This weekend's New York Times reported that as of last Tuesday dairy farmers in Germany are striking. It's a classic case of supply and demand. The EU decided to raise milk quotas, leading to more supply and lower prices. Meanwhile feed and fuel prices have gone way up, which has put the pinch on German dairy farmers. In response, they're attempting to create demand by striking.
However, as the NYT points out, this situation is a little different than the Italian pig farmers, because these dairy farmers must continue to milk the cows. Because their goal is to keep the milk out of the market, they end up pouring it out, literally dumping food down the drain. It's an unfortunate situation, especially since worldwide there are so many people who are struggling with food shortages and hunger.
You heard it here first! As of June 1, the pig farmers of Italy are going on strike. That puts Parma ham, prosciutto, and Piacenza pork neck salami, as well as other Italian pork products, under threat.
The Italian farmers say their earnings have been cut in half, with falling pork prices and rising feed costs. They decided to strike when financial assistance talks with the government fell through earlier this month. Part of the strike calls for farmers to not recognize Protected Designation of Origin certificates, which then can't be sold under EU rules.
If you're a big fan of Italian pork products, you might want to think about stocking up. If the garbage strike in Naples is any indication, this could last for a while.
Despite urges from various British food organizations, the European Food Safety Authority decided against banning additives in food.
Their reasoning? A recent £750,000 study, which found a link between eating food loaded with additives and colorants and impulsive/hyperactive behavior in kids, was not a substantial enough reason to ban the additives entirely. In the study, eight and nine year olds who had ingested food with additives could not sit still long enough to complet simple tasks, like a 15-minute computer exercise. (Yeah, but neither could most of the eight year olds I know, with or without stimulants. Heck, most 25 year-olds I know don't have the patience to finish a 15-minute computer task).
But the study did prompt some retailers to change their ways: Marks and Spencer, a British department store that sells everything from shirts to iPods to gourmet foods, vowed to stop selling food and drink that contain additives by the end of the month.
The study results should not be ignored, but I don't blame the EU for not jumping to conclusions. Banning food with additives falls along the same lines as banning food with trans-fats, and I have the same opinion in each case: use your own good judgment and discretion. If packaged foods make your kid hyperactive, don't buy the foods, or at least limit their intake. Simple as that.
"Oh no! We're running out of intestines!" That's basically what the Swiss Meat Association is saying. The favorite sausage of Switzerland, the cervelat, is encased in cow's intestines, preferably from Brazilian cows. And though Switzerland is not part of the EU, the country follows those rules when it comes to trade and food regulations. Turns out the EU has curbed imports of Brazilian cows/parts due to BSE (mad cow) fears.
Supplies of the intestines used to make the Swiss delicacy are projected to run out in the summer, just when football (soccer) fans from all over Europe arrive for the Euro 2008 Championship. A "Task Force Cervelat" has been put together with scientists, bureaucrats, and industry insiders in order to try to solve the problem. Everyone agrees it will take some time for the EU regulators to make any changes. The task force is even looking into getting cow intestines from other sources, though no one wants that.
Generally, about 160 million cervelat sausages get eaten in Switzerland each year. Unfortunately, if the Task Force Cervelat doesn't come up with any answers, that number may be reduced this year. What will they eat at football games?
The FDA has determined that food from cloned animals and the offspring of cloned animals is as safe to eat as the products from conventionally bred animals. While food producers, manufacturers and sellers in the US ponder over that conclusion, the EU is looking to draw its own. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has begun an investigation into "the future impacts of livestock cloning."
Currently, there are no regulations in the European Union about the consumption of cloned animals or of any products derived from them. The science behind animal cloning has developed so rapidly over the past few years, however, that some scientists believe that clones are on the verge of being able to become commercially viable for mainstream animal breeders/producers. But feasibility is not the be-all and end-all of the issue. The EFSA intends to look at not only scientific studies, but at ethical ones. They expect to be able to start to shape their decision in about six months.
For several years many European vineyards have been making a percentage of their wine into alcohol to use in disinfectants and as gasoline additives. The European Union may have to force vineyards to destroy some of their vines because the over-production of wine is getting out of hand. The EU has been trying to control prices on wines and been spending $190 million a year in destroying perfectly good wine to do so. Now there is a proposal out to destroy 100,000 acres of wine, more than 10% of Europe's total acreage of vines, over the next five years as a way to control the surplus. Europe, especially France has suffered from poor wine sales the past decade.
Other wine producing areas such as New Zealand, Australia, South America, South Africa, and the US are producing very good wines at decent prices that are now controlling the market. It is yet to be seen whether the European vineyards will be cut back or if some other method of control will be used. Personally I might drink more French and European wines if the price dropped, especially for the better quality products which I don't try as often as I would like.
A few months ago, I posted about the debate that several vodka producing countries are having over what should and shouldn't be called vodka. An article in today's New York Times picks up the story. Basically, certain countries, including Finland, Sweden and Poland, contend that for something to be called vodka, it must be distilled from either potatoes or certain grains, not from things like grapes or maple syrup. These countries are seeking labeling restrictions for these "non-traditional" vodkas. BBC News reported that such restrictions could affect up to two thirds of all the vodka currently produced in non-Baltic EU countries. The NYT article also points out that vodka's history and original ingredients are up for debate, citing possible Russian, Polish, Italian and Arabian origins that may have included plums, apples or grapes.
In contrast to American consumers, who regularly request that the nutritional information be presented in the absolute simplest form possible, European consumers are now saying that they would prefer to have the calories in foods on their nutritional labels. The reason for this is not that they have some deeper understanding of nutrition than Americans, but that energy-based labeling is the most widely understood system and that many consumers would like to see an EU-wide system that does not vary from place to place. The US system seems to be their model, with the most recent drive being for foods to have "front-of-pack and back-of-pack nutrition labeling, based on a uniform list of nutrients, nutrition information per serving and the introduction of Guideline Daily Amounts (GDAs)." Once a standard is in place, then simplifications can be made or additional labeling systems added, but you can't simplify what isn't there, so shoppers will have to wait for a basic system first.
Attention readers who live in the EU: you might want to look into adopting an olive tree. For £60, you can lay claim to one of the 881 trees in the Nudo organic olive grove in Italy and receive all of the produce from that tree. Think about that for a moment and realize that you'll be able to make salad dressings with and dip bread into olive oil from your own tree. You will receive three packages during the year from Nudo. The first will contain a certificate and an information booklet about your tree, the second (in spring) will have 1-3 liters of pressed extra virgin olive oil and the third (in fall) will contain lemon-flavored olive oil and three types of olive oil soaps. Unfortunately, they don't ship outside of the EU or I would be well on my way to adopting one of the 300 or so remaining trees.
Richard Lochhead, a candidate in the Scottish National Party, has added a
food issue to his platform that he things will help his campaign. He has promised to fight to give Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) status
to shortbread. PDO is a classification by the EU that aims to ensure that goods, if given a particular name,
originate from a single location. This would mean that the only official shortbread could come from Scots bakers, if
the biscuits were given protected status; other shortbreads would have to be described as
"shortbread-like." The Walkers bakery is a local
employer in the area Lochhead is campaigning in, so it seems like a good stand for him to take, even if shortbread is
unlikely to receive PDO status.
Scotch whisky is enjoying unprecedented popularity around the world, especially in Asian countries. The annual
foreign market is more than £2 billion. Understandably, the distillers would like to hold on to as much of this
market as they can, but there are some who are none too happy about the current
market.
In India, sales of whisky have enjoyed a fifty percent increase in the last year and a Scotish Whisky Association
(SWA) representative said that "India is the industry's number one trade priority." That is where the trouble
starts. The SWA is protesting the 212-525% taxes and tariffs on their imports, which the Indian government and
distillers say is necessary to protect local products. Indian distillers, in turn, are protesting the fact
that the EU does not permit them to sell their own brew as "whisky" in Europe because it is molasses-based,
not cereal-based. The Indian distillers, like magnate Vijay Mallya, say that having to call their beverage an
"Indian spirit" hurts sales and the EU's labling requirements amount to protectionism, especially since they
are not asking to call their products "scotch," and are willing to use the label "Indian
whisky."
Efforts towards a settlement have failed thus far, but the EU is apparently conducting negotiations to see if a
resolution can be reached.
The Italian government recently voted, almost unanimously, to uphold its decision to allow
only products made with 100% cocoa butter to be labeled as "pure chocolate". Other fats are allowed in the
products, such as those from milk, fruits and nuts, but the European Union currently allows up to 5% vegetable fats to
be present in a product labeled as "pure chocolate". In both sets of definitions natural flavors and soya
lecithin (non-genetically modified, in Italy) are allowed to be present in chocolate.
Italy introduced this definition of "pure chocolate" in 2003 in order to protect traditionally produced
Italian chocolate from competition with imports, which were less expensive due to their partial use of non-cocoa fats.
Italy, which may have to face the European Court of Justice because of its failure to recognise the European standards,
is planning to petition the EU to obtain Traditional Specialty Guaranteed (TSG) status for its chocolate. Achieving this
status would mean that the EU would recognise the Italian "pure chocolate" label and its assurance of 100%
pure cocoa butter products made in a traditional manner.
Italian chocolate makers and cocoa growers have supported the government's efforts wholeheartedly. Chocolate is a 350 million
euros ($424 million dollars) per year business in Italy, with the average Italian consuming nearly 10 pounds
per year, a number which doubled in the past ten years and continues to grow.
The European Union has developed a proposal
to allow foods that have up to 0.9% genetically modified material to be sold with labels that confirm them as
organic. The EU says that this measure, which would go into effect by 2009, is being proposed to protect
organic farmers against the "risk of GM contamination." The commissioner for agriculture and rural
development claimed that this move would make it easier for consumers to identify organic products, presumably by
making them more similar to non-organic items.
Current guidelines stipulate that organic products cannot contain genetically modified substances "in any
quantity." Environmental and organic groups are protesting the action, saying that "organic" labeled
products should contain no more than 0.1% GM material, the lowest amount that can be detected both reliably and
consistently. The EU should support organic farming, but not by lowering the standards of the industry.