ISSN 1032 5298 • PRINT POST APPROVED PP241613/00096 VOL 72 ISSUE 4
OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2020
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF AIFST
Real-world measures for controlling food fraud Freeze-thaw stability of frozen meals The future of protein
Regulars By the Numbers The Pulse Sensory Fast Five
Continuing Professional Development
Education and continuing professional development Nelson Mandela said education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world. The world of food science and technology is changing rapidly and, as an industry, we need to ensure we keep up to date with changes. Education is a major focus for AIFST, built around our key priorities of grow, learn, connect and champion.
Why a CPD program? In today’s increasingly competitive and changing world, food scientists and technologists must stay at the cutting edge of new developments throughout their careers. It is no longer possible to rely on basic studies or on-the-job training to provide professional advice and service to our employers, customers and clients. This means to continually improve our technical knowledge and skills we need to engage in continuing professional development (CPD). AIFST also recognises that in modern organisations, food scientists and technologists are increasingly responsible for developing their own careers. CPD allows you to enhance your future.
A CPD program reflects the professionalism of the members, improves their professional standing and enhances their employability by formalising and documenting CPD activities. It assists in keeping knowledge up to date and illustrates an ability to adapt to changing roles in the food industry and food production environment. Ensuring currency in a complex job market can be difficult and companies look for staff who bring a broad range of skills.
What is a CPD program? A continuing professional development program is an active self-planned and structured program for developing and enhancing your professional skills. Ideally, the program is designed with clear objectives, extends your professional knowledge and capabilities, and allows you to engage in a broad range of activities to increase your career options.
The AIFST CPD program The AIFST CPD program was launched in 2019. It is voluntary and designed to encourage members to maintain currency of skills and knowledge and assist with career planning. It will provide recognition
of experience and interests and align food scientists with other wellrespected professions. Much of AIFST members’ skill set is developed over their working life but is not always part of their formal qualifications. The CPD program is intended to provide recognition of these activities and skills by formalising and recording the process in a straightforward and transportable way. The best outcome for the food science community is to develop a recognised professional identity. The competence of members is vital to the development and credibility of food science practitioners and AIFST is committed to providing value to members by developing and supporting this program.
How do I get involved? Keep an eye out for member communications, visit the CPD page on the AIFST website or contact AIFST (education@aifst.com.au).
OCTOBER – DECEMBER 2020
16
22
42
34
REGULARS
16 Choose your food colours wisely The latest research on what consumers want in their food
05 By the Numbers 06 The Pulse 09 People 14 AIFST News 18 Sensory 44 Research Roundup 46 Events 47 Fast Five
20 Food industry training Save and make money through food waste 22 Promoting science Pushing back on deniers and influencers 25 Finding food australia content online AIFST’s journal is a rich source of information on food technology 26 Freeze-thaw stability of hollandaise sauce Getting frozen meals right is important for food producers 28 COVID-19, wet markets and food safety The pandemic makes good food safety practices even more imperative
ISSN 1032 5298 • PRINT POST APPROVED PP241613/00096 VOL 72 ISSUE 4
IN THIS ISSUE
OCTOBER-DECEMBER 2020
OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OF AIFST
Real-world measures for controlling food fraud Freeze-thaw stability of frozen meals The future of protein
32 The future of protein How will we feed 9.7 billion people by 2050? 34 Practical real-world food fraud control measures Global food safety standards require a food fraud assessment 36 Naturally, it’s a bit confusing What to consider before claiming your product is ‘natural’
Regulars By the Numbers The Pulse Sensory Fast Five
COVER The future of protein.
38 Science at the service of the nation The important role of evidence-informed decision making 40 Food industry, food security and a healthy Australia Dietary risk factors now the leading global contributor to disease 42 A world first in humanitarian science and technology A new option for the bachelor of food science degree 45 STEM workforce report first to include food science A comprehensive analysis of Australia’s STEM trained workforce
food australia 3
Published by The Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology Limited.
Food for Thought
Editorial Coordination Bite Communications
Contributors Anna-Maria Arabia, Dr Jayashree Arcot, Scott Bouvier, Dr Jane M Caldwell, Dr Michelle Colgrave, Lauren D’Ambrosio, Dr Andrew Dansie, Lisa Flower, Dr Pablo Juliano, Dr Russell Keast, Surin Kitithongsopon, Dr Johannes le Coutre, Dr Gie Liem, Deon Mahoney, Emily Mantilla, Dr Martin Palmer, Dr Christina Pollard, Dr Georgie Russell, Dr Jay Sellahewa, Melinda Stewart, Tanya Wilkins, Clare Winkel.
Advertising Manager Clive Russell
Subscriptions AIFST | aifst@aifst.com.au
Production Bite Communications
Subscription Rates 2021 Subscription Rates for 4 editions Australia $116; Overseas (airmail) $184; single copies $29.00; Overseas $46.00 food australia is the official magazine of The Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology Limited (AIFST). Statements and opinions presented in the publication do not necessarily reflect the policies of AIFST nor does AIFST accept responsibility for the accuracy of such statement and opinion. Editorial contributions are invited. Guidelines are available at aifst@aifst.com.au Original material published in food australia is the property of the publisher who holds the copyright and may only be published provided consent is obtained from the AIFST. Copyright © 2018 ISSN 1032-5298
Welcome to the Spring edition of food australia, the final one for 2020 and what a year it has been! COVID-19 has impacted every facet of our lives and presented challenges and opportunities to adapt and innovate across the food supply chain. In By the Numbers this issue we look at the impact of COVID-19 on the Australian research workforce. We feature an extract from the opening address of the 2020 convention by Anna-Maria Arabia, chief executive of the Australian Academy of Science, on the impact of the pandemic on STEM and research. Each year, AIFST recognises the outstanding achievements of our members and colleagues through the annual awards program – this year we celebrated with a virtual awards presentation – head to page 14 to see the results. In this edition we feature articles on key topics and trends, continuing the theme of promoting science we look at what COVID-19 has taught us and how we can better support scientific research, including a piece on COVID-19, wet markets and food safety. Turning to current trends we look at the future of protein, influenced by changing dietary patterns due to environmental, health and animal welfare concerns. Our article on food security and a healthy Australia looks at what is needed to protect public health and safety. Over the past decade food fraud has been identified as an emerging risk to the food industry worldwide, and the article on page 34 provides an overview of practical real-world food fraud control measures. Finally, as this is our last edition for 2020, I would like to thank all of our members and the wider food industry community for your support during what has been a very challenging year. Feedback – we would love to hear what you think about this issue of food australia. Please take a few minutes to share your thoughts: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/foodaust As always, I invite and encourage all members to take an active role engaging with the Institute – it is only through continued engagement that we can fulfill our purpose of uniting food industry professionals in the science of feeding our future.
AIFST Board Chair: Mr Duncan McDonald Non-executive directors: Ms Suz Allen, Mr John Kavanagh, Mr Deon Mahoney, Ms Sandra Loader and Dr Chris Downs.
AIFST National Office 11 Julius Avenue, North Ryde, NSW, 2113, Australia Tel: +61 447 066 324 Email: aifst@aifst.com.au Web: www.aifst.asn.au
Fiona Fleming B. App Sc (Food Tech); MNutr Mgt; FAIFST; MAICD Chief Executive Officer fiona.fleming@aifst.com.au
BY THE NUMBERS
Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on Australia’s research workforce In May this year, a group led by Australia’s chief scientist, Dr Alan Finkel, investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the Australian research workforce. Their investigation synthesised the available evidence on current and future effects on Australia’s researchers and their capability to support recovery efforts. Research across industry, government and academic sectors will be negatively affected by the economic aftershocks of the pandemic. Job losses will unfold over the next six months and longer as the true impacts of the reduction in international fee revenue, industry co-investment and the labour force take effect. The pandemic is impacting research capability in a number of ways. Much of Australia’s research workforce has placed its existing projects on hold to answer the call for COVID-19 research. Physical distancing and travel restrictions are denying access to facilities and resources. Clinical trials and population health studies have been affected by the new demands on clinical resources and interrupted access to patients and population cohorts. The closure of laboratories is disrupting lab research unrelated to COVID-19. Income to universities, medical institutes, publicly funded agencies, CRCs, and the industrial sector is suffering from the loss of income from foreign students, business research spending and philanthropy. The report notes that while it may be too early to say with confidence what form the research workforce will take following the pandemic, indications are that the research workforce will contract and have reduced capacity after the pandemic to contribute to economic recovery.
21,000
The number of FULL-TIME UNIVERSITY jobs predicted to be LOST in the 6 MONTHS to December 2020
7,000
of the LOST university jobs are likely to be RESEARCH-RELATED academic staff
43% of applied RESEARCH in Australian industry was conducted by UNIVERSITIES in 2017, so a REDUCED capacity to INNOVATE is a likely outcome of the COVID-19 impact
57% OF UNIVERSITY R&D WORKFORCE IN 2018 WERE DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL POSTGRADUATE STUDENTS
9,000 The estimated number of international STUDENTS who will NOT RESUME their research in 2020 due to TRAVEL restrictions
30%
of PhD STUDENTS in Australia were INTERNATIONAL in 2018 and
75%
of these students were doing SCIENCE DEGREES
39%
Up to of university OPERATING REVENUE came from international STUDENT FEES in 2018
Source: Rapid Research Information Forum. (2020). “Impact of the pandemic on Australia’s research workforce”. Australian Academy of Science. https://www.science.org.au/covid19/research-workforce
food australia 5
THE PULSE
Keeping food on our plates in a crisis The Food Agility CRC has launched a $10 million Mission Food for Life project to help build data-driven resilience in Australia’s food supply chains and keep food on our tables in a crisis. The CRC is bringing together a consortia of agrifood and tech businesses to create new data-driven solutions to help the industry rebound quickly, reinvent business models and build resilience. The CRC’s CEO, Dr Mike Briers, said the recent series of shocks to agrifood supply chains has been a wake-up call that more needs to be done to ensure food supply continuity. “The last eight months alone have brought drought, fire, pandemic and geo-political barriers. Supply chains have been pulled and strained in ways we have never experienced before,” Dr Briers said. “Compounding shocks are creating a future where the ability to rebound, reinvent and be resilient are the keys
to prosperity. Those with the capacity to respond quickly via digital solutions and build new data-driven business models have the upper hand. “We invite other businesses to join with us in tackling what is one of the
greatest challenges of our time: how to keep food on the table in a crisis and beyond,” he said. For more information, visit www. foodagility.com/mission-food-for-life
World-first f lavour profile for Wagyu beef The unique flavour, texture and aroma of Australia’s famous Wagyu beef can now be marketed using a world-first flavour profile developed by University of Queensland (UQ) and the Australian Agricultural Company (AACo). Flavour wheels are commonly used by the wine, seafood, coffee, beer and cocoa industries to describe flavour and sensory properties, but this is the first time the approach has been applied to Wagyu beef. UQ sensory and flavour expert Dr Heather Smyth has created the new flavour wheel with AACo to provide product descriptors that differentiate the different Wagyu cuts and marbling grades. “The flavour wheel will enable exporters and chefs to select Wagyu products based on the specific sensory experience they will provide consumers - including aroma, flavour, texture and after-taste,” Dr Smyth said.
6 food australia
During blind taste tests of a selection of premium Wagyu beef samples, a flavour panel identified nearly 100 words to describe Wagyu based on sensory attributes involving texture, aroma and flavour. It taps into how the ‘terroir’ - the unique environment of the vast, natural grasslands of Northern
Australia where cattle are produced - and other factors such as genetics, age, gender, diet, handling and processing impart a unique flavour signature into the beef. “This research lifts Australian beef to a new standard as world-leading producers of distinctive, quality food,” Dr Smyth said.
Research roadmap for insect industry Australia’s insect industry has developed a plan to reach a $10 million annual industry target within five years. The new industry-led research, development and extension (RD&E) roadmap encourages insect industry members to share knowledge and collaborate as a key step towards industry growth. Developed by ag tech company AgThentic with funding from AgriFutures Australia, the roadmap contains three key recommendations: 1. Share ideas and knowledge for the benefit of all industry members involved 2. Develop practical industry guidelines to provide building blocks for a strong industry
3. Leverage these to invest in foundational research. AgriFutures Australia’s senior manager of emerging industries, Tom McCue, said the development of the RD&E plan will help guide future investment and long-term growth. “This is an important milestone for the Australian insect industry, and we’re excited about the future possibilities as this roadmap clearly shows where investment can get the best results,” Mr McCue said. “The benefits of being an industryled exercise means there are no surprises, the changes required to achieve scale have been prioritised, and members understand how they can grow all aspects of the industry,
from breeding and harvesting, to processing and marketing,” he said. To download a copy of the roadmap report, visit www.agrifutures.com.au
New frontier for plant-based meat With more plant-based meat products appearing on supermarket shelves and restaurant menus, consumers need to know what benefits these new plant-based meats might offer. A new report, Plant-Based Meat: A Healthier Choice?, has been developed by Food Frontier (a not-for-profit alternative protein think tank) and leading accredited practising dietitian Teri Lichtenstein. The report analyses the health and nutrition benefits of plant-based meats available across Australia and New Zealand. In a comparison of the nutrition
averages of plant-based meats to similarly processed conventional meats - such as sausages, burgers and chicken-style pieces - the report found plant-based meats have: • Higher or comparable protein • Lower or comparable kilojoules and sodium • Lower fat and considerably lower saturated fat • Health-promoting fibre (65 per cent of plant-based meats that list fibre are a ‘good’ or ‘excellent’ source) The report also explores evidence of other factors that may influence
health, including processing, ingredients, and the individual and public health risks associated with consumption of conventional meat. To download a copy of the report, visit www.foodfrontier.org/reports
Innovation trends for substitute meat A report produced by IP Australia shows how consumer demand for environmentally sustainable and ethical products is driving innovation, productivity and competitiveness in the food industry. It provides an overview of where meat substitute technologies such as imitation meat and lab-grown meat are being developed, where the markets are, and who the major players are. The report, created to help inform policy-making for Australia’s food industry, uses patent data to
analyse trends in meat substitute technologies. It found imitation meat technology is an area of growth and investment across the world. Between 2000 and 2012, patenting of imitation meat technologies maintained a low and relatively steady rate, with a significant increase in patent filings since 2013. While large food companies are among the top applicants, China dominates the sector as the largest source of innovation and the largest patent filing destination in imitation meat.
China’s Guizhou Bezon Food Industry Co Ltd filed the largest number of patents in the sector. The United States, Europe and Japan are the other major players, with Australia ranking equal fifth, alongside Canada, as a patent filing destination. There are 258 patent families filed in imitation meat, with 85 per cent of imitation meat patent families currently active. For a copy of the report, visit www. ipaustralia.gov.au
food australia 7
THE PULSE
Food traceability on the rise
The demand for tracking and tracing our food supply right along the supply chain, from paddock to plate, is increasing. Here we report several projects currently underway to design better systems for increasing food traceability in Australia. Next level ‘whole of chain’ tracking Even though Manbulloo is Australia’s largest grower of mangoes, they had difficulties with the flow of business information along their supply chain. It was fragmented and information was difficult to access and share, leading to errors during marketing. Each partner in the supply chain operated individual information systems with key information shared via email or verbally via telephone. The solution was a single product identification and traceability system and carton identifier that anyone in the chain could scan to identify the history of the fruit as it moved through the chain. They worked with business logistics company GS1 to develop a new whole-of-chain network. Now, anyone in Manbulloo’s supply chain can enter a carton number and see where all mangoes are from that batch, from packing shed to retailer. The new tracking system links up with each individual software system along the supply chain meaning reporting is now available in real time.
Trace, track and trust South Australia is known for producing high quality food and wine for domestic and export markets, but consumers increasingly demand guaranteed authenticity in their foods. Blockchain technology could provide this new level of trust, and Adelaidebased ag tech startup co-founder Andrew Grant believes South Australia’s primary industries can lead in the end-
8 food australia
to-end food traceability space. Mr Grant has co-founded a smart tracking software startup, Trust Provenance, which has developed a new platform integrating data points along the supply chain to guarantee food safety, traceability, biosecurity, quality and provenance. The system captures data in real-time, integrating these onto one platform, and secures the data in the blockchain. A digital portal allowing producers, packers, processors, retailers, quality inspectors and consumers to know the true journey of a product. “The days of ‘hand on heart, I guarantee my produce is clean, green, safe and of this quality’ are limited,” Mr Grant said.
Traceability program builds trust in Aussie supply chains Australia’s food safety systems will soon be strengthened by a national implementation program to help track and trace food products from farm to fork in domestic and export markets. The industry-led program, codesigned by Deakin University’s centre for supply chain and logistics (CSCL), includes an Australian-first guide to implementing food traceability, product specific guides and industry demonstrations to enable greater visibility along the entire supply chain. Whether the product is an animal, plant, grain or grocery item, knowing where it has been, when and how it was handled, and who was involved is essential to build full product traceability. Dr Hermione Parsons, industry
Professor and director of CSCL, said the program will help supply chains achieve end-to-end traceability and lift capability across the sector from small producers and food manufacturers to large-scale enterprises. “It will ensure industry can better respond to product recalls and will give consumers greater certainty about the source of the products they buy,” Dr Parsons said.
Tracking exports from paddock to pallet to plate The University of Tasmania has been awarded $455,000 to develop a new cloud-based digital solution to improve the traceability of Australian fruit marketed in China. Mr David Littleproud, Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management, said the funding was part of the Australian government’s $7 million traceability grants program. “This is yet another example of innovation that reinforces and promotes Australia’s reputation as a producer of clean, green and safe food,” Mr Littleproud said. “The cloud-based technology will allow easy tracing of Australian produce along the supply chain, making it simpler to extract information that supports its authenticity and compliance. The app will also include a function that will further support the digital promotion of Australian fruit and vegetables overseas,” he said. The system will be built so it can be adapted to other Australian fresh produce supply chains with minimal modification.
PEOPLE
Vale John Kinsey: food technology leader After a long life and remarkable career, a distinguished member of the food science community, John Kinsey, passed away recently. John worked tirelessly to develop and support the profession and contributed to the development of many of the professional services that food scientists in Australia still enjoy. John was born in Sandringham, Victoria, in 1927. His formal education started at Moorabbin primary school (next to his parent’s milk bar). From there he went on to Hampton high school and then Melbourne Institute of Technology (now RMIT) where he studied chemistry and obtained a fellowship diploma of applied chemistry in 1948. He commenced his professional career as an industrial chemist with cosmetics firm Potter and Moore in 1949 and became an Associate of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute (RACI) in 1950. When Potter and Moore was absorbed by Bush Boake Allen (BBA), John moved into the flavour division and contributed to the improvement and development of food flavours in Australia and their end-product applications. He worked on improved techniques for the extraction of natural raw materials and the installation of plant for producing flavour chemicals such as vanillin. After moving through a range of senior scientific roles he progressed
into sales and marketing. In April 1968, John and his family relocated to New Jersey in the US where he established a new branch for BBA before returning to Australia in October 1971 to take up a senior marketing role. In the mid 1970’s he became the managing director of BBA Australia and during his tenure, and beyond, the company was the dominant player in the Australian flavour and fragrance industry. John later became the company’s vice president Asia Pacific. He made considerable effort to improve the knowledge and use of flavours in the food industry by participating in talks, lectures and group discussions in the Institute and other associations. Throughout his career, John was an active champion of food science and technology and encouraged and supported his staff to be actively involved in AIFST and other industry associations. John made a significant contribution to the organisation of professional development activities in Australia, including as committee member of the southern section of the IFT, and as a founding member of AIFST and chairman in 1962. John was the technical secretary of the Food Technology Association (FTA) of Victoria (1955-1965) and the president (1963-65). He was President of the Council of Australian Food Technology Association (CAFTA) from
1965-1967 and again in 1972-74. He also served as the food industry representative on the Food Industry Committee of the National Health and Medical Research Council (NH&MRC). During John’s time as FTA Victoria president, he was instrumental in creating the first food science and technology course in Victoria, at RMIT. To foster student involvement, John and the FTA Vic created two scholarships per year to the RMIT course. In recognition of his outstanding contribution to AIFST and the Australian food industry, John was the 10th recipient of the AIFST award of merit (1976). His award of merit address was titled Thoughts of a pragmatic food technologist – now marketer. John touched many lives during his career and he leaves behind a rich legacy for the Australian food industry.
Dr Roman Buckow joins University of Sydney Dr Roman Buckow has joined the Centre for Advanced Food Enginomics at University of Sydney. As a Professor of practice in food engineering, he will be focussed on linkages between the university and industry for commercial adaptation and innovation in dairy, meat and legume processing. Dr Buckow obtained his PhD in food process engineering from Berlin University of Technology after completing a MSc in engineering. He was then postdoctoral fellow at Food Science Australia in Melbourne.
Since 2010, Dr Buckow has held several leadership positions at CSIRO including the food transformation group which included the CSIRO food innovation centre pilot plant in Melbourne. Dr Buckow has led a portfolio of scientific collaborations between CSIRO and its national and global industry partners. Most recently, Dr Buckow was co-leader of CSIRO’s strategic future science program on foods for precision health.
food australia 9
PEOPLE
Vale Dr Doug Graham: crop science luminary Dr Doug Graham, a graduate from the Universities of Durham and Cambridge, came to Australia from the UK in September 1961 to join the plant physiology unit (PPU) at CSIRO’s division of food preservation. He became part of a group that studied the role of nucleic acids, making several significant advances in this field. Doug also worked on ‘chilling injury’ in plants and events that led to cell death. In 1970, Doug moved to the CSIRO food preservation laboratory where he examined the relationship between carbonic anhydrase and photosynthesis, levels of nicotinamide adenine nucleotides and Krebs cycle intermediates and changes in tomato fruit ripening caused by ethylene dibromide fumigation. He published 48 papers, presented 10 conference papers and wrote six book chapters. In 1972 Doug was appointed acting leader of CSIRO’s wheat research unit and in 1975 he was a visiting Professor
for the Japan Society for promotion of science at Nagoya University. He was chairman of the fruit and vegetable postharvest research sub-committee (1976-78), steering committee chair for the development of research facilities in ASEAN countries (1977) and editorial board member for Food Research News, a CSIRO journal. As part of the US-Australia science agreement, Doug travelled to University of Hawaii to discuss the role of membranes in low temperature stress in crop plants. He became leader of CSIRO’s plant physiology section, that included the fruit storage section. There was friendly rivalry between these groups, but Doug encouraged respect for each other and their work. He was a great leader who was instrumental in getting scientific papers published and obtaining much needed funding. Doug became the officer in charge of the laboratories at North Ryde and
was acting chief from time to time, until his retirement in 1996. Doug’s colleagues had great respect for him and considered him a true gentleman, a helpful colleague, and a good boss to work for. A great tribute for any scientist. Our condolences go to Doug’s family and friends.
Vale Hollis Ashman: a food industry inspiration The global and Australian food industry lost a good friend and much revered colleague recently. Hollis Ashman was a graduate of Purdue University and her early career was in automotive and industrial electronics and engineering. It was during this time she became interested in marketing and strategy and completed an MBA at University of Pittsburgh. The next stage of her career was in senior corporate marketing and strategy roles around the world, eventually leading to the food industry with Nabisco. Seeing a gap in the area of consumer science, Hollis co-founded ‘The Understanding and Insight Group’ in 2001 to provide cutting-edge research in consumer experience and understanding. Hollis received much recognition and many awards for the Insight Group’s work, including as co-winner of the bronze Edison award for
10 food australia
applied technology research tools for mind Genomics® IdeaMap®. Her work with algorithms to understand human behaviour was game changing for the food industry. Hollis came to Australia in 2013 to work at the Mondelez food innovation centre to develop strategy and opportunity space in the premium and luxury market for Mondelez and SMEs to export to Asia. Hollis was a driving force behind one of the first industrial transformation research programs, first with Mondelez International and then with University of Melbourne. She worked tirelessly to ensure the research had application to the food industry and she was able to bridge the often wide divide between academia and industry. Hollis she was an inspiration. She was a highly intelligent and innovative thinker who challenged dogma and had a passion for capacity building and nurturing young scientists and food industry specialists. During her
time with University of Melbourne she mentored many early career scientists, PhD, masters and undergraduate students - an enduring legacy. She also had an active life outside work enjoying bushwalking and racing Austin Healeys. Hollis leaves behind her daughter Jennifer and son Chris in the US, and her two grandchildren who were her pride and joy.
AIFST appoints the 2020 Fellows Award for Australian agricultural researcher
The 2020 AIFST Fellows were announced at the virtual awards night held in July 2020. The Institute’s Fellows have given outstanding service in research and development, technology transfer and/or development of the food industry, in addition to holding a long-standing membership with AIFST.
AIFST would like to welcome Dr Geoffrey Annison, Dr Michael Depalo, Christine Giuliano, Jodie Hill, Associate Professor Mark Turner, Dr Andreas Klieber, Dr David Miles, Dr Martin Palmer and Dr Cheryl Taylor as Fellow members of AIFST.
Dr Craig Miller appointed BSI’s new general manager BSI has appointed AIFST Fellow Dr Craig Miller as general manager of technical and operations. The role, which commenced in August 2020, supports BSI’s end-to-end delivery of audit and certification services across Australia and New Zealand. Dr Miller will drive strategic growth in capacity and capability through a focus on training and developing assessors. He will also be providing leadership to enhance and support the quality, compliance and accreditation functions of the business. Dr Miller is familiar with leading teams of technical experts and operations specialists given his experience managing audit and certification programs for the past eleven years. His previous senior roles with Dairy Food Safety Victoria and SGS have involved extensive work in food safety auditing and management system certification businesses. “I have always seen auditing and certification as a powerful way to gain and maintain market access for clients. Benefits such as ensuring the production of safe food, quality
products, or a safer environment or workforce are also really fulfilling outcomes,” Dr Miller said. BSI has robust quality, risk and compliance management processes, and ensuring they continue to deliver best in class service to clients is important to Dr Miller. Navigating the COVID-19 situation has been challenging because these services are critical for client’s business continuity, and Dr Miller has a particular interest in helping assessors adapt to new delivery methods as the situation in the region evolves.
Professor Michelle Colgrave: 2020 ICM Agrifood award winner. Professor Michelle Colgrave has been presented the coveted ICM Agrifood Award by the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering (ATSE) for significant contribution to the agricultural sector. Working with research teams at Edith Cowan University and CSIRO, Professor Colgrave received the award for her work ensuring cereals are safe for people with coeliac disease. Her research at Edith Cowan University focuses on analysing proteins, including gluten, and finding better ways to test for the presence of gluten in food labelled as gluten free. Professor Colgrave was also involved in the development of the world’s first gluten-free barley at CSIRO, which is used in the production of gluten-free cereals and beer. “I’ve been fortunate to work with a team of brilliant scientists and conduct research to deliver safe food and new sustainable agricultural products,” Professor Colgrave said. Professor Colgrave shared the award with Dr Greg Falzon from Flinders University.
food australia 11
PEOPLE
South Australian cheesemaker Kris Lloyd was named Member of the Order of Australia (AM) in the General Division on the Queen’s Birthday 2020 Honours List, for significant service to the artisan cheesemaking industry, education and tourism. Ms Lloyd is chief executive and head cheese maker of Woodside Cheese Wrights, which she established in 1999. She has won many industry awards including the Grand Dairy Award in 2004 and 2011 and gold medals at the World Cheese Awards. In 2010, she won the Telstra Business Women’s national award for business innovation and the following year was presented with an Adelaide Food Legend award for her commitment to the industry in setting up the Artisan Cheese Making Academy Australia. Ms Lloyd also established the specialist association Cheese SA, which introduced industry-driven education and training programs, and was the founder of the successful annual CheeseFest which has expanded to include other fermented
Image credit: Dean Martin
Cheesemaker makes Queen’s birthday honours list
products under the banner of CheeseFest & Ferment Festival. Although Ms Lloyd is recognised as an international cheese judge, she describes herself as a parochial South Australian. “We should all recognise what a rich tapestry of flavours, people and cultures we have in our vibrant food
sector” Ms Lloyd said. “The cheese and food industry is such an incredibly important part of my life, I hope that my recognition will shine a light on all the cheesemakers and food producers across the country, and especially in my home state, South Australia,” she said.
Karen Job joins Food Frontier Karen Job recently joined Food Frontier, Australia and New Zealand’s independent think tank and expert advisor on alternative proteins, in the newly created role of head of industry engagement. Ms Job brings nearly two decades of specialist food industry experience from her previous role at leading UK retailer Marks & Spencer (M&S). Her most recent role at M&S was as company microbiologist, leading the policy development, governance and standards on microbiological safety and spoilage. She was also head of science and innovation, leading the strategy for new technologies, products and processes. In the new role at Food Frontier, Ms Job will support the rapidly growing alternative proteins sector across the value chain - from agriculture
12 food australia
and ingredient processing to manufacturing, retailing and export opportunities. “Given the trusted reputation of brand Australia, and our access to world-class scientists to deliver innovation across the protein sector, our local plant-based meat and cultivated meat industries are ideally positioned to make Australia a global leader in alternative proteins,” Ms Job said. “I’m thrilled to join an organisation working to drive the development of a diversified, future-proofed protein sector down under,” she said. Ms Job relocated from the UK to Melbourne earlier this year where she established a technical consultancy business to bring her extensive knowledge to the Australian food industry. Previously a chartered
scientist and Fellow of the UK IFST, Ms Job became a professional Member of AIFST soon after arriving in Australia.
Professor Peter Halley joins Fight Food Waste CRC Professor Peter Halley has recently joined the Fight Food Waste (FFW) CRC as deputy program leader of the Transform Program, established to extract valuable products from waste streams. As a leading international expert in bio-based polymers and translational polymer research, including the conversion of organic matter such as food waste to bio-polymers, Professor Halley will be a great asset to the Transform program. Professor Halley’s career spans more than three decades at University ofM1681_RK_AZ_Food_Australia_122x162.qxp_Layout 1 10.02.20 12:47 Seite 3 Queensland (UQ) with roles as the head of the school of chemical engineering, director of the centre for high performance polymers, chief investigator in the advanced materials processing and manufacturing centre, and as a founding member of UQ Plastics. He is a Professor in chemical engineering at UQ and was also head of the school of chemical engineering from 2014 to 2019. Professor Halley has previously worked in a number of private industry roles and with three cooperative research centres (CRCs in polymers, food manufacture and packaging science, and sugar innovation). He is a fellow of the Institute of Chemical Engineers (IChemE) and a fellow of the Royal Australian Chemical Institute, and is on the editorial board of the Plastics, Rubbers and Composites, Starch, the Journal of Renewable Materials and Green Polymers. Professor Halley has won the IChemE Shedden Uhde Award and Prize for Excellence in Chemical Engineering (2004), the CRC Sugar Innovation Award (2008), the CRC Polymers Chairman’s Award for research and commercialisation I N D U S T R I E S www.cathayindustries.com.au (2011) and received the CRC Association Technology Transfer Award in 2002 and 2015.
E
. G N I T I C X
R
OLOU C F O PACT THE IM
food australia 13
AIFST NEWS
The 2020 AIFST Awards Each year AIFST recognises the outstanding achievements of our members and colleagues, and the contribution they have made to the Institute and the Australian food industry, through the annual awards program. Due to COVID-19 meeting restrictions, this year’s AIFST 2020 awards ceremony was held as a virtual event following the AIFST virtual conference and exhibition. AIFST congratulates all our award winners and nominees, with special thanks to the judges who generously contributed their time and expertise.
AIFST president and chairman Peter Schutz presents Lisa Szabo with the AIFST President’s Award. The AIFST President’s Award Dr Lisa Szabo, director food safety and CEO Food Authority, NSW Department of Primary Industries, Biosecurity & Food Safety. This Award recognises, acknowledges and acclaims an individual or an organisation that has made an outstanding contribution to the Institute. Lisa has worked in the Australian food sector in technical, management and industry leadership roles since
1994. She was awarded her PhD from the University of Queensland in 1994 and went on to work with a wide range of industry and government organisations including CSIRO Food Science Australia, the Australian Food Safety Centre of Excellence and the NSW Food Authority. In 2015 Lisa took on her current role providing high level strategic direction and leadership to the regulation of food safety through the development of policies, operational
AIFST Jack Kefford Award for Best Paper A paper by Drs Sushil Dhital, Mike Gidley and Haiteng Li titled ‘Wall porosity in isolated cells from food plants: implications for nutritional functionality’, published in Food Chemistry, was the winner of this years’ Kefford Award.
AIFST Peter Seale Food Industry Innovation Award The Daly Potato Company Pty Ltd in Tasmania was awarded the Peter Seale Food Industry Innovation Award for their potato salad varieties with increased shelf life. Their new potato salad, made from the by-product of the washed potato lines for fresh market customers, was well received by consumers, but the need to ship it from Tasmania to mainland Australia was a logistical disadvantage to its competitors. To offset this disadvantage, they increased the product’s shelf-life by controlling water activity and pH levels and using sterilising and high
AIFST Bruce Chandler Book Prize Dennis Forte and Gordon Young received this years’ award for their book ‘Food and Feed Extrusion Technology: An Applied Approach to Extrusion Theory’.
14 food australia
programs and legislation that delivers safe food production in NSW. Lisa’s contribution to the Institute includes: • Providing advice to the Institute’s leadership on government policy development and implementation • Serving on the publications committee for the food australia journal • Serving on AIFST Board selection committee over a number of years • Supporting the development of conferences and webinars • Frequently speaking at AIFST conferences • Actively promoting AIFST through her networks This list of contributions does little to reflect the real value of Lisa’s contribution to the Institute. She demonstrates consistent day-today leadership through her personal participation in AIFST initiatives and events and by encouraging and supporting her staff to contribute by attending events and writing articles for publication, and encouraging her professional network to engage in AIFST activities.
The award was presented by Tom Lewis (RDS Partners, FAIFST) to Susie Daly. temperature cooking throughout the manufacturing process, thus making it more attractive to supermarkets. The increased shelf-life led to increased sales from all retailers.
AIFST Allergen Bureau Julie Newlands Award The team from Monash Health and the Monash Health Central Production Kitchen were awarded this year’s Allergen Bureau Julie Newlands Award. The award was presented to Imran Hanif and Peter Fischer in recognition of their team’s excellence in food allergen management based on their contribution to a consistent, sciencebased approach to food allergen risk assessment, management and communication.
Imran Hanif and Peter Fischer from the Monash Health and the Monash Health Central Production Kitchen Team
AIFST Research Poster Competition The Research Poster competition is an opportunity for students and early career researchers to showcase their work as emerging professionals amongst their peers. This year posters were ‘on display’ for the full two weeks of the AIFST virtual exhibition. First place was awarded to Gethmini Kathogoda from QAAFI, for the poster “Impact of Storage on Phytochemicals and Sugars in Queen Garnet Plum”. The team members were Tim O’Hare, Yasmina Sultanbawa, Bruce Topp, Hung Hong and Michael Netzel. Equal second place was awarded to posters from two students at RMIT: • Indee Hopkins for “Australians’ Experience and Willingness to Consume Edible Insects”. • Mayumi Silva for “The Effect of Different Casein to Whey Protein Mixtures on the Properties of Double Emulsions Prepared Using Ultrasound-assisted Emulsification”. AIFST Research Poster People’s Choice Award The winners of this new award category were selected by popular vote from conference attendees who visited the virtual poster exhibition during the 2020 conference. This year’s inaugural winners of the People’s Choice Award were:
• Sophie Selby-Pham, Monash University: ‘A Novel Method for Predicting Absorption of Phytonutrients in Humans’. • Minoli Aponso, Monash University: ‘Formulations Including an Essential Oil can Produce Hydrogen Peroxide and Potentially Disinfect FoodContact Surfaces’. • Margaret Murray, Monash University: ‘Does Timing Influence the Recovery of Post-meal Oxidative Stress by Phytonutrients? A Systematic Literature Review’. AIFST Foodbank Hunger Hero Award The 2020 Hunger Hero recipient is Justin Dowling, general manager of supply chain operations with Woolworths Group. Justin and his team have been instrumental in strengthening the Foodbank relationship with Woolworths’ supply chain. They helped implement and promote several new Foodbank initiatives including training, posters, demarcated Foodbank areas in distribution centres and Foodbank league tables. These initiatives resulted in a 50 per cent increase in Foodbank donations from Woolworths.
Australian Food Engineering Association Words by Drs Jay Sellahewa and Pablo Juliano Throughout the history of Australia’s agrifood economy, food engineers have made a significant contribution to the value of Australian agricultural commodities through the development and implementation of processing innovations that transform, preserve and stabilise. Since its formation in 2000, the Australian Food Engineers Association (AFEA) has represented and supported food engineers through activities including workshops and events, with a highlight being the successful bid to host the 13th International Congress on Engineering and Food (ICEF13) in Melbourne in 2019.
AFEA is planning future symposia and workshops in collaboration with industry organisations including AIFST, Engineers Australia and IChemE, and is now focussing on: 1. Increasing awareness of the food engineering profession 2. Connecting those interested in food engineering across Australia 3. Sharing knowledge on how food engineering principles can deliver successful economic, environmental and social outcomes. AIFST promotes the food engineering profession in Australia through linkages with academia, industry and research institutes in Australia and overseas, led
by AIFST’s food engineering groups in NSW and Victoria. In addition to activities in Australia, AFEA will continue to maintain its international linkages through IAEF, IFT and IChemE. AFEA invites anyone with an interest in engineering and food to join the association, attend their events and volunteer for activities. For more information, contact filip. janakievski@csiro.au Dr Pablo Juliano is president, Jay Sellahewa is past president and Filip Janakievski is secretary of the Australian Food Engineering Association.
food australia 15
FEATURE
Choose your food colours wisely Words by Lisa Flower
Raw materials are selected based on a number of factors including vibrancy and stability.
A
key finding from consumer research commissioned by global natural colour supplier Chr. Hansen was that natural colours are important to three out of four Australian consumers when making a decision on grocery purchases. The research also found consumers were seeking a balanced approach and often used short-cuts to help guide them through complexity. Market research company T-Garage surveyed 800 Australian consumers in January 2020 to better understand the role natural colours play in the purchasing decision-making process and attitudes to ingredients in food. The study found there is a strong movement towards ‘fresh’ and ‘natural’, driven by consumers trying to make choices that give them more of a balanced approach to health and nutrition. However, there is confusion about what some of the new labelling terms mean (such as ‘plant-based’) and how some of the new health trends and movements make sense to them and their families. These latest changes have led to a
16 food australia
feeling of confusion and complexity amongst consumers, who ultimately just want it to be easy for them to make ‘good’ food choices. For this reason, consumers are thankful there are a number of ‘short-cuts’ or ‘proxies’ that help them in their mission to achieve a more naturally balanced approach to their nutrition.
Engaged with food, freshness and impact on health There have been a number of changes to Australian diets over the past five years. Eating in moderation, watching out for sugar and moving away from ‘overly processed’ foods are some of the key overarching themes. These are closely followed by a desire to eat more ‘natural’ foods, with 69 per cent of consumers stating they are paying more attention to ingredients lists. The research found some of the key driving influences when purchasing food and beverages are a desire for natural and local produce, which is both high quality and fresh, and a
Consumers are paying more attention to ingredient lists. desire for ingredients that are easy to understand. It is no surprise then to hear the research found the use of natural colours and absence of artificial ingredients rated highly in the decision-making process, with 75 per cent of consumers rating these factors as important.
Front of pack claims and the educated consumer The study found the familiar on-pack call-out of ‘no artificial colours’ appealed to 81 per cent of consumers.
ISO 9001:2015 LIC 10372 SAI Global
Consumers are seeking a balanced approach and use short-cuts to help guide them through complexity of ingredient labelling. With the rise of plant-based foods and the increasing prevalence of vegetarian and flexitarian food preferences, an on-pack call-out of ‘plant-based colours’ was also strongly welcomed. The research found the claim ‘plant-based colours’ soared in appeal, compared to other types of colours, when consumers were more educated regarding the colouring methods used by food manufacturers.
We have a range of masks, in stock and ready for despatch.
Colour choice important across the board The use of natural colours was rated of ‘high importance’ in food categories associated with health and everyday use, such as pre-prepared meals and sauces, where 69 per cent of consumers said they were concerned about the types of colour being used. All food categories rated above 60 per cent for ‘concern’ regarding the types of colour being used. While it might be expected there would be less concern for colours used in our takeaway foods, the study found 44 per cent of consumers (and 56 per cent of ‘high achiever’ consumers) were actively concerned about the colour used in their takeaway meals. Depending on brand positioning, therefore, the choice of food colouring options is an important factor of considerable concern for consumers. For more information visit https://www.chr-hansen.com/ en/natural-colors
Scan the barcode or visit our website to see our range.
Surgical and KN95 face masks are in stock and ready for immediate despatch. View our website to find out more.
www.rowe.com.au Stirring and Mixing
About Chr. Hansen Chr. Hansen is a global biosciences company developing natural solutions for the food, nutritional, pharmaceutical and agricultural industries. Chr. Hansen provides an extensive range of natural colours for all applications in food, beverage and pet food, and a portfolio of colouring foods under the FruitMax® brand for Australian manufacturers. Chr. Hansen also has local sales, marketing, quality and applications support. Lisa Flower is the marketing manager Australia and New Zealand for Chr. Hansen. f
New South Wales & ACT Ph: (02) 9603 1205 rowensw@rowe.com.au
Queensland
Ph: (07) 3376 9411 roweqld@rowe.com.au
Victoria & Tasmania Ph: (03) 9701 7077 rowevic@rowe.com.au REF:101
South Australia & NT Ph: (08) 8186 0523 rowesa@rowe.com.au
Western Australia
Ph: (08) 9302 1911 rowewa@rowe.com.au
x/marketing/advertising/AIFST/101-AIFST.SEP 2020
food australia 17
SENSORY FEATURE
FOOD FILES Words by Drs Russell Keast, Gie Liem and Georgie Russell
The chemistry of coffee flavour Coffee is a significant global commodity and some of the statistics are staggering. There are more than 12 million coffee farms globally and the coffee industry employs 125 million people. Coffee exports are worth $26 billion, more than 400 billion cups of coffee are consumed each year and the total retail market is worth $113 billion. For some of us, the day doesn’t really start until the first cup of coffee is consumed. There are a lot of coffee options available to consumers, from the Nescafe Blend 43 to home espresso, the local café, or even the brewing giant Starbucks. Most coffee consumers have an unconscious understanding of the coffee flavour they prefer and much of the preference will be linked with coffee aroma. Understanding coffee aroma and the links to consumer acceptance is a complex topic, and a recent review by Mahmud et al provides a starting point with a comprehensive summary of compounds involved with coffee flavour. The authors provide a 15page summary table of the all the known volatile aroma active compounds, their individual odours and the minimum and maximum concentrations reported in coffee. As an example, benzothiazole
18 food australia
provides a leather aroma, while methanethiol has a cabbage aroma. These individual aromas are not typically dominant when consuming coffee, but they form part of the overall coffee aroma. The large number of individual compounds that make up coffee aroma are part of the reason there is so much diversity in flavour between coffees, and why the links with quality and acceptance are so hard to untangle. But it is reasonable to say that not many consumers want a coffee that has a dominant cabbage flavour (excess methanethiol), and regular consumers of coffee know when the flavour of their favourite brew is compromised. There may be no conclusive identification of key aromas driving consumer acceptance of coffee but, at the very least, this review paper provides a wonderful reference table for those involved with flavour analysis. Mahmud et al (2020). “Unravelling the relationship between aroma compounds and consumer acceptance. Coffee as an example.” Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety. DOI: 10.1111/1541-4337.12595 (free download)
Can imagery on food packaging make consumers eat more? Food packaging is used to influence consumers in many different ways using a variety of attributes in
different combinations. These could include branding, claims, packaging materials, colours, fonts and marketing imagery. Increasingly, research has demonstrated the important role marketing imagery plays in influencing consumers. Images can readily attract consumer attention and, due to less need for cognitive processing than textual information, can also have a powerful influence on decisions that are made quickly, like many of those made in supermarkets. Packaging images can influence consumer expectations about the product (such as displaying ingredients that give the food flavour) and also the ways in which textual information (such as claims) is processed and used. A recent review highlighted the ways in which subtle differences in the images of products contained within the packaging can influence not only how consumers perceive the product (such as what it might taste like), but how much of the product consumers serve themselves and how much they subsequently eat. In particular, the size of the suggested serving shown on the food package (small or large) can influence perceptions of how much product is in the packaging, how much is served, and how much is consumed. McGale and colleagues and Aerts and Smits have both
recently demonstrated that increasing the suggested serving size of various food items resulted in children serving themselves more of the food and, in many cases, caused children to consume more of the product. Likewise, adults have been shown to be influenced by serving size images, serving themselves more of the food when its packaging images displayed larger serving sizes. It is likely that serving size images provide consumers with an anchor, or a suggestion of what is ‘normal’, which helps form their serving and consumption decisions. Although there is still much to be learned, it is becoming increasingly clear that images of the food product on the front of a package can have important influences not only on how consumers perceive the food, but also how much of it they serve and eat. Gil-Perez et al (2020). “Without words: the effects of packaging imagery on consumer perception and response.” Current Opinion in Food Science 33:69-77 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2019.12.006 McGale et al (2020). “The influence of front of pack portion size images on children’s serving and intake of cereal.” Pediatric Obesity 15(2) https://doi.org/10.1111/ijpo.12583 Aerts et al (2018). “Do depicted suggestions of portion size on pack impact how much (un) healthy food children consume.” International Journal of Consumer Studies doi.org/10.1111/ ijcs.12503
Sensory marketing even more important during COVID-19 With more people working from home, anxiety levels increasing and boredom added on top, it is no wonder we have changed our food habits. With COVID-19 causing lockdowns which affect nearly every corner of the world, it seems likely that changes in food habits due to COVID-19 may be similar in different parts of the world. Bracale and Vaccaro analysed the shopping and market data from 10,769 stores in the period from midFebruary to the end of March 2020 in Italy during their strict lockdown period. In response to the Italian lockdown, consumers started to panic buy.
Sales of long shelf life items such as canned foods, in combination with frozen foods, increased by up to 50 per cent. This was in contrast to sales of fresh produce, such as vegetables and fruits, which saw a decrease of around 18 per cent. Although one would expect sweet snacks to increase, they decreased by as much as 20 per cent. However, items which could be used for home backing, such as flour and other ingredients for cakes, went up by 64 per cent. Similar figures were seen for ingredients to make home pizza. These buying patterns suggest consumers probably used their time at home to do more home cooking and backing, and similar trends have been observed in Australia. Nielsen market data during the first Australian nation-wide lockdown found food which can be stored for longer, such as frozen vegetables, were in strong demand (a 39 per cent increase). However, the sale of fresh produce such as fruit decreased by five per cent. In addition, food delivery platforms such as Deliveroo and UberEATS saw a significant change. Deliveroo saw a 597 per cent increase in ‘fish and chips’ orders, playing tango with a 139 per cent increase in ice cream orders. From a sensory marketing perspective, these changes are interesting. In a ‘normal’ world, we use all our senses to make food choices. We smell the fresh produce, feel the texture, and sometimes even have the opportunity to taste the food.
However, when buying frozen or canned foods, and making online food orders, we miss out on a lot of sensory experiences when we make food choices. This means the marketing of food which engages our senses through packaging, photos and text (sensory marketing) becomes instrumental to the success of the product. Currently the Consumer Analytical Safety Sensory (CASS) Food Research Centre is applying its experience in sensory marketing in understanding online food choices. In the ‘new normal’, this research direction will provide important insights for those who want to promote and sell food online. Bracala R & Vaccaro CM. (2020) “Changes in food choice following restrictive measures due to Covid-19.” Nutrition, metabolism and cardiovascular diseases. doi.org/10.1016/j.numecd.2020.05.027 http://www.roymorgan.com/findings/8398-snackfood-consumption-may-2020-202005110542 https://www.ausfoodnews.com.au/2020/05/12/ deliveroo-data-reveals-australias-lockdown-eatinghabits.html https://www.sbs.com.au/news/cooking-is-helpingaustralian-families-stay-connected-to-theircultures-during-lockdown https://www.nielsen.com/au/en/insights/ article/2020/no-more-smashed-avo-australianshoppers-turn-to-cheaper-long-lasting-fruit-andveg-options-during-lockdown/
Dr Russell Keast is Professor, Dr Gie Liem is Associate Professor and Dr Georgie Russell is Senior Lecturer at the CASS Food Research Centre at Deakin University. f
food australia 19
SUSTAINABILITY FEATURE
Food industry training: save and make money through food waste Words by Emily Mantilla and Tanya Wilkins
I
t is tough in the middle of a global pandemic to get attention for other messages, but the Fight Food Waste Cooperative Research Centre (FFW CRC) has an important one to share. Australian businesses can reduce their costs, and potentially create new income streams, by reducing their food waste. To help businesses achieve this goal, FFW CRC participants Honey and Fox Pty Ltd conducted an Australian food industry training needs analysis to discover what types of training would have the biggest impact on food waste throughout the supply chain. A training needs analysis is a deep dive to discover what the food industry needs in terms of training, and then learn what the gaps are for training on that particular topic. The first finding was that very little online searching is undertaken for training regarding food waste management. This is largely because industry tends not to see food waste as an issue and tells us there is still much work to do to get the food waste issue on the agenda. Industry told us the three main areas they see the most food waste are:
20 food australia
• When food is packaged • When food is processed • In the food service sector Having this understanding of where food waste is occurring provides opportunities and makes it easier to act strategically to address the issue. It may be that industry needs a campaign similar to the FFW CRC’s current consumer focused ‘Fight Food Waste – it’s easy as’ digital campaign on Facebook and Instagram, so they also know it’s easy to save money by reducing food waste. In the desktop audit component of the training needs analysis research, we found more than 104 vocational education training (e.g. TAFE) units, out of a possible 16,000, that contained food waste in the performance criteria. Five out of the total of 18 national training packages contained at least one unit that was focused on food waste. The seafood industry training package was the only one that had a specific unit dedicated to food waste. This is a result of work in the past by the Australian Seafood CRC to have a food waste component included in the training package. The FFW CRC will try and replicate this success so
food waste can be taught throughout the supply chain. We also found that non-nationally recognised training (which provides no formal qualification or certification) was actually trending upwards as the preferred method of training. This trend was not a surprise, as we know Australian food industry businesses are mostly owner/operators with little spare time and very often regionally based. There is not the time nor the luxury to invest in long and expensive courses involving travel to major capital cities. To assist with easy location of industry food waste training options, the FFW CRC is developing a searchable food waste training database so businesses can more easily find the food waste training they require. When it came to specific training needs, we heard that micro-businesses want tips and tricks to raise the profile of food waste in their business and help developing new markets for new products they might be able to create with their food waste. Small businesses also wanted help with collaboration across the supply chain, improving food storage processes and reducing packaging.
Communication also came up as a need for small businesses who wanted to get their workforce engaged. Medium-sized businesses also had similar concerns relating to packaging and creating a cultural shift within their organisations around food waste, so it becomes part of everyone’s role. The concept of a food waste audit also started to enter the conversation with medium-sized operations. The FFW CRC is currently developing an online tool called DIRECT which will help industry reduce food loss and waste. DIRECT, currently in piloting phase, enables food businesses to understand the true cost of waste, including how to conduct resource efficiency assessments, identify and calculate resource efficiency and understand the business value of improving resource efficiency. Lastly, some of the larger operations told us that they were also looking for greater communication and
collaboration across the supply chain and wanted help developing new markets for their products. To provide training to meet these needs, we now understand that Australian food businesses do not consider training as a once off event. They told us there needs to be ongoing support, coaching, resources and even further training to help them implement their new knowledge back into their businesses. Training must also be budget-friendly for micro and small businesses. This piece of work has shown us that there is a motivation to reduce food waste from a business perspective. The FFW CRC is pleased to hear this and we’re ready and willing to help more businesses with their food waste issues, especially through the provision of targeted training programs and ongoing support to reach the ambitious target of an Australia without food waste.
For more information on DIRECT visit www.fightfoodwastecrc.com.au/ project/direct/ Emily Mantilla is the learning and engagement director with FFW CRC participants Honey and Fox Pty Ltd. Honey and Fox are agribusiness marketing, market research, communications, R&D extension and education specialists working with farmers, fishers and small food businesses. Emily is also the Project Manager for the FFW CRC ‘s industry connection hub. Tanya Wilkins is communication manager for the FFW CRC and works to communicate and extend CRC research results and initiatives to the wider community and to industry throughout the whole supply chain. Tanya also provides communications and extension support to the FFW CRC’s industry connection hub. f
Foodcare meters for pH Analysis with Application Specific Probe HI98164
Yogurt pH Meter
Includes probe with conic tip and glass body.
HI98165
Cheese pH Meter Includes probe with conic tip and AISI 316 stainless steel body.
HI98161
Food pH Meter Includes probe with conic tip and food grade PVDF body.
HI98163
Meat pH Meter Includes probe with stainless steel piercing blade and food grade PVDF body.
Hanna food quality pH meters are rugged and portable with the performance and features of a benchtop. Five models are available in this series to measure food, milk, meat, yogurt and cheese. Each model is supplied in a durable thermoformed carrying case that
HI98162
Milk pH Meter Includes probe with spheric tip and food grade PVDF body.
holds the meter, probe, cleaning solutions and calibration buffers securely in place. w w w.hannains t .com. au
food australia 21
FOOD SAFETY FEATURE
Promoting science: pushing back on deniers and influencers Words by Deon Mahoney
R
igorous scientific endeavour underpins everything we know and do as food scientists and technologists. Not surprisingly, science is an important foundation of the AIFST strategic plan, supporting the delivery of innovative, sustainable, and safe food to consumers. In her opening address to the 2020 AIFST annual convention Ms Anna-Maria Arabia, chief executive of the Australian Academy of Science, highlighted the importance of evidence informed decision-making and the vital role scientific enterprise plays. Unfortunately, the contest of scientific ideas is occurring in an environment where misinformation is causing a decline of public trust in science. In recent times there has been a persistent increase in antiscience attitudes and behaviours, including attacks on the integrity of scientists. In the biological sciences area, immunisation programs and vaccines have become targets, along with genetically modified organisms (GMOs), novel foods, gene editing, nanotechnology and other biotechnologies.
22 food australia
In the United States, Dr Anthony Fauci (director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases) recently warned of an antiscience bias being a major problem during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Pseudoscience and the post-truth era Anti-science is not a new phenomenon. In 1957, Martin Gardner published the book Fads and fallacies in the name of science1 which exposed the pseudo-science movement. It described the role of pseudo-scientists in the propagation of fads, misinformation, fallacies, strange cults and bizarre remedies for medical issues. Nowadays the term post-truth has come into vogue, with the twentyfirst century often referred to as the post-truth era. Post-truth refers to circumstances in which objective facts and evidence are less important in shaping public opinion than emotion and personal belief. Post-truth was selected as word of the year by Oxford dictionaries in 20162, with facts and expert opinions of secondary importance relative to emotion and belief. The anti-science
movement has become even more rampant with the advent of social media during this era.
Participants in the antiscience environment The rise of social media has seen the emergence of bloggers, influencers, deniers and self-proclaimed experts, some of whom propagate and promote junk science and misinformation to the masses. Food blogging is not a new concept, but the rise of platforms such as Instagram and YouTube have taken it to the next level. The chef Jamie Oliver has 8.2 million followers on Instagram. His account describes him as a chef and dad, providing photos, recipes, and book links and promoting his Ministry of Food campaign in the UK. There are numerous other food bloggers legitimately promoting recipes and information about the origin and production of food and encouraging diversity in our diets. Unfortunately, a host of other players have entered this space, challenging conventional science and disseminating dishonest information. Many of these influencers are neither
academically trained nor skilled in scientific disciplines, but they have huge numbers of followers which they influence and persuade. Influencers can be found promoting controversial topics such as alternative foods and medicines, the dangers associated with GMOs and anti-vaccine science. The most deliberate and visible anti-science movement has involved the anti-vaccination movement, with their goal to discredit vaccines. For example, during 2019 there was an increase in vaccine-preventable illnesses such as measles and whooping cough in Europe, North America, and Pacific island nations. This surge was attributed to a decline in vaccination rates and was strongly linked to anti-vaccine proponents endorsing inaccurate and discredited information about vaccine safety.
Why do people question science? The public is increasingly exposed to complicated and contradictory information about real and sometimes illusory hazards – leaving them ill-equipped to distinguish between a hazard and the actual risk to self. At the same time, scientific expertise is colliding with organised and concerted anti-science sentiments in the public domain. For example, during the past twenty years, consumers have been alerted to potential hazards in the food supply such as acrylamide, chloropropanols, dioxins and perand polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS). When faced with the challenge of understanding the risk, consumers rely on their preconceptions. This is called confirmation bias, and it reflects an inclination to choose information that confirms our existing beliefs or values. Accepting information that supports our beliefs is easy and requires little intellectual power. There is also the issue that the public fails to appreciate science is difficult and scientific knowledge is continuously evolving. In its
simplest form, the scientific process involves the formation and testing of hypotheses using systematic experimentation and observation. Then, through a process of interpretation and reasoning, the scientist can either declare the hypothesis supported or not supported. The output is then documented, subjected to peer review and subsequently published. But scientific findings must never be considered final, as they are prone to being reversed through further experimentation by disbelieving and competitive colleagues. Scientists rarely proclaim an absolute truth or absolute certainty, because uncertainty is inevitable at the frontiers of knowledge.3 This creates confusion for the public as they seek to unravel conflicting and contradictory information and, not surprisingly, they respond by sticking with their pre-existing beliefs – whether it’s the dangers of caffeine, the risks associated with GMOs or the benefits of dietary supplements.
What has COVID-19 taught us? The COVID-19 pandemic has led to heightened public exposure to scientific information. Doctors, epidemiologists, virologists and modellers now feature in the mainstream media, and the public is barraged with scientific facts and figures. With scientific issues everywhere in the media, the pandemic is changing public perceptions of science. They have learned to understand a little about epidemiology, contact tracing and the way data is presented and interpreted. Unfortunately, there is still confusion about the changing nature of scientific discovery, with advice changing as we learn more about this disease. For example, early advice suggested masks were of limited value outside a public health setting. But as more information emerged about the way the virus was spread by droplets and aerosols, the advantages of wearing
masks became more apparent. This is despite a lack of objective quantification of the true benefits of masks. Likewise, early endorsement of the value of anti-malarial drugs as a treatment promoted widespread belief in their efficacy despite results to the contrary. Not surprisingly, the COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in an explosion of medical research. The US National Library of Medicine hosts a database that records ongoing research. The registry at ClinicalTrials.gov currently lists 3,438 studies on COVID-19, including 254 trials exploring the use of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19. Concerns have been raised about a potential waste of research effort, caused by duplication, insufficient research infrastructure, poor study design and inadequate reporting.4 The pandemic has created an environment for the anti-science brigade to spread misinformation, resulting in the promotion of a range of unsubstantiated facts, practices and cures. Everything from the virus being a hoax, to causative agents such as fifth generation mobile technology (5G) and treatments involving the internal use of chlorine-based sanitisers or hydroxychloroquine.
How can we do better? We need to support scientists to do scientific research and better communicate the results of their work. The dissemination of scientific intelligence must be improved and presented in a form accessible to the public. In the food sector, we have failed in the past to effectively communicate the success and benefits of technologies such as irradiation, GMOs and nanotechnology to the public. Plus, the public remains sceptical about the way the industry uses pesticides in production, food additives, processing aids and other emerging technologies. Several European and Asian countries have banned the cultivation
food australia 23
FOOD SAFETY FEATURE
of GMOs because of pressure from activists and public unease. Social media influencers have stressed the dangers of so-called ‘Frankenfoods’ (a reference to the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley) and conveniently ignore the safety assessments and GMOs benefits for disease resistance, increased food security and improved nutrition, particularly in developing economies. This is despite most regulatory agencies openly declaring GMO crops and foods currently available for sale to be safe. Consumers want to know if food containing GMOs with altered genes is any less safe than food generated through traditional plant breeding. The answer is no, but the public is still not convinced. In Australia, any food produced using gene technology is regulated under Standard 1.5.2 – Food produced using gene technology. All such foods must undergo mandatory pre-market
approval (a food safety assessment) and be labelled appropriately. The labelling requirement is not for safety reasons, but rather enables consumers to make an informed choice. Scientists and the food industry have failed to adequately communicate the results of these safety assessments to the public in a way that can be easily understood.
process and a failure by science to effectively communicate complex concepts. This trend will not change with the continued upsurge in antiscience pundits. It is essential that the science community responds to the challenge, engages more with an increasingly cynical public, and defends their science.
References Conclusion While science plays a major role in our lives, it continues to create concern and uncertainty in the minds of many consumers. There is an urgent need for more meaningful communication and interaction to ensure the public understand the benefits of scientific endeavours and the true nature of any hazards or risks. Public questioning and disregard for sound science demonstrates a failure to understand the scientific
1. Gardner M. (1957). “Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science”. (Dover Publications Inc., New York) 2. Oxford dictionaries. (2016). https://languages. oup.com/word-of-the-year/2016/ 3. Achenbach J. (2015). “Why do many reasonable people doubt science?” National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ magazine/2015/03/science-doubters-climatechange-vaccinations-gmos/ 4. Glasziou P et al. (2020). “Waste in covid-19 research”. BMJ 369: m1847 https://www.bmj. com/content/369/bmj.m1847
Deon Mahoney is head of food safety at Produce Marketing Association (PMA) Australia-New Zealand. f
Comprehensive technical support, consulting, training and integrity solutions specialising in food safety, food fraud and threat management. FOOD TRAINING PROGRAMS INCLUDE: HACCP, GMP, VACCP, TACCP, BRCGS, Food Safety Culture, VITAL 3.0, Internal Auditing, Food Labelling Legislation
FLEXIBLE TRAINING DELIVERY ON-LINE COMPLIANCE TRAINING
INTEGRITY SOLUTIONS
TECHNICAL SUPPORT AND CONSULTING SERVICES • Audits • Labelling reviews • System Development • Standard Design • Scheme management www.integritycompliance.com.au
24 food australia
info@integritycompliance.com.au
+61 7 3390 5729
REGULARS
Finding food australia content online Words by Melinda Stewart
F
or anyone working in the food industry, or studying or undertaking research in food science, the AIFST’s journal food australia is a rich source of information. It covers a broad range of topics including emerging technologies, industry developments, regulatory developments, new ingredients, food safety, nutrition and sustainability. So, whether you are wanting to browse the latest issue, need to find a specific article or need to know what has been published on a particular topic in the past, the following tips should help you efficiently find the content you need. As with most things, there is more than one way to skin the proverbial cat, so consider one of the following options, or a combination, to find what you need.
If you’re a member of AIFST Members can go directly to the journal’s location on the AIFST website, sign in and browse the current issue, or past issues back to 2013. If you are looking for a specific article, or articles on a specific topic, but don’t know which issue they were published in, using one of the scholarly search engines first will help you find what you’re needing more quickly. Read on further for tips on this. If you’re a student, academic or researcher at a university or research institution
Most university and institutional libraries will have full-text access to food australia. If you know the title and author details of the article you require, enter them into the library search box. Remember, using the ‘advanced search’ option will usually help refine your search. Alternatively, use the journal search function to find the record for food australia, including which database the journal is indexed in and what period is covered. For example, in many Australian university libraries, food australia is made available via the Australian public affairs full text (APAFT) and the humanities and social sciences collection databases on the Informit platform. It is also indexed in the food science and technology abstracts (FSTA) database which can be accessed through familiar research solutions Web of Science, Ovid and EBSCOHost.
Scholarly search engines The two scholarly search engines which index food australia are Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic (MA). At the time of writing, the most widely known of the two, Google Scholar, had indexed 2,430 food australia articles from 1988 through to the July-September 2020 issue. The most direct way to search Google Scholar for content published in the journal is to type source: “food australia” in the search box along
with your search terms. Alternatively, if using the advanced search feature, type “food australia” into the field labelled ‘Return articles published in’ and combine this with your search terms and/or author details in the relevant fields. Full-text articles are not normally available. However, if you are a student, academic or researcher, you will typically be able to click through from Google Scholar to access the full-text articles made available by your institution’s own library. If not, use it as a tool to identify the articles you want to read and, if you’re not a member of AIFST, check if the journal is available at your public or state library. Another option is to visit your nearest university library, as many have guest computers that enable access to online resources. MA also indexes food australia. As with Google Scholar, full text is not available, so its main use is as a tool to identify articles of interest. MA also provides a range of data and metrics for the journal, including article citation data and, at the time of writing, it had indexed 666 papers dating from 1981 through to 2018. AIFST holds back issues prior to 2013 in print, so please contact us if you need assistance with accessing articles prior to this date, or with any other queries, via aifst@aifst.com.au. Melinda Stewart is technical information specialist at AIFST.
f
food australia 25
FEATURE
Freeze-thaw stability of hollandaise sauce for pre-cooked frozen meals Words by Surin Kitithongsopon
Figure 1. After freezing, thawing and heating, from left to right : hollandaise sauce samples made of natural fresh yolk, natural yolk powder, PLA2 treated fresh yolk and PLA2 treated yolk powder
F
rozen meals allow food producers flexibility in production, distribution and logistics with multiple implications that deliver greater convenience and product range to consumers. The quality of certain meals remains stable during the freezing, thawing and heating processes, while some do not. Meals featuring emulsion-based sauces, such as hollandaise, exemplify a product range that does not freeze well. Although hollandaise sauce is used extensively in the food industry, it is susceptible to separation of the emulsion of oil and water phases, leading to coagulation which makes it visually unappealing to consumers and commercially unusable.1 This research demonstrates an enhanced formulation for hollandaise sauce that potentially ensures stability during freezing, thawing and heating to avoid an undesirable appearance and texture. Emulsions are intrinsically thermodynamically unstable, as they may eventually degrade and break down through a range of effects including phase separation, gravitational separation, coalescence and flocculation, especially during freezing and thawing. Emulsified fat droplets are one of the major structural components contributing to the desirable physicochemical and sensory properties of hollandaise
26 food australia
and similar sauces. Freeze-thawing initiates a separation of the emulsified water and oil components resulting in a coagulated texture. Maintaining consistency of hollandaise-type sauces subjected to freezing, thawing and heating is contingent on the stability of their compositional and structural properties, in addition to external factors like storage, freezing and defrosting.2,3
Thirty-five sauce samples trialled In this trial, 35 hollandaise sauce samples were prepared from fresh and powdered egg yolk and soy lecithin, to which some xanthan, locust bean gum, guar gum, sugar and salt were added to quantify their enhancement and synergistic interactions. Phospholipids in egg yolk lecithin is the key factor for emulsification in hollandaise sauce. The natural and phospholipase A2 (PLA2) treated fresh and powdered egg yolk and soy lecithin were used in each sample to test their emulsifying functionality. Xanthan, locust bean and guar gum were added to the sauce to evaluate their contribution to stability and enhancement of emulsion durability. Sugar and salt were also added and tested to determine their effect. Once the hollandaise sauces were prepared, they were stored in a -18째C
freezer ranging from 73 hours up to 616 hours, to enable observation of any time induced variables. All samples were thawed for 48 hours at 3-5째C and heated at 180째C for 30 minutes. The PLA2-treated egg yolk (both fresh and powdered) were the most stable during freezing, thawing and heating, as shown in the two beakers on the right-hand side of Figure 1. Moreover, the sauce can also be further diluted by adding water leading to the production of higherquality sauces at a lower unit cost. The hydrolysation of the position 2 phospholipid by the PLA2 converts it into lyso-phospholipid modifying the egg yolk, enhancing its water solubility by amplifying the emulsifying properties of egg yolks in oil-in-water suspensions.4 PLA2 modified egg yolks, irrespective of whether they are fresh or powdered, do not harden even when heated at high temperatures at 180째C. The cleavage of one of their two fatty acid tails by the enzyme enables a closer, tighter packing together of oil, thereby enhancing the formation of rigid micelle structures resulting in the formation of smaller droplets and proportionately increased sauce stability.4,5 A conversion of 80 per cent of phospholipid is argued to be sufficient to support a full enhancement of the emulsifying properties of modified egg yolk.6
Sensory analysis determined best formulation The hollandaise sauce was upscaled at Gate Gourmet’s Sydney kitchen (an airline catering company) and tested on industry standard breakfast meals. Sensory analysis was used to evaluate the sauce by Gate Gourmet’s chefs and staff. The results confirmed the hollandaise sauce made of the PLA2 treated yolk produced the most acceptable result. The increased tolerance for high temperature of reformulated hollandaise sauces not only extends their usable life and enables freeze-thaw stability, it also inhibits the growth of undesirable microorganisms since the sauce can be pasteurised at higher temperatures4. Egg yolk treated with PLA2 results in substantial cost saving due to the reduced quantity of fats or thickening agents, such as oil or butter and number of egg yolks required, while maintaining excellent product properties. Pourability, scoopability, viscosity and most of all freeze/ heat stability become quantifiable value adding attributes for any new products developed with enzyme treated fresh egg yolks. Additionally, the market for emulsion-based sauces can be grown significantly by the addition of PLA2 because of the ability to freeze and heat any future product in or on which they are used. Given the growing market for heat-at-home prepared frozen meals, the potential market could be significant. PLA2 has already been certified by FSANZ as a processing aid. Sincere thanks to Franck LeBon, Sharon Meaker, Jeremy Steele (Gate Gourmet Sydney), Jan Carstens (Sanovo Denmark), Andrew Ballard (Unilever ANZ), Julian Cox and Ken Buckle (UNSW) for assistance with this research.
References 1. Jeremiah LE. (2019). Freezing Effects on Food Quality. Routledge. 2. Ghosh S & Coupland JN. (2008). “Factors affecting the freeze–thaw stability of emulsions.” Food Hydrocolloids 22(1) 105-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. foodhyd.2007.04.013 3. Rousseau D. (2000). “Fat crystals and emulsion stability - a review.” Food Research International 33(1) 3-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/S09639969(00)000 17-X 4. Daimer K & Kulozik U. (2008). “Impact of a treatment with phospholipase A2 on the physicochemical properties of hen egg yolk.” Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 56(11) 4172-4180. https://doi.org/10.1021/jf703641e 5. Degner B, Olson K, Rose D et al. (2013). “Influence of freezing rate variation on the microstructure and physicochemical properties of food emulsions.” Journal of Food Engineering 119(2) 244-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jfoodeng.2013.05.034 6. Jaekel T & Ternes W. (2009). “Changes in rheological behaviour and functional properties of hen’s egg yolk induced by processing and fermentation with phospholipases.” International Journal of Food Science & Technology 44(3) 567-573. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.2008.01847.x
Surin Kitithongsopon is a recent Honours Graduate in the School of Chemical Engineering (UNSW) with a focus on food science and technology. He has a special interest in food processing, food safety and quality control and a research focus on the application of sustainable, new technologies to enhance the value, nutrition and flavour of existing and emerging comestibles. Surin believes advanced food processing technologies, particularly when enriched by Australia’s multicultural palette, can be influential on the global stage. f
nutrition labelling Get 3 MONTHS FREE
with FoodWorks 10 Nutrition Labelling the Australian software for recipe development and label compliance.
Design new product formulations and recipes according to nutritional criteria. Generate nutrition labels (NIPs, ingredient statements and allergen declarations) that comply with the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code and other regulations. Calculate CoOL and HSR values from a recipe's raw materials and generate standard marks. Integrate with label-printing software.
No more complicated spreadsheets. Better recipes. Compliant labels. FoodWorks is trusted Australian software with friendly local support.
Offer ends 30 November 2020
Call 07 3223 5300 Visit www.xyris.com.au Email info@xyris.com.au
food australia 27
FOOD SAFETY FEATURE
COVID-19, wet markets and food safety Words by Dr Jane M Caldwell
G
iven the impact of COVID-19, we are being re-educated and updated on safe practices in the workplace, social settings, shopping, and daily life. Quarantines and physical distancing have become imperative. Although the need to obtain food continues, grocery stores, farmers markets, and roadside stands have all been affected. COVID-19 is not known to be transmitted by food or its packaging (Seymour 2020), yet the public is concerned about proper food handling.
Wet versus wild markets ‘Wet markets’ which get their name from the presence of liquid - such as tanks of water containing live fish and melting ice used to keep meat cold - are a staple in Asia but are found worldwide, including in the United States. Like farmers markets, wet markets typically have open-air stalls selling
28 food australia
produce, fresh meats, and seafood. Live animals such as poultry, fish, and shellfish may also be slaughtered and sold on site (Maron 2020). Wet markets become ‘wild markets’ when live wild game animals are present. The now infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China had a wild animal section where snakes, beavers, porcupines, baby crocodiles and other species were slaughtered onsite prior to sale (Maron 2020). The market is believed by many to be ground zero for COVID-19 and zoonotic transfer from bats into the human population. However, a World Health Organisation food and animal disease expert stated that it was not clear whether the virus came from an infected live animal or a human vendor or shopper (Anonymous 2020a). While wet markets do exist in the United States, no uninspected, wild game meat may be sold due to state and federal regulations. Commercially
raised game or harvested meats may be sold but must pass through a US Department of Agriculture or state inspected processing facility. These non amenable wild species have the same inspection and regulation requirements as traditionally farmed species such as beef and poultry. For more information on the processing and regulation of game meats in the United States refer to the article “Safe Consumption of Wild Game” in the March 2020 edition of Food Technology magazine.
Exotic food myths and risky consumption behaviors In some cultures, there are beliefs that meat or other products from certain wild animals provide therapeutic effects (Li et al. 2020). For example, meat from a pangolin, a scale-covered mammal, is believed to reduce rheumatism and its bile is believed to improve eyesight (Li et
al. 2020). Pangolins are one of the most trafficked mammals in Asia and increasingly, Africa; their meat is considered a delicacy and their scales are used in traditional medicine and folk remedies (Anonymous 2020b). Pangolins are thought to possibly be the intermediate host for transmission of the coronavirus from bats to humans. This is based on comparisons of the amino acid compositions of the spike proteins on viral surfaces (Zhang et al. 2020). Eating bush meat is risky. A contemporary trend, more travelers are seeking exotic cuisine on international excursions. Some in pursuit of new gastronomic experiences consume and encounter wildlife in wild markets. Unfortunately, this may pose health risks due to zoonotic transmission of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), H1N1 influenza, bird flu, and novel coronavirus pneumonia (Ying et al. 2020).
A behavior called ‘the mukbang’ involves people eating in front of internet audiences strange or dangerous food. In 2016, one broadcast featured someone eating bat soup. Sometimes the animals are eaten raw or live (Li et al. 2020). According to a survey conducted in southeast Asia and commissioned by the World Wildlife fund, 93 per cent supported government closure of unregulated wildlife markets (Maron 2020).
Foodborne viruses Viruses causing human foodborne illness cannot grow in foods. Viruses found on foods are the result of fecal contamination or handling by infected persons (Seymour and Appleton 2001). Viral foodborne pathogens are those that can infect a person via the gastrointestinal (GI) tract due to their acid resistance. The most common causes of viral GI distress are norovirus and hepatitis A (Seymour and
Appleton 2001). Data collected from 2004 to 2012 showed that most produce-related outbreaks in the United States and European Union were caused by norovirus followed by Salmonella bacterial species (Callejon et al. 2015). Both viral and bacterial outbreaks have been closely tied to the consumption of raw produce consumed in salads; and in the European Union, norovirus on berries was cited as the major culprit in viral outbreaks (Callejon et al. 2015). These viruses are difficult to culture in the lab; therefore, most research uses viral surrogates such as feline calicivirus or murine (mouse) norovirus which can be grown in cell cultures (Richards 2012). Unlike enteric viruses, respiratory viruses such as the coronavirus have not been shown to be spread by eating contaminated food (Seymour and Appleton 2001, Seymour et al. 2020).
food australia 29
FOOD SAFETY FEATURE
with clean water prior to eating and cooking meats to recommended internal temperatures - continue to be important. Produce should not be washed with dish soap and detergents or treated with disinfectants not intended for produce (Seymour et al. 2020).
Nutraceuticals and COVID-19
Produce and social distancing. Photo courtesy of Jane M Caldwell. In a recent interview, Lee-Ann Jaykus, William Neal Reynolds Distinguished Professor of food science at North Carolina State University, said: “If the [COVID-19] virus were present in a food, it would still not be likely to infect the person eating that food - although it’s probably not impossible. However, for such an infection to occur, all the right factors would need to be in place. I believe putting our attention on foods takes attention away from what we already know works, which is social distancing and isolation” (Shipman 2020).
Coronaviruses and food What do we know about coronaviruses and food or food contact surfaces? Not much. Early research indicated that some coronaviruses are not acid tolerant. A study with human coronavirus 229E found that virus infectivity was at a maximum at pH 6.0 when incubated in cell cultures at either 4ºC or 33ºC (Lamarre and Talbot 1989). At 33ºC, infectious titers dropped precipitously from 5.0 log10 plaque forming units (PFU)/mL to below detection levels (<1.3 log10 PFU/mL) when the pH decreased from 4.5 to 4.0 (Lamarre and Talbot 1989). The pH of gastric juice in the human stomach lumen is between 1.5 and 3.5 (Wikipedia 2020). While human coronavirus strain 229E would probably not survive passage through the upper digestive tract via consumption of contaminated food,
30 food australia
recent studies with COVID-19 question whether it targets the human GI tract through binding of angiotensinconverting enzyme 2 expressed by epithelial cells in the small intestine (Liang et al. 2020). Studies with the coronavirus strain MERS-CoV suggested that the human GI tract may be an alternative infection route (Zhou et al. 2017). In the MERS-CoV study, intragastric inoculation of MERS-CoV (105 PFU) caused a lethal infection in human DDP4 transgenic mice. As the enteric infection progressed, live virus emerged in the lung tissue indicative of a secondary respiratory infection. Liang et al. (2020) cautioned that human intestinal cells might be vulnerable to attack by COVID-19 and that the incidence of diarrhea should receive more attention by clinicians. The National Institutes of Health cited a study revealing that COVID-19 was infectious in aerosols for up to three hours and on plastic and stainless-steel surfaces for up to three days (NIH 2020). Although these results suggest that humans can be infected by breathing aerosols or touching contaminated surfaces, these infections were induced in laboratory cell cultures. Furthermore, the interaction of COVID-19 contamination of food contact surfaces and subsequent transfer of infectious particles to foods has not been explored. And, infectivity rates in humans need evaluation. Good food safety practices - including rinsing produce
Food bioactive compounds were studied to see if they provided any inhibitory effects on COVID-19 proteases or polymerases. In silico modeling evaluating binding energies between compounds and viral proteins found that several candidates (phycocyanobilin, riboflavin, cyanidin, daidzein, and genistein) derived from fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes have the potential to be potent inhibitory compounds (Pendyala and Patras 2020). The authors said further in vitro and in vivo research is needed to validate their preliminary results. Other researchers are looking at coconut oil as a treatment. Monolaurin and lauric acid have antiviral activities, being able to destroy the membrane of lipid-coated viruses. As reported in a recent IFTNEXT newsletter item, because coconut oil contains high levels of lauric acid, it is being considered as nutraceutical therapy.
What’s next? By the time this article goes to publication, we will undoubtedly know considerably more about COVID-19 and the causative virus (SARSCoV-2). Less dangerous surrogates should be identified to increase the pace of research and lower the risk to scientists working with the coronavirus. Attitudes concerning risky consumption behaviors will need to evolve. Experts and respected authorities need to bust myths about wild game therapeutics. Social media should address opinions about what is trendy or outrageous to eat. All risky food consumption behaviors should be discouraged by peers and professionals. Governments should more closely
regulate wet markets, and unregulated wildlife markets should be banned worldwide. Let’s use this pandemic as a call to action to reinforce proven food safety practices, provide widespread consumer education, and assist all retail outlets with sciencebased preventive measures. The author thanks Ben Chapman, food safety extension specialist at North Carolina State University, for his helpful edits and suggestions.
References • Anonymous. (2020a). “WHO Expert Believes Wuhan Wet Market Played Role in COVID Outbreak.” VOA News May 8. https://www. voanews.com/covid-19-pandemic/who-expertbelieves-wuhan-wet-market-played-role-covidoutbreak. • Anonymous. (2020b). “What Is a Pangolin?” World Wildlife Fund. https://www.worldwildlife. org/stories/what-is-a-pangolin. • Callejon RM, Rodriguez-Naranjo MI, Ubeda C, et al. (2015). “Reported foodborne outbreaks due to fresh produce in the United States and European Union: trends and causes”. Foodborne Pathog Dis 12:32–38. • Lamarre A & Talbot PJ. (1989). “Effect of pH and temperature on the infectivity of human
coronavirus 229E.” Can J Microbiol 35: 972–974. • Li J, Li J, Xie X, et al. (2020). “Game consumption and the 2019 novel coronavirus.” The Lancet 20:275–276. doi.org/10.1016/ S14733099(20)30063-3. • Liang W, Feng Z, Rao S, et al. (2020). “Diarrhea may be Underestimated: a Missing Link in the 2019 Novel Coronavirus.” medRxiv doi:10.1101/20 20.02.03.20020289. Preprint. • Maron DF. (2020). “‘Wet Markets’ Likely Launched the Coronavirus. Here’s What you Need to Know.” April 15. National Geographic. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/ animals/2020/04/coronavirus-linked-tochinese-wet-markets/. • NIH Research Matters. (2020). “Study Suggests New Coronavirus may Remain on Surfaces for Days.” March 11. https://www.nih.gov/newsevents/nih-research-matters/study-suggestsnew-coronavirus-may-remain-surfaces-days. • Pendyala B & Patras A. (2020). “In Silico Screening of Food Bioactive Compounds to Predict Potential Inhibitors of COVID-19 Main Protease (Mpro) and RNA-Dependent RNA Polymerase (RdRp). ChemRxiv. doi. org/10.26434/chemrxiv.12051927.v2. (Preprint). • Richards GP. (2012). “Critical review of norovirus surrogates in food safety research: rationale for considering volunteer studies.” Food Environ Virol 4: 6–13. doi:10.1007/s12560-011-9072-7. • Seymour IF & Appleton H. (2001). “A review: foodborne viruses and fresh produce.” J Appl Microbiol 91: 759–773. • Seymour N, Yavelak M, Christian C, et al. (2020). “Is Coronavirus a Concern on Fresh Produce?” EDIS (March). https://journals.flvc.org/edis/ article/view/121334.
FOOD AND AGRICULTURE
• Shipman M. (2020). “What we Know and Don’t Know About Food Safety and COVID-19.” April 8. https://news.ncsu.edu/2020/04/food-safetyCOVID-q-and-a/. • Wikipedia. 2020. Gastric Acid. https:// en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gastric_acid. • Ying T, Wang K, Liu X, et al. (2020). “Rethinking Game Consumption in Tourism: A Case of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia Outbreak in China.” Tourism Recreation Research. doi:10.108 0/02508281.2020.1743048. • Zhang Y, Zhang C, Zheng W, et al. (2020). “More Evidence Suggests Pangolins may Have Passed Coronavirus From Bats to Humans.” Sci Alert April 11. https://www.sciencealert.com/ more-evidence-suggests-pangolins-may-havepassed-coronavirus-from-bats-to-humans. • Zhou J, Li C, Zhao G, et al. (2017). “Human intestinal tract serves as an alternative infection route for Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus.” Sci Adv 3(11):eaao4966. doi:10.1126/ sciadv.aao4966.
Jane M Caldwell PhD is contributing editor to Food Technology and director of microbiology and research at Chestnut Laboratories in Springfield, Missouri, in the US. f Published with permission from IFT.
CONTROL
MAKING THE
DIFFERENCE
SAFETY
INNOVATIVE SAFETY, QUALITY AND SUSTAINABILITY SOLUTIONS FOR YOUR FOOD SUPPLY CHAIN
INSPECTION
CERTIFICATION
• • • • •
• GFSI (SQF, BRC, FSSC 22000, Global G.A.P.) • Freshcare, HARPS • Gluten Free, Non-GMO • UTZ, RSPO, ECA, ESA
Pre-shipment In-store product quality Secret shopper Post-shipment Agricultural testing
CONSULTANCY
LABORATORY
• Training • Second Party Audits • Internal Audits and other customised services • Food Safety and Quality Systems • Food labelling compliance
• • • • • •
Pathogens Hygiene Indicators Allergens Nutritional Analysis Contaminants and Residues All Species ID and GMO’s
Call our friendly client services team for a quote or allow us to develop a customised service to meet your needs.
CONTACT US (03) 9574 3200 agrifood.au@sgs.com www.sgs.com.au SGS Agriculture & Food
food australia 31
FEATURE
The future of protein Words by Dr Michelle Colgrave
C
urrent estimates predict that around 70 per cent more food will be required to feed the growing global population which will reach 9.7 billion by 2050. Asia will be home to more than half the world’s population by 2030 and will have an annual food spend of $8 trillion,1 yet only one-quarter of Asia’s land mass is arable. The challenge will be how to meet this global food gap while maintaining our planet’s health. Global resource constraints are putting limits on animal-derived protein production. While plant and alternative sources of protein offer an opportunity to fill this gap, we also need to grow our existing high value industries by enhancing their sustainability. We are also witnessing changing dietary patterns due to concerns over the environment, animal welfare and personal health and nutrition. According to a 2019 Food Frontier report,2 in addition to around 11 per cent of Australians claiming they follow a vegetarian diet, 30 per cent were making a concerted effort to reduce red meat consumption – the so-called ‘flexitarian’ movement. A study just published in the British Medical Journal examining the environmental impact of our dietary choices estimated that adopting the ‘planetary health’ diet could cut greenhouse gas emissions in Australia
32 food australia
by 86 per cent, with a concomitant decrease of 31,000 avoidable deaths every year.3
Ageing population and chronic disease In Australia, we are also facing challenges in the human health area with an ageing population and rising rates of chronic disease. During the 20 years between 1999 and 2019, the proportion of the population aged 65 years and over increased from 12.3 per cent to 15.9 per cent, and this group is projected to increase more rapidly in the next decade. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, two thirds (67 per cent) of Australian adults were overweight or obese in 2017-18, representing a four per cent increase in three years. Additionally, one quarter of children aged 5-17 years were overweight or obese. Addressing these health issues by delivering optimised nutrition will be critical for the health and prosperity of Australia. By transitioning from a commodity base to value-added premium protein ingredients, Australian breeders, growers, processors and producers can capitalise on the rapid growth of the protein-based sector and gain access to new export markets for wealth creation. According to a 2020 AgriFutures report,4 strong global demand for
protein will accommodate growth in both animal-based and alternative protein sectors. The report points to an additional opportunity for the protein market in 2030 valued at $19.9 billion, of which $8.9 billion is for animal protein products, $7 billion for plant proteins and $3.1 billion is for alternative protein categories. Already capitalising on the opportunity is a new food company called v2food which is delivering sustainable and nutritious plantbased protein to Australian plates. v2food was brought together by Main Sequence Ventures, CSIRO’s innovation fund, and Competitive Foods Australia. The v2food product is made from legumes, but looks and tastes like meat and contains added fibre and nutrients.
The challenge of plant-based protein Opportunities also exist to address the demand from those consumers who are not quite ready to make the transition to a plant-based diet. With advancements in technology, it is possible to reformulate meat products to add beneficial plantbased components such as protein, fibre or omega-3 fatty acids. But there is still work to be done to match plant ingredients to meat to deliver hybrid products that replicate the taste and texture of meat.
Lastly, ‘alternative proteins’ refers broadly to plant-based and food technology alternatives to animal protein. This category includes proteins from legumes, algae, fungi, insects and those derived from cellular agriculture – this could be from microbes such as yeast, or cultivated meat grown from cells harvested from animal muscle. For the more adventurous eaters, it may soon be easier to join the ranks of the two billion people globally who eat insects as part of their regular diet. The edible insect industry in Australia is still emerging, but the sustainability and nutritive values are two compelling arguments to make a meal (worm) of them.
How does Australia capture these opportunities? As a major producer and exporter of protein, we can capitalise on this demand by capturing high value, high
margin export market opportunities, in the process building our sovereign manufacturing capability and creating new jobs. Australia’s food industry is well placed to develop novel, differentiated protein products that meet the requirements and changing dietary patterns of the modern health and environmentally conscious consumer. In order to achieve this, Australia will need to build strategic partnerships between research and development organisations and industry, supported by public and private investment. We need to work together through science innovation and technology towards the common goals of health, sustainability and value creation. There are huge opportunities to tackle waste and supply chain inefficiency and increase yield, but also to increase the biodiversity on which our current food systems rely
and generate novel products using sustainable processes.
References 1. PWC, Rabobank and Temasek. (2019). “The Asia Food Challenge Report: Harvesting the Future”. https://www.asiafoodchallenge.com/. 2. Food Frontier. (2019). “Hungry for plant-based: Australian Consumer Insights”. https://www. foodfrontier.org/reports/. 3. Springmann M, Spajic L, Clark MA, et al. (2020). “The healthiness and sustainability of national and global food based dietary guidelines: modelling study”. British Medical Journal. 370, m2322. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2322 4. AgriFutures. (2020). “The Changing Landscape of Protein Production.” https://www.agrifutures. com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/20-001. pdf
Professor Michelle Colgrave is a principal research scientist within CSIRO agriculture and food. Michelle leads the future protein initiative which aims to seize the opportunity created by the world’s growing demand for high quality protein, and fast track the growth of Australia’s new protein industries through science, innovation and technology. f
Proficiency Testing Australia (PTA) offers scheduled and customised proficiency testing programs for chemical and microbiological food testing laboratories: • Food • Chemical • Pathogens in Food • Non-Pathogens in Food For more information, please contact PTA at ptaenquiry@pta.asn.au food australia 33
FEATURE FOOD FRAUD
Practical real-world food fraud control measures Words by Clare Winkel
A
ll Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) food safety standards now require a food fraud vulnerability assessment across a food manufacturer’s entire supply chain, with a major emphasis on ranking raw materials for potential vulnerability. If any potential fraud is identified by the investigation, it is expected that appropriate mitigation strategies and control measures will be implemented. Using a risk assessment and ranking method I developed in 2016, I recently re-assessed the raw materials for a company that had originally been assessed in 2018.1 The original 34 raw material rankings ranged from the highest score of 60 to the lowest score of 3, out of a possible highest score of 125. The next lowest score was 32, and the next was 24. In 2020 the 23 raw material rankings ranged from a high score of 18 to the lowest score of 3, yet many of the ingredients were the same. What else had changed? The reason the score improved so much was that the company had spent time examining its suppliers and assessing what they really knew (or did not know) about their ingredient supply chain. As a result,
34 food australia
they changed not just their suppliers, but also their supply chains, so they knew the country of origin and could identify each major step in the supply chain, combined with the controls already in place.
Changing suppliers can decrease uncertainty For example, the ingredient that scored 60 in 2018, was supplied by a broker who gave two different countries of origin, no source manufacturer, no certifications and no certificate of assurance or batch specific lab results. Not only did the supplier fail to undertake any control measures, the company purchasing the product took no samples and didn’t carry out any testing or conduct even basic sensory assessment. In 2020, that same ingredient is now supplied by a wholesaler who supplied the following information and documentation: • Country of origin • Name of the source manufacturer • Current GFSI certificate of the source manufacturer • Current GFSI certificate of the wholesaler
• Certificate of assurance from the source manufacturer. The company then undertook sensory evaluation (appearance, aroma and taste) of received products and also conducted a detailed review of the product information form (PIF).2 This closer analysis found that the raw material was not sourced from a species at high risk from fraud (as had been assumed), but was instead sourced from a different species which had a much lower risk of fraud. The PIF contains useful information when you are starting your food fraud assessments - if it is completed correctly and completely - including information on product description (often listing species Latin name), country of origin, source manufacturer, ingredient declarations, allergens, product description, legal description, allergen management and controls in place, suitability for claims, physical, organoleptic, chemical and micro specifications, that can all be matched to information from your supplier. The general history of fraud for each ingredient was identified using the Horizon Scan database. This database lists all daily recalls from almost every
country in the world, along with many national border rejections, covering food safety and food fraud issues for thousands of raw materials and packaging. This analysis enables you to easily and correctly quantify the risk for that raw material, and the risk for the specific country of origin, and search for specific suppliers. Horizon Scan can also identify what type of adulterants you should be looking to test for.3
Public databases can help detect inconsistencies Many supplied audit certificates can be matched to the standards public access database to confirm that it is indeed legitimate. Any discrepancy between stated information in the PIF, audit certificates and certificate of assurance needs to be investigated. If you suspect the certificate of assurance you are receiving may be fraudulent, line up 12 months of records to see if the results are identical, as
almost no product sourced from plants or animals will be identical all year round. The next step is to take a product sample and get it tested independently. Even taking a sample of the product at each delivery and smelling it, feeling it, and assessing the colour against a known master sample, can help identify batch to batch discrepancies. If a sample is identified as ‘different’ to a known sample, then a ‘presence/ absence’ test for starch or gluten can often identify additional components that may indicate fraud. There are also a wide range of sophisticated lab tests that can be undertaken to identify food fraud, but start with some consistent and complete supply chain information, and product sampling, to minimise your risk to food fraud in your raw materials. Know and understand your supply chains, use sensory evaluation, review the detail on the PIF, read the
information printed on the actual ingredient cartons, research the history of fraud for each ingredient, identify what type of adulterants you should be looking for, obtain valid certificate of assurances, and then get it tested independently.
References 1. https://www.integritycompliance.com.au/ course?courseid=20-raw-materials-assessment 2. https://www.afgc.org.au/industry-resources/ product-information-form-version-6 3. https://www.integritycompliance.com.au/pages/ global-food-integrity-and-risk-system 4. “What does a Food Fraud Vulnerability Assessment Look Like?” at the BRC Global Standards, Food Safety Americas. 2019, San Diego USA. https://vimeo.com/351518036 5. “When it doesn’t smell, look or feel right: Food Fraud Detection & Mitigation in the raw material supply chain. A case study of food fraud.” SQF International Conference, Atlanta Georgia USA. https://vimeo.com/301102480
Clare Winkel is executive manager, technical solutions, at Integrity Compliance Solutions. She has presented on food fraud internationally, including the SQF & BRC conferences in the US.4,5 f
Clean
Every colour tells a story It starts with carefully selected fruit, vegetables and edible plants. It ends with the most vibrant, richest palette of minimally-processed edible juice concentrates. We call them FruitMax®. Clean, simple and natural, each FruitMax® product is crafted to wholeheartedly support rising consumer demand for transparency – and clearly labelled foods, coloured by nature. True story. Let FruitMax® help you tell yours.
Chr. Hansen Pty Ltd, 49 Barry St, Bayswater, VIC 3153, Australia www.chr-hansen.com/color
food australia 35
REGULATORY
Naturally, it’s a bit confusing Words by Scott Bouvier and Lauren D’Ambrosio
T
he 2020 Food & Health Survey, conducted by the International Food Information Council, found consumers are most influenced by claims associated with the word ‘natural’ when shopping in supermarkets or purchasing food prepared outside the home.1 The survey also found ‘natural’ claims are more persuasive than ‘organic’, ‘environmentally friendly’ and ‘locally-sourced’ claims. Therefore, it’s unsurprising that food businesses are increasingly labelling and advertising food products using phrases such as ‘nature’s choice’, ‘a natural source of iron’, ‘sourced from nature’, ‘naturally sweet’ or comprised of ‘all-natural ingredients’.
What does ‘natural’ actually mean? To many consumers, the term ‘natural’ conjures up notions of purity,
36 food australia
nature, health and wellness. For food technologists, the term may link to a technical specification or scientific method of extraction. For food companies it may be a relative claim, based on a comparison to another process or ingredient which could have been used. According to the ACCC, a ‘natural’ claim may imply a product is superior because it has certain natural characteristics, as opposed to being processed or artificial, or otherwise removed from its natural form.2 Anecdotally, we also know that consumers are willing to pay a premium for products that are marketed as ‘natural’ or ‘organic’. Currently, there is no clear legal definition or specific standard in relation to ‘natural’ claims on food products. Products marketed as ‘natural’ do not need to be certified and the Food Standards Code is
silent on ‘natural’ claims. All of this leaves the meaning of such claims open to interpretation and potentially ambiguous to consumers when making purchasing decisions. For example, how would a consumer answer the following questions? • Can a product be considered ‘natural’ if it contains an artificial ingredient? • Is it still ‘natural’ if the ingredient originally existed in nature, even if it has been subsequently highly processed before being added to the product? • If something has been processed with chemicals, is it still ‘natural’? • Can genetically modified ingredients be called natural? In the absence of specific regulation on natural claims, the only standard that applies is that set out under
Australian consumer law. Accordingly, when making natural claims, food businesses must ensure they do not: • Engage in conduct that is misleading, deceptive, or likely to mislead or deceive • Make false representations regarding the standard, quality, grade, composition or benefits of a product • Engage in conduct that is likely to mislead the public as to the nature, manufacturing process, or characteristics of a product. When assessing whether a claim is likely to be misleading or deceptive, food businesses should consider the overall impression in the context of the food product, including the type of food product, whether it has a premium positioning, the prominence of the claim, the images and other elements on the label and any associated marketing materials. Patently false claims – such as,
‘natural source of calcium’ in relation to a food product with no calcium content – will clearly fall foul of the Australian Consumer Law. However, even if a natural claim is literally true, it may still be misleading to consumers. For example, a prominent claim on a food label stating that a product ‘contains natural ingredients’ could be misleading if natural ingredients only make up a small proportion of the product, while the remaining ingredients are highly processed. Food businesses should be aware of these many risks around false labelling, given that one of the ACCC’s enforcement priorities for 2020 is ‘misleading conduct in relation to the sale and promotion of food products, including health and nutritional claims, credence claims and country of origin’. When announcing the ACCC’s 2020 enforcement priorities, ACCC
Chair, Rod Sims said the ACCC would work closely with other regulators to improve Australian Consumer Law compliance in relation to the sale and promotion of food products.
References 1. International Food Information Council. (2020). 2020 Food & Health Survey https://foodinsight. org/2020-food-and-health-survey/. 2. Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. (2006). Food and beverage industry: Food descriptors guidelines to the Trade Practices Act.
Scott Bouvier and Lauren D’Ambrosio lead King & Wood Mallesons’ food law practice and advise a range of highprofile food and consumer brands on food and advertising regulation, IP, technology, product recalls, therapeutic goods and commercial matters. f
Redefine the future of food Australia’s leading manufacturing exhibition is back in 2021.
25 28 JULY 2021 Sydney Showground
Save the date and subscribe for updates at foodproexh.com
food australia 37
OPINION
Science at the service of the nation Words by Anna-Maria Arabia
W
orldwide COVID-19 has triggered a spike in interest in the practice of science policy and advice, and not a moment too soon. Unfortunately, we’ve been living in a world where the contest of ideas is increasingly taking place in a concerning environment of misinformation and declining public trust in democratic processes and institutions. In a relatively short time, we’ve collectively witnessed the evolving role of evidence-informed decision making in Australia and the deep value of experts and evidence, while also exposing the fragility of the research enterprise - the very enterprise on which we’re depending to arrest the pandemic and to solve the challenges emerging from it. In an environment where there is a blurring of the line between opinion and fact and an increasing volume of opinion versus fact, we’ve witnessed concerted efforts to challenge experts, the evidence-based track record, and institutions – the very pillars of democratic decision making. And when we can’t agree on a shared set of facts, it’s hard to have a meaningful debate about how to solve problems or work towards goals. We’ve witnessed this scenario during the summer bushfires and the debates about the role of climate change in them. It’s hard to move
38 food australia
forward when there’s an absence of a shared set of facts amongst different stakeholder groups. At a global scale, acting on a shared understanding of boundaries and facts is often referred to as a rulesbased order, that has until recently served us very well. But today, the rules or the shared facts to guide us are blurred, and that order is being replaced by things like the US-China trade wars, the denigration of global institutions like the World Trade Organisation and most recently the World Health Organisation. So, whilst a pandemic is neither welcome nor wanted, it has accelerated a much needed turning point in public thinking about the role of experts. It has also catalysed a far more mature relationship between decision-makers, such as politicians, and experts across a range of scientific fields. In 2018 an OECD report called upon governments to develop national mechanisms for the provision of scientific advice in crises, in particular for complex and novel crises like the one we’re living through now. It also called for the fostering of domestic capability in science policy and advice. Indeed, the routine provision of scientific evidence from independent, authoritative, and trusted sources to inform policy making has been absent in Australia to date. There are few permanent and structural mechanisms for the provision of independent scientific advice to government or to the parliament more broadly. Policy can be, and often is, developed without consulting scientific evidence. While government receives scientific evidence from publicly funded research agencies and topic-specific scientific committees, and there is no doubting the quality of the information
provided, none of these sources are genuinely independent of government and all of their advice is not available for scrutiny. The response to COVID-19 has been a significant turning point, with the emergence of a range of expert advisory committees providing advice directly to government. Whilst one might expect health and medical science to dominate in this advisory landscape, I’m pleased to say that multidisciplinary advice is being delivered routinely to government across a range of areas. One such mechanism to achieve this is a rapid research information forum, or otherwise called the RRIF. In short, scientific experts are playing a crucial role in ensuring our future is in the hands of decision makers who are armed with robust evidence. The RRIF was established in April this year and it’s convened by Australia’s chief scientist, Dr Alan Finkel, and its operations are led by the Australian Academy of Science. RRIF enables the evidence base on any subject matter to be provided to government and other decision makers in a timely way, usually within seven to ten days, so as to inform relevant and important policy decisions at the time those decisions are being made. Importantly, RRIF is independent of government. It is uniquely positioned to synthesise the best available evidence, without making policy recommendations and without engaging in advocacy. To uphold principles of independence and transparency, the reports are provided to government, and then they’re made publicly available on the Academy of Science’s website. To date, 11 reports have been published, and the feedback from ministers receiving RRIF reports is overwhelmingly positive, leading to
additional questions being assigned to RRIF and questions being posed by ministers across a range of portfolios, not just from the health minister. We’ve been able to provide advice to the science minister, the education minister, directly to the Prime Minister’s office, and the National COVID-19 Coordination Commission. The Academy of Science is providing RRIF’s engine room, and it’s a great privilege to be able to do so and to be able to place science at the service of the nation. We work with experts drawn from other learned academies, chief scientists across the nation, and other STEM organisations bringing together STEM, humanities and social science knowledge, and we coordinate their multidisciplinary contribution. The Academy of Science is able to bring to the RRIF independence, authority, national and international convening power, reputation and excellence. Importantly, the Academy of Science also brings a unique capability to meet the demands of tight deadlines, ensuring the best possible scientific advice is provided to ministers when they need it. The president of the National Academy of Science in the US calls this “actionable science”. It’s relevant,
it’s timely and it’s accessible to a nonspecialist audience. We’ve always known, but now we have living proof, that the regular and routine provision of scientific evidence from independent authorities and trusted sources strengthens decision making. It strengthens democracy, leadership and trust in governments. And while this has not been an historic practice or feature in Australia’s policy landscape, it is now hoped that beyond COVID-19, decision makers may be somewhat addicted to the benefits of evidence-informed policy. We’re working towards a scenario where we will be able to provide this sort of advice to decision makers well beyond COVID-19. The pandemic has certainly been an interesting turning point in terms of how decisions are made. The irony, however, is that while the pandemic may have made visible the role of science in informing decision making, it has also exposed how vulnerable and unsustainable Australia’s research funding model is. Research is overly reliant on cross subsidies between teaching and research and the true cost of research, including indirect costs, are not adequately accounted for. As a result, in universities alone, Australia stands
to lose around 7,000 researchers in the next six months, with women and the casualised workforce disproportionately impacted as a result of COVID-19 triggered revenue losses. There is likely to be a generation of researchers lost from the STEM ecosystem. A strong research base is critical to respond to pandemics and to recover from them. For example, to build advanced manufacturing and minimise Australia’s dependence on global supply chains. This is not a just problem for the STEM sector, rather a problem for the nation. More optimistically, it is an opportunity for government to implement a bold reform agenda in order to recover from the pandemic and ensure the science and research system which has served the nation so well is put on a more sustainable footing so it can continue to do so in the future. Ms Anna-Maria Arabia is the chief executive of the Australian Academy of Science. f This is an extract of the author’s opening address at the 2020 AIFST Convention.
The Shine Dome in Canberra is home to the Australian Academy of Science. Photo courtesy of the Australian Academy of Science.
food australia 39
FEATURE
Food industry, food security and a healthy Australia Words by Dr Christina Pollard
H
ealth sells, particularly when it comes to food. That’s why many food manufacturers and retailers focus on the health benefits of their products in their labelling and promotion1,2 and health is often a
key feature of their corporate social responsibility statements.3 Although Australian supermarkets make such commitments, research suggests there is room for improvement in many of the key areas where change is needed to improve public health.4 Dietary risk factors are now the leading contributor to the global burden of disease. Given this fact, leading authoritative bodies such as the World Health Organisation and the Public Health Association of Australia (PHAA) are making recommendations to improve the food system to improve public health. For example, the PHAA vision statement describes the type of food system needed for public health: “a safe, nutritious, affordable, secure and environmentally sustainable food system accessible to all Australians for health, wellbeing and prosperity now and into the future”. There are five main outcomes we are looking for across the population to protect public health and safety: 1. Diet quality - a dietary pattern including a wide variety of nutritious foods every day that promote health and reduce the risk of disease, consistent with official
40 food australia
dietary guidelines. Food-based dietary guidelines in more than 100 countries around the world, including Australia, provide advice on the dietary patterns required to improve population health. Government dietary guidelines are informed by scientific evidence and reviewed from time to time to keep up with changes in evidence. It has just been announced that the Australian Dietary Guidelines, Eat for Health, are about to be reviewed. 2. Food safety - food regulation systems’ food standards program and food safety regulations not only protect the public from threats to food safety, fraud and adulteration of food, they are evolving to address the risks of dietary excesses and imbalances that lead obesity and diet-related disease such as diabetes, heart disease, and some cancers.5 3. Food security - routine access to an appropriate, adequate, safe, affordable, nutritious and reliable food supply. 4. Sustainable food supply that protects environmental sustainability, both now and into the future. 5. Healthy food economy – a viable food industry that supports health, social equity and prosperity. In April 2020, the Australian bureau of agricultural and resource economics and sciences (ABARES) reported
The WA Food Relief Framework, supported by the WA council of social services and funded by Lotterywest. that Australia does not have a food security problem, despite temporary shortages of some food items. Despite this, food insecurity is increasing across the globe and is at an unacceptable level in most wealthy countries with developed economies such as Australia.6 Supermarkets position themselves as addressing food insecurity, which is particularly important during environmental or health emergencies. The role of supermarkets in protecting food security was highlighted during the Australian bushfires earlier this year, and currently as we respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The COVID-19 lockdown measures and physical distancing or ‘shielding’ requirements impacted the supply of food across the globe. In Australia, the major supermarkets worked closely with governments and food charities to support the emergency response. This concerted effort maintained the supply and quality of food available. Along with businesses throughout the food system, supermarkets also instigated numerous measures to protect the public, including online shopping and sanitation measures. Alliances such as the WA food relief framework (WAFRF) - a crosssector committee led by the Western Australian council of social services was well placed to assist the response. A description of the approach can be found on the organisation’s website (www.wacoss.org.au). An exciting innovation - the Food Stress Index7 - was socialised and developed with the WAFRF and will be developed further to assist the targeting for food relief. Supermarkets describe their commitment to address food insecurity in their corporate social responsibility statements. Systems have evolved over time where they donate their surplus or waste food to charities to redistribute to feed the hungry. In some ways, this alliance to address surplus food waste with food charities does help address the increasing demand for food relief in Australia. There is, however, increasing concern that this surplus food redistribution system does not respond to either issue well - that of reducing food waste or that of reducing food insecurity. There have been calls for some time now to uncouple food waste mitigation as the main solution to hunger and food insecurity in Australia.8 For both economic and health reasons, reducing the overproduction and excess consumption of food is the main strategy used to reduce food waste. The main concern with this is that, by framing the solution to food insecurity as waste reduction, the
issues of poverty and inequality - the two key reasons people are food insecure - are overlooked. The COVID-19 pandemic also saw governments introduce additional social protection measures to support people undergoing financial hardship. The food security response pivoted, from a redistribution of surplus waste food, to one that has procured and provided safe and nutritious food as the main objective. The social distancing and lockdown measures forced changes to the way food for food relief was procured, stored and distributed. Almost overnight, charities found themselves confronted by changes that meant they had to change their business model because volunteers and food distribution systems were no longer available. Just as the restaurant and café sector had to change to takeaway service delivery, the food relief sector turned to hamper or boxed models with different distribution methods. New cohorts needing food relief appeared, for example, universities found themselves needing to support international students who lost their employment and were unable to repatriate. Governments provided additional funding to support the disaster food response so the food relief system did not need to rely solely on surplus or waste food. Strong alliances were formed to procure, store and distribute the food. There was a need for a ‘back to basics’ diet, and it appears that the types of foods provided would support a basic nutritious diet, at least in the short term. As the COVID-19 ‘recovery’ phase continues, so will the need to focus on action to ensure that food insecurity, diet quality, food safety, environmental sustainability and a viable food economy persist.
References 1. Pulker CE, Farquhar HE, Pollard CM, Scott JA. (2020) “The nutritional quality of supermarket own brand chilled convenience foods: an Australian cross-sectional study reveals limitations of the Health Star Rating.” (2020) Public Health Nutr,
Frozen meals made available through the food relief network for Curtin University students. 23(12):2068-2077. (doi:https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1368980020000051) 2. Pulker C, Scott J, Pollard CM. (2018). “Ultra-processed family foods in Australia: Nutrition claims, health claims and marketing techniques.” Public Health Nutr 21(1):38-48 (doi:10.1017/S1368980017001148 ) 3. Pulker C, Trapp G, Scott JA, Pollard CM. (2018). “Global supermarkets’ corporate social responsibility commitments to public health: a content analysis.” Globalization and Health 14, 121. (doi: 10.1186/s12992-018-0440-z.) 4. Pulker CE, Trapp GS, Scott JA, Pollard CM. (2018) “What are the position and power of supermarkets in the Australian food system, and the implications for public health? A systematic scoping review.” Obesity Reviews 19 (2) 198-218 (doi:10.1111/obr.12635) 5. Lawrence MA, Pollard CM, Weeramanthris TS. (2019). “Positioning food standards programmes to protect public health: current performance, future opportunities and necessary reforms.” Public Health Nutr. 22(5):912-926. (doi: 10.1017/ S1368980018003786.) 6. Pollard CM, Booth S. (2019). “Food Insecurity and Hunger in Rich Countries - It Is Time for Action against Inequality.” Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16(10). pii: E1804. (doi: 10.3390/ ijerph16101804) 7. Landrigan T, Kerr DA, Dhaliwal S, Pollard CM. (2018). “Protocol for the development of a Food Stress Index to identify households most at risk of food insecurity in Western Australia.” Int J Env Res Pub Health (15): 2086. (doi:10.3390/ijerph16010079) 8. Booth S, Pollard CM. (2020). “Food insecurity, food crimes and structural violence: an Australian perspective.” Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health 44(2), 87-88. (doi:10.1111/1753-6405.12977)
Associate Professor Christina Pollard is director of Curtin University’s public health advocacy institute and vice president of the Public Health Association of Australia. She is a public health dietitian and best known for the Gofor2&5© fruit and vegetable campaign. f
food australia 41
EDUCATION
World Food Program distributes food in Nacate village, near Macomia, as part of recovery efforts in Mozambique after cyclones Idai and Kenneth. Photo credit: UN Photo/Eskinder Debebe.
A world first in humanitarian science and technology Words by Drs Andrew Dansie, Jayashree Arcot and Johannes le Coutre
S
tudents completing their undergraduate studies in food science at University of NSW (UNSW) in Sydney can now add a minor in humanitarian science and technology to their bachelor of food science (honours) degree. This offering provides undergraduate students with education across the fields of humanitarian and international development within a curriculum that is already recognised by the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT) in the US. Humanitarian science and technology experts analyse and design food and nutritional solutions to support the wellbeing and welfare of disadvantaged individuals and communities. This covers a spectrum of activities from disaster response and preparedness to long-term sustainable community development. Technical solutions are developed and implemented within a framework
42 food australia
of food and nutrition security and working to meet the targets of the United Nations sustainable development goals (SDGs). This includes low and middle income countries worldwide as well as marginalised or remote communities in Australia. The humanitarian minor degree provides students with human centred solutions that focus on appropriateness and sustainability. Teaching students to develop workable solutions in disaster affected or chronically disadvantaged communities requires real world exposure and a focus on developing solutions in partnership with those in need.
Addressing future challenges Current Australian-born undergraduate students who entered university straight from secondary school will enjoy a life span until approximately
2080. By then, the estimated global human population will have grown from 7.8 billion to 9-11 billion people. Throughout the careers of these students the growing challenges of poverty, food insecurity, disasters and nutrition will need to be faced with increasing innovation and determination. They will need to nourish more people, provide them with nutritionally diverse foods, create secure food systems and get food to where it is needed in emergencies. These are large and complex challenges. On top of this, food plays a central aspect in the lives and livelihoods of all cultures around the world, and humanitarian work needs to address cultural, palatable and religious aspects. The new minor degree combines skills as a food scientist with competence in humanitarian practice to address problems relating to inequalities and lack of access
in alignment with the SDGs and international humanitarian relief efforts. Students complete a humanitarian fundamentals core as well as a development studies elective to provide them with the context and key principles. Students then select their choice of another relevant elective and a self-chosen project course.
Engaging with real world programs Real world engagement is a central part of the minor design and students will have the opportunity to work in humanitarian science and technology as part of their degree. Travel assistance grants provided by grants provided by the Australian Government through the DFAT-funded New Colombo Mobility Program will provide an opportunity for volunteer student positions overseas with existing partnership institutions such as the World Food Program (WFP) and United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). Involvement with ongoing programs and projects such as these will give students valuable insight into the work of humanitarian and development efforts on the ground. The minor in humanitarian science and technology at UNSW is part of the university’s humanitarian engineering program that recognises the important role universities play in improving equitable and sustainable development and assistance for those in need. Food security and nutrition in the humanitarian context imply complex and multidisciplinary challenges, termed ‘wicked’ problems in development circles, that have no single solution. It is in this space that food science and technology graduates need to be well equipped if their generation is to make a positive impact impact on human and planetary health. As part of this new minor, an elective course in food and health security will also be available to students. This course will directly address the SDGs in the context of food and health security facing different populations around
“With the prevalent and emerging external ‘shocks’ that result in humanitarian crises there is an urgent need to train food scientists, technologists and engineers to develop appropriate skills to prepare them to face these difficult situations in many countries around the world. Therefore, I am pleased to note that UNSW has taken the initiative to develop this unique program in humanitarian food science and technology and I have no doubt that it will prepare the next generation of students with the relevant expertise to tackle the many humanitarian challenges that the world will face in the future.” Mr Jay Sellahewa, International Humanitarian Food Science and Technology Network “As the world will continue to grapple with the weaknesses, inequities and risks in global food systems, only highlighted during COVID-19, food science professionals able to develop solutions that link to pathways aimed to sustainable and resilient food systems will be key. Thus, the introduction of a minor focused on the skills needed to perform in the humanitarian and development sector for food science students is a welcome addition.” Dr Carla Mejia, regional nutrition advisor, World Food Program, regional bureau for Latin America and the Caribbean. “With increasing pressures from climate change, pandemics and other social and environmental issues, there is an ever greater concern about food security and the need to provide access to sustainable food supplies. The minor in humanitarian science and technology at UNSW will equip food science students within the faculty of engineering with the skills to deal with these complex issues. UNSW engineering considers that the engineering discipline is key to solving the world’s humanitarian issues and we are committed to educating our students to have a positive impact on creating solutions to these important problems.” Professor Maurice Pagnucco, deputy dean (academic), faculty of engineering, UNSW Sydney.
the world. The scope will include both micro (household) and macro (population, country) levels. UNSW participated in the Humanitarian Food Science and Technology Symposium organised by AIFST in 2017 and, with a track record in humanitarian food science and technology, UNSW is in a privileged position to offer this program. For more information on the humanitarian science and technology minor visit http://unsw.to/hst For more information on the humanitarian engineering program at UNSW Sydney visit unsw.to/he. Dr Andrew Dansie is a senior lecturer in humanitarian engineering in the school
of chemical engineering and school of civil and environmental engineering at UNSW Sydney, an Honorary Research Associate at University of Oxford and on the United Nations development program vetted expert roster for freshwater management. Dr Jayashree Arcot is an Associate Professor within the food and health cluster, school of chemical engineering at UNSW Sydney. Dr Johannes le Coutre is a Professor within the food and health cluster, school of chemical engineering at UNSW Sydney. f
food australia 43
RESEARCH ROUNDUP
ARC research hub delivers for dairy innovation Words by Dr Martin Palmer
Lab-scale simulation of butter churning (University of Queensland).
E
stablished in 2014, the ARC Dairy Innovation Hub has been a highly successful research collaboration between the University of Melbourne, University of Queensland, Dairy Innovation Australia Ltd, Food Innovation Australia Ltd, Dairy Australia and core industry members responsible for 70 per cent of Australia’s milk production, including Bega, Lion Dairy and Drinks and Saputo Dairy Australia. The Hub was one of the first initiatives to be funded through the Australian Research Council Industrial Transformation Research Program.Over the last six years, this multidisciplinary research program has involved more than 40 researchers, led by Professor Sally Gras (University of Melbourne). Innovative science and engineering have been applied across a range of strategic research themes and manufacturing challenges, under the guidance of industry partners. This has included work on topics as diverse as dairy product microstructure and high-resolution microscopy, adjunct starter cultures and cheese flavour,
44 food australia
new separation technologies for whey and permeate processing, fat crystallisation and emulsion science, microencapsulation, milk foaming and tribology. Further details about these projects, individual researchers, industry partners and research outcomes are available on the Hub website: https:// chemical.eng.unimelb.edu.au/dairy/ The Hub is now celebrating some significant successes. In the advancement of dairy science, for example, more than 60 scientific publications and 100 conference presentations have resulted from Hub research. On the industrial front, member companies have been able to realise significant returns on investment from applying research outcomes to solve manufacturing problems. The industrial impact of this research has also been recognised in some national awards to Hub researchers, including a Victoria Fellowship (Dr George Chen, 2016) the IChemE Fonterra Award 2018 (Prof Sally Gras, 2018) and the ICM Agrifood Award 2019 (Dr Lydia Ong, 2019).
As the original ARC Hub draws to a close, the formation of a new, three-year, $3.8 million, industry cofunded Dairy Innovation Hub has now been announced by Dairy Innovation Australia Ltd (DIAL) and the University of Melbourne. Led again by Professor Gras, the Hub will develop, test, scale up and apply practical research solutions to increase the productivity, profitability and sustainability of dairy manufacturing. Working closely with industry partners, researchers will use the collaborative approach developed over the last six years both to provide tailored solutions for individual manufacturers and to impact on the broader dairy manufacturing industry. Translation and technology transfer of research outcomes will directly assist manufacturing companies through activities at manufacturing sites. Key project areas identified by industry include reduction and reuse of manufacturing by-products (for example brine and whey), optimisation of manufacturing processes for key export products and increased quality and functionality of new dairy products. Dr Martin Palmer, FAIFST, is enterprise fellow, food and agribusiness, at University of Melbourne. f
Confocal laser scanning micrograph of mozzarella cheese, showing greenstained protein strands and red-stained fat globules (University of Melbourne).
STEM workforce report first to include food science Words by Melinda Stewart
T
his year AIFST celebrated national science week with a series of webinars1 featuring people who work in roles related to food science across industry and higher education. These webinars provided a platform for the speakers to share their experience and attendees to gain valuable insights into the many career paths taken. These personal insights into life as a food scientist in Australia have been complemented by the recent release of the second Australian STEM workforce report from the office of the chief scientist.2
The 2020 report builds on data from the 2016 report, with important updates on the demographics, industries, occupations and incomes of people in Australia with VET or university qualifications in STEM. It also includes some new chapters on women and young people in STEM. The report draws on census data from 2006, 2011 and 2016 and includes analysis of a number of specific professional populations including, for the first time, food science.
Food science graduates and careers Most data in the report on food scientists can be found in chapter 14, STEM pathways: other natural & physical sciences (Other NPS), which presents analyses not included in the previous edition. This new chapter examines the employed population in Australia with university qualifications (bachelor degree and above) in Other NPS. Food science is combined with biotechnology as one of seven ‘narrow fields’ along with medical science, pharmacology and forensic science. The field of food science and biotechnology is defined as “the study of the physical and chemical properties of food and the industrial use of
living organisms to produce food, pharmaceuticals and other products”. Food Science and Biotechnology graduates make up 25 per cent of all Other NPS graduates and, between 2011 and 2016, there was a 32 per cent increase in the number of employed graduates in this field, increasing from 5,910 to 7,796.
Food science and biotechnology graduate salaries A higher percentage of food science and biotechnology bachelor graduates earned $104,000 or more, with 23 per cent of males and 11 per cent of females in this income bracket.
Where do food science graduates work? In the Other NPS category, food science and biotechnology had the highest proportion of graduates working in the private sector (86 per cent) compared to an overall figure of 70 per cent of Other NPS graduates. The most common industry division of employment for food science and biotechnology graduates was manufacturing (32 per cent). Other NPS doctoral graduates were more concentrated in education and training, with 43 per cent of the working population employed in this division. Education and training was also the top division of employment for food science and biotechnology doctoral graduates. The occupation of ‘food and wine scientist’ is one of the top three occupations of chemical sciences and ‘other natural and physical sciences’ industries.
Women in STEM While females outnumbered males in most occupations, a higher proportion of males than females were employed as chemists and food and wine
A highlight from Australia’s stem workforce report – July 2020 scientists (58 per cent male). Of those in the labour force with university science qualifications, females outnumbered males in six of the 10 largest education fields of Science, including food science and biotechnology. This report provides valuable insights and establishes a benchmark for future analysis of the food science profession. Access to such data is essential for tracking specialist numbers and career pathways - an important exercise given the food and grocery manufacturing sector is Australia’s largest manufacturing sector, representing 32 per cent of all manufacturing jobs and generating a $122.1 billion annual turnover.3
References 1. Recordings of the AIFST’s national science week webinars are available via the website https://www.aifst.asn.au/page-18206 2. Office of the Chief Scientist, 2020 Australia’s STEM Workforce Report https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/news-andmedia/2020-australias-stem-workforce-report 3. AFGC, State of the Industry Report 2019 https://www.afgc.org.au/download/afgc-2019state-of-the-industry
Melinda Stewart is technical information specialist at AIFST. f
food australia 45
EVENTS
Australian Food Safety Week 2020 The Food Safety Information Council will be holding Australian Food Safety Week this year from 14 to 21 November 2020. The Food Safety Information Council is a health promotion charity and the national voice for science-based, consumer-focused food safety information in Australia. It aims to reduce the number of Australians getting sick from food poisoning by providing simple, easy to follow consumer information on the handling, storage, and preparation of food. The Food Safety Information Council will be holding Australian Food Safety Week from 14 to 21 November, 2020. The theme for 2020 is ‘Food Safety - it’s in your hands’ which has been designed to build on the good consumer behaviour that has been established during the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the National Notifiable Disease Network, rates of salmonellosis, campylobacteriosis and STEC (Shiga toxin-producing
46 food australia
Escherichia coli) have reduced, as have a number of other infectious diseases, since the COVID-19 pandemic began. It seems likely that these beneficial trends are due to the greatly improved handwashing and additional social distancing practices that have been widely implemented by a significant portion of the Australian population. The Council has partnered with educational company First for Training to make online basic food safety training courses affordable and available and to help get training courses and materials into schools. First for Training will be making a charitable donation of 10 per cent of all course sales to the Food Safety Information Council to help keep its important work going. For more information visit: https:// foodsafety.asn.au/australian-foodsafety-week-2020/ or email info@ foodsafety.asn.au.
AIFST 2021 Convention: SAVE THE DATE In 2021, the AIFST Convention (AIFST21) will be co-located with foodpro at the Sydney Showground at Sydney Olympic Park on July 26 and 27. The AIFST is planning a full two-day program with concurrent sessions and the option to join in person or virtually. Join us in July 2021 to grow, learn and connect.
5
FAST
The future of online learning Question: In March this year universities moved almost all teaching to completely online and closed campuses for non-essential work to reduce the spread of COVID-19. As we continue teaching largely online for the remainder of 2020, what is your experience of online learning and how do you view this as a long-term learning platform? Associate Professor Mark Turner and Naomi Vinden University of Queensland The University of Queensland offered 99 per cent of subjects online from mid-March including students located offshore. Live interactive lectures and tutorials were possible through Zoom and practical classes replaced with videos. Students missed the practical labs, learning technical skills and interacting with students and staff. Not all students learn the same way and the act of doing is a major part of the learning experience. Attendance rates for Zoom lectures were similar to face-to-face, however, cameras were turned off and not seeing student’s faces was difficult. Some skills are only gained through an on-campus experience, making a completely online food science degree a less preferred option. Associate Professor Vicky Solah Murdoch University Lecturers worked long hours to convert teaching programs to online. Students used collaboration platforms to listen to lectures, ask questions, chat with classmates and get help and support, and labs were viewed as pre-recorded videos. Most online live classes had attendance equal to or above oncampus classes, but students reported very few positives. While lectures for second semester remain online, most
tutorials and labs are now back on campus. Some units have face-to-face as well as online tutorials, so the lecturer workload is still challenging. The bachelor of food science and nutrition (FSN) is new, so students did not have time to build support networks and felt even more isolated in lockdown. The consensus was a definite ‘no’ to study online. The strength of the FSN course is engagement in hands-on activities that demonstrate real food and nutrition applications, only possible on-campus. Annelise Sarikas Third year bachelor of food science and technology student at UNSW As a student studying a degree encompassing science and engineering, both comprising very practical components, I have found this new learning environment somewhat challenging. The quick conversion to an online platform has resulted in a loss of subject integrity during the process. My favourite part of studying a food science and technology degree is the practical lab component, which enables the opportunity to collaborate with peers and physically tackle tasks which will be required in the workforce. Whilst online learning platforms with interactive capabilities can convey the same educational objectives, I am a strong believer in hands-on learning and eager to get back to the lab. Gethmini Kodagoda Second year PhD student, University of Queensland I’m one of the international students stranded offshore due to COVID-19 travel restrictions. The chaos of COVID-19 completely changed my plan and I had to reassess my research priorities. Initially it was hard to adjust to this new normal, but within a few weeks - with continuous
support from my university, advisory panel and my family - I completely adapted to online learning. I used the time to expand knowledge in my research area and used online learning platforms such as webinars and virtual workshops to enhance my expertise in new areas. I even participated in several virtual conferences where I shared my research findings to a global scientific audience. Though online learning lacks social interactions, it can be used as an effective platform for researchers. More virtual global opportunities to disseminate our work should be initiated for a successful online learning experience. Professor Tom Ross, Dr Lyndal Mellefont and Dr Matthew Wilson University of Tasmania University of Tasmania (UTas) ‘closed its doors’ in late March due to COVID-19. But, even before that, we had a cohort of Chinese food science students unable to return to Australia. We rapidly redesigned their program to provide a pedagogically analogous experience online, including virtual research projects. With the subsequent ‘lockdown’, we repeated this process for ‘domestic’ students. Attendance at ‘virtual lessons’ did not differ systematically cf. ‘face-toface’. We successfully used online tools to improve student engagement in real-time virtual lectures, such as class polls and break-out groups, which also allowed ‘quieter’ students to be more involved. UTas offered not to record ‘FAIL’ results on transcripts, leading some students to disengage. Also, we had ‘phantom’ students who were loggedon but clearly not watching or listening. We also experienced bandwidth issues and the challenge of noninvigilated on-line exams.
food australia 47