Category Archives: News

Soft Drinks

UK soft drinks industry need to start budgeting

The launch of the latest UK budget has firmly put sugar in the firing line.  George Osborne has announced a tax on large manufacturers of sugar-sweetened soft drinks they produce or import.

Sugar-sweetened soft drinks will be taxed in two distinct bands, those with a total sugar content above 5% (5g per 100ml) and a higher band for those with 8% added sugar. Details and definitions of what is considered ‘sugar’ are still unclear, but ‘pure’ fruit juices and milk based drinks will be excluded.  Also small scale manufacturers will not have to pay this levy, which will be placed onto manufacturers directly in two years time.  Will this additional charge be passed on to consumers?  We’ll have to wait and see!

The classification of sugar in the budget will need further clarity.  Assuming ‘sugar’ is added sucrose, what about other sweetening agents? Fructose? Glucose? Corn Syrups? What are classified as ‘pure’ fruit juices?  How will sugars in these products be measured?

There are more questions than answers at this early stage, and with consultation in the summer we’ll be watching closely to find out more!

Jamie’s Sugar Rush – Not a rushed response?

SodasSo it’s been a few weeks since Jamie’s launched his battle against sugar , and I’ve been waiting to hear the response and reaction from consumers, manufacturers, legislators, and frankly anyone! Interestingly, even though everyone is talking about in sugars in our foods and drinks, it hasn’t really been the storm I was expecting.

This got me thinking, whilst it is certainly a good idea to tackle how much sugar we all eat and drink, as Jamie showed the dental and general health implications could be huge. This in turn could reduce the strain on the NHS and have wider reaching benefits. Whilst his campaign message is undoubtedly very well intended, I have a few questions on his approach.

Firstly, would a 10p increase in drinks costing £2.45 in his restaurants really dissuade anyone from ordering a drink with added sugar, particularly when you consider other restaurants charge around £2.50 anyway?  I realise this is just the start to his tax proposition however, other restaurants have appeared to be slow or reluctant to follow his lead, which is intriguing.

Whilst he backed up his manifesto with the observed reduction in fizzy drink consumption in Mexico following a one peso drinks tax, can we really compare these very different nations and use the same the approach to very different social status and sugar intake problems?  He hardly mentioned the early stage results of the Mexican findings, nor discussed the difficulties observed during the introduction of France’s soft drink tax, which showed a far lower level of impact over a longer period of time, and is a nation with a closer socio-economic structure to the UK.

The final queries I have from Jamie’s sugar rush, were when Jamie outlined how much sugar we can easily consume in our diets (without even having fizzy drinks, desserts or sweets).   When discussing a typical daily diet, Jamie found we could easily consume over five times the recommended level of sugar without a fizzy drink in sight, fundamentally questioning the point of focusing on a single food offering, rather than recommending balance and moderation.  This got me thinking, if sugar is in a wide range of our foods and drinks already, what are the food and drinks industry doing to align with government recommendations?  Are they doing anything to reduce sugar in their products already?

The food and drinks industry aren’t just standing idly by and increasing the sugar levels in their products, many of them are constantly striving to reduce sugar contents right under our noses!  Using a small step reduction approach, which takes a small amount of sugar out of the product so that consumers won’t notice, they then wait until everyone has adjusted to the new sweetness level and do it again.  This method has been used on reducing salt and sugar in products for years, however it does take time.  Larger scale jumps can lead to consumers noticing a large difference and rejecting of the product (even if claimed on the label), which can severely damage consumer enjoyment, the product and even perception of the brand too.  All of these are heavy costs to the food and drinks industry, and they are determined to products that taste good and consumers will like.

Alternatively, sweetening agents such as aspartame, sucralose and more recently stevia have also been included into products.  These deliver sweetness without the diabetes and tooth decay issues associated with sugar, and are commonly used in diet drinks and as table top sweeteners.  However, consumer perceptions of sweeteners are mixed, with some feeling these aren’t a natural source of sweetness and opting for sugar and honey alternatives, whilst others find these an option for low-calorie enjoyment of sweet products.

Jamie’s sugar rush has highlighted a key debate in the production of our foods and drinks, and the need to strike a balance between great tasting products and healthy lifestyle.  I’m sure this debate will continue for the foreseeable future, and maybe Jamie’s efforts will be a slow burning reminder for the food and drinks industry to keep sugar near the top of their priorities.

Soft Drinks

Sugar wars – The attack of the chef

Sugar is in the headlines again this week and battle lines are being drawn.  Celebrity chef Jamie Oliver has launched an attack on sugar in a Channel 4 documentary to be shown later this week on UK TV, and the Food and Drink Federation has already hit back in defense.  This couldn’t be more topical following the recent SACN guidelines aiming to reduce sugar consumption to 5g a day.

Jamie Oliver and his team are aiming to introduce a tax on soft drinks with added sugar.  The sugary drinks tax would increase beverage costs by 20p per litre, which would add around 7p onto the cost of canned soft drinks.  Soft drinks have been singled out in Jamie’s manifesto as he states they are the largest single source of sugar consumption for children, providing high calorie intakes and impacting dental health.  Although a 20p per litre cost increase may not sound like much, the cost increase would be too large for manufacturers to absorb themselves and would therefore be passed directly on to consumers with the intention to reduce sugary drink consumption, increase overall public health, improve dental health and potentially reduce obesity levels.  Other countries have already introduced this tax with varying degrees of success, including France, Hungary, and most recently Mexico where a 10% tax on sugar-sweetened beverages is projected to decrease consumption by around 12% and could substantially reduce the prevalence of obesity.

However the Food and Drink Federation has already hit back, stating sugar consumption in the UK is in decline, with increasing consumption of diet product offerings.  The regulatory body also insists that sugary soft drinks are not the largest source of calories consumed by children, with director general Ian Wright suggesting that government legislation of sugar consumption won’t work by “Demonising one nutrient out of a range on the national menu is not a healthy way to proceed.”  Since many food and beverages are already taxed, the federation suggests any additional taxes would not be proven effective at driving long-term dietary changes, as found with the sugary drink tax in France showing initial decreases in consumption followed by normal patterns resuming.

This debate got me thinking, how can we define what is a “sugary drink”?  What about natural sugars?  Plenty of products already state “No Added Sugar” on the label, would these be exempt from the sugar tax?  Fruit juices can contain similar amounts of fructose as the levels of added sugar in soft drinks, would these need to be taxed even though the sugar isn’t “added”.  With the ever increase demand for natural products, will including natural sources of sweetness such as fruit juices and honey be included in this tax too?

Another thought is about the level of sugar in these drinks.  Would a blanket price increase be introduced, as requested in Jamie’s manifesto, or would the level of tax be based on the amount of sugar in a product?  Would providing sugar tax bands, or a sliding tax scale support the food and drinks industry to reduce sugar levels, and encourage consumers to make healthier choices?

I look forward to this documentary to find out more details, answer these questions and really understand the options, opportunities and challenges facing us to reduce sugar in the UK population’s diet.

The not so sweet taste of fat

Fat

Another exciting study has hit the world of taste research.  Researchers from Purdue University, have found new evidence to suggest we can perceive the taste of fat, termed ‘Oleogustus’.  In a study published this month, Mattes and his team have found new evidence that fats can have a distinct taste, different sensation to the basic tastes of sweet, sour, salty, bitter or umami.

In this study, volunteers were screened for their taste ability through a series of discrimination (spot the similar samples) tests.  Screening selected 69% of volunteers, with 36% showing higher taste acuity.  Successful participants wore nose clips, to reduce the impact of aroma and flavour, and sorted a variety of taste samples into groups using an adapted Taxonomic Free Sorting approach.  The samples were matched for texture, so volunteers focussed on taste differences when describing what united samples that they placed in the same groups.

Sorting results found participants grouped samples into salty, sweet, sour and bitter tastes, with the fat samples generally placed separately to all these basic tastes.  Whilst some overlap was observed with certain fats considered to be have elements sour, umami and bitter tastes, follow-up assessments found participants could isolate the fat samples specifically. Some short chain fatty acids were found to be slightly sour, whilst medium length chain fatty acids had some cross-over with umami compounds such as Monosodium Glutamate.  Interestingly, long chain fatty acids were found to have some bitter associations for consumers, and these findings led the study authors to conclude that the taste of fat may not be entirely pleasant, and even considered unpalatable.

Despite fat delivering a specific sensation we can detect on the tongue, it is the combination of these tastes, aromas, textures and flavours that contribute to the full sensory experience.  Fats can aid flavour delivery and provide texture cues to a wide range of products such as the melting mouthfeel of chocolate and ice cream, so even though it may be unpalatable when isolated, fat is easily accepted in the full context of foods and beverages.  Nevertheless, this greater understanding of what we perceive when we eat, can help industry develop low fat alternatives and fat replacers, knowing the role this essential ingredient plays in the mouth, and how we can perceive it.

This is a fascinating finding for both sensory research and the food industry as a whole, particularly for those developing low fat products with fat free alternatives.  This study highlights that fat has a taste which could be important to mimic in low fat products, as well as indicating the levels that isolated fatty acids can detected by consumers.  The concentrations of fats used in this study are around the levels in fermented and rancid products and could help explain the unpalatable nature of fat samples by consumers.  This new study suggests the taste of fat could play more of a role in food perception than we all realise, beyond the texture and mouthfeel characteristics we recognise in some of our favourite foods like chocolate!

Halving sugar intakes – What impact does this have on food & drink?

Sugar on spoonThe Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), has recommended the average daily intake of sugar in the UK to be halved.  This aims to reduce the risk of obesity, type 2 diabetes and improve overall dental health.  This interesting BBC News Article on Sugar Intakes highlights the role of consumers, retailers and the food and drinks industry in taking steps towards this dietary change.

But will this be easy to achieve?  Well I think there are definitely some challenges ahead, both in terms of changing consumer behaviour, but also for food and drink developers.  Moving towards alternative sweetening options such as natural and artificial sweeteners is not a simple task of replacing like for like.  Removing or replacing sugars and can severely affect the sensory characteristics of products not just by impacting the sweetness, but also the overall flavour and how it is delivered, the texture and mouthfeel of the product and the after-effects after swallowing.  This makes any changes, even small ones, easy for consumers to notice and can lead to disliking and rejecting the low sugar formulation.

This reminds me of The Sugar Debate we had at work.  Recently MMR carried out a quick online poll asking people whether sugars or artificial sweeteners concerned them most in their foods and drinks.  Interestingly 33% of consumers were concerned by sugar, whilst 29% were concerned by aspartame and 4% by sucralose.  Perhaps the recommendations from the SACN will increase concern over sugar and make the first steps towards adapting consumer diets.

The Sugar Debate: What are consumers most concerned about?