Forbidden Foods and Drinks - Essay Example

Forbidden Foods and Drinks. Forbidden drinks and food involve those beverages and foods that individuals abstain from using them due to a cultural or religious prohibition. Different taboos forbid meat for a certain animal such as rodents, mammals, bony fish, amphibians, crustaceans, molluscs, and reptile. Some food that is forbidden is specific to a certain excretion or part of an animal, whereas other forbidden food forgo plants, insect, and fungi consumption. In this respect, forbidden food involves rules concerning which food could not be eaten and the manner in which animals needs to be slaughtered. These prohibitions have origins that are varied. In other situations the forbidden food is due to some considerations of health, others come about because of the symbolic system of humans (Gebhardt 21). Different foods could be prohibited in certain festivals, specific times in life, and different classes of people. This paper explores different types of forbidden food and drinks. A number of religion prohibit the intake of some specific foods. For instance, A strict rule is set by Judaism concerning whatever could and could not be eaten. Similar laws are observed in islams who divide food in the form of halal and haraam. On the other hand, Jains strictly follow their religion hence only consume vegetarian. Hindus also prohibit the consumption of cow meet since they take cows as being that are sacred (Mike 6). Apart from this, some communities scrutinise the coking process instead of the real food. For example, in Christianity of early medieval specific uncooked of fast food were considered to be of dubious status. In this case, the consumption of canned as well as other fast foods is forbidden to this group of individuals. This can be attributed to the fact that the canned foods and other fast foods are sweeter and consumption-ready; they can be directly taken without requiring farther preparations that other food substances require. It is also because the cost on these types of food stuffs has been reducing drastically making the affordable. Examples of common canned and fast foods that are widely consumed include beef jerky, yoghurt, jam, canned tea and canned meat, just but to name a few. In spite of the large markets that they command, the food stuffs are considered to be harming the society in various ways, but what are these various ways that the canned foods are considered to harm the society? This paper discusses ways in which the canned foods are harming the society. To begin with, the canned food manufacturers are hurting the society through providing of false information on the ingredients that are used in the manufacturing the canned foodstuffs. The manufacturers are often concerned that disclosing the correct information would have an impact on the market of their food stuff products. And indeed such incidences have been prevalent. In most cases, the manufactures would rather provide information that would entice the consumer. Yet the best information that would entice the consumer in this case is falsified information. For instance, the use of the word ‘cholesterol free’ and ‘sugar free’ is currently synonymous with information on canned foodstuffs such as milk and yoghurt. On seeing these, the health-concerned consumers buy products and use them in large quantities, hardly knowing that the information is they rely on is falsified and that the products would harm them. Yet it has been confirmed that most canned foodstuffs contain little percentages of real food, and they are in no way, therefore, nutritious compared to natural foodstuffs. Secondly, some manufacturers go as far as giving false information on the manufacture date as well as the expiry date of the canned products. The motive behind has always been so that their products stay long on the market and be bought. They have again done so at the expense of consumers’ health. This way, the chances of consumers ingesting stale food are high. The eventuality is that the consumers’ health is immensely compromised. Thirdly, there are cases where the manufacturers use ingredients that are contaminated with certain poisonous chemicals. Hereunder, a special reference, is given to the 2008 Chinese melamine milk scandal; China exported canned milk that had been contaminated with melamine. Before discerning that the products had been contaminated with melamine, various lives were already lost, especially those of babies who drunk the contaminated milk. Although nations, as well as concerned groups, quickly moved to put in place measurements to curb the menace, clearly the products had harmed the society; those who had not been infected with melamine had been at least affected. What is even more is that most cases of foodstuffs that are contaminated exist, only that they are unreported. And many consumers are being affected health-wise! The other ways in which the canned food manufacturers are harming the society is through preservatives that they use. For example, nitrates and nitrites are used as preservatives in canned meat. These compounds are associated with nausea and vomiting, among other health complications. Sodium nitrite, which is used as a preservative in canned drinks, is associated with allergy and hyperactivity. Food colouring, which is derived from coal tar, is associated with causing some types of cancer. Even so, most canned food stuffs are associated with prevalence in the cases of obesity. Mark you; these are not all the ways in which canned foodstuffs harm the society. The developments in the food regulatory policy have led to significant nutritional changes, health changes and changes of information that pertain the food labels in New Zealand and Australia since 2000. Correct labelling of food products is a significant aspect since it enables consumers to obtain accurate information concerning the food labels thus enabling them to have informed choices of the products. In this regard, this paper explores an assignment that was set to help the students in understanding the requirements of the food regulatory policy which shapes nutrition, food fortification, health, information related to food labels; the profile of health, nutrition, and claims that are available on food product; the food products compliance with the regulation of food that are related to labels, and the relationship between food policy consideration that is related to the accessibility of food and the related regulations of the food. The food standards for breakfast cereals include: To have the wholegrain definition amended, to have the editorial note omitted because it is obsolete, to approve the mandatory fortification of wheat flour for bread making, and to have a new clause that approves mandatory iodine fortification. Cereals include grasses that are cultivated for their grain components that are edible. Naturally cereals are exceptionally rich in vitamins, carbohydrates, minerals, fats, protein, and oils. When these cereals get refined, through the germ and bran removal, the content that remains is carbohydrates which fail to have the main nutrients. During the 2000 survey period, a number of food labels for cereals were examined, compared, and collected by a group of five students (Gebhardt 34). About fifty one cereal labels were collected. These labels were broken down into four subcategories. These included the reduced fat, low fibre, high fibre and the sweet cereal categories. Of the products collected, eleven of them were fortified. These products not only came from one subcategory, but also from also two more subcategories. In this case from the reduced fat subcategory, one product was fortified, from the high fibre category of cereals, four products were fortified, and from the sweet cereal category, seven products were fortified. The remaining forty products collected were not fortified. In this respect, the sweet cereal category had the predominant amount of fortified products. The highest value of sodium content in the cereal products was 725mg where as the least sodium content in the cereal products collected was 0mg. The range of the sodium content was 725mg. These products, therefore, had a wide range of sodium content. Despite these, the sodium content in cereals was extremely low. According to research the daily consumption of sodium should be between 1500mg to 2400 mg. If this amount of sodium is in a diet, then, such a diet is referred to as a low sodium diet. On the other hand, the sodium content required in an individual’s diet is 69 mg per day. Comparing these values with the meant sodium content in the cereal products which is only 259mg and a range of 725mg, the sodium content of the products collected is low. Therefore, the cereals collected had an exceedingly low content of sodium. Research conducted on the amount of sodium level in food categories has shown that a diet of low sodium has an effect of lowering the pressure of blood, for persons with hypertension and those with a normal pressure. Fortification involves adding minerals and vitamins to food which does not contain nutrients like those ones naturally. The main objective of fortifying cereals has always been to increase mineral and vitamin consumption to the populations that fail to meet the recommendations of the diet. It is a strategy that is helpful in increasing the intake of nutrient for many people with no reliance on people to develop diet behaviour change. In this study, the eleven products that were fortified contained fortification minerals and nutrients like calcium (mg and % RDI), foliate, thamine, vitamin C, and iron. For these products, the fortification occurred at a level of about 25%. Studies have shown out that if cereals are fortified by calcium, they lead to increase in absorption for children of six to nine years old. Apart from these, cereals that were calcium fortified had no effect on the level of iron that is normally added to cereals. This study also found out that other nutrients that are needed for cereals included thiamine, folic acid, and riboflavin. However, cereal fortification may have its drawbacks. Despite the fact, that it can better the nutrients for some cereals it can cause excess level in other cereals. For instance, a study advanced on fortification of cereals reports that many cereals had nutrients that were higher compared to the stated labels. In a case like these, one may consume more nutrients like folic acid, which may end up having a diverse effect to the body. For the case of increased folic acid intake, it would worsen the deficiency of vitamin B-12. Nutrition and health claims include statements that are voluntarily made by a certain manufacturer concerning labels and also on the advertisement of the content of nutrient in a specific food category. In this study, there were some nutrition and health claims that were displayed. These claims included a 2% fat content for the reduced fat cereal category, and the 1% total fat content on the low fibre cereal category. Therefore, products within the cereal category displayed claims of low fat but no other type claim. Low fat, on the other hand, does not fall into the category of mineral or vitamins, though it is related to the fortification of cereals. Research has shown that a substantial amount of fat is needed by the body so as to enable the body to absorb vitamin A, D, K, and E, which are normally fat soluble vitamins. Low fat will also facilitate the absorption of compounds like lycopene. When manufacturers include low fat claims concerning cereals is due to its advantage of facilitating the absorption of vitamins that are used in fortification. During fortification minerals and vitamins are normally added to food labels. In this regard, these claims relate to the fortification of cereals. However, health claims of low fat on cereal have also confirmed the benefits of low fat in improving health condition of individuals, and reducing the risks of diseases. Research has shown that diets of low fat will help in reducing the risks of heart disease. Increased amount of fat that is saturated in the blood will increase the level of cholesterol in the blood thus leading to heart diseases. During the survey, there was a large non-compliance index of the brand labels. This non-compliance of the brands indicated the demand for measures for nutritional labelling, and surveillance practices. The major issues in the cereal brands were the increased number of brands in the market. From the data collected there were a number of cereal brands, which had same grain ingredients. For instance the ‘honey wheats’ and the ‘mini wheats’ had the same fat, carbohydrate, and protein content. After the fortification of these two brands, there were large differences in the mineral and vitamin content thus the different brand names. In this regard, the issues related to nutrients profile that are connected to the food item brand name included: About 27 cholesterol and energy nutrients were listed in the survey Individual fatty acids were expected to be added, the nutrients values needed to be provided, and whenever analytic values failed to exist the values of the labels needed to be calculated. A study made on the cereal brands by the Drug and Food administration argues out that minerals in cereals could easily be identified but not the brand names of the different labels. This study also argued out that, in its research, several brands of the cereal products are always composite during the period before analysis thus making them to lose their identity. For instance, the corn flakes, is fortified by different companies at different nutritional levels. In this case, when several brands are collected together for analysis, the iron value will not be represented in any specific brand, but will end up varying according to the way the brands were composited. Concerning the ingredients list, a survey on seven mandated nutrients lists, reported that of the 51 products, eleven products met the nutritional criteria. The remaining forty products did not meet either one or more nutritional criteria. In this case, the findings included that over 57% of the cereals contained increased sugar 53% contained a low amount of fibre. The Reduced fat cereals contained a 63% sugar content and 60% fibre content. The low fibre cereals contained a 36% fibre content, and 26 sugar content. The high fibre cereals contained 60% fibre content and 19% sugar content. All the cereal had a remarkably low sodium concentration with the highest value having a content of 725 mg and the lowest with a zero content. All the fortified products were listed with the amount in the NIP. However, there were no non-compliance issues with claims that were made. According to the high fibre cereals, the cost for the fortified labels were $5.26 per 350 of Nestle$ 4.29 per 220g of puffer billies, and$ 4.29 per 220g of Ooby Doos. The cost for the non-fortified high fibre cereal labels were $4.83 per 500g of Weet- Bix bites, $6.44 per 400g of Bricher Muesli. In this subcategory, the average price for the fortified labels was $4.00 per 220g, and the average cost of the non fortified cereals was $2.83 per 220g (Currie 7). Comparing these values, it is evident that the price of the fortified products is higher than that of the unfortified products. It was also evident that the food products with fortification claim had a higher price compared to other products (Catherine & Helen 10). A research conducted on fortification of cereals reports that, during the process, quality controlled materials like the standardized reference material. This study explained that these materials were used in analyzing and monitoring cereal samples in order to ensure valid outcome. This study argues out that the average cost of fortification was about $20,000 that was used in analyzing the total fibre dietary, proximate components, nine vitamins, individual fatty acids, nine mineral, the geometric isomer, and cholesterol in one sample of cereal product. In this case, fortification of three brands of cereals would cost an approximation of $18,000. This large cost of fortification is in turn passed on to products for consumers. Therefore, the cost of fortified products in the market would be exceptionally high compared to the non-fortified ones because of the excess cost of fortification during the production that is passed to the consumers. Work cited Catherine, MC, & Helen , YB. Acceptability and use of cereal-based foods in refugee Camps: Case-studies from Nepal. New Jersey: Oxyfam paper press; 2008. Print. Currie, J. Effects of Fast food Consumption: forbidden food. New York: Oxford publisher.2009. Print. Gebhardt, SE. Survey nutrients data base: human nutritional service. (serial on the internet). 2003 Oct 9; [cited 2012 December 6; Available from http://www.nutrientdataconf.org/. Mike, AP, The super foods for optimum health: chlorella and spirulina. New York: Jack and Sons publishers; 2003. Print. Read More