Skyfarming can contribute to solve severe problems of the food system
Dr. Sabine Bonneck
26 posts
On Nov 1st 2018 food experts gathered in London to discuss the impact of Brexit on the food system. Obviously a clear vision or strategy is still missing, while the Brits are losing confidence.
The Pioppi diet clears up with widespread principles and is a conclusive plea for a low-carbohydrate, higher-fat diet that is fun.
Nutrition education should cover the entire life cycle. It is indispensable for assessing the impact of dietary behaviour on one’s own health and on the environment
Before we start to produce insects on a large scale, we should think about a few things. Above all, animal welfare.
The British food industry is on the verge of a major upheaval. Will it be possible to maintain high standards for food?
Entomophagy could probably help to make the supply of animal protein to humans more sustainable. Research suggests that insects can suffer or even feel pain. Basic principles of animal welfare should therefore be observed in industrial breeding.
Food fraud must be tackled more efficiently. A higher probability of being detected and support for smaller manufacturers could possibly help.
4th “Meat Atlas” published For the fourth time, the Heinrich-Böll-Foundation and , in cooperation with Le Monde diplomatique, have published a “Meat Atlas”. Anyone who has already dealt with the subject knows that our meat consumption is too high. The report underpins this with impressive facts and figures and also […]
The New Food Magazine hosted a Food Fraud Conference in London, chaired by Professor Chris Elliott. Progress has been made since the horsemeat scandal, but there is still a lot of work to do.
The grand coalition intends to continue the politics in agriculture and nutrition.
In the context of food fraud consumers expect a better information exchange between food producers and authorities.
Keeping insects seems to be a promising way to cover the human needs for animal proteins. It is sustainable, does not violate the principles of animal welfare and is part of a healthy diet.
Only a few interested people and organisations from the member states did comment on the draft of the regulation on acrylamide in foodstuffs.
The Commission suggests benchmarks as central element of the draft regulation on acrylamide in foodstuffs. The benchmarks are high. Producers are requested to explain why their products exceed the benchmarks. But it remains unclear whether sanctions will ensue.
In 1994 Acrylamide was assessed as “probably carcinogenic” by IARC. When in 2002 the substance was found in foodstuffs, plenty ressources were spent to learn more about risk and mitigation measures. More than ten years later there are hardly any new findings related to the risk. It is possible to reduce the acrylamide contents in many products, but there is no evidence for a reduction. Risk governance took place hidden from the public gaze. Consumers were not involved and international guidelines on risk governance were waived. A risk council could have ensured a more systematic approach.
For many months in many countries a heated debate about sugar tax has been ongoing. Considering rising cases of obesity and diabetes, political action is required. Sugar tax seems to be the only effective measure.
Food fraud has been known since people started dealing with food. Public health was affected very often. In Germany the first food law was passed in 1879.
The President-designate of the United States does not believe in climate change. “Postfactual” has been named International Word of the Year. The subject of the 6th Stakeholder Conference of the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), to which the risk assessors had invited to the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences and […]
The beginning of the FSA-campaign “Go for Gold” was difficult and leaves essential questions unanswered. Can it still be successful?
The FSA launched the campaign “Go for Gold” to reduce acrylamide contents in foodstuffs. Manufactured products are not included, thus the chance of success can be questioned.
Acrylamide in foodstuffs would have better been processed if a risk council had been involved.
On this website the term „food scandal“ is not used without quotation marks. We use it to describe grievances related to food, but real scandals might occur in the political sphere.
If, according to scientific conventions, IARC assesses a substance as “probably carcinogenic” to humans, experts normally do not question its carcinogenicity for humans.
All risk assessments on acrylamide in foodstuffs come to the conclusion that the substance is carcinogenic and a concern for humans. Now, the European Commission is planning to intervene.
A lot of research related to acrylamide in foodstuffs was initiated, but the risk for humans can still not exactly be determined. How does the story go on after EFSA’s latest risk assessment?