthletter Offers Advice on How to Survive in Latte LandWASHINGTON—Would you drink a Quarter Pounder with Cheese? If you order a venti (20-oz.) Starbucks Caffè Mocha, you might as well be sipping that 500-calorie burger through a straw. And a venti Starbucks Java Chip Frappuccino, with 650 calories and nearly a day’s saturated fat, is a McDonald’s coffee plus 11 creamers and 29 packets of sugar, according to the watchdogs at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. In the <a href ="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/coffee.pdf ">September issue </a> of Nutrition Action Healthletter, CSPI’s nutritionists tell you how to keep your coffee break from becoming a Big Mac break. “Most people wouldn’t consider shoehorning in a Quarter Pounder with Cheese somewhere between breakfast and lunch, but it’s perfectly possible to get 500-plus calories in a drink from Starbucks,” said CSPI senior nutritionist Jayne Hurley. “Fortunately, it’s a cinch to bring down the calories and saturated fat in many of these drinks by making a few simple changes.” • Go nonfat. A nonfat or soy cappuccino or latte is always a calorie bargain. Ordering a grande (16 oz.) nonfat cappuccino or latte with nonfat milk instead of whole saves all the saturated fat plus 50 to 100 calories. • Skip the whip. At Starbucks for example, whipped cream adds some 120 calories and 7 grams of saturated fat that you could do without. • Slash the sugar. Order sweetened drinks with sugar-free syrup or get them unsweetened and add your own sugar (about 10 calories per pack) or Splenda (0 calories). • Look for “light.” At Starbucks, grande Frappuccino Lights slash the calories to 150 to 250 by replacing half the sugar with Splenda and dropping the whipped cream. A medium (14 oz.) Dunkin’ Donuts Latte Lite keeps the calories at 100. <p)The Nutrition Action Healthletter article charts the calories, saturated and trans fat, sugar, and caffeine for drinks at Starbucks, Dunkin’ Donuts and other chains using company data. Like their fast-food cousins, Starbucks and other coffee sellers put nutrition numbers on their websites, but not their menu boards. <a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:S.3484:">Leglislation</a> that would require large chain restaurants to list calories on menu boards has been introduced in more than a dozen states, the District of Columbia, and in both Houses of Congress in the past several years. None of those bills has become law yet, but CSPI is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/anyone_s_guess_final_web.pdf">actively pushing</a> their adoption and is encouraging other states and cities to require calories on menu boards and expanded nutrition information on printed menus. The article is available at http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/coffee.pdf. Nutrition Action is the largest-circulation health newsletter in North America, with 900,000 subscribers in the U.S. and Canada. 2006-09-05 New Online Calculators Encourage Eating Green http://cspinet.org/new/200608161.html Consumers Can Check Impact of Diet on Health, Environment, & Animal Welfare on EatingGreen.orgTwo interactive online calculators on the new <a href="http://www.eatinggreen.org">Eating Green web site</a> from the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org">Center for Science in the Public Interest</a> allow consumers to gauge the health, environmental, and animal welfare impact of their diet. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/EatingGreen/score.html">“Score your Diet” calculator</a> provides a qualitative assessment of one’s diet on those three fronts, while the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/EatingGreen/calculator.html">“Eating Green” calculator</a> provides a quantitative assessment of the environmental costs of the meat and other animal products in one’s diet, and shows how small dietary changes can help an individual’s health and the health of the planet. For example, replacing just one serving of beef, one egg and one serving of cheese per day with fruit, vegetables or whole grains would spare the need for 1.8 acres of cropland, 40 pounds of fertilizer and three ounces of pesticides each year, according to the site. This change also would increase an individual’s daily dietary fiber intake by 16 grams and reduce fat intake by 22 grams. Plus, users can see how eating a lot of fruit, choosing grass-fed instead of grain-fed beef, or cutting back on eggs can change one’s health, environment, and animal welfare scores. Consumers can also take an interactive tour of the food supply from the fertilizer factory to feedlot to the dinner plate, and learn about problems associated with modern meat production. The web site represents a new strategy on the part of the 35-year-old organization to make an environmental case for more plant-based, though not necessarily vegetarian, diets. That strategy is described most fully in CSPI’s new book, <a href="http://www.cspistore.org/item/SixArguments.html">Six Arguments for a Greener Diet</a> ($14.95, ISBN 0893290491). That book discusses the links between animal-based foods and chronic and infectious diseases; environmental pollution, depletion of aquifers, and soil erosion; and animal welfare. “There’s something here for you whether you care about global warming or whether you care about your waistline,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “People should consider 'eating green' both for altruistic reasons, since it’s much better for the planet, but also for selfish reasons, since it’s much better for your health. So if you’re considering switching from a Hummer to a Prius, or switching to energy-efficient light bulbs and appliances, consider also what you’re having for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.” 2006-08-16 "Food Industry Protection Act" Threatens Hundreds of State and Local Food Safety and Labeling Laws, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200607261.html WASHINGTON—More than <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/testimony_2.pdf">220 state and local food safety and labeling laws</a> including restaurant hygiene codes, milk pasteurization requirements, and even some states’ warnings to pregnant women about drinking alcohol or consuming fish high in mercury would be killed if a controversial bill before the Senate becomes law. The euphemistically named <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s3128is.txt.pdf">National Uniformity for Food Act (S.3128)</a> will be the subject of a hearing tomorrow in the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. While the bill purports to bring about uniformity between Food and Drug Administration regulations and various state laws, its sponsors’ real target is California’s Proposition 65, which requires warnings on products with ingredients that cause cancer or birth defects. However, many important food-safety functions are primarily carried about by local and state governments, and CSPI says this overly broad bill would eliminate those statutes as well. “The fallout from this attack on California’s Proposition 65 could be the destruction of hundreds of other state and local food safety and labeling laws in every state,” said CSPI senior staff attorney Benjamin Cohen, who submitted written testimony to the panel. “Parents pouring milk for their kids or dining in a restaurant shouldn’t have to worry about getting a foodborne illness. Yet some Senators would place their constituents at greater risk of that just to please the powerful and politically connected food industry.” The bill is opposed by many governors, including California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (R), state attorneys general, and state agricultural and food safety officials. The bill is also opposed by many public-health and environmental groups who say that California’s Proposition 65 has been an important force in spurring manufacturers of consumer goods to avoid the use of many dangerous chemicals instead of putting warning labels on packages. The law has spurred the removal of lead from wine bottles’ foil caps and reduced arsenic levels in bottled water. While the law applies only to products sold in California, companies typically reformulate products nationally. The House passed a companion measure, H.R. 4167, in March. 2006-07-26 FDA Misleads Congress on Agency Efforts to Halt Deceptive Food Labeling http://cspinet.org/new/200607181.html Agency Routinely Checks for Presence, not Accuracy, of Nutrition Facts LabelsA Food and Drug Administration (FDA) <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sen_and_hou_rpt_109-92_food_label_reg..pdf">report</a> requested by the House and Senate Appropriations Committees concerning the agency's efforts to stop inaccurate nutrition information and misleading health-related claims on food labels is itself misleading, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The FDA report implies that agency inspectors checked more than 28,000 food labels for inaccurate nutrition information within a recent 14 month period when in reality, the inspectors merely checked to see whether a Nutrition Facts panel was present on the label, not whether it was accurate. "The FDA’s report to Congress demonstrates that the specific issues of concern to the Committee—the accuracy of Nutrition Facts labels and misleading health-related claims that make it difficult for Americans to comply with federal dietary advice--have been the casualty of not only budget cuts, but a lack of commitment on the part of the Agency to fulfill its mission," wrote CSPI legal director Bruce Silverglade to the Congressional committees responsible for FDA appropriations. "The FDA should be cracking down on claims for bogus 'whole wheat' products, deceptive '0 trans fat' claims, inaccurate 'Nutrition Facts' labels, and misleading statements like 'made with real fruit' (when the product contains only fruit flavors), not just eyeballing labels to make sure that information is printed in the required format." "The FDA’s report obfuscates the Agency's abdication of its responsibility to ensure honest food labeling by touting irrelevant statistics concerning routine Agency inspection activities. The FDA has been less than forthright with Congress," said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Ringel Heller. CSPI urged the Congressional committees to direct the FDA to: (1) conduct supermarket sweeps to stop misleading health-related claims; (2) systematically test the accuracy of Nutrition Facts labels; (3) give labeling enforcement higher priority during inspections of manufacturing facilities and distribution facilities; (4) put a stop to marketplace fads before they get out of hand; and (5) increase funding to the FDA division responsible for food labeling. CSPI sent appropriators in Congress a detailed <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/fn5rep.pdf">rebuttal</a> of the FDA's report. 2006-07-18 Federal Trade Commission Urged to Investigate Beer and Liquor Sponsorship of NASCAR http://cspinet.org/new/200607121.html CSPI Says Logos on Cars, at Tracks—-Even on Toys—-Confuse Young Kids About Drinking and DrivingWhen it conducts its upcoming review of the alcohol industry’s advertising and marketing practices and the industry’s self-regulation systems, the Federal Trade Commission should examine the burgeoning alcohol sponsorship relationships with Nascar, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. Along with a detailed <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ftc_nascar_let.pdf">letter</a> highlighting both the sponsorship deals and Nascar’s simultaneous efforts to attract more kids to its audience, CSPI sent FTC Chairman Deborah Platt Majoras a little present that illustrates the problem: A Matchbox-type toy car emblazoned with logos for <a href="http://store.nascar.com/product/index.jsp?productId=2175893&cp=2056639.2056462.2056653.2057491&clickid=leftnav_txt&parentPage=family">Miller Lite</a> beer. Other toy cars licensed by Nascar bear Budweiser, Coors Light, Crown Royal, Jim Beam, and Jack Daniels logos. "Linking drinking with high-speed driving—in front of audiences that include millions of young people—is asking for trouble," said CSPI alcohol policies director George A. Hacker. "A self-regulatory system that allows beer logos on toys and liquor signage at supposedly 'family' events is not a system worth keeping. Young people—-especially those under 12 years old—lack the social and intellectual sophistication to understand fully that alcohol and driving are a potentially lethal mixture. Alcohol marketers and Nascar deserve the black flag." Nascar has five alcoholic-beverage "premier" sponsors, making alcoholic beverages the largest Nascar sponsor category among all other consumer goods sponsors. According to Nascar, 58 percent of 2-to-11 year-olds and 50 percent of 12-to-17 year-olds are Nascar fans, and Nascar is the second most popular televised sport among 7-to-11 year-olds, behind NFL football. Yet Nascar counts Anheuser-Busch, Miller Brewing, Diageo/Crown Royal, Jack Daniels, and Jim Beam among its sponsors. Anheuser-Busch and Crown Royal are each name sponsors of various racing events, and liquor-brand sponsorship is expanding rapidly. All of those companies are likely to have logos on cars, signage on tracks, or ads on Nascar telecasts. "We talk about it as the fabric of the game," said Tony Ponturo, Anheuser-Busch’s director of sports marketing, in surprisingly candid remarks to Sports Business Journal in May. "When your signs are part of the playing field, you can’t avoid that." Among other strategies to lure young people to its brand, Nascar has been aggressively building its audience of young people by actively encouraging Hollywood to develop racing-themed movies such as Herbie Fully Loaded, starring 19-year-old Lindsey Lohan, and the forthcoming Talladega Nights, starring Will Ferrell. It premiered the G-rated cartoon film, Cars, at Lowe’s Motor Speedway and plans a Nascar-related morning cartoon for children’s television. At least with the toy cars bearing beer logos, Nascar realizes it may have a problem: The boxes' fine print indicates the toy "is intended for adults of legal drinking age," though elsewhere, in a warning about choking, it says it is not intended for children under 3. "The Federal Trade Commission should take a hard look at how alcohol marketers are using Nascar to appeal to young people," said Hacker. "Car races are a strange place for kids to learn about alcohol, drinking, and driving." CSPI leads a coalition called the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>, which has been waging a campaign to get beer ads off college basketball and other sports programming. 2006-07-12 Hidden Conflicts of JAMA Authors Exposed http://cspinet.org/new/200607112.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Director Merrill GooznerTwo years ago, the Center for Science in the Public Interest <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200407123.html">warned the editors</a> of the Journal of the American Medical Association and other leading scientific journals that there was a persistent pattern of non-disclosure of conflicts of interest by researchers publishing articles within their pages. CSPI said that a voluntary disclosure policy needed teeth if it was going to work. Our concerns were ignored. Today’s <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115257995935002947.html?mod=hps_us_pageone">Wall Street Journal</a> documented a major failure to disclose relevant conflicts by seven authors of a JAMA article involving the safety of anti-depressant use by pregnant women. At least two of those authors, including lead author Lee S. Cohen, a Harvard Medical School professor and director of the perinatal and reproductive psychiatry research program at Massachusetts General Hospital, had their conflicts of interest documented in CSPI's Integrity in Science Database at <a href="http://www.integrityinscience.org">www.integrityinscience.org</a> prior to publication of the article. It’s clear that the Journal of the American Medical Association does not evaluate conflict of interest disclosures when articles are submitted. As a result, some authors with blatant conflicts of interest apparently feel they can ignore the journal’s policy with impunity. The only solution is for journals to adopt strong penalties for authors who fail to disclose – a three-year ban from publishing in the pages in the journal (such a policy has been adopted by <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/press/200410061.html">Environmental Health Perspectives</a>). The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors should also make a ban by any of its members apply to all its members. 2006-07-11 New Data Show FDA/EPA's Mercury Advice on Tuna Doesn't Hold Water http://cspinet.org/new/200607111.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalAsk a pregnant woman: What if you found out the government based its tuna advice on just a few types of canned tuna, and missed those with the very highest levels? I bet she would say, "Sorry Charlie, I’ll skip it this time". After all, skipping tuna for the brief span of the pregnancy is no big deal if it offers greater protection from harm to the unborn fetus. <a href="http://www.defenders.org/tunamercury/report.html">Defenders of Wildlife's canned tuna testing </a>shows that FDA's "averages" for mercury in canned light tuna just don’t hold water. This means the government's advice is not protective for many pregnant women and children, especially those who: • Eat imported canned tuna from Latin America, especially Ecuador. • Buy “no-name” brands of light tuna. • Shop for tuna in ethnic neighborhoods. Defenders of Wildlife has documented that children who limit their canned light tuna consumption to two cans of tuna a week (recommended by the government advisory) would exceed the EPA reference dose in almost every case if they weighed less than 50 pounds. Consuming many of the brands they tested, children would quickly exceed the level of mercury in their bodies at which adverse health effects have been observed. Given these results, many women and children may want to limit their consumption of canned tuna to levels well below those recommended by FDA. While an occasional tuna sandwich is not a problem, a steady diet of tuna for women of childbearing age and children could lead them to have excess levels of mercury in their body. Pregnant women or those planning a pregnancy should be especially careful, as the mercury they accumulate in their bodies can be transferred to their unborn fetus. The fetus is much more sensitive to mercury and can suffer adverse neurological development, affecting such areas as walking and speech development. The good news is that mercury gradually leaves the body, so if a woman stops eating high mercury containing fish about a year before she becomes pregnant, she can reduce the levels in her body to negligible amounts. So here is our advice to pregnant women, those planning a pregnancy, and those serving young children: Eat fish, but avoid shark, swordfish, and king mackerel. Limit consumption of tuna to an occasional sandwich, and avoid all albacore and light tuna brands where the fish comes from Latin America. 2006-07-11 Medical Experts Call on Secretary Leavitt to Tackle Hypertension by Promoting Salt Reduction http://cspinet.org/new/200607101.html Two dozen leading hypertension experts, physicians, and health groups <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/salthhs.pdf">today urged</a> Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt to swing his agency into action to reduce Americans’ salt consumption. The staggeringly high salt levels in countless processed foods and restaurant foods are a major factor in raising Americans’ blood pressure, which in turn is a major contributor to heart disease and stroke. African Americans are disproportionately at risk for high blood pressure, those experts said. “There is virtual unanimity within the scientific community regarding the contribution of excessive sodium consumption to cardiovascular disease,” the experts write, pointing to various government-funded recommendations, including those of the <a href="http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/html/chapter8.htm">Dietary Guidelines for Americans</a>, the <a href="http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3788/3969/18495.aspx">Institute of Medicine</a>, and the <a href="http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/hypertension/jnc7full.htm">Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on the Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure (JNC-7)</a>. In 2004, Dr. Claude Lenfant, then the director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, estimated that 150,000 lives could be saved each year if sodium levels in packaged and restaurant foods were halved. According to the American Heart Association: • 40 percent of African Americans are hypertensive, compared to 27 percent of Caucasians. That results in an 80 percent greater rate of fatal strokes and a 50 percent greater rate of heart disease death for African Americans than whites. • In 2003, the death rates per 100,000 people from hypertension were 49.7 for black males vs. 14.9 percent for white males and 40.8 percent for black females vs. 14.5 percent for white females. • Hypertension is believed to be the underlying cause of death for 30 percent of hypertensive black males and 20 percent for hypertensive black females. Last month, the American Medical Association passed a <a href="http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/16461.html">resolution</a> emphasizing the need to achieve 50 percent sodium reductions for processed and restaurant foods and urging the Food and Drug Administration, which falls under HHS, to revoke the “generally regarded as safe,” or GRAS status, of salt. The Center for Science in the Public Interest has <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt">filed regulatory petitions with (and lawsuits against)</a> the FDA at several points over the last 25 years urging the agency to do just that. The letter to Secretary Leavitt also points out that Americans spend some $15 billion per year on antihypertension drugs—and that taxpayers and consumers alike would welcome government action to reduce those expenditures. “Unfortunately, government treats dietary approaches to high blood pressure as a spectator sport,” according to CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The government’s unwillingness to act—even to encourage voluntary changes by industry—has turned many Americans' hearts into ticking time bombs.” Signatories to the letter include Frank M. Sacks, M.D., of Harvard Medical School, Myron H. Weinberger, M.D., of Indiana University School of Medicine, L. Julian Haywood, M.D., of the University of Southern California, and Delegate Donna M. Christensen (D), a physician who represents the U.S. Virgin Islands in Congress. “It's high time that our nation’s leading health authorities began solving one of the nation’s leading health problems,” Dr. Sacks said. “Reducing sodium consumption is critical to preventing cardiovascular disease.” 2006-07-10 FDA Fails to Protect Americans from Dangerous Drugs and Unsafe Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200606271.html Agency Captured by Industries It Should Be RegulatingWhile the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is in the self-congratulatory throes of its <a href="http://www.fda.gov/centennial/">100th anniversary</a>, leading independent experts on nutrition, food safety, and drug safety say the agency is failing to protect Americans. While the beleaguered agency obediently rushes expensive new drug therapies on the market, it does virtually nothing to help reduce the toll of diet-related and drug-induced disease in America, according to <a href="http://www.citizen.org/hrg/">Public Citizen’s Health Research Group</a> and the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org">Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI)</a>. The FDA is scheduled to mark the 100th anniversary of the passage of the 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act at a June 30 ceremony at the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/oc/commissioners/wiley.html">Harvey Wiley </a> Federal Building in College Park, MD. That building is named for the reform-minded U.S. Department of Agriculture chemist who became the first director of the Bureau of Chemistry, which later became the FDA. “FDA was our country’s first consumer protection agency and Americans have relied on FDA to ensure the safety of their food and drugs for 100 years,” said <a href="http://www.house.gov/waxman/ ">Representative Henry A. Waxman</a>. “Under the Bush Administration, FDA has undermined enforcement and betrayed its consumer-first legacy. FDA must start enforcing the law and return to a culture that places public health concerns ahead of industry profits.” “The FDA’s centennial is not so much a time to celebrate, but to mourn the FDA’s gradual descent into irrelevancy,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The great Republican president Theodore Roosevelt would be sick to his stomach if he could see how Harvey Wiley’s hard-charging tiger of an agency became such a pliant pussycat.” According to Public Citizen’s Health Research Group, some of the problems and failures at the FDA include: • User fees. The FDA’s increasing reliance on so-called user fees from drug and medical device companies encourages the agency to treat those companies more like fee-paying customers. Instead of being fully funded by the government, FDA took in $380 million in user fees in the 2006 fiscal year. Former FDA official Janet Woodcock stated that the law authorizing such fees creates a “sweatshop mentality” at the agency’s Centers for Drug Evaluation and Research. • No Learning from Drug Mistakes. In <a href="http://www.citizen.org/publications/release.cfm?ID=7411">testimony </a>before the Institute of Medicine, Public Citizen Health Research Group director Sidney M. Wolfe, MD, cited 13 instances of drug approvals which either should not have been approved (including Crestor, Rezulin, and others), or should have been restricted (Accutane and others) or withdrawn (Baycol, Seldane, and others) earlier than they were. • Tobacco Failures. Five companies illegally market and promote laser treatment for smoking cessation. Public Citizen last week petitioned the FDA to crack down on those companies, since the FDA hasn’t approved the device and there’s no evidence the treatment works. Consumers who are convinced to pay up to $399 for laser treatment may be diverted from real programs that work, such as nicotine gum or patches—thus fewer smokers will be helped to quit. And, though it had essentially removed nicotine-containing beverages from the market in 2002, those drinks have reappeared. Just this month, NICLite, which the company breathlessly says is the “World’s only Nicotine Replacement Drink!,” and that it is “classified as a Dietary Supplement by the FDA,” began a marketing campaign. According to Wolfe, either the company is lying about the status of these products or the FDA inexplicably reversed itself and declared that they can legally be sold as dietary supplements. Either way, it represents a failure of the FDA to enforce the law of the land. “The FDA’s 100th anniversary propaganda campaign hides and denies the many ways the agency is engaging in an unprecedented assault on the American public on behalf of its drug, device, food, and other industry ‘clients,’” said Wolfe. CSPI says <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/sleeping_watchdog.pdf">failures on the food side of the FDA</a> include: • Obesity. Over the past three decades, rates of obesity have doubled in young children and adults, and tripled in teenagers. In 2003, then-Commissioner Mark B. McClellan declared FDA’s intention to “confront the obesity epidemic ... to help consumers lead healthier lives through better nutrition.” Three years later, according to CSPI, the agency has done essentially nothing. Even with a food that’s a major contributor to obesity—soda—FDA has declined to place <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200507131.html">health notices on cans and bottles</a>, require added sugars to be listed separately on labels, or to require multi-serving containers to list the number of calories for the whole container. • Heart Disease. One of the most potent promoters of heart disease is the trans fat in partially hydrogenated oil. Though after a 10-year slog the FDA finally required trans fat to be listed on nutrition labels—spurring some manufacturers to abandon the oil—the FDA has done nothing to get restaurants to disclose or eliminate it. In 2004 CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200405181.html">petitioned the agency </a>to ban partially hydrogenated oil and, until such a ban, to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200407221.html">require disclosure in restaurants</a>, but the FDA has not acted. The result: thousands of unnecessary premature deaths every year. • High Blood Pressure. Perhaps the single most harmful substance in the food supply gets zero attention from the FDA—sodium chloride, or <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/">salt</a>. CSPI and the American Medical Association want FDA to revoke the “Generally Regarded as Safe” status of salt and to treat it as a food additive, subject to reasonable upper limits in packaged foods. In 2004, the head of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute estimated that cutting the sodium content of the food supply in half would save 150,000 lives per year. • Fraudulent Labels. Of 11,000 employees, the FDA tasks a grand total of four people at headquarters to police food labels. Thus, supermarket shelves are graced with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200510272.html">carrot cake virtually without carrots, fruitless “fruit snacks” made with high fructose corn syrup, “whole wheat” products with a lot of white flour</a>, and so on. CSPI says the most significant FDA labeling initiative in recent years was an industry-written initiative to let manufacturers place misleading “qualified health claims” on food labels. FDA’s own research found that the program confused consumers, but the program, championed by food companies, continues. • Food Safety. Faced with the emergence of dangerous chemicals (such as mercury or acrylamide) in food, the FDA takes years before acting—and even then, its response is typically tepid. Faced with outbreaks of bacterial pathogens in food, FDA is similarly nonresponsive: Salmonella in eggs could be all but eliminated with finalized on-farm regulations to control the hazard, but those have been delayed for years. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508181.html">Shellfish contaminated with deadly Vibrio vulnificus </a>kill 20 or so people every summer, but FDA relies on an industry-funded partnership with state governments to ensure shellfish safety. “A scrappy nonprofit like CSPI, with one litigator on staff, forced labeling changes from major companies like <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508112.html">Tropicana</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606011.html">Frito-Lay</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html">Pinnacle Foods</a>,” said Jacobson. “Yet when we hand the FDA neatly wrapped complaints on a silver platter, it just ignores them.” • Industry Capture. The FDA often relies on advisory committees made up of outside experts to offer science-based advice, particularly on approvals of drugs and medical devices. But those panels often include—and are sometimes dominated by—scientists or researchers who have direct financial relationships with the companies whose products are under scrutiny. In recent years, FDA advisory committees evaluating <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/integsci_4.24.pdf">antihypertensives</a>, various <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200509091.html">diabetes drugs</a>, and the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200402012.html">pediatric use of anti-depressants</a>, have all included industry-funded scientists. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200502251.html">On one committee</a>, 10 of 32 panelists investigating the controversial painkillers known as COX-2 inhibitors, including Vioxx, had ties to the makers of those drugs. CSPI and Public Citizen acknowledge that the FDA has many hard-working, diligent civil servants who need more resources to do their jobs effectively. But both the Administration and Congress have hampered the agency: the Administration, by leaving the agency rudderless and without a permanent commissioner for roughly 70 percent of the Bush presidency; and Congress, by abdicating much of its oversight responsibility, and by slashing the headquarters staffing of the food side of the agency by 11 percent since 1978. Much of the attention the Administration does pay to the agency comes in the form of unwelcome political interference, the groups say. The FDA’s failure to approve the over-the-counter use of the contraceptive Plan B is one case where the agency has been accused of letting politics, rather than science, rule the day. (Susan Wood, the assistant FDA commissioner for women’s health, resigned over the matter, citing political interference from then-Commissioner Lester Crawford). In April, an out-of-the-blue FDA declaration that marijuana has no medical benefit seemed politically motivated, since it contradicted the findings of a 1999 science panel that said it did. “As we celebrate the 100th anniversary of this important agency, there are too many instances in which it appears to be moving back to the 19th century, when industry did whatever it wanted,” said Wolfe. “All too often, the FDA seems to forget that it is a regulatory agency with legally mandated responsibilities to protect the public.” 2006-06-27 Give Bud the Boot from World Cup, Groups Say http://cspinet.org/new/200606221.html Global Resolution Urges FIFA to Eliminate Alcohol Promotion in World Cup EventsInfluential medical organizations and grassroots groups from around the world today called on FIFA, the governing body for the World Cup, to get rid of alcohol promotion at World Cup events and on match broadcasts. More than <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/signers.pdf">260 diverse health, youth, sports, and religious groups from 43 nations </a>. endorsed a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/resolution_fifa.pdf">global resolution</a> urging World Cup organizers to stop undermining the positive values of sport by putting beer ads in front of so many young soccer fans worldwide. Anheuser-Busch, the world’s largest brewer and producer of Budweiser, is one of 15 official partners of the 2006 FIFA World Cup and has prominent visibility at World Cup venues. It sponsors the Man of the Match award for each game, sells its beer at matches, and advertises extensively on broadcasts of World Cup matches. According to Anheuser-Busch executives, its sports marketing activities are intended to make their beer “part of the fabric of the game.” “It’s time to break the tie between alcohol marketing and high-profile sporting events,” said George A. Hacker, Director of Alcohol Policies at the Washington-based Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and a member of the board of directors of the Global Alcohol Policy Alliance (GAPA). CSPI organized the resolution effort. “FIFA is now on notice that there is widespread opposition to Budweiser’s hijacking the values of sports to promote drinking to hundreds of millions of fans, including young children, around the world.” According to FIFA, in 2002 a cumulative audience exceeding 28.8 billion viewers watched more than 41,100 hours of dedicated World Cup television programming over the 25 match days of the event – and 1.1 billion people watched the final match on television. The resolution calls on FIFA to examine the role of marketing alcoholic beverages in the World Cup for “consistency with the values of sport, health, and fair play represented by international sports competition.” It is available in several languages including <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_resolution_in_french.pdf">French</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_resolution_in_spanish.pdf">Spanish</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_resolution_in_german.pdf">German</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_resolution_portugese_2.pdf">Portugese</a>, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_resolution_in_italian.pdf">Italian</a>, and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global_resolution_in_thai.pdf">Thai</a>. Four percent of the burden of disease and 3.2 percent of all deaths globally are attributed to alcohol, and alcohol is the foremost risk to health in low-mortality countries and the third in developed countries, according to The World Health Report 2002. The 58th World Health Assembly resolved that harmful drinking is among the leading underlying causes of disease, injury, domestic violence against women and children, disability, social problems and premature deaths; is associated with mental ill-health; has a serious impact on human welfare affecting individuals, families, communities and society as a whole; and contributes to health inequities. “Advertising alcoholic beverages at the World Cup, perhaps the premier global family event, is totally unacceptable,” said J. Edward Hill, M.D., American Medical Association Immediate Past President. “We know exposure to television advertising for alcoholic beverages increases the likelihood that children will drink and consume alcohol more heavily. Eliminating all alcohol advertising and marketing at all future World Cup tournaments would demonstrate a commitment to promoting the health of youth and sports fans worldwide.” The 264 signers of the resolution represent a diverse array of health, youth, sports, drug control, and religious organizations worldwide – ranging from such groups as the World Medical Association, the National Federation of Youth Organizations in Bangladesh, the National Youth Council of Ireland, and the National Drug Abuse Control Council in Belize to the American Medical Association, the Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine in Ankara Turkey, and the Qatar National Anti-Doping Committee of the Qatar National Olympic Committee. Thailand contributed 86 organizational endorsers, in an effort spearheaded by Stopdrink.com, a project of the ThaiHealth Promotion Foundation. Spokespersons from around the world urged FIFA to eliminate alcohol promotion from the World Cup: Dr. Franklin Alcaraz Del C. of Centro Latinoamerico de Investigación Cientifica (CELIN), a research organization in Bolivia: “CELIN supports sports activities as alternatives to drug consumption, therefore CELIN thinks that the World Cup with no alcohol, should be the best example to follow.” Valerio Leonardo, executive director of AMOPROC, an alcohol-prevention group in Mozambique: “Alcohol-related accidents, crimes, and abuse of women and children fill our police stations and hospital clinics. Too often, what little money that’s available for bread goes for alcohol instead, leading to impoverishment, dependency, even HIV/AIDS. Beer promotion in the World Cup violates our principles of peace and human rights.” Luciana Michelin, coordinator of Gruppi di Solidarieta in Italy: “Children are massively over-exposed to advertising and promotion for alcoholic beverages. Sensible values and a profound respect for young people’s futures dictate that the world’s most popular sporting event should end its alcohol sponsorship.” Ahmadou Kane, coordinator of Association des Jeunes pour le Developpement AJD/PASTEEF in Senegal: “We are a youth association that promotes public health and education, which makes this campaign of the highest concern to us; all the more so because young people are the target of this mass-advertising of alcohol.” “ANPA is proud that France blocked beer advertising in the World Cup four years ago, because French law prohibits the advertising of alcoholic beverages,” said Claude Riviere, European Affairs Officer of the Association Nationale de Prevéntion en Alcoologie et Addictologie. “The law was upheld by the European Court of Justice, which ratified the restriction on trade as a valid exercise of national authority to protect public health from advertising intended to increase alcohol consumption.” In India, Dr. S. Arul Rhaj, Vice President of the Commonwealth Medical Association: “In a developing country health is the foundation upon which the wealth of the nation is built and strengthened. Alcohol is harmful to you, your family, and society. It damages your health, wealth, mind, and peace.” Dr. Hariharan of the Indian Alcohol Policy Alliance: “Alcohol consumption in the west has reached a very high level and it would be troublesome if countries like India and China follow on that path. The drinks industry sees both countries as emerging and promising markets for expansion.” Derek Rutherford, Chairman of the Global Alcohol Policy Alliance (GAPA): “The most insidious form of alcohol advertising is sports sponsorship. It reveals industry self-regulation of advertising as a complete sham. The industry is aware that sports is a cheap method for them to reach the young in all parts of the globe in order to recruit new drinkers. The association of alcohol with sport is a mismatch.” Dr. Joe Barry, former president of the Irish Medical Organization: “The World Cup is saturated with advertising and promotion for alcohol brands. It is regrettable that those massive promotional budgets are welcomed by FIFA and given free rein by the Irish Government when this country has such publicly acknowledged problems with alcohol consumption.” “Through television, on their sporting heroes, and on their own playing fields, young people in New Zealand are bombarded with alcohol marketing messages that reinforce our binge drinking culture,” said Ross Bell, Executive Director of the New Zealand Drug Foundation. “If we are to get serious about changing that culture, then we must break the unhealthy relationship between alcohol and sports.” Hermann Meyer, publisher of alkoholpolitik.ch: “Switzerland and Austria will host the European football championship in two years. The Global Resolution gives us a strong platform to oppose alcohol sponsorship and service at those games. Eliminating alcohol from sports takes on special importance in Switzerland, where sports, alcohol, and young people are too frequently and dangerously linked.” Dr. Ronaldo Laranjeira, a professor of psychiatry and director of the Brazilian Alcohol Advocacy Project (ACCA): “Brazil is a country where millions of young people look to our football players as heroes and role-models. Our alcohol policies are still in an embryonic stage, and an alcoholic beverage can cost less than a pint of milk. Beer adverts can be watched anytime day or night. It is a great privilege to be part of this movement.” The resolution represents an extension of CSPI’s on-going <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>, an effort within the United States to reduce youth exposure to alcohol advertising on television sports. As part of that Campaign, 24 percent of the universities in the National Collegiate Athletic Association have pledged to support an end to all alcohol advertising on college sports broadcasts in the U.S. “FIFA touts its responsibility to promote health and points to its elimination in 1986 of tobacco advertising in all its tournaments,” said Hacker. “If FIFA had a genuine concern about promoting health, particularly among the hundreds of millions of its youngest fans, it would give the boot, as soon as possible, to alcohol sponsorship, signage and advertising.” In addition to FIFA, the resolution will be sent to the World Health Organization, and to health and sports ministers around the world. The World Health Organization is currently examining world-wide alcohol issues in preparation for a report to the Sixtieth World Health Assembly in May of 2007. 2006-06-22 Dietary Supplement Bill Would Require Companies to Report Adverse Reactions to FDA http://cspinet.org/new/200606211.html Statement of CSPI Legal Affairs Director Bruce SilvergladeManufacturers of dietary supplements should absolutely be required to report serious adverse reactions to the Food and Drug Administration. That’s why the Center for Science in the Public Interest strongly supports the <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/final_language_june_20.pdf">bipartisan legislation</a> sponsored by Senators Hatch, Durbin, Enzi, Harkin and Kennedy. Reporting of adverse reactions will make it easier for the FDA to identify problem ingredients and to protect consumers. Under the current voluntary system, the FDA receives less than 1 percent of all reports of adverse reactions to dietary supplements. We urge the Senate to approve this legislation promptly and hope that the House can pass a companion bill before the end of the current session. We also encourage Congress to provide sufficient funding to the FDA so that the Agency can timely respond to reports of adverse reactions and protect the public from any hazardous products. 2006-06-21 23 States Get Failing Grade on CSPI's School Foods Report Card http://cspinet.org/new/200606201.html Kentucky Tops List with A-In the past year California, Connecticut, and New Jersey all made headlines for bumping soda out of schools and for otherwise improving the foods available to kids during the school day. But according to a year-end <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/school_foods_report_card.pdf">School Foods Report Card</a> issued today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the state of Kentucky has the strongest school nutrition policy in the land. For the 50 states and the District of Columbia, CSPI evaluated the policies for foods and beverages that are sold in schools through vending machines, school stores, fundraisers, and a la carte foods-foods sold in the cafeteria alongside the federally subsidized school lunch program. CSPI looked at nutrition standards for foods and drinks, and the grade levels, hours, and locations on campus to which the states' policies apply. Kentucky's school food policies were given an A-. The state only allows vending machines and school stores to sell food on campus in the afternoon, a half-hour after the last lunch period, and has strong nutrition standards for foods and drinks sold during the rest of the school day in all schools. Permitted drinks include 1 percent or fat-free milk, waters, 100 percent fruit or vegetable juice, or other drinks with less than 10 grams of sugars per serving. For foods, Kentucky set reasonable standards for portion sizes, saturated fat, sugars, and sodium. The state got an A- rather than an A because of its weak beverage portion size standards, lack of limits on trans fat, and a loophole for a la carte foods (it allows any item that is a part of a reimbursable meal to be sold through a la carte). Nevada, Arkansas, New Mexico, Alabama, and California all received B+s. Seven states received Bs or B-s; 15 states received Cs or Ds (the District of Columbia received a C), and 23 states received Fs. Only ten states have school nutrition standards that apply to the whole campus and the whole school day at all grade levels. Nine states limit the saturated-fat content of school snacks, and only seven address trans fat, which, gram-for-gram, is even worse for children's hearts and health. Just five states set limits on sodium. Nineteen states limit added sugars. "Although some local school districts have school foods policies that are far better than the state standards, far too many states allow way too much junk food in schools," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "With junk food tempting kids at nearly every other public place in America, schools should be one place where parents don't have to worry about what their kids are eating. States should continue to enact stronger nutrition policies, but since the school lunch program is, after all, a federal program, Congress should take action to ensure that all school foods are healthy." Currently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has a standard for what it calls Foods of Minimal Nutritional Value, and restricts the sale of those foods in the cafeteria during mealtimes. That 30-year-old standard focuses on whether the food has sufficient levels of various nutrients, and not on whether the food has excessive calories, added sugars, sodium, or saturated and trans fat. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200604052.html ">Bipartisan legislation (S. 2592 and H.R. 5167) </a>introduced earlier this year would require USDA to bring its nutrition standards for foods sold out of vending machines, school stores, and a la carte in line with current nutrition science, and to apply those standards to all foods sold on campus throughout the school day. Seltzer water--something that should be allowed in schools, for instance, is disallowed under the current standard-but Twinkies and potato chips are allowed. Sugary soda--the largest single source of teens' calories--is likely to be less common in schools in coming years, thanks in part to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605031.html">voluntary agreement</a> the soda industry made with former President Clinton, Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, and the American Heart Association. That announcement, which headed off a lawsuit planned by CSPI and various lawyers, is voluntary and might be hard to enforce, and CSPI says it should not forestall local, state, or federal action to ensure that soda and other sugary drinks, including Gatorade-style "sports" drinks, are removed from schools. CSPI recommends that the only beverages sold in schools be waters, seltzer, low-fat or fat-free milk, and unsweetened juice drinks with at least 50 percent fruit juice, and that beverage portion sizes (other than for water) be limited to 12 ounces. For snacks, CSPI recommends reasonable limits for saturated and trans fat, sodium, and added sugars. School food policies should apply to all grade levels, the whole school day, and everywhere on campus, according to the group. "There is no need to balance school budgets at the expense of our children's health," said Wootan. "School beverage contracts typically raise less than $10 a year and many schools have found that they can raise just as much money selling healthy foods." -30- 2006-06-20 KFC Sued for Fouling Chicken with Partially Hydrogenated Oil http://cspinet.org/new/200606121.html Lawsuit Aimed at Eliminating, or Disclosing Use of Artery-Clogging Frying OilWASHINGTON--<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/final_complaint.pdf">See you in court</a>, Colonel Sanders. That's the message delivered today to <a href="http://www.kfc.com">KFC</a>, a unit of Louisville, KY-based Yum! Brands, by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Today that group and the Washington, DC, law firm of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C., filed suit against the fast-food giant over its use of partially hydrogenated oil--the chemically altered, trans-fat-laden oil that kills roughly 50,000 Americans per year. The class action suit, filed in Superior Court of the District of Columbia, asks that the court prohibit KFC from using partially hydrogenated oil, or that at the very least, signs be posted in KFC outlets notifying customers that many KFC foods are high in trans fat. "Grilled, baked, or roasted chicken is a healthy food-and even fried chicken can be trans-fat-free," said CSPI executive director <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/mfj_kfc_statement.pdf">Michael F. Jacobson</a>. "But coated in breading and fried in partially hydrogenated oil, this otherwise healthy food becomes something that can quite literally take years off your life. KFC knows this, yet it recklessly puts its customers at risk of a Kentucky Fried Coronary." <a href="http://www.yum.com/nutrition/documents/kfc_nutrition.pdf">Meals at KFC can be startlingly high in trans fat</a>. Besides chicken, KFC's biscuits, potato wedges, pot pie, and several desserts all contain hefty amounts of trans fat from partially hydrogenated oil. Just one Extra Crispy breast has 4.5 grams of trans fat. A large order of Popcorn Chicken has 7 grams of trans fat, and KFC's Pot Pie contains 14 grams of trans. A typical 3-piece Extra Crispy combo meal, with a drumstick, two thighs, potato wedges, and a biscuit has a staggering 15 grams of trans fat-more trans fat than an individual should consume in a week. The plaintiff in the case is retired physician Arthur Hoyte, of Rockville, Maryland. He had purchased fried chicken at KFC outlets in Washington, DC, and elsewhere, not knowing that KFC fries in partially hydrogenated oil. "If I had known that KFC uses an unnatural frying oil, and that their food was so high in trans fat, I would have reconsidered my choices," said Dr. Hoyte. "I am bringing this suit because I want KFC to change the way it does business. And I'm doing it for my son and others' kids-so that they may have a healthier, happier, trans-fat-free future." Once thought to be innocuous, trans fat is now known to be more harmful than saturated fat, since it simultaneously raises one's LDL cholesterol, which promotes heart disease, and lowers one's HDL cholesterol, which protects against it. Small amounts of trans fat occur naturally in beef and milk, but almost 80 percent of Americans' trans fat comes from partially hydrogenated oils. The new trans-fat labeling requirement for packaged foods, has encouraged numerous manufacturers to switch to non-hydrogenated vegetable oil. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/trans_report.pdf">Restaurants have been much slower to act</a>. McDonald's famously promised to reduce trans fat in cooking oil in 2002, though it quietly reneged on that promise in 2003. In 2004, California trial attorney Stephen Joseph filed a lawsuit against McDonald's over its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html">broken promise</a>, which the company settled in 2005 by agreeing to pay $7 million to the American Heart Association. McDonald's still has not changed its oil. Just last week, the Wendy's fast-food chain <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606081.html">announced</a> it was switching to a non-hydrogenated mixture of corn and soybean oil in its deep-fryers, making its fried foods virtually trans-fat-free. Among major table-service chain restaurants, the 700-outlet <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/ruby_tuesday_statement.pdf">Ruby Tuesday </a>chain has dumped partially hydrogenated oil (in favor of canola oil). While many fast-food chains have added more healthful items to their menus, KFC's highest profile nutrition gambit was <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200311073.html">an ill-conceived and widely ridiculed ad campaign designed to portray KFC fried chicken as a weight-loss aid and health food</a>. Those ads-which Jacobson said "took the truth, dipped it in batter, and deep-fried it"--were pulled after CSPI filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. "District of Columbia law allows consumers to seek relief from the courts when companies fail to disclose essential facts about their products," said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. "That KFC uses the worst frying oil imaginable to prepare its chicken is something that KFC should absolutely be required to disclose at the point of purchase." The lawsuit asks the court to require KFC to switch to a less harmful frying oil. If the court declines to do that, it could require signs in restaurants that say "KFC's fried chicken and certain other foods contain trans fat, which promotes heart disease." Although a decision against KFC in the lawsuit would only be binding in the District of Columbia, CSPI hopes it would encourage the chain to change its practices nationwide. "This lawsuit is meant to serve as wake-up call to the food industry that changes must be made to protect the consumer from known dangers to his or her health," said Richard D. Heideman, senior counsel of Heideman Nudelman & Kalik, P.C. Trans-fat levels at KFC vary widely around the world. According to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200604131.html">research published in the New England Journal of Medicine</a>, KFC chicken and potato products in Spain, Portugal, and Denmark have far less trans fat than they do in the United States, Peru, or Poland, for instance. (Hungary had the most). Denmark restricts the use of trans fat from hydrogenated oils to 2 percent of the fat in foods. In recent months, CSPI has turned to litigation to get food companies to market their products more honestly. It has negotiated out-of-court settlements with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508112.html">Tropicana</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200505031.html">Quaker</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200606011.html">Frito-Lay</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html">Pinnacle Foods</a> and was credited (along with Heideman Nudelman & Kalik) with being the catalyst for an agreement to get <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605031.html">soda out of schools </a>that the industry reached with former President Clinton and others. CSPI will likely soon sue <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605111.html">Cadbury-Schweppes </a>for rebranding 7UP as "all-natural" (it's not) and is currently suing the maker of a fungus-based meat substitute called <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/">Quorn</a>. for failing to inform consumers that the product can cause severe vomiting, diarrhea, and breathing difficulties. Also, CSPI and the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood are having discussions with Kellogg about <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601181.html">marketing junk food to young children</a> and may ultimately sue that company and Viacom/Nickelodeon. "It's harder to avoid trans fat at KFC than at any other fast-food chain in America," Jacobson said. "You can't tell by tasting or by looking at the food, but trans fat is almost everywhere on this menu. By frying in such a dangerous oil, KFC is making its unsuspecting consumers' arteries Extra Crispy. CSPI would far prefer the trans-fat problem be solved through voluntary action by restaurants or regulatory action by the FDA, but neither industry nor government has acted. Hence this litigation." 2006-06-12 Kudos to Wendy's for Dumping Partially Hydrogenated Oil http://cspinet.org/new/200606081.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonQuite simply, <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/money/industries/food/2006-06-08-wendys-usat_x.htm">Wendy's removal of artery-clogging partially hydrogenated oils </a> from its deep-fryers will make its French fries and fried chicken healthier than similar foods at McDonald's, Burger King, KFC, and other competitors. Wendy's deserves enormous credit for breaking the trans-fat log jam in the restaurant world. Its action proves that other restaurants, big or small, have no excuse for continuing to impair their customers' health by using partially hydrogenated oil. Indeed, chains whose fare is loaded with trans fat are at risk of being sued for marketing unnecessarily harmful foods and not warning patrons of the risk. To solve the trans-fat problem once and for all, the Food and Drug Administration, that sleeping watchdog, needs to act. The FDA has ignored CSPI's 2004 petitions calling for <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200407221.html">disclosure</a>. of trans fat in restaurants and a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200405181.html">virtual ban of </a>. partially hydrogenated oil. 2006-06-08 Statement by CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. Wootan on the New FDA Report on Restaurant Foods and Obesity http://cspinet.org/new/200606021.html Restaurant foods play an increasingly important role in the American diet, and any serious discussion about obesity has to take that into consideration. I hope this collaborative effort organized by the Food and Drug Administration through the Keystone Center signals that the restaurant industry is increasingly willing to be part of the solution, and that government policymakers will increase their scrutiny of the industry’s practices and promises. A major recommendation of this report is that restaurants provide nutrition information in a standard format that’s easily accessible and easy to use when people are making purchasing decisions. That’s something that’s sorely lacking today. Fortunately, lawmakers in Congress and in more than a dozen states have introduced proposals to require calories on fast-food menu boards and expanded nutrition information on chain restaurants’ printed menus. Eighty percent of Americans say they want nutrition information available for all menu items at restaurants. Menu labeling would help consumers make informed choices and would encourage restaurants to offer more nutritious options. Perhaps McDonald’s might reconsider its 1,160-calorie chocolate milkshakes, Denny’s its 1,000- calorie breakfast platters, and the Cheesecake Factory its 1,560-calorie slices of carrot cake. 2006-06-02 Frito-Lay Agrees to Label Fake Fat Olestra More Clearly on its "Light" Chips http://cspinet.org/new/200606011.html Agreement with CSPI Avoids LitigationFrito-Lay will avoid <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601041.html">a lawsuit threatened by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI)</a> by disclosing more prominently on labels the presence of the controversial fat substitute olestra, or Olean, on its “Light” line of potato chips and tortilla chips. In January, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/olestra_demand.pdf">notified Frito-Lay of its intent</a> to file a lawsuit on behalf of a Massachusetts woman who became ill after eating Ruffles Light chips, which are made with olestra. Olestra causes diarrhea, cramping, fecal incontinence, and other symptoms in a small percentage of consumers, and CSPI contended that in 2004 the company downplayed the presence of that ingredient when it changed the name of its olestra-containing chip line from “WOW!” chips to “Light.” As part of a settlement agreement, Frito-Lay will <a href="http://www.cspinet.org">prominently display an oval-shaped Olean logo and a banner reading “made with olestra”</a> on fronts and a short statement noting the presence of olestra on the backs of packages of Doritos Light, Lay’s Light, Ruffles Light, and Tostitos Light. Frito-Lay will also make a $150,000 award to the Harvard Medical School Division of Nutrition, which was not a party to the dispute. “We’re pleased that Frito-Lay agreed to these modest changes, which are sufficient to avoid a lawsuit and will help consumers who know enough to avoid Olestra to do so,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “That this unsavory chemical was allowed to enter—and remain—in the food supply at all represents a serious mistake by the Food and Drug Administration.” More than 3,700 consumers <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/olestra">have filed reports on CSPI’s web site</a> about adverse reactions to olestra-containing products since 1996. From CSPI and industry, the FDA has received more than 20,000 reports from consumers experiencing everything from cramping and fecal urgency to extreme diarrhea. Some people sought emergency room treatment and some were hospitalized. Despite having received more complaints about olestra than any other food additive in history, in 2003 the FDA dropped its requirement for a warning label on olestra-containing chips. CSPI is increasingly turning to the courts to stop deceptive advertising and labeling and unfair practices in part because, it says, the FDA, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the Federal Trade Commission do virtually nothing in the area. In recent months, CSPI has struck settlements with several other companies over deceptive labels (including with <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508112.html">Tropicana</a> and Quaker, both corporate cousins of Frito-Lay, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html">Pinnacle Foods</a>). In January, CSPI and the Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood announced <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601181.html">a planned lawsuit against Kellogg and Viacom/Nickelodeon</a> aimed at curbing junk-food marketing aimed at children under eight. Earlier this month, the nation’s biggest soft drink manufacturers <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200605031.html">headed off another planned CSPI lawsuit by agreeing to pull sugary soda out of schools</a> in an agreement brokered by former President Bill Clinton, Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, and the American Heart Association. 2006-06-01 CSPI to Sue Cadbury Schweppes over "All Natural" 7UP http://cspinet.org/new/200605111.html High Fructose Corn Syrup Not Remotely Natural, Says CSPIThe company that makes the “uncola” is accused of telling an untruth in a new marketing campaign that touts 7UP as “100% natural.” The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/cadbury_notice.pdf">will sue 7UP’s manufacturer</a>, Cadbury Schweppes, unless the company drops the claim. Although the company removed several artificial ingredients from the drink, at least one remains: high fructose corn syrup. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/7up.pdf">Sunny new television ads</a> for 7UP show cans of the drink being picked from fruit trees, or harvested from the ground, yet there is no fruit juice in 7UP. The narrator says it “tastes better than ever because we stripped out all the artificial stuff leaving just five all natural ingredients.” Besides carbonated water and high fructose corn syrup, the other three are citric acid, unspecified “natural flavors,” and potassium citrate. Though not any better or worse nutritionally than plain table sugar, high fructose corn syrup is spawned from a <a href="http://www.corn.org/theprocess.htm">complex, multistep industrial process</a> by which starch is extracted from corn and converted with acids or enzymes into glucose and fructose. “Pretending that soda made with high fructose corn syrup is ‘all natural,’ is just plain old deception,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “High fructose corn syrup isn’t something you could cook up from a bushel of corn in your kitchen, unless you happen to be equipped with centrifuges, hydroclones, ion-exchange columns, and buckets of enzymes.” In a legal notice to Cadbury Schweppes executives, CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner wrote that the primary purpose of the suit would be to prohibit the company from describing any product with high fructose corn syrup as “natural,” and that CSPI would also seek restitution, corrective advertising, and attorneys’ fees. CSPI’s announcement comes a week after Cadbury, Coca-Cola, and PepsiCo agreed not to sell sugary soda in schools, thus avoiding a separate lawsuit CSPI and other parties intended to file. The Food and Drug Administration does not have an official definition for “natural” foods. Nor does it take action to prevent food companies from calling the most obviously artificial ingredients “natural.” For example, CSPI once complained about Ben & Jerry’s “All Natural” ice creams, which variously included such obviously non-natural ingredients as hydrogenated oil, corn syrup, alkalized cocoa powder, and even “artificial flavors.” But FDA took no action other than sending CSPI a letter indicating that “natural” was “not among our current enforcement priorities.” In March the Sugar Association, which represents cane and beet sugar producers, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/sugar_fda_petition.pdf">petitioned the FDA to define “natural.”</a> While FDA has no definition, the U.S. Department of Agriculture allows only those meat and poultry products that have been minimally processed can be labeled as natural. CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_natural.pdf">wrote to the FDA in support of the Sugar Association’s petition</a> and urged the agency to adopt a definition identical to USDA’s. That would mean that high fructose corn syrup, partially hydrogenated oils, and other ingredients that are more than minimally processed couldn’t be called natural. “If the FDA were doing its job, perhaps a lawsuit wouldn’t be necessary,” said Gardner, who will work with Massachusetts attorney Ken Quat on a Cadbury Schweppes suit. “While this particular mislabeling doesn’t present much of a health threat, consumers and honest companies shouldn’t have to put up with dishonest claims in the marketplace. Happily, though, several states have excellent consumer protection laws that can be used to stop deceptive advertising.” CSPI said it will consider other legal action against companies that use high fructose corn syrup in their ostensibly “all natural” products. 2006-05-11 CSPI Applauds Agreement to Get High-Calorie Drinks Out of Schools; Drops Planned Litigation http://cspinet.org/new/200605031.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonSoft drink companies have been using schools to market empty-calorie beverages to children, a practice that many parents and nutritionists have deplored. Considering that <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200603061.html">recent scientific studies have shown</a> that increased soft-drink consumption contributes to obesity, today's announcement that soft drink companies will be pulling their high-calorie drinks from schools represents a significant advance for children's health. I applaud President Clinton, Governor Huckabee, and the American Heart Association for facilitating this progress and the industry for agreeing to it. The agreement goes a long way toward getting all sugary drinks out of schools. Serving sizes will decrease. Calories will be capped. And by getting sugary sodas out of all schools at all times, the companies will give kids a better chance of forming healthy eating habits. Though there is room for improvement-<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/sports_drinks.pdf">sugary "sports" drinks</a> still will be sold in schools, for instance-this voluntary agreement is certainly good enough that CSPI will drop its planned lawsuit against Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, Cadbury Schweppes, and their bottlers. I hope this settlement contributes to the momentum that is building in Congress for <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200604052.html">legislation that would require USDA to update its standards for foods sold outside of school meals</a>. That would enable USDA to eliminate the sale of candy, cookies, French fries, potato chips, and other snack foods, as well as sports drinks, that are standard fare in school vending machines and stores. I would like to thank CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner, Richard Heideman of the Heideman, Nudelman & Kalik law firm in Washington, and Richard Daynard of the Public Health Advocacy Institute at Northeastern University for negotiating effectively with the soft-drink industry over the past six months and for demonstrating that the judicial system can play an important role in spurring public health advances. 2006-05-03 CSPI Reaction to CASA Study http://cspinet.org/new/200605022.html Statement of Alcohol Policies Project Director George A. HackerThe latest study by The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University (CASA) adds to a mountain of growing evidence that the alcoholic-beverage industry cannot be trusted to regulate itself nor be expected voluntarily to give up advertising and marketing aimed at attracting its principal profit centers: underage and adult excessive drinkers. It should come as no surprise that an industry that derives nearly $50 billion in revenues from underage and adult pathological drinking has opposed almost every major public health measure designed to reduce alcohol problems, and that it has attempted to cover its tracks by preaching personal and parental responsibility in a myriad of ineffective education programs that smack more of public relations than serious prevention. The take-away messages from CASA’s report are clear. Self-serving “responsibility” campaigns by alcoholic-beverage producers or their trade groups are no substitute for effective government regulation of the advertising and marketing of alcoholic beverages. Government agencies should not involve industry in program and policy development. Efforts to reduce alcohol problems, such as running media campaigns, monitoring and enforcing standards for alcohol advertising and sales, and providing information to parents about underage drinking, should – as recommended by the National Research Council in its 2003 report on preventing underage drinking – be entirely independent of industry influence. Knowing the sheer magnitude of the industry’s financial stake in underage and excessive adult drinking – even if it’s a few billion more or less than CASA’s estimates – should also help Congress better understand industry opposition to long-overdue tax increases and an independent, adequately funded national media campaign to prevent underage drinking. Hopefully, Members of Congress and federal regulators will in the future more skeptically consider invitations to participate in slick public relations events to highlight industry’s role in combating such problems as underage drinking or dangerous drinking by young women. CASA’s analysis serves as a strong reminder also to college presidents and the NCAA that their collaboration with beer marketers to promote drinking to college students (many of them underage) and other sports fans undermines the values of sports, the principles of higher education, and their efforts to address rampant and costly alcohol problems in higher education. 2006-05-02 CSPI Reaction to FTC-HHS Report on Food Marketing to Children http://cspinet.org/new/200605021.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe joint report of the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Health and Human Services makes stronger welcome recommendations on improving food marketing aimed at kids. Importantly, the agencies recommend that food companies and the industry-funded Children's Advertising Review Unit, or CARU, set baseline nutrition standards for foods that can be marketed to children through television, schools, and via cartoon characters on food packages. Currently, virtually any food, no matter how nutritionally bankrupt, can be marketed to virtually any child, no matter how young. Parents are fed up with their authority being subverted by junk-food marketers. The industry's self-regulation system in this area has clearly failed. If the industry wants to salvage that system, and avoid lawsuits by angry parents, food companies and CARU should immediately implement these new government recommendations. 2006-05-02 Bug-Based Food Dye Should Be ... Exterminated, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200605011.html Labeling Improvements Aside, Carmine Still Causes Allergic ReactionsCarmine and cochineal extracts, the red food dyes made from the dried bodies of the <a href="http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=%22cochineal%20insect%22&btnG=Google+Search&sa=N&tab=wi">cochineal insect</a>, should be <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/carmine_letter.pdf">exterminated from the food supply</a> once and for all, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200601271.html">considering a rule</a> that would require disclosure of carmine or cochineal on food labels—a proposal that CSPI says is an advance over the status quo in which the dye can be described merely as “color added” or “artificial color.” But while the proposed disclosure rule would help consumers who know they’re allergic to carmine avoid it, a ban would protect those who might not know. CSPI contends that the FDA’s proposed rule lowballs the number of people who experience allergic reactions to carmine and cochineal each year, and that the expense of emergency-room treatment of those reactions far outweighs the costs of relabeling or reformulating carmine-containing products. Furthermore, CSPI urges that if the FDA doesn’t ban the substance in food it should at least require labels to disclose that it is “insect-based,” which would be useful to people who wish to adhere to kosher or vegetarian diets. “Why tolerate a food coloring that sends a couple hundred people to emergency rooms each year, yet its only purpose is cosmetic?” asks CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Here’s an idea for food companies: If you want to make your strawberry or cherry yogurt a brighter shade of red, why not just add more strawberries or cherries instead of resorting to insect juice?” CSPI is sending the FDA <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/carmine_reactions.pdf">summaries of 32 adverse reaction reports</a> it has received since it <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/carmine_8_24_98.htm">first petitioned the FDA about carmine and cochineal extract in 1998</a>. Typical symptoms included itching, swelling of the eyes or tongue, difficulty breathing, hives, and headaches. Carmine is used in various yogurts, fruit flavored drinks, candies, and other products. 2006-05-01 Secretary Leavitt Urged to Jump Start HHS's Moribund Anti-Obesity Efforts http://cspinet.org/new/200604271.html Action Urged Before US-EU Summit Meeting in MayThe top health official in the United States is doing woefully little to stem the obesity epidemic or help Americans avoid diet-related diseases, according to the nonprofit nutrition advocacy group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The group says that Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Mike Leavitt <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/hhs_obesity_letter.pdf">should develop and announce major education and regulatory measures</a> in advance of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/brussles_meeting.pdf">an upcoming U.S.-European Union meeting</a> on diet, physical activity, and health. Former Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson gained favorable headlines for the concern his office expressed for obesity and physical activity. While Thompson’s program amounted to little (the program was literally called “Small Steps”), CSPI says that even those small symbolic efforts exceed the attention that Secretary Leavitt has given to diet and health. Obesity only warrants glancing mentions in <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/secretaryspage.html">a document on the HHS web site</a> outlining Leavitt’s priorities for the next 500 days. “Secretary Leavitt’s apparent lack of concern about preventing obesity and diet-related diseases sends a strong signal to the food industry that it need not worry about government scrutiny of its practices, even where children are concerned,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Not only is the department failing to help prevent the several hundred thousand premature deaths due to obesity, heart failure, diabetes, and other diet-related problems, it doesn’t even seem to care that the government and consumers are unnecessarily shelling out billions of dollars annually to treat those conditions.” In 2004, the federal government <a href="http://www.cspinet.org">reluctantly decided to support</a> the approval of the World Health Organization’s 2004 Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity, and Health—a document that called on food companies to reform their practices regarding marketing to children and improve the nutritional composition of their foods. CSPI says that if the HHS wanted to advance the objectives of that strategy it would require food processors to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt">lower sodium levels</a>, ban the use of <a href="http://www.transfreeamerica.org">partially hydrogenated oils</a>, reform Nutrition Facts labeling to have more useful information about serving sizes and added sugars, and work with the FTC to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200311101.html">protect kids from the marketing of unhealthy foods</a>. The Administration would also support legislation in Congress that would give USDA broader authority to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200604052.html">set standards for foods</a> sold in schools outside the school meal program, and to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200311051.html">require nutrition information</a> on fast-food menu boards and chain-restaurant menus, says CSPI. “Several European countries are outpacing the United States in implementing sensible prevention-oriented policies,” said Bruce Silverglade, legal affairs director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and president of the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations, which includes groups in Europe. “The United Kingdom is successfully pressuring food companies to reduce salt, Denmark has virtually eliminated partially hydrogenated oils, and France has cracked down on vending machines in schools. Regrettably the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services isn’t interested in securing those and other public health advances for American consumers.” The U.S. government, represented by HHS Deputy Secretary Alex Azar, will be meeting with the European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Protection in Brussels on May 11-12 to discuss public policy approaches to combating obesity and improving diet and health. The meeting, organized by the European Union, will also be attended by food industry officials, consumer groups, and academics from both sides of the Atlantic. The meeting is the culmination of a one-year effort by the European Union to identify limits on food marketing, improvements in ingredient composition, and consumer education initiatives that have successfully been used to address dietary health problems. “We hope that HHS and the American food industry take note of some of the progress that is being made in Europe and implement such measures—and others—here at home,” said Silverglade. 2006-04-27 Look for "The Whole (Grain) Truth" in Nutrition Action Healthletter http://cspinet.org/new/200604261.html “Good Source of Whole Grain” and Other Such Claims Can Often Mean “Made with Mostly Plain Old Refined White Flour”The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200501126.html">Dietary Guidelines for Americans</a> released by the federal government in 2005 place welcome emphasis on the importance of including whole grains in the diet. Happily, many genuinely whole grain products line supermarket shelves. But according to the cover story in the May issue of <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/index.htm">Nutrition Action Healthletter</a>, some food companies are trying to cash in on the whole grain trend by adding whole grain claims on labels—even if their products have more refined white flour or sugar than whole grain. “The average American eats less than one serving of whole grains a day,” writes Bonnie Liebman, director of nutrition at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, publisher of Nutrition Action Healthletter. “Yet it would be hard to find an American who doesn’t know that people need to eat more of them.” The proliferation of such misleading promises as “made with whole grain” and “good source of whole grain” and phrases like “harvest wheat” certainly aren’t helping consumers who want to follow the Dietary Guidelines’ recommendation to “make half your grains whole.” Three of the examples CSPI highlights include: Kraft Supermac & Cheese is one of many products whose labels boast that it is “good source of whole grain.” The Food and Drug Administration issued voluntary guidelines to industry to curb such claims, but until industry does, a “good source of whole grains” can have much more refined grain than whole grain, according to Liebman. DiGiorno Harvest Wheat Rising Crust Pizza boasts of the “goodness of its harvest wheat crust” that has “9 grams of whole grain per serving.” CSPI says that’s better than no grams of whole grain, but this particular pizza has more refined white flour than whole wheat. “Wheat” can mean refined flour or whole wheat. Entenmann’s Multi-Grain Cereal Bars’ “multi-grain” crust is mostly bleached wheat (meaning refined) flour, and has more sugars and palm oil than whole grain oats or wheat. Added minus: The “real fruit filling” has more corn syrup than fruit. CSPI says that “multi-grain,” or phrases like 5-grain, 10-grain, or 12-grain, don’t mean “healthy,” if those grains are mostly refined. CSPI’s article also helps consumers separate the whole wheat from the chaff when it comes to the science surrounding whole grains and the extent of their impact on cardiovascular health, diabetes, colon cancer, and obesity. 2006-04-26 Statement of CSPI Senior Staff Attorney Benjamin Cohen on Proposed Food-Safety Rollback http://cspinet.org/new/200604242.html It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h4167rh.txt.pdf">propose a bill</a> that would<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/shredding.pdf">eliminate more than 200 state and local food safety laws</a> on restaurant sanitation, milk pasteurization, and shellfish safety—and to then simultaneously claim that the bill does none of those things. If the bill truly does as little as these K Street lobbyists now claim, it would be hard to explain why they are pushing it so hard. The industry obviously objects to California’s popular <a href="http://www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/law/P65law72003.html">Proposition 65</a>, which requires notices on products that contain a cancer- or birth-defect-causing ingredient. But needless to say, the ambiguity about what this bill does or doesn’t do is due to the fact that the food industry has tried to ram this bill through Congress without a single hearing and without a single witness testifying under oath. Within the last two weeks the Governor of California, and officials in Baltimore and New York City have all expressed opposition to the so-called National Uniformity for Food Act. They are part of rising tide of bipartisan opposition by Governors, Attorneys General, and state and local food safety officials that has stung the food industry. We call on the United States Senate to block this ill-intentioned legislation. 2006-04-24 FDA Panel Investigating Labeling of Antihypertensive Drugs Stacked with Industry Consultants http://cspinet.org/new/200604241.html Draft Guidance May Miss Opportunity to Educate Americans About Importance of Lifestyle, Diet on High Blood PressureThe Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) advisory committee on cardiovascular and renal drugs will be chaired by and dominated by industry-connected scientists when it meets on Wednesday to evaluate draft labeling guidance for antihypertensive drugs. In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_blood_pressure_letter.pdf">letter to FDA commissioner Dr. Andrew von Eschenbach</a>, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says that meeting should be postponed to give the staff of the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation Research time to identify panelists who are free of conflicts of interest, and who could bring balance to the panel. A balanced panel would at least have some members with expertise on how hypertension can be treated with diet and lifestyle changes, according to CSPI. The National Institute of Health’s Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure, or JNC-7, found that weight reduction, adoption of the low-sodium Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension (DASH) diet, physical activity, and moderation of alcohol consumption are “critical” for prevention of high blood pressure, and “indispensable” for managing it. In testimony early this year, FDA commissioner Dr. von Eschenbach told a House committee that the FDA should not be prohibited from appointing advisory committee members with ties to drug companies because they may often be the best in the field. But CSPI points out that FDA did not include any of the non-conflicted scientists who served on JNC-7, or on another important government-funded trial, the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial (ALLHAT). “American hospitals and medical school faculties are filled with experts on preventing and treating high blood pressure, and it is simply not the case that all of them have financial relationships with drug makers,” said Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science Project at CSPI. “If the FDA can’t find any to serve on this particular panel, we stand ready to help them identify some.” Wednesday’s panel will be chaired by University of Colorado professor William Hiatt, who has conducted blood pressure research on behalf of Bayer Pharmaceutical. The FDA posted conflict-of-interest waivers for eight others who will serve, but a final committee roster is unlikely to be publicly announced before the meeting. CSPI also told the agency that its draft labeling guidance ignores the government’s own advice on the importance of lifestyle changes on lowering blood pressure, misrepresents the findings of the major government-funded science on hypertension, and would permit drug companies to make claims on drug labels that have not been reviewed by FDA. CSPI says that the labeling guidance would open the door for labeling abuse by letting drug companies tout the advantage of one drug over another without much evidence, and would squander and opportunity to educate Americans about the importance of diet and lifestyle in treating hypertension. “The FDA acts as if it is much more concerned with pampering the pharmaceutical industry than it is preventing disease through better diets,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The best science on blood pressure shows that adoption of healthy lifestyles, including losing weight and reducing sodium, is indispensable to reducing blood pressure. Yet FDA does very little to help Americans make those changes.” Some 65 million Americans have high blood pressure and more than half of them are on one of more than 60 drugs used to control the condition. The labeling guidance under consideration would let drug companies point to a drug’s additional effects on other conditions, such as congestive heart failure, angina, or kidney disease, as a reason for doctors to prescribe one drug over another. Drug companies conduct so-called seeding trials designed to do just that: to find some reason—any reason—for a physician to prescribe a newer, more expensive drug instead of an older, generic therapy. An additional approach to labeling antihypertensive drugs says CSPI could be a notice on the label and inserts would encourage patients to talk to their doctors about lifestyle changes, and state that “weight loss, diets rich in vegetables and fruits, and diets low in salt are simple ways of treating high blood pressure. Lowering your blood pressure through such changes could save you the cost and side effects of this (and possibly other) medications.” Labeling for some diabetes drugs and cholesterol-lowering statin drugs could bear similar messages, says CSPI. 2006-04-24 Study Finds Trans Fat Levels Vary in McDonald's, KFC Foods Worldwide http://cspinet.org/new/200604131.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe <a href="http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060413/D8GUS2GG1.html">startling test results</a>, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, of widely varying trans fat levels in deep-fried fast food, are further proof that McDonald's, KFC, and other chains could virtually eliminate trans fat in their products. Not that further proof of that was actually needed. McDonald's and KFC know that they could instantly make their fried foods more healthful. Manufacturers of packaged foods <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511221.html">are moving away from partially hydrogenated oil in droves</a>, but fast-food chains are largely sticking with this discredited, artificially produced ingredient. As the accompanying review in NEJM makes plain, trans fat is implicated in an enormous number of premature deaths each year. It is sad that the Food and Drug Administration has not acted on our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200407221.html">petition to require restaurants to disclose whether they use partially hydrogenated oil</a>, or our <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200405181.html">petition to eliminate it altogether</a>. Clearly in Denmark, where health authorities took decisive action to protect Danes' hearts and arteries by curbing the use of partially hydrogenated oil, McDonald's and KFC's products are much healthier there than they are here. The FDA should really be embarrassed. 2006-04-13 Despite Third Mad Cow, Administration Promises Still Unkept http://cspinet.org/new/200604061.html Animal ID System, Cattle Feed Rules Long Overdue, but Stalled by Industry Influence, Says CSPIDespite the discovery of three cows infected with bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, long overdue measures to ensure the safety of the food supply and to keep foreign markets open to American beef have been stalled, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). In <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/cow_sense.pdf">a report</a> coauthored with OMB Watch and Consumer Federation of America, CSPI says special-interest lobbying at federal agencies and at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) helped keep reforms, such as a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/animal_id.pdf">nationwide animal identification system</a> and a strong regulation governing cattle feed, from being finalized. The report identifies 10 closed-door meetings that staff at OMB, which is part of the Executive Office of the President, have held with the meat and feed industry, and points out that the senior levels of the Bush Administration’s Department of Agriculture are filled with former industry insiders. The groups are calling on Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns to jump start the stalled animal identification system and the Food and Drug Administration to finalize a rule preventing animal feed from being contaminated with mammalian blood, so-called “chicken litter,” and other animal-containing products that could pass on the prions that cause BSE. “We don’t need another mad cow to tell us how weak the United States’ cattle tracking system is,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “While Canada can quickly track all cattle that may have eaten infected feed, USDA has refused to mandate a similar system in the U.S.” “Once again, we see the Bush administration putting corporate special interests over the public interest, when it comes to mad cow disease,” said J. Robert Shull, director of regulatory policy at OMB Watch. “We can expect more broken promises and weak protections as long as the administration continues to put foxes in the henhouse and give special interests a hotline that goes straight to the White House.” OMB officials met with the North American Casing Association, National By-Products, the National Renderers Association, the American Feed Industry Association, the Pet Food Industry association, the American Meat Institute, the National Grain and Feed Assocition, and other meat-related companies and trade associations, on BSE-related policies from August 2002 to October 2005. In addition to the animal identification system and the feed rule, the groups also recommend increasing survillance by testing all cattle showing signs of central nervous system disease, as well as cattle 30 months or older. Healthy cattle 20 to 30 months old should be randomly, but less intensively, screened for BSE, the groups say. 2006-04-06 Bipartisan Support on Capitol Hill for Healthier School Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200604052.html Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act IntroducedThe school foods reform movement, which has been sweeping through states and local school districts, has reached the nation’s capital. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/school_foods_bill.pdf">Bipartisan legislation</a> aimed at improving the nutritional quality of foods available in schools was introduced today in both houses of Congress. The bill calls on the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to update its decades-old nutrition standards for drinks and snack foods sold in cafeterias alongside the regular school meals and to apply those standards everywhere on school grounds, including in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/dispensing_junk.pdf">vending machines</a> and school stores. In 1979, USDA defined what it calls “foods of minimal nutritional value,” and restricted sale of those foods in the cafeteria during mealtimes. Since then, however, current nutrition science has rendered those standards obsolete, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). And since so much food is sold outside the cafeteria throughout the school day, the bill’s sponsors say updated standards should apply to the whole campus. “When parents send their kids to school with lunch money, they shouldn’t have to worry that the money will be spent on foods that promote obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay,” said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. “Disco-era nutrition standards don’t make sense in 2006. When you have an obesity epidemic, schools shouldn’t sell candy at recess, potato chips for lunch, and soda throughout the day.” USDA’s current definition of foods of minimal nutritional value focuses on whether a food has at least minimal amounts of one of eight nutrients. However, that definition doesn’t address calories, saturated or trans fat, salt, or added sugars. By the current standard, seltzer water—something that CSPI says should be allowed in schools—is disallowed, while candy bars, cookies, and potato chips can be sold anywhere on campus at all hours of the day. Back in the 1970s, most food sold on school grounds was sold in the cafeteria, and thus subject to USDA’s standards. Since then, vending machines have become commonplace. According to a report issued last year by the Government Accountability Office, 83 percent of elementary schools, 97 percent of middle schools, and 99 percent of high schools sell foods out of vending machines and school stores, as well as in a la carte lines in the cafeteria. A 2004 survey by CSPI of 251 schools found that 75 percent of the drinks and 85 percent of the snacks sold in school vending machines were of poor nutritional quality. “Many kids are at school for two meals a day. But instead of a nutritious school breakfast and lunch in the cafeteria, they are enticed to eat Cheetos and a Snickers Bar from the vending machines in the hallway," said Sen. Tom Harkin (D-IA), lead sponsor of the measure. "Junk food sales in schools are out of control. It undercuts our investment in school meal programs, and steers kids toward a future of obesity and diet-related disease. Congress cannot stand idly by while our kids are preyed upon by junk-food marketers.” In addition to Senator Harkin, sponsors of the Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act include Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), and Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI). House sponsors include Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT), and Rep. Nancy Johnson (R-CT). “Parents throughout the country know all too well the poor nutritional temptations facing our children each day at school,” Murkowski said. “At a time when childhood obesity rates continue to climb at an alarming rate, it is imperative that we take decisive action to curb this trend by helping our children develop healthy eating habits today that will impact them throughout their lives. This legislation takes an important step forward by removing the unhealthy foods that are currently being offered in our schools.” “Nutrition for children is fundamental,” Specter said. “This would update the definition of food nutritional value and give the Secretary of Agriculture more authority over foods sold in schools. Pittsburgh and Philadelphia schools have taken steps in a similar direction and I think this would be a good national policy.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nana_coalition.pdf">Supporters of the bill</a> argue that it is largely a myth that improving school foods reduces school revenue. Much of the money spent on junk food in vending machines or a la carte lines would otherwise be spent either on healthier snacks or on the federally reimbursable school meal. Also, schools’ soft-drink vending contracts typically raise only about $10 to $20 per student per year. In a survey of 17 schools and school districts conducted by USDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 12 schools and districts increased their revenues after switching to healthier options, and four reported no change. “Revenue from junk-food sales isn’t a philanthropic donation by soda and snack food companies,” Wootan said. “The money comes out of children’s pockets, and Coke and Pepsi take a cut of that money back to corporate headquarters. Schools, are, in effect, taxing kids to help fund schools.” The legislation is supported by CSPI, the National PTA, the School Nutrition Association, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nana_coalition.pdf">more than 80 other organizations</a>. 2006-04-05 "I Can't Believe It's Not Better" http://cspinet.org/new/200604051.html Lab Tests Reveal Hidden Trans Fat in “0 Grams Trans” SpreadsMany popular vegetable oil spreads that boast of “0 grams trans fat” on their labels actually contain significant levels of trans, according to laboratory analyses commissioned by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). And that’s perfectly legal, since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) lets food manufacturers claim zero grams of trans fat as long as the product has less than half a gram per serving. Eat a few servings of these and other ostensibly trans-free products each day and, without even knowing it, you might end up consuming considerably more trans fat than you should, according to CSPI. The products tested by CSPI and their trans fat totals were: Shedd’s Spread Country Crock 0.4 g Take Control 0.4 g Blue Bonnet Homestyle 0.3 g Promise Stick 0.3 g I Can’t Believe It’s Not Butter Original 0.3 g “Food companies should be weaning themselves off of partially hydrogenated oil altogether, and not sneaking it into vegetable oil spreads advertised as trans-fat-free,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “In the meantime, consumers should seek out products that don’t make use of this discredited ingredient, particularly if they’re concerned about reducing their risk of heart disease.” “All of the trans-free claims that CSPI analyzed would be illegal in Canada. Canada prohibits companies from making those claims on products that have more than 0.2 grams of trans fat. While 0.2 is still not zero, it would be more protective of consumers’ hearts and arteries, according to CSPI. “The CSPI study provides the first publicly available information on just how much trans fat is present in foods that list 0g, but that contain partially hydrogenated oil. The amounts might have been as little as 0.01 or 0.05 grams, truly trivial amounts, but the foods analyzed contained much more. “The federal Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee recommends that Americans consume less than 1 percent of their calories from trans fat. For someone on a typical 2,000-calorie diet, that works out to about 2 grams of trans, or about as much as the average consumer would get from the trans fat that occurs naturally in milk and meat. ““Getting trans fat on Nutrition Facts labels was a major advance for consumers’ health, but zero grams should really mean zero, or at least something a lot closer to zero,” said Dr. Carlos A. Camargo, Associate Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology at Harvard Medical School, and member of the 2004 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. “These amounts of trans fat may seem small, but they can quickly add up to more than what people should consume in a day.” 2006-04-05 New Aspartame Study May Allay Cancer Concerns http://cspinet.org/new/200604041.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe new National Cancer Institute study significantly allays concerns raised by a recent <a href="http://www.ramazzini.it/fondazione/docs/AspartameGEO2005.pdf">Italian study</a> that found that modest amounts of aspartame caused cancer in rats. However, it's important to note that the people observed in the new study were only 50 to 69 years old. In contrast, the Italian researchers allowed the rats to die a natural death, equivalent to people living into their 80s, 90s, or older. If aspartame only causes cancer in truly elderly people, the new study wouldn't detect a problem. Also, the new study's means of measuring aspartame consumption -- food-frequency questionnaires -- is imprecise. That approach is not capable of detecting small increases in cancer rates. 2006-04-04 April is Alcohol Awareness Month http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/alcaware.pdf Alcohol Facts You’ll Never Hear from Big Booze 2006-03-30 1,000 Complain About Reactions to "Quorn" http://cspinet.org/new/200603281.html Meat Substitute Made From Vat-Grown Fungus Causes Vomiting, Allergic Reactions ... and a LawsuitThe number of people who became sick after eating Quorn, the meat substitute made from a factory-fermented fungus, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn">filed adverse reaction reports</a> with the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) has now topped 1,000. More than 750 of those complaints came from Britons, with 218 from Americans. Because several percent of people who eat Quorn experience <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/victims.html">adverse reactions ranging from nausea and vomiting to life-threatening anaphylactic shock</a>, CSPI has urged the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/quorn_mcclellan_letter_4-23.pdf">Food and Drug Administration</a> in the U.S. and the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/krebs_letter.pdf">Food Standards Agency</a> in the United Kingdom to take the products off the market or at least require bold warning notices. CSPI has been collecting adverse reaction reports about Quorn since 2002, shortly after the FDA accepted the manufacturer’s contention that Quorn was GRAS, or “generally recognized as safe.” In the UK, Quorn has been marketed nationally for over a decade. When it first arrived in American supermarkets, Quorn’s labels described its main ingredient as a “mycoprotein [which] comes from a small, unassuming member of the mushroom family,” and as “mushroom in origin.” CSPI found that the organism in Quorn <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn/quornpr_032102.html">is actually a form of mold</a> named Fusarium venenatum, venenatum being the Latin word for filled with venom, or poisoned. British and American regulators pressured Quorn to drop its dubious claim to being a type of mushroom and spurred other minor labeling improvements, though the company still deceptively brags on its web sites that Quorn is a “relative of mushrooms, truffles, and morels.” “The organism in Quorn is small and unassuming, to be sure—microscopic, in fact—until it’s fed into giant fermenting tanks and harvested by machine,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But saying Quorn is a relative of mushrooms is like saying that rats are related to chickens. In any event, our labeling concerns were quickly eclipsed by safety concerns, once we learned that the inventors’ own safety tests found that Quorn made some people sick to their stomachs.” In May 2005, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200505031.html">filed suit in Texas state court</a> against Quorn and its leading U.S. retailer, Whole Foods, asking that those companies place warning labels on packages and freezer cases about the symptoms some people suffer after eating Quorn. That case has been reassigned and is now pending in Federal District Court in Austin, TX. The plaintiff in that case is Avery Goodman, who suffered a five-hour bout of vomiting and diarrhea and two days of stomach pain after eating “Quorn Naked Cutlets.” His symptoms are similar to hundreds of reports filed at www.quorncomplaints.com. One 25-year-old Illinois woman vomited a dozen times after eating Quorn and before she figured out the cause. A 35-year-old British woman experienced increasingly severe vomiting and diarrhea after eating Quorn, until she realized that it was the Quorn that was making her sick. Other people experience skin reactions and breathing difficulties. One Idaho girl, aged 7, had a rash and hives for a week after eating a single Quorn nugget. A 32-year-old New York man had two severe asthma attacks after eating Quorn products. One 46-year-old man from County Down, Northern Ireland developed a rash and his throat swelled shut after eating Quorn sausages. He was hospitalized for six days. Dozens of others have reported hives, itching, and difficulty breathing or swallowing. Quorn’s manufacturer admits that some people experience adverse reactions, but claims it is only one out of every 146,000 consumers. It came up with that number by dividing the number of portions of Quorn sold worldwide by the number of complaints the company had received in one year. CSPI’s obscure web site has already received reports from one out of every 32,000 British Quorn consumers. Based on the fact that food poisoning is dramatically underreported, and based on a telephone survey it commissioned of British Quorn consumers, CSPI estimates that the true reaction rate is more like one out of 25 consumers. “What’s most distressing is how nonchalant the FDA and British food safety officials have been about this particular organism being used for food, especially in a time of increased concern about food allergies,” Jacobson said. “FDA officials told me that they consider Quorn safe because it does not cause permanent, severe harm. That’s a ridiculous standard, and it ignores the fact that Quorn causes potentially fatal anaphylactic reactions.” Most of the Quorn sold in the United States comes in the form of chicken-like cutlets or “tenders,” beef-like “grounds,” imitation sausages, and cylindrical “roasts.” In the U.K., the company has transmogrified the fungus into even more incarnations, including burgers, bangers, lamb-like “grillers,” porkish “ribsters,” Swedish style “balls,” “fillets in white wine sauce,” lasagnas, pies, and other products. 2006-03-28 Groups Urge Removal of Logging Executive from Forestry Panel http://cspinet.org/new/200603212.html Weyherhaeuser Has Obvious Financial Conflict of Interest, Groups SayMore than a dozen public interest and environmental organizations <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/nas_letter.pdf">today protested</a> the presence of a top forest products industry executive on a National Academies of Science (NAS) committee charged with evaluating the impact of forest management practices on the nation’s water quality. The NAS appointed George Weyerhaeuser, Jr., a vice president of Weyerhaeuser Company, one of the largest forest products companies in the world, to the Hydrologic Impacts of Forest Management Committee despite NAS rules prohibiting the appointment of scientists with conflicts of interest to its advisory panels. The Interior Department’s Bureau of Reclamation had asked for the study committee, whose first meeting is Wednesday. “This study committee will have a direct impact the Weyerhaeuser Company so having an executive from that company on the panel is a direct conflict of interest,” said Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science project at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “While the law allows for exceptions in cases were a scientist’s expertise is irreplaceable, any special expertise that Mr. Weyerhaeuser brings to this committee could easily be gotten elsewhere.” The public interest groups also protested the lack of balance on the committee, another requirement of the law. While at least two forest products industry consultants were appointed, no scientists from environmental groups or with a conservation-oriented background are on the panel. “The bias of the committee as it stands is slanted toward private industry interests, whose function is not necessarily in the best interest of sustainable forest management practices, including improved water quality,” said Amy Mall, senior forest policy analyst for the Natural Resources Defense Council. In recent years, there have been both legislative and administrative actions dramatically changing the policies that govern forest health and management. Congress is currently considering legislation that seeks to waive the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), as well as various water quality statutes, for logging projects. The Forest Service is finalizing regulations to exclude forest management plans from review under NEPA. Our national forests supply clean drinking water to tens of millions of Americans and provide some of the most important aquatic habitat in the country, so it is crucial that any NAS panel evaluating current practices in light of these proposed changes be totally free of conflicts of interest and be properly balanced if the public is to have any faith in the final report, the groups say. The letter’s signers provided four names of scientists willing to serve on the committee to give it better balance. 2006-03-21 CSPI Says Orangutans Literally "Dying for Cookies" http://cspinet.org/new/200603211.html Group Calls on Food Industry & Consumers to Avoid Palm Oil from Unsustainable Sources in Malaysia and IndonesiaIncreased demand for palm oil is <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/palm">fueling destruction of the rainforest habitats</a> of Sumatran and Bornean orangutans, pushing those and other already endangered species even closer to extinction, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/palm/CSPI_Palm_adlr.pdf" target="full-page ad in The New York Times">full-page ad in The New York Times</a>, CSPI says orangutans are literally dying for cookies, as food manufacturers are replacing partially hydrogenated oils with palm oil in cookies, crackers, cereals, and microwave popcorn. CSPI, which has <a href="http://www.transfreeamerica.org">led efforts to get trans fats out of foods</a>, is calling on food manufacturers to use as little palm oil as possible and to seek it out from environmentally sustainable sources. “As it happens, palm oil is almost as conducive to heart disease as the partially hydrogenated oil it is frequently replacing,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But much of the increased demand for palm oil is being satisfied by growers in Malaysia and Indonesia, whose authoritarian regimes turn a blind eye to the environmental destruction.” Palm oil is forecast to overtake soybean oil as the world’s most produced and traded edible oil by 2012. Malaysia and Indonesia account for 83 percent of palm oil production, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/palm">Cruel Oil</a>—a 2005 CSPI report on the health and environmental consequences of palm oil. Since the 1970s, the area planted with oil palm in Indonesia has grown more than 30-fold to almost 12,000 square miles. In Malaysia, the area devoted to oil palm has increased 12-fold to 13,500 square miles. As rainforest is cleared for oil palm plantations, orangutans and other species have less room to roam and reproduce and become easier targets for poachers. Borneo’s orangutan population was reduced by a third in just one year, 1997, when almost 8,000 were either burned to death or massacred as they tried to flee fires set to clear rainforest for new plantations. CSPI’s ad shows a baby orangutan sitting amidst skulls of adult orangutans with the headline “Dying for a Cookie?” The ad urges consumers to read labels and to select products with non-hydrogenated soybean, corn, canola, or peanut oils, all of which are more environmentally friendly and better for human hearts and arteries than palm oil. “We can find other ways of making cookies,” the ad reads. “We can’t find other ways of making orangutans.” In <a href="http://takeaction.cspinet.org/campaign/WalMartPalmOilKills">an alert</a> posted on its web site CSPI calls on H. Lee Scott, Jr., president and CEO of Wal-Mart, to adopt a corporate policy on sustainable palm oil. CSPI says that as the nation’s biggest grocery retailer, Wal-Mart should reformulate its house brands to use as little of the ingredient as possible, to seek out sustainable sources for the palm oil it does use, and to insist that its suppliers to do the same. Wal-Mart’s British subsidiary, Asda, has already joined the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, a international forum of industry and NGO stakeholders. “Fortunately, many companies that have reformulated their products to remove partially hydrogenated oils have been able to do so by using healthier oils,” Jacobson said. “Palm oil should be treated as an ingredient of last resort by consumers and corporations alike.” 2006-03-21 CSPI Calls for FDA Crackdown Against Deceptive Trans-Fat Claims http://cspinet.org/new/200603161.html '0 Grams Trans' Labels Mislead Consumers about Foods High in Artery-Clogging Saturated FatThe nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) today <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/trans_fat_sat_fat.pdf">urged the Food and Drug Administration</a> (FDA) to take enforcement action against companies making misleading trans-fat claims on food labels. CSPI says that any claim of “0 grams trans” on foods high in saturated fat is inherently misleading, since consumers might think such a product is good for one’s heart health. Manufacturers such as Sara Lee, Mrs. Smith's, and Nestle misleadingly label several of their products "0 grams trans," even though they have 4 to 11 grams of artery-clogging saturated fat. The FDA considers 4 grams and up to be a high level of saturated fat. “Just because a food doesn’t have any trans fat doesn’t by itself make it a health food,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Companies shouldn’t foster confusion by making trans-fat claims on foods high in saturated fat, and the FDA shouldn’t let them get away with it.” The products described in CSPI’s complaint are: * Mrs. Smith's Apple Pie: A prominent red banner over the brand name states "0g trans fat per serving." One serving of the product contains 7 grams of saturated fat. * Mrs. Paul's Crunchy Fish Fillets: A banner stating "0 grams trans fat per serving" appears directly above the brand name. One serving of the product contains 5 grams of saturated fat. * Spectrum: Organic All Vegetable Shortening: A yellow highlighted batter stating "0 grams trans fat" appears on the front label. One serving of the product contains 6 grams of saturated fat. * Nestle Crunch Ice Cream Bars: A banner over the large-print word "Crunch" states that there is "0g trans fat!" One serving of the product contains 11 grams of saturated fat. * Sara Lee Pumpkin Pie: The label states that the product has "zero 0g transfat." One serving of the product contains 4 grams of saturated fat. The FDA currently prohibits food companies from making “saturated fat free” claims for foods that have virtually any trans fat. CSPI says the agency should have a corresponding rule prohibiting "0 grams trans" claims on foods high in saturated fat. 2006-03-16 NCAA Schools Urged to End Beer Ads on Broadcasts http://cspinet.org/new/200603151.html Of 64 Men’s Basketball Tournament Schools, 10 Support an End to Beer Ads on College Sports ProgrammingThe Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV today urged 54 of the 64 colleges and universities sending teams to the NCAA men’s basketball tournament to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/beerfreeletter.pdf">commit to ending beer advertising on college sports games</a>. The campaign, which is led by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and is backed by an impressive array of coaching greats and organizations, says that associating drinking with college sports makes a mockery of athletic and academic values and makes it harder for officials to combat <a href="http://www.collegedrinkingprevention.gov/statssummaries/snapshot.aspx">alcohol problems on college campuses</a>. Each year, 599,000 students suffer alcohol-related injuries, including 97,000 students who are victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape. 1,700 college students die each year in alcohol-related deaths. “Public health and law-enforcement officials already have their hands full trying to prevent underage and binge drinking and combating alcohol-fueled violence on campus,” said George Hacker, director of CSPI’s alcohol policies project. “The last thing they need is more than $50 million in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/bud.bachelor.pdf">beer advertising</a> on collegiate sports every year, sending the signal that these schools support drinking. Nearly a quarter of all NCAA-member schools realize this, but it’s time for the rest to follow suit.” The Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV has been urging college officials to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/college_commit.pdf">sign a pledge</a> indicating that the school will prohibit alcohol advertising on locally produced sports programming, and that the school will work within its athletic conference and within the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) to eliminate all alcohol advertising from televised college sports. Some <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/cafst/schools.htm">246 NCAA-member colleges</a>—representing 24 percent of the NCAA—have signed, including <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/signing_schools.pdf">10 of the 64</a> schools in the tournament. “The tournament should be a celebration of the best in college sports,” wrote Hacker and Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV manager Jay Hedlund in a letter today to 54 college presidents whose schools have not signed. “Unfortunately, the event and its youthful participants have been hijacked to hawk beer to students and other fans, including many who are younger than the minimum legal drinking age.” In addition to CSPI, the Campaign is backed by U.S. Representative Tom Osborne (R-NE), formerly the head coach of the University of Nebraska football team. He has sponsored a resolution in the House of Representatives which calls on the NCAA to stop beer advertising on its telecasts. Other NCAA coaching legends who support the Campaign include Dean Smith, John Wooden, Joe Paterno and Jim Calhoun. “Rather than make money from beer commercials, universities have a unique opportunity to minimize the exposure of young people to alcohol advertising and send a clear message on the serious risks of underage and excessive drinking,” said Representative Osborne. The letter to the college presidents is available online at http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/beerfreeletter.pdf. More information about the campaign is available at http://www.beerfreesportstv.org. 2006-03-15 USDA Proposes Making Recall Information Public http://cspinet.org/new/200603071.html CSPI Says Move Would Help Consumers Avoid Tainted FoodA <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/NR_030606_01/index.asp">regulation proposed</a> by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety Inspection Service would help consumers avoid contaminated meat or poultry in the event of a recall, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Under the draft regulation, USDA would post on its web site the names of grocery stores and restaurants that received shipments of tainted meat and poultry products. USDA’s current practice is to keep that information secret and to forbid individual states from disclosing it on their own. “Consumers have a right to know whether the meat or poultry they’ve purchased is being recalled due to contamination with deadly bacteria,” said CSPI food safety staff attorney Ken Kelly. “By not naming the names of individual retailers, USDA had been making it difficult for consumers to avoid tainted food. This is a welcome, if overdue, change.” In 2004, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200408051.html">launched a campaign</a> to encourage USDA to disclose the names of stores and restaurants that receive tainted meat and poultry. CSPI says that even though the new proposal is a good first step, USDA still needs the legal authority to require companies to recall tainted foods. Currently, the agency has to rely on the meat industry’s voluntary compliance with recall requests from USDA. 2006-03-07 USDA Proposes Making Recall Information Public http://cspinet.org/new/200603071.html CSPI Says Move Would Help Consumers Avoid Tainted FoodA <a href="http://www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/NR_030606_01/index.asp">regulation proposed</a> by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety Inspection Service would help consumers avoid contaminated meat or poultry in the event of a recall, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Under the draft regulation, USDA would post on its web site the names of grocery stores and restaurants that received shipments of tainted meat and poultry products. USDA’s current practice is to keep that information secret and to forbid individual states from disclosing it on their own. “Consumers have a right to know whether the meat or poultry they’ve purchased is being recalled due to contamination with deadly bacteria,” said CSPI food safety staff attorney Ken Kelly. “By not naming the names of individual retailers, USDA had been making it difficult for consumers to avoid tainted food. This is a welcome, if overdue, change.” In 2004, CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200408051.html">launched a campaign</a> to encourage USDA to disclose the names of stores and restaurants that receive tainted meat and poultry. CSPI says that even though the new proposal is a good first step, USDA still needs the legal authority to require companies to recall tainted foods. Currently, the agency has to rely on the meat industry’s voluntary compliance with recall requests from USDA. 2006-03-07 New Study Should Spur Action to Oust Soda, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200603061.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe new Pediatrics report provides dramatic evidence that the empty calories in soda and noncarbonated soft drinks promote weight gain in overweight teenagers. If the soft drink industry had any respect for children's health, it would extend its recent pull-out from elementary schools and remove soda, "sports" drinks, and other high-calorie beverages from middle and high schools. School boards and legislatures that haven't ejected soda from all schools already should see this study as another compelling reason why they should do so. The small profit that schools earn from soda sales does not justify a practice that causes health problems in students. 2006-03-06 Government Testing of Chicken Shows Dramatic Jump in Salmonella in 2005 http://cspinet.org/new/200602231.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalUSDA <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/salmonella_in_broilers.pdf">test results announced today</a> show that Salmonella rates in chicken increased almost 80 percent since 2000. In 2000, about 9 percent of chickens tested by USDA were positive for Salmonella but the new data show more than 16 percent testing positive. Steady increases in Salmonella, including a 2.8 percent jump in 2005, mean that more chickens contaminated with Salmonella are going home with consumers than at any time since the mid 1990s. USDA is belatedly stepping up oversight of the poultry industry to try to reverse this trend, but it has stood idly by while processors have challenged the agency's authority in court. Without legislation from Congress restoring USDA's authority to enforce microbial limits in the meat supply, the agency will simply flap its wings at Salmonella problems. More than a million people in the United States get sick from Salmonella infections each year, and more than 500 die. What the agency needs is authority to close down any meat or poultry plant that fails to meet performance standards. 2006-02-23 Campbell Praised For Lowering Sodium in Soup, Juice http://cspinet.org/new/200602221.html Campbell Soup Company, long a bastion of high sodium products, is drawing praise from the Center for Science in the Public Interest for <a href="http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060222005465&newsLang=en">significantly reducing</a> the sodium levels in some of its products and for introducing a number of lower-sodium versions. "It's rare for companies to acknowledge consumer demand for foods lower in salt, rarer still for companies to act on that," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Campbell is expanding its customers' choices. I hope that other food manufacturers follow suit." According to CSPI, Americans are consuming twice as much sodium as is healthy, and are therefore suffering from higher rates of hypertension, heart attacks, and strokes. In 2004, the director of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and two colleagues estimated that cutting the sodium content of packaged and restaurant foods by 50 percent could save 150,000 lives per year. Last year, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511081.html">CSPI petitioned</a> the Food and Drug Administration to set reasonable limits for its use in packaged foods. 2006-02-22 Trans Traps http://cspinet.org/new/200602171.html New Labeling Rules Spur Major Improvements but Pitfalls Remain, Says CSPI’s Nutrition Action HealthletterNew <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200307091.html">trans-fat labeling regulations</a> that went into effect on January 1 have <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200511221.html">spurred many food processors</a> to dump partially hydrogenated oils in favor of less harmful alternatives. As welcome as those changes are, consumers shouldn’t assume that all food manufacturers have gotten rid of trans, nor should they assume that all foods with “zero grams trans” are zero threat to the arteries, according to an article published in the forthcoming issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter, which is published by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). “Many companies have taken the trans out of their foods, but the harmful fat may still lurk in some pies, microwave popcorns, doughnuts, cake frostings, biscuits, stick margarines, frozen French fries, and other trans traps,” said CSPI nutrition director Bonnie Liebman. “If the trans fat line on Nutrition Facts labels is anything but zero, shop for alternatives. But steer clear of foods with more than a gram or two of saturated fat, which is also bad for your heart.” Some of the “Trans Traps” identified in Nutrition Action include: * Celeste Vegetable Pizza For One. Most pizza has a lot of saturated fat thanks to the cheese. This single-serve pizza has 4.5 grams of saturated fat and an unexpectedly high 4.5 grams of trans fat. (Some comes from the crust, but most comes from the “cheese substitute” made with partially hydrogenated oil.) A competitor, Lean Cuisine, makes a single-serve vegetable pizza with no trans and just 1.5 grams of saturated fat. * Pop-Secret Movie Theater Butter microwave popcorn. Many companies claim that a solid fat is required for microwave popcorn. The partially hydrogenated oil used in this one gives it 6 grams of trans. (A Newman’s Own variety has no trans but its palm kernel oil supplies 8 grams of sat fat.) Better brands, like Orville Redenbacher’s Smart Pop and Pop Secret 94% Fat Free, have cut both saturated and trans fat. * Nestle Crunch Ice Cream Bars. The box boasts “0 g Trans Fat!” But that doesn’t necessarily mean “good for your heart,” says CSPI. The Food and Drug Administration disallows “trans-free” claims, but allows “0 grams trans” on the fronts of packages—even on products like this, which have 11 grams of saturated fat per bar, more than half a day’s worth. “Don’t assume that a food with ‘0 grams trans' is a gift to your arteries,” said Liebman. “Those claims are misleading on foods that aren’t also low in saturated fat.” Nutrition Action is urging its 900,000 subscribers to ask Health and Human Services Secretary Mike Leavitt to take action on several of CSPI’s trans-fat policy recommendations. CSPI wants the FDA (which is under HHS) to: * Revoke its approval of partially hydrogenated oils * Require restaurants that use partially hydrogenated oil to disclose it * Ban “0 g trans fat” claims on foods with saturated fat, and * Allow “0 g trans fat” only on foods with less than 0.2 grams of trans, not anything less than half a gram. Although small amounts of trans fat occur naturally in beef and dairy foods, about 80 percent of the trans fat in Americans’ diets comes from factory-produced partially hydrogenated vegetable oil. Partially hydrogenated oils were once thought to be harmless, but in the last 15 years, medical research has proven that trans fat is even more harmful than saturated fat. While both saturated and trans fat raise LDL, or “bad” cholesterol, thereby raising risk of heart disease, only trans fat lowers HDL, the “good” cholesterol that helps guard against heart disease. CSPI maintains information about trans fat on one of its web sites, www.transfreeamerica.org. 2006-02-17 Health Care Speech at Wendy's HQ? http://cspinet.org/new/200602151.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonDoes anyone else think President Bush picked a strange venue for a health care speech? Was the lobby of Philip Morris unavailable? Real leadership on holding down health-care costs would mean advocating policies to help Americans prevent health problems. The kind of food served up at Wendy's and other fast-food chains--fatty meats, fatty cheese, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/nah/septrans.html">trans-fat-laden frying oil</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/liquidcandy/index.html">sugary drinks</a>, and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt">salty everything</a>--contributes to obesity, heart disease, stroke, and other problems. Americans spend about $40 billion a year just on drugs to treat high blood pressure, high cholesterol levels, and diabetes. Unfortunately, the Bush administration is not willing to invest political capital or money in programs to improve diets or reduce cigarette smoking or alcohol problems. 2006-02-15 CSPI to Anheuser-Busch: Cancel the Torino Teen Kegger http://cspinet.org/new/200602131.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policy Project Director George Hacker on Alcohol Marketing at OlympicsIf Anheuser-Busch truly wanted to use the Olympics “to remind parents about the importance of preventing underage drinking,” they could start by canceling the <a href="http://www.abpeople.com/abpeoples/scripts/content/press/article-pressrelease.aspx?articleid=8009">keg party they’re having tonight</a> in Torino for underage athletes. Then they could withdraw their sponsorships of the 2008 Olympic games in Beijing and their sponsorships of the Olympic teams in the U.S. and other countries. Parents don’t need a <a href="http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060213/cgm067.html?.v=21">televised lecture</a> about underage drinking from August Busch. How far are parents’ anti-drinking efforts supposed to go when Anheuser-Busch spends hundreds of millions each year appealing to young people? 2006-02-13 Statement of CSPI Nutrition Director Bonnie Liebman on the Women's Health Initiative Study http://cspinet.org/new/200602082.html Media reports on a recent major study on low-fat diets may mislead the public because they suggest that current advice to reduce the risk of heart disease and cancer are wrong. In fact, the study tested diet advice that is 10 to 20 years out of date. The Women’s Health Initiative, which randomly assigned almost 50,000 women to eat either a low-fat diet or their typical diet, found no significant difference between the groups’ risks of breast cancer, colorectal cancer, or cardiovascular disease. However, health authorities including the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences, the American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, and the Departments of Health and Human Services and Agriculture have not recommended a low-fat diet for at least a decade, if at all. Since that time, heart disease experts have recommended replacing bad fats (saturated and trans) with good fats (polyunsaturated and monounsaturated). In the WHI, women who were told to eat a low-fat diet cut back only modestly on all fats, so they did not benefit from an increase in good fats. Furthermore, women on the low-fat diet were eating only slightly less bad fat than the women who were told to eat their usual diets, reducing the odds that researchers would see a difference in the groups’ heart disease rates. The American Cancer Society’s current diet guidelines recommend eating more fruits and vegetables, choosing whole grains over refined grains and sugars, limiting the consumption of red meats, limiting alcohol, maintaining a healthful weight, and staying physically active. Unfortunately, many fatty foods in the average American diet are high in bad fat. Those foods include red meat, pizza, pies, pastries, frosted cakes, full-fat ice cream, butter, stick margarine, doughnuts, and most commercially fried foods (chicken, fish, and French fries). So people who mistakenly conclude that they needn’t watch their fat intake are likely to eat more bad fat. Media reports also downplayed an intriguing result in the study on breast cancer. The data suggest that a low-fat diet may reduce the risk of breast tumors that respond to estrogen but not progesterone. Future research may clarify whether diet reduces the risk of some tumors but not others. 2006-02-08 CSPI Responds to the Beer Institute's Creation of an Independent Third-Party Review Panel to Field Complaints About Beer Advertising http://cspinet.org/new/200602081.html Statement of Alcohol Policies Project Director George HackerThe Beer Institute’s new Code Compliance Review Board (CCRB) represents a modest step forward in allowing consumers and others to challenge beer ads that fail to meet even minimal industry standards. Although the Center for Science in the Public Interest welcomes this change, we note that it was accompanied by a significant weakening of the Beer Institute’s Advertising and Marketing Code. We also have concerns about how the process would work. According to the Beer Institute’s pronouncements, complaints would still first be forwarded to the advertiser for response, and then only later to the review panel. We have concerns about the time it might take for the adjudication of complaints, and we are still in the dark about what authority the CCRB will have to enforce compliance with the Code. So far, the Beer Institute has stated that the board’s findings will be posted on the Beer Institute’s web site. That transparency doesn’t amount to much of a resolution, if the ad has already run for two months and continues to run, despite board disapproval. The Beer Institute’s belated adoption of independent third party review occurs after numerous complaints about beer advertising that all too routinely appeals to underage drinkers, portrays illegal or dangerous activities in connection with beer drinking, or mocks alcoholism and the enabling of abusive drinking. It’s worth noting that several of Anheuser-Busch’s Super Bowl ads, though intended to be humorous, depicted risky activities in connection with drinking; hoarding, stealing and worshipping beer; violence against women; and adolescent, indecent behavior. We look forward to testing the effectiveness of the new Code and the Code Compliance Review Board. 2006-02-08 Top Hospitals Harming Hearts by Cooking with Trans Fat http://cspinet.org/new/200602061.html CSPI Tests Show Hospitals Using Partially Hydrogenated OilEighteen of the nation's top hospitals are unnecessarily harming their faculties and staffs, their visitors, and some patients by serving foods prepared with partially hydrogenated oil-the biggest source of artery-clogging trans fat in the American diet. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) commissioned <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fries_chart.pdf">independent laboratory analyses</a> of French fries from the hospitals' cafeterias in order to identify the oil they used for deep-frying. While French fries will never be a health food, says CSPI, hospitals could at least make them safer for their patients' hearts and arteries by frying in canola, soy, peanut, or other heart-friendly oil. "Partially hydrogenated oil has as much place in hospital cafeterias as ashtrays have in the operating rooms," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Serving foods high in trans fat in a health-care setting violates the principle of 'first, do no harm.'" CSPI tested French fries from 14 of the top 16 hospitals with Honor Roll status in U.S. News & World Report's rankings. (Two of the 16, Cleveland Clinic and Johns Hopkins do not sell any fried foods in their cafeterias, though the former sports a McDonald's on its campus). CSPI also tested French fries from six top children's hospitals. The tests found trans fat in the fries at all 20 institutions. Serving sizes at the hospitals varied widely, so to have an apples-to-apples comparison of trans-fat content, CSPI used a standardized serving size of 6 ounces-the size of a large order of McDonald's fries and slightly less than the 6.3-ounce average of the samples CSPI weighed. The French fries served at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania have the most trans fat, at 5.3 grams of trans per 6-ounce serving, followed by the University of Michigan Medical Center (4.9 g) and UCLA Medical Center (4.6 g). Trans-fat levels in that range necessarily mean that the hospital is using partially hydrogenated oil in its deep-fryer. Amounts under 2 grams suggest that the institution is using a non-hydrogenated vegetable oil in its deep-fryer, but is using frozen French fries that had been par-fried in partially hydrogenated oil. Among the children's hospitals, the French fries at Children's National Medical Center in Washington, D.C., had the most trans fat, at 4.1 grams per 6-ounces followed by St. Louis Children's Hospital (3.9 g) and Children's Medical Center Dallas (2.0 g). CSPI says that hospitals should know better than to use partially hydrogenated oil. In 2003, the National Academies' Institute of Medicine concluded that Americans should eat as little trans fat as possible, and in 2004, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee recommended that Americans consume less than 1 percent of their calories from trans fat-about 2 grams per day. "Deep-fried foods probably shouldn't be served in hospitals in the first place, but foods high in trans fat should certainly be excluded," said Carlos Camargo, Associate Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology at Harvard Medical School, and a physician who practices at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. Dr. Camargo was a member of the federal government's most recent Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. After being notified by Dr. Camargo that Massachusetts General Hospital's fries had the most trans fat of any hospital CSPI had tested, Susan Barraclough, the director of nutrition and food services at that hospital immediately switched to trans-fat-free frying oil. One of the two varieties of fries that Massachusetts General sells is still par-fried in partially hydrogenated oil, but the hospital is considering switching to fries that are entirely trans-fat-free. The Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minn., told CSPI that its food-service program had independently switched to trans-free fries and oil shortly after CSPI's testing. For those reasons, neither institution is listed on CSPI's chart. CSPI also tested French fries from several government cafeterias. The cafeterias at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., and the Food and Drug Administration's headquarters in Rockville, Md., had negligible amounts (0.2 grams or less) of trans fat. But the fries served at the main cafeteria at the U.S. Department of Agriculture-the government's lead agency for nutrition education-had a heart-stopping 5.8 grams of trans per 6-ounces. Although small amounts of trans fat occur naturally in beef and dairy foods, about 80 percent of the trans fat in Americans' diets comes from factory-produced partially hydrogenated vegetable oil. Partially hydrogenated oils were once thought to be harmless, but in the last 15 years, medical research has proven that trans fat is even more harmful than saturated fat. While both saturated and trans fat raise LDL, or "bad" cholesterol, thereby raising risk of heart disease, only trans fat lowers HDL, the "good" cholesterol that helps guard against heart disease. For that reason, Harvard School of Public Health professor <a href="http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/trans_free_cafeterias.html">Walter Willett</a> calls trans fat a "metabolic poison" that is responsible for tens of thousands of premature heart attack deaths each year. In 2004, CSPI formally petitioned the FDA to all but prohibit the use of partially hydrogenated oil in food manufacturing and to require restaurants and institutional food-service providers to disclose whether they use it. New trans-fat labeling rules have encouraged many grocery manufacturers to reduce or eliminate partially hydrogenated oil in foods. Restaurants and institutional food-service providers have been slower to act, even though trans-fat-free frying oils and trans-fat-free frozen French fries are readily available from several major suppliers. 2006-02-06 U.S. Ski Association Urged to Dump Beer Sponsor in Wake of Bode Miller Flap http://cspinet.org/new/200602021.html Does Skiing Really Need an "Official Alcoholic Beverage?" asks CSPIWhen champion skier Bode Miller confessed to taking to the slopes intoxicated, one of the first to tut-tut his disapproval was Bill Marolt, president and CEO of the U.S. Ski and Snowboarding Association. "Not only is the use of alcohol irresponsible on the part of an athlete, but it is also a dangerously inappropriate message to send to participants in our sport, especially young skiers and snowboarders," said Marolt. Now Marolt's group is accused of fostering irresponsibility and sending inappropriate messages to young people because of its partnership with Anheuser-Busch, maker of Budweiser and Bud Light—the "official malt beverage" of the ski association. "Talk about the pot calling the kettle black," wrote George Hacker, director of the Alcohol Policies Project at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) in a letter to Marolt. "It is disingenuous and hypocritical of you to summon all of this fake outrage when your association is helping Anheuser-Busch promote beer to the many young people who follow and participate in USSA activities." CSPI is calling on the USSA to terminate its relationship with Anheuser-Busch and to forgo all other alcohol sponsorships in the future. The National Ski Areas Association, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, SAFE KIDS, and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission all recommend skiers and snowboarders to avoid alcohol consumption. 5,000 people under the age of 21 die from alcohol-related causes each year, including unintentional injuries. "The Ski Association already has an official pasta, an official car, an official asset management company, an official hair care provider and an official Internet services provider," said Hacker. "Does it really need an official alcoholic beverage?" 2006-02-02 CSPI Applauds Connecticut School Foods Plan http://cspinet.org/new/200602011.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo WootanWe applaud Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell and Connecticut Senate President Pro Tempore Donald Williams for championing children's health by taking bipartisan action to improve the foods available to kids during the school day. The school beverage standards announced today are among the strongest in the nation and will greatly improve the diets of children in schools. The bill will replace soda with healthful drinks, and also includes strong financial incentives for schools to adopt the state's nutrition standards for snack foods sold in vending machines, a la carte lines, school stores, and fundraisers. End Hunger Connecticut and others deserve a great deal of credit for working tirelessly toward these landmark school nutrition reforms. 2006-02-01 Bush Administration to Allow Secret Bugging of Americans? http://cspinet.org/new/200601271.html CSPI Says Proposed Rule on Insect-based Food Coloring Doesn't Go Far EnoughIn response to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/carmine_8_24_98.htm">legal petition filed in 1998</a> by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is proposing a new labeling regulation that would require food companies to disclose when the red or orange color in a food product comes from cochineal extract, or carmine. FDA will not, however, require companies to list the source of those food colorings: the tiny, dried bodies of the cochineal beetle. These colorings, which can now be listed on labels as "artificial color," cause severe allergic reactions in a small number of consumers. The proposed rule would be helpful to them, according to CSPI, but vegetarians, Jews who try to keep Kosher, and anyone else who might not care to eat extracts of six-legged critters will be left in the dark. CSPI wants the FDA to require that the phrase "insect-based" follow carmine or cochineal extract on ingredients lists. "Why not use a word that people can understand?" asked CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Sending people scurrying to the dictionary or to Google to figure out what 'carmine' or 'cochineal' means is just plain sneaky. Call these colorings what they are-insect-based." The coloring is used in juice drinks, yogurts, and candies, and gives the Italian apertif Campari its signature red color. Members of the public, food companies, and other interested parties have 60 days to file comments with the FDA before the rule is finalized. The rule would not go into effect until 2009. 2006-01-27 Supplementing Their Income http://cspinet.org/new/200601241.html A Nutrition Action Exposé on How Dr. Weil, Dr. Phil, and Larry King Turn Your Trust into CashA folksy, popular daytime television host. A legendary radio and television interviewer. And a best-selling author and health guru whose familiar bearded face recently appeared on the cover of Time magazine. These three men have one thing in common, according to the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/weil.pdf">cover story</a> in the current issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter. They all use their fame to hawk vitamins, herbs, and other dietary supplements that often rely on inflated claims and dubious (or nonexistent) science. Consumers who buy these products may be overpaying or wasting their money entirely, according to CSPI. Dr. Andrew Weil is the nation’s best-known proponent of alternative, or integrative, medicine. His books, speeches, television appearances, and popular websites have made him a trusted household name in health advice. He offers himself to the public and the media as an informed, sensible authority on dietary supplements. “But Weil is hardly an objective expert on supplements,” says CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. “The more supplements Weil can persuade consumers to buy, the more he benefits. Consumers should bear that in mind when they listen to his advice.” Weil markets his own brand of 18 vitamin and herb products and is careful to tell consumers that his “after-tax profits go to a foundation that supports integrative medicine.” But he rarely discloses that this is not just “a” foundation, but his own Weil Foundation and that its main beneficiary is Weil’s own program at the University of Arizona. What’s more, CSPI’s review of the 2002-2004 tax returns for the Weil Foundation, the latest available, found that during those years the foundation reported no contributions from Weil or his company and awarded only one $5,000 grant. But it’s the vast sums of money Weil and his company are being paid to promote dietary supplements that CSPI says would really raise consumers’ eyebrows—if they knew about it. In 2003, Weil signed a blockbuster five-year deal with the giant online pharmacy drugstore.com that pays Weil’s company and his foundation a guaranteed minimum of $12.4 million in sales commissions and donations on dietary supplements and other products he recommends to consumers at his and drugstore.com’s websites. In addition, drugstore.com agreed to pay Weil himself $1.6 million in “honoraria.” This financial arrangement came to light only last summer when the company sued Weil for not promoting their products aggressively enough. “Consumers should know that when they buy any supplements recommended by Andrew Weil on his and drugstore.com’s websites, Weil’s company is collecting a sales commission of up to 25 percent on every bottle,” says CSPI’s David Schardt. “Even if some of this money eventually trickles down to his foundation, that’s still a pretty big incentive to push lots of vitamins and herbs, even where the evidence is dubious.” For instance, Weil sells his own brand of evening primrose oil, which he recommends for skin conditions, brittle fingernails, arthritis, and PMS. (Drugstore.com pays Weil’s company a sales commission of $2.00 to $3.50 on every bottle he sells on the Internet.) But virtually all of the well-designed scientific studies show that evening primrose oil is ineffective for dermatitis, psoriasis, eczema, brittle nails, and PMS, according to an analysis of the research by CSPI. One study did find that the substance helped reduce the tender and swollen joints of rheumatoid arthritis, but only at a dose 28 times higher than Weil sells. The other celebrities that CSPI says have leased out their names to companies making iffy claims include Phil McGraw (a.k.a. Dr. Phil) and CNN talk show host Larry King. Dr. Phil recently abandoned a line of expensive dietary supplements in the face of a probe by the Federal Trade Commission. Dr. Phil’s Shape Up pills were said to contain “scientifically researched levels of ingredients that can help you change your behavior to take control of your weight.” Dr. Phil is being sued by California consumers who accuse him (correctly, in CSPI’s view) of making false and misleading statements about his supplements Over the years, CNN’s King has done first-person paid testimonials for a wide range of substances, including Garlique garlic pills (“the one to trust,” said King), and coral calcium (which “has changed my life and could change yours”). Recently, King has been promoting Ester-C, which CSPI says is an over-hyped brand of vitamin C that is twice as expensive as regular vitamin C. “Either Larry King has a knack for picking weak products to pitch, or manufacturers seek him out to lend credibility to supplements that could use some,” said Schardt. Weil, McGraw, and King did not respond to Nutrition Action Healthletter’s requests for interviews, despite repeated attempts. 2006-01-24 CSPI Calls on Journals to Strengthen Disclosure of Conflicts http://cspinet.org/new/200601121.html The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is calling on the editors of Science and Nature, the world’s two most prestigious science publications, to strengthen their conflict-of-interest disclosure policies. Both Drs. Hwang Woo-Suk of Seoul National University and Gerald Schatten of the University of Pittsburgh have numerous stem cell patent applications on file at the World Intellectual Property Organization and the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. None were disclosed in the March 2004 and June 2005 Science articles describing somatic cell nuclear transfer or the August 2005 Nature article describing the cloning of Snuppy the Afghan hound. CSPI Integrity in Science director Merrill Goozner called on the editors to strengthen their conflict of interest disclosure policies by requiring authors to declare all financial conflicts of interest, including patents and patent applications, whose value may be affected by publication; to tell authors they will publish those conflicts; and to impose a three-year ban on authors who fail to disclose any financial conflicts. The government-sponsored journal Environmental Health Perspectives has such a ban. "Science and Nature should take the lead in the wake of this scandal," said Goozner. "In a world where financial incentives can warp the scientific enterprise just as much as the lust for scientific prestige, it is incumbent that journal editors have strict conflict-of-interest disclosure policies. And, given the voluntary nature of disclosure, they should have teeth like a three-year ban on publishing for failing to disclose." 2006-01-12 Frito-Lay Target of Olestra Lawsuit http://cspinet.org/new/200601041.html CSPI Wants Court to Order Labels on Frito Lay “Light” Chips to Warn of Diarrhea, Stomach CrampsFrito-Lay <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/olestra_demand.pdf">has been notified</a> that it will be sued by a Massachusetts consumer for deceptively marketing its line of “Light” potato chips. Those chips are made with olestra—<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/olestra_report">the controversial fat substitute</a> that causes diarrhea, stomach cramps, and other unappetizing symptoms. The plaintiff, a 30-year-old woman from Braintree, Mass., experienced severe gas, cramps, and an urgent need to go to the bathroom after <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200410251.html">eating Ruffles Light</a> potato chips. She says that she would not have bought the product had she had known the chips contained olestra and is asking the court to require labels on Light chips warning consumers about the potential for adverse reactions. She is being aided in her lawsuit by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and by Massachusetts lawyer Kenneth D. Quat. The <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/olesnatl.htm">laxative-like effects</a> of olestra became fodder for late-night comics in the mid-1990s, but the complaints filed by people who became sick after eating olestra are not amusing. <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/olest1.html">Since 1996</a>, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received from CSPI, Frito-Lay (a division of PepsiCo), and Procter & Gamble (the developer of olestra) more than 20,000 adverse reaction reports—mostly involving diarrhea, flatulence, greasy stools, stained underwear, orange-colored oil in toilet bowls, and cramps. Some have sought medical attention in emergency rooms (and even undergone surgery) or experienced incontinence in public places after getting sick after eating chips made with olestra. In 2003, under pressure from the food industry and over the objection of CSPI, the Food and Drug Administration <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200308011.html">dropped a requirement</a> for olestra-containing foods to bear a label warning consumers about abdominal cramping and loose stools. Then in 2004 Frito-Lay quietly renamed its olestra-containing line of “WOW!” chips as “Light”—a move that CSPI says was designed to intentionally deceive people into thinking that the product was an entirely new olestra-free lower-calorie chip. “It’s bad enough that Frito-Lay still uses this discredited and dangerous chemical, one of the most infamous food additives in history,” said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. “But by quietly changing the name of this product line and purposefully deemphasizing the presence of olestra, Frito-Lay is really tricking consumers. And that deception is putting Americans at risk of some pretty unsettling side effects. CSPI has taken this action only after many months of informal efforts to convince the company to take corrective action voluntarily.” Since Frito-Lay rebranded WOW! chips, sales have increased sharply, and CSPI has received via its website (<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/olestra">www.cspinet.org/olestra</a>) a sharply increased number of complaints, including from people who ate the chips thinking they did not contain olestra. A 66-year-old Cherry Hill, NJ, man required hospitalization after suffering dizziness and vomiting after eating Lay’s Light regular potato chips. A 37-year-old woman from Randelman, NC, began throwing up and having diarrhea shortly after eating Doritos Light and Ruffles Light chips. Her symptoms lasted for two days, and she required six bags of intravenous fluids in the emergency room. Two Lexington, OK, siblings, aged 7 and 10, experienced severe stomach pains, greasy stools, and vomiting after eating Tostitos Light chips, according to their mother, who contacted CSPI. Last week, CSPI forwarded 396 new reports to the FDA, bringing to 3,753 the number of reports CSPI has sent the agency since 1996. In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/olestra_report.pdf">letter to Acting FDA Commissioner Andrew C. von Eschenbach</a>, CSPI is asking the agency to reinstate the warning label on olestra-containing products. “I remember learning about the effects of olestra, so never in a million years would I have knowingly purchased potato chips that contain it,” said Lori Perlow, the plaintiff. “I was driving my car when my symptoms hit. Frankly I feel lucky to have reached my destination in one piece.” Chips in Frito-Lay’s “Light” line include Doritos Light, Lay’s Light original and barbecue, Ruffles Light original and cheddar and sour cream, and Tostitos Light. Procter & Gamble makes Fat Free Pringles with olestra in original and sour cream and onion flavors; it, too, has taken the sales-killing Olean logo off its packages. Procter & Gamble developed olestra and owns the brand name Olean, though in 2002 it sold the Cincinnati factory that actually manufactures the substance. Two other chip makers, Herr’s and Utz, dropped their olestra chips. Canada and the United Kingdom both rejected the use of olestra. “Frito-Lay knows that its Light chips will send hundreds of consumers to the hospital and many thousands frantically rushing to the nearest toilet,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Changing the name from WOW to Light reflects Frito-Lay’s duplicitous efforts to save a dying product, regardless of consumers’ wellbeing. We hope the court requires Frito-Lay to stop the deception, to place prominent warnings on packages, and to sponsor television commercials and full-page newspaper advertisements to disclose the deception.” “The demand letter asserts that Frito-Lay has engaged in the very kind of deceptive conduct that the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act was designed to address," said Kenneth Quat, the Massachusetts lawyer. “If a lawsuit becomes necessary, we believe that the rights of Ms. Perlow and other consumers to be informed of the risks of ingesting olestra will be vindicated." In recent months, CSPI has increasingly turned to the courts to seek changes in several food companies’ practices. It has negotiated settlements regarding the deceptive labeling of such products as Tropicana juice drinks, Quaker Oats oatmeal and grits, and Aunt Jemima frozen waffles. CSPI has lawsuits pending in state and federal courts and is working with outside lawyers to get courts to curb soda sales in schools. 2006-01-04 Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson on Burger King's King Kong Promotion http://cspinet.org/new/200512151.html With its Triple Whopper, Burger King is solidifying its reputation as the fast-food chain most likely to solidify your arteries. A teenager having a Triple Whopper and a 42-ounce shake is going to eat upwards of 2,500 calories and 2 days' worth of saturated fat in just one sitting. That may be fine if you're climbing the Empire State Building every day but it's not fine for your typical sedentary schoolkid. When a corporation is so plainly putting its customers' health in such peril, it has a responsibility to put calorie information right on the menu board. The only reason it doesn't is because it fears, probably correctly, that people will order smaller portions. And that means less profit for Burger King. While we've come to expect the worst from Burger King, we let the entertainment industry too easily off the hook. Those folks shouldn't be auctioning off Harry Potter, SpongeBob SquarePants, or King Kong to the highest bidder. By doing so they become willful accomplices in the fast-food industry's apparent war against the public's health. 2005-12-15 House Republicans Mounting Attack on State Food Laws http://cspinet.org/new/200512141.html Industry Lobbyists Want to Topple California’s Prop. 65, but State Officials Fear Bioterror ImplicationsCongressional Republicans are mounting an assault on state food-safety and labeling laws, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is poised to take up legislation that would summarily pre-empt almost 100 state laws having to do with carcinogen labeling, seafood safety, and food allergens and additives. The measure is opposed by many in the California delegation since it would interfere with that state’s Proposition 65, which requires warning notices on products that contain ingredients known to cause cancer or birth defects. And state officials, led by the Association of Food and Drug Officials (AFDO), fear that the measure would hamper their abilities to respond to a bioterror attack via the food supply. “The food industry may find various state laws and regulations inconvenient, but that’s not a good reason to torch these laws in one fell swoop,” said Benjamin Cohen, CSPI senior staff attorney. “Front-line public health officials should be getting more cooperation and encouragement from Congress to protect public health, not less. This bill is just payback to a politically powerful and financially generous industry.” According to the Congressional Budget Office, the bill would adversely affect food safety and labeling requirements in almost 30 states and cost the FDA more than $100 million over five years to implement a system of waivers called for in the legislation. A Mississippi state law that requires catfish products be labeled as farm-raised or wild would go by the wayside. Laws governing smoked fish products would be scrapped in New York, Michigan, and Wisconsin. And California’s program to place in-store notices about mercury in certain fish would similarly be nullified if the National Uniformity for Food Act becomes law, according to CSPI. “Local and state regulatory agencies perform approximately 80 percent of the food safety work currently done in the United States,” wrote Marion Aller, president of the Association of Food and Drug Officials AFDO, in a December 5, 2005 letter to the committee. “When you consider that local and state food safety programs are our first line of defense against acts of terrorism involving the food supply, AFDO respectfully suggests that now is not the time to dismantle our national food protection program that maintains one of the safest food supplies in the world.” California Attorney General Bill Lockyer opposes the measure because of its impact on Proposition 65 also. “Proposition 65 has an excellent record of providing additional protection of public health within California directly and by spurring greater action by FDA,” Lockyer wrote in 2003. “Federal preemption of this law and similar state requirements is bad federalism, bad science, and bad public policy.” 2005-12-14 Alcohol Tax Hikes Prove Popular in New Poll http://cspinet.org/new/200512071.html Seventy-one percent of Americans support a five cent per drink increase in federal alcohol taxes, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/alcohol_poll.pdf">new survey research</a> commissioned by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). As lawmakers consider slashing popular social programs to bridge the federal budget gap, CSPI says they should instead consider raising taxes on beer, wine, and spirits—which could raise more than $20 billion in desperately needed revenue over the next five years. When asked whether they prefer raising alcohol taxes or cutting social programs as a way of offsetting the budget deficit, a whopping 79 percent of respondents favor the alcohol tax increase. Even 68 percent of Republicans surveyed and 70 percent of drinkers would support raising alcohol taxes over cutting programs such as food stamps, Medicaid, and drug benefits for the elderly. “Raising alcohol taxes alone may not balance the budget, but it would boost revenues in a way that’s popular, fair, and provides real money, said George A. Hacker, director of CSPI’s alcohol policies project. “In past decades, alcohol interests have too often beaten back any across-the-board increases in booze taxes. But with an expensive war being waged, and with painful cuts in popular social programs on the table, we can’t let one politically powerful industry keep evading its fair share.” In recent decades, federal taxes on alcoholic beverages have effectively fallen dramatically due to inflation. That’s because such taxes are typically assessed not as a percentage of the purchase price, but as a flat dollar amount. Those levies have been raised only once for beer and wine, and only twice for liquor in the past 55 years. Had the federal tax on beer merely kept pace with inflation, it would be more than triple what it is today. Liquor taxes would have increased sixfold. Most Americans would be largely unaffected by increases in alcohol taxes. More than one-third don’t drink at all, and most others drink only occasionally. Eighty percent of the alcohol consumed in America is downed by twenty percent of the drinkers. According to the Adams Beer Handbook, more than half of beer and liquor drinkers have incomes above $60,000 a year. “Cutting social programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, and food stamps is an absolutely unconscionable way to cut the deficit so long as lawmakers are leaving billions in alcohol tax increases off the table,” said Hacker. “Especially when one considers that the $18 billion in current state and federal alcohol tax collections barely cover a tenth of the $185-billion price tag of underage drinking, alcohol abuse, and drunk-driving. Congress last found the courage to raise alcohol taxes in the Reconciliation Act of 1990, and it should follow that precedent today.” Last May, 59 prominent economists, including four Nobel laureates, called on Congress to raise alcohol taxes to help offset the massive economic and social costs of alcohol. Henry Aaron, a senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution, said that lawmakers “would be well advised to increase a tax that would help close the federal deficit and discourage the continued epidemic of alcohol abuse.” In its 2005 budget options report for Congress, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that raising the tax on distilled spirits to $16 per proof gallon from the current rate of $13.50 and equalizing the rate of tax on the alcohol in beer and wine to that level would yield $27 billion in new revenue over the next five years. Numerous researchers have concluded that higher taxes would lead to slightly less drinking, and could cut the incidence of alcohol problems and their costs. A nickel-a-drink tax increase might save as much as $5 billion per year. Earmarking some of the revenues for alcohol treatment, prevention, and public education could further reduce the societal toll of alcohol problems, according to CSPI. CSPI’s survey was of a nationally representative sample of 512 American adults. The survey was conducted in mid-November via telephone by the Global Strategy Group polling firm. The margin of error is plus or minus 4.3 percent. 2005-12-07 Institute of Medicine Reports on Food Marketing Aimed at Kids http://cspinet.org/new/200512062.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo WootanThe <a href="http://www.iom.edu/report.asp?id=31330">Institute of Medicine's report </a>on food marketing to children is a milestone that marks the beginning of the end of junk-food marketing to kids. The report sends a clear signal to food company executives and advertisers that the industry needs to completely rethink the way they do business. And lawmakers should look at the IOM report as a roadmap to help improve kids' diets and address childhood obesity. Getting junk food out of schools, promoting fruits and vegetables, putting nutrition info on chain restaurant menus, and scrutinizing food ads on children's television programming are four things Congress could consider right now to advance the IOM's recommendations. The IOM report really confirms what most parents know to be true from personal experience: Food advertising aimed at kids works. It changes kids' preferences. And since the foods that are advertised are mostly high in calories and low in nutrition, the net effect is less healthy children. We call on food companies to set meaningful industry-wide nutrition standards for which foods are appropriate to market to kids in the first place. One company, Kraft, has made some voluntary moves in the right direction. But most food companies are still using SpongeBob, toy give-aways, and slick advertising to entice toddlers and young kids to consume products that are rarely much more than some mix of sugar, salt, white flour, fat, and food dye. It has been nearly a quarter century since the Federal Trade Commission sent shivers up the spine of the food and broadcast industries, when it suggested a ban on junk-food ads aimed at kids. Since that effort died, advertisers have only become more sophisticated in the ways they get kids to demand junk food. We hope Congress, at long last, weighs the compelling scientific evidence on food marketing and kids' health and comes to the same conclusions as the Institute of Medicine. 2005-12-06 Government Should Warn About Mercury in Fish, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200512061.html Groups Say FDA Should Urge States to Require Point-of-Purchase NoticesThe Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should urge states to require <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/mercury_advisory.pdf">easy-to-understand advice</a> about mercury in fish right at the seafood counter, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Such notices would warn high-risk consumers—pregnant women, women who may become pregnant, and young children—not to eat swordfish, shark, king mackerel, and tilefish, and they should limit their consumption of fresh, frozen, and canned white tuna. California already uses point-of-purchase notices similar to the one CSPI proposed to the FDA, and several major grocers, including Safeway and Wild Oats, post versions of their own. But CSPI says a standardized message would be beneficial to state policymakers, retailers, and consumers alike, many of whom are justifiably confused about the risks posed by mercury in seafood. “The current advisory on mercury in fish is very complex and was clearly not intended for the general public,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “FDA should ask urge supermarkets to put clear information right at the fish counter, where pregnant women or those serving young children can easily see it. That way, pregnant consumers don’t have to avoid the fish counter, but can easily choose alternative seafood that doesn’t carry the risk.” DeWaal is speaking on Tuesday at an international conference, Seafood and Health, in Washington, D.C. In 2003, then-FDA Commissioner McClellan wrote in a letter to CSPI, “One of the key needs for an advisory to be successful is for it to be clear and well-communicated. There are many ways that in which this can be achieved, including the use of printed materials at the point-of-purchase.” Mercury is an environmental pollutant that bioaccumulates in large ocean-dwelling fish, such as swordfish, shark, some types of tuna and king mackerel. Eating seafood is the leading cause of exposure to methylmercury, a reproductive toxin that can cause neurological damage to the developing fetus and young children. Women can avoid the risk by steering clear of fish containing high-levels of mercury for 12 months before becoming pregnant. In 2001, FDA issued an advisory warning to pregnant women, those planning to become pregnant, nursing mothers and those feeding young children to avoid fish that contain the highest levels of mercury. The advisory was revised in 2004, with the agreement of both the FDA and the Environmental Protection Agency. The revision included advice on limiting consumption of white (albacore) tuna to six ounces per week and to limit overall fish consumption to 12 ounces per week. CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/mercury_letter.pdf">letter to FDA</a> notes that while California has already implemented a mandatory point-of-purchase advisory, and some chains are adopting them voluntarily, “the size and content of the messages vary. Therefore, FDA would be performing an important service by providing a standard health communication that all fish retailers can use.” The Natural Resources Defense Council, the Mercury Policy Project, and the environmental group Oceana similarly are calling on the FDA to push point-of-purchase advisories on mercury in seafood. 2005-12-06 CSPI Reaction to Soda Lobby Study on Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200512011.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonIt's a telling sign that the soda industry knows it is losing its battle to stay in America's schools when its lobbyists are congratulating themselves for lower sales. They're trying to make it seem like it's their benevolence and self-restraint that were responsible for a decline and not the parents, and increasingly, some policymakers, who are sick of soda companies putting profits ahead of our kids' health. If they think soda sales in schools have declined now, they should wait until the statewide reforms in <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200509141.html">California</a> and <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200506071.html">New Jersey</a> kick in, as well as the improvements pending in many other big school systems. Of course, the American Beverage Association has been fighting parents' efforts to improve school foods every step of the way. This is an industry that only makes concessions to public health when they're on the verge of being forced to. Remember, these are the same folks who not too long ago licensed their logos for use on baby bottles and defended Coke marketing in Africa as if it were famine relief. If they now are concerned with fending off parents' lawsuits, I suggest that they be content with selling their obesity-inducing product in virtually every public place in America other than schools. Spin notwithstanding, soft drinks such as soda and so-called 'sports drinks' are the biggest single source of kids' calories. Any serious plan to make a dent in childhood obesity would put curbing soda consumption at the top of the list. This study doesn't add much to the sum of human knowledge on soda sales in school. It's just a panicky and desperate attempt at public relations. 2005-12-01 Transatlantic Cooperation on Food Marketing, Labeling, & Nutrition Urged to Help Curb Obesity Epidemic http://cspinet.org/new/200511281.html In response to sporadic pressure from regulators on either side of the Atlantic, food companies occasionally improve their labeling or marketing practices, or reformulate products to have a better nutritional profile. But the non-profit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) is urging governments to pressure companies to make such improvements the standard practice in all countries in which they do business, rather than just doing the bare minimum to keep each country’s regulators at bay. The nutrition and food-safety watchdog group says that regulatory cooperation that spreads food companies’ best practices could help curb a growing global epidemic of obesity and diet-related disease. “Food companies respond to ad hoc laws, regulations, and exhortations from American and European authorities, but tend not to export their nutritional or labeling improvements overseas,” said Bruce Silverglade, director of legal affairs for the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “Some food companies maintain that it’s impossible to adopt one practice or another, when in fact, they’ve already done so in another country.” In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/lost_in_translation.pdf">report released today</a>, CSPI found that in the United Kingdom, where sodium reduction has been a major priority of the government, General Mills has reduced the sodium content of Honey Nut Cheerios to 500 milligrams (mg) per 100 grams (g). In the U.S., the same cereal has 700 mg per 100 g, and the company has no plans to change. Similarly, Kraft reduced the salt content of Dairylea Lunchables in the UK by one-third but did not make corresponding reductions in the U.S. Dairylea Lunchables “Ham stack’ems” contains 800 mg of sodium per 100 g in the UK, while the U.S. equivalent product contains 1040 mg of sodium per 100 g. In some cases, European consumers can’t enjoy advances made in the United States. Here, Masterfoods’ Mars candy bars have full nutrition information, but in Europe, the company lists only a handful of nutrients on labels. PepsiCo has placed limits on the calorie content of its single-serving Frito-Lay snack products sold in U.S. schools, but has not shown similar restraint with its Walker Crisps line sold in the UK. PepsiCo has begun to produce a smaller size package of chips in the UK that is directed to children. In European countries where food marketing aimed at children has come under intense scrutiny, Coca-Cola has removed in-school branding on vending machines. In the U.S., the soda industry has not done that, but the American Beverage Association did urge its members to pull soda out of elementary schools (though it left the status quo largely intact in high schools). California and New Jersey acted on their own to remove most soda from all schools entirely over the next several years. “We welcome advances in nutrition on either side of the ocean, but there’s no reason food companies can’t enact new policies consistently,” Silverglade said. “If American and European regulators cooperated and actively pursued a unified strategy against obesity and diet-related disease, companies would take notice.” In 1998, the U.S. and the European Union (EU) agreed to work cooperatively on some trade issues with the formation of the Transatlantic Economic Partnership (TEP). To date, though, the only regulatory cooperation in the nutrition area involves narrow, technical projects, such as developing standardized testing methods for measuring nutrients in food. According to CSPI, the TEP could be used to help identify and implement best corporate practices on both continents. CSPI co-chairs the food policy committee of the Trans Atlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD), a coalition of American and European consumer groups that makes recommendations to the U.S. and the EU on matters affecting consumer welfare and trade. The TACD is co-sponsoring a conference on transatlantic policy initiatives related to food marketing, diet and health on December 1-2 in Brussels Belgium. The conference, “Generation Excess II,” will examine how the U.S. and the EU are responding to the obesity crisis and related problems concerning diet and health. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a global strategy for combating obesity and diet-related disease that includes recommendations on reducing partially hydrogenated oils, added sugars, and salt in processed foods and for curbs on junk-food marketing aimed at kids. The WHO also says that international collaboration is crucial, since many companies operate globally. The WHO strategy has been greeted more warmly by European regulators, who are beginning to recognize the seriousness of the obesity epidemic there, than by their counterparts in the Bush Administration. “Regrettably, the Bush Administration has done very little to address obesity, unless you include its initial – and unsuccessful – opposition to the World Health Organization’s effort to develop a global anti-obesity strategy,” Silverglade said. 2005-11-28 Food Processors & Supermarkets Move Forward on Trans Fat http://cspinet.org/new/200511221.html Chain Restaurants Lag Far Behind, According to CSPI SurveyWhile many of America's biggest food manufacturers and supermarket chains are busily replacing trans fats with more healthful substitutes, the biggest restaurant chains are still frying French fries, chicken nuggets, and other fast foods in trans-fat-laden, heart-attack-inducing partially hydrogenated oils, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/trans_report.pdf">a survey conducted</a> by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Trans-fat labeling on packaged foods <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200307091.html">becomes mandatory</a> on January 1, 2006. That looming deadline has been a powerful incentive for supermarkets and food manufacturers to switch to healthier oils, but CSPI found that the lack of any nutrition labeling or disclosure requirements for restaurant chains has caused them to lag far behind. While several major restaurant chains, including Yum! Brands, corporate parent of KFC, Taco Bell, and Pizza Hut, told CSPI they are testing healthier oils, only a few chains have already taken action. They include: * Au Bon Pain, a 220-location café chain based in Boston, has eliminated trans fat from all of its cookies, bagels, and muffins, and is now using a non-hydrogenated margarine; * Jason's Deli, a 137-outlet sandwich and salad chain, has stopped using partially hydrogenated oils in all of its products; * Panera Bread, a 773-outlet café chain that was formerly part of Au Bon Pain, is in the process of replacing all partially hydrogenated oils and plans to be trans-free by year's end; * California Pizza Kitchen has removed trans fat from deep-fried foods and is working on eliminating it from all other foods. Last year, Ruby Tuesday, with some 700 table-service restaurants around the country, began deep-frying in heart-healthy canola oil, though its suppliers still par-fry some items in partially hydrogenated oil. Chik-fil-A fries in peanut oil in its outlets, though its suppliers also par-fry French fries in partially hydrogenated oil. Among companies that responded to CSPI, Starbucks, ice-cream chain Friendly, and fried-chicken chain Popeyes indicated they had no plans to remove or reduce trans fat in their foods. In 2002, McDonald's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html">famously promised</a> to reduce and ultimately eliminate the trans fat in its cooking oil, but in 2003 it quietly retreated from its pledge. McDonald's settled a lawsuit against it on the matter by giving $7 million to the American Heart Association and by promising to spend more money informing its customers about the "delay." Although McDonald's has reformulated Chicken McNuggets and a few other products to have a little less trans fat, its fried foods are still very high in trans overall. A meal including a 5-piece Chicken Selects and a medium order of French fries has about 9.5 grams of trans fat-five days' worth of trans fat if one were following the recommendations of the government's Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. McDonald's outlets in Australia, Denmark, and Israel all fry in trans-free oil. Meals at other restaurants also are loaded with trans fat. KFC's Chicken Pot Pie contains 14 grams of trans, and Taco Bell's Nachos BellGrande has seven grams. "Selling food cooked in or with partially hydrogenated oils is like selling a car without seat-belts," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Partially hydrogenated oil causes thousands of avoidable premature deaths, and the restaurant industry's reluctance to change is absolutely reckless." Processed food manufacturers have made much more progress than restaurant chains. According to CSPI's survey, seven of the 10 top-selling cracker brands have been reformulated to contain zero grams of trans fat per serving. (CSPI warns, however, that the FDA lets companies treat amounts of trans under half a gram per serving as zero. Someone eating several servings of foods that contain just under half a gram of trans could easily reach their daily limit without knowing it.) Food manufacturers making headway on trans fat include: * Kraft has eliminated most or all trans fat from Triscuts, Wheat Thins, Chips Ahoy, Mallomars, Reduced Fat Oreos, Boca products, Honey Maid low fat Cinnamon Grahams, SnackWell's Cracked Pepper crackers, and other products; * Gorton's has replaced partially hydrogenated oils with healthier oils in its entire line of fish sticks and fillets; * George Weston Bakeries plans to eliminate trans fat in all Entenmann's and Freihofer cake and danish products; * McCain now uses canola oil for all of its grocery and retail frozen potatoes and one line of its food-service French fries. Supermarket chains are also making progress, according to CSPI. Whole Foods has never sold foods with partially hydrogenated oil, and nine of 11 chains that responded to CSPI's queries say they have already made changes or plan to do so for their store-brand products. Wegman's has been making gradual changes for years; the Raley's and Giant chains have asked suppliers to make changes and have switched to trans-free McCain for store-brand frozen French-fries. "Including trans fat on food labels has had a much greater positive effect that most people imagined," said Jacobson. "Nevertheless, the federal government should do what Denmark has done, and actually require companies, including restaurants, to send partially hydrogenated oils down the garbage disposal of history." Denmark limits trans fat to 2 percent of the fat or oil content of foods. Although small amounts of trans fat occur in meat and dairy foods, 80 percent of trans fat in the diet comes from partially hydrogenated oils. Trans fat is the most harmful of fats in the food supply, since it both raises LDL, or "bad" cholesterol, and lowers HDL, or "good" cholesterol. Dr. Walter C. Willett, professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health, and his colleagues estimate that trans fat in food causes at least 30,000 premature deaths in the U.S. each year. Although CSPI has been aggressively urging food companies to eliminate partially hydrogenated oils, the group <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/palmoilreport/index.html">does not want companies to switch to palm oil</a>. That oil is generally produced in Indonesia and Malaysia, where oil palm plantations have replaced rainforest teeming with orangutans, tigers, and other endangered species. Moreover, it promotes heart disease, though not to the same extent as the typical partially hydrogenated oil. CSPI's survey included 38 major food manufacturers, 100 restaurant chains, and 25 supermarket chains. 2005-11-22 Salmonella Outbreaks Linked to Produce on the Rise http://cspinet.org/new/200511211.html Produce is Primary Cause of Large Salmonella OutbreaksMost people properly associate Salmonella with raw poultry. But according to an analysis of food-poisoning outbreaks by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, fresh produce is catching up with chicken as a major culprit of Salmonella infections. And, says CSPI, produce-related outbreaks tend to be larger than poultry-related outbreaks, and sicken more people, sometimes hundreds at a time. In CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html">Outbreak Alert! database</a>, which contains information on nearly 4,500 outbreaks between 1990 and 2003, produce triggered 554 outbreaks, sickening 28,315 people. Of those 554 outbreaks, 111 were due to Salmonella. Although poultry has historically been responsible for far more Salmonella infections, in the most recent years in CSPI’s database, produce seems to be catching up. From 1990 to 2001 poultry accounted for 121 Salmonella outbreaks and produce accounted for 80. But in 2002-2003, produce accounted for 31 Salmonella outbreaks and poultry accounted for 29. “Fresh fruits and vegetables are at the center of a healthy diet, so it’s critical that steps are taken to improve their safety,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “FDA should require growers to limit the use of manure to times and products where it poses no risk. And packers and shippers should mark packaging to ensure easy traceback when fruits and vegetables are implicated in an outbreak.” Although produce outbreaks were responsible for the most illnesses, seafood was responsible for more outbreaks, 899, than any other food, but only 9,312 illnesses. Poultry triggered 476 outbreaks involving 14,729 illnesses; beef triggered 438 outbreaks involving 12,702 illnesses, and eggs triggered 329 outbreaks involving 10,847 illnesses. CSPI’s database includes only outbreaks where both the food and the pathogen are identified, so its data represents only a fraction of the total burden of foodborne illnesses. The CDC estimates that 76 million Americans get sick and 5,000 die from foodborne hazards each year. In recent years, Salmonella outbreaks have been traced back to lettuce, salads, melons, sprouts, tomatoes, and other fruit- and vegetable-containing dishes. In 2004, there were three separate outbreaks involving 561 Salmonella infections that were linked to contaminated Roma tomatoes. From 2000 to 2002, Salmonella-contaminated cantaloupe imported from Mexico sickened 155 and killed two. Salmonella isn’t the only pathogen that ends up on produce. In 2003, green onions in salsa from a Pennsylvania ChiChi’s restaurant transmitted hepatitis A to 555 people, killing three. Also that year, E. coli on a bagged salad mix sickened more than 50 restaurant patrons in the San Diego area. CSPI has long recommended the creation of a single food safety agency and an emphasis on improving on-farm practices to help curb foodborne illness. FDA-regulated foods are linked to two-thirds of foodborne illness outbreaks, yet the FDA’s budget is only 38 percent of the total federal food safety budget. While USDA has the resources to inspect meat plants daily, the FDA inspects food facilities it regulates on average just once every five years. Neither agency has principal responsibility for overseeing on-farm food-safety practices. CSPI’s report, “Outbreak Alert! Closing the Gaps in Our Federal Food Safety Net,” is updated annually, and is available at http://www.cspinet.org/foodsafety/outbreak_report.html 2005-11-21 Group Asks FDA to Limit Salt in Processed Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200511081.html Excess Salt in Diet Kills 150,000 Each Year, Says CSPIAfter 25 years of false starts and foot-dragging the Food and Drug Administration should use its authority to set reasonable upper limits on the salt content of processed foods, according to a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_salt_petition.pdf">legal petition</a> filed today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The group says that excess salt in the American diet contributes to hypertension, which causes heart attacks and strokes. Hypertension experts have estimated that reducing sodium levels in the diet by half would save about 150,000 lives annually. CSPI first urged the FDA to set salt limits in 1978. In 1982, the agency promised to act if the food industry didn’t bring down sodium levels on its own. Since then, according to CSPI, Americans’ sodium intake has increased, not decreased, and the agency has done nothing. CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/salt_lawsuit.pdf">sued the FDA </a>to regulate salt earlier this year, but the court ruled that CSPI would need to file another petition with the agency. “Frankly, the FDA is more interested in racing expensive new drug therapies for high blood pressure to market than it is improving Americans’ diets so they wouldn’t need the drugs,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Improving the food supply by gradually reducing the sodium content of processed foods would send a lot fewer Americans scurrying for expensive medical care. You’d think an administration ostensibly in favor of weighing costs and benefits of government action would see that.” Despite the pleas of health experts to cut back, salt consumption has drifted upward over the past 30 years to the point where Americans are now consuming about 4,000 milligrams of sodium per day—about twice the recommended amount. According to CSPI, it’s hard not to exceed one’s daily sodium maximum if one eats <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/hspackaged.html">processed foods </a>or restaurant foods. Take frozen entrees. One Banquet Macaroni & Cheese dinner contains 1,500 milligrams (mg) of sodium; Oscar Mayer’s Lunchables range from 670 mg of sodium to 1630 mg of sodium. Some (admittedly huge) Swanson Hungry Man XXL dinners contain 3,180 to 5,410 mg of sodium, making it easy to exceed a day’s allotment at one meal. Many <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/salt/hsrestaurant.html">restaurant meals</a> are equally high in sodium, though diners typically don’t have any nutrition information to help guide their choices. Many Chinese entrees have more than 2,500 mg of sodium; the Lumberjack Slam breakfast at Denny’s has 4,460 mg of sodium. An <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508171.html">August CSPI analysis of more than 550 food items</a> found dramatic variations in sodium content—which, the organization says, means that many companies could use less salt without affecting taste. “Unfortunately, except for a very small number of Healthy Choice-type foods, sodium levels in everything from bread, to canned tomatoes, to salad dressings ranges from high to extremely high,” said Jacobson. “For all the food industry’s rhetoric about the wide range of consumer choices it supposedly provides, it has failed miserably at giving consumers a real choice when it comes to salt.” According to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200502242.html">“Salt: The Forgotten Killer,”</a> a report issued by CSPI in February, 77 percent of the sodium in the average American diet comes from processed foods and restaurant foods; about 12 percent of sodium occurs naturally in foods such as dairy and seafood; and only small amounts are actually added by consumers during cooking (5 percent) or at the table (6 percent). CSPI’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_salt_petition.pdf">new legal filing</a> with FDA asks that the agency treat salt as a food additive for purposes of regulation, as opposed to an ingredient the agency designates as “Generally Recognized as Safe,” or GRAS. The agency has greater authority to regulate food additives, including the authority to set upper limits or require special labeling for a given additive. CSPI asked the agency to set upper limits for salt in various categories of processed foods and to lower the Daily Value, or DV, for individuals from 2,400 mg to 1,500 mg of sodium per day. CSPI notes in its petition that several government bodies have urged Americans to reduce their salt consumption, and even FDA itself in 2005 reaffirmed its conclusion that sodium has an adverse impact on cardiovascular disease. In 2003, the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure, or JNC 7, called for a 50 percent reduction in sodium consumption—a target that CSPI urged FDA to shoot for. CSPI’s current petition to the FDA was also sent to Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt with a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/salt_letter.pdf" target="cspi">cover note of support </a>from organizations including the American Nurses Association, the American Public Health Association, the American College of Preventive Medicine, and the International Society on Hypertension in Blacks. Prominent physicians and researchers signing the letter include Dr. Carlos Camargo of Harvard Medical School, Dr. Steve Havas of the University of Maryland Medical School, Dr. Jeremiah Stamler of the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Dr. Myron H. Weinberger of the Indiana University School of Medicine, and Dr. Jackson T. Wright of the University Hospitals of Cleveland. 2005-11-08 CSPI Praises Sesame Street Workshop's Partnership with Sunkist http://cspinet.org/new/200511071.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanParents of young children know how difficult a trip to the supermarket can be, when familiar cartoon characters like SpongeBob SquarePants, Dora the Explorer, and Shrek grace the packaging of candy, sugary cereals, and other junk foods. We've long encouraged companies to use their marketing smarts to promote healthful foods and make it easier for parents to help to prevent obesity, diabetes, and other conditions in their kids. We're thrilled about the partnership between Sesame Street Workshop and Sunkist, which will help encourage kids to snack on fruit and engage in other healthy habits. We hope that big entertainment conglomorates that make billions from licensing deals follow Big Bird's and Elmo's lead--and do more to help kids and families, instead of helping fuel the obesity epidemic by plugging junk food. 2005-11-07 Compromise Reached on Financial Conflicts of Interest on FDA Panels http://cspinet.org/new/200510273.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Project Director Merrill GooznerThe compromise provision to the FY2006 Agriculture/FDA appropriations bill that provides advance notice when scientists with conflicts of interest serve on FDA advisory committees is a step in the right direction. We congratulate the Senate and House conferees, especially Sen. Richard Durbin and Rep. Maurice Hinchey, who helped make this possible. Consumers concerned that drug, device and food manufacturers have corrupted the FDA’s advisory committee process will soon have 15 days notice when the FDA wants to put scientists with conflicts of interest on one of its 30 advisory panels. Simultaneous publication of the waivers granted to scientists, along with their conflicts, gives the public additional information for evaluating whether their participation may taint the proceedings. Under the current system, where the waivers are kept under wraps pending a Freedom of Information Act request that can take years, the public is effectively kept in the dark about the ties between some scientists on FDA panels and the companies whose products are up for approval. Moreover, we're glad to see that the FDA will have to document to Congressional appropriators and the HHS inspector general what steps it has taken to avoid appointing scientists with conflicts to its panels. This will encourage the agency to seek out more of the nation’s highly qualified scientists who do not have financial ties to industry. However, past experiences suggests this bill does not go far enough. CSPI believes the FDA can find qualified scientists without conflicts of interest to serve on all of its advisory panels. That’s why the waivers should be disallowed entirely. At the least, the present disclosure bill could have been made stronger by forbidding scientists with waived conflicts of interest from voting at the conclusion of a committee’s deliberations. 2005-10-27 Crackdown on Fraudulent Food Labels Urged http://cspinet.org/new/200510272.html CSPI Exposes Some of the Most Misleading Ingredient ClaimsHealth-conscious consumers are being misled by many food labels that exaggerate the presence of healthful ingredients, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The nutrition and food-safety watchdog group says that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/misleading_labels_letter.pdf">doesn't have the resources or the will</a> to stop deceptive labeling and typically does nothing even when flagrantly fraudulent labels are brought to its attention. Today CSPI, a state attorney general, and a ranking appropriator in Congress are all saying that needs to change. For years, CSPI has filed complaints with the FDA about egregiously mislabeled foods -- for example, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508111.html">"blueberry" waffles with no blueberries</a> or "strawberry" yogurt for kids with no strawberries. The FDA's inaction on such products has been taken by food manufacturers as a signal to make even more deceptive claims, said CSPI. "Food manufacturers are shamelessly tricking consumers who are trying to eat more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains," said CSPI director of legal affairs Bruce Silverglade. "Too many processed foods contain only token amounts of the healthful ingredients highlighted on labels and are typically loaded with fats, refined sugars, refined flour, and salt, in various combinations." At a news conference in Washington with Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal, Silverglade said that the FDA should immediately stop misleading food labels, including those for: * Gerber Graduates for Toddlers Fruit Juice Snacks -- the package is decorated with pictures of oranges, cherries, and strawberries, but the leading ingredients are corn syrup and sugar. "You can guess why Gerber doesn't call these things Corn Syrup Snacks-no parent would buy them," says Silverglade. "This is candy, not fruit juice." * Betty Crocker Super Moist Carrot Cake Mix -- the box depicts what appear to be pieces of carrot, but the only carrot ingredient is "carrot powder," which is the 19th ingredient listed, behind artificial color, salt, and dicalcium phosphate. * Smucker's Simply 100% Fruit -- the strawberry version of this "100% fruit" spread contains 30 percent strawberries; the blueberry version contains only 43 percent blueberries. Both have more fruit syrup than fruit-syrup that comes not from berries but from less-expensive apple, pineapple, or pear juice concentrate. * Kellogg's Eggo Nutri-Grain Pancakes -- the label boasts that these pancakes are "Made with Whole Wheat and Whole Grain," but the pancakes are made primarily with white flour and have more high-fructose corn syrup than whole wheat or other whole grain. CSPI says that foods labeled "whole grain" should have whole grain flour as their flour constituent, as is the requirement for whole wheat bread. * General Mills' Yoplait Light Fat Free Yogurt -- the label claims to (burn more fat( and help dieters lose weight if they consume three servings of milk, cheese, or yogurt daily. However, the U.S. government's Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee has called the evidence on dairy products and weight loss inconclusive. * Quaker Oats Pasta Roni -- the label boasts White Cheddar & Broccoli in large letters and displays a picture of pasta with pieces of broccoli. Although broccoli appears on the fourth line of a 14-line ingredient list, there are only small specks of broccoli in the actual package. "Budget cuts have decimated the number of FDA regulators working on food labeling, while their responsibilities for monitoring the way food is packaged and marketed have increased substantially," said Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), ranking member of the Appropriations subcommittee that sets the FDA budget. "We must do everything we can to encourage healthy eating and reduce obesity in this country by restoring integrity to the FDA and empowering people to make informed decisions about the foods they are eating. The FDA must investigate labeling violations, and take action to ensure consumers have accurate nutrition information." In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/misleading_labels_letter.pdf">letter</a> to acting FDA commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, CSPI said that FDA's Office of Nutritional Products, Labeling, and Dietary Supplements (ONPLDS), does not have any plan to identify and remedy misleading labeling. Field inspectors only review labels during their inspections of manufacturers' facilities, during which label violations are not a central focus and which occur on average only once every five years. The few warnings issued by the agency typically involve only obvious violations, such as the complete omission of a Nutrition Facts panel or the inclusion of an overt drug-like claim. Of 9,000 employees, the FDA has the equivalent of only four full-time headquarters staff enforcing food-labeling laws-a staffing level that CSPI says has proven to be completely incapable of ensuring honest labels on the $500 billion worth of FDA-regulated foods. Nevertheless, even with those few staffers, the agency could still be much more aggressive in policing misleading labels. Although the FDA has done little to stop misleading food labels, private lawyers and at least one state attorney general, Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, have brought lawsuits to crack down on fraudulent food labels. Blumenthal's office has reached several settlement agreements with food companies, including South Beach Beverage Company (SoBe), owned by PepsiCo, Inc., which agreed to stop making unproven health claims for its products and paid the state $219,000 in penalties and legal costs. "Mislabeling food as healthy is hazardous to health," Blumenthal said. "The mislabeling mentality in the food industry is completely out of control, taking consumers for fools. An understaffed, unmotivated FDA is unacceptable. Informed and safe diet decisions require the truth. Our message to the FDA and the food industry: Do your job; give consumers the real facts, not feckless spin." CSPI and private consumer-action lawyers have persuaded such major companies as <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200508112.html">Tropicana</a> and Quaker Foods, both units of PepsiCo, and Pinnacle Foods, the maker of Aunt Jemima Frozen Blueberry Waffles, to improve their labeling practices. Because of government inaction, CSPI is increasingly turning to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200505031.html">discussions with companies and to the courts</a> to stop misleading labelling. 2005-10-27 Nutrition Labeling Proposed for DC Chain Restaurants http://cspinet.org/new/200510271.html Legislation Would Put Nutrition Info on Menus at Fast Food and Other Chain Restaurants in Nation’s CapitalDistrict residents waiting in line at McDonald's may soon be able to see that a Big Mac costs 590 calories, if legislation sponsored by District of Columbia Councilmember Phil Mendelson (D-At-Large) becomes law. The Menu Education and Labeling (MEAL) Act would require fast-food and other chain restaurants in DC to list calories, saturated plus trans fat, carbohydrates, and sodium on printed menus and calories on menu boards (where there is less space). The legislation, which is similar to bills introduced in state legislatures in Maine, New Jersey, and New York, would only apply to standard menu items – not special orders or changing specials – at chain restaurants with 10 or more locations nationally. "We congratulate Councilmember Mendelson for working to give District residents better information about their food choices," said Margo G. Wootan, CSPI's director of nutrition policy. "Too often, nutrition information in chain restaurants is hard to find, hard to read, or missing altogether. This bill would take the guesswork out of restaurant dining." Away-from-home foods account for a third of Americans' caloric intakes, and the high calorie content and large portion sizes of many restaurant foods are key contributors to the skyrocketing rates of obesity in children and adults, according to CSPI. "I urge my fellow Councilmembers to co-introduce the MEAL Act," said Mendelson. "This bill will help the thousands of District residents who watch what they eat to manage diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure." Mendelson will reintroduce the MEAL Act on Tuesday, November 1, 2005. The bill is supported by the American Cancer Society, South Atlantic Division; American Diabetes Association, DC Affiliate; American Heart Association, National Capital Area, as well as many other local organizations and distinguished nutrition and health experts. 2005-10-27 McDonald's to Add Nutrition Info to Packaging http://cspinet.org/new/200510251.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonMcDonald’s announcement that it will add nutrition information to most of its packages is a useful step in providing customers more, and more readable, nutrition information. It stands apart from some other nutrition initiatives – such as brochures and posters – that McDonald’s and other companies have undertaken that were more illusory than useful. And it <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/mcdonalds3.pdf">puts the lie</a> to the fast-food industry’s contention that it’s impossible to do. That said, a far better step would be to provide calorie counts right on the menu board, so consumers would have that one critical piece of information <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/mcdonalds4.pdf">before</a> they placed their order. Considering America’s obesity epidemic, that calorie information would do more than just about any other measure to help people protect their waistlines. We hope that McDonald’s will upgrade its menu boards voluntarily or at least not oppose legislation in New York, Washington, D.C., and other locales that would require it. On the bar graphs on package labels, I wish McDonald’s would distinguish saturated and trans fat from total fat—an important distinction that would help Americans reduce their risk of heart disease. As it happens, McDonald’s fried foods are high in saturated and trans fat, since their potatoes, chicken, and fish are fried in a partially hydrogenated oil blend. One reason not to praise an announcement like today’s too loudly is that McDonald’s <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200409241.html">infamously retreated from its promise</a> to reduce and ultimately eliminate the trans fat in its cooking oils. We hope that they eventually make good on that. Over the years, CSPI has urged McDonald’s and other companies to not only provide information, but to improve their foods by using leaner meat, reducing the salt content of practically everything, using more whole grains, and using liquid oils instead of partially hydrogenated oils. 2005-10-25 Ghoulishly Great Ideas for Halloween Parties and Trick-or-Treating http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/halloween.pdf 2005-10-24 So-Called "Personal Responsibility Act" Passes in House http://cspinet.org/new/200510191.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonOnce again, members of the House of Representatives have leapt to the defense of restaurant chains and food manufacturers. It seems to me that if Congress really wanted to encourage personal responsibility, it would enact laws that actually encouraged Americans to choose better diets. But of course this silly legislative effort has nothing to do with encouraging personal responsibility and everything to do with pleasing a powerful and politically connected industry. Instead of dishing out special legislative favors to the food industry, a better way of promoting personal responsibility would be to put nutrition information on menus and menu boards. 2005-10-19 Schwarzenegger Urged to Veto "Alcopop" Tax Break http://cspinet.org/new/200510061.html So-called "Malternatives" Aim to be Kids' First Drink, According to CSPIThe controversial, sweet-tasting alcoholic drinks known as "alcopops," many of which bear the brand names of hard liquor companies such as Bacardi, Smirnoff, Skyy, and Stolichnaya, derive some of their alcohol content from distilled spirits and should be taxed and regulated accordingly, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The group today <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/alcopop.pdf">urged</a> California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to veto legislation that would tax alcopops at the low rate assessed for beer, and make the drinks available everywhere beer is sold. "These alcopop drinks represent a sneak attack on society's efforts to shield kids from liquor marketing and deter underage drinking," said George A. Hacker, director of the alcohol policies project at CSPI. "We shouldn't be rewarding this kind of corporate irresponsibility with special tax breaks. We hope Governor Schwarzenegger vetoes this special-interest giveaway." Although some of the alcohol in these drinks comes from malt fermentation like the alcohol in beer, some of the alcohol in alcopops comes from distilled spirits, which also provide some of the flavor. In this way, says CSPI, alcopops manufacturers have the best of both worlds: They can give consumers the impression that the drinks have the vodka or rum associated with brand names such as Bacardi or Smirnoff, yet they can give regulators the impression that these drinks are more like beer. CSPI's public opinion surveys indicate that alcopops are <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/summary_of_findings.pdf">popular among young people</a>, and that adults strongly favor restrictions on marketing alcopops to kids. If Gov. Schwarzenegger does not veto Assembly Bill 417, alcopops will be taxed at 20 cents per gallon as opposed to the $3.30 rate per gallon for liquor. California Attorney General Bill Lockyear, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, and other public health and safety advocates are also opposed to a tax break for alcopops. "Governor Schwarzenegger <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200509141.html">displayed great courage</a> in standing up to the soda and snack-food lobby by getting junk food out of schools," Hacker said. "We hope he similarly stands up to the alcohol industry, which has sunk to new lows in recent years peddling these alcopops to a young audience." 2005-10-06 Herbal Roulette http://cspinet.org/new/200510041.html Health Canada Approving Dubious Claims for Supplements, According to CSPI’s Nutrition Action HealthletterHealth Canada’s Natural Health Products Directorate (NHPD) has been busy in recent years approving hundreds of sometimes startling claims for various herbs and botanicals. Thanks to the agency, companies can now market garlic to treat respiratory infections, licorice to relieve joint pain, pennyroyal to "reduce giddiness," and cornflower to strengthen weak eyes. Black horehound has been approved as both a sedative and a stimulant. According to an exposé in the current issue of Nutrition Action Healthletter, it’s no wonder the NHPD is so eager to approve so many dubious claims: Of 13 members of its Expert Advisory Committee that evaluates such claims, six are practicing herbalists and a seventh runs a wholesale herb import business. Two have done scientific research on herbs and two have built academic careers promoting botanicals for health. "Health Canada is trying to roll back the calendar to the 19th century and the era of snake oil," charged David Schardt, senior nutritionist at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, publisher of Nutrition Action. NHPD’s panel has approved more than 300 such health claims based solely on "traditional use," which need only be supported by two traditional sources, such as compilations of herbal folklore, even when the claim is contradicted by modern science. The champion botanical is a perennial herb called Heal-All, which the NPHD has declared traditionally effective for 23 conditions, including sore throats, backaches, coughs, colds, cramps, diarrhea, vomiting, and fevers. More than 8,000 more products are waiting for NHPD’s approval, and the supplement industry is expected to submit more than 30,000 products for approval over the next year or two. The article is available <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/feature_herbal_roulette.pdf">here</a>. 2005-10-04 FDA Study Proves FDA Confuses Consumers by Allowing Dubious Health Claims on Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200509291.html The Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) policy of allowing preliminary health claims on food labels misleads consumers and has “failed the key communications test,” according to a <a href="http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/dockets/dockets/03N0496/03N-0496-rpt0001.pdf">previously undisclosed FDA study</a> obtained by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). In 2002, the Bush administration reversed a decade-old policy requiring that health claims be based on sound science. Under the new policy, which the food industry helped craft, health claims are generally permitted regardless of the state of scientific evidence as long as companies include a disclaimer such as the scientific evidence supporting a claim is “limited and inconclusive.” For instance, the FDA authorized a label claim that green tea may reduce the risk of breast and prostate cancer, as long as the label also states that the agency believes it is “highly unlikely” green tea has such an effect. “The new FDA study clearly demonstrates that preliminary health claims lead to deception,” said CSPI director of legal affairs Bruce Silverglade. “The FDA should immediately cease authorizing preliminary health claims and withdraw approval for those that it has allowed.” Those claims are permitted so long as they are qualified by terms like “scientific evidence suggests but does not prove,” or state that the claim is based on “supportive but not conclusive research.” The FDA study found that those qualifying statements don’t “reliably convey the intended level of scientific support for a health claim,” and that people in the study “attributed more certainty to claims with disclaimers than those without disclaimers.” Among the preliminary health claims sanctioned under the policy are claims that nuts, olive oil, and foods containing omega-3 fatty acids can reduce the risk of heart disease. Under consideration are claims that whey protein in infant formula may reduce the risk of food allergies in infants, lycopene may reduce the risk of cancer, and that lutein may reduce the risk of cataracts and macular degeneration. The food industry has long pressured the FDA to authorize claims without waiting for scientific agreement. A 1990 law requires the FDA to only authorize health claims for foods that are supported by “significant scientific agreement.” The industry argued that the FDA should instead follow a 1999 U.S. Court of Appeals decision that dietary supplement manufacturers had a First Amendment right to make preliminary health claims so long as disclaimers prevented consumer deception. However, the court said that the FDA did not have to authorize preliminary health claims if the agency had evidence demonstrating that consumers would be “bewildered” and that the disclaimers “would fail to correct for deceptiveness.” “The FDA’s current policy allows companies to dupe consumers into thinking that this food or that food is the key to reducing the risk of cancer and heart disease,” Silverglade said. “The courts have made it clear that the First Amendment is not a license to practice quackery, but that is exactly what the Bush FDA policy sanctions.” CSPI obtained the study by filing a request under the Freedom of Information Act, which the FDA had initially declined. FDA had even declined to make the report available to several members of Congress. Shortly after turning over the study to CSPI the FDA put the study, Effects of Strength of Science Disclaimers on the Communication Impacts of Health Claims, on its web site. 2005-09-29 'MyPyramid for Kids' a Kid-Friendly Flop, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200509281.html The kids' version of the food pyramid is as ineffective as the adult version, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). CSPI said today that <a href="http://teamnutrition.usda.gov/resources/mpk_close.pdf">MyPyramid for Kids</a>, like the adult MyPyramid, fails to convey the otherwise sensible advice found in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, and is emblematic of an Administration that has no real commitment to improving Americans' diets. "My Pyramid for Kids doesn't dare to discourage children from consuming so much soda, fast food, candy, and other junk foods," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Even if MyPyramid for Kids were terrific, there's no strategy to put materials in every classroom in America--they're actually only making them available upon request. It's as if they've asked Mike Brown to design a response to the obesity epidemic." Although the Department of Agriculture trumpets the high traffic at its MyPyramid.gov web site, a <a href="http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=mypyramid.gov">search via the web service Alexa.com</a> shows that traffic peaked immediately after the site's launch, and plummeted quickly thereafter. On a given day, traffic at web gaming sites designed to promote junk food, such as <a href="http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=6m&size=medium&compare_sites=postopia.com&y=r&url=mypyramid.gov#top">Postopia.com</a> or <a href="http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=6m&size=medium&compare_sites=candystand.com&y=r&url=mypyramid.gov#top">Candystand.com</a>, far outpaces traffic at <a href="http://mypyramid.gov">MyPyramid.gov</a>. CSPI said that if the Administration wanted to reduce the toll of diet-related disease, it could start by aggressively promoting increased consumption of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains; removing soda and junk foods from schools; getting junk-food ads off children's television; and supporting legislation that would put calorie counts on fast-food menu boards. And instead of relying solely on the Internet, the government should take to the airwaves, according to CSPI. "When McDonald's wants to reach kids, it turns to television advertising first and foremost," said Jacobson. "If government is to improve kids' eating habits it should invest hundreds of millions of dollars on television advertising promoting healthy diets. If such a campaign made even a dent in obesity or diet-related disease, it would be a windfall for American taxpayers." 2005-09-28 Statement of Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson on the Resignation of FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford http://cspinet.org/new/200509231.html Despite various policy disagreements, we'll miss Dr. Crawford for his openness, and because he's really one of the only FDA commissioners who has had substantive experience with food safety. The agency has had so much turnover in the top spot, and turmoil throughout, that it could have benefitted from a period of steady leadership. The country doesn't need a rudderless FDA when tens of thousands of Americans are dying unneccessarily from dangerous drugs and dangerous foods pumped full of trans fat and sodium. We hope the next commissioner is able to assert the agency's indpendence from the kinds of political and corporate pressures that have rendered the agency ineffective on many fronts. 2005-09-23 How Safe is the Food in America's Schools? http://cspinet.org/new/200509221.html New Federal Law Gives Parents Access to Cafeteria Inspection ReportsIs your child’s school cafeteria free of rodents, under-cooked or improperly stored food, and other <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/foodborne_hazards.pdf">hazards</a> that can cause serious—and possibly fatal—food poisoning? A new federal law makes it easier for parents to answer that question by requiring more frequent inspections and easy access to school cafeteria inspection reports. Today the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the nonprofit nutrition and food safety watchdog group, released its <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/bill_of_rights.pdf">School Food Safety Bill of Rights</a>, which tells parents how to take advantage of the new law and become involved in promoting food safety at the school level. The new law was folded into the Childhood Nutrition Reauthorization bill last year by food safety advocates in Congress, led by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT). It went into effect in July. “Kids have a right to safe food in school, and parents have a right to know what goes on in the school cafeteria,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “Until now, many parents had to jump through hoops to track down inspection reports. Posting these reports in schools and on the Internet will be a powerful incentive for schools to run clean and safe cafeterias.” CSPI <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/report_card.pdf">graded 25 localities</a> on their current practices for disclosing school cafeteria inspection reports. New York, Chicago, Boston, Cleveland, Minneapolis, Philadelphia, and Washington are among many jurisdictions that do not make school cafeteria inspection reports available online. Denver and Houston do put reports online, but don’t assign scores like other jurisdictions do. Los Angeles County gives scores, but makes them hard for users to find. CSPI gave grades of “B” to DeKalb County, Georgia; Seattle and King County, Washington; and San Francisco, for making their reports available online. Only one jurisdiction received CSPI’s “A” grade: Maricopa County, Arizona, which includes Phoenix. Its online reports even include the comments of the inspectors. “With 28 million children eating lunch at school every day in the United States, I believe government has an obligation to ensure parents have some peace of mind when they send their children off to school in the morning,” said Representative DeLauro. “Since children are particularly vulnerable to foodborne illness, schools must be vigilant in their efforts to ensure that cafeterias are not putting children at risk. These changes in law will support parents who want to work with school principals and food-service directors to ensure a safe environment.” <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/outbreaks_by_cause.pdf">Some of the most common pathogens</a> responsible for school outbreaks include E. coli O157:H7, Clostridium perfringens, Norovirus, and Salmonella, according to data from CSPI’s Outbreak Alert! database. Some infections from those can be directly linked to critical violations in school cafeterias, especially violations involving improper food temperature. Clostridium perfringens and Staphylococcus aureus can multiply to dangerous levels when foods that are supposed to be served hot are allowed to cool. Infected food handlers may have been responsible for some outbreaks of Norovirus and Hepatitis A. Salmonella, which is common on raw poultry, can spread to fresh produce if those foods are stored improperly close to one another. Hamburgers or foods containing ground beef can harbor E. coli if not cooked to 155 degrees Fahrenheit. Nine-year-old Tony Streiff of Minneapolis was hospitalized in 2000 after he and his classmates ate school lunches containing undercooked beef contaminated with E. coli. Tony’s ordeal inspired his father Ken Streiff to become an advocate for food-safety in schools. “Parents should take an active role by asking questions, insisting that the cafeteria is inspected regularly, and demanding that any violations are addressed immediately,” said Streiff. Parents can see if schools are complying with the new law by visiting the cafeteria and seeing if the inspection reports are posted in a visible location. If it has been more than seven months since the last inspection, CSPI advises parents to call the city or county public health department. And, if the inspection report lists troubling violations, parents and PTAs should ask to discuss a food-safety plan with the school principal. CSPI also says that although more needs to be done, school food service providers have gone to great lengths in recent years to improve the nutritional quality of school meals. More fruits and vegetables end up on school lunch trays than in the past, and meals are generally lower in saturated fat, cholesterol, and sodium. 2005-09-22 Senate Votes to Require Greater Transparency on Conflicts of Interest at FDA http://cspinet.org/new/200509211.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Director Merrill GooznerThe <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/fda_amendment.pdf">amendment passed by the Senate</a> last night is a step in the right direction. We congratulate the Senate and particularly Senator Richard Durbin, who led the effort. Consumers concerned that <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/press/200502251.html">drug</a>, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200504062.html">device</a> and food manufacturers have corrupted the FDA’s advisory committee process may soon have 15 days notice when the FDA wants to put scientists with conflicts of interest on one of its 30 advisory panels. Simultaneous publication of the waivers granted to scientists, along with their conflicts, gives the public additional information for evaluating whether their participation may taint the proceedings. Under the current system, where the waivers are kept under wraps pending a Freedom of Information Act request that can take years, the public is effectively kept in the dark about the ties between some scientists on FDA panels and the companies whose products are up for approval. However, this bill does not go far enough. CSPI believes the FDA can find qualified scientists without conflicts of interest to serve on all of its advisory panels. That’s why the waivers should be disallowed in all but the most extraordinarily circumstances (there may be some rare-disease exceptions). Moreover, in no cases should scientists with conflicts of interest be allowed to vote at the conclusion of a committee’s deliberations. We’re glad the Senate included a provision requiring the agency report to the Health and Human Services Inspector General what steps it took to find unconflicted scientists when it staffs an advisory committee. This will encourage the agency to seek out more of the nation’s highly qualified scientists who do not have financial ties to industry. 2005-09-21 Gov. Schwarzenegger Signs California School Nutrition Bills http://cspinet.org/new/200509141.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe school nutrition bills to be signed by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger are the first and best of their kind in the nation. Congress should act to protect kids’ health in exactly the same way—by getting soda and junk food out of schools in the rest of the country once and for all. Selling soda and junk food in schools isn’t philanthropic, it’s predatory. The money from soda contracts comes out of children’s and parents’ pockets. Coke, Pepsi, and other junk-food marketers enjoy being in schools because they know it is one of the only places they can target kids without parental interference. But in California, parents have clearly had enough, and leaders of both parties took notice. We hope that the Bush Administration and Congress similarly act to support parents efforts to feed their children healthy diets. Governor Schwarzenegger and State Senator Martha Escutia deserve particular credit for their personal cheerleading for better nutrition in schools. Their examples are especially refreshing to see since so many other politicians choose to roll over and play dead rather than stand up to the junk-food lobby. 2005-09-14 FDA Lets Scientists With Drug Company Ties Evaluate New Insulin Product http://cspinet.org/new/200509091.html The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is under fire again today for allowing scientists with direct financial ties to a drug manufacturer to serve on an advisory committee charged with evaluating that company's product. At a meeting today of the Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee that considered the safety and efficacy of Pfizer's proposed insulin inhaler, at least three of the committee's nine members had direct ties to Pfizer, the product's manufacturer, or its technological partner, Nektar Therapeutics. One other member-the acting chairman-holds stock in Pfizer. Dr. Talmadge E. King of San Francisco General Hospital has consulted with Nektar in the recent past. He was granted a complete waiver to participate in the meeting. Dr. Dara P. Schuster of Ohio State University has consulted and spoken on behalf of Pfizer. He also was granted a complete waiver. Dr. Nelson Watts, usually the committee's chairman, was allowed to participate in the meeting without a vote despite earning $5,000 to $10,000 a year for serving on Pfizer's speakers bureau. And Dr. Paul Woolf, who chaired the meeting, was granted a "de minimus" waiver for owning under $25,000 in stock in Pfizer. According to today's FDA presentation, the data behind Pfizer's claim that insulin inhalers will be safe and effective for people with Type I diabetes is unclear. Yet the ease and desirability of switching to an inhaler from subcutaneous injections will make this product extremely attractive to millions of Americans suffering from diabetes, whether Type I or Type II. That's why it is critical that the advice given the FDA by its advisory committees be free from conflicts of interest or even the appearance of conflict of interest, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). "The public's faith in the integrity of the process is undermined when one-third of an advisory committee's membership has significant financial ties to the company seeking the product's approval," said Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science project at CSPI. In the past, the FDA has claimed that it cannot find suitable expertise without ties to industry and that all of the most qualified people have such ties. Yet every medical school in the country has experts who both practice and conduct research in the fields of endocrinology and pulmonary medicine (relevant here because they were considering the safety of the chronic use of inhalers). "It is ludicrous that the FDA could not find highly qualified experts in these fields who did not have ties to the manufacturer," said Goozner. Because of the FDA's use of conflicted scientists on its advisory panels, the House of Representatives in June voted to require the FDA to end the practice and seek out unconflicted advice. The Senate should pass a similar measure next week when it considers the FDA appropriations bill. 2005-09-09 GAO Report Shows Junk Food in 9 out of 10 Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200509071.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanA <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/gaoreport.pdf">new report</a> from the Government Accountability Office leaves little doubt about the proliferation of junk foods in America’s schools. Despite pockets of progress around the country, the GAO report shows that nearly nine out of 10 schools offers junk foods to kids out of vending machines, school stores, and via “a la carte” lines right in the cafeteria. High schools are pretty much saturated with junk food, and middle schools seem to be getting worse, not better. That some high schools have come to depend on revenue from junk-food sales is a national disgrace. But this revenue isn’t a donation from Coke or Pepsi—it’s coming out of parents’ and children’s pockets. Schools can make money without selling junk food. A study by USDA and CDC found that in 17 schools and districts that measured revenue before and after improving school foods, 12 saw revenue increase and four had no change. We certainly encourage school systems and state legislatures to act on their own. But strong federal action is needed to protect what is, after all, a major federal investment in the school lunch program. It’s startling how many legislators have put the “rights” of Coke, Pepsi, and other junk-food makers ahead of the things that parents value—their kids’ education and health. 2005-09-07 New Studies Show How Food Industry Targets Children http://cspinet.org/new/200508231.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanA pair of troubling new studies published today in the <a href="http://www.ajph.org">American Journal of Public Health</a> shows just how the deck is stacked against parents when it comes to children’s nutrition. Virtually the only foods that are advertised to kids are soft drinks, sweets, fast-food items, and other junk foods. Plus, we’ve known that fast-food companies aggressively market directly to kids with toy giveaways, cartoon tie-ins, and cross promotions with kids’ movies. And when you consider that fast-food chains site restaurants on kids’ routes to and from school, it’s as if society is setting up families to fail. Instead of making it easy for parents to raise healthy kids, the food industry is putting kids on a fast track to obesity, diabetes, and other diet-related disease. Why can’t the food industry start using its marketing cleverness to sell fruits, vegetables, and healthy drinks and snacks to kids? Why do fast-food restaurants have to set up shop within a stone’s throw of so many schools? The food industry likes to put all the blame on parents and the young victims of the obesity epidemic. How does this industry dare lecture anyone about personal responsibility? What about corporate responsibility? 2005-08-23 Deaths, Illnesses from Contaminated Oysters Continue, Despite Plan http://cspinet.org/new/200508181.html CSPI Urges Processing for Raw, Gulf Coast OystersDespite a risk management plan adopted in 2001, deaths and illnesses caused by raw oysters contaminated with the dangerous Vibrio vulnificus bacteria have remained relatively constant. The main reason that deaths aren't increasing is because in 2003, one state, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200304151.html">California</a>, reduced its Vibrio deaths to zero by banning the sale of the riskiest unprocessed Gulf Coast oysters, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). CSPI today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/issc_letter_2005.pdf">told</a> the <a href="http://www.issc.org/">Interstate Shellfish Sanitation Conference (ISSC)</a>, the quasi-public organization that regulates shellfish safety, that it should reduce deaths and illnesses by requiring treatment of oysters harvested from the Gulf of Mexico harvested during warmer months. Much of the industry has resisted employing technologies that can kill Vibrio without affecting taste, such as cold pasteurization and hydrostatic pressure. The ISSC risk management plan called for a 40 percent reduction in Vibrio illnesses for 2005 and 2006, and a 60 percent reduction for 2007 and 2008. To measure its progress, the ISSC intends to look at data from what it calls the "core states" of Florida, Texas, California, and Louisiana. CSPI says that it is more likely that the California ban, rather than anything the ISSC is doing, will make those targets achievable. CSPI said the ISSC could better gauge the effectiveness of its plan by excluding California and looking at other states, preferably from the Gulf region. "No matter how much cocktail sauce the industry dumps on the data, in 2004 20 people died unnecessary and painful deaths after eating contaminated oysters," said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. Virtually all oysters carry the bacteria, which are particularly deadly for people who have liver disease, diabetes, AIDS, or other immune deficiencies. Half of the victims who develop a blood infection from Vibrio vulnificus will die from it, making it one of the deadliest types of food poisoning. "The shellfish industry representatives that dominate the ISSC are more concerned with avoiding the inconvenience and expense of regulation than with protecting the public's health," said CSPI staff attorney Amy McDonnell. "This is an industry that needs to be improved by federal regulation, not protected by an interstate cheering section." This week the ISSC has been considering, among other things, its risk management strategies for Vibrio vulnificus at a meeting in Point Clear, Alabama. CSPI has urged public health authorities to advise consumers to avoid eating any raw, untreated oysters that are harvested from Gulf states during April through October. Restaurateurs and retailers who want to serve untreated oysters should seek out those from the colder waters of New England or the Pacific Northwest, according to CSPI. 2005-08-18 Soda Companies Pull Out of Elementary Schools; CSPI Says Policy Should Cover All Schools, Urges Government to Act http://cspinet.org/new/200508172.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanToday’s announcement that the member companies of the American Beverage Association <a href="http://www.ameribev.org/schools/vending_policy.asp">will voluntarily pull soda out of elementary schools</a> is an encouraging step from an industry that, up to now, has thwarted angry parents who want to get soda out of their kids’ schools. The soda industry has aggressively, and shamefully, taken advantage of the precarious financial position of many public school systems. And, frankly, too many school administrators have been willing to close budget gaps at the expense of their students’ health. Given that poor diet and obesity are problems among teens, soda also has no place in America’s high schools and middle schools, which are much bigger markets for soda companies than elementary schools. I think the soda industry sees the handwriting on the wall. The industry surely hopes this voluntary half-step will forestall efforts to get soda out of all schools. But we hope that Congress, states, and school systems act to ensure that schools sell only healthful drinks and snacks to all children. 2005-08-17 Food Industry Accused of "Salt Assault" on America http://cspinet.org/new/200508171.html CSPI Says Steep Sodium Reductions Achievable for Many BrandsMost foods sold in supermarkets and restaurants are too high in salt. But <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/saltupdatedec08.pdf">a new study*</a> by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) finds that some manufacturers are recklessly loading up their products with two, three, or even four times as much salt as their competitors within a food category. The dramatic differences in sodium from brand to brand are proof positive that many companies could easily achieve significant reductions without sacrificing taste, according to CSPI. “Some brands of processed foods have sodium levels that are off the charts compared with other brands in the same category,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Excess sodium in the diet causes tens of thousands of preventable heart attacks and strokes each year. This salt assault is probably good for funeral directors and coffin makers, but it is a disaster for shoppers and restaurant patrons.” CSPI analyzed the labels of more than 500 food items in 20 categories and ranked them according to sodium content. For each product, CSPI calculated how much more sodium it had than the product with the least sodium in the category. For instance, among brands of diced canned tomatoes, Hunt’s Original has almost twice as much sodium (310 milligrams per 100 grams of product) as Contadina Roma Style (160 mg per 100 g). But you can’t count on one brand being consistently lower or higher, says CSPI. Curiously, Contadina Roma Style tomato paste has more than three times as much sodium (910 mg per 100 g) as Hunt’s (270 mg per 100 g). Nor did other potential trends hold up: CSPI found that among supermarket brands, natural-foods brands, or national name brands, any could be highest or lowest in a given category. General Mills Honey Nut Cheerios has almost three times as much sodium as Barbara’s Honey Nut O’s (700 vs. 250 mg per 100 g). On the other hand, natural-food brand Hains Rich All Natural crackers have almost 50 percent more than the similar original Ritz crackers (1,233 vs. 844 mg per 100g). What CSPI found at the meat counter may be particularly surprising to consumers. While fresh poultry and pork are naturally low in sodium, much frozen or processed poultry and pork is marinated, “enhanced,” or otherwise processed in a sodium-rich solution. As a result, some brands of pork spareribs (Hormel, say) might have three-and-a-half times as much sodium as what USDA says spareribs naturally have (290 mg vs. 80 mg per 100 g); a packaged pork loin roast (Tyson) may have more than five times as much sodium as what unprocessed pork loin naturally has. One brand of frozen turkey breast (Marval Prime Young) has almost nine times as much as a frozen Purdue whole turkey (440 mg vs. 50 mg per 100 g). (CSPI also notes that with some of these so-called “enhanced” or processed products, the consumer is actually paying for extra water weight as well as unnecessary salt.) In restaurants, consumers don’t have easy access to nutrition information, and sodium levels can vary just as unpredictably there as among packaged foods. Burger King French fries, for example, have almost three times as much sodium as McDonald’s fries (550 mg vs. 190 mg per 100g). Pizza Hut’s thin-crust cheese pizza has nearly twice as much sodium as Little Caesar’s (620 mg vs. 330 mg per 100 g). “Because salt is in so many foods at such high levels, it is virtually impossible for people to follow health authorities’ advice to cut way back on sodium, particularly when packaged foods and restaurant foods make up such a big part of Americans’ diets,” Jacobson said. “Food companies should use less salt across the board, but especially in the products that have the most. Why not put consumers in the driver’s seat, and let them decide for themselves how much salt to add?” According to CSPI, processed foods and restaurant foods contribute about 80 percent of the sodium in Americans’ diets. Only about 10 percent comes from salt added during cooking at home or added at the table. The remaining 10 percent is naturally occurring. Americans now consume about 4,000 milligrams of sodium per day—about twice the recommended amount. The 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommends that young adults consume less than 2,300 mg of sodium per day. People with hypertension, African Americans, and middle-aged and elderly people—almost half the population—are advised to consume no more than 1,500 mg per day. “Most people are surprised to find out that so little of our dietary sodium comes from the salt shaker, and that there is so much sodium in foods that aren’t even considered salty, like bread or canned tomatoes,” Jacobson said. “Many people think of French fries as a salty food, but even a small McDonald’s cheeseburger has many times the sodium content of a small McDonald’s fries.” CSPI is urging Congress to create a new Division of Sodium Reduction within the FDA that could encourage—through bully pulpit and regulation—food companies to use less salt. In the United Kingdom, where salt reduction has been a major priority for that country’s Food Standards Agency, some food products, such as Kraft’s Lunchables, have less sodium there than they do in the United States. *2008 Updated Report 2005-08-17 Tropicana to Change Labeling of Fruit-Flavored Drinks http://cspinet.org/new/200508112.html More Accurate Labeling Resolves LawsuitTropicana Peach Papaya drink has no peach juice and no papaya juice. In fact, the very small amount of juice in this drink is pear juice from concentrate. But at least the company will make some changes to its labels which will help consumers understand the drink is a flavored drink and not 100 percent juice. In response, the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and two private lawyers <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/tropicana_agreement.pdf">have agreed to drop</a> a lawsuit against Tropicana’s parent company, PepsiCo. The lawsuit was originally filed by attorneys Mark Cuker and William Riback on behalf of a New Jersey consumer who purchased Tropicana Peach Papaya. CSPI, which in May announced its intention to use litigation more often to stop deceptive food labeling practices, joined the Tropicana case earlier this year. The new label will identify the product as “Peach Papaya flavored juice drink/from concentrate with other natural flavors,” and will drop the phrase “Made with REAL Fruit Juice.” The company will also do so for its Tropicana Strawberry Melon, which contains no strawberry juice or melon juice. “There are important differences between real fruit juice on the one hand, and sodas and fruit-flavored drinks on the other,” said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. “Tropicana Peach Papaya and Tropicana Strawberry Melon simply are not 100 percent juice, and this settlement will help make that more clear.” “We’re open to listening to legitimate concerns and this seemed like a reasonable concern,” said Danielle Vona, director of juice and juice drinks, Pepsi-Cola North America. “We want to take every opportunity we can to provide consumers with nutrition information about our products.” The labels will still depict pictures of peaches and papayas. The actual ingredients of the drink are water, high-fructose corn syrup, filtered pear juice from concentrate, citric acid, phosphoric acid, potassium citrate, ascorbic acid, sodium polyphosphates, natural flavors, potassium benzoate, gum arabic, potassium sorbate, xanthan gum, ester gum, calcium disodium EDTA, yellow 6, and red 40. “These changes will help consumers understand that the juice drink is only juice-flavored, with very little real juice,” said Cuker. “We are happy that PepsiCo agreed to these labeling changes and that we did not need to move forward with litigation.” “As part of this settlement, PepsiCo has agreed to make a $100,000 donation to the American Heart Association for its work in New Jersey,” Riback added. In May, PepsiCo’s Quaker Foods unit agreed to resolve a similar dispute involving the labeling of several varieties of instant oatmeal and grits. New labels on those products make the words “artificially flavored” more prominent. 2005-08-11 Aunt Jemima to Correct Labels for "Blueberry" Waffles http://cspinet.org/new/200508111.html CSPI Was on the Verge of Suing Manufacturer, Pinnacle FoodsSleepy regulators at the Food and Drug Administration have known for years that the “blueberries” in Aunt Jemima Blueberry Waffles are fake, despite the bounty of plump berries bursting forth on the product labels. But it took the threat of a lawsuit from the nonprofit food-safety and nutrition watchdog group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), to actually get Aunt Jemima’s attention. In a settlement struck between CSPI and Aunt Jemima’s corporate parent, Pinnacle Foods, the company promises to more clearly indicate that the product is artificially flavored and that the “blueberries” in question are imitation. In return, CSPI won’t haul Aunt Jemima before a judge. “We thank Pinnacle Foods for speedily agreeing to these sensible label improvements, and we appreciate their willingness to work collaboratively,” said CSPI litigation director Stephen Gardner. “In fact to be fair, Pinnacle Foods only recently acquired Aunt Jemima, so they’re righting a wrong that didn’t originate with them.” Only very careful label readers would notice, tucked into the middle of a long list of ingredients, the “artificially flavored blueberry bits.” These “bits” are made from sugar, dextrose, partially[J1] hydrogenated soybean oil, soy protein concentrate, artificial flavor, salt, citric acid, cellulose gum, blue 2 lake, red 40 lake, and malic acid. Those ingredients are likely to remain the same, but the front label will state clearly “with imitation blueberries.” Also, the words “artificially flavored” will be printed more clearly on the label. “Still, no actual blueberries are harmed in making Aunt Jemima Blueberry Waffles,” Gardner said. In the past year, CSPI has more aggressively policed deceptive labeling claims on its own, by turning to litigation, partly since it says the FDA does a poor job in this area. In recent weeks, CSPI has reached settlements with Quaker Foods and Tropicana over deceptively labeled products and is currently suing Quorn Foods, which makes meat substitute made from processed fungus. CSPI has received, and forwarded to the FDA, complaints from more than 900 consumers who experienced nausea, severe vomiting, diarrhea, or anaphylaxis after eating Quorn products. CSPI is also suing the Whole Foods supermarket chain, which sells the products without warnings despite knowing that the products cause illnesses. Those suits are pending in Texas state courts. “The FDA could certainly use more staff to be on the lookout for deceptive labeling or unhealthful additives,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “But frankly, even when you hand them the most egregious examples on a silver platter they tend to take years to act, if they act at all.” 2005-08-11 Food Safety Officials Push Global Guidelines http://cspinet.org/new/200507281.html CSPI Says Mad Cow, Avian Flu, Bioterrorism Concerns Require Global CoordinationBioterrorism, mad cow disease, and other more common food safety hazards know no borders and require stronger food safety systems all over the world, according to a group of food safety officials and consumer advocates from 25 countries who met in Geneva last month. The first-of-its-kind conference was organized by the U.S.-based Center for Science in the Public Interest, and hosted by the World Health Organization (WHO). Contaminated food kills millions of people worldwide each year—a death toll that could be reduced by promoting strong national food laws, disease surveillance programs, food recall and tracking systems, and other steps outlined in the document agreed to by the conferees. “A global campaign to improve food safety is needed if we are going to make food safer for consumers in both developed and developing countries,” said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. “The fragmented or non-existent food safety programs in most countries are no match for today’s hazards. As food and food animals move rapidly across the globe, so do hazards in the food supply. BSE, avian flu and bioterrorism are only our latest examples.” In 2003, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) started the Safe Food International project in partnership with the WHO and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations and consumer organizations all over the world to promote stronger national food safety programs, to reduce food-related deaths and illness, and to deter the use of food as a target of intentional contamination. The <a href="http://safefoodinternational.org/guidelines_for_consumer_organizations_20050727.pdf">Safe Food International Guidelines</a> are intended to assist both consumer organizations and governments in determining the minimum requirements for national food safety programs and cover eight essential elements for an effective food safety program. The document says that countries should have a disease surveillance system that “identifies foodborne-illness outbreaks while there is still time to remove the contaminated food from the market and prevent illnesses.” CSPI says such systems would be essential to helping countries respond to a bioterrorist attack via the food supply. To address concerns about mad cow and other animal diseases, the guidelines urge countries to utilize animal identification systems using ear tags and other devices and to ensure that feed for cows and other ruminants does not contain any ruminant tissue. To manage all food safety hazards, the Guidelines state that national food safety programs “must be funded sufficiently to conduct regular inspections of food-processing facilities and imports, conduct laboratory tests of both domestic and imported food, set standards, and do risk analysis.” With cosponsorship from the WHO and the FAO, Safe Food International developed these guidelines in consultation with the following consumer organizations: Union for the Protection of Consumer Rights (Armenia) Test-Achats (Belgium) Ligue pour la Défense du Consommateur (Benin) ProTeste (Brazil) Federation of Consumers in Bulgaria Mouvement National des Consommateurs (Cameroon) Ontario Society for Nutrition Professionals (Canada) Union des Consommateurs (Canada) Organización de Consumidores y Usuarios (Chile) Pesticide Eco-Alternatives Center (China) EcoWomen (China) China Consumers’ Association Estonian Consumers Association Federation of Consumer Organizations (India) Consumer Coordination Council (India) Voluntary Organization in the Interest of Consumer Education (India) Consumers Korea (Republic of Korea) Consumers Lebanon Consumers Association of Penang (Malaysia) Pro Public (Nepal) Consumers’ Institute (New Zealand) Asociación Peruana de Consumidores y Usuarios (Peru) Polish Consumer Association Association Senegalaise pour la Defense de l'Environnement et des Consommateurs (Senegal) National Consumer Forum (Seychelles) Consumers Union (United States) Consumer Education Trust (Uganda) WHICH (United Kingdom) Consumidores y Usuarios Asociados (Uruguay) International Association of Consumer Food Organizations Consumers International “While the main responsibility for ensuring safer food lies with producers and national governments, consumers must become more active in assuring the safety of food by assuming their own particular responsibilities,” said Jorgen Schlundt, executive director of the WHO’s food safety department. “In the home, consumers must observe safe food-handling practices that help avoid foodborne diseases. In food markets as well as eating establishments, consumers must be careful in selecting food for quality and safety. Finally, consumers must become knowledgeable about food safety issues and push for political support for government programs that foster food safety from production to consumption.” 2005-07-28 Aspartame: New Study Renews Cancer Concern, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200507272.html Consumers & Manufacturers Should Switch to Sucralose Pending Thorough Government Safety TestsThe Food and Drug Administration should immediately review the safety of the artificial sweetener aspartame, and possibly ban it, in light of a <a href="http://www.ramazzini.it/fondazione/docs/AspartameGEO2005.pdf">new study</a> published in the European Journal of Oncology. The study, conducted in Italy, found statistically significant increases in lymphomas and leukemias among female rats given aspartame. The smallest amount of aspartame (20 milligrams per kilogram of body weight) that caused a significant increase in cancer incidence is in the ballpark of what many people consume. The study also found equivocal results regarding brain tumors. At a minimum, the government should conduct new animal studies of aspartame and encourage consumers and manufacturers that use artificial sweeteners to switch to sucralose, which CSPI considers to be the safest of the several artificial sweeteners on the market. Aspartame, also sold as Equal and NutraSweet, is used in Diet Coke, Diet Pepsi, and thousands of other foods and is consumed by 200 million people in the United States and around the world, according to the industry's Calorie Control Council. "The FDA immediately should ask the government's National Toxicology Program to conduct new animal studies to assess the cancer risk from aspartame. As a precautionary measure, in the several years it would take to design and conduct such studies, the FDA should consider ordering aspartame off the market," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "Despite several shortcomings in the new study, one notable plus is that it was designed and conducted independently. Virtually all of the previous research was sponsored by the makers of aspartame." (In 1996, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that the FDA repeatedly stopped the National Toxicology Program from conducting lifetime animal tests of aspartame.) The authors of the Italian study call for "urgent re-examination of permissible exposure levels of [aspartame] in both food and beverages, especially to protect children." CSPI has long urged that aspartame be better tested, but has not maintained that the artificial sweetener is harmful, except to some people in whom it causes headaches. The California Environmental Protection Agency has also called for further studies on aspartame. 2005-07-27 NCAA Recruiting Young Audience for Beer Ads http://cspinet.org/new/200507271.html CSPI Says Alcohol Advertising Incompatible with Outreach Efforts that Target Kids as Young as 6The National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) is actively building brand loyalty among young people in order to get them interested in sports and to boost the attractiveness of NCAA telecasts to advertisers. But those recruitment efforts may deliver more and more young viewers to Anheuser-Busch and other beer marketers which advertise heavily on college sports. In a report released today, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), which has been waging a Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV, said the NCAA’s otherwise-admirable youth outreach efforts should continue, but the beer ads on its telecasts should not. “The NCAA can play a positive role in society by getting kids interested in athletics and physical activity, and by getting kids excited at the prospect of continuing their education at a college or university,” said CSPI alcohol policies project director George A. Hacker. “But beer advertising is totally inconsistent with those youth recruitment efforts. We’re all for the NCAA expanding interest in its brand. But it shouldn’t be serving up potential underage drinkers to Anheuser-Busch and other brewers.” The NCAA executive committee will consider the issue of alcohol advertising at its meeting in Indianapolis on August 4. Current NCAA policy purports to exclude those ads that “do not appear to be in the best interests of higher education.” The policy prohibits alcohol ads but makes a specific exemption for beer. “What kind of crazy policy would promote beer drinking to young NCAA fans, among others, when drinking problems—violence, unwanted and unprotected sex, alcohol poisoning, school dropouts, and property damage—are the most pressing issues on college campuses?” asked Hacker. “You don’t need a college degree to understand that hawking beer to young fans is not in the best interests of higher education.” (over) Each year, 500,000 students suffer alcohol-related injuries, including 70,000 students who are victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape. 1,400 college students die each year in alcohol-related deaths. In 2003, beer advertisers spent $52.2 million on televised college sports. Bud Light led the way with $11.4 million, followed by Miller Lite, Budweiser, and Coors Light. That year the NCAA tournament concentrated $21.1 million in beer ads into three weeks of games watched by more than 6 million children and teens. “While beer advertisers claim that they’re targeting only consumers of legal drinking age, the NCAA is reaching out aggressively to widen its audience of teens,” Hacker said. “Some of its programs are designed to attract kids as young as six. Again, we’d have no problem with those programs, if only they weren’t drawing millions of children and teens to clever and seductive enticements to drink beer.” CSPI’s Campaign for Alcohol Free Sports TV has aligned some 228 NCAA-member schools against the current policy. One of the coaches who leads the Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV is Dean Smith, who coached the University of North Carolina men’s basketball teams from 1961 to 1997, including two NCAA championship teams. “We need to understand that children start following athletics at the age of nine or ten,” Smith said. “These beer ads are highly appealing to them. When beer companies say their ads aren’t directed at young people, I find it hard to believe.” The NCAA runs at least 10 different youth recruitment programs at the national level, including a kid-friendly web site with games; an all-ages fan festival called Hoop City; a take-a-kid-to-a-game program, and a cartoonish mascot named J.J. Jumper. The NCAA promotes sportsmanship through contests and classroom materials, and runs various education and mentoring programs geared to young people. CSPI had previously raised concerns about the NCAA’s coziness with Anheuser-Busch, notably several large donations the brewer gave in the 1990s, and the hiring of a former Anheuser-Busch marketing executive to oversee the NCAA’s educational programs. CSPI said that when the NCAA executive committee’s review of alcohol policy is conducted in August, it should reflect the values of its member schools. 2005-07-27 Kellogg's Told to Stop Trashing Apples http://cspinet.org/new/200507201.html Apple Jacks Ads Portray Apples as 'Bad,' 'Sour'An advertising campaign for Kellogg's Apple Jacks disparages real apples as sour and as otherwise inferior to sugary breakfast cereal. The ads are coming under fire from the Produce for Better Health Foundation, a nonprofit education and marketing organization aimed at increasing fruit and vegetable consumption, whose members include produce growers, shippers and supermarkets, and the nonprofit nutrition and food-safety watchdog group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest. They want Kellogg's to discontinue the ad campaign and promise not to steer kids away from healthy foods in the future. The ads and accompanying web site depict a fictional character named "Bad Apple" as "sour" and "grouchy"—in contrast to a Jamaican-accented cinnamon stick character described as "laid back" and "happy." The ad tells kids that "Apple Jacks doesn't taste like apples,"—as if that's a good thing— "because the sweet taste of cinnamon is the winner, mon." "It's bad enough that Kellogg's is selling a cereal that has more sugar, and, in fact, more salt, than apples or apple juice concentrate," said Margo G. Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). "But to then go and trash the taste of real apples adds insult to injury." Most children are not eating recommended amounts of fruits and vegetables. On an average day, 45 percent of children eat no fruit, and 20 percent eat less than one serving of vegetables. The average 6 to 11 year old eats less than two cups of fruits and vegetables a day, achieving only half the recommended daily amount for this age group. "Kellogg’s is using the good name of apples to make parents feel better about the brand, but the company is actually disparaging this healthful food in its messages aimed at children," said Elizabeth Pivonka, president and CEO of Produce for Better Health Foundation. "Parents can feel good about giving apples to kids, but Apple Jacks has more sugar than any other ingredient and just one gram of fiber." In a letter to Kellogg's CEO James M. Jenness, Wootan and Pivonka ask the company to establish guidelines, including nutritional standards, for how it markets foods to children. 2005-07-20 'Self-Regulation' of Food Marketing is More Like Self-Preservation, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200507141.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThere's no doubt that the current self-regulatory scheme set up by the food industry fails to protect kids from billions of dollars worth of advertising and marketing of low-nutrition foods. The industry's guidelines are agnostic on the subject of nutrition, when they should have basic nutrition thresholds for which foods are appropriate to market to kids in the first place. Often, when complaints are brought at the <a href="http://www.caru.org">Children's Advertising Review Unit</a>, the eventual enforcement actions just nibble around the edges of the problem. When you have a system where the judge is hired and paid for by the judged, you have a system that's more self-preservation than self-regulation. The steps that <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200501125.html">Kraft</a>, Nickelodeon and PepsiCo are beginning to take are encouraging, but the industry needs to do so much more. Responsible food marketing would support, rather than undermine, parental authority and responsibility. Parents are drowned out by sophisticated marketing for junk foods. If industry wanted to forestall legislation that would restore the Federal Trade Commission's authority to regulate advertising and marketing aimed at kids, the industry would strengthen CARU, as recommended in CSPI's <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200501051.html">Guidelines for Responsible Food Marketing</a>. Industry should develop nutrition standards for foods advertised and marketed to kids. Those standards should be implemented for the marketing that takes place in schools, on packaging and television ads, on advergames and the Internet, and in product placements on kid-oriented movies and television shows. 2005-07-14 CSPI Calls on FDA to Require Health Warnings on Sodas http://cspinet.org/new/200507131.html New "Liquid Candy" Data: Teens Guzzling More Soft Drinks than Ever BeforeTeenage boys who drink carbonated or non-carbonated soft drinks consume an average of three 12-ounce cans per day, and girls more than two cans, according to <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/liquid_candy_final_w_new_supplement.pdf">a new analysis</a> of 1999-2002 government data. Teens who drink soft drinks get nearly 15 percent of their total calories from those drinks. Although adults seem to be turning to diet soda, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says that the data show teenagers are actually drinking more high-calorie soft drinks than ever-and less diet soda than in years past-despite growing concerns about obesity. "Just as the soaring rates of obesity have shocked Americans, so should the increasing consumption by teenagers of one of the causes of obesity," CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson said. "What was once a rare treat in a small serving is now served up morning, noon, and night, virtually everywhere Americans happen to be. How did a solution of high-fructose corn syrup, water, and artificial flavors come to be the default beverage?" In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/final_soda_petition.pdf">petition</a> filed today with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), CSPI asked the agency to require a series of rotating health notices on containers of all non-diet soft drinks-carbonated and non-carbonated-containing more than 13 grams of refined sugars per 12 ounces. (The typical 12-ounce soda contains 40 grams.) CSPI said that those messages could include: • The U.S. Government recommends that you drink less (non-diet) soda to help prevent weight gain, tooth decay, and other health problems. • To help protect your waistline and your teeth, consider drinking diet sodas or water. • Drinking soft drinks instead of milk or calcium-fortified beverages may increase your risk of brittle bones (osteoporosis). CSPI also said that caffeinated drinks should bear a notice that reads "This drink contains x grams of caffeine, which is a mildly addictive stimulant drug. Not appropriate for children." "It is obvious to physicians who treat obese children that the extra 200, 300, or 400 empty calories kids get from soft drinks contribute to weight gain," said Dr. Caroline M. Apovian, director of the Nutrition and Weight Management Center at Boston Medical Center. "If you want to stop the epidemic of childhood obesity, curbing soda consumption is the place to start. Health messages on labels would certainly help parents and teens be aware of the risks." In 2004, soda companies produced 37 gallons of carbonated non-diet soda-providing about 60,000 empty calories-for every man, woman, and child in the United States, according to Liquid Candy, a CSPI report first issued in 1998 and re-released in updated form today. As high as that is, industry data show that per capita production of carbonated soda has dropped 7 percent since 1998. And because many adults have switched to diet soda, production of non-diet soda has declined 12 percent-the biggest decrease ever. Nevertheless, despite that decline in overall production, soda consumption in kids has increased from the 1970s to the 2000s, as have their rates of obesity. Obesity has doubled in kids, and tripled in teens. Though the correlation is striking, recent studies have provided even more direct evidence implicating increased soda consumption with weight gain. CSPI's new data show that one out of every 10 boys consumes 66 ounces-equivalent to five and a half 12-ounce cans, or about 800 calories-per day. One out of every 20 boys consumes the equivalent of 7 cans per day, or about 1,000 calories. The amount of refined sugars that soda-drinking teens get from soda exceeds the government's recommendations for their sugar consumption from all foods. "Soda is bad not only for what is provides kids, but for what it takes away," said Lucy Nolan, executive director of End Hunger Connecticut!. That group recently lobbied successfully for legislation banning soda and other junk foods from schools only to see it vetoed by Governor Jodi Rell. "Hardly any kids are getting enough calcium, vitamins, fiber, vegetables, or fruit. The more soda you drink, the less of those you get. If school systems spent half as much time trying to get more fruits and vegetables into schools as they did trying to keep soda contracts, our kids would be much better off." Overweight or obese teens are increasingly at risk for type-2 diabetes, once called "adult-onset" diabetes and once rare in kids. And the decreased calcium intake that may accompany increased soda consumption can put people, particularly women, at greater risk for broken bones and osteoporosis. CSPI's petition is supported by the American Dental Hygienists Association, the American Society of Bariatric Surgeons, the Consumer Federation of America, the National Center for Health Education, and others. It is also supported by leading scientists and nutrition experts, including Gladys Block of the University of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health; George Bray of the Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University; Brian Burt of the University of Michigan School of Public Health; JoAnn Manson of Harvard Medical School; and Marion Nestle of New York University. Besides health messages on labels, CSPI recommends requiring calorie labeling of beverages on chain restaurant menus and menu boards, and stopping soda sales in schools. CSPI also says that states and local governments that levy small taxes on soda or other junk foods should consider earmarking those revenues for promoting health and fitness. A national 2-cent-per-can tax on soda would raise $3 billion annually-almost one thousand times as much money as the federal government spends promoting consumption of fruits and vegetables. 2005-07-13 CSPI Reaction to New Mad Cow Confirmation and Administration's "Faith-Based Mad Cow Policy" http://cspinet.org/new/200506241.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalIt appears the animal that recently was confirmed as positive for bovine spongiform encephalopathy did not enter the human food supply. But since the United States does not have a mandatory animal tracking system, USDA's strategy is basically to cross its fingers and hope that beef from a BSE-infected animal doesn't end up on Americans' dinner plates. Call it a faith-based mad cow policy. In May, Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns put national animal identification on a slow boat and delayed implementation until 2009. Canada was able to move from a voluntary to a mandatory animal tracking system in one year. There's no reason why the United States can't implement a system just as good as Canada's just as quickly. Happily, the risk of contracting the human form of mad cow disease is minuscule. But the benefits of a better system that allows traceability up and down the food chain is that it would allow other potentially infected cattle to be more easily found. In addition, it also would help public officials to more easily contain food-poisoning outbreaks due to E. coli 0157:H7 and other hazards, including bioterrorism. 2005-06-24 Conn. Governor Sides with Soda over Parents & Kids' Health http://cspinet.org/new/200506141.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanWe are extremely disappointed that Governor Jodi Rell vetoed the school nutrition bill. By siding with soda companies, Governor Rell has undermined parents' ability to feed their children healthful diets. Soda is already the single biggest source of calories for many kids and today Governor Rell has pretty much guaranteed that that will remain the case in Connecticut. By vetoing this legislation, Governor Rell is keeping Connecticut's school-aged children at increased risk of tooth decay, obesity, and diabetes. Perhaps this is not surprising, given that Coca-Cola's fight against this bill was led by a former top campaign advisor to Governor Rell. But it is a shame nevertheless. Governor Rell's veto has little to do with 'local control' of school foods. Coke and other junk-food companies fight local control tooth and nail whenever local school systems try to improve school foods. 2005-06-14 House Votes to Prohibit Financial Conflicts of Interest on FDA Panels http://cspinet.org/new/200506082.html Statement of CSPI Integrity in Science Director Merrill GooznerIn the past year it has become increasingly clear that scientists who have financial ties to drug companies or medical-device manufacturers should not be sitting in judgement of those companies' products. For far too long the FDA has had an overly cozy relationship with drug companies--a coziness formalized by having scientists or physicians with direct financial conflicts of interest sitting on FDA advisory committees. If enacted, this legislation would help restore public confidence in the safety of Americas food, drugs, and medical devices. We congratulate Representative Maurice Hinchey on the successful passage of his amendment to the FDA/USDA appropriations bill, which would prohibit conflicted persons from serving on these panels. We are especially gratified that Rep. Hinchey's efforts gained bipartisan support, and we hope that the Senate adopts similar language. 2005-06-08 CSPI Releases Global Food Safety Report http://cspinet.org/new/200506081.html Safe Food International Conference Under Way in GenevaThe Center for Science in the Public Interest has released <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/global.pdf">a detailed survey </a> of food-safety challenges around the world. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), contaminated food contributes to 1.5 billion annual cases of diarrhea in children, resulting in more than three million premature deaths. The report comes as food-safety officials and experts from 25 countries convene in Geneva at a landmark conference convened by CSPI, the WHO, and the Food and Agriculture Organization. The conference will feature keynote addresses by Dr. Stuart Slorach, chairman of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, Mr. Geoffrey Podger, the chairman of the European Food Safety Authority, and Dr. Maria Neira, head of the Spanish Food Safety Organization. 2005-06-08 CSPI Applauds NJ Governor on School Foods Improvements http://cspinet.org/new/200506071.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael JacobsonActing Governor Richard Codey deserves applause from New Jersey parents for promoting and protecting children's health by ridding the state's schools of soft drinks and candy. New Jersey is the first state to take this historic step, and we hope that many others will quickly follow its lead. Sodas and other sugary drinks are the single biggest source of calories and added sugars in the diets of teenagers. Only 2 percent of children meet the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s five main recommendations for a healthy diet. Particularly in light of skyrocketing rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes among children, junk foods have no place in schools. Another Governor, Connecticut's Jodi Rell, has a similar opportunity to advance children’s health, in the form of sweeping legislation that would also take much soda and junk food out of that state's schools. We strongly encourage her to side with Connecticut's parents and children, and not with the soda and junk-food marketers who have tried so hard to kill this important bill. 2005-06-07 "Cruel Oil" Report Exposes Palm Oil's Impact on Health & Environment http://cspinet.org/new/200506021.html Plantations Clearing Rainforest, Threatening Already Endangered Species, Says CSPIPalm oil has long been known to promote heart disease, but a new report from the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) says that palm oil production also promotes destruction of the rainforest, particularly in Malaysia and Indonesia. Further loss of forest may push endangered animal species, including orangutans, Sumatran tigers, and <a href="http://www.sameasterson.com/BorneoRhino.html" target="cspi">Sumatran rhinos</a>, into extinction. Production of palm oil is spiking upward, partly because some food manufacturers are seeking alternatives for partially hydrogenated oils, which promote heart disease. CSPI strongly urges manufacturers to replace partially hydrogenated oils, but to switch to the most healthful oils possible. Companies that must use palm oil should use as little as possible and obtain it from environmentally sustainable sources, says the group. Palm oil is the world's second-most-produced and internationally traded edible oil, according to CSPI's report, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/palm_oil_final_5-27-05.pdf">Cruel Oil: How Palm Oil Harms Health, Rainforest, & Wildlife</a>. More than 80 percent of the world's palm oil comes from Malaysia or Indonesia—where it is mostly grown on land that once was rainforest or peat-swamp forests. When those forest areas are cleared, habitat for endangered animals is destroyed. "We applaud food manufacturers for moving away from trans-fat-laden partially hydrogenated oils, and happily, many companies are switching to such heart-healthy oils as soybean, corn, or canola," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, who co-authored the report along with wildlife ecologist Ellie Brown. "Consumers and food processors should realize, though, that palm oil still promotes heart disease and that producing palm oil has a devastating impact on rainforest and endangered wildlife." One reason some food processors use palm oil is that it is semi-solid at room temperature, making it useful in products such as cookies, crackers, spreads, and bars. Palm oil is also less expensive than soy and other vegetable oils. Some of the products that use palm oil, sometimes in combination with other oils, include Pepperidge Farm Oatmeal Cranberry cookies, Voortman Vanilla Wafers, Nabisco Golden Oreo cookies, Cadbury Finger Dark Cookies, and many products sold at "health food" stores. However, a new generation of more-healthful vegetable oils also shows promise for foods that require a more solid fat. High-oleic canola or sunflower oils are now being used in some products. A new trans-fat-free version of Crisco shortening is made with a blend of liquid soybean oil and fully hydrogenated soybean oil. While partially hydrogenated oils now have a well-deserved bad reputation, CSPI says some companies have tried to paint a healthful halo around palm oil. Labels for various Newman's Own products, for instance, use statements like "contains no trans-fatty acids" and "can be grown organically in tropical regions," which make it sound as if palm oil is beneficial both for human health and the environment. Most palm oil is produced in Malaysia or Indonesia. Production in Indonesia has grown more than 30-fold since the mid-1960s, to the point where almost 12,000 square miles are planted in oil palm. In Malaysia, 11 percent of the total land area (about 62 percent of the country's agricultural land) is devoted to palm oil. Companies sometimes profit from selling logs from the rainforest and then burn the area to make way for oil palms. The associated road-building, soil erosion, air and water pollution, and chemical contamination also have contributed to the loss of wildlife habitat and the displacement of indigenous peoples. "Consumers should understand that a seemingly small decision in this country—what kind of cookie, cracker, or hand lotion to buy—can have major consequences on the other side of the world," said Brown. CSPI’s report highlights five endangered animals: Sumatran tiger: The Sumatran tiger is one of only five remaining tiger subspecies, reduced from eight by recent extinctions. Only 250 of these animals may exist in the wild. Bornean and Sumatran orangutans: These are the only great apes that exist outside of Africa. Both species are in crisis and may well become extinct within ten years. One study found that the orangutan population decreased by 45 percent in the 1990s, and much of their remaining habitat is slated for conversion to oil palm agriculture. Asian elephant: Only about 2,900 elephants are estimated to remain in all of Sumatra, 800 in peninsular Malaysia, and 1,000 in Borneo. The home range of one family of elephants is about 25 to 65 square miles, so a breeding subpopulation of 20 elephant families would need to roam over about 500 to 1,300 square miles. Other Asian elephants survive in other countries. Sumatran rhinoceros: The two biggest threats to the Sumatran rhino are illegal hunting and habitat loss. Road building shrinks the animals’ travel corridors and makes them more accessible to poachers. Their total population is estimated at fewer than 400. CSPI, Environmental Defense, the International Primate Protection League, Rainforest Relief, WALHI/Friends of the Earth Indonesia, and a dozen other organizations from around the world are urging the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and other international aid agencies not to fund oil-palm development projects. In addition, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/hhsletter.pdf">14 scientists today called on</a> the Department of Health and Human Services to encourage food processors to move away from partially hydrogenated oils and palm oil and toward more healthful oils. 2005-06-02 CSPI Announces Food-Safety Conference at the WHO http://cspinet.org/new/200505241.html Officials & Advocates from Around the World Meeting in Geneva Next MonthFood-safety advocates and experts from around the world will convene next month at the World Health Organization (WHO) headquarters in Geneva, Switzerland. The conference, Crafting a Public Health Agenda for Modern Food Safety Systems, is organized by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and will mark the first formal discussion among consumer organizations about developing and advocating for food safety standards that will reduce deaths and illnesses and help prevent food emergencies. The conference will feature keynote addresses by Dr. Stuart Slorach, chairman of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, Mr. Geoffrey Podger, the chairman of the European Food Safety Authority, and Dr. Maria Neira, head of the Spanish Food Safety Organization. Participants are coming from Uganda, China, New Zealand, India, Cameroon, Poland, Brazil, Peru, Uruguay, and elsewhere for the landmark meeting. "In a global economy, the food for a single meal may come from several continents and travel half way around the world," said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "No country, not even the United States, can inspect every food shipment at every port of entry to monitor food safety. The effort to improve food safety must be both local and global. A successful campaign to make food safer in South America or Africa will also mean safer food for U.S. and European consumers." CSPI, the nonprofit food-safety and nutrition watchdog group with offices in Washington, D.C. and Ottawa, created Safe Food International to empower consumer organizations in each region of the world to advocate for strong and sensible food-safety policies in their home countries and to develop an international network for future communication and advocacy. Draft food-safety-promotion guidelines can be viewed at www.safefoodinternational.org/reports.html. Cosponsored by the WHO, the Food and Agriculture Organization, the Nuclear Threat Initiative, and the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations, the meeting runs from June 8 to 10. 2005-05-24 Connecticut House Passes Bill Ousting Junk Foods from Schools http://cspinet.org/new/200505191.html Measure Must Return to Senate for Final Passage, Then to Gov.Legislation prohibiting the sale of sugary sodas, candy bars, and other junk foods in schools passed the Connecticut House of Representatives last night and is headed back to the state Senate, where it has passed once before in slightly different form. According to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest, <a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/2005/amd/s/2005SB-01309-R00HA-AMD.htm">the bill</a>, which would now allow only juice, milk, water, and healthy snacks in K through 8 vending machines, would make Connecticut’s school foods the healthiest in the country. A successful amendment to the bill would allow diet sodas and Gatorade-type sports drinks in high schools, but only after the lunch hour. "Schools should be offering the best of everything, not the worst," said CSPI nutrition policy director Margo G. Wootan. "The explosion in childhood obesity and diabetes has many contributing factors, and one of them is the availability of high-calorie soft drinks and candy bars in schools. It’s about time a state legislature stood up to greedy soda companies and put kids’ health first. We call on Connecticut Governor Jodi Rell to sign the bill after it passes the state Senate again, so that Connecticut parents can have greater confidence that the state’s schools aren’t undercutting their efforts to raise healthy kids." The bill also would ensure that Connecticut students in grades K through 5 receive at least 20 minutes of recess per day, in addition to existing physical education classes. CSPI has been working to improve school foods with legislators and community leaders in several states. In 2003 it issued a <a href="http://cspinet.org/schoolfood/">School Foods Tool Kit</a> to help parents and school administrators make changes. That kit includes case studies of how some schools have raised as much revenue—and sometimes more—by selling more healthful options than the soda, chips, candy, and other junk foods that many schools sell to kids. CSPI’s model guidelines would not allow the Gatorade-type sports drinks in schools, since they have almost as much sugar as sodas. And although those drinks and diet sodas can displace more healthful drinks, the Connecticut bill sets the toughest school nutrition standards in the country. 2005-05-19 HeLP America Act an Important Step Toward Curbing Obesity, Reducing Disease http://cspinet.org/new/200505181.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanSenator Harkin's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/sb2558.pdf">HeLP America Act</a> offers bold initiatives aimed at improving the health of all Americans by preventing disease and promoting wellness. Senator Harkin is to be congratulated for calling attention to the fact that America spends enormous sums of money to treat illness and yet spends very little to make sure people do not get sick in the first place. The HeLP America Act includes a number of policies and programs aimed at nutrition, physical activity, and obesity. Over the past two decades, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/obesity.pdf">obesity rates</a> have doubled in adults and children and tripled in teens. Provisions in this legislation to improve school foods, provide nutrition labeling at chain restaurants, curb junk food marketing aimed at children, and fund nutrition and physical activity programs at the Centers for Disease Control are just the kind of actions that government should take to give Americans a fighting chance to eat well, be active, and maintain a healthy weight. While others talk about obesity, Senator Harkin is offering Congress the chance to enact meaningful legislation which would help Americans to make real improvements to their health and quality of life and help to reduce skyrocketing healthcare costs. 2005-05-18 Noted Economists Support Higher Taxes on Alcoholic Beverages http://cspinet.org/new/200505161.html Coalition Cites Budget Deficit, Social Costs of AlcoholSome of America's most distinguished economists today called for what they say are <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter-alcohol.pdf">long-overdue increases in federal excise taxes on alcoholic beverages</a> to help offset the massive economic and social costs of alcohol. In a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/petition-alcohol.pdf">declaration </a>to Congress organized by the Coalition for the Prevention of Alcohol Problems (<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze/CPAP/CPAPindex.htm">CPAP</a>), the economists, who include four Nobel laureates, say legislation promoted by the alcohol industry to reduce such taxes would damage public health, increase budget deficits, and threaten the safety of Americans, especially young people. "Through neglect, Congress has allowed effective rates of tax on a substance that does more harm than any illegal drug to fall dramatically, even as the federal budget has sunk far into the red," said Henry Aaron, senior fellow in economic studies at the Brookings Institution. "As our elected officials deliberate on how to deal with our fiscal woes, they would be well advised to increase a tax that would both help close the federal deficit and discourage the continued epidemic of alcohol abuse." Citing government reports on the effects of alcohol taxes, the economists urged lawmakers to avoid adding to the national debt by rejecting industry appeals to lower federal taxes on alcohol, which have only increased once in 54 years for beer and wine and only twice for liquor. "Tens of millions of dollars a year already are spent marketing alcoholic beverages to underage consumers," said George A. Hacker, director of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/booze">Alcohol Policies Project</a> at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest and a CPAP convener. "Lower taxes and lower prices will only further entice young people to drink. Calls for an alcohol tax reduction clearly are designed to line the pockets of the alcohol industry, without regard to the consequences." According to Stacia Murphy, president of the National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence, the total cost of alcohol use by youth alone exceeds $58 billion per year. "As a society, we’ve got to do a far better job of informing our citizens – and our young people, especially – that there is no free ride when it comes to alcohol consumption," Murphy said. "Do we really want to encourage any more drinking by lowering the cost of alcohol?" Signatories to the Economists’ Declaration on Federal Alcohol Excise Taxes include George Akerlof, Daniel Kahneman, Lawrence Klein, and Robert Solow, all winners of the Nobel Prize for Economics, as well as 55 other leading economists. 2005-05-16 USDA Announces More Delay on Mandatory Animal ID Systems http://cspinet.org/new/200505052.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalWhile USDA's announcement of a <a href="http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?contentidonly=true&contentid=2005/05/0149.xml">new proposal on animal identification and traceback systems</a> represents an important food safety improvement, the timeline for implementation is another Bush-adminstration bow to the cattle producers. Delaying until 2009 this essential food and animal health protection means the U.S. is lagging even further behind many of our trading partners on food safety issues. In 1996, when USDA first announced mandatory process control systems in meat plants, the U.S. was a leader on food safety issues. In 2003, Secretary Veneman announced more major reforms, including an animal identification and tracing system, in response to a finding of a single case of mad cow disease in Washington state. A national cattle tracking system is an important new control for both animal and public health protection. But, with today's announcement that the program won't take full effect until 2009, the Bush Administration has cemented it's role as a food safety laggard. The U.S. should adopt a mandatory animal identification system at least as effective as the one in place in Canada. Canadian officials were able to move from a voluntary to a mandatory animal identification and traceback system in a year. Secretary Johanns today proposed that that same effort will take the U.S. nearly four years. Animal ID and traceback systems would enable the U.S. to contain animal disease outbreaks more quickly, sustain consumer confidence in the food supply, and ensure greater access to world markets for our beef products. We urge Secretary Johanns to revise his timeline and make food safety a priority for the Bush Administration. 2005-05-05 Multinational Food Companies Could Face Tougher Ingredient Labeling http://cspinet.org/new/200505051.html Multinational food companies like Nabisco, Kellogg, Unilever, and Nestlé might have to disclose on labels the percentage of key ingredients in their products if tough new labeling standards eventually are adopted by a group of more than 50 countries meeting to debate international trade rules for the food industry. Currently, most countries require that ingredients be listed on food labels in order of predominance. Under proposals favored by some countries and consumer advocacy groups, disclosing the actual percentage of major ingredients would become mandatory. If countries adopted such standards, labels would reveal that: * Kellogg's Frosties cereal contains 39 percent added sugar; * Ritz Bits Cheese Sandwiches contain only 3 percent cheese; * Kellogg's All Bran Apricot Bites contain only 6 percent fruit; * Campbell's Cream of Mushroom Soup contains only 8.5 percent mushrooms; and * Heinz's canned tomatoes consist of 40 percent tomato juice. "Percentage ingredient labeling is a common-sense measure that would help prevent consumer deception and encourage companies to provide more healthful and less unhealthful ingredients in their foods," said Bruce Silverglade, director of legal affairs at the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (<a href="http://www.cspinet.org">CSPI</a>), who also serves as president of the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations (IACFO). "Such a requirement would also help consumers follow World Health Organization recommendations to eat more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and to reduce consumption of added sugars," stated Bill Jeffery, CSPI national coordinator for Canada. The new labeling standards are being considered by a committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission, sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and WHO, which is meeting in Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, May 7-13. Codex standards take many years to develop and are not binding, but often pave the way for mandatory legislation because many nations around the world use them as a model for national laws. Percentage ingredient labeling regulations are already in effect in the European Union, Thailand, Australia, and New Zealand. Multinational food companies closely follow the development of Codex standards because they may lead to new regulatory requirements that are generally immune from challenge as trade barriers at the World Trade Organization. The International Council of Grocery Manufacturers Associations is attempting to stop the spread of percentage ingredient labeling requirements by opposing efforts by Codex to develop a new Codex standard. The U.S. government delegation to the Codex meeting is also opposing expansion of labeling requirements. "We hope that governments will resist pressure from industry, and instead heed the advice of the WHO and develop international standards for food labeling that will enable consumers to improve their diets and reduce their risk of disease," Silverglade said. 2005-05-05 Legislation Would Bar Industry-Connected Scientists From Reviewing Drugs http://cspinet.org/new/200505041.html CSPI Supports Hinchey Effort to Reform FDAScientists with financial ties to drug makers or other medical companies would be prohibited from serving on federal advisory committees charged with reviewing the safety of drugs, if reform legislation offered by Representative Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) becomes law. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (<a href="http://www.cspinet.org">CSPI</a>), which monitors scientists' ties to the drug, food, chemical, and other industries, announced its support for the legislation, which would also separate the drug-safety function of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from the new-drug-approval function. The FDA Improvement Act would also make the agency less reliant on fees from drug companies to fund its work. Research conducted by CSPI's <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/index.html">Integrity in Science Project</a> revealed that 10 of 32 scientists on a February advisory panel looking into the safety of the arthritis pain killers known as Cox-2 inhibitors <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/press/200502251.html">had financial ties</a> to the several manufacturers of those drugs. If the votes of those scientists had been eliminated, the panel would have voted to recommend removing 2 of 3 Cox-2s from the market. In another recent case, one physician <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200504062.html">who was paid</a> to appear in a promotional video for a brand of silicone-gel breast implants sat on a panel charged with reviewing their safety. According to CSPI, the FDA begins virtually every advisory panel reviewing a new product with a statement waiving the prohibition on conflicts of interest for some of the scientists on the panel. Hinchey's bill would prohibit those waivers. "For far too long the Food and Drug Administration has had an overly cozy relationship with the industries it regulates," said Merrill Goozner, director of CSPI’s Integrity in Science project. "It is certainly true that more and more doctors and scientists are accepting funding from, working for, or investing in drug companies. But the notion that there aren’t enough without financial conflicts of interest to serve on federal advisory committees is demonstrably untrue. Legislation such as that offered by Rep. Hinchey is exactly what is needed to restore public confidence in the FDA." 2005-05-04 Food Watchdog Group Announces Litigation Initiative http://cspinet.org/new/200505031.html Whole Foods, Quorn Target of First Suit; Quaker Avoids Lawsuit by Making Label ChangesThe Center for Science in the Public Interest (<a href="http://www.cspinet.org">CSPI</a>), the nonprofit food watchdog group, said today that it intends increasingly to turn to the courts to stop deceptive labeling, fraudulent advertising, and the use of dangerous food additives. CSPI recently hired Stephen Gardner, a former assistant attorney general in New York and Texas, to direct its litigation efforts, which the group says are necessary since the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) have done a poor job enforcing the law in these areas. CSPI filed one case today, joined a potential class action recently, and announced that a planned lawsuit against PepsiCo's Quaker Foods unit was dropped because the company has agreed to labeling changes on several products. CSPI <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/petition-quorn.pdf">filed suit</a> against <a href="http://www.quorn.com">Quorn Foods</a>, the company that makes an allergy-causing fungus-based meat substitute, and natural-foods grocery giant <a href="http://www.wholefoodsmarket.com">Whole Foods Market</a>, Quorn's biggest U.S. retailer. The plaintiff in the Quorn case, Avery Goodman, purchased Quorn Naked Cutlets from Austin-based Whole Foods in September 2004. Shortly after eating the product, Goodman experienced a five-hour-long bout of stomach cramps, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, followed by two days of stomach pain. In response to a complaint from Goodman, Quorn Foods acknowledged that Quorn causes "allergic and adverse reactions" but rebuffed his suggestion that the company place warning labels on its products. Goodman is asking the court to require warning labels on Quorn packages and on Whole Foods' freezer cases. He is seeking a refund of the small amount of money he spent purchasing the Quorn, and is asking that his suit be certified as a class action so others could get refunds as well. Quorn--sold nationally in Great Britain since 1995--was introduced in the U.S. in 2002, positioning itself as a healthful alternative to meat products. Its packaging calls the main ingredient "mycoprotein," which the label describes as being related to mushrooms, morels, and truffles. Mycoprotein is made from a fungus that is more akin to mildew than mushrooms, according to CSPI. Quorn's parent company, Marlow Foods, grows this fungus in giant vats, harvests it, and processes it to resemble chicken or ground beef. The larger problem with Quorn is that it causes allergic reactions in several percent of consumers. Many who eat Quorn foods will develop unsavory gastrointestinal symptoms such as the ones Goodman experienced, or even more serious, potentially life-threatening symptoms characteristic of anaphylactic shock. CSPI has repeatedly called on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to recall and ban Quorn, or at least require warning labels on it, but to no avail. Notwithstanding the reactions Quorn causes, the FDA has accepted the company's contention that the product is "Generally Recognized as Safe," or GRAS. In total, 169 Americans and almost 700 people in Britain and elsewhere have reported adverse reactions to Quorn products after finding a CSPI web site, <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/quorn">QuornComplaints.com</a>. Plaintiff Goodman says that he could have avoided his ordeal if there was a warning label, either on the package or on the freezer case in Whole Foods. "Whole Foods doesn't seem to care about the misery some people suffer after eating Quorn," said Goodman. "Apparently, they knew about the adverse effects before they sold it to me. Yet, they aggressively promoted it without any warning notice whatsoever. Is Whole Foods a reputable store? I'm not sure. I feel betrayed by the makers of Quorn, Whole Foods, and the FDA. They all knew about the danger of this 'health food,' but never bothered to let me know." The suit was filed Travis County District Court, in Whole Foods' hometown of Austin, Texas, under Texas' Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Local attorney Austin Tighe of the law firm of Feazell & Tighe is co-counsel on the case. "This is a case where both Quorn Foods and Whole Foods know that this particular product literally makes people sick, yet they do nothing to warn consumers," said CSPI's Gardner. "The purpose of this lawsuit, and similar suits we intend to file, is to stop that kind of reckless corporate misbehavior." CSPI says that it hopes that its overall litigation initiative will encourage companies on their own to ensure that their products are safe and accurately labeled and advertised. Separately, CSPI recently negotiated some labeling changes with PepsiCo's <a href="http://www.quakeroats.com">Quaker Foods</a> unit, eliminating the need to file a planned lawsuit. The products at issue include Quaker instant oatmeals with names such as <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/betterlabeling.html">"Strawberries & Cream" and "Peaches & Cream."</a> The labels, however, do not make clear that those products have none of the advertised strawberries, peaches, or, for that matter, cream. Similarly, varieties of Quaker instant grits are branded "<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/quakergrits.countrybacon.pdf">Country Bacon</a>," "<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/quakergrits.realbutter.pdf">Real Butter</a>," and "<a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/pdf/quakergrits.hamncheese.pdf">Ham 'n' Cheese</a>," yet those products have no bacon, butter, or ham, and virtually no cheese. Quaker, which was already considering revising its instant oatmeal labels, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/quaker_letter.pdf">agreed to several</a> of CSPI's suggested improvements. The new labels will more clearly state that these products are artificially flavored. "It is our hope that CSPI will be able to work with companies to iron out problems, obviating the need for litigation and expediting benefits to consumers," said Gardner. Also, CSPI has joined in a proposed class action lawsuit against the maker of Arizona Iced Tea. Led by Houston trial attorney Martin J. Siegel, this suit contends that the company is making <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200304291.html">fraudulent claims on the labels of its "Arizona Rx"</a> line of drinks. Those products' labels variously indicate the presence of popular herbal ingredients such as echinacea, gingko biloba, valerian, ginseng, and sometimes vitamins. According to independent laboratory tests, the drinks had barely detectable levels of those ingredients. And according to CSPI, there is little or no evidence if any dose of those herbs and nutrients delivers the enhanced memory, reduced stress, or other health benefits that the company implies its drinks deliver. "The Food and Drug Administration has the authority to correct these kinds of deceptive claims on food labels, but despite our many complaints over many years, the agency has rarely acted," said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. "So long as the FDA keeps napping, we'll be hauling more and more food companies into court to protect consumers from fraud." 2005-05-03 Weight Loss in a Bottle? http://cspinet.org/new/200504281.html More Like Money Loss in a Bottle, According to Nutrition Action Healthletter"Step off the scale and into the CortiSlim lifestyle!" screams the front page of CortiSlim.com. "When everyday stress holds you back from looking and feeling your best, positive change is within your reach when you commit to live the CortiSlim Lifestyle." That "CortiSlim lifestyle," however, bilks consumers for millions by making baseless claims for overpriced pills, according to an <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/may05us.pdf">article in the May issue</a> of Nutrition Action Healthletter, the 900,000-circulaton newsletter published by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Along with a stable full of similarly named competitors, <a href="http://www.cortislim.com">CortiSlim</a> is a dietary supplement that promises to make pounds melt away by suppressing cortisol, a hormone that, among other things, helps keep blood pressure up during traumatizing events. But there's no good evidence to suggest that the ingredients in CortiSlim help lower cortisol levels, or that lowering cortisol levels even helps promote weight loss, according to CSPI. "CortiSlim may not melt away unwanted pounds, but it can very efficiently melt away unwanted dollars," said CSPI senior nutritionist David Schardt. Taking CortiSlim as directed can cost up to $5 a day. Another weight-control claim CSPI examines is that of <a href="http://www.enovaoil.com">Enova</a>, a new cooking oil produced by Archer Daniels Midland. The company maintains that more of this blend of modified canola and soybean oils is burned as energy and less is stored as fat. According to CSPI, Enova doesn't boost metabolism, so if the body doesn't store it in fat cells, it's going to store something else there instead. "At two or three times the price of regular vegetable oils like olive or canola, Enova is not the answer to the obesity epidemic," says Schardt. CSPI also examines supplements containing conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), which over the years has been variously touted as a cancer fighter, a weight-loss promoter, and a fat burner. One new Norwegian study found that one brand of CLA, <a href="http://www.tonalin.com/tonalin/main.html">Tonalin CLA</a>, might indeed help people lose a few pounds over one year, at least for a few months. The same study, though, shows worrying changes in blood chemistry that could signal increased risk of heart disease and stroke. CSPI's advice? Until researchers show that CLA works and is safe, don't try it. Published ten times a year, Nutrition Action Healthletter is famous for its exposés of the nutritional content of restaurant meals, and other foods. Introductory subscriptions cost $10 and can be ordered online at http://www.cspinet.org. 2005-04-28 New "My Pyramid" is Missed Opportunity, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200504191.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanThe <a href="http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/">Dietary Guidelines</a> unveiled in January were the strongest ever, but the <a href="http://mypyramid.gov">new pyramid</a> doesn't clearly communicate that advice to the public. By making "one size doesn't fit all" the mantra, and by replacing one pyramid with 12, the government has made this advice more complicated than it needs to be. There are simple key principles about healthy eating that truly do work for all Americans, and those could have been represented on one symbol. Such a symbol would have made it immediately clear that we should be eating more fruits and vegetables; low-fat and fat-free dairy products as opposed to cheese and 2% milk; chicken and lean meats as opposed to hamburgers; whole grains as opposed to refined grains; and for everyone, less soda and less salt. But because one needs to go to a web site to get any of that detail, this new symbol is a missed opportunity. USDA seems to have bent over backward to avoid upsetting any particular commodity group or food company by not showing any foods that Americans should eat less of. The government should be using the dietary guidelines as a blueprint for national action and the basis for sound nutrition policies. How can parents effectively guide their kids' food choices when so much <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200405111.html">soda and junk food</a> is for sale in America's schools, and with so many <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200311101.html">billions of dollars in junk food advertising</a> aimed squarely at kids? How can people balance calories in with energy out without <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200311051.html">calorie counts</a> on fast-food menu boards? Whatever the content of the pyramid, the government does very little to help Americans eat accordingly. If the government does with this pyramid what it did with the last one, which is to say very little, then we can expect a similar result: Americans will become fatter and will remain just as vulnerable to heart disease, cancer, and diabetes. 2005-04-19 Court Decision Reverses Ban on Dangerous Ephedra http://cspinet.org/new/200504152.html Statement of CSPI Legal Affairs DirectorThis <a href="http://www.utd.uscourts.gov/documents/204cv409-28.pdf">decision</a> leaves no doubt that the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) prevents the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from taking unsafe products off the market. Congress should swiftly amend DSHEA to clarify and strengthen the FDA's authority to protect the public from dangerous products and mandate that the National Academy of Sciences conduct a comprehensive safety and efficacy review of dietary supplements. The Federal District Court decision striking down FDA's ban on ephedra states that when the government cannot determine a safe level of a supplement, it must continue to permit the product's sale, even when the product has no health benefits. The Court's decision places the FDA, and consumers, in an untenable position. Ephedra killed 155 Americans and injured thousands of others, more than that of any other supplement on the market. We urge the FDA to appeal this decision, but the real solution is for Congress to amend the law and empower the FDA to protect the public from dangerous products. 2005-04-15 Bush Administration Fails to Support Update of Code of Ethics for International Trade in Foods http://cspinet.org/new/200504151.html WHO Recommended Nutrition, Food-Safety UpdatesConsumer groups are chiding the Bush Administration for failing to support efforts by the World Health Organization (WHO) to update a 20-year-old <a href="www.codexalimentarius.net/ download/standards/1/CXP_020e.pdf">Code of Ethics for International Trade in Foods</a>. According to the International Association of Consumer Food Organizations (IACFO), that Code needs to be updated to include guidance on marketing junk food to kids and related nutrition issues. This week in Paris revisions to the Code were being considered by a committee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) sponsored by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization. The WHO called on the committee to revise the Code to address marketing practices that affect nutrition and diet-related disease. The U.S. failed, though, to support the WHO recommendation. "This 20-year-old Code of ethics needs to reflect current concerns about nutrition and diet-related disease, particularly the growing epidemic of childhood obesity worldwide," said Bruce Silverglade, director of legal affairs for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, who attended the meeting on behalf of IACFO. "The Bush Administration talks a lot about the obesity crisis, but fails to speak up when it counts," he said. The U.S.-based Food Products Association opposed revising the Code. The Code sets baseline standards that countries can apply to the marketing of food products. While not mandatory, most countries follow regulatory policies that are consistent with the Code. While European countries attending the Codex meeting generally supported revising the Code, some Latin American countries opposed such efforts, expressing fears that revisions could create new trade barriers. The U.S. government remained silent on the point. The Codex Secretariat stated it would be "awkward" to proceed in the absence of greater enthusiasm, and despite support from the chair of the Codex committee, the matter was dropped. 2005-04-15 Happy Anniversary, McDonald's! http://cspinet.org/new/200504141.html Here's Hoping Your Next 50 Years Will Be Better than Your FirstStatement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson McDonald's has had an enormous impact on our diets, on agriculture, and the economy. To be fair, McDonald's has done better than some of its competitors when it comes to food safety, animal welfare, and the environment. Burger King, for one, should probably be grateful that McDonald's gets the lion's share of scrutiny and criticism in some of those areas, and in terms of nutrition. But fifty years of McDonald's burgers and fries have coarsened our palates, expanded our waistlines, and clogged our arteries. Thanks to McDonald's one can eat cheaply, though there are much better ways of eating even more inexpensively. But McDonald's deserves a lot of the blame for having transformed the way America eats. We now eat quicker, and in what would have seemed like bizarre or impolite ways many years ago. (In our cars, for instance). What was once an occasional treat or convenience has morphed into a once-, twice-, or thrice-a-day indulgence. Billions of dollars of advertising make this all seem normal. No one should think that McDonald's genius was in satisfying a demand for meals of burgers, fries, and Cokes. Its genius was creating that demand in the first place. I'm glad that McDonald's now offers some better salads, and is experimenting with putting some fruit on its menu here and there. But for every new healthy menu item, they seem to add at least one unhealthy menu item, like the McGriddle. McDonald's first fifty years was marked by billions and billions of consumers around the world fed billions of servings of fatty meat, fatty cheese, partially hydrogenated oils, high-fructose corn syrup, and way too much salt. All in all, this has been a recipe for obesity, heart disease, diabetes, and other expensive and debilitating diet-related health conditions. So happy anniversary, McDonald's. Here's hoping that your next fifty years is fifty times healthier than your first. 2005-04-14 Bud Light Accused of Trivializing Alcoholism in New Ad http://cspinet.org/new/200504071.html Watchdog Groups Say Beer Ad Depicts Lying About DrinkingWASHINGTON—-A new ad for Bud Light beer depicts men joking about lies they've told to cover up their daytime drinking, and two watchdog groups say the Federal Trade Commission should crack down and ask Anheuser-Busch to pull the ad. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/cspi_ncadd_bud_light_complaint_letter.pdf">letter to FTC</a> enforcement official Janet Evans, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the <a href="http://www.ncadd.org/">National Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependence (NCADD)</a> say the ad irresponsibly makes light of alcoholic behavior. The ad in question features a group of men drinking at a bar. The bartender asks the men how they are able to leave work early every day to drink. The men each then recount various lies or excuses they use to prioritize drinking over their job responsibilities—the kind of lies that real-life alcoholics might use to disguise their covert drinking, according to the groups. "Anheuser-Busch no doubt thinks this ad is funny, but there is nothing funny about promoting the destructive and addictive behavior that is recklessly presented in this ad," said George A. Hacker, director of CSPI's Alcohol Policies Project. "Anheuser-Busch is signaling to heavy drinkers and alcoholics that it is perfectly okay to lie to coworkers, or ask them to lie for you, to conceal work-time drinking. This is a new low even for Anheuser-Busch, a company that has not been shy about exploring the depths of corporate irresponsibility." Late last year, <a href="http://cspinet.org/booze/2005/pdf/FTC_letter.pdf">CSPI complained</a> to the FTC that a previous Bud Light ad violated the beer industry’s own voluntary guidelines for responsible advertising. That ad showed referees stealing beer and running away from police. While it was done in a jocular manner, CSPI said it clearly violated the letter of the industry's guidelines, which prohibit ads that depict illegal behavior of any kind. That ad prompted the FTC to express concern about the industry’s process for dealing with complaints and ensuring companies' compliance with the code. CSPI and NCADD say this latest ad certainly violates the spirit of the code, which states that beer should be portrayed in a "responsible manner." While the guidelines are silent on the propriety of depicting alcoholic behavior in advertising, the code does have a prohibition on approving product-placement campaigns that depict alcoholism or alcohol abuse. "Anheuser-Busch's 'It's All Here' ad clearly demonstrates the total inadequacy of the Beer Institute’s voluntary advertising standards and enforcement and represents a continued gross lack of respect even for industry’s weak standards," the groups' letter states. CSPI and NCADD say that the fact that the beer industry's advertising code does not expressly prohibit such an ad shows how flawed that code is. "One wonders how Anheuser-Busch would feel if its workers decided to follow the example provided by its own advertising, and left work early each day under false pretenses to hang out at a bar," said Stacia Murphy, NCADD president. According to NCADD, alcohol problems cost American businesses an estimated $134 billion in lost productivity. 2005-04-07 Single Food Agency Needed, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200504061.html Durbin and DeLauro Introduce Safe Food Act of 2005WASHINGTON--Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) today introduced the Safe Food Act of 2005, a bill that would help protect consumers from food-borne illness by consolidating the current fragmented and overlapping food-safety system, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The bill would establish a comprehensive program to protect public health while also bolstering consumer confidence in the safety of the food supply. "Our federal food-safety system is nearly 100 years old," said CSPI food safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "It was never designed to manage modern hazards like E. coli O157:H7 or new concerns like mad cow disease, genetically modified foods, or bioterrorism." The Safe Food Act of 2005 would consolidate the activities of various federal agencies—including the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Veterinary Medicine, and the Commerce Department's National Marine Fisheries Service—each responsible for just a portion of the nation's food supply. "The U.S., with its 'horse and buggy' food laws, is falling behind many other nations when it comes to food safety." said DeWaal. "The Safe Food Act represents a modern science-based approach to food regulation." 2005-04-06 CSPI Reacts to FDA "Calories Count" Initiative http://cspinet.org/new/200504012.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe labeling changes on which the FDA is soliciting comment would be small but welcome measures. If implemented, they would help those consumers who read labels see how many calories they're taking in. But obesity is not a small problem and those small steps won't make much of a dent. They need to become part of a much more comprehensive strategy anchored by a number of big steps. For instance, the government properly expends some effort developing sensible dietary guidelines for Americans, but aside from printing up a small number of brochures and having a press conference or two, the government does virtually nothing to educate Americans about those guidelines. Why not a penny-per-can tax on soda? That could raise more than $1 billion annually that the government could spend to encourage consumption of fresh fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and other foods the guidelines say Americans should eat more of. Let's get junk food out of our schools, and require calories to be listed on fast-food menu boards. Let's fund a major media campaign to encourage kids to get away from the TV and instead take up physical activity--unfortunately the latest Bush budget just zeroed out such a campaign. Improving Nutrition Facts labels may help a little, but so much more needs to be done. 2005-04-01 Coaches, CSPI Urge NCAA to End Beer Ads on College Sports http://cspinet.org/new/200504011.html NCAA to Review Alcohol Policies on April 28, But CSPI Questions Propriety of Anheuser-Busch TiesWhen it reviews its alcohol policies later this month the NCAA should vote to end beer ads on televised college sports programming, according to the <a href="http://cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>—a coalition of health advocacy groups and coaches organized by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The campaign is <a href=" http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ncaa_presidents_letter.pdf">calling on the 18 college presidents</a> that make up the NCAA’s Division I board of directors not to let the close financial ties between the NCAA and mega-brewer Anheuser-Busch influence their decisions. CSPI says that an example of those ties is an <a href="http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/governance/division_I/board_of_directors/2005/January/11_Ad_Policies.htm">internal briefing paper</a> recently prepared by NCAA staff which pointedly reminded the 18 college presidents of Anheuser-Busch’s financial generosity to the NCAA. “We call on the college presidents who govern the NCAA to personally take control of the alcohol-policy review from the NCAA staff,” said George A. Hacker, director of CSPI’s <a href="http://cspinet.org/booze/">Alcohol Policies Project</a>. “College presidents should recognize that Anheuser-Busch is motivated not by philanthropy, but by a desire to sell beer to college sports fans, and to have a seat at the table when decisions like these are being made.” Anheuser-Busch paid the NCAA $2 million in 1990—less than a year after the NCAA rejected a proposed ban on beer ads in favor of a policy that allows beer ads to the exclusion of ads for other alcoholic beverages. That money and subsequent payments fund the NCAA’s alcohol-education programs. In 1996, the NCAA installed a former Anheuser-Busch marketing executive, Ronald J. Stratten, to administer them. In 2004, Stratten helped publicize an Anheuser-Busch-funded survey designed to downplay the problem of alcohol-fueled fan misbehavior at college sports events. That survey maintained that findings such as “93 percent of students do not throw beverages,” at games and “92 percent of students do not fight with other fans,” were evidence of safe celebratory behavior at college sports events, in contrast to “widespread myths” to the contrary. “Regrettably, Mr. Stratten’s track record at the NCAA suggests that he’s more interested in playing defense for brewers, than going on offense against underage or excessive drinking,” says Hacker. “The Division I board of directors can produce a credible review of NCAA alcohol policy only if Mr. Stratten or any other former beer-industry employee is not staffing or participating in any way.” Donations from Anheuser-Busch to the NCAA are dwarfed by the millions of dollars they and other brewers spend on ads on college sports. Much of that revenue is kept by broadcasters, but some is eventually divided among the coffers of the NCAA, dozens of athletic conferences, and hundreds of individual colleges. In 2003, the industry spent more than $52 million to place 4,747 ads on college sports, including $21.1 million for 395 ads on the NCAA men’s basketball tournament alone. In 2002, there were more beer ads on the NCAA men’s basketball tournament than there were on the Super Bowl, all college football bowl games, the World Series, and the NFL Monday Night Football series combined. Many coaches, college presidents, and athletic directors increasingly see advertising beer on college sports as inconsistent with their efforts to reduce underage and binge drinking on their campuses. 227 colleges and universities have signed the campaign’s <a href="http://cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/collcomm.htm">College Commitment</a>—a pledge to prohibit alcohol advertising on locally produced college sports telecasts and to work within their athletic conferences and the NCAA to end all alcohol advertising on college sports. That effort also has the backing of former <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/dean_smith_statement.pdf">North Carolina basketball coaching legend Dean Smith</a> and U.S. Representative Tom Osborne (R-NE), the former University of Nebraska head football coach. Other current and former coaches support ending alcohol advertising on college sports, including Jim Calhoun, Joe Paterno, and John Wooden. “The NCAA says that its advertising should be ‘in the best interests of higher education,’” said Jay Hedlund, manager of the <a href="http://cspinet.org/booze/CAFST/">Campaign for Alcohol-Free Sports TV</a>. “It is inconceivable that college presidents could believe that hawking beer to students and other young people is in the best interests of students, higher education, or the NCAA.” Each year, 500,000 students suffer alcohol-related injuries, including 70,000 students who are victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape. 1,400 college students die each year in alcohol-related deaths. “Coaches know first hand that alcohol and college sports do not belong together,” said <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/dean_smith_statement.pdf">Dean Smith</a>. “We have made progress, but really need the Division I schools, which appear on television more often, to take a stand.” The Division I board of directors is scheduled to conduct its alcohol-policy review when it meets in Indianapolis on April 28. 2005-04-01 Animal ID System Needed to Thwart Mad Cow, Says Report http://cspinet.org/new/200503211.html CSPI Says Profits, Not Public Health, Drives Effort to Keep Canadian Border ClosedDespite the discovery of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), or mad cow disease, in four older Canadian cattle, including one discovered in Washington state, there is no public health basis for preventing young Canadian animals from entering the United States, according to a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/bse_final_report.pdf">new report</a> from the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). The report says that since Canada has an effective mandatory cattle identification system, it would be much easier to track a Canadian cow from the slaughterhouse back to its farm of origin than it would be to track an American animal. That safeguard is essential, says CSPI, if public health authorities are to prevent cattle contaminated with BSE, E. Coli, or other hazards from entering the food or animal feed supply. "Instead of trying to keep out competition from Canada, the American cattle industry should support a mandatory national animal identification and tracking system in this country," said CSPI food-safety director Caroline Smith DeWaal. "Shipping beef overseas would be easier, plus American consumers would have greater confidence that meat from any future mad cow doesn’t end up in supermarkets and restaurants. The animal ID system also would be enormously helpful in pinning down causes of food-borne illnesses caused by bacteria, which routinely kill thousands of people annually." CSPI’s report comes two weeks after a federal judge issued a temporary order blocking the reopening of the border to Canadian cattle. The ban on importing Canadian animals was scheduled to end on March 8, but a group of American cattle producers sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), citing concerns about food safety. And, on March 3, the United States Senate passed a resolution calling for keeping the border closed. However, a recent USDA audit indicates that the three BSE-positive animals were all more than six years old and probably consumed feed produced before the ban on animal protein in ruminant feed went into full effect. And the Japanese government has indicated that Congressional action barring imports of Canadian cattle could actually further delay the resumption of U.S. exports to Japan. "American ranchers’ alleged health concern about young Canadian cows exposing American consumers to BSE is all sizzle and no steak—-it has nothing to do with human health and everything to do with protecting their profits," DeWaal said. Major industry players are divided over reopening the Canadian border, with many cattle producers opposed, and import-reliant processors, represented by the American Meat Institute (AMI), in favor. But the report notes that apart from the border issue, many beef stakeholders, notably AMI, the McDonald’s restaurant chain, and some individual ranchers, have voiced support for a mandatory system for cattle identification and tracking. The European Union and many other countries, including Australia (the world’s largest beef exporter), New Zealand, Japan, Brazil, and Argentina already have mandatory ID or traceability systems. CSPI’s report, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/name_that_cow.pdf">Name That Cow</a>, recommends that the U.S. should move quickly to implement a mandatory national system requiring all cattle to bear ear tags or other visible identification indicating the farm of origin and year of birth. The report also recommends that all high-risk cattle parts—including brains and small intestines—should be banned from animal feed and pet food, regardless of the age of the animal. Furthermore, says CSPI, spinal columns and neck bones from cattle of all should not be used in machines that separate meat from bones, and spinal cord should be banned from human food. CSPI also urges that the U.S. finalize, and Canada implement, a ban on downer cattle from entering the food supply. "The question is how much longer USDA will delay implementing mandatory national cattle identification and other common sense reforms," DeWaal said. "That kind of food-dragging is isolating our cattle industry from the rest of the world." 2005-03-21 CSPI Supports Harkin Initiative on Junk-Food Ads Aimed at Kids http://cspinet.org/new/200503161.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonEach day, American kids get exposed to scores of commercial messages, and probably half of those are for food. If advertisers were trying to get kids to try new vegetables, or to eat more fresh fruit, or to switch from white bread to whole-wheat bread, I’d be all for it. But the overwhelming majority of the food ads kids see are for junk foods: Soda. Candy. Cookies. Sugary cereals. Fatty snacks. Fast food. And fast-food companies aren’t pushing salads on kids but burgers, fries, and chicken nuggets fried in partially hydrogenated oil. And make no mistake: Ads for these foods aren’t targeting parents, they’re targeting kids. And its time to pull our kids out of the crosshairs. It’s bad enough that nearly all of the foods that are marketed are junk foods. But the tactics that food companies use are designed to exploit the innocence and naiveté of children. In some cases food marketing is so subtle that even the most media-savvy youngster wouldn’t recognize it as advertising: Product placements in movies. Using cartoon and movie characters to brand fast-food meals. Encouragement to purchase junk food so kids can play a game on the Internet. Some food companies, not content with just having a vending machine in school hallways—though that’s bad enough—also worm their way into the classroom. The cumulative effect is to convince kids that foods that are bad for their health are the rule and not the exception. Messages about healthy eating—even those delivered by parents—are greatly outnumbered, and ultimately crowded out of kids’ minds. The food industry says that parents are in charge of their kids’ diets. But I think parents are sick and tired of being lectured to about their parental responsibilities by an industry that tells kids that it’s normal to eat a bowl of chocolate-chip cookies for breakfast. Or a 20-ounce Coke during the middle of a school day, when parents can’t easily guide their kids’ food choices. The self-regulatory regime the industry ballyhoos for is a joke. The <a href="http://www.caru.org"target="cspi">Children’s Advertising Review Unit</a> plays a role, but it states that part of its mission is “preserving their freedom to direct their messages to young kids.” By “their,” CARU means the advertisers that pay CARU’s bills. Well, I think it’s time for a regulatory regime that is designed to protect kids, not advertisers. CSPI has developed its own set of <a href="http://cspinet.org/marketingguidelines.pdf">guidelines for responsible food marketing to kids</a>, and we encourage companies that are serious about corporate responsibility to adopt them. <a href="http://cspinet.org/marketingguidelines.pdf">Our guidelines</a>, unlike CARU’s, actually take nutrition into account. Right now, there is no food, or rather I should say, no combination of fat, flour, sugar, salt, and additives that CARU wouldn’t allow to be marketed to kids. And our guidelines would have companies end the most manipulative of food marketing tactics, where the industry’s guidelines just nibble at the edges of the problem. We applaud Senator Tom Harkin for his leadership on behalf of parents and their children’s health, and support fully his efforts to shield kids from junk-food marketing and advertising. 2005-03-16 Health Advocates Urge Reform of FDA Advisory Committees http://cspinet.org/new/200503101.html Scientists Shouldn't be Passing Judgment on their Funders' Products, Groups SayHealth advocates today urged the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop placing scientists with direct financial conflicts of interest on its advisory committees, and to limit the number of individuals with any industry ties to no more than half of any committee. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/letter_to_fda.pdf">letter to Acting FDA Commissioner Lester Crawford</a>, the groups said that the agency failed to comply with the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/opacom/laws/fedadvca.htm"target="cspi">Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA)</a> when it assigned scientists with ties to manufacturers of arthritis pain drugs known as Cox-2 inhibitors to serve on a panel charged with evaluating those drugs. Last month, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) <a href="http://cspinet.org/integrity/press/200502251.html">found that of 32 experts serving on the FDA’s Arthritis Drug and Drug Safety Advisory Committee, 10 had received funding from Pfizer, Merck, or Novartis</a>. Pfizer makes Celebrex and Bextra, Merck makes Vioxx, and Novartis is developing a similar drug. At the end of the three-day meeting designed to assess the cardiovascular risk presented by these drugs, the panel voted to keep all of those drugs on the market. But according to The New York Times, the committee would have recommended that Bextra and Vioxx be withdrawn were it not for the votes of scientists with conflicts. “The FDA is the ultimate arbiter of the safety and efficacy of industry products,” states the letter signed by CSPI, the <a href="http://www.womenshealthnetwork.org/"target="cspi">National Women’s Health Network</a>, the <a href="http://www.medicalconsumers.org/"target="cspi">Center for Medical Consumers</a>, the <a href="http://www.cochrane.us/uscccc.htm"target="cspi">U.S. Cochrane Center Consumer Coalition</a>, and eight other health-advocacy groups. “[FDA] relies on its advisory committees for guidance. No one financially connected to the firms whose products are up for consideration should be allowed to vote on what that guidance should be.” CSPI and the groups are not asking the FDA to exclude scientists with any corporate ties from serving on committees, just those currently or recently employed by companies with a direct stake in the committee’s proceedings. The groups urged the FDA to stop granting waivers that allow conflicted scientists to serve. In the case of the Cox-2 review panel, the FDA issued a blanket waiver summarily covering every scientist on the panel. None of those scientists’ financial ties to industry were disclosed prior to or during the meeting. “The FDA has become so reliant on scientists connected with industry that it routinely grants waivers for conflicts of interest, not just in exceptional cases,” said Amy Allina, program director of the National Women’s Health Network. “FDA’s unquestioning acceptance of this degree of industry influence has had a damaging effect on the quality of advice it gets from advisory committees and also has undermined the public’s faith in the advisory process.” The groups are also calling for greater transparency and for greater opportunities for public participation in the federal advisory committee process. They want the FDA to post biographies of proposed committee members online 30 days before committee meetings instead of 72 hours before, and to allow the public 20 days to comment on the proposed roster. The groups say that FDA’s practices lag behind those of the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Academies. “No one would consider a jury’s verdict credible if a number of jurors had taken money from the defendant,” said Merrill Goozner, director of the <a href"http://cspinet.org/integrity/">Integrity in Science project</a> at CSPI. “If the FDA wanted to restore public confidence in its decisions about the safety of food ingredients, drugs, and medical devices, it should reform the advisory committee process. I hope members of the Senate ask Acting Commissioner Crawford about these issues during his confirmation hearings next week.” Other signatories to the letter include the Reproductive Health Technologies Project, Breast Cancer Action, the Annie Appleseed Project, National Consumers League, the National Autism Association, SafeMinds, the National Research Center for Women and Families, and Our Bodies, Ourselves. 2005-03-10 CSPI to NCAA: Time to Revisit Beer Ads http://cspinet.org/new/200503091.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George A. HackerFor too long, efforts to combat underage drinking on campus have been undermined by millions of dollars in beer advertising on college sports--advertising that reaches millions of kids below the legal drinking age. We stand in strong support of Representative Tom Osborne’s effort to encourage the NCAA and its member schools to pledge to end all alcohol advertising during college sports programming. When the NCAA Division 1 Board of Directors meets in April to review its alcohol advertising policy it should note how many of its member colleges have already made such a commitment. Today that number stands at 227--some 22 percent of the NCAA. This effort also has the support of many college coaching greats including John Wooden, Dean Smith, Joe Paterno and Rene Portland, and Jim Calhoun. It is time for the NCAA to look up at the scoreboard and realize that time is running out on alcohol advertising on college sports. 2005-03-09 Conflicts of Interest on COX-2 Panel http://cspinet.org/new/200502251.html Research from CSPI's Integrity in Science ProjectThe Food and Drug Administration on February 16-18, 2005 held an advisory committee meeting to discuss the cardiovascular risk posed by painkillers known as Cox-2 inhibitors, which include Celebrex, Bextra and Vioxx. The former two drugs are manufactured by Pfizer. The latter is manufactured by Merck. Novartis also has a Cox-2 inhibitor in its pipeline. At the end of the hearing, the FDA advisory panel voted to keep all three on the market, though with heightened warnings about the dangers posed by this class of drugs. At the request of the New York Times, the Center for Science in the Public Interest evaluated the 32 scientific experts chosen by the FDA to evaluate these drugs. The CSPI research uncovered affiliations between 10 of the scientists that served on the committee and the three manufacturers of Cox-2 inhibitors. This would appear to be a direct violation of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which prohibits scientists with direct conflicts of interest from serving on panels offering advise to federal regulatory agencies. Another 17 scientists had other ties to drug manufacturers, though not the three with products under consideration at the meeting. According to a New York Times analysis of the votes, the advisory committee would have voted against Bextra and Vioxx staying on the market had scientists with conflicts of interest been excluded from the vote. Here is the CSPI analysis of the FDA Advisory Panel: CSPI found ten (10) physician/researchers with direct ties to Pfizer, Merck or Novartis (including G.D. Searle and Pharmacia, which are now part of Pfizer). They were: Total: 10 Steven Abramson, M.D., Professor and Chairman, Division of Rheumatology, NYU School of Medicine, New York. Has an interest in Merck. (“Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation and Research,” Congressional Hearing Transcripts, 7/20/99) Received speaker's honoraria or consulting fees from <a href=" http://www.freecme.com/gcourse_view.php?course_id=1824">Pfizer</a>, Amgen, Novartis, and Pharmacia. <a href=" http://www.docguide.com/news/content.nsf/news/2A345DDE45B8C851852569AE004B52DC"> Consultant for Searle, and a member of the Speakers Bureau for Pfizer. Received an unrestricted educational grant from Pharmacia. </a> Joan M. Bathon, M.D., Professor of Medicine, Division of Rheumatology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University. Received consultancies and/or honoraria from Centocor, Inc., a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, totaling less than $10,000 per year. (Arthritis Rheum. 2004;50:3432-43.) Received ad hoc consultant fees and support for this research from Immunex. (Arthritis Rheum. 2002 Jun;46(6):1443-50.) Received support for research on etanercept and methotrexate in patients with early rheumatoid arthritis from Immunex, Inc. (N Engl J Med. 2000 Nov 30;343(22):1586-93.) <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/Bathon,%20Joan%20M..pdf">Consultant for: National Advisory Board CTLA4-IG Project, Bristol Myers Squibb, 2000; International Advisory Board, Anti-TNF Project, Centocor, 2000; National Advisory Board, Anti-TNF Project, Knoll Pharmaceuticals, 2000; National Advisory Board, Anti-TNF Project, Immunex and Wyeth, 1998-99; National Advisory Board, Cox-2 Project, Searle, 1998-2000; Consultant, Bradykinin receptor antagonist project, Fournier Pharmaceuticals, 1996; Consultant, Anti-inflammatory initiative, Procter & Gamble.</a> John J. Cush, M.D., Chief of Rheumatology and Clinical Immunology, Presbyterian Hospital, Dallas, TX. Article on concomitant leflunomide therapy in patients with active rheumatoid arthritis despite stable doses of methotrexate listed potential conflicts of interest due to consultancies, honoraria and grants received. (Ann Intern Med. 2002 Nov 5;137(9):726-33.) <a href="http://www.fbhc.org/cme/abt04202/index.cfm">Consultant: Abbott, Amgen, Wyeth, Centocor, Pfizer, Regeneron; Disclosure: Current Investigator: Abbott, Amgen, Biogen Idec, Pfizer. (J Rheumatol. 2005 Feb;32(2):203-7.) ) Received grants from Abbott, Amgen/Weiss, Aventis, Centocor, IDEC/Genentech, Isis Pharmaceuticals. Dr. Cush is a member of The Cadeuceus Group, LLC. </a> Robert H. Dworkin, Ph.D., Professor of Anesthesiology, Neurology, Oncology and Psychiatry, School of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Rochester, NY. Member of the <a href=" http://shingles.mgh.harvard.edu/dworkin.htm"> Steering Committee of the Pfizer Medical and Academic Partnerships in Pain Medicine.</a> Received research support, consulting fees, or speakers bureau honoraria in the past year from <a href=" http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?doc_id=4671&nbr=3405"> Abbott Laboratories, Allergan, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Elan Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly and Co, Endo Pharmaceuticals, King Pharmaceuticals, Johnson and Johnson, NeurogesX, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Pfizer, Purdue Pharma, Quigley Pharma, Reliant Pharmaceuticals, and UCB Pharma.</a> John T. Farrar, M.D., Senior Scholar, University of Pennsylvania, Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Philadelphia. Received research or grant support from <a href=" http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?doc_id=4671&nbr=3405"> Pfizer, Cephalon, Smithkline Beecham, Knoll, and Searle; served as a consultant for Abbott Laboratories, Alza, Endo Pharmaceuticals, UCB Pharma, and Faulding; and served on the speakers bureau of Purdue Frederick.</a> J. Michael Finley, D.O., Associate Professor and Chair of Medicine, Western University College of Osteopathic Medicine. Received funding for the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/Finley,%20J.%20Michael.pdf">Zometa Trial from Novartis Pharmaceuticals in 2000.</a> Allan Gibofsky, M.D., J.D., Professor of Medicine and Public Health, Weill Medical College, Cornell University, New York, NY. Independent advisor to Amgen and Wyeth trial to evaluate the impact of a tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitor in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in the United States (RADIUS study). (2002 Drug Week via NewsRx.com and NewsRx.net , Drug Week, November 29) Clinical trial comparing the efficacy of cyclooxygenase 2-specific inhibitors in treating osteoarthritis supported by Pharmacia (Arthritis Rheum. 2003 Nov;48(11):3102-11.) On the Speaker’s Bureau for <a href="http://www.fbhc.org/cme/abt04202/index.cfm">Abbott, Amgen/Wyeth, Pfizer and TAP Pharmaceuticals. Consultant to Abbott, Amgen/Wyeth and Pfizer. Stockholder: Abbott, Amgen, Bristol Myers-Squibb and Pfizer. Dr. Gibofsky is a member of The Cadeuceus Group, LLC. </a> Charles H. Hennekens, M.D., Visiting Professor of Medicine and Epidemiology and Public Health, School of Medicine, University of Miami, Boca Raton, FL. Coinventor on a patent application filed by Brigham and Women’s Hospital on the use of markers of inflammation in coronary artery disease. (N Engl J Med. 2000; 342:836-43) Consultant for AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb/Sanofi, Novartis, Pfizer, and Reliant. Co-author of Pfizer funded study, “Absence of Interaction Between Atorvastatin or Other Statins and Clopidogrel.” (Arch Int Med. 2004; 164: 2051-7) Serves as a consultant, including Chair or membership on Data and Safety Monitoring Boards, to AstraZeneca, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chattem, Delaco, Glaxo-Smith Kline, McNeil, Novartis, Pfizer, and Reliant. (Circulation. 2003;108(10):1191-5) Steven E. Nissen, M.D., Vice-chairman of Cardiology, and Head of Clinical Cardiology, Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland, OH. Research on lipid-lowering therapy on progression of coronary atherosclerosis through the use of statins Pravachol (pravastatin) and Lipitor (atorvastatin) funded by Pfizer. Research support from AstraZeneca, Merck-Schering Plough, Esperion Therapeutics, Takeda, Pfizer, and Sankyo. (JAMA. 2004;291:1071-80) Richard Platt, M.D., M.Sc., Professor and Chair, Department of Ambulatory Care and Prevention, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. Primary investigator in 9/1/04-8/31/05 project funded by <a href="http://kpco-cru.org/Biosketch/Raebel%20Marsha.pdf">Pfizer</a> on enhanced identification of adverse drug events. Primary investigator in 9/1/04-8/31/05 project funded by <a href="http://kpco-cru.org/Biosketch/Raebel%20Marsha.pdf">TAP Pharmaceuticals</a> on Gout Pharmacoepidemiology. Co-investigator of 01/01/03-12/31/05 study funded by <a href="http://kpco-cru.org/Publications/2004-05_Grants_Updated.pdf">GlaxoSmithKline</a> on Safety and Utilization of Lotronex in the United States. In addition, CSPI found seventeen (17) physician/researchers who received research support or had other financial ties to pharmaceutical firms (but not direct ties to manufacturers of Cox-2 inhibitors). In three cases, the ties were to Merck or Pfizer but were deemed too old to be relevant. They were: Total: 16 Ralph B. D’Agostino, Ph.D., Professor of Mathematics/Statistics and Public Health, Boston University, MA. On the scientific advisory board of <a href="http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1314755/000104746905001308/a2150064zf-1.htm">Gentium S.p.A.</a> On scientific advisory board of Penwest. (“Penwest Appoints Pharmaceutical Industry Leaders Dr. William M. Wardell And Dr. Ralph B. D'Agostino to Scientific Advisory Board,” PR NewsWire, 6/8/01) Has interests in pharmaceutical companies which necessitate his being granted a full waiver in order to participate in a Food and Drug Administration Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Committee meeting regarding OTC Vaginal Antifungal Class Labeling. (“Nonprescription Drugs Advisory Subcommittee with Industry Representation from the Reproductive Health Drugs and Anti-Infective Drugs Advisory Committee,” Congressional Hearing Transcripts, 9/11/98) Michael R. Cohen, R.Ph., M.S., D. Sc., President, Institute for Safe Medication Practices, Huntington Valley, PA. Consultant and advisory board member for <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/cohen,%20michael.pdf">Merck</a>(1988-1992). Stephanie Y. Crawford, Ph.D., M.P.H., Associate Professor, College of Pharmacy, University of Illinois, Chicago. Research on cost effectiveness of HMG-CoA reductase inihibitors in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia sponsored by <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/Crawford,%20Stephanie%20Y.pdf">Sandoz Pharmaceuticals</a> (1995-1997). Ruth S. Day, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Psychology, Duke University, Durham, NC. Research on optimizing patient comprehension through medicine information leaflets sponsored by <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/day,ruth%20s..pdf">U.S. Pharmacopeia, Inc.</a>, (1998). Consultant on gastric distress syndrome and migraine management for <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/day,ruth%20s..pdf">Glaxo</a>, and on auto injectors for drug delivery to <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/day,ruth%20s..pdf">Dey, Inc.</a> Janet Elashoff, Ph.D., Director, Division of Biostatistics, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA. Has interests in pharmaceutical companies which necessitate her being granted a general matters waiver in order to participate in a <a href=" http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/transcripts/3919T2.htm"> Food and Drug Administration Anti-Infective Drugs Advisory Committee</a> meeting regarding the ranking of antimicrobial drugs according to their importance in human medicine. Thomas Fleming, Ph.D., Professor and Chairman, Department of Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle. 17 <a href="http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/02/transcripts/3848T1.htm">Receives between $10,000 and $50,001 in consulting fees from GlaxoSmithKline and receives less than $10,001 per year from each of four of its competitors.</a> Fleming received a consulting fee for a limited consultation with Boehringer-Ingelheim. (Circulation. 2004;109:e9004-5) Served on oncology Clinical Advisory Board for Sunesis. (“Sunesis Begins Phase I Clinical Study of SNS-595 for Cancer; Prestigious Oncology Clinical Advisory Board Established,” PR Newswire, 6/28/04) Speaker on IntraBiotics’ live web cast featuring a panel of experts to discuss iseganan for the treatment of oral mucositis. (“IntraBiotics to Host a Conference Call and Web Cast with a Panel of Experts,” PR NewsWire, 3/18/02) Curt D. Furberg, M.D., Ph.D., In 2002 to 2003, his services were retained by plaintiffs’ attorneys as expert in cases related to cerivastatin and rhabdomyolysis or myopathy. In that capacity, he was compensated for reviewing this issue and providing expert opinions for use in litigation. Plaintiffs’ attorneys reviewed and commented on written expert reports resulting from this work. These expert reports were disclosed to the defendants in the cases, including Bayer Corporation, and the author has been questioned in deposition regarding the reports. (JAMA. 2004 Dec 1;292(21):2622-31. Epub 2004 Nov 22) Wake Forest University. A “member of a paid panel asked by Wyeth-Ayerst to ensure the validity of the firm’s research” re diet drug Redux (USA Today, 4/1/98, p. 1A) Co-author of a study of a Sandias calcium channel blocker, DynaCirc. (Lingua Franca, June/July, 1997; p. 56) Chair (1992-present), <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/furberg,curt%20daniel.pdf">Investigators Committee of the Heart, Estrogen-Progestin Replacement Study, Wyeth; Co-chair (1992-1999), Steering Committee of Prospective Randomized Evaluation of the Vascular Effects of Norvasc Trials, Pfizer; Chair (1992-present), Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project, Bristol Myers Squibb</a>. Jacqueline S. Gardner, Ph.D., M.P.H., Associate Professor, Department of Pharmacy, University of Washington, Seattle, WA. Received support from Glaxo for a comparative study of prescription and medical service utilization patterns among pediatric asthmatics in Medicaid and HMO’s (1993-1994); <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/gardner,jacqueline%20s..pdf">research supported by Solvay Pharmaceuticals and The Upjohn Company</a>. Peter A. Gross, M.D., Chairman, Department of Internal Medicine, Hackensack, NJ. <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/gross,peter%20a..pdf">Received grants from Wyeth (1994-1995, 2000), Abbott (1995)</a>. Gary Stuart Hoffman, M.D., Chairman, Rheumatic and Immunologic Diseases, The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, OH. Studies evaluating anti-tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) therapies in Wegener's granulomatosis and giant cell arteritis, were partially funded by Centocor, Immunex, and Amgen. (Arthritis Rheum. 2004 Jul;50(7):2296-304.) Norman T. Ilowite, M.D., Director, Division of Rheumatology, Schneider Children’s Hospital, New Hyde Park, NY. <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/Ilowite,%20Norman.pdf">Industry sponsored on-going research:</a> A 12 week randomized double blind trial with a 12 week open label extension to investigate the efficacy and safety of novel agent administered once daily and naproxen oral suspension administered twice daily in children with juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (2001-2003); Safety population pharmacokinetics of a novel agent in the treatment of JRA (1997-2003); Randomized multi center, blinded, placebo-controlled study with an open label run in period to evaluate the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of a novel agent in particular course JRA (2000-02); Companion study to evaluate the long term safety of a novel agent in polyarticular course JRA (200-02); Phase IV registry of a novel agent in JRA(2000-05); Phase III, double-blind, randomized study comparing methotrexate plus novel agent vs. methotrexate alone in polyarticular course JRA (2000-02). <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/Ilowite,%20Norman.pdf">Completed industry sponsored research:</a> Pharmokinetics, safety and efficacy of TNFR:Fc in the treatment of methotrexate resistant polyarticular JRA (1996-1999); Open, oral dose study to evaluate the steady state plasma concentration profile of a novel agent, followed by a 12 week, double-blind, active comparator-controlled extension in late and post-pubertal adolescents with JRA (1999-2001); Open label study of a NSAID in patients with JRA (1999-2000). Susan M. Manzi, M.D., M.P.H., Associate Professor of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh. An open label, multi-center study (1997-2001) to evaluate the long term safety and reliability of GL701 in patients with systemic Lupus erythomatosus <a href="http://www.fda.gov/cder/audiences/acspage/CVs/manzi,%20susan%20m..pdf">sponsored by Genelabs Technologies, Inc. Received grants from LaJolla Pharmaceuticals (2000-2001). Biogen, Inc. (1998-2000), Dupont (1998), Merck (1998) </a>. Louis A. Morris, Ph.D., President, Louis A. Morris & Associates, Dix Hills, NY. He has Served as an expert consultant to <a href="http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/workshops/disclosures/biographies.pdf">numerous pharmaceutical and communication companies</a>. Emil Paganini, M.D., F.A.C.P., F.R.C.P., Section Head, Dialysis, Cleveland, OH. Co-inventor of 05/13/03 US Patent 6,561,997 “Extracorporeal fluid circuit and related methods” assigned to The Regents of the University of Michigan and Nephros Therapeutics. Steven L. Shafer, M.D., Professor of Anesthesia, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA. Vice President of Product Development at the Pharsight Corporation. <a href="http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1040853/000091205701524887/a2054410zdefr14a.htm">Owns 1.3 percent of the company’s stocks</a>. Study partially funded by AstraZeneca on “Propofol Dosing Regimens for ICU Sedation based upon an Integrated Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Model.” (Anesthesiology. 2001;95:324-33) Robyn S. Shapiro, J.D., Ursula Von der Ruhr Professor of Bioethics, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee. Speaker at a Medical Education Symposium Sponsored by PointOne Systems. (“National Leaders Will Share Expertise in Genetics and Application of Genetic Knowledge in Clinical Practice at Daylong Event, 'Clinical Application of Genomic Discovery,'” PR NewsWires, 3/4/03) Served on <a href="http://www.mcw.edu/bioethics/robyncv.html">Glaxo/Wellcome Data and Safety Monitoring Board. Speaker at 5/12/99 Ethics Conference sponsored by SSM Ministry Corporation, "Ethical Issues in Health Care: End-of-Life Issues</a>." Alastair Wood, M.D., Assistant Vice Chancellor, Professor of Medicine and Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN. Co-inventor of 12/11/01 U.S. patent 6,329,153 “Method for evaluating immunosuppressive” assigned to Vanderbilt University. Served on Board of Directors of Antigenics. (“Antigenics Reports Third Quarter 2004 Financial Results and Recent Highlights.” Business Wire. 10/19/04) 2005-02-25 'Forgotten Killer' Salt Kills 150,000 a Year, Says CSPI Report http://cspinet.org/new/200502242.html CSPI Sues FDA to Force End to 20-Year Delay in Regulating SaltToo much salt in the diet is boosting Americans’ blood pressure and is prematurely killing roughly 150,000 people each year, according to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/salt_report_with_cover.pdf">a new report</a> issued today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Despite the pleas of health experts to cut back, salt consumption has drifted upward over the past 30 years to the point where Americans are now consuming about 4,000 milligrams of sodium per day—about twice the recommended amount. CSPI is <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/salt_lawsuit.pdf">filing a lawsuit</a> against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in federal court to compel the agency to classify salt as a food additive. Presently, FDA classifies salt as GRAS, or Generally Recognized as Safe, which means that it is not closely regulated. CSPI is also urgently recommending that consumers choose lower-sodium foods, and is proposing that the FDA phase in reasonable limits on the salt content of foods that provide the most salt to the diet. “Americans spend more than $15 billion each year on drugs to treat hypertension, yet the government spends almost nothing to reduce salt consumption,” said CSPI executive director <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/final_mj_salt_statement.pdf">Michael F. Jacobson</a>. “And taking its cue from indifferent regulatory agencies, the food industry has done little to lower sodium levels in processed and restaurant foods.” The <a href="http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/"target="cspi">2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans</a> recommends that young adults consume less than 2,300 mg of sodium per day. People with hypertension, African Americans, and middle-aged and elderly people—almost half the population—are advised to consume no more than 1,500 mg per day. Nevertheless, sodium intake has increased steadily since the 1970s. “The medical community has reached a consensus that diets high in sodium are a major cause of high blood pressure as well as pre-hypertension, or blood pressure just short of high blood pressure,” said <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/havas_statement.pdf">Dr. Stephen Havas</a> of the University of Maryland School of Medicine and a leading sodium expert. Havas also represents the American Public Health Association on the National Institutes of Health’s advisory committee on the prevention and control of hypertension. “High blood pressure and pre-hypertension significantly increase the risk of having a heart attack or stroke. Today roughly 65 million Americans have high blood pressure and another 45 million have pre-hypertension. Unfortunately, a lifetime of eating too much salt is putting Americans’ lives in jeopardy.” Processed foods and restaurant foods contribute almost 80 percent of sodium to the diet, according to the 32-page report. Thousands of processed foods, such as frozen dinners and soups, contain between 500 and 1,000 mg of sodium per serving. Some Swanson Hungry Man XXL dinners contain more than 3,400 mg of sodium per package, and one, the Roasted Carved Turkey, contains 5,410 mg. A package of Maruchan Instant Lunch ramen noodles with vegetables contains 1,400. And although a few companies offer reduced-sodium product lines (most notably ConAgra’s Healthy Choice products), CSPI says those are the exception rather than the rule. Among different brands of similar foods, CSPI found wide variances in sodium content. A two-tablespoon serving of Ken’s Light Caesar salad dressing has 600 mg of sodium, while the same amount of a similar product, Morgan’s Caesar, has 170. Progresso Vegetable soup has 940 mg of sodium per serving, while Healthy Choice Garden Vegetable has 480 mg. Ragu Traditional Old World Style pasta sauce has 756 mg of sodium per serving while Classico Tomato and Basil has 310 mg. Another pasta sauce, Enrico’s All Natural No-salt-added, has just 25 mg per serving. Unlike packaged foods available in grocery stores, restaurant foods are not yet required to provide any nutrition labeling, and no major restaurant chain discloses sodium content on menus. Plenty of restaurant meals, including many Chinese entrées, deli sandwiches, and breakfasts, provide more than a whole day’s worth of sodium. Denny’s Lumberjack Slam breakfast has 4,460 mg of sodium and a typical order of General Tso’s chicken with rice has 3,150 mg, according to the report. The bulk of Americans’ salt intake is not coming from the salt shaker. Only about 11 percent percent of sodium in the diet comes from salt added while eating or cooking. “The high sodium content of the American diet—mostly from processed foods—represents an enormous health problem,” said Dr. Claude Lenfant, president of the World Hypertension League. “If we could reduce the sodium in processed and restaurant foods by half, we could save about 150,000 lives per year.” CSPI first sued the FDA over salt in 1983, when it asked a federal district court to direct the FDA to declare sodium a food additive—a declaration that would have given the agency the authority to set limits for salt in foods. The FDA, though, had just begun requiring sodium labeling on some packaged foods and convinced the court that that measure should be given a chance to work. FDA told the court “if there is no substantial reduction in the sodium content of processed foods … the FDA will consider additional regulatory actions, including proposing a change in salt’s GRAS status.” CSPI’s new lawsuit, filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, contends that since salt content in foods hasn’t declined, the court should order the agency to finalize a decision on salt’s regulatory status. “There is no way the FDA can look at the science and say with a straight face that salt is ‘generally recognized as safe,’” Jacobson said. “In fact, salt is generally recognized as unsafe, because it is a major cause of heart attacks and stroke. The federal government should require food manufacturers to gradually lower their sodium levels.” In addition to setting limits on sodium, CSPI also recommends that government: <ul><li>require front-label symbols to identify high-sodium foods</ul></li> <ul><li>require chain restaurants to disclose sodium (and other nutrients) on menus and in brochures</ul></li> <ul><li>prod food manufacturers to use less salt</ul></li> <ul><li>establish within FDA a Division of Sodium Reduction</ul></li> <ul><li>mount other initiatives to prevent cardiovascular disease, including major campaigns to promote diets rich in vegetables, beans, fruit, nuts, and other healthful foods</ul></li> CSPI points out that several foreign governments employ some of those strategies. Most dramatically, the British government is waging a vigorous campaign to reduce sodium consumption by one-third. As a result, Heinz has reduced sodium in baked beans by 30 percent and McDonald’s has lowered the sodium content of a typical Happy Meal by 20 percent. While Kraft has lowered the sodium of the Lunchables sold in Great Britain, the sodium in American Lunchables remains unchanged. “When high-salt diets are turning so many Americans’ hearts into ticking time bombs, American health policymakers are acting more like Keystone Kops than the bomb squad,” Jacobson said. CSPI says that the best way for consumers to cut back on salt is to eat more fresh fruits and vegetables (which are practically sodium-free) and fewer processed foods and restaurant meals. Note: Salt: The Forgotten Killer is available for free at www.cspinet.org/salt or by sending $8 per copy to CSPI, 1220 L St. N.W., Suite 300, Washington, D.C. 20005. 2005-02-24 Researchers Failed to Gauge COX-2 Heart-Attack Risks, Despite Early Warnings, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200502161.html Published studies of prescription painkillers Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra were largely geared to developing new uses for those drugs and were much less concerned with the question of whether they increased users' risk of heart attacks and strokes, according to a review of the medical literature by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). That patients taking COX-2 inhibitors might be at greater risk of experiencing cardiovascular events became known in the medical community in 2001, when researchers from the Cleveland Clinic published a warning in the <a href="http://www.jama.ama-assn.org"target="cspi">Journal of the American Medical Association</a>. Yet even after that report, none of the clinical trials published in the medical literature was designed to gauge that risk. And while CSPI found that many of the studies were funded by the drug companies themselves, even the independently funded trials failed to assess the overall cardiovascular impact of this class of drugs. "The failure of researchers in both the private and public sectors to follow up on the critical safety questions raised in one of the earliest large trials for these drugs points out the need for an independent safety arm at the Food and Drug Administration to require such trials," said Merrill Goozner, director of the <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/integrity">Integrity in Science project</a> at the CSPI. "Drug companies managed to enroll tens of thousands of patients in clinical trials aimed at selling more of these drugs, but none of them conducted a well-designed, placebo-controlled study to see whether these drugs caused heart attacks." CSPI could determine the source of funding for 145 out of 237 published clinical trials of those drugs, known as COX-2 inhibitors. And of those 145, 103 were funded directly or indirectly by Merck and Pfizer, the companies behind the drugs, and 41 were funded by government or non-profit institutions. Nearly 85 percent (87 of 103) of the industry-funded trials that have appeared in the academic literature since 2001 involved testing the pain relief afforded by COX-2 inhibitors for off-label uses, according to CSPI. Just 16 (15.5 percent) of the trials funded by drug companies evaluated any type of health risk associated with the drugs, and only five (4.9 percent) of those had anything to do with cardiovascular risk. Three of those were funded by Pfizer, and sought only to measure narrow questions such as those involving drug-drug interactions among cardiovascular patients. Public and non-profit institutions did no better at putting safety and heart health at the top of their agendas, according to CSPI. Of the 41 trials not funded by industry, just eight (19.5 percent) asked questions related to potential side effects of COX-2 inhibitors and none of those involved cardiovascular risk. Three of the trials whose funding could not be determined considered cardiovascular risk, but again, only in a narrow way. CSPI found that the vast majority of the industry-funded trials in the literature were what are sometimes called "seeding" trials: clinical trials for common but off-label uses of drugs that have already been approved for narrower indications. Such seeding trials accounted for over 90 percent of the trials whose funding was undisclosed or could not be determined, which suggests that a high proportion of those were also industry-funded, according to CSPI. "Drug companies are effusive in their self-congratulation over their big research and development budgets, but they tend to spend that money figuring out how to sell more drugs instead of answering these critical safety questions," Goozner said. "The idea is to get results published in a wide range of journals so that salespersons can deliver reprints to physicians in those specialties." Merck, for instance, funded 12 physicians associated with the Altoona Center for Clinical Research to test Vioxx against a traditional non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug made by one of its rivals for arthritis of the knee. The results, published last year in the Journal of the American Geriatric Society, showed both worked, both were well tolerated and Vioxx offered slightly faster pain relief. CSPI's review comes as the Food and Drug Administration is holding a three-day hearing to evaluate the magnitude of the cardiovascular risk posed by Vioxx and other COX-2 inhibitors. Its findings quantify problems finally being recognized by leading voices in the medical community. "When clinical trials showed an increased risk of myocardial infarction, rather than consider this finding a major danger signal, the manufacturers designed trials to show efficacy for other indications and enhanced the cardiovascular safety monitoring in these subsequent trials," Dr. Jeffrey Drazen, editor of the <a href="http://content.nejm.org/"target="cspi">New England Journal of Medicine</a>, wrote yesterday. "Had trials designed to test the question of cardiovascular toxicity directly been launched in 1999 and executed with urgency, substantial morbidity and perhaps a substantial number of deaths could have been prevented." 2005-02-16 CSPI Reacts to Lester Crawford Nomination http://cspinet.org/new/200502142.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe FDA is an agency in crisis, especially on the drug side. We hope that Lester Crawford will be able to rise above corporate pressures and the Administration’s anti-regulatory agenda to make consumers’ health his paramount concern. An effective FDA could save hundreds of thousands of lives by promoting better medical practices and improving the nutritional quality of the food supply. Dr. Crawford’s past service in government and in industry raises questions about his appropriateness to lead the beleaguered agency, but we will wish him much success and seek to work with him if he is confirmed as commissioner. 2005-02-14 Splenda Should Stop Confusing Consumers, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200502141.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonOver the years, CSPI has challenged the honesty of dozens of food-industry advertising campaigns and label claims. We've targeted ads and labels sponsored by the beef and coffee industries and by such companies as KFC, Procter and Gamble, Campbell, Arby's, Kraft, and Quaker. In some cases the products were safe, in other cases unhealthful. Our position has always been that advertising and labeling, whether for products that are healthful or unhealthful, should be truthful and non-misleading. Today we're talking about Splenda, which contains the artificial sweetener sucralose. The product itself appears to be safe. Unlike sugar and high-fructose corn syrup, it is low in calories and does not promote tooth decay. But that is no excuse for misleading labeling and advertising. McNeil Nutritionals, a division of Johnson and Johnson, goes to great lengths to imply that Splenda is natural and safe by using the slogan "made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar." To understand how consumers perceived Splenda's slogan, last April CSPI commissioned a national Internet survey that included 426 people who had used Splenda. Only 57 percent of Splenda users correctly believed that Splenda was an artificial sweetener. 47 percent of Splenda users incorrectly believed it was a natural product. Only 8 percent of the respondents correctly believed that it was made from sugar and chlorine. The sucralose in Splenda is, in fact, a synthetic chemical that contains chlorine, something that no natural sugar contains. "Made from sugar," certainly sounds better than, say, "made from chlorinated hydrocarbons," or "made in a laboratory," or "fresh from the factory." Splenda's artificiality may present a marketing challenge, but that's not an excuse to confuse consumers and lead them to believe that Splenda is natural or in any way related to sugar. I hope that McNeil starts marketing Splenda honestly. 2005-02-14 McDonald's Settles Landmark Trans Fat Lawsuits http://cspinet.org/new/200502111.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonThe excellent legal settlement reached between McDonald’s and <a href="http://www.bantransfat.com"target="cspi">BanTransFats.com</a> and in the class action on the same matter is a perfect example of how litigation can motivate food companies to change their practices for the better. The programs that the American Heart Association will be able to sponsor should accelerate the food industry’s movement from partially hydrogenated oils to more healthful natural oils. Partially hydrogenated oil causes tens of thousands of premature deaths each year and is an ingredient whose days are numbered. The Food and Drug Administration should act on CSPI’s <a href="http://transfreeamerica.org/press/200409241.html">petitions</a> and virtually ban partially hydrogenated oil and, in the interim, at least require restaurants to disclose when they use it. When McDonald’s announced that it was reformulating its frying oil to contain less trans fat, the company told the public that its fried foods would be healthier. By retracting its promise as quietly as it did, McDonald’s purposefully deceived its customers. While this settlement will help undo some of the damage, McDonald’s should keep its promise and change its frying oil, as it already has in Denmark and Australia. All restaurants of any kind should immediately switch to healthier oils for the sake of their customers’ health. 2005-02-11 Bill Would Put Nutrition Info on New Jersey Restaurant Menus http://cspinet.org/new/200502022.html Act Would Only Affect Chains with 20 or More OutletsFast-food and other chain restaurants would be required to disclose nutrition information on menus if legislation introduced by Assemblymen Douglas Fisher (D-District 3) and William Payne (D-District 29) becomes law. A3064 would require retail food establishments to list calories, saturated plus trans fat, carbohydrates, and sodium on printed menus and calories on menu boards. The bill applies only to standard menu items--not changing specials--and only to chains with 20 or more outlets in New Jersey. Nutrition information is needed on chain restaurant menus since Americans are getting about one-third of their calories from outside the home, according to the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Americans eat out twice as often as they did in 1970 and children eat almost twice as many calories in an average restaurant meal than in a home-cooked meal. The nutritional content of popular restaurant items varies widely, and in one CSPI study, even professional dietitians failed to correctly estimate the calorie content of popular restaurant meals. A large milkshake at McDonald’s has more than a thousand calories, 35 percent more than are in a meal of a hamburger, small fries plus a small Coke. "Most of the largest chain restaurants don't provide nutrition information, and those that do make it hard to find, hard to read, or available only on web sites," said CSPI's director of grassroots advocacy Claudia Malloy. "Good nutrition information is available in supermarkets, but people can only guess when they're eating at chain restaurants." People have become accustomed to having access to nutrition information in supermarkets and they want that information on menus. According to nationally representative polls two-thirds of Americans support requiring fast-food and other chain restaurants to display the calorie content of their foods on menus and menu boards. "This legislation would provide the citizens of New Jersey with the information they need to make informed choices, eat better, and maintain a healthy weight," said Malloy. "Such information would be a boon to people who watch what they eat to manage medical conditions such as diabetes, high cholesterol, or high blood pressure." Legislation similar to A3064 is pending in Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, and Massachusetts and is expected to be reintroduced in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives as well as in several other states. 2005-02-02 Agricultural Biotechnology Withering on the Vine, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200502021.html Analysis Finds Fewer Biotech Crops Moving Through Regulatory SystemFor years, agricultural biotechnology companies and industry analysts predicted that genetic engineering would spawn a cornucopia of heartier crops, more-healthful oils, delayed-ripening fruits, and many other more nutritious and better-tasting foods. However, the number of genetically engineered (GE) crops going through the regulatory review process dropped sharply between the late 1990s and the early 2000s, according to a report issued today by the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Also, the federal government is taking longer to review GE crops, according to CSPI, even though most of the recent crops have been slight variations of previously approved crops. CSPI reviewed regulatory records for GE crops at the <a href="http://www.fda.gov/"target="cspi">Food and Drug Administration (FDA)</a> and the <a href="http://www.aphis.usda.gov/"target="cspi">Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)</a> of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. CSPI found that the products reviewed in the 2000s have mostly been crops with the same or similar genes as the first generation of GE crops commercialized in the late 1990s, such as insect-resistant or herbicide- tolerant versions of soybean, corn, cotton, and canola. “The biotech industry is quick to bemoan government regulation, claiming it is too onerous,” said Gregory Jaffe, director of <a href="http://cspinet.org/biotech/">biotechnology policy</a> for CSPI and the author of the report, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/withering_on_the_vine.pdf ">Withering on the Vine: Will Agricultural Biotech’s Promises Bear Fruit?</a>. “But the fact is that even without strict government regulations, the industry is not innovating, it is stagnating. The industry promised a bounty of beneficial crops, but the biotech cupboard remains pretty bare, except for the few crops that have benefitted grain, oilseed, and cotton farmers.” Government reviews of GE crops have slowed in the last few years. At the FDA, to which companies submit human-safety data about their GE crops voluntarily, CSPI found that from 1995 to 1999, 47 crops completed the regulatory process, with consultations taking, on average, about seven months from start to finish. From 2000 to 2004, only 15 crops completed the process—a drop-off of two-thirds. And, the FDA took almost twice as long—13.8 months on average—to complete its reviews. APHIS focuses on whether a GE crop presents a hazard to other plants. Companies formally petition APHIS to have their GE crops given “non-regulated” status. Forty-nine such approvals were granted from 1995 and 1999, with approvals taking an average of six months from start to finish. Just 13 such approvals were granted from 2000 to 2004, and again, it took APHIS almost twice as long—13.4 months on average—to grant approvals. “Those who believe that biotech crops hold great potential to help human health, farmers, and the environment should be concerned that few new crops are coming down the pike,” said Jaffe. “At the same time, we should work to replace the voluntary, antiquated, and inefficient hodgepodge of a regulatory system with a mandatory system that takes risk into account. Those crops expressing genes known to be safe should be expedited, freeing up government officials to focus on novel crops where the risks may be greater.” In the report CSPI also recommends increasing public investment in GE crops, particularly by applying existing technology to non-commodity crops and by expanding research on biotech crops that would benefit consumers. CSPI also urged increased government support for research on crops that would be important to developing countries and says that the agricultural biotechnology industry should make its proprietary technology freely available for public research and development efforts. Finally, CSPI criticized the biotech industry for opposing sensible biosafety regulations in the U.S. and abroad—regulations that CSPI says would help GE crops gain greater acceptance among consumers. 2005-02-02 Suit Against McDonald's Proceeds http://cspinet.org/new/200501261.html Statement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. JacobsonIt makes sense that the plaintiffs in the McDonald's suit will be able to advance their case before Judge Sweet. Fast-food companies that try to convince kids and parents to eat more and more unhealthful food do so at their own legal peril. If you market products to children that cause disease, and you do it in a way that conceals the risks from parents, you may end up explaining your actions to a judge or a jury. That hardly seems that radical a notion. And, anyone who thinks this kind of litigation is frivolous should remember that McDonald's is fairly notorious worldwide for using the courts to silence its critics. This type of litigation isn't about putting a particular chain or a particular industry out of business. It's about changing company practices and improving kids' health. If I were a fast-food executive, I'd be spurred by the Appeals Court’s decision to come up with healthier menu items, put calorie counts on menu boards and full nutrition information elsewhere, and stop advertising junk food directly to kids. Furthermore, I'd urge Congress to focus more on improving children's health and nutrition, and less on shielding junk-food makers from litigation. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/meal_s2108.pdf">Senator Harkin's</a> and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/meal_hr3444.pdf">Representative DeLauro's</a> Menu Education and Labeling bill, the MEAL Act, would be a good place to start. That bill would put calorie counts on fast-food menu boards and expanded nutrition information on printed menus at big chain table-service restaurants. 2005-01-26 Nutrition Watchdogs Urge Firing of Lynn Swann http://cspinet.org/new/200501131.html Chairman of President’s Fitness Council Shouldn’t Flack for JunkNutrition advocates and government watchdogs today called for the firing of <a href="http://www.fitness.gov/bio_swann.htm"target="cspi">Lynn Swann</a>, the chairman of the <a href="http://www.fitness.gov/"target="cspi">President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports</a>. According to published reports in <a href="http://www.corporatecrimereporter.com/swann011205.htm"target="cspi">Corporate Crime Reporter</a> and The Washington Post, the former Pittsburgh Steelers football player received payment to appear at a public relations event for a vending-machine trade association. “On the day following <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200501126.html">the federal government's release of the new guidelines on diet and exercise</a>, it is unseemly to have the chairman of the President’s Council on Physical Fitness act as a paid shill for the junk food industry,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “It is shameful that the Department of Health and Human Services put its stamp of approval on Swann’s behavior. We hereby nominate Lynn Swann to serve as Chairman of Jocks for Junk Food. In his new position he can lord over the many dozens of professional athletes who lease out their names and reputations to soda companies, fast-food restaurants, and salty-snack makers.” Swann appeared at a press conference organized by the <a href="http://www.vending.org/"target="cspi">National Automatic Merchandising Association (NAMA)</a>, which was designed to launch an initiative to place labels ranking the nutritional value of vending-machine offerings. CSPI says that the move is just a public-relations ploy to forestall more school systems from banning junk food from vending machines on school grounds. Jacobson today <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/swann_thompson_letter.pdf">asked Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy Thompson</a> to urge President Bush to fire Swann. Jacobson also called for the dismissal of any other member of the commission who makes commercial endorsements for junk-food manufacturers. One other member of the Council, <a href="http://www.fitness.gov/bio_smith.htm"target="cspi">Emmitt Smith</a>, the National Football League all-time rushing leader, has endorsed products from Frito-Lay, Pepsi, Coca-Cola, and McDonald’s, according to his biography. Council member <a href="http://www.fitness.gov/bio_garciaparra.htm"target="cspi">Nomar Garciapara</a>, who plays shortstop for the Chicago Cubs, has made commercial endorsements for Dunkin’ Donuts and Twizzlers. Government watchdogs also criticized Swann for taking money from the NAMA. “Lynn Swann’s ability to speak out on the need for children to limit their junk food intake will be severely compromised by his role as spokesperson for the vending machine trade association,” said Melanie Sloan, executive director of <a href="http://www.citizensforethics.org/"target="cspi">Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics</a> in Washington, or CREW. “President Bush should take note of the conflict of interest and immediately request Mr. Swann’s resignation from his position as Chairman of the President’s Council on Physical Fitness and Sports.” 2005-01-13 CSPI Applauds New Dietary Recommendations http://cspinet.org/new/200501126.html Calls for New Government Campaigns to Implement ThemStatement of CSPI Executive Director Michael F. Jacobson The <a href="http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/"target="cspi">new Dietary Guidelines</a> is the most health-oriented ever. It provides stronger recommendations for consuming less sodium and trans fat and more whole grains. The Guidelines also recommends eating nine servings a day—about four-and-a-half cups—of fruits and vegetables, up from five servings. Importantly, the guidelines apply to the federal school lunch and breakfast programs. Under the new Guidelines, schools will need to offer less-salty foods and more fruits, vegetables and whole grains. Although the Guidelines does not give specific limits for trans fat and added sugars, its intent is clear. It advises people to consume as little trans fat as possible. It also recommends choosing “foods and beverages with little added sugars or caloric sweeteners.” The Guidelines states that only eight teaspoons of added sugars—less than in a can of Coke—fit into a healthy moderate-fat diet. In a higher-fat diet, there’s no room for any added sugars. As good as the Dietary Guidelines is, it will do little to improve the public’s health without vigorous efforts to improve the food environment and communicate them with the public. To support the guidelines’ healthy-weight goals, Congress needs to provide the Centers for Disease Control with greatly increased funding for programs that promote nutrition and activity and pass laws requiring calorie labeling on menus at chain restaurants and shielding kids from junk-food marketing. Because industry has done little voluntarily to implement past Dietary Guidelines for Americans, government regulatory agencies need to take such actions as limiting the salt content of processed foods, eliminating the use of partially hydrogenated oils, and lowering the current limits on fat in processed meats. 2005-01-12 Kraft Advertising-to-Kids Policy Applauded http://cspinet.org/new/200501125.html Statement of CSPI Nutrition Policy Director Margo G. WootanKraft is doing parents a real favor by recognizing that foods of poor nutritional quality should not be advertised to kids. By <a href="http://www.kraft.com/newsroom/01122005.html"target="cspi">setting nutrition standards for foods advertised to six- to 11-year-olds, Kraft</a> will make it a little easier to reduce kids’ consumption of foods high in calories, saturated and trans fat, or added sugars. Kraft has taken an important first step. The next should be to strengthen its sodium standards, limit advertising to kids 12 to 17, and extend its marketing guidelines to cartoon characters on packages, “advergames” on the Internet, contests, and other forms of marketing. I hope that other companies—like Kellogg, General Mills, and McDonald’s—will emulate, and out-do, Kraft. Unfortunately, modest corporate restraints on the advertising of processed foods will not increase the marketing of truly healthful foods—like fruits, vegetables, and fat-free dairy products—that should form the bulk of children’s diets. That’s where government needs to step in and sponsor major healthy-eating campaigns, ensure that processed foods are more healthful, and strengthen nutrition education in schools. 2005-01-12 CSPI Praises Alcohol Section of Dietary Guidelines http://cspinet.org/new/200501123.html Statement of CSPI Alcohol Policies Project Director George A. HackerCSPI applauds the <a href="http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/pdf/Chapter9.pdf"target="cspi">alcohol section of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2005</a>. Although the overall advice on alcohol is little changed from the sound message of the 2000 edition, the new version strengthens important messages, including the discussions of moderation and the catalog of persons who should not drink at all. The document should be widely circulated and promoted, by government, health professionals, and alcohol producers. The 2005 discussion of alcoholic beverages, in keeping with an emphasis found throughout the Guidelines, wisely pays great attention to the calories in alcoholic beverages, specifically mentioning the additional calories in mixers combined with distilled spirits. We believe that this emphasis on calories will strengthen our efforts to require calorie labeling of alcoholic beverages. The Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau (TTB) recently announced plans to propose rules to improve consumer information labeling of alcoholic beverages, partly in response to CSPI's December 2003 petition. 2005-01-12 Guidelines for Marketing Food to Kids Proposed http://cspinet.org/new/200501051.html CSPI Calls for Nutrition Standards and Curbs on TV Advertising, Movie Tie-Ins, School-based Marketing and Other Tactics for Selling Junk Food to ChildrenThe Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) today released new <a href="http://cspinet.org/marketingguidelines.pdf">Guidelines for Responsible Food Marketing to Children</a>, which call on food manufacturers, broadcasters, restaurants, movie studios, and schools to reform the way drinks, snacks, fast-food meals, and other foods are marketed to kids. The Guidelines propose curbing certain marketing techniques but unlike the food industry's self-imposed guidelines, CSPI is proposing basic nutritional thresholds for determining which foods should be marketed to kids in the first place. The Guidelines were developed with input from experts from academia, government, and industry. Each day, children receive about 58 commercial messages from television alone, about half of which are for food. According to CSPI, much of that advertising is for high-calorie or low-nutrition foods and undermines parents' efforts to provide healthful diets for their kids. While a number of factors affect children's food choices, studies show that food marketing attracts kids' attention and affects their food preferences and choices. The amount of marketing aimed at kids has doubled in the last 10 years from $7 billion to $15 billion a year. "Parents are outgunned by food companies and the toys, cartoon characters, celebrities, and psychological munition that food marketers have at their disposal," said CSPI nutrition policy director <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/margo_statement.pdf">Margo G. Wootan</a>. "Parents try to get their kids to eat bananas, broccoli, and whole wheat bread, but those messages get drowned out by marketing for French fries, cookies, and candy. What we're really asking is that marketers act responsibly, and not urge kids to eat foods that could harm their health." Ideally, says CSPI, only healthful foods like fruits, vegetables, and whole-grain products would be marketed to kids. But CSPI’s Guidelines would allow a much broader range of foods to be marketed to kids, as long as the food in question provides some positive nutritional benefit and isn't too high in saturated and trans fat, salt, or added sugars. For instance, CSPI's Guidelines call on companies not to market low-nutrition drinks like soda, sports drinks, and sweetened ice tea to kids. Food companies could, though, market: <ul><li>drinks that contain at least 50 percent fruit juice and no added caloric sweeteners;</ul></li> <ul><li>water and seltzer without added caloric sweeteners; and</ul></li> <ul><li>low-fat and fat-free milk, including flavored milks.</ul></li> The Guidelines call for foods marketed to kids to be in reasonable portion sizes, to provide some basic nutrients, and to have: <ul><li>Less than 30 percent of total calories from fat (excluding fat from nuts, seeds, and peanut or other nut butters);</ul></li> <ul><li>Less than 10 percent of calories from saturated plus trans fat;</ul></li> <ul><li>Less than 25 percent of calories from added sugars; and</ul></li> <ul><li>No more than 150 milligrams (mg) of sodium per serving of snack items; no more than 480 mg per serving for soups, pastas, meats, and main dishes; and no more than 600 mg for meals.</ul></li> The Guidelines would allow companies to use almost any marketing technique to market healthful foods to kids. But it also calls on companies not to use certain commonly used techniques to market low-nutrition foods to kids, including: <ul><li>Advertising on television shows for which more than a quarter of the audience is children. Foods like Mrs. Butterworth's Little Dunkers, for example, could not be advertised on Nickelodeon's children’s programming.</ul></li> <ul><li>Product or brand placements in media aimed at kids, including movies, television shows, video games, web sites, and books. For instance, Burger King could not pay to place its products in Warner Bros.' Scooby-Doo 2.</ul></li> <ul><li>Licensing agreements or cross-promotions with kid-oriented movies or television programs, or use of cartoon or fictional characters from such programs. Burger King could not use SpongeBob SquarePants to promote burgers and fries, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/shrek_twinkie.pdf">Hostess Twinkies couldn't use Shrek</a>, nor could the movie Lemony Snicket's Series of Unfortunate Events be used to promote Procter & Gamble's Sunny Delight.</ul></li> <ul><li>Use of curricula, fundraising activities, educational incentives, or other school-based sales or marketing of junk food. The Guidelines would prohibit programs like those used by Pizza Hut and Chuck E. Cheese which use junk food to reward academic achievement.</ul></li> "No parent would allow a door-to-door salesman to come into the house and spend a few unsupervised minutes with the kids, yet junk-food manufacturers have similar unfettered access to kids' impressionable minds via advertising and marketing," said CSPI executive director <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/michael_statement.pdf">Michael F. Jacobson</a>. "Food manufacturers like to put all the blame on parents, but these companies go right around parents' backs, directly to kids—and sometimes directly to toddlers—with sales pitches for unhealthful foods." Over the last 20 years, rates of obesity have doubled in children and tripled in teens. And, since most children's diets are too high in calories, saturated and trans fat, and sodium, one-quarter of kids between the ages of five and 10 have high blood pressure, elevated blood cholesterol levels, or other early warning signs for heart disease. Type 2 diabetes can no longer be called "adult onset" diabetes because of rising rates in children. The last serious attempt to protect children from junk-food advertising was a quarter-century ago, when the Federal Trade Commission was investigating whether advertising aimed at kids was inherently unfair. Congress, in response to pressure from food manufacturers, broadcasters, and the advertising industry, quashed the FTC's effort to regulate such ads. Since then, advertising aimed at kids has been largely unregulated, but for the industry’s own self-regulatory body, the <a href="http://www.caru.org/"target="cspi">Children’s Advertising Review Unit (CARU)</a>, a division of the Council of Better Business Bureaus. The group is funded by regulated companies, and seeks to "preserve their freedom" to advertise to kids. Today CSPI sent its Guidelines to officials at major food companies, chain restaurants, television networks, television stations in the 50 largest markets, movie studios, supermarkets, and children's magazines and <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/food_marketing_practices_sample_letter.pdf">urged</a> them to comply on a voluntary basis. "For far too long, food manufacturers, fast-food restaurants, and media conglomerates have been profiting by pushing obesity- and disease-causing junk foods to kids," Wootan said. "It's time for them to clean up their act." 2005-01-05 CSPI, Environmental Working Group Challenge Two Scientists on EPA panel http://cspinet.org/new/200412091.html Committee on Teflon Toxic Larded with Industry ScientistsHealth advocacy groups this week called on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to remove two scientists from its “short list” of candidates for the <a href="http://www.epa.gov/sab/pdf/pfoa_shortlist_bios.pdf">advisory committee</a> that will evaluate the health risk posed by a chemical used in making Teflon. The two scientists either did studies or worked for DuPont, which still makes the chemical, or 3M Corp., which manufactured it until 2001. In a <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/lettertoepa.pdf">letter</a> sent to EPA administrator Michael Leavitt and the staff organizing the committee, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) and the Environmental Working Group called for removing Michigan State University professor John P. Giesy, who four years ago conducted 3M’s $1.3-million study of the toxicity of the chemical, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA). The groups also called for removing Pfizer chemist John C. Cook from the panel. Prior to working for Pfizer, Dr. Cook spent many years working for DuPont, which still makes PFOA to use in its Teflon manufacturing plants. PFOA is one of the most durable synthetic chemicals known to man. It is showing up in increasing concentrations in the blood of humans, with concentrations higher in children than in adults. Recent studies have shown that low doses of PFOA harm lab animals—at estimated blood levels lower than those found in some children. The advisory committee will be evaluating the EPA’s draft assessment of the risks associated with exposure to PFOA. This risk assessment could determine if the chemical should be more tightly regulated or even removed from the market. “Anyone with relevant conflicts of interest must be eliminated from the panel,” Merrill Goozner, director of the Integrity in Science project at CSPI, and Dr. Timothy Kropp, chief scientist at the Environmental Working Group, told the EPA. “Dr. Giesy fails the test of financial independence from parties with a financial stake in the outcome of this committee’s work,” they wrote. And while Dr. Cook no longer works for DuPont, the health advocacy groups pointed out that “his inclusion on this committee would taint the committee’s final work product since his long tenure with DuPont may lead some to ‘perceive’ a conflict of interest, whether it exists or not.” One of the rationales for the conflict of interest section of the Federal Advisory Committee Act is to eliminate not just actual conflicts, but the perception of conflicts of interest on scientific advisory committees. That way, the public can be assured that the government is receiving a fair and balanced outside review of its work. CSPI and EWG also pointed out to EPA officials that seven other scientists on the proposed panel either work for companies that manufacture chemicals or work with non-profits with close ties to the chemical industry. On the other hand, there were seven scientists on the EPA short list that the groups felt could fairly evaluate the environmental risks associated with PFOA. The two groups cautioned EPA that it must ensure the final committee is balanced, which is also a requirement of the Federal Advisory Committee Act. 2004-12-09 CSPI on Latest Food Bioterrorism Regulation http://cspinet.org/new/200412061.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalSecretary Tommy Thompson is right to think that the food supply isn't as safe as it could be from a terrorist attack. It hasn't helped that most of the anti-bioterrorism regulations that the Administration has issued have been significantly watered down under pressure from the food industry. The FDA's <a href="http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/news/2004/NEW01143.html">new record-keeping requirement </a> is a modest improvement, but nothing to breath a sigh of relief over. What is needed is brand new legislation that would give FDA authority to visit foreign factories and farms that want to ship food to the U.S., and authority to mandate recall and traceability all along the food supply. Ultimately, the food laws should be comprehensively modernized and food-safety functions combined into a <a href="http://www.cspinet.org/new/200410071.html">unified food-safety agency</a>, rather than the hodgepodge we have today. 2004-12-06 National Geographic Deceives Parents, Says CSPI http://cspinet.org/new/200412011.html Ad-Free Samples of National Geographic Kids Deceptive, Group Tells FTC<a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ngkidsadfree.pdf">Sample issues of National Geographic Kids magazine</a> give the impression that the magazine is advertising-free, but the real thing is chock full of ads for junk food and other products, according to <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ngkpetition.pdf">a complaint filed today with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)</a>. The sample issues are used in direct-mail solicitations aimed at potential new subscribers. But the complaint, filed by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), alleges that the venerable National Geographic Society is deceiving parents who wouldn’t expect that fully one-third of the publication’s pages are filled with ads for products that promote obesity and sedentary lifestyles. <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/200407191.html">Last July</a>, CSPI first raised concerns about junk food advertising in National Geographic Kids. CSPI reviewed the content of 17 issues and found 51 junk-food ads, including ads for Twinkies, M&Ms, Frosted Flakes, Froot Loops, <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ngkad8.pdf">Hostess Cup Cakes</a>, and Xtreme Jell-O Pudding Sticks. One mock cover of National Geographic Kids was an ad for the fast-food chain <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/ngkad1.pdf">Arby’s</a>. So when CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson received an ad-free issue of the magazine in his mailbox, he was surprised. “The ‘sample issue’ I received was certainly free of advertising, so for a split second I thought that National Geographic might have had a change of heart about peddling junk food to kids,” Jacobson said. “I regret that it hasn’t. And I regret that National Geographic is making matters much worse by deceiving parents with this disgusting bait and switch.” CSPI is asking the FTC to block National Geographic from distributing ad-free sample issues of National Geographic Kids so long as the publication itself contains advertising. The complaint also asks the FTC to require National Geographic to offer refunds to all current subscribers to National Geographic Kids. According to the complaint, parents’ postings on Amazon and Epinions express surprise over the amount of advertising in National Geographic Kids. One poster wrote that it “seems like another vehicle attempting to get my son to buy products,” and that it is “awful.” Another wrote that “the advertising is shameful and irresponsible ... in an age when we are preoccupied by the health of our children, particularly their diet.” Another wondered how National Geographic could have “gone so wrong, treating children like nothing more than little consumers,” calling it “truly ugly.” CSPI told the National Geographic Society in July that some of its junk food ads were especially unseemly for a magazine ostensibly devoted, in part, to appreciation of the animal kingdom: Ads for Hostess Cup Cakes and Twinkies actually depict a duck being hit by a train and a beaver being crushed by a falling object. In addition to ads for junk foods, National Geographic Kids contains ads for DVDs, television shows, and video games—all products that discourage physical activity and, like junk foods, help fuel childhood obesity. National Geographic Kids has included advertisements since its launch in 2002. A predecessor publication, National Geographic World, was ad-free from its launch in 1975 until mid-2002, when ads began appearing. According to the National Geographic Kids media kit, ads in the publication range in price from $31,825 to nearly $169,000. Many other kids’ magazines, such as Ranger Rick or My Big Backyard, succeed without advertising revenue though. “Kids already get exposed to enough junk-food marketing,” Jacobson said. “Why shell out $17.95 to expose them to even more?” 2004-12-01 CSPI Urges Reforms to Minimize Exposure to BSE, Bush Administration "Failed to Deliver" on Promises http://cspinet.org/new/200411231.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalIn all probability, a small number of BSE-infected animals are circulating in North America, and it is prudent to assume that some are entering the feed and food chain. While consumers' risk of contracting the human form of the disease is minuscule, USDA and FDA should nevertheless implement steps to ensure that human and animal exposure to the agent that causes the disease is further minimized. We shouldn't react to Mad Cow disease in fits and starts as more cattle test positive. We should assume that some will test positive, but we shouldn't wait to protect the food supply. The Bush Administration has failed to deliver on many of the promises it made when the first case of BSE was discovered. FDA should immediately implement long-promised regulations to strengthen the 1997 feed ban by eliminating plate waste, poultry litter, and cattle blood from cattle feed. Cattle evolved to eat grass, not garbage. In addition, the FDA should ban cattle parts from all animal feed, to further reduce the risk of the disease spreading to more cattle. An animal identification system is important to track cows that may have contracted BSE at the same time as any cows that test positive. USDA should phase in a requirement that cattle producers only market animals whose age and origin can be tracked. Most costs of this tracking system should be born by the beef industry. Low-cost forms of animal identification used in other countries include ear tags and tattoos. While USDA has banned spinal and neck bones from animals 30 months and older from human food production and has promised to test more meat from "Advanced Meat Recovery" systems, those actions are not enough. USDA should ban all spinal and neck bones from food production, including AMR systems, and it should finalize a ban on downer cattle. These are reforms that would benefit both consumers, who want to be confident in the safety of their food, and the beef industry, which is suffering from importers' bans on American beef. That said, the risk of contracting the human form of BSE is exceedingly small. In England, where beef-eating consumers may have been exposed many times during the early 1990s, when the epidemic in the cattle population peaked, only around 150 consumers contracted the disease. While the disease is horrible and inevitably fatal, it is nonetheless quite rare even in England. 2004-11-23 CSPI On Potential New Mad Cow Case http://cspinet.org/new/200411181.html Statement of CSPI Food Safety Director Caroline Smith DeWaalThe inconclusive test result that may lead to a second finding of mad cow disease in the U.S. raises numerous questions about why the Bush Administration has delayed implementing promised protections against Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy. Last December, the Department of Agriculture promised they would implement a nationwide animal identification program, but today there is no system in place to trace an infected cow back to its farm of origin. Last winter, the Food and Drug Administration promised to ban specified risk materials from all animal feed but the agency never finalized rules to accomplish this. Finally, there is no mandatory recall system in place if meat from an infected animal is sold to consumers. That's what happened last year when a BSE-infected cow was found in Washington state. While there is probably no risk to the public, the lack of mandatory animal identification and mandatory recall, and the absense of a complete ban on specified risk material in animal and human food, leaves consumers and cattle producers vulnerable in many ways if the cow in question is found to have BSE. 2004-11-18 Thompson Urged to Show Leadership on Obesity, Heart Disease http://cspinet.org/new/200411171.html Why Not Start By Weighing in on the Thickburger?, Asks CSPIThe nation’s leading nutrition advocacy organization says that the top federal health official should be an active participant instead of a hapless spectator in America’s struggle against obesity and other diet-related maladies like heart disease and stroke. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) today urged Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson to speak out against unhealthful trends in the food industry like, say, the 1,400-calorie <a href="http://cspinet.org/new/pdf/thompsonthickburgerletter.pdf">Monster Thickburgers</a> introduced by the Hardee’s fast-food chain. In 2003, Secretary Thompson indicated he would use his office to encourage food companies to adopt more healthful practices. “I'm going to sta