Sprouted Grains: Not So Fast!

Image courtesy of SOMMAI at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Image courtesy of SOMMAI at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Understandably, the baking and cereal products industries are very excited about sprouted grains these days. Well, it is a new, healthy and otherwise compelling narrative about whole grain foods and other seeds, like beans. Major companies such as Kellogg’s (Kashi) and J.M. Smucker (Enray) have already committed themselves to what they perceive to be a band-wagon growth opportunity. Raw food enthusiasts are big on sprouts. But, call me contrarian! There is ample reason not to get too excited too quickly about sprouted grains. They provide a good story line, but nutritional claims, cost, product safety and consumer awareness remain serious barriers to growth. New market exuberance may be premature.

“Sprouted grains” was a big big topic of discussion at the recently concluded AACC International’s (i.e., cereal chemists) Annual Meeting in Minneapolis, MN (October 19-22). On the plus side, sprouted grain breads and other cereal products have been gaining a lot of attention, at least in the food press. The arguments for sprouted grains are primarily nutritional, though good taste very importantly factors in, as well. Sprouting is the process whereby seeds, when moisturized, arouse themselves from dormancy and reconfigure themselves for rapid growth. The seed’s fiber, starch and phytates break down, releasing antioxidants, sugars and minerals. Starch breaks down into simple sugars that either sweeten the sprout and can be flushed away reduce glycemic value. Some vitamin contents are increased. The process typically involves soaking seeds between 1 – 4 days to induce sprouting, followed by a heat-kill step to knock out enzymatic activity, and milling to create a flour.

Here are some of the concerns cited at the conference:

  1. The process of adding water, holding, kilning (i.e removing the added water), and milling is expensive. Yes, the beer industry can do it, but beer isn’t cheap and it enjoys deservedly high margins. Sprouted grains are not low cost ingredients.
  2. Yes, nutritional value is enhanced, but by what standards? Bob Hanson of Briess Malt & Ingredients Co., noted in a highly detailed and engaging presentation that sprouting is a highly variable process for which nutritional value will vary greatly according to the length of time and other sprouting conditions used (i.e., was the seed germinated for four hours or four days?). Developing uniform, standardized levels of nutritional enhancement for which suppliers and nutritional labels will be held accountable remains a major challenge. Plus, as pointed out by retired-but-not-really nutrition professor Julie Jones, an academic for whose intellectual rigor and honesty I retain enormous respect even when we disagree, given the cost and use level of sprouted grains, how will their enhanced nutritional value make a significant dietary difference? We don’t know, for example, how effective the released polyphenolic antioxidants (likely released from the breakdown of arabinoxylan bran structures) are in human physiology. Nor do we know how to balance the potential cancer-inhibiting actions of phytate against the mineral-releasing breakdown of phytates during sprouting.
  3. Probably the most important challenge is safety. Grains and beans come in from the field with imbedded toxins and trailing pathogenic microbes. In some cases, the microbes are imbedded inside the seeds. Sprouting provides an ideal medium for their outgrowth. The beer industry resolves this by boiling the seed wort; the baking industry has no such option. According to University of Nebraska food science professor Andreia Bianchini, kilning of the sprouted grains does not significantly reduce microbial counts. Although reading between the lines of the Hanson presentation suggested to me that Briess has resolved this problem to its own satisfaction, the consensus appeared to be that sprout safety remains a serious liability issue for the industry at large. I have no doubt that good solutions exist (I can think of some off the top of my head), but much work still needs to be done.
  4. Finally, there is consumer awareness and demand. Sprouted grains are not new – they’ve been percolating in the cereal foods industry for at-least a decade, promoted by companies such as Food For Life Baking Company’s Ezekiel bread, which has developed a loyal following. A look at Internet chatter trends for “sprouted grains” provides the following profile:

Sprouted Grain TrendAlert OCT-15This graph shows a steadily increasing rise in total Internet chatter (blue line) over time, combined with low VIC TrendAlert™ volatility (red line). Accelerating growth in Internet chatter combined with low volatility is indicative of stable growth and should be promising. That’s the good news. However, at this time, the term “sprouted grain” is generating only 25,000 to 30,000 Google hits per month. Compare that to “rice” (~1.2 million hits per month) or “quinoa” (~600,000 hits per month), and you realize quickly that “sprouted grain” has a long way to go before it becomes the talk of the town. Internet chatter matters.

Sprouted grain is an interesting and promising ingredient category with a compelling narrative. Here’s my take: its time hasn’t yet come!

The Power of Near-Real Time Food Trend Volatility Analysis

Is your food company busy addressing rising Vegan, Vegetarian, DASH, Anti-Inflammatory, ABS or Paleo diet trends today? If not, why not? These are among today’s top-10 diet trends driving consumer food choices.

Although Internet and social media analysis techniques are still in their infancy, these “big data” bases should not ignored: they best reflect what consumers think and say about their food choices. Think of the Internet as a very large consumer survey population that can be sampled at-will, at very low cost and on a near-real time basis. Internet chatter analysis also reveals trends not easily discernable using conventional analysis techniques, such as retail product scanning, new product placement tracking and consumer surveys…in near-real time! There is the problem of information clutter, however: the Internet has a very low signal-to-noise ratio and it can often be difficult to discern between what is important or relevant and what is not. Also, Internet search engines are fickle and just finding the most applicable search terms can be challenging.

This post references work undertaken at BEST VANTAGE Inc. (www.bestvantageinc.com) to establish new tools for consumer trends analysis, drawing on techniques developed by the financial industry. Previous work undertaken on this challenge is referenced here and here. In this posting, we demonstrate how volatility analysis, using our VIC™ internet chatter volatility indices, can rapidly prioritize emergent trends not readily detectable using conventional market analysis tools. The earlier warned, the faster that companies can adapt to and capture the high ground of new consumer opportunities.

Why volatility? Volatility is a leading indicator of change. Whether in nature, societies, economies or financial markets, “volatility” marks rapid exchanges of material and information that signal impending change. Internet chatter surges or wanes as individuals adapt to new information and adjust their demands and expectations accordingly. Internet chatter volatility denotes activity and information exchange: it does not explain the underlying reasons for change, which requires a more forensic analysis of the Internet database. Thus, a surge in Internet chatter signals that change is pending and that a more in-depth analysis of the underlying reasons for volatility is likely warranted.

In the chart below, the VIC™ volatilities of the top 9 diet trends (out of 40 analyzed) are presented together. It is clear that, already in late-2009 (six years ago), interest in vegetarianism surged, followed by a surge in vegan diet-related chatter beginning in 2013. These are the markers that should have signaled to the processed food, foodservice and food ingredient companies to closely track these diet trends and adjust their product lines and strategic plans accordingly. This period (2009 – present) also exhibited very significant spikes in Internet chatter volatility pertaining to high-protein, low-carb Paleo and ABS diet-related Internet chatter.

Top-9 Trend Volatility

A look at annualized growth trends in Internet chatter suggests how rapidly these four trends will remake our industry. Between 2013 and 2014 alone, BEST VANTAGE observed the following growth rates (i.e., velocity) in Internet chatter, presented along with 5-year annualized growth rates as benchmarks.

  • Vegan Diet (1-yr: 590%; 5-yr Annualized Growth Rate: 89%)
  • ABS Diet (1-yr: 315%; 5-yr Annualized Growth Rate: 115%)
  • Paleo Diet (1-yr: 159%; 5-yr Annualized Growth Rate: 101%)
  • Vegetarian Diet (1-yr: 152%; 5-yr Annualized Growth Rate: 85%)

Internet volatility and velocity analysis should not be used in place of conventional market tracking techniques. They do offer powerful early indicators of emergent trends, helping companies to know where to look and how to respond to the most volatile index of all, consumer behavior. In a future posting, I will explain the value of using Internet chatter volatility and velocity analyses as strategic decision-making tools.

U.S. “Whole Seed” versus “Whole Grain” Labeling Alert

440px-3_types_of_lentil

Our position is that whole-seed beans, peas, lentils, chickpeas, flaxseed, mustard, sesame, walnut, pine nut, almonds and other whole seeds should also qualify as “whole grains” under FDA regulations.

[UPDATED] For FoodNavigator summary of this issue, please follow link at the end of this post.

Should a “whole seed” definition apply only to cereals (members of the grass family) or to all seeds (including flaxseed, sesame, beans, chia, lentils…)?

This is still an open question with major consequences for the food industry and consumers alike. Resolution of this issue will determine to what degree non-cereal seeds (grains) will be used in many of the new foods currently under development in the United States.

Although the official Food & Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) comment period ended years ago, the word is that they are still looking for guidance on this matter. Here is how to make your opinion regarding “whole grain labeling” regulations…matter.

The U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) first proposed a definition for “whole grains” in 2006, to be followed by a requisite 90-day comment period. Today (December 2013), a working regulatory definition remains elusive. There is still time for our industry to contribute to this debate.

Earlier this year, attendees of the Nutrition Division luncheon at the AACCI Annual Meeting (Oct 1-4, Albuquerque, New Mexico) learned that the FDA had communicated to a AACCI Nutrition Division delegation that: a) it wanted to make resolution of a “whole grain” definition a priority and b) today, seven years after the formal closing of the 90-day comment period, it was still open to comments that would help the FDA arrive at a proper decision.

This has enormous implications for the U.S. food ingredient and food manufacturing industries. Here are the how, why and what thereof:

  1. The original FDA proposal would only allow cereals (taxonomic members of the grass family) and “pseudocereals” (a very loosely defined term) such as amaranth and quinoa, to be included under this definition. Other whole-seed flours, such as flaxseed, sesame, chickpea or dry bean flours, would not be included even though they are a) more nutritionally rich than cereals and b) utilized in foods in very similar manners to those of cereals (which meets one definition for a “pseudocereal”). There is strong support among some in industry and academia for a broader “whole seed” definition that includes all whole-seed ingredients.                                 [ line space]
  2. Regulatory and nutritional interest in “whole grains” is driven by a recognition that the outer pericarp (bran) layers of the seed are rich sources of nutrients and that removal of the bran during milling diminishes the nutritional value of the seed.  This is true for all seeds, not just cereal seeds. Ergo, the guiding principle behind developing whole-grain definitions should be based on nutritional, not taxonomic, considerations. It is in the public interest to promote consumption of whole seeds…all whole seeds… versus refined or otherwise fractionated seeds.                                                               [line space]
  3. Exactly what constitutes a “whole grain” will have enormous implications for food formulation: for example, one proposed definition of a whole-grain food claim would mandate that a minimum of 8 grams per 15-gram serving (dry breakfast cereals) or 30-gram serving (cookies) be in the form of “whole grains”. If this definition is limited to cereals and “pseudocereals” (which also remain undefined) and allowing for other necessary “functional” ingredients in the formulation, this leaves precious little room for the use of other whole-seed ingredients such as flaxseed, sesame, pulse or even whole nut powders, in the formulation. Yet all of these non-cereal “whole seeds” generally contribute considerably more nutritional value to foods per unit weight than do cereals, as the recent upsurge in the use of such ingredients in gluten-free foods has demonstrated.                                                [line space]

As of now, there have been precious few letters submitted on behalf of a whole –grain definition that includes non-cereal seed ingredients. The flaxseed industry associations (Ameriflax, Flax Canada and Northern Crops Institute) are the only exceptions. Only ADM has submitted a letter supporting the inclusion of pulses, a fast-growing and nutritionally rich category, within whole grain definitions. From suppliers of sesame seeds, nutmeats, chia and others….nary a peep!

The gluten-free industry should especially be interested in expanding the definition of whole grains to all seeds, given the use of such whole seed ingredients as flaxseed, pea, bean and nutmeat flours as alternatives to gluten-containing wheat and barley cereal grains.

A list of letters already submitted can be found here:

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/06d0066/06d0066.htm

 The ADM letter in support of designating pulses as “whole seeds” can be found here:

 http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/06d0066/06d-0066-c000012-01-vol1.pdf

To those industries, associations and individuals that do have an interest in broadening the definition of “whole seed”, there is still time to make your voices heard to the benefit of improving nutrition, enhancing the public welfare and stimulating product innovation.

Please send your letters to:

Division of Docket Management (HFA-305)                                                                   Food & Drug Administration                                                                                         5630 Fishers Lane – Room 1061                                                                                 Rockville, MD  20852

Re.  Federal Register Vol. 71 No. 33: Docket 2006D-0066

For link to December 6, 2013 FoodNavigator-USA Summary of the issue:

http://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/content/view/print/854110