Bioavailability Counts

News report bylines cite cancer protective, cholesterol lowering, muscle building, and many other health enhancing attributes for chemicals derived from food. What gets lost in translation, however, is that many of these studies do not take into account the role of digestion and absorption of these agents from food, in other words bioavailability. Quercetin, a widely distributed flavonoid with numerous reports in the scientific literature on its biological activities in cell systems has a bioavailability (as % excreted dose) of 6% in humans fed onions (Simons et al. 2010). These authors reported bioavailability for genistein (soymilk) and hesperitin (grapefruit) each at 7%, naringenin (orange) at 3%, whereas daidzein (soymilk) was 43%. Genistein’s flavonoid analogue, apigenin, has bioavailability of < 3% in rats exposed to a major form of apigenin in foods, apigenin-7-glucoside (Hanske et al., 2009). Anthocyanins from strawberries were 2% bioavailable (Carkeet et al., 2008). In contrast, coffee phenolic acids were almost 50% bioavailable (Stalmach et al., 2009).

Many flavonoids and phenolic acids show promising biological activity in cell systems when tested as aglucons but not in the form the intact human would experience (Manach et al. 2005). Plant phenolics (phenolic acids, flavonols, flavonones, isoflavones) occur in food as glucosides. During digestion, they may be deglucosylated by human or microbial glucosidases. Apparently, only aglucons are absorbed and immediately biotransformed to make glucuronide or sulfate conjugates in the intestinal mucosa, with additional biotransformation by the liver, kidney and other organs before excretion. The absorbed phenolics are excreted in the urine or in the bile where they are deconjugated in the lower intestine by microbes and reabsorbed with concomitant biotransformation. More than 90% of plasma circulating forms are glucuronides or sulfates (Zhang et al. 2003). These forms that the cells interact with need much more study, but seem to be much less bioactive than the aglucon phenolics that they are derived from, as shown for isoflavone glucuronides (Zhang et al. 1999). Most plant phenolics are catabolized by gut microflora (Hendrich 2002). The great variety of these gut microbial metabolites is not well characterized yet for their bioactivities. Additionally, most plant phenolics and their metabolites do not accumulate in tissues but are rather rapidly excreted, most within a day after intake.

Thus, reports on the biological activity of interesting phytochemicals need to be interpreted in terms of the assay system, i.e., how closely it mimics intact digestion, absorption, and circulation, and the form of the phytochemical, i.e., is the chemical form the one circulating in plasma that cells will actually experience?

Patricia A. Murphy and Suzanne Hendrich
Iowa State University

References:

Carkeet, C., Clevidence, B.A., Novotny, J.A. Anthocyanin Excretion by Humans Increases

Linearly with Increasing Strawberry Dose1 J. Nutr. 2008, 138: 897–902.

Hanske, L., Loh, G., Sczesny, S., Blaut, M., Braune, A. The Bioavailability of Apigenin-7-Glucoside Is Influenced by Human Intestinal Microbiota in Rats. J. Nutr. 2009, 139: 1095–1102.

Hendrich, S. Bioavailability of isoflavones. J Chromatog. B 2002, 777: 203-210.

Manach C, Williamson G, Morand C, Scalbert A, Rémésy C. Bioavailability and bioefficacy of polyphenols in humans. I. Review of 97 bioavailability studies. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 Jan;81(1 Suppl):230S-242S.

Simons, A., Renouf, M., Murphy, P., Hendrich, S. Greater apparent absorption of flavonoids is associated with lesser human fecal flavonoid disappearance rates. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 141-147.

Stalmach, A. , Mullen, W. Denis Barron, D., Uchida, K., Yokota, T., Cavin, C., Steiling, H., Williamson, G., Crozier, A. Metabolite Profiling of Hydroxycinnamate Derivatives in Plasma and Urine after the Ingestion of Coffee by Humans: Identification of Biomarkers of Coffee Consumption. Drug Metab. Dispos. 2009, 37:1749-1758.

Zhang, Y., Song, T. T., Cunnick, J. E., Murphy, P. A., Hendrich, S. Daidzein and genistein glucuronides in vitro are weakly estrogenic and activate human natural killer cells in nutritionally relevant concentrations. J. Nutr. 1999, 129: 399-405.

Zhang, Y., Murphy, P. A., Hendrich, S. Glucuronides are the main isoflavone metabolites in women. J. Nutr. 2003, 133: 399-404.

Nanotechnology and Food: An IFT Perspective

Nanotechnology is a rapidly growing field of research that is revolutionizing various sectors of the economy such as medicine, energy, electronic, and defense; and potentially the food and agriculture sector with on-going research in many areas of application. IFT recognizes the potential to positively impact the food industry as well as the possible environmental, health, and safety implications that may negatively impact the food supply chain. IFT thus supports objective and well-designed research and development efforts that address all aspects of the spectrum. To this end, IFT has taken on a leadership role as a catalyst for research, innovation, and communication, both domestically and internationally. Here are details on IFT activities.

It is noteworthy that interest in nanotechnology and food has significantly increased in recent years in both the public and policy arenas. Particular interest has focused on research discoveries on applications in food, potential safety implications, and regulatory oversight.  A new bill, Nanotechnology Safety Act 2010, introduced in the U.S. Senate by Senators Mark Pryor (D-AR) and Benjamin Cardin (D-MD) is seeking to create a new nanotechnology risk assessment program within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The program will investigate the safety of nanoscale materials intended for use on FDA-regulated products. The bill is seeking an appropriation of $25 million annually between 2011 and 2015 to fund the FDA scheme. For details on the bill visit the Web site.

IFT in collaboration with the FDA, Grocery Manufacturers Association, International Life Sciences Institute-North America, and Nanotechnology Characterization Laboratory of the National Cancer Institute are working to establish and increase the knowledge and understanding of the safety of nanomaterials with potential for use in food-related applications. A comprehensive report on safety of nanomaterials for food applications has been developed and is being prepared for publication in peer reviewed food science and toxicological publications. This will work will help inform regulatory processes and may provide scientific support for the proposed Senate Bill. Furthermore, it will help guide future direction of food nanotechnology through gap identification and development of strategic plans to address consumer, regulatory, and industry needs.

Betty Bugusu
IFT Research Scientist

Looking Back to Move Forward in the Kraft Cadbury Merger

They say if you just wait for a while things will come back around.  Well, that sure is the case with Kraft and confections, but now in an even greater or bigger position. The merger between Kraft and Cadbury places Kraft as the largest confectionery company internationally in areas such as chocolates, sugar confections, and a close second in chewing gum.

With such a presence, opportunities will arise for those in the food industry with vision and skills.

Cadbury’s Adams Gum Division, located in Whippany, N.J., has been very successful recently and I would expect this to not only continue, but also grow under more U.S. support and direction.  Also, this division’s possible reconsideration of nutraceutical products could or should be on the horizon.  Remember a product named Body Smarts?  Maybe the time for its resurrection is now? And could other “better for you” and high protein products be next in line? This growth could mean new opportunities for confectioners and food scientists alike.

Many questions linger after the announcement of the merger. Will Kraft consider pumping more resources in their old stable divisions like Caramel and Marshmallows? Will they be used as ingredients in new Cadbury chocolate items made here in the U.S.? Will they be looked at more seriously now, as new ingredients are available to improve the formulas and reduce product costs? Again, new opportunities for jobs would definitely be created.

Chocolate, which is Cadbury’s core expertise, continues to grow as a nutraceutical base and many new product possibilities seem promising here—be they solid chocolates or fortified with anti-oxidants, omega 3’s, etc..

Will older products like Snack Wells be reconsidered? The brand was very successful in the marketplace and with Cadbury’s chocolate support I am sure a variety of newly created, highly rated consumer products can be generated. Of course this would all require the special skills of food technologists and support staffing (i.e. engineers, flavorists, sensory screeners, etc.).

I was pleased to see Kraft take this move, and compliment it for “reaching for the stars.” This industry change can only be positive and open many opportunities for creative and skilled individuals. I would expect to see more lights being on at Kraft and Cadbury tech centers starting in the 3^rd quarter of this year, maybe sooner. For those interested, the time is now to renew those resumes and CV’s and get those letters ready.

Let us wish Kraft success and that will in turn be good for us all.

Robert Boutin
President, Knechtel

Let the U.S. Government Budget Games Begin!

Now that the U.S. government’s budgetary pencil dust has settled a bit, we can see features of President Obama’s proposed 2011 budget worthy of praise, as well as some budget gimmickry.

For example, the President proposed an increase in Food and Drug Administration (FDA) food safety funding from $1.049 billion in FY 2010 to $1.368 billion in FY 2011—a whopping 30% increase on top of substantial increases the two previous years. This would boost the recent influx of new FDA personnel with an additional 718 Full-Time Equivalents (FTEs) for food safety activities.

Sounds great, but will it happen? Look more closely. Only 25% of the proposed increase in funding is supported by a request in appropriations. The budget “assumes” that Congress will enact fees on regulated industry that will provide the remainder of the proposed funding. Other Presidents have used this ploy, with the “assumed” funding never being realized. Thus, a “proposal” in the eyes of the Administration may be a “gimmick” in the eyes of Congress.

While some new fees on regulated industry seem likely to be enacted this year as part of Food Safety legislation, there are mounting concerns about such fees hurting U.S. competitiveness and, therefore, jobs. At any rate, it is highly unlikely that such fees would generate the “assumed” revenues in FY 2011.

In the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) budget, proposed funding for the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) is flat—$1.037 billion in FY 2011, up from $1.019 billion in FY 2010, but a modest level of fees on regulated industry is “assumed” here as well.

The USDA research budget would include the following increases in food research:

• $11 million for food safety research (above $158 million in FY 2010).
• $54 million for obesity-related research efforts (above $69 million in FY 2010).
• $20 million for National Institute of Food and Agriculture efforts to improve food safety through new and improved rapid detection methods, pre- and post-harvest epidemiological studies, and improved food harvesting and processing technologies.
• $5 million in the Agricultural Research Service budget to develop and validate integrated science-based management practices to prevent preharvest contamination of produce by eneteric pathogens; develop postharvest intervention strategies to eliminate any pathogen contamination; and develop and validate detection and sensing technologies.

In the context of a freeze on federal discretionary spending, how are these increases funded? For the most part, proposed new spending would be offset by the complete elimination of all congressional funding initiatives. Good luck with that.

There is an old saying in Washington: the President proposes; the Congress disposes.

USDA budget summary (pdf)
FDA press release

John Bode
Principal Attorney
Olsson Frank Weeda Terman Bode Matz PC

Lack of Visibility + Product Recall = Perfect Disaster

The rising number of large-scale food recalls in recent years is not going unnoticed. Incidents such as the recent beef recall from Huntington Meat Packing and the January 2009 peanut butter Salmonella outbreak are all stacking up, adding to the lack of consumer confidence, growing scrutiny from regulators, unprecedented demand for food from emerging nations, and increased demands for brand-protection assurance.

The impact of food recalls alone, in both human and financial terms, can be quite staggering. The financial costs associated with the recall of peanuts from Peanut Corporation of America are believed to have topped $1 billion.  The human cost was even more profound: Nine people died and hundreds became sick from eating contaminated peanut products. In response to widespread incidents of food contamination like this, the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) issued a new study recommending guidelines for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to establish a comprehensive product system to track the movement of food products effectively from farm to table.

Food processors are also doing their part to address this complex challenge by leveraging enterprise software to automate and integrate traceability across all steps in their supply chains. Just as accounting systems act as financial systems of record, these enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems create an operational system of record.

Newer, more powerful ERP systems also contain product lot-tracing capabilities that allow a business to trace the source of all ingredients, and project the distribution of all food products made and sold within just a few minutes, if not seconds. The increased confidence provided by this level of tracking enables food processors to establish a competitive advantage and save thousands of dollars. With proof of “in-control status” for customers, auditors, and regulatory inspectors, such systems can also help prevent the potentially catastrophic consequences of a failed safety audit or comprehensive recall of all lots (and potentially products) on store shelves or consumers’ pantries.

Considering the ever-growing regulatory pressures worldwide, greater consumer awareness, and the increased safety risks inherent in the extended global supply chain, having the right technology in place is no longer a luxury.  It’s a strategic differentiator that is imperative for surviving and thriving today and in the years ahead.

Jack Payne
Director of Solutions Consulting
CDC Software

A New Decade Deserves a New Commitment to Safe Food

The second decade of the 21st century is here. Cars can speak to drivers and direct them where to go. Masses of readers have ditched dog-eared paperbacks for electronic surrogates that can hold hundreds of volumes yet fit comfortably in their hands. With all of this, isn’t it reasonable to expect that consumers be able to walk into supermarkets and come out with food they know is safe?

According to U.S. government estimates, eating contaminated food causes hundreds of thousands of Americans to be hospitalized and thousands to die each year. Foodborne illness also takes a financial toll on victims, their families, and society, costing hundreds of billions of dollars annually, according to one expert analysis. The fear—and consequences—of foodborne illness are real, and consumers want better assurance that it will not strike them or their loved ones. Nationwide polling has made this clear. According to a bipartisan poll commissioned by the Pew Health Group over the summer, 89% of voters support new food-safety legislation—an endorsement that crosses gender, age, economic, and partisan lines.

As the recent outbreaks of foodborne illness linked to contaminated spinach, peanut butter products, and cookie dough underscore, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not currently possess the authority, funding, and capacity to adequately ensure the safety of food consumers purchase, whether it be imported items or those produced in the U.S. As these outbreaks also demonstrated, it is not only victims and their families who suffer from contamination in the food supply; recalls and interrupted production that result from outbreaks cost the food industry millions of dollars—a loss that is compounded by consumer fears about purchasing stigmatized foods.

The Senate food-safety reform bill, S. 510, would shift the FDA’s focus from responding to outbreaks as they occur to creating a food-safety system focused on preventing foodborne illness. Among other measures, the bill increases inspection rates for high-risk food facilities, requires facilities to develop preventive control programs to reduce the risk of contamination, increases FDA authority to mandate recalls of tainted products, and creates stricter requirements around imports.

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor & Pensions unanimously passed this bipartisan piece of legislation in November 2009. Now, as soon as possible, the Senate needs to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, in order to make food-safety reform a reality. In July, the House overwhelmingly passed H.R. 2749, its version of the FDA food-safety reform, which does even more to strengthen the food-safety system than does the Senate bill.

Consumers want and need a better food-safety system. The food industry wants and needs the same thing—an alignment of interests that rarely occurs. Congress should vote on, and pass, FDA reform legislation as soon as possible, and begin the New Year—and new decade—with the promise of safer food.

Courtney Brein
Linda Golodner Food Safety and Nutrition Fellow
National Consumers League

2010 Brings Some New and Some Enduring Trends

The FoodWatch databases for restaurant menus and food magazine/newspaper articles track an array of key indicators for trend identification. Along with the database tracking, FoodWatch uses a number of other sources to validate and enhance trend information. Using this data, I have identified some diverse trends to watch in 2010.

Desserts with a savory/sweet flavor
At the height of the trend craze for balsamic vinegar, we saw many fruit and vinegar combinations for dessert—such as strawberry with a splash of balsamic vinegar used in shortcakes. The newer sweet/savory trend in desserts uses a wider array of savory ingredients. Sometimes the pairing aims to capture the yin and yang of the flavors, sometimes it plays the saltiness off of the sweet, and in other combinations the intent is for the savory component to heighten the sweetness of the dessert. In all cases, the result is a more complex set of flavors with layers of interest.

Lemon and herb combinations have become particularly trendy. Some examples seen in the media are Lemon Snow Pudding with Basil Custard Sauce, featured in the April 2009 issue of Gourmet, and Blueberry Shortcakes with Lemon Thyme Biscuits, shown in the June 2009 issue of Bon Appétit. Other lemon desserts seen in the recent media include rosemary, basil, and fennel.

Among the savory ingredients seen in desserts are sesame seed, tea and smoked tea, blue cheese, and browned butter. In addition, salted caramel has become a very popular flavor profile. The flavor has been seen in many media recipes, and is often used in combination with chocolate, fruits, and ice cream.

Local still going strong
Shoppers and cooks want to know the origins of their food and want to buy from local growers and farmers. At all levels of the shopping experience, consumers seem to have a genuine interest in sourcing local. The occurrences of local foods being identified on menus have reinforced this interest with cooks. Local foods go hand-in-hand with a desire to frequent artisan and family-owned businesses. And, of course, farmers’ markets continue to be popular, many extending their season by moving to indoor locations.

Street food
Upscale chefs have taken to the streets. Border Grill has trucks serving tacos, quesadillas, ceviches, and more from Food Network’s “Too Hot Tamales” Mary Sue Milliken and Susan Feniger. Located in Chicago, Ill., Rick Bayless has opened Xoco, which serves Mexican street fare in an open cooking marketplace environment. Cities like Seattle are making it easier on vendors to offer foods in mobile restaurants. From French pastries to shawarma sandwiches, fast food on wheels is offering customers global and gourmet sampling experiences that they might otherwise not consider.

The southern influence spreading to mainstream
A search of chain restaurants found that 25 had a menu item of jambalaya, gumbo, or catfish. The term “southern fried” has gained popularity. West Coast independent restaurants are even identifying the brand of grits used in cooking. In addition, many have discovered and embraced the health benefits of cooked kale, chard, and other traditional southern hearty greens.

New sugars
Not all sweetness is granulated or white. Look for more molasses, raw and unbleached sugar, agave syrup, and Okinawa black sugar in foods. We may be seeing the advent of specialized sugar much the way specialized salts became popular several years ago. Honey, especially with artisan flavors and origins, continues its popularity. Maple syrup and sugars endure.

Linda Smithson
Partner
FoodWatch
http://www.foodwatchtrends.com/

Can Meta-analysis Help Biosafety Research?

Santa Clara University Biology Professor Michelle Marvier and her colleagues have recently published a meta-analysis of field studies that concluded that Bt crops are generally more benign for non-target invertebrates than chemical insecticides. A second meta-analysis of lab studies found no harmful effects of Bt proteins on honeybees. Although these reports will probably fail to convince skeptics, they raise an important question: Can meta-analysis be used to tease meaningful results out of a series of studies that, taken individually, are inconclusive? Given the cost and methodological complexity of ecological studies, it’s an important question.

The answer is affirmative only if the studies analyzed are sufficiently well designed and conducted to yield useful data. The need to discard or discount flawed studies presents a constant challenge to meta-analysts. Even when carefully selected criteria for inclusion or exclusion of a data set are stated a priori, researchers are accused of bias when they exclude a study that seems to favor one point of view over another.

If we are to avoid the GIGO—garbage-in garbage-out—effect in meta-analysis, incomplete and/or flawed studies must be excluded. A perfect example is the study reported in PNAS by Rosi-Marshall et al. (2007) which claimed to show that pollen from Bt-maize was injurious to caddisflies in a laboratory aquatic ecosystem, but was flawed in numerous ways. For example, pollen produced by currently available varieties of Bt-maize contains very low concentrations of Bt toxin. In addition, the authors extrapolated from a laboratory experiment to a field system based on a single study, an extrapolation that is problematic, especially given that they used pollen in doses higher than the maximum encountered under field conditions. Possibly the most damning of all is that they reported elsewhere that they had failed to find these effects in the field (http://www.benthos.org/database/allnabstracts.cfm/db/Columbia2007abstracts/id/370), an important fact that should have been disclosed in the PNAS paper. The omission of those contrary findings arguably amounts to investigator misconduct.

Despite all the sensational publicity they may attract, such flawed studies add no value to meta-analysis.

An additional challenge for researchers is the well-known “File Drawer Effect.” Papers that show no differences—and especially no new risks or harms—are seldom of interest to scientists or journalists and are unpublishable. Thus, there is little incentive for scientists to spend their careers proving that safe crops are safe. This skews the literature in favor of papers that show effects, usually adverse. This phenomenon, combined with the willingness of some scientists to skew their studies toward negative results for a variety of reasons—good funding, publications, notoriety, and politics among them—make meaningful meta-analyses exceedingly difficult.

Taking nothing away from the careful analysis performed by Marvier and her colleagues, two important points emerge. First, as Marvier notes, “If meta-analyses and large databases of completed studies were to become a routine part of risk assessment, then there would not be the distraction of single experiments capturing media attention and inappropriately alarming or comforting the public and policy-makers.” It would be better if regulators were allowed to make science-based decisions free from pressure and politics from their over-seers in Congress and far from the maddening din of the media.

Second, perhaps we are asking all the wrong questions of all the wrong crops. By that I mean simply that GM crops are more precisely engineered, have far fewer and less random changes than conventional crops, and are far more thoroughly researched; indeed pre-market safety reviews are not required for non-GM crops even though they have more numerous, random, and potentially disruptive mutations in their DNA. We also have over 12 years experience from more than 13 million farmers on greater than 2 billion acres in 25 countries (Brooks and Barfoot, 2008) in profitably growing and harvesting GM crops, with no evidence of adverse environmental or human health impact and mounting evidence of substantial environmental benefit.

The greatest contribution Marvier and colleagues have made is to provide yet one more independent objective analysis that points to the conclusion that GM crops are as safe as any other crop produced by any other breeding technology; all crops should be evaluated for safety in a risk-based fashion, independent of the technology used to develop them.

Bruce Chassy
Professor of Nutritional Sciences
Professor of Food Microbiology
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

References

Meta-studies for biosafety research, Michelle Marvier from the University of Santa Clara (USA). http://www.gmo-safety.eu/en/news/712.docu.html

E.J. Rosi-Marshall et al. 2007. “Toxins in transgenic crop by products may affect headwater stream ecosystems” PNAS 104 :16204-16208.

Graham Brookes and Peter Barfoot. 2008. Global Impact of Biotech Crops: Socio-Economic and Environmental Effects, 1996-2006. AgBioForum, 11(1): 21-38. http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/agbioforumpaper2008final.pdf

BPA Returns to the Consumer Stage

A recent issue of Consumer Reports contains results of a limited monitoring program that detected Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical used in the manufacture of polycarbonate plastics that include some food packaging materials, in several of the 19 name-brand foods tested. While the findings were predictable, the article drew national headlines with its contention that consumers could be facing serious risks from exposure to BPA in their foods.

The controversy stems from the debate over what levels of consumer exposure to BPA should be of concern. The US Environmental Protection Agency and the European Food Safety Authority consider an acceptable daily level of BPA exposure to be 50 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day. In contrast, the Consumer Reports article argues for an acceptable daily level of 0.0024 micrograms per kilogram of body weight per day, which is more than 20,000 times lower than the U.S. and European levels. This much more strict level is based upon results of a single controversial study suggesting abnormal reproductive effects at low doses of BPA.

Consumer exposure from BPA continues to be very low. A comprehensive study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 2007 using urine samples from more than 2,000 individuals concluded that typical daily exposures to BPA are about one million times lower than the levels that showed no adverse effects on reproduction or development in comprehensive multigenerational animal studies.

Nov. 30, 2009 was the deadline for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to provide a safety assessment of BPA in foods, which it apparently did not meet. This deadline was self-imposed by the FDA after its science board recommended that the FDA consider findings of additional toxicological studies before determining an appropriate acceptable level of exposure. The Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee of the California Environmental Protection Agency recently reviewed BPA toxicology studies and reached the conclusion in July 2009 that BPA offered no clear evidence of developmental or reproductive harm to consumers.

Decisions as to the acceptability of exposure to chemicals such as BPA require a thorough review of exposure levels and toxicology information, with the ultimate decisions based upon a “weight of evidence” approach. The “pick-and-choose” approach advocated in the Consumer Reports article is unlikely to sway scientific opinion regardless of its impact of raising fears and distrust among consumers.

Carl K. Winter, Ph.D.
Director, FoodSafe Program and Extension Food Toxicologist
Department of Food Science and Technology
University of California

Restaurant-Inspired Private Label Foods

What do French pastry vegetarian pizza, Buffalo-style chicken meatballs, and orange citrus soufflés have in common? All of these products were on display at the recent Private Label Manufacturers Assoc. Trade Show in Rosemont, Ill. As private label foods continue to climb up the quality ladder, they are looking to restaurants and chefs for inspiration when developing new product concepts. This culinary trend was evident at the show, which was home to a multitude of food manufacturers offering value-added frozen and chilled appetizers, entrees, snacks, and desserts—many with an ethnic twist.

Olive Street Table, Santa Barbara, Calif., sampled several varieties of its French pastry pizza. The frozen vegetarian products feature a flaky crust and all-natural ingredients. The company has applied for a patent on the process for making the French pastry dough (pizza crust) in industrial-size batches. Celebrity Chef Bobby Flay named the Mediterranean-style pizza as one of his favorite products at the 2009 Fancy Food Show in New York. Gianni Foods, Linthicum, Md., showcased its Make & Bake Pizza Kit, which includes its own ovenable baking pan, crust, and individual pouches of cheese, sauce, and pepperoni. The 27-oz product may be refrigerated or frozen.

Rosina Food Products, Buffalo, N.Y., sampled Buffalo-style chicken meatballs. Made with all white meat chicken and Buffalo wing-style hot sauce, the products can be used as a standalone appetizer or as a pizza topping. Concord Premium Meats, Quebec, Canada, grilled chicken and pork kabobs. Product varieties include Chipotle Seasoned and Lemon & Herb Seasoned. The fresh, marinated product comes in a 16-oz package—four 4-oz skewers.

Cuisine Solutions, Alexandria, Va., a frozen food manufacturer specializing in sous vide cooking, displayed Bake & Serve Orange Citrus Soufflés. Double B Foods, DeSoto, Texas, showcased Mini Bagel Dogs—mini frankfurters enrobed in chewy pretzel dough. The chilled, 8-count product comes in a 16-oz bag. Preparation is fairly simple; just heat and serve.

The growth of restaurant-inspired foods is one direction for store brands, which may benefit from licensing or tie-ins with established or up-and-coming celebrity chefs.

What trends did you uncover at the Private Label Trade Show?
Bob Swientek
Director of Publications
Editor-in-Chief, Food Technology magazine