This paper outlines the framework for a working definition of functional foods utilised by the National Centre of Excellence in Functional Foods, considers trends in the areas of influence, and raises issues for the successful commercialisation of functional foods by the Australian food industry

Tapsell, Linda C.

English

Research Online

University of Wollongong Research Online Faculty of Health and Behavioural Sciences - Papers (Archive) Faculty of Science, Medicine and Health 2005 Functional Foods: definition and commercialisation Linda C. Tapsell University of Wollongong, ltapsell@uow.edu.au Follow this and additional works at: https://ro.uow.edu.au/hbspapers  Part of the Arts and Humanities Commons, Life Sciences Commons, Medicine and Health Sciences Commons, and the Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons Recommended Citation Tapsell, Linda C.: Functional Foods: definition and commercialisation 2005, 384-386. https://ro.uow.edu.au/hbspapers/1361 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact the UOW Library: research-pubs@uow.edu.au Functional Foods: definition and commercialisation Abstract This paper outlines the framework for a working definition of functional foods utilised by the National Centre of Excellence in Functional Foods, considers trends in the areas of influence, and raises issues for the successful commercialisation of functional foods by the Australian food industry. Keywords definition, foods, functional, commercialisation Disciplines Arts and Humanities | Life Sciences | Medicine and Health Sciences | Social and Behavioral Sciences Publication Details Tapsell, L. C. (2005). Functional Foods: definition and commercialisation. Food Australia, 57 (9), 384-386. This journal article is available at Research Online: https://ro.uow.edu.au/hbspapers/1361 Functional foods: definition and commercialisationL. c. TapsellThis paper outlines the framework for a working definition of functional foods utilised by the NationalCentre of Excellence in Functional Foods, considers trends in the areas of influence, and raises issues forthe successful commercialisation of functional foods by the Australian food industry.There are many definitions offunctional foods, dependingon the field of interest. From the science perspective,functional foods are those that provide benefits' beyondbasic nutrition' (Palou & others 2003), or that arefunctional at some physiological level (ADA 2004).Identification of these foods varies, with recognitionthat they incorporate new technologies (Anon 2004)but may also include whole foods (ADA 2004). Thus,functionality can emerge from the bioactive properties ofingredients in food formulations as well as from the foodmatrix of natural whole foods. From a market perspectivehowever, the description of functional foods variessubstantially from that used in the scientific literature.Here, terms such as 'just a little bit better for you','counting carbs', and 'healthier kids' (Sloan 2004), formcategories of functional foods that sound very differentto published scientific categories such as 'low fat food','whole oat products' and 'folate fortified cereal' (ADA2004). Linked to marketing, but referenced to science,another key influencer is the regulatory environment.Here, published standards refer to the legality of claimsabout the health benefits of foods in terms of nutrientcontent and function, and disease risk. In this sense,functional foods could be seen as those that come underthe governance of health claims legislation. With allthis in mind, it is probably more helpful to talk about a'working definition' of functional foods that recognises allthe key influencers rather than assuming the definition is'cut and dried' (Figure 1).Science &TechnologyFUllctional FoodOpponuniticsReGulationMarket trendsThe global functional food market has been estimated atS47.6b and growing (Sloan 2002), with trends to watchyear by year. There appears to be strong agreementthat the consumer wants better nutrition, and reportson trends indicate how consumers are responding toperceptions of benefits. If regulation demands a marriagebetween science and marketing, then a comparisonbetween the market perceptions and science knowledgebase is helpful. A review of the science concepts behind thetop 10 trends published in 2002 and 2004 (Sloan 2002,2004) indicates a core set of scientific underpinningsthat vary in depth of knowledge (Table I), but changesin marketing definitions do not necessarily reflect rapidshifts in the science base. Nevertheless, mapping thevariation and determining capability in the sciencebase will help in planning innovation in functional fooddevelopment. For example (and bearing in mind thatthere is always more to know), there is a good workingknowledge of the functional properties of macronutrients(protein, fat, carbohydrates), and of a wide range ofvitamins and minerals in foods. New bioactives areconstantly being identified, but it will take some time tobring the science base of these components to the levelof the former list. Likewise, the functional propertiesof whole foods (and whole diets) are relatively under-researched. There is variation in the understanding ofphysiological end-points and biomarkers of disease, albeitenough in some areas to support food innovation. Theselatter areas (eg lifestyle disease prevention) can also beseen to support a range of functional food categories(Table 1). As to the full gamut of possibilities, the wayin which key health benefits are researched and referredto in the marketing literature will vary depending on theamount of information available and the maturity level ofthe science in that area. For example, the science behinddiet and heart disease is relatively strong, but may beless well developed in diet and stress management or eyehealth. In other areas, the perceived health benefit maynot be linked directly to benefits to human physiology.For example foods that are 'free from' certain chemicalsor production processes relate rather to a broader senseof health. Thus, from the marketing perspective, theconsumer driven functional food market is not alwaysreferenced to nutritional science.Figure 1. Working definition of functional foodsProfcssor Linda Tapscll is the Director of the National Centrc of Excellence in FWlctiOllal F--oods, clo Smart Foods, University of 1f-bIlOllgOllg, NSW 2522.This paper is a summary of a presclllation at the AIFST 37th AII/lUal COl1velllioll, Bn:{balle, July 2004.384 Food Australia 57 (9) - September, 2005Copyright of Full Text rests with the original copyright owner and, except as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, copying this copyright material is prohibited without the permission of the owner orits exclusive licensee or agent or by way of a licence from Copyright Agency Limited. For information about such licences contact Copyright Agency Limited on (02) 93947600 (ph) or (02) 93947601 (fax)Advances in scienceIn large part however, shifts in science have a significantimpact on food innovation. Developments in foodtechnology in particular are creating ever greateropportunities for innovation within the food industry(Mermelstein 2003). Associated scientific disciplinesdescribe the chemical, physical and structural propertiesof foods, and bring together knowledge of biology andengineering (Frewer & others 2003). New productdevelopments resulting from work in this area willprovide functional foods that can be tested for healthbenefits through the discipline base of nutrition science.The coalescence of nutrition science and foodtechnology can also be seen from changing perspectives inthe past century. Beginning with basic sanitation throughto preventing deficiencies (particularly of vitamins andminerals), and then excesses through an understandingof the diet-chronic disease relationship, nutrition scienceis now focused on health and wellbeing, improvingquality of life, preventing disease and reducing risk ofdisease (Schneeman 2003). The rationale for functionalfoods is well recognised by nutrition practitioners,notably dietitians, where an ageing population, increasedhealthcare costs, more aware and autonomous consumers,better scientific evidence and changes in food regulationlay the path for their effective use (ADA 2004, Patch &others 2004).From a science perspective, functional foods may bestudied with a view to food components (eg type of fator bioactive ingredients), the whole food (eg milk, nuts),or whole diets (eg low carbohydrate). Establishing theevidence for the health benefits of functional foods maybegin with research that provides a strong theoreticalposition (What is in there? How does it work? Can effectsbe shown in humans? Is there evidence of possible effectsin population studies). Clinical studies prove the theoryin practice, but even then reality testing and consumerunderstanding is required.Recent advances in science can be seen in eventssuch as the ILSI Workshop on Functional Foods at the2004 conference of the Federation of American Societiesof Experimental Biology. Here, control of food intakeby gut hormones, fatty acid interactions with geneexpression, low carbohydrate diets and dairy calciumand weight loss were the key topics (Anderson & others2004, Tapsell 2004). The nature of the science presentedTable 1. Comparison of market trends for 200214 with nutrition science underpinningsTop 10 trends 2002 1 Top 10 trends 2004 2 Scientific concepts1. Broader nutrient speciality ingredient 1. Just a little bit better for you {Ca, 1. Functional properties of nutn·ents infortification (sources of nutrients, fibre, antioxidant fortified products, foods (protein, fat and carbs - typesbioavailability, type and effects of formulations enhancing bioavailability, and amounts; vitamins and minerals -protein, fibre benefits) low fat, organic) requirements; other bioactive substances2. Condition specific marketing (fortified 2. Counting cams (Iow starch, commodity - activity and bioavailability)foods to promote heart health, shifts, low carb candy bars) 2. Functiona' properties of whole foods (theprovide energy, manage joint health,3. Healthier kids (snacks, fruit, yoghurt food matrix, impact of organic methods)improve cognition/mood, promoteintestinal health, optimal growth and bars, organic foods) 3. Unks between food components anddevelopment) 4. Serious considerations (preventing heart heafth benefits (physiological end-points3. Lifestyle enhancers (energy beverages, disease, obesity, diabetes, osteoporosis,or biomarkers of effeCt/activity)foods supporting immunity, stress fortified foods, soy, low GI) 4. Key health benefits (bone/eye/dental/management, sleep, and improved 5. Must have ingredients (whole foods, heart health, reduced heart disease riskmental performance) omega 3, sterols, fortified and low factors, reduced appetite, bowel health,4. Sports market crossover (energy energy density foods)concentration, mood, meeting nutritionalrequirements, increased activity level,replenishment, protection and recovery 6. Fizzy, fruity, flavoured (healthier options weight loss, reduced diabetes riskfor athletes, gym foods for active adults - enriched, sourced, low energy density, factors, reduced stress, healthy immuneand kids' sport's products) carbonated, organic, satisfying} response, non-allergenic, reduced risk of5. Kids' health (fortified foods for kids, 7. High-powered alternatives (stimUlating contamination)foods to manage kids weight and energy drinks, high protein bars, soy 5. Delivery systems (bioavailability, taste,lifestyle disease risk, foods that supportmental focus and avoid allergens)alternatives) supply chain integrity)6. Gender, age and ethnic positioning 8. Pace-setting restaurants (reduced(women's and men's health, over 50's portion sizes, healthier menu items, lowprotective foods) carb)7. Weight, satiety and appetite suppression 9. Naturalfy gourmet (organic ready meals,(foods that support weight management) coffee, ingredients - oils, condiments,8. Fast-forward for functional snacks (dietsnack foods with natural ingredients,vegetarian options, 'free from' options,and fortified candy and enriched snack'wild' produce)bars)9. Mother Nature knows best (fish oils, 10. Internationaf learnings (reducing lifestyleprobiotics, prebiotics, soy, whey protein) disease risk, probiotics, bioactive dairypeptides, low GI, liquid breakfasts, grain10. Non-traditional food markers (foods milks, omega 3, olive oil).supporting eye and dental health,healthy skin, nutraceuticals)1. Adapted from Sloan (2002)2. Adapted from Sloan (2004).Food Australia 57 (9) . September, 2005 385outlined the links between theoretical development inthe basic sciences through to clinical trials as describedabove. An example of this type of work in Australia canbe seen in studies of the impact of polyunsaturatedfatty acids on appetite control mechanisms and bodycomposition (Huang & others 2004), linked to a clinicaltrial demonstrating the impact of a whole food (walnuts)delivering PUFA in the diet on health outcomes indiabetes management (Tapsell & others 2004).RegulationHaving conducted the science, the translation of keyfindings to promotional claims for products is one of themain challenges in commercialising functional foods. Inlarge part, food standards regulate this process. Thereare differences in regulation around the world, but thereare efforts towards harmonisation (Shimizu 2003), whichis important for regional and world trade. The previousJoint Australia and New Zealand Food Standards Code,included a description of health claims (StandardI.IA.2), but prohibits them on food except for the linkbetween folate and a reduced risk of neural tubal defects(see www.foodstandards.gov.au). A new food standard,currently proposed (P293), will allow health claims atlow and high levels, both requiring substantiation, butonly high level claims needing pre-approval. Part of theconsultation process has involved consideration of theearly adoption of claims approved in other countries.Workshops in this area have suggested that there maybe some preference for claims relating calcium tothe prevention of osteoporosis, low saturated fat andcholesterol levels with reduced risk of heart disease, thebenefits of fibre, fruit and vegetables as protective fromcancer, and lower energy values for obesity prevention(see www.nceff.com.au). While this whole process hasa way to go, it does suggest that manufacturers mightconsider both the nature and type of claim likely to bepermitted for foods as one aspect of managing risk forproposed functional food development.ConclusionInnovation is central to remammg competitive, andthe development of functional foods provides realopportunities for the Australian food industry in thisregard. Precisely locating these opportunities, however,requires a working definition of functional foods thattriangulates market trends with the science base andregulatory issues, where relevant. The heterogeneity ofthe food industry in Australia suggests that this will meandifferent things to different sectors, but the process willstill apply. Determining what is best for Australia willtake some time to work through, and is more likely toemerge through partnerships with industry groups to adda fourth dimension - the experience and capability of theindustry itself. Commercialisation science is the weakeststep in the development process and experience showsthat a long term vision and a focus on proven startingpoints works best (Mellentin 2004). The National Centreof Excellence in Functional Foods is working tOwardsthis goal in setting up infrastructure and communicatingframeworks for functional foods to produce benefits forthe Australian food industry. It is a complex task, but afirst pass suggests that all the ingredients are there.386 Food Australia 57 (9) . September. 2005ReferencesADA, 2004. Position of the American Dietetic Association: FunctionalFoods. J Am. Diet. Assoc. 104: 814-826.Anderson, P,Milner,J & Nnoka, C. 2004. Highlights ofILSI FunctionalFoods meeting. Nutrition Today 39: ) 80.Anon. 2004. Functional foods. Food Aust. 56: 82.Frewer, LSJ & Lambert, N. 2003. Consumer acceptance of functionalfoods: issues for the future. Brit. Food J. )05: 714-731.Huang, XF, Xin, X, McLennan, P & Storlien, L. 2004. Role of fatamount and type in ameliorating diet-induced obesity: insightsat the level of hypothalamic arcuate nucleus leptin receptor,neuropeptide Y and pro-opiomelanocortin mRNA expression.Diabetes Obes. Metab. 6: 35-44.Mellentin, J. 2004. Functional ingredient strategy - commercialisationskills are the missing element. New Nutrition Business. March2004.Mermelstein, NH. 2003. Food research trends - 2003 Dnd beyond.Food Technol. 56: 30-49.Palou, A, Serra, F & Pico, C. 2003. General aspects on the assessmentof functional foods in the European Union. Eur. J Clin. Nutr. 57:512-517.Patch, CS, Tapsell, Le & WiIliams, PG. 2004. Dietetics and functionalfoods. Nutrition Dietetics 6): 22-29.Schneeman, B. 2003. Evolution of dietary guidelines. JAm. Diet. Assoc.103 (12 5uppl): 55-9Shimizu, T. 2003. Health claims on functional foods: the Japaneseregulations and an international comparison. Nutr. Res. Rev. 16:241-252.Sloan, A. 2002.The top 10 functional food trends: the next generation.Food Technol. 56: 32-57.Sloan, A. 2004. The top 10 functional food trends 2004. Food Technol.58: 28-51.Tapsell, LC. 2004. Conference Report: Experimental Biology 2004:Translating the Genome. Nutrition and Dietetics 61: 112.Tapsell, Le & others. 2004. Including walnuts in a low fat/modified fatdiet improves HDL: Total cholesterol levels in patients with type 2diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Care 27: 2777-2783. 0ADM receives second award forNovaLipidThe American Oil Chemists' Society has announcedthat the Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM),received the 2005 AOCS Corporate AchievementAward. This Award recognises industry achievement foran outstanding process, product, or contribution thathas made the greatest impact on its industry segment.The purpose of the award us to recognise and honourthe contributors to an outstanding process and/orproduct, which represents a significant advance in theapplication of technology to a Division of the AOCS.ADM was recognised for the development ofinnovative technologies for the production of healthierfats and oils. This is evidenced by the introduction ofits NovaLipid line of zero/low tran, fat oils and theirpotential impact on public health. ADM was one ofthe first companies to announce the development oflowlzero traIlS oil products. A new line of products wasintroduced that uses enzymatic interesterificarion toobtain the need functionality, oxidative stability andhealth/nutnional requirements of food oils. The ADMNovaLipid line includes a cookie shortening, and allpurpose vegetable oil shortening, and all purpose pieand cake shortenings. This is the second award for thisproduct (see food Aust. 57(6): 234, June 2005). 0

Functional Foods: definition and commercialisation

https://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2414&amp;context=hbspapers

Functional Foods: definition and commercialisation

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Online