Natural vanilla is one of the most recognizable and sought-after foundational flavors in the world. The trend toward clean label ingredients has only intensified demand for its distinctive, classic taste in its natural form rather than as an artificial or synthetic flavor.

In fact, according to research from the International Food Information Council (IFIC), nearly 6 in 10 consumers check product labels before making a first-time purchase. As food and beverage brands shift away from chemically produced imitations, the sourcing of real, natural vanilla is increasingly a concern for manufacturers.

The supply chain for the best natural vanilla is as complex and intricate as its deep, richly nuanced aromatic profile. Key to this endeavor, and to ensuring the highest quality, is having boots on the ground in the growing regions where the agricultural conditions and curing processes can be carefully observed and guided. To achieve this, suppliers need extensive local relationships and a strong understanding of cultivation and production practices.

The most critical components of successful production of natural vanilla are the local partnerships in the various growing regions. Cultivating vanilla is one of the most intricate agricultural processes of any spice or flavor in the world. To produce vanilla pods of exceptional quality, particular cultivars must be grown, and each orchid’s flower must be pollinated by the hand of an experienced grower. These pods must be meticulously tended to under specific conditions and must be harvested at peak maturity (harvesting pods too early greatly diminishes quality).

The geographies in which vanilla can be grown are very limited. Therefore, suppliers need to be able to lean into longstanding, embedded relationships and deep knowledge at the local level in Madagascar—where 80% of the world’s vanilla is sourced—as well as places as diverse as Uganda, Papua New Guinea and Indonesia. Having close, working relationships with local cultivators and processors is necessary to make sure each step in the process is done with care and attention to detail. And there is, perhaps, no step more important in this process than curing.

It takes eight months to cure vanilla beans. Cutting corners and rushing the process severely risks degrading the quality (and quantity) of the vanillin produced. Suppliers of natural vanilla must carefully control each step and should employ specialists who can train local employees on how to optimize the curing process. A high level of control over curing enables suppliers to apply the highest standards in production.

This excerpt was taken from a longer article in FBI’s “Natural color and flavor solutions” digital magazine. Click the link to access it, along with the full issue.

With a decade of flavor and ingredient industry experience, Philip Caputo leads marketing and consumer insight development at Virginia Dare. He and the flavor and extract company help brands turn ideas into innovative products with tasteful formats and flavors. Caputo’s previous roles were at Hagelin Flavors and Frutarom USA, and he has a business marketing degree from Manhattan College.

Two significant, intertwined issues plague the CBD beverage industry today. The first is the stability of the cannabinoid(s) to remain suspended in the beverage over extended periods of time. The second is absorption of the cannabinoid(s) into the lining that coats the inside of aluminum cans.

Cannabinoids like CBD, THC and CBG from full spectrum hemp-derived oil are not soluble in water. That means an emulsion must be created in order for cannabinoids to remain suspended and dispersed throughout a beverage. The emulsion is a mixture of microscopic liquid droplets of CBD (and potentially other cannabinoids) evenly distributed throughout another liquid. These droplets are most commonly nano-emulsified or encapsulated by stabilizing/emulsification agents to keep them suspended throughout the other liquid.

Water: Love it or hate it

Two terms are important to understand here: hydrophilic and hydrophobic. Hydrophilic refers to molecules that get along with water, whereas hydrophobic refers to molecules that do not. Cannabinoid emulsion droplets are hydrophobic. The inside of aluminum cans are coated with a very thin polymer layer designed to keep the liquid inside away from the aluminum and preserve the product’s taste and protect it from corrosion. 

This polymer layer is also hydrophobic, and therein lies the problem: Neither one of them gets along with water, and the hydrophobic liner will attract the hydrophobic emulsion droplet, causing it to attach to the liner and leading to a decrease in cannabinoid potency of the beverage over time. In some cases, the potency is reduced almost completely, rendering the product ineffective.

Emerging trouble in cannabinoid beverages

Canopy Growth first identified challenges with cannabinoid stability and the aluminum can liner issue with its Canadian THC-infused beverage in April 2019. In the US, cannabis beverage producers Lagunitas and Tinley have also been experiencing the same problem. Tinley CEO Jeff Master has stated that they found “97% absorption into the can after a few months.”

Like those who came before, CFH, Inc. was running into the same issue in 2019 when it first began development of its CBD infused beverage, James & James. Formulating an infused beverage with CBD isolate is difficult enough; formulating with full spectrum crude oil is even more so. It comes down to basic chemistry: Oil and water don’t mix. When serial testing of its finished product ensued, it became apparent that the 25 mg of full spectrum CBD present at the time of canning was reduced by as much as 90% in three months. Clearly, the product potency quickly departed from the label claim.

Indeed, this is a widespread problem in the CBD beverage industry. Many companies proclaim that their cans contain between 20-25mg of CBD. However, stability and potency are not yet regulated in this industry, and standards guidelines are still being developed. This begs the following questions: How many of these beverages are incorrectly labelled? Are their potency claims no longer accurate? Do they need to be relabeled or recalled due to a failure to meet label claims?

25 mg of CBD … or not?

In an effort to identify just how far-reaching these issues are, CFH evaluated 40 different CBD-infused beverages in cans, plastic and glass bottles. The data showed a wide range of variability in the label claim for CBD content compared to the actual test result.

Of the 40 products tested, 10 had “Manufactured On” dates that were 150 days or less from when the evaluation was performed. The data showed that in under five months, these products already contained less than 50% of the target CBD content.

Overall, variability in the CBD content for the 40 products tested ranged from a low of 0% to a high of 132% of the label claim. A total of three beverages tested at 0% CBD content; all of them were in plastic bottles. At the other end of the spectrum, a CBD content of 132% indicates a significant over-formulation.

On average, the CBD concentration across the 40 products tested was 26.2% less than the amount listed on the label.

Though it was not alone in these challenges, it was back to the drawing board for CFH. The first hurdle was to find an emulsification method that would effectively keep the full spectrum hemp flower crude oil in solution over extended periods of time. The second was to identify a beverage container that would not attract the cannabinoid emulsion and lead to detrimental effects on product potency.

CFH evaluated several methods for creating an emulsion, including sheering and sonication, nano-emulsification, encapsulation and chemical bonding, searching for at least one that would provide the desired outcomes of long-term emulsion stability and maintain the product potency and shelf life indicated on the label.

Positive outcomes and making good choices

Ultimately, one emulsion process emerged as the leader for use with a full spectrum hemp flower-derived CO2 extracted crude oil. The resulting product stayed in solution, demonstrating stability and shelf life of more than a year from the date of manufacture. As for the issue of cannabinoids migrating out of the beverage into the walls of the container? Stability studies revealed that using glass bottles eliminated the problem completely.

So, amongst the sea of CBD beverages in the marketplace, what should you look for when you are making a purchase. 

• Type of container: Is the beverage in a can or a plastic bottle? Both have demonstrated issues with stability and cannabinoid potency. Glass bottles appear to be the solution here.
• Freshness: Look for a “Manufactured On” date to assess for potential potency degradation.
• Purity: Ask to see a third-party COA (Certificate of Analysis) documenting that the beverage is free from pesticides, residual solvents, heavy metals, microbial contaminants, molds/mycotoxins and foreign matter. If any of this information is missing from the COA, the question arises as to why it was not included. Unfortunately, until regulatory oversight of CBD beverages becomes a mainstay, it’s best to move on to a beverage made by a company that does include it.
• Potency: Make sure the COA verifies that the amount of CBD in the container matches the label claim.
• Stability data: Request a stability study COA to confirm the product you are purchasing maintains its potency through the intended shelf life.
• Traceability: Visit the company’s website to see if they provide transparency in ingredient sourcing and traceability. Many companies do not know where their CBD ingredients come from, and that opens the door for questions around product consistency. You want a beverage company that can provide you with comprehensive and consistent data with high standards that are verified by outside parties. 

For more on developments and innovations in the hemp, cannabinoids and CBD market, we’ve got you covered at SupplySide West. Check out the two-hour workshop, “Hemp’s expanding opportunities (mostly) beyond CBD” on Tuesday, Oct. 26, from 1:00-3:00pm, in the lower level, South Pacific C room.

Researchers at the Institute for Systems Biology investigated the functional determinants of how differences in the taxonomic composition of the gut affect the body’s response to weight loss interventions. The findings were published in mSystems, an open-access journal of the American Society for Microbiology.

“Your gut microbiome can help or cause resistance to weight loss and this opens up the possibility to try to alter the gut microbiome to impact weight loss,” said lead study author Christian Diener, Ph.D., a research scientist at the Institute for Systems Biology in Seattle.

For the study, researchers enrolled a cohort of 105 individuals selected from a larger population participating in a commercial wellness program; 48 had lost more than 1% of their body weight per month over a six- to 12-month period, while 57 lost no weight and had a stable body mass index (BMI) over the same period. Each individual in the cohort had baseline blood metabolomics, blood proteomics, clinical labs, dietary questionnaires, stool 16S rRNA gene sequencing data, and follow-up data on weight change. In a subset of 25 individuals who showed the most extreme weight change phenotypes, the researchers generated additional targeted proteomics data on obesity-associated proteins in blood before and after intervention, and baseline stool metagenomic data.

After controlling for sex, age and BMI, the research team identified 31 baseline stool metagenomic functional features associated with weight loss responses. These included complex polysaccharide and protein degradation genes, stress-response genes, respiration-related genes, and cell wall synthesis genes, as well as gut bacterial replication rates. The team concluded that the microbiota may influence host weight loss responses through variable bacterial growth rates, dietary energy harvest efficiency and immunomodulation. Therefore, there could be an opportunity to alter the gut microbiome to impact weight loss, or to offer appropriate guidance on diet alterations to individuals whose gut bacteria may confer resistance to weight loss.

“Before this study, we knew the composition of bacteria in the gut were different in obese people than in people who were non-obese, but now we have seen that there are a different set of genes that are encoded in the bacteria in our gut that also responds to weight loss intervention,” Diener said. “The gut microbiome is a major player in modulating whether a weight loss intervention will have success or not. The factors that dictate obesity versus non-obesity are not the same factors that dictate whether you will lose weight on a lifestyle intervention.”

For more on developments and innovations in gut health, we’ve got you covered at SupplySide West. Check out the two-hour workshop, “Microbiome modulation for strategic wellness” on Tuesday, Oct. 26, from 9:00-11:30 am, in the lower level, South Pacific G room.

FDA has identified an Idaho-based supplier of produce as the source of potentially contaminated onions imported from Mexico.

Local, state and federal agencies—including FDA and CDC—are investigating a multistate outbreak of Salmonella Oranienburg infections linked to whole, fresh onions.

The onions were sold to restaurants and grocery stores throughout the U.S., according to CDC.

FDA reported 652 illnesses and 129 hospitalizations associated with the outbreak. No deaths have been reported.

FDA’s traceback investigation is ongoing, but it has identified Hailey, Idaho-based ProSource Inc. (also known as ProSource Produce LLC) as the source of the potentially tainted onions. FDA said the company has agreed to voluntarily recall red, yellow and white onions imported from the state of Chihuahua, Mexico.

Although ProSource Inc. indicated the onions were last imported on August 27, the produce can last up to three months in storage and may still be in businesses and homes, CDC warned.

“Illness subclusters investigated in this outbreak thus far are associated with restaurants and food service locations,” Frank Yiannas, FDA’s deputy commissioner for Food Policy and Response, said in a news release Wednesday. “That’s why as our investigation continues, we’re advising restaurants, retailers and consumers to not eat, sell or serve red, yellow and white onions supplied by ProSource Inc. that were imported from the State of Chihuahua, Mexico from July 1 through August 27, or products containing these onions.”

The outbreak has affected consumers in 37 states, according to CDC. And of 417 people with information available, 129 people, or 31%, have been hospitalized, the disease control agency said.

CDC added investigators are working to determine if the outbreak is linked to other onions and suppliers. FDA said it would provide more information as it becomes available.

“We are issuing this update early in our investigation as part of our continued commitment to transparency and early communication,” Yiannas said. “We will provide updates as we learn more during our continuing traceback investigation, especially if there are any updates to this critical public health advice.”

CDC recommended consumers immediately contact their health care provider if they suffer severe symptoms of Salmonella, including diarrhea and a fever higher than 102°F, diarrhea lasting more than three days that is not improving, bloody diarrhea, an inability to keep liquids down due to vomiting or signs of dehydration, such as dry mouth and throat.

ProSource, which sells onions and potatoes, did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

More than 700 companies received a notice this month from the Federal Trade Commission regarding the use of endorsements and testimonials.

The notice of penalty offenses warned recipients they could be subject to nearly $44,000 in civil penalties per violation if they engage in certain deceptive or unfair practices, such as falsely claiming a third party’s endorsement or failing to reveal an unexpected material connection with an endorser.

“The notice could apply not only to a company’s own ads but also to its use of influencers, fake reviews and reviews by customers with connections to the company,” explained Seena Gressin, an FTC attorney, in a recent blog.

FTC singled out top marketers—not because they necessarily have breached its rules.

“Fake reviews and other forms of deceptive endorsements cheat consumers and undercut honest businesses,” Samuel Levine, director of FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in an Oct. 13 news release. “Advertisers will pay a price if they engage in these deceptive practices.”

FTC commissioners recently voted 5 to 0 to authorize the notice and its distribution before Rohit Chopra left the agency. The former FTC commissioner is now the head of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

In part, the notice was perceived as an effort by FTC to obtain money damages under the Federal Trade Commission Act—notwithstanding an adverse court ruling earlier this year. The U.S. Supreme Court held in AMG Capital Management LLV v. Federal Trade Commission that the agency can no longer rely on Section 13(b) of the FTC Act to obtain monetary relief.

FTC’s recent notices are reliant on what lawyers described as a rarely used provision of the FTC Act: Section 5(b). Per this section, the agency can obtain civil penalties if:

1. FTC determines a practice is deceptive or unfair;
2. The agency issues a final cease and desist order (other than a consent order); and
3. Any corporation, person or partnership engages in the above activities and had “actual knowledge” that such an act is unfair or deceptive and unlawful.

The notices describe practices the agency has determined are deceptive or unfair in prior administrative cases, according to FTC’s news release. The notices reference several administrative decisions from as early as 1941 and as recently as 1984—when advertising relied principally on radio, television and print mediums and well before the internet age.

“What kinds of advertising crosses the line?” Gressin asked in her blog. “Among other things, companies that use endorsements:

• Can’t misrepresent that an endorser is an actual, current or recent user of a product
• Can’t misrepresent that endorsers’ experiences represent people’s typical experiences
• Can’t use an endorsement without good reason to believe the endorser still holds the views expressed
• Can’t use an endorsement to make deceptive claims about how a product performs, and
• Can’t fail to disclose an unexpected relationship between the endorser and the advertiser, like a business or family relationship, a payment, or a gift of a free product.”

Several firms on the massive list—essentially a who’s who in American business—market food and/or nutritional supplements, including Amway Corp., Bayer Corp., General Nutrition Corp., Hershey Co., Nestlé USA Inc. and Reckitt Benckiser LLC.

“FTC staff is not singling out your company or suggesting that you have engaged in deceptive or unfair conduct,” FTC stated in a sample cover letter sent to the companies. “We are widely distributing similar letters and the notice to large companies, top advertisers, leading retailers, top consumer product companies and major advertising agencies.”

FTC, however, could seek civil penalties from companies on the list, rather than “a slap on the wrist,” if the agency subsequently finds they have engaged in the unlawful activities described in the notices, warned Katie Bond, a partner with the law firm Lathrop GPM.

Former law professor Lina Khan, who was sworn in as FTC chair in June, has made it known “she intends to be an aggressive enforcer,” Bond said in an interview.

In a memo outlining her priorities and sent in September to FTC staff and the commissioners, Khan said her agency must be "forward-looking in anticipating problems and taking swift action."

"On both the competition and the consumer protection sides, this means being especially attentive to next-generation technologies, innovations and nascent industries across sectors," she stated. "Timely intervention—be it checking anticompetitive conduct that would lead markets to tip, or targeting unfair practices before they become widely adopted—can help us tackle problems at their inception, both limiting harms and saving resources over the long term."

Attorney Ivan Wasserman suggested the recently distributed notices reflect FTC’s message that it’s going to continue to enforce the law and seek money damages in spite of the Supreme Court’s decision in AMG and that it remains concerned about how easy it is to commit fraud online via endorsements and testimonials.

But to date, FTC hasn’t “dropped a big hammer solely on improper use of influencers either not disclosing material connections or making claims that are not substantiated,” noted Wasserman, a partner with Amin Talati Wasserman LLP.

He questioned whether the agency would focus its limited resources on an influencer who sends out a tweet or two and fails to disclose a statement was sponsored, rather than focusing on unsubstantiated and pervasive claims that products treat diseases.

Wasserman, however, suggested FTC may start taking more aggressive action against repeat offenders culpable for deceptive endorsements and testimonials. But whether FTC will be able to obtain large civil penalties in court based on its recent notice and subsequent deceptive acts is an open question.

“It remains to be seen whether such a blanket ‘notice of penalty violation’ will survive what will surely be multiple, inevitable court challenges,” attorneys with Kelley, Drye & Warren LLP wrote in a recent blog.

Editor's note: This article first was published by Natural Products Insider, the sister website to Food & Beverage Insider. 

 

In the wake of COVID-19, many consumers are seeking to improve their overall health through their diets. And while it’s easy for consumers to identify certain foods—fruits and vegetables, for example—as healthy and others—candy and soda, for example—as less healthy, it’s not always easy to compare two or more similar foods or beverages.

Researchers at Tufts University have sought to make such comparisons easier through their new “food compass,” which gives food and beverage a score between 0 and 100 to objectively measure its overall healthfulness (Nature Food. Volume 2;809–818 [2021]). 

To develop this “Food Compass Nutrient Profiling System,” the researchers examined and ranked more than 8,000 foods and beverages.

“We scored 54 attributes across nine health-relevant domains: nutrient ratios, vitamins, minerals, food ingredients, additives, processing, specific lipids, fiber and protein, and phytochemicals,” the authors wrote. “The domain scores were summed into a final Food Compass Score (FCS) ranging from 1 (least healthy) to 100 (most healthy) for all foods and beverages.”

Based on this assessment, raspberries came out on top as the healthiest food examined, scoring a 100. Other high performers included salted almonds, vegetable curry, tuna fish with light mayo, and black coffee. Perhaps unsurprisingly, many of the lowest rated foods were highly processed instant meals and fast food. Instant noodles, dinged for their typically high sodium content, scored a 1 on the scale, with instant puddings and soups as well as fast food burgers and pizza all scoring single digits.

While the high and low points of the scale are unsurprising, some of the close scores should serve to open consumers’ minds about what it really means for a food or beverage to be “healthy.” For example, a serving of white rice with soy sauce scored similarly to an ice cream sundae; one serving of pasta rates similarly to a cheeseburger.

The creators of the compass system noted foods scoring higher than 70 should be sought out; those ranked between 31-69 should be consumed in moderation, and those scoring 30 or less should be generally avoided. Somewhat concerningly, the average score of the 8,032 foods and beverages assessed was just a 43.2. Desserts and snacks were the lowest-scoring group, with an average score of just 16.4; on the other end of the spectrum, fruits averaged a 73.9, vegetables averaged 69.1, and nuts, legumes and seeds averaged a score of 78.6. The system also compared different forms of animal-derived protein; seafood scored best with an average score of 67, followed by poultry (42.7) and beef (24.9).

“Once you get beyond ‘eat your veggies, avoid soda,’ the public is pretty confused about how to identify healthier choices in the grocery store, cafeteria, and restaurant,” said Dariush Mazaffarian, M.D., and the lead author of the study. “Consumers, policy-makers, and even industry are looking for simple tools to guide everyone toward healthier choices.”

The authors’ overall assertion—that consumers desire to eat and drink healthier foods and beverages, but struggle to identify them—can be seen in other areas. A recent study, for example, noted consumers are more likely to choose healthier food options when those options are clearly labeled. Additionally, consumer demand for healthier versions of their favorite foods and beverages is on the rise—everything from healthier snacks and beverages to confectionery, baked goods and more.

Additionally, the overall healthfulness of food and beverage products comes down to myriad factors. Consumers may not know whether it’s best to avoid some ingredients, like salt and sugar, or seek out others like fiber and protein. A system that takes all of those considerations into account and provides one single—even if perhaps over-simplified—number would make consumer comparison shopping simpler.

OTA on Oct. 18 launched a search for the new CEO with global consulting firm Korn Ferry, which has extensive experience working with similar associations and a track record of success in finding and placing top-tier executive directors and CEOs. The search committee is composed of members of the association’s Board of Directors and led by Board Member Paul Schiefer of Amy’s Kitchen.

“If there’s one thing I’m feeling right now, it’s confident,” Batcha said. “Confident in my team at OTA, confident in the great folks at Korn Ferry who we’ve brought on to help with our search, and confident that the next person we select to lead this organization is going to bring a new outlook, fresh ideas, and a dedication to moving organic forward.”

“OTA has grown tremendously over this past decade thanks to Laura’s leadership,” Schiefer said. “What we’re looking for is someone who can match that level of passion for organic, a visionary leader who can build on Laura’s legacy of success. OTA is steering the organic sector into the future; our next CEO will have the unique honor of guiding that journey.”

The CEO will provide leadership, coordination, and oversight of the organization and serves as the public face of OTA. Together with the Board of Directors, this executive will be responsible for defining the association’s mission and establishing shared objectives for OTA’s member companies. OTA is seeking a leader with a visionary and inclusive style who is skilled in relationship management and has a keen awareness of the organic landscape.

Korn Ferry has begun its process of recruitment. Interested individuals are invited to learn more about the opportunity and apply directly by submitting a resume and cover letter to [email protected]. The cut-off date for applications is Nov. 29.