Posted on by HaysHarvest

A Streetwise 2, chemical free please

Should we be worried about the chemicals in our food?

As I write this, Twitter is a flurry of activity over local celebrity chef Lesego Semenya’s (aka LesDaChef) comments on a video from Food Insider’s Food Wars series. The video in question contrasts meal options on the US and UK KFC menus, looking at portion sizes, local variations, and of course a chemical breakdown of the ingredients. These types of videos are generally touted as a way to highlight problems in the agro-food system but all too often, they tap into fear mongering to ensure their profitability in the click-bait economy. There are many legitimate reasons to criticise multinational fast-food corporations and their impacts on the communities they occupy, from uncompetitive business practices to their role in gentrification and socioeconomic coercion of poorer dietary choices. However, the choice to perpetuate the chemophobic narrative of “their food contains chemicals!” is dangerous and deeply anti-scientific, with widespread social implications.

The International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry defines chemophobia as “the irrational fear of chemicals”. Its history and origins are complex, and a mix of both our evolutionary hardwiring to keep us safe and the relationship between science and society. Chemistry teacher James Kennedy has a fantastic introductory series on the origin, pervasiveness, drivers, under-lying fallacies, and psychology of chemophobia for anyone wanting to know more about this phenomenon, but here we will focus on food.

From expression of cultures to individual creativity, food has always been a deeply personal experience. Almost all our early innovations, from tool making to fire, centred on expanding the range of food resources available to us and unlocking the nutrients inside of them. The development of agriculture brought us a more stable food supply than before, but also fundamentally altered the structuring of society. As we became more efficient at producing food, so more people were freed from the arduous task of producing their own. This enabled us to develop new career paths and build civilisations beyond the early pastoralists wildest dreams, but has also led to a disconnect between the consumer and the producer. In this context, the producers are not just those of us in the agricultural sector, but also our colleagues who work closer to fork than field.

As a plant and soil scientist it always amuses me when I hear someone talk about avoiding food with chemicals in it. Besides the fact that everything is made from chemicals, many of the chemical compounds that give our food the flavour experiences we crave and rave about are, in fact, defensive chemicals produced by plants to deter us.  Capsaicin, the chemical compound that gives chillies their bite, evolved specifically to deter mammals from eating these fruits (yes, chillies are botanical fruits) and the sensation we feel is not a taste per se, but rather a nerve response that is triggered when capsaicin comes in contact with our mucous membranes. The usual response to this is that these chemicals are ‘natural’. ‘Naturalness’ is, however, a meaningless concept with no scientific backing. Many compounds that are potentially toxic in relatively low doses, including arsenic, formaldehyde, and the organic pesticide copper sulphate, are also natural. What matters is the amount of exposure to a particular chemical over a particular time period. To quote Theophrastus von Hohenheim, largely considered the father of toxicology, “All things are poisonous and nothing is without poison; only the dose makes a thing not poisonous”.

So why does the KFC ingredients list look so long and intimidating? I spoke to Riëtte de Kock, Associate Professor at the University of Pretoria’s Department of Consumer and Food Sciences, to find out more.

On Twitter you offered to take one of LesDaChef’s fried chicken recipes and break it down into an industry-standard ingredients list. Looking at both the ingredients for LesDaChef’s hot wings and KFC South Africa’s wings, what are the noticeable differences to you as a food scientist?

Yes, I wanted to demonstrate that the differences between what is contained in food prepared at home and in industry are essentially minimal if one takes note of the requirements labelling of retail food products.  A food company has to supply to its customers products that are safe and of consistent quality.  Consumers do not like surprises and the food has to taste, look, feel and smell yummy and exactly the same as expected every time that they buy the brand, no matter where.  That is in contrast to what I, and probably most consumers and even chefs, would do at home.  LeDaschef admits that he does not follow recipes “You’d be shocked to know I actually don’t write any of these recipes down, I just make stuff“. At home we change ingredients, food preparation practices and quality as we please and rely on what is available in the pantry at the time. The quality of the end result depends on our culinary know-how and skills and at times on how much money we have to spend on ingredients.

The recipe used by a food company like KFC will reflect the need for assurance of consistent quality.  The choice of ingredients is based on steady supply of ingredients of reliable and desired quality and cost which is checked on a daily basis using a rigorous quality control process.  When preparing food in bulk, quality and performance of ingredients are essential factors to consider e.g. KFC opt to use more stable palmolein as frying medium rather than sunflower oil as one may do at home.

The KFC ingredient list features a list of E code numbers which may scare consumers that are not familiar with these.  The numbers are based on a universal international identification system that is used by the food industry to identify ingredients.  The use of E numbers is to avoid miscommunication due to varying names for ingredients in different languages as used in various countries.  E numbers are usually not listed on products in South Africa in order not to confuse consumers.

Why is it important for you that people understand that even home-cooked meals can be broken down into these types of lists?

Food contributes much to consumer health and well-being. As I demonstrated with the chef’s recipe, food prepared at home and in industry are basically very similar.  I fully support LesDaChef’s view that consumers need to prepare food and understand food more.  The reality is that most food items prepared and consumed in households in South Africa contain commercial ingredients.  Ready-to-prepare and ready-to-eat items also make up a large share of meals. The food industry and food scientists like myself have an important responsibility and can/should do much more to inform and educate consumers about the food items that they buy and consume.  Knowledge and understanding of the nature of food ingredients can provide consumers with insight to make informed decisions about food.

Should we be concerned about what is in our fast foods?

Yes, we should always be concerned about what is in our food.  However, the concern about fast food should not be any greater than the concern about the food that we prepare or consume at home or anywhere else.  Risk criteria that consumers need to apply when choosing any food item include is it safe and will it make me happy (in the long and the short run)?  When judging the contribution of a specific food item towards nutrition and health, consumers should consider their overall diet but also their lifestyle.  A balanced diet with adequate intake of protein, energy-providing items based on activity levels, vitamins and minerals, and with limitations on the intake of fat, sugars and salt, is essential.

LesDaChef tweeted “I just share what’s in your food. What you do with the info is up to you…” which is a common reason used by public figures to justify why they share information. In your experience, and given the wider context of chemophobia, are these ingredients lists meaningful to the public without further explanation?

The reason why food companies are obliged to provide a detailed, transparent food ingredient list for a commercial product is to protect consumers.  This is to protect consumers against allergens and intake of ingredients that they may want to avoid due to religious (e.g. pork), medical (e.g. some consumers cannot digest lactose, a milk sugar readily) or other personal reasons (e.g. veganism).  A multitude of complex food regulations direct the development and supply of commercial food products.  Food companies employ (food) scientists and technologists that are trained to study and understand the safety and functions of ingredients based on their chemical and physical makeup. 

Consumers are generally poorly informed about many of the ingredients on food labels and get nervous when the list becomes long or contain items that they do not recognise as things that they would stock in their pantries.  For commercial products, food product developers often safely extract and only add the key element from a commonly known ingredient to perform a specific function e.g. enhance flavour.  An example is monosodium glutamate (MSG), a compound found naturally in tomatoes, mushroom, seaweed which is added to enhance flavour.  Some of these vital functional additives (ingredients that are added in small quantities to play a specific role in a product) can be manufactured more efficiently and sustainably using man-made industrial processes.  Food scientists monitor that the ingredients that are added to food are safe and necessary.

What role do you believe public figures such as celebrity chefs can play in the communication of food science?

As social influencers celebrity chefs can play a huge role to inform and educate consumers.  Consumers need to be encouraged to understand food and to question what is added to the food that they buy:  What is this or that ingredient?  Why is it added?  How do you know that it is safe?  The professional chef could team up with qualified and experienced food scientists to share, discuss and debate concerns in order to educate and inform the public.  Chefs and food scientists share a passion for food preparation and food supply and have complementary skills and knowledge. Food scientists can and should certainly up their game to communicate more clearly to consumers the science behind the walls of the industry.  Celebrity chefs may provide them the platform to do so.

I’ve never particularly enjoyed most fast food and have much disdain for the multinational corporations that enable the majority of franchises. As I mentioned at the start of this piece, there are many legitimate reasons on which to critique the current fast-food business model and our own relationship with food, but perpetuating the anti-science narrative of chemophobia distracts us from having a legitimate conversation. Despite some public opinion harking back to a time that never existed when we all lived in harmony with nature kumbaya-style, the science is clear that the food we eat has never been safer.

Although both LesDaChef and Professor de Kock advocate for us to all to prepare food, this is something I disagree with to an extent. I view cooking as a chore and something I do only out of absolute necessity. If I could afford to have mutton curry delivered to my door in the portions I need with the speed and ease I can have a Streetwise 2, I would do it every day. The only reason I don’t eat fast food is because it’s difficult or expensive to get the types of foods that I like. I don’t think I need to physically prepare my own food in order to have a positive relationship with it, in the same way I (as an agricultural scientist and all-round plant enthusiast) don’t expect chefs and food scientists need to grow their own produce to have a positive experience with preparing food. I trust that food scientists like Professor de Kock are doing their best to ensure that these ready-made meals are safe, the same way they should trust us agricultural scientists to ensure the produce they’re working with is safe. I believe this is an important component of building a positive relationship with food, and necessary to have honest discussions of continuing to improve the agrofood system. To quote one of my favourite food science communicators, The Angry Chef: “Convenience foods are already with us, thoroughly integrated into our lives, invigorating them, enlivening them and allowing us to live them to the full. To reject them and the modernity they represent is completely unrealistic. To attach guilt and shame to them, to ascribe moral values to those who choose them, is a dangerous path. At best it will create the sort of guilt cycling that pushes people towards negative behaviours. At worst it will permanently damage people’s relationship with food.”

This is not to say that I don’t encourage everyone to try know a little bit more about the world and be interested in understanding the systems that support them, just that it’s impossible for us to be experts in every field. In the frantic pace of the 21st century, there is no doubt that we should be more conscious of our body’s needs and ensuring we are living as healthy a lifestyle as possible, but our decisions need to be evidence-based and health is not just about every individual meal we eat. If the food scientists are telling us that the ingredients of fast food are safe, and the dieticians are telling us that fast food in moderation isn’t going to be detrimental, then we should be listening.

Hay’s Harvest

Posted on by michellebeeslaar

Heritage Month: History, Culture and Social Cohesion

How does knowing South Africa’s history contribute to celebrating our diverse culture and reinvigorate our vision of social cohesion?

South Africa celebrates Heritage Month annually in September, culminating on the 24th. The month, in the aftermath of Apartheid, is intended to provide an opportunity to create awareness of the diversity of the people in South Africa in terms of amongst other attributes – race, religion, tribes and ethnicities. Awareness firstly, but secondly and perhaps the most important since the advent of democracy in 1994: social cohesion.

Heritage month cannot be commemorated or celebrated in the absence of understanding the tumultuous history of the country. In what we may term our “modern” beginning, the San and Khoekhoen provide rich historical evidence for their hunter-gatherer and pastoralist lives as far back as 2000 years.

The first European settlement was commercial, through the Dutch East India Company or VOC which was the world’s first corporate conglomerate, initially intended for trade with India, but it soon became apparent that there were more opportunities for expansion and in 1652, South Africa was settled starting in the Cape. The settlement was intended as a docking station for ships but soon morphed into a colony. It’s worth noting that the Portuguese did land in South Africa in 1497 as part of Vasco da Gama’s voyage of “discovery”, but unlike the tales of myth; he and his company did not discover South Africa or settle in it at that time. The British Empire, who by now, had used its vast and strong naval fleet to become a major colonial power, moved to settle South Africa, to ensure the Dutch did not lay claim to the wide potential of resources, arriving initially in what is now known as Nelson Mandela Bay, in 1820.

Throughout the 1800s, European colonialists moved to occupy the country and divide  into four provinces: the Cape and Natal controlled by the British with Free State and Transvaal under the administration of the Dutch. The British moved quickly to extend its area into the northern part of the Cape as diamonds were discovered there from 1867. Later, the gold and gems discovered in the Free State and Transvaal led to bitter competition over mineral resources, resulting in the brutal Anglo-Boer War from 1899 to 1902.

Often glossed over is the slave history of the Cape Colony for over 200 years until 1834 when slavery was banned. Slaves were commodities that were sold and had their occupation and lives determined. The majority of slaves bought and sold within South Africa were from Angola, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Madagascar, Malaysia and Mauritius. From this infusion between the San, Khoekhoen, African tribes who had settled south, the colonialists and the slaves, emanated the language of Afrikaans, which particularly amalgamated Dutch with Malay. Added, religions such as Islam and Hinduism were brought to our shores alongside a variety of Christian missionary denominations. Augmenting, the slave culture mingled with the European colonials to create a race now known as Coloureds who were mixes of the races. They developed a culture of their own in how they used Afrikaans, traditional food, music, dance and cultural observances. Likewise, the British, Dutch, Huguenots who sought sanctuary from France, Indians, Khoekhoen and San each came and in time adapted their language, food and cultural practices, reinforcing their religious beliefs in the process.

This is the colonial history and it’s often unfortunate that  Black tribes, other than the San and Khoekhoen, find too large gaps in our history between this period to the 1900s.  Colonial apologists are fond of using the “empty land myth”, which attempts to argue that other than what they term the Khoi-San, the European colonialists and Black tribes arrived in South Africa at a relatively similar time and had equal claim to “undiscovered” land.  The closer truth is that Bantu tribes started moving and settling south around 500AD. Within this broad categorization were our Zulu ancestors. The Xhosas in turn formed part of the Nguni tribes, who also moved south and were thriving settled prior to the Dutch arrival in 1652. Likewise, by 1500, the Sotho and Tshwane had established solid chiefdoms. It is therefore a false narrative that Black Africans were not settled and had claimed South Africa as their home alongside the San and Khoekhoen, significantly before the Dutch, British, French Huguenot and also Portuguese i.e. European settlement.

Fast forward to 1900 and the White European population began to stamp its authority in terms of language, religion and creating a spatial planning that used a Black manual labour force, including freed slaves to extrapolate resources to be used and refined by the colonial powers to build the wealth and military might of their empires. From this period legislation was put in place to reinforce the practice. The African National Congress was established in 1912 to attempt to push back this minority rule. South Africa was granted independence from the British Empire and became a republic in 1961. Apartheid was legislated and the United Nations had declared it a crime against humanity in 1966. The indignity and impoverishment accompanied by harsh inequality of Blacks continued until a negotiated settlement that led to the first democratic elections in 1994, which the ANC won and within 2 years in 1996 a constitutional democracy was formalized with the adoption of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

We could evaluate 26 years of ANC majority rule in South Africa, but that isn’t the point. The point is to use September to delve deeper into our history from 2000 years ago and fill in the blank spaces or add the details that may even surprise you. If we acknowledge that history is based on fact, not around the fire stories and we broaden our knowledge beyond our echo chamber, we move from commemorating Heritage Month to celebrating it.

Gift your neighbour or colleague a bowl of your traditional food.  Add a little note of its history. Eat the samosa, bunny chow or Gatsby. Think about how braai meat with pap and sous binds so many of us together. Look into learning, sharing information and understanding (before judging) on practices like circumcision, wearing a bindhi, Mosque call to prayer, why orthodox Jews won’t work on a Saturday, lobola, polygamy, why no visitors are allowed after the birth of a child in some cultures and how religions vary significantly in death and burial practices.

This September 2020, though the COVID_19 pandemic and subsequent lockdown has taken a heavy toll on many, we have an opportunity to take time to learn at least one small period in our history and from that, reach out a hand to say ‘tell & show me more and don’t forget the foods’. Life is for the living and we live in an incredibly diverse country with a complex history but also through openness of mind, heart and active citizenry, the ability to create a state of social cohesion, a state where socioeconomic equality is a norm, not a clash of culture or classes.