Take the quiz: Are You a Monster or a Rock Star?

Test your caffeine IQ!

Are You a Monster or a Rock Star-THE QUIZ

M&Ms Coated in Bacteria from Outer Space? Food Science in the News: Aug 2013

Food Science in the News:

On August 13^th, the FDA approved the use of a certain bacteria as a natural color additive.

Now presenting:

THE 10 THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT SPIRULINA

10- IT’S FROM MARS.

The petition to use spirulina extra as a color additive was filed by Mars Inc. The petition is for candy and chewing gum so it’s fair to expect slight color changes in Mars products.

9-IT’S BEEN TO OUTER SPACE.

Spirulina was used to feed NASA and ESA astronauts due to its concentrated nutritional profile (60-70% protein by dry weight, high beta-carotene, B12 and iron content).

8-IT LIKES SALT AND WATER.

Spirulina is a type of algae that needs alkaline lakes to flourish. It grows in fresh and marine waters but it needs high salt and high pH conditions.

7-IT’S THE MASTER OF TWO KINGDOMS.

Spirulina was first classified in the plant kingdom because it performs photosynthesis. It was later classified in the bacterial kingdom based on its genetics and other biochemical properties.

6-IT’S PROOF SCIENTISTS ENJOY NAMING THINGS.

If you look at spirulina under a microscope you’d see…. spirals. Surprised, aren’t you. Spirulina’s structure involves filaments that wind into a helix or spiral.

5-IT’S GRAS.

No, not like the stuff that’s greener on the other side but Generally Recognized As Safe. A substance obtains GRAS status when the FDA reviews studies proving toxicological safety.

Side-note: Ingredients in a food/beverage product must be either approved food additives or GRAS. Spirulina is popular in supplements, but it has been GRAS since 2003. 

See GRN000127 – Oct 2003 -  FDA GRAS Notice. 

 

4-IT LIKES HEAVY METAL, ... especially mercury.

Because it’s grown in alkaline lakes, mercury content is cause for concern. The good news is the WHO/FAO tested commercial spirulina products and found their lead and mercury contents were below the limit for safety. The bad news is that survey was done way back in ’89. The bottom line is controlling the source of the water can alleviate the heavy metal load.

3-IT MAY IMPROVE CHOLESTEROL LEVELS.

Some of the human clinical trials published using spirulina as a functional supplement have suggested the following correlation (with the corresponding dose, specified):

• Increased HDL, decreased LDL (4.5 grams per day for 6 weeks)
• Improved lipid profile for patients with CVD (2-4 grams per day for 3 months)
• Improved cholesterol profile for patients with diabetes type 2 (1-2 grams per day for 2 months)

The fine print here is that these trials were all small and their findings are not consistent across multiple trials. It’s too soon to say whether spirulina will be the next Lipitor.

2-FINALLY, A FOOD COLORANT YOU CAN EAT ALL DAY AND NIGHT.

The “No Observed Effects Level” is 15 grams per kilogram of bodyweight per day, which means a 60 kilogram person can eat 900 grams of this stuff per day and not notice any side effects. No word yet on whether “seaweed breath” counts as a side-effect.

Pounds to Kilograms Converter 

 

1-JUST A PINCH WILL SPREAD THE COLOR FURTHER THAN YOU CAN IMAGINE.

As someone who has personally worded with spirulina, I can testify that a small pinch of it is potent enough to turn an entire glass of water dark blue-green. It’s also quite magical how this stuff colors the scale, the countertop, the tips of your fingers/gloves, the measuring spoon…

Welcoming spirulina into the world of color additives brings us one step closer to not needing artificial colors, but achieving a true blue may be more of a challenge than it seems. Step 1 is to know what you’re dealing with (“the devil you know beats the devil you don’t). Step 2 comes later, when blue M&Ms start looking a little green…

REFERENCES:

Mars Inc. Petition Granted by FDA 

General Review on Spirulina 

Scientific Studies with Spirulina  

10 words on Monster Minis: Hurray - 1 serving/can! Warning - 12 cans/case.

The Full Assessment:

As Dr. Brian Wansink pointed out in his book Mindless Eating - Why We Eat More Than We Think, it's easier to overindulge from a giant bag of chips than from 12 separate 100-calorie packs. The simple act of opening multiple containers creates a "pause point", an opportunity for the subconscious to confirm with the conscious that this action is truly what we want to do. 

Monster Minis take a giant leap forward in caffeine safety because each can is one serving, creating a bigger opportunity for portion control.

Portion control is a key aspect of caffeine safety, but so is pacing. Monster Minis Rehab offers 77 milligrams of caffeine per can. The maximum dosage of caffeine recognized as safe is 400 milligrams per day, according to the US Food and Drug Administration and Health Canada (based on this research HERE). Someone (a healthy, non-pregnant/nursing person over 18 who is not sensitive to caffeine) would have to consume over 5 cans of Monster Minis Rehab* to surpass this recommended limit (*assuming there were exactly 77 milligrams and not 76.5 or 79 milligrams in each and every can and this person consumed absolutely no other caffeine from gum, jelly beans, potato chips, chocolate, headache medicine, ol' fashioned soda, cosmetics, etc.).

By providing only 77 milligrams of caffeine per can, Monster Minis Rehab offers a large enough dose of caffeine to be effective but a small enough dose to facilitate better pacing.

Hello, Monster? I'm the elephant in the room.

Monster Minis promote caffeine safety through better portion control and pacing, but frequency is still a critical hurdle to clear. As explained in ARE YOU A MONSTER OR A ROCK STAR: a guide to energy drinks, there are four frequencies that affect caffeine safety. Caffeine per serving and caffeine per day have already been discussed, above, but what about caffeine per hour? 

Two healthy adult men consume 400 milligrams of caffeine in one day but the man who consumes 400 milligrams over his 12-hour shift will have a different experience than the man who consumes 400 milligrams in one hour. Monster Minis come in a 12-pack, not a 4-pack like their larger counterparts. Why 12?

Critics of energy drinks may be quick to point out that this 12-pack model further blurs the lines between energy drinks and soda, at precisely the same time Congress is trying to stick "energy drinks" with tougher regulations. However, the packaging engineers I know would be quick to point out packaging decisions are largely based on what is most cost-effective and what's easier to ship. Regardless of the journey, let's consider the destination – the end-consumer who finds this 12-pack more appealing than the single can. 

A recent article on Nielson.com suggests that busy moms are buying more energy drinks than college crammers and party-goers. However, it's tough to tell from the data whether V8 Fusion Energy, Starbucks Refreshers, Nawgan, and Archer Farms caffeinated products are all counted the same as RedLine, Red Bull and Venom. These products are all technically "energy drinks" but it's undeniable that they appeal to different demographics.

So who is this 12-pack of Monster Minis for?

BOTTOM LINE

It's short-sighted to label Monster Minis straight up-or-down "safe" or "unsafe" because that largely depends on the person buying the case. Yes, it's LITERALLY a case-by-case basis. How many cans that person consumes per hour and how quickly that person goes through one entire case will determine how effective and how safe this product truly is.

The difference between a poison and a cure is the dosage. Paracelsus - the Father of Toxicology

Learn more about how pacing, portion control and frequency affect caffeine's effectiveness and safety HERE

Energy Drink of the Month - August 2013

I know you don't want to hear it, or read it, but I'm going to say it anyway – summer is ending. If you're like me, you spend your nights plotting how to make the summer last just a little bit longer, contemplating which adventures you simply must fit in your schedule before the wind starts getting chilly and the sun isn't waiting for you to get off work before it sets.

There are several aspects of this month's chosen drink that make it perfect for this time of year, but first it's important to understand a few seasonal environmental factors that will affect one's energy level.

1 – Changes in sleep schedule.

If you're of school age, your days of staying up til 2 a.m. and sleeping in past noon are numbered. Getting used to waking up early might be a difficult transition for some, so a little help in the form of caffeine might be necessary.  Even if you're NOT a student, you may have noticed a significant change in freeway traffic. With less people driving to and from school, there's usually fewer cars on the road. For many working adults, that means not having to wake up QUITE so early to beat the traffic to work. My, my, we're in for a shock once schools go back into session. When you have to wake up earlier and earlier to avoid "Please-don't-rear-end-me" freeway phobias, you may need some help waking up. Driving tired is at just as dangerous as driving drunk.

2 – Sun-daze.

It's not unusual to feel fatigued after a long day in the sun, even if all you did was work on your tan. This "sun fatigue" has several suggested causes, ranging from dehydration to increased production of certain vitamins to increased UV damage and subsequent inflammation of the skin (the largest organ of the body). If playing or basking in the sun leaves you feeling wiped out, you may need something to wake you up for your evening activities.  

3 – Cramming.

If you've made a summer bucket list, you may feel the heat as you try to check every activity off your list before the summer ends. Hey, if the days are longer, why not try to cram everything into one week, right? Sure, why not, but that hustle and bustle leaves some a bit winded.

For all three situations above, caffeine is just ONE solution. Getting more sleep, getting less sun or driving to lively music instead of news radio are also helpful solutions to these scenarios. For these situations, you don't need a high-powered shock of energy, only a gentle boost. That's precisely why I've picked Archer Farms Pomegranate Blueberry for the Energy Drink of the Month for August 2013.

This drink is exceptionally enjoyable on a hot summer day and its 12 ounce size makes it easy to carry. It's 40% juice so you won't have to worry about how the heat affects carbonation (carbonation and heat do not get along). Moreover, each can contains only one serving with a whopping 70 milligrams of caffeine. That's just 10 milligrams short of the caffeine in a Red Bull or Starbucks Frappuccino, but it's significantly less caffeine than other ready-to-go/convenience factor caffeine sources like McD's iced coffee or Starbucks' bottled Iced Coffee.

Make no mistake, though this drink is fortified with vitamins and contains ginseng and taurine, caffeine is the active ingredient. In nature, pomegranates and blueberries are loaded with anti-oxidants but the juice itself, not as much. The sugar (19 grams per serving) will also help with battling fatigue but there are sugar-free versions for those trying to limit their added sugars.

According to the 5 Levels of Fatigue outlined in the book ARE YOU A MONSTER OR A ROCK STAR: a guide to energy drinks, this product would be at the upper end of Fatigue Level 2: Too Tired to Go It Alone. There are alternatives to caffeine to beat the August-specific causes of fatigue, but for those who do turn to caffeine, start small. Save the high-powered drinks with upwards of 120 milligrams for the days when the sun is only out for your lunch break or for the all-nighter midterms study sessions.

With only 70 milligrams of caffeine amidst the crisp, refreshing juice of a pomegranate-blueberry combo and the light sweetness of pear juice (ahem, the first juice listed on the Ingredient Line), this is the perfect energy drink for the month of August.

Read a more in-depth review of this drink here:
What's Good At Archer Farms
 

Which comes first: supplement safety laws or the power to enforce them? The Durbin-Blumenthal Dietary Supplement Labeling Act

US Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) recently introduced the Durbin-Blumenthal Dietary Supplement Labeling Act. This legislation is intended to protect consumers from dangerous supplements by imposing new requirements on supplement manufacturers. While the intentions of this legislation are noble, there are fatal flaws that will prevent this bill from accomplishing any of its goals.  
There are 4 main objectives of the bill, and what follows is the corresponding 4 reasons why this bill won't work:
The 4 Objectives of the D-B Supplement Labeling Bill (scroll to the bottom of the page)

Requirement #1: Allowing FDA to track how many dietary supplements are on the market and what ingredients they contain. 
Flaw #1: A registration requirement is only as effective as the person/people reviewing the submissions.
The proposed legislation would require dietary supplement manufacturers to register their products with the FDA and to provide a copy of the label as well as information on its ingredients (to prove safety and efficacy).
Theoretically, that would curtail the number of products that are absolute poppycock, with no scientific basis whatsoever. Example: Deer Antler pills (no, this is not a joke).

In reality, it will take a live human being to read through all the paperwork (electronic or hard copy) of all the dietary supplement registration/submissions. And if said FDA Agent finds something bogus, won't it require another human being (or multiple people) to call or visit this dietary supplement manufacturer and deliver the warning letter or Cease and Desist notification? 
With human resources and manpower already stretched thin, how will the FDA accomplish any of the supplement review goals stipulated in this bill?


Requirement #2: Requiring more information on product labels including warnings associated with specific ingredients.
Flaw #2: This requirement means supplement manufacturers would have to put warnings on the label to call out the hazards for specific ingredients that may cause adverse events for any particular groups. Hmmm, now that sounds like a fantastic idea...but does this sound familiar to anyone else?

Furthermore, the Council for Responsible Nutrition brought up an excellent point in their official response to the proposed bill. As Steve Mister, President and CEO, CRN said in the statement, 

We cannot support legislation that directs FDA to require warning labels for products or ingredients that ‘could cause’ adverse events or potential risks as this is a case of the precautionary principle run amok. While the premise may be well intentioned, in practice this requirement would lead to confusing and unnecessary label instructions likely to deter consumers from using beneficial dietary supplements based on uncommon or miniscule risks. Further, a new law is unnecessary because the Dietary Supplement Health & Education Act (DSHEA) already provides FDA with the authority to mandate warning labels if the agency determines there is an unreasonable risk of injury or illness under the conditions of use provided in the labeling. Other provisions of the legislation likewise create burdensome new mandates for manufacturers who are already complying with DSHEA without addressing the industry’s outliers.     

Read the Whole CRN Opposition HERE 

Requirement #3: Giving FDA the authority to require manufacturers to provide proof for any potential health benefit claims

Flaw #3: Current law already requires a supplement manufacturer to notify the FDA about their structure/function claims (meaning claims that an ingredient with a particular structure elicits a particular function - ex. Calcium builds strong bones). 

One point for the bill: According to this article by Natural Product Insider, a government report has indicated that the FDA needs more authority to compel a manufacturer to submit these kind of documents to prove their structure/function claims. 

HOWEVER: When the FDA is granted more authority to monitor these claims, the argument of Insufficient Manpower comes up again. What good is having the authority to monitor and request these documents if there aren't actual people and hours to devote to this task? It would be a tough call to have to decide whether to put FDA's resources toward monitoring supplement claims and monitoring imported foods and resolving food outbreaks (Remember the Cantaloupe Crisis? The Deadly Peanut Butter Salmonella outbreak?)  FDA Resources Spread Thin in Enforcing Food Safety

Furthermore, the FDA and Federal Trade Commission is already responsible for monitoring labels that are misleading. Warning Letters - see how many are due to "misbranding" 

Requirement #4: Directing the FDA to clarify the distinction between dietary supplements and food and beverage products with additives. 

Flaw #4: Beverages are not inherently safer than supplements. 

It's no secret that Senators Durbin and Blumenthal are anti-energy drinks. 

See here (3 Senators Concerned Over How Energy Drinks are Marketed), and here (Senator asks FDA to tackle beverage vs supplement issue)

Oddly enough, one of the biggest complaints against energy drinks is that they are beverages masquerading as supplements. Supposedly, that makes them less accountable for ensuring product safety. As laid out clearly in this article by The Hill Regulation Blog:

"Energy drinks are marketed as dietary supplements instead of beverages, leading them to be regulated more laxly, Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (Ill.) said." 

HOWEVER, as food/beverage/supplement industry lawyer Justin J. Prochnow explains in this interview from BevNet Live, (starting around 3 minute mark) switching from a supplement to a beverage doesn't mean the product is safer. It means the product has to abide by a different set of rules (What? Supplements have regulations? Yes, and this is the #1 myth regarding supplements because indeed, they DO have regulations to abide by). 

Monster energy, Red Bull and Rockstar are now all marketed as beverages (actually, Red Bull has ALWAYS been marketed as a beverage). Does that mean these products are any less likely to harm someone who consumes too many energy drinks in one day or consumes just one energy drink too fast (meaning consuming over 200mg caffeine under 20minutes)? No. 

The bottom line is regardless of whether the product is marketed as a food/beverage/supplement, there are multiple other factors that determine its safety. 

BOTTOM LINE: Those in the supplement AND food industry know safety is multi-factorial. Hygiene, pest control, ingredient contamination and adulteration - all these factors and many more affect how safe a product truly is. In a world where a supplement or food company can easily falsify a piece of paper stating the composition of their product, the answer is NOT to require companies to file more paperwork. The answer is not to give the FDA and other governing bodies the authority to monitor that paperwork, but to give them the resources (money, manpower, hours, grassroots support etc) to enforce the laws and regulations already in existence. 

 

New "Green-Eyed Guide Recommends" and Thoughts on Being Naked

New book listed under "Green Eyed Guide Recommends..."
READ IT BEFORE YOU EAT IT: How to Decode Food Labels and Make the Healthiest Choice Every Time - By Bonnie Taub-Dix, MA, RD, CDN.

Why I chose this book:
Food labels are often accused of being confusing and misleading, despite numerous efforts by multiple different agencies to come up with more user-friendly labeling (follow the links for the latest example of these efforts).
Facts Up Front labeling guide
Front-of-Pack Labeling Initiative

Why everyone can benefit from reading (or at least flipping through) this book:
Label reading doesn't have to be confusing and there shouldn't be so many lawsuits about consumers being mislead. (What? You mean this chocolate peanut butter isn't healthy? Gasp!)

Case-in-point: Naked Juice is one of many companies who were sued for reportedly misusing the term "Natural", even though the FDA has yet to define that term.
News Article: Naked but Not 'Natural'

From a food science perspective, the term "natural" is a misnomer, regardless of whether the product labeled as such has GMOs or added vitamins or extra fiber. Doesn't "natural" mean "caused by nature, not by humankind"? So isn't every processed food technically not natural? When is the last time you saw or heard of a granola bar roaming the Great Plains or a brownie rolling through the forest?

 

You can't tell me you ACTUALLY believe this product is "All Natural"...

Yes, this "Natural Debate" is somewhat old news, but these lawsuits keep springing up, and there's no shortage of movements that demand, "We want to know what's in our food!" Well, if that's really true, the first step should be education a la READ IT BEFORE YOU EAT IT, available wherever books are sold. 

ARE YOU A MONSTER OR A ROCK STAR: a guide to energy drinks - NOW AVAILABLE in paperback

After 10 years of collecting data, reading labels, watching the news, reading research and talking to numerous scientists, health professionals and other experts in the field of beverages and supplements, my guide to energy drinks is finally ready for public consumption.

I'm not sure what being a mother is like, but this book is practically my baby. So much work and time and energy went into this project. I hope you enjoy it!

 

Paperback edition NOW AVAILABLE - here
To stay up to date on the release of the Kindle/Nook/iPad and Hardcover versions, follow me on Twitter: @GreenEyedGuide