Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 148
The Food Industry and Nutrition
GILBERT A. LEVEILLE
Investigations of eating patterns and nutritional adequacy often seem
to be based on the following two assumptions: (1) that food selection is
and has been the major determinant of nutritional status and (2) that any
change in eating behavior will negatively affect nutritional status. I would
like to take issue with these assumptions and assert that the food industry
has had a strong positive impact on the improvement of the food supply
and, hence, on nutritional status. This influence provocatively suggests
the only way to improve diets. If future changes in diet composition can
be agreed on, they will be affected primarily by changing the food supply
rather than food selection behavior. How can these changes best be im-
plemented?
A cooperative effort among academia, government, and the private
sector is essential for dealing with present and future nutrition issues, and
scientific consensus is critical to that effort. Because recommendations
for action are difficult to implement unless there is scientific support,
scientific consensus is He essential element for creating workable public
policy that will rally the private sector to creatively change the food supply
and thereby achieve the identified objectives. An example is illustrative.
Nutrition research and subsequent cooperative efforts among academia,
government, and the food industry resulted in the virtual eradication of
deficiency diseases (Heybach et al., in press). No longer do hundreds of
thousands of Americans die of pellagra each year, nor do we see children
with bowed legs resulting from rickets. Goiter, a result of iodine defi-
ciency, is not commonplace, as it once was in many parts of the United
148
OCR for page 148
THE FOOD INDUSTRY AND NUTRITION
i49
States. The elimination of nutrient deficiency disease was not the result
of better food selection (i.e., consumers simply following the recommen-
dations of nutrition researchers). Rather, it was the result of the food
industry modifying the food supply—of adding iodine to salt, vitamin D
to milk, and enriching cereal. Information from nutrition research led to
a consensus on nutritional benefits and, eventually, to policies that the
food industry could and did implement.
The contemporary nutritional issues that demand the kind of cooperative
effort described above are more complex than those of the past. Inadequate
nutrient intake is still a concern. And although calcium, magnesium, iron,
zinc, pyridoxine, and folic acid intakes fall short of desirable levels, caloric
intake appears to be excessive for many Americans (Pao and Mickle,
19811. Achieving lower caloric intakes with the existing food supply would
further lower nutrient intake. The objective to ingest more nutrients and
fewer calories requires a more nutrient-dense diet. Such a diet can be
achieved by careful consumer selection of foods, an effective but unlikely
solution. A better solution would be the evolution of a more nutnent-
dense food supply.
Another contemporar, and complex nutrition issue involves He view
that better health can result from particular diets, for example, diets lower
in fat, particularly saturated fat; lower in cholesterol; lower in calories;
lower in salt; higher in fiber. Most consumers would have difficulty se-
lecting and maintaining these diets. The food industry, however, could
make a contribution
· if nutritional goals were clearly defined and supported by scientific
consensus;
· if consumers were sufficiently convinced to purchase new products;
and
· if manufacturers differentiated between Be new, improved and He
old products in their marketing. !
The essential element for this process to occur is a clear scientific
mandate for changes in our food supply. It can lead to workable public
policy and regulations that in turn provide the framework for an effective
food industry response.
REFERENCES
Heybach, J. P., G. D. Coccodrilli, and G. A. Leveille. In press. The contribution of processed
food intake to the nutrient status of the U.S. population. In R. S. Hams and E. Karmas, eds.
Nutritional Evaluation of Food Processing, 4th ed. AVI Publishing Co., Inc., Westport; Conn.
Pao, E., and S. J. Mickle. 1981. Problem nutrients in the United States. Food Technol. 35:58-
79.