http://www.aglinenews.com

" I heard it
through the
AgLine"

 

July 25, 2008

 

 

 

·        Ag giants intensify debate over food versus fuel

·        Mexico hot under the collar at US pepper scare

·        Tomato growers get help in compensation quest

·        Ethanol co-product eyed for organic weed control

·        Nutritional value of organics questioned … again

 

 

 

Ag giants intensify debate over food versus fuel

CHICAGO -(Dow Jones)- A group of U.S. agribusiness companies led by Archer Daniels Midland Co. (ADM) launched a new front in the intensifying food-versus- fuel debate Thursday, maintaining that technology can ease global supply shortages.

ADM, backed by seed makers Monsanto Co. (MON) and DuPont Co. (DD), as well as Deere & Co. (DE), made their call through a new lobbying organization called the Alliance for Abundant Food and Energy.

The move highlights a sharp divide in the U.S. agribusiness sector over food and energy policy, notably subsidies for ethanol and other renewable fuels.

Members of the new alliance have long argued that technological improvements would boost crop yields and prevent demand from renewable fuels from crowding out food supplies.

This view is fiercely opposed by food companies such as Tyson Foods Inc. (TSN) , which has called for U.S. ethanol subsidies to be dropped as its profits have been eroded by higher feed costs for its poultry, pork and beef processing business

The alliance is led by Mark Kornblau, a Democratic strategist, and its launch in a general-election year coincides with a period of sharply rising food inflation, as well as soaring gas prices.

Executives from the four companies and the Renewable Fuel Association, or RFA, will call on lawmakers worldwide "to support agricultural innovation globally".

"While others are asking should it be food 'or' feed 'or' fuel, we believe the answer is 'and'," said Monsanto Chief Executive Officer Hugh Grant on the company's earnings call last month.

The lobbying is expected to trigger staunch opposition from other executives in the U.S. agribusiness sector who have called for reform of renewable fuel policy.

Tyson Chief Executive Dick Bond attributes rising food inflation in the U.S. to competition for corn from ethanol producers, as well as the rising global demand for protein that pushed corn and soybean prices to record levels in recent weeks.

Bond has called on Congress to reduce or drop a federal tax subsidy and end import tariffs on sugar-based ethanol.

"Diverting corn to make ethanol doesn't make sense," said Bond in April. Tyson declined to comment ahead of the alliance launch at a press conference in Washington.

Current U.S. renewable fuel policy includes a 51-cent-a-gallon subsidy on corn-produced ethanol and a tariff on imports, mainly sugar-based ethanol from Brazil.

Bond wants both of these removed, a call that makes his stance more strident than others in the sector, such as Cargill's CEO, Greg Page, who has made repeated calls for a greater level of national debate on the food-versus-fuel issue.

Cargill and Bunge Ltd. (BG), another agribusiness group vocal in the debate, are not members of the alliance.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Mexico hot under the collar at US pepper scare

(Reuters) – Mexicans are jumping to the defense of the jalapeno pepper, maligned by U.S. health inspectors in a salmonella scare but loved by millions in its ancient home and growing in popularity north of the border.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said on Monday it found a jalapeno pepper contaminated with the strain of salmonella that has sickened more than 1,200 people and warned everyone across the United States to stop eating them.

But the warning did little to dampen the appetite for jalapenos in Mexico, where the spicy green pepper is heaped on tacos and sandwiches at almost every street corner.

Jalapenos, named after the eastern Mexican city of Jalapa, were grown before the Spanish conquest in the 1500s and chiles are among the oldest domesticated crops in the Americas.

"Mexico has one of the best cuisines in the world. In the United States they don't understand, they have hamburgers and hot dogs. That's not a tradition, that's just junk," said Pedro Garcia while slathering salsa on to fried tacos at a busy street stall in Mexico City.

Mexico's ancient Aztec royalty favored drinks of chile and chocolate and Mayans tried to cure everything from dysentery, to asthma to vertigo with spicy powders.

"In the United States, they have weak stomachs, everything makes them sick," said Garcia, 46, a school administrator.

The outbreak of the salmonella strain, known as Salmonella Saintpaul, has now made 1,251 people ill and put 229 into hospitals in the United States.

But Mexico's agriculture ministry says that salmonella strain has never been found here and that the Texas packing factory where the pepper was processed might be to blame.

NEW FASHION

Despite the salmonella outbreak, jalapenos have become increasingly popular in the United States, both in Mexican restaurants and on supermarket shelves.

"It's the new fashion," said Jose Manuel Gochicoa who heads the chile growers' association in Mexico, the world's largest producer of fresh chiles.

Exports, most of them to the United States, have risen between 10 and 15 percent every year over the last decade and now over 100,000 hectares (247,000 acres) of peppers are grown in Mexico, 80 percent of them jalapenos.

Dozens of varieties of chiles, some which provoke sweating and crying, have become a cooking trend in the United States. Food writer and spice expert Dave DeWitt describes the fad as "culinary bungee jumping."

"Very rarely do you ever hear someone say, 'I used to eat hot and spicy food but now I'm back to bland,"' said DeWitt, the author of over 30 books on chiles like "The Spicy Food Lover's Bible" and "The Chile Pepper Encyclopedia."

Inspectors are holding up truck loads of the some 100 tons of peppers crossing into the United States from Mexico every day, raising the risk of produce being left to rot before it reaches stores, Gochicoa said.

"By creating this bottleneck at the border, people are just going to stop exporting," he said.

Health inspectors have had trouble identifying the origin of the salmonella bacteria and first blamed tomatoes grown in south Florida or Mexico.

Return to Top

 

 

Tomato growers get help in compensation quest

 

(The Wall Street Journal) – Federal health officials haven't cleared tomatoes as a cause of the salmonella outbreak that has sickened more than 1,270 nationwide, but the tomato industry has -- and it is asking taxpayers to compensate them for their loss.

Rep. Tim Mahoney, a Democrat from Florida, a big tomato producer in the U.S., introduced legislation Wednesday night that would give the nation's tomato growers and shippers $100 million to compensate for losses they incurred in the outbreak. The Agriculture Department would decide who qualifies, much like the way disaster assistance is carried out.

At the same time, Congress has scheduled at least three hearings next week on the salmonella outbreak and why it took so long to figure out what caused it.

The sought-after amount is based on an estimate from Florida growers and includes crops abandoned in the field, products thrown out by retailers and tomatoes forced to be sold as low as $5 a box, compared with as much as $20 in a normal market, said Reggie Brown, executive vice president of the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange, a cooperative of tomato farmers. The Agriculture Department hasn't released a firm estimate of the cost to farmers or distributors.

On June 7, the Food and Drug Administration warned consumers against eating certain types of raw tomatoes, suspected of carrying the virulent Saintpaul strain of salmonella. Many restaurants dumped their supplies of tomatoes, and many consumers shunned them. But the number of cases skyrocketed, and tests seeking salmonella on tomatoes all turned out negative.

This week, the FDA and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced they had discovered a single jalapeño pepper tainted with the Saintpaul strain in a Texas distribution center. Last week, the FDA lifted its warning on tomatoes, but the CDC held out the possibility tomatoes had caused earlier cases.

"In this particular case, there is no smoking gun," said Rep. Mahoney. "What we have is losses." He said he wasn't "blaming the FDA for the choices they make, but there are consequences to those choices."

Michael Herndon, an FDA spokesman, said, "FDA's actions are based on public health. Congressional efforts to improve food safety are something FDA always supports."

Consumer advocates oppose the bill. Sarah Klein, a staff attorney at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, said the food-industry lobby over the years has weakened federal food-safety oversight, and consumers shouldn't foot the bill now. "We'd like to see the industry focusing on how to prevent these outbreaks for the future to protect consumers and their bottom line," she said.

Tom Stenzel, president of United Fresh Produce Association, said the fresh-produce industry has sought tougher FDA regulation of tomatoes and other items. In recent years, Florida tomato growers and California leafy-green growers pushed through tougher measures in their own states, including mandatory inspections and training.

But the industry disagrees on who should benefit from the bill. Mr. Mahoney said it covers farmers and shippers, which were hit the hardest by the FDA warning. Mr. Stenzel, said it also should cover those further up the supply chain, such as packers and repackers, who suffered damages, too.

It is uncertain whether the bill will pass Congress. There isn't similar legislation in the Senate, and there is little time for lawmakers to act before the November election. Last year, spinach growers unsuccessfully pushed a similar measure to compensate for losses after the government's 2006 recall of fresh spinach after an outbreak of E. coli.

Return to Top

 

 

Ethanol co-product eyed for organic weed control

 

(USDA-ARS) – Studies by Agricultural Research Service (ARS) scientists have shown that dried distiller's grains (DDGs), co-products of corn ethanol production, have potential as an organic fertilizer and for weed control. But some ethanol producers are adopting new corn-grinding methods that may affect the DDGs' usefulness.

To further study DDGs, ARS plant physiologist Steve Vaughn and colleagues entered into a one-year cooperative research and development agreement (CRADA) with Summit Seed, Inc., a Manteno, Ill.-based company specializing in turfgrass production.

America's ethanol industry generates an estimated 10 million to 14 million metric tons of DDGs annually from both wet and dry milling of corn, processes that yield fermentable sugars for conversion into fuel alcohol. About 75 percent of the DDGs are fed to livestock. But since 2005, Vaughn has led a team at the ARS National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research (NCAUR) in Peoria, Ill., to develop new, value-added uses for DDGs.

In greenhouse and field studies, Vaughn showed that the DDGs can be used as an organic fertilizer for tomatoes and other crops. Indeed, in 2007, DDG-treated plots of Roma tomatoes yielded 226 total pounds of fruit, versus 149 pounds from untreated plants. And in turfgrass trials, the DDGs stopped annual bluegrass and other weed seeds from germinating in stands of Kentucky bluegrass.

But now, with more ethanol plants using dry-grinding methods, the DDGs, germ and fiber fractions are generated before, rather than after, corn sugars are fermented into ethanol. Determining how this new practice changes the DDGs' biochemical and physical properties is a chief focus of ARS' CRADA with Summit Seed.

Vaughn's ARS colleagues are Jill Winkler, Kathy Rennick, Fred Eller, Mark Berhow and Brent Tisserat--all with NCAUR in Peoria--and Rick Boydston and Hal Collins, both with ARS in Prosser, Wash.

 

Return to Top

 

 

Nutritional value of organics questioned … again

(foodnavigator.com) – A debate has ignited over the nutritional benefits of organic produce compared to conventional, with recent analysis disputing claims of its nutritional superiority.

In a report published in March, the Organic Center at America's Organic Trade Association argued that organic produce is 25 per cent more nutritious than conventional foodstuffs.

However, these claims were unfounded, according to Joseph Rosen, emeritus professor at Rutgers University and scientific advisor to the American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) in his report "Claims of Organic Food's Nutritional Superiority: A Critical Review", published yesterday by ACSH.

He criticised the methodology and said the information was carefully selected to support arguments for the nutritional benefits of organic produce. When recalculating the data used in the original report, Rosen concluded that conventional products are actually 2 per cent more nutritious than organic varieties.

The two takes on the data add to the ongoing questions on whether organic produce, which is becoming increasingly popular among consumers, has nutritional benefits.

Amarjit Sahota, director for the UK's Organic Monitor, said a key component driving this growth is the assumption that organic food is healthier, especially for fresh fruit and vegetables, which make up between 60 and 70 per cent of organic sales.

"Seven or eight years ago, there was much speculation on the benefits of organic produce, but a real lack of any substantial research," he said.

"But over the last few years, more and more research has shown that there are more vitamins and nutrients in organic food than in conventional food. And there is far more research coming out with this conclusion than vice versa."

The organic market has been experiencing considerable growth in recent years, as consumers have become ever more aware of the effects diet can have on their health and are turning away from produce grown using pesticides.

The UK Soil Association, also advocates of organic food, expects a healthy 10 per cent growth for sales of organic products this year, which it says if four to five times higher than sales growth for the general food market in a good year. 

Differences between reports

The Organic Center's review, "New Evidence Confirms the Nutritional Superiority of Plant-Based Organic Foods", looked at peer-reviewed scientific studies published since 1980 comparing nutrient levels in organic and conventional foods.

 

 It identified 236 organic and conventional foodstuffs that were equally measured on nutrient content, and found that in 61 per cent of the cases, the organic versions were more nutritionally dense.

Furthermore, the organic samples contained higher concentrations of important polyphenols and antioxidants in about three-quarters of the 59 matched pairs representing the four phytonutrients.

And, in general, the report said: "Across all 236 matched pairs and 11 nutrients, the nutritional premium of the organic food average 25 per cent."

However, in yesterday's report, Rosen wrote that the methodology of the study was flawed as "results that were not statistically significant were used throughout, non peer-reviewed papers were included and much relevant data… not included".

Examples of Rosen's criticism include the fact that Organic Center's report claimed organically grown vegetables had more quercetrin than conventional varieties. Rosen said the organic ones studied had been sprayed with an organic pesticide that would have increased the plant's production of the nutrient.

Additionally, one study looking at the nutrient content from an analysis of kiwi fruits included the skin, which most consumers do not eat, as well as the pulp.

Previous studies

These conflicting views echo similar scientific debates raging over the advantages of organic over conventional.

For example, a US study published last July in the Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry concluded that organically-grown tomatoes contain higher levels of beneficial flavanoids than conventional ones.

The researchers said that organic tomatoes contained on average 79 and 97 per cent more quercetin and kaempferol aglycones than conventionally grown tomatoes.

Meanwhile, a review from the British Nutrition Foundation last June said that the overall body of science does not support the view that organic food is more nutritious than conventionally grown food.

"Organic farming represents a sustainable method of agriculture that avoids the use of artificial fertilisers and pesticides and makes use of crop rotation and good animal husbandry to control pests and diseases," wrote BNF's Claire Williamson.

"From a nutritional perspective, there is currently not enough evidence to recommend organic foods over conventionally produced foods."

 

Return to Top

 

End Transmission