Sharp edges and blunt results

By Les Watkins

Consumers can be putting themselves at risk when trying to open the packaging of newly-bought food. Each year in the UK alone, that task results in about 67,000 people needing hospital treatment for injuries.

Research by two respected nutritional scientists – Dr Malco Cruz-Romero and Dr Joseph P Kerry of University College Cork in Ireland – indicates that this is merely the tip of the problem.

In a recent ly-publ ished book, Processed meats: Improving safety, nutrition and quality, they explain:
“It is thought that only 35 percent of such accidents are reported to hospitals, thereby suggesting that the real figure is more likely to be around 200,000 cases per year.”

And that is just in the UK.

The elderly and those with arthritis or impaired vision are particularly at risk.

A survey of 2,000 people aged 50-plus found that 91 percent of respondents had needed help to open packaging and 71 percent had injured themselves in the attempt.

“Consequently there is a requirement for the meat industry to address such issues…when developing conveniencestyle muscle-based, ready-meal products – not just from a public good perspective but also from demographic and marketing perspectives,” say the authors.

Frustration experienced while accessing a pack’s contents can make consumers switch to a competing product.

And, of course, any injuries could lead to a costly and image-damaging lawsuit.

That is why the provision of consumer convenience is an ever-increasing packaging trend.

Cooked-meat producers are progressively aiming for packaging that is even more easy to open as well as being resealable, oven-able, microwave-able and self-venting.

It should also be easy to grip, provide performance signals and have contact points which protect users from getting burned following heating.

“Market research has shown that consumers will pay more for packaging that provides desired convenience attributes,” they write.

“For example, the introduction of zippered closures over the past 20 years has created an obvious convenience…so that now it is almost impossible to find consumer-friendly packages without this feature.

“Another example of packaging providing convenience is where it is used to portion-control food products. Increasing concern about obesity means that smaller sizes or portions of cooked meat food products are being viewed as correctly sized.”

For purchasers, however, taste remains of paramount importance.

That is stressed in another chapter by Professor Lowell B Catlett of New Mexico State University, USA, who explains how food producers have recently made major strides in understanding the mechanics of taste.

Until the early 1900s science said that the tongue could detect only four flavours – sweet, salty, bitter and sour.

Renowned French chef Augusta Escoffier developed a new type of meat stock, described in his 1903 book Guide Culinaire, in which the tongue could
taste one more flavour. It proved to be an enjoyable one.

Escoffier had stumbled across the amino acid L-glutamate which in 1907 a Japanese chemist used to create the famous monosodium glutamate (MSG) – which as Professor Catlett points out, “became a chef’s secret way to add a new taste sensation”.

Now we jump forward to 2000.

That was when scientists identified a tongue receptor that senses only glutamate and L-amino acids.

Professor Catlett says: “Technology now gave consumers a way to understand and appreciate why they generally love the taste of meat and how that taste sensation can be added to other foods via L-glutamate.”

Processed meats: Improving safety, nutrition and quality (ISBN 13 978 1 84569 466 1) edited by J P and J F Kerry, retailing at US$305+P&P was released last July by Woodhouse Publishing, Sawston, Cambridge, UK.

Food labeling hypocrisy

By Les Watkins

Consumers are told more about their footwear than about their food. And that is just stupid.

My favourite shoes, a flexible redleather pair, were made in India. I know because the information is printed inside them.

But some of those vegetables I enjoyed last night...where the devil did they come from? Toowoomba perhaps? Or maybe Texas or Toronto or possibly Timbuktu? Your guess is as good as mine.

The truth about where much of our food originates is kept hidden and that is totally unfair on consumers as well as on up-front manufacturers.

Does the stuff on offer at supermarkets come from the Bay of Plenty or the market gardens of South Auckland? Or was it harvested in countries such as China or Vietnam?

All too often we’re not allowed to know because our idiotic policy on labeling makes that a secret. Few people realise, for instance, that just one brand of frozen vegetables on sale here contains only vegetables grown in New Zealand.

That brand is Talleys. Their competing companies – excellent though they may be – are not required to mention that they use vegetables imported from a range of countries including Ecuador, Thailand, Chile and America.

Blandly-worded labels merely state that this food is ‘packed in New Zealand from local and imported ingredients’.

OK. But what is imported? How much of it is? And from where?

Sorry, that’s apparently considered not our business.

We can only assume that the authorities are reluctant to risk upsetting anyone – including the New Zealand companies and the overseas sellers – but they should remember that at least 75 percent of customers would prefer their food to originate in New Zealand.

That’s been confirmed by several surveys. I’m not suggesting anything is wrong with the imported vegetables. But why are consumers denied the right to make their own choices?

Stores are obliged to let us know the country of origin of goods such as our clothes or shoes.

But origin information about food is voluntary. And that, as I indicated earlier, is totally daft.

The government should stop pussyfooting around on this issue. Comprehensive labeling of food should be mandatory.

Time for the next leap forward

By Iain MacIntyre

New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research chief operating officer Bruce Campbell is urging the New Zealand wine industry to proactively engage in further research and development to unleash its considerable potential for growth.
“Having built a good platform, the industry needed to now take the next leap forward. Good examples in the past have been where there has been a focus on sustainability, yield forecasting models or viticultural techniques to enhance wine flavours or styles that have really added benefits,” he says.
“The challenge is to grow more scale but at the same time maintain the price premium that is there – the premium people are willing to pay for New Zealand wine because it offers something more.”
Mr Campbell says his message was well received when delivered to the recent New Zealand Winegrowers’ Romeo Bragato conference in Auckland.
“Plant and Food, through the way Crown entities are funded now, has the opportunity to invest its core funding into partnerships with industry to be able to create more value.

For more information:
New Zealand Institute for Plant & Food Research
Tel: (09) 925-8652
Visit: www.plantandfood.co.nz