• The politics of restaurants and picking a 7:30 dining time.
• Corn: The dark secret behind fast food.
• The EU welcomes wonky produce, but what about Canada?
  
• Wines: Quinta Da Alorna Reserva 2006 Arinto/Chardonnay (Portugal), Domaines Mau Château Ducla 2005 (France), Gloria Colheita Seleccionada Tinto 2004 (Portugal), J. Lohr Los Osos 2006 Merlot (California), Pirramimma 2005 Petit Verdot (Australia)
• Restaurant Reviews: Brunch Spots in Toronto and Restoran Malaysia
• Recipes: Bayou Shrimp Stew and Truchas a la Parrilla

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.

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.  

[via A Full Belly]

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.