Organic Baby Formula Update

I got this follow-up via email to a story we talked about a couple weeks ago on cane sugar in organic baby formula.

Washington, D.C. – Congresswoman Rosa L. DeLauro (CT-3), chairwoman of the Agriculture, Food and Drug Administration Appropriations Subcommittee, urged the Food and Drug Administration to examine the long-term health and safety implications of sucrose-sweetened infant formulas in a letter to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach. The inquiry stems from a New York Times report last month about a major brand of organic infant formula, which uses the much sweeter cane sugar, or sucrose.

“Sucrose is much sweeter than sugars used in other infant formulas, so there is an increased likelihood that babies will become accustomed to the sweeter taste and forsake solid foods. While there may not be any immediate health risks associated with the use of sucrose in infant formulas, the long-term health implications raises serious concerns over its continued use,” DeLauro writes in the letter. “The concerns outlined in the New York Times article would indicate that this issue deserves serious examination.”

Below is the text of the letter.

Dear Dr. von Eschenbach: (Food and Drug Administration Commissioner)

I am writing to express concern regarding a recent report in the New York Times about a major brand of organic infant formula that is sweetened with cane sugar, or sucrose. As you know, sucrose is much sweeter than sugars used in other infant formulas, so there is an increased likelihood that babies will become accustomed to the sweeter taste and forsake solid foods. While there may not be any immediate health risks associated with the use of sucrose in infant formulas, the long-term health implications raises serious concerns over its continued use.

As has been reported, sucrose can not only erode tooth enamel faster than other sugars, but some studies suggest that its inclusion in infant formulas also could result in excessive consumption and rapid weight gain in the first year. This is especially disturbing given recent findings by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that suggests that childhood obesity rates may have plateaued. I fear that the increased use of sucrose in infant formulas would diminish the minimal gains that are being made in the battle against childhood obesity.

Another troubling aspect of this situation is the organic labeling associated with the infant formula containing sucrose. While organic labeling is not under FDA jurisdiction, it is an important component of this issue since consumers purchase organic products because they believe it is healthier. This connotation is especially critical to parents who purchased the so-called organic infant formula containing sucrose mistakenly believing that they were providing a healthy food source to their babies. As Dr. Gary K. Beauchamp, Director of the Monell Chemical Senses Center, asserted in the New York Times article, “The entire enterprise of formula is the attempt to make it as close as possible to human milk. Making sweeter formula so that babies like it more seems to me contrary to the ethos of organic food, as a doctor and as a grandfather.”

The article also noted that the European Union’s Scientific Committee on Food found that sucrose provided no particular nutritional advantages, and might lead to excessive consumption. As a result of this finding, and the subsequent committee recommendation, the 27 countries of the European Union will be banning sucrose-sweetened infant formulas by the end of 2009.

The concerns outlined in the New York Times article would indicate that this issue deserves serious examination. If this is a problem that the FDA already is investigating, please let me know the status of the agency’s work If the FDA is not currently looking into this issue, I strongly urge you to begin examining this problem to determine the long-term health and safety implications of sucrose-sweetened infant formulas.

Thank you very much for your consideration of this matter. I look forward to receiving a prompt reply.

Sincerely,

ROSA L. DeLAURO
Chairwoman
House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration,
and Related Agencies

Here's a link to the original blog on this topic.

-NewsAnchorMom Jen

Organic Baby Formula

I got this in an email and thought it was worth sharing after hearing about how important organic food is all weekend at the Autism One Conference:

The article is from Julia Moskin from the New York Times:

Amy Chase started feeding Similac Organic infant formula to her second son, Amos, as soon as he was born in November 2006."When I saw the organic at Publix, I bought it, no questions asked,"said Ms. Chase, a self-described "yoga mom" in Atlanta.Like Ms. Chase, many American parents have rushed to embrace Similac Organic formula, even though it sells for as much as 30 percent more than regular Similac. In 2007, its first full year on sale, it captured36 percent of the organic formula market, with sales of more than $10million, according to Kalorama Information, a pharmaceutical-industry research firm. (Similac's parent company, Abbott Laboratories, does not release sales figures for individual products.)

Parents may be buying it because they believe that organic is healthier,but babies may have a reason of their own for preferring Similac Organic: it is significantly sweeter than other formulas. It is the only major brand of organic formula that is sweetened with cane sugar, or sucrose, which is much sweeter than sugars used in other formulas. No health problems in babies have been associated with Similac Organic. But to pediatricians, there are risks in giving babies cane sugar: Sucrose can harm tooth enamel faster than other sugars; once babies get used to its sweeter taste, they might resist less sweet formulas or solid foods; and some studies suggest that they might over eat, leading to rapid weight gain in the first year, which is often a statistical predictor of childhood obesity.

Asked about these concerns, Carolyn Valek, a spokeswoman for Abbott Nutrition, the division of Abbott Laboratories that makes Similac Organic, said that sucrose had been approved by the Food and Drug Administration and was considered "safe and well established." Ms. Valek said that Similac Organic had no more sweetener than other formulas and that prolonged contact with any kind of sugar could cause tooth decay. In Europe, where sudden increases in childhood obesity are a pressing public health issue, sucrose-sweetened formulas will be banned by the end of 2009, except when ordered by a doctor for babies with severe allergies. The 27 countries of the European Union adopted the new rules according to the recommendations of the group's Scientific Committee on Food, which found that sucrose provided no particular nutritional advantages, could, in rare cases, bring about a fatal metabolic disorder, and might lead to overfeeding.

The F.D.A., however, which regulates infant formula, does not specify which sugars can be used, as long as they are already classified as safe. Nor does it set the amount of sugar per serving, as it does for fats and proteins. Still, a number of pediatricians said they were surprised by the choice of sucrose."I would be very concerned about this as a pediatrician," said Dr.Benjamin Caballero, director of the Center for Human Nutrition at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health and an expert in risk factors for childhood obesity. "The issue is that sweet tastes tend to encourage consumption of excessive amounts," Dr. Caballero said. Evidence shows that babies and children will always show a preference for the sweetest food available, he said, and they will eat more of it than they would of less-sweet food."This is how breakfast cereal manufacturers compete," he said.

Ms. Valek of Abbot Nutrition said the company did not "optimize for taste" when developing infant formula. "Our primary focus is to support normal growth through optimal nutrition and quality ingredients," she said. Organic formula, with sales of about $20 million annually, makes up only a sliver of the $2.5 billion formula market, according to A.C. Nielsen,the market research company. Similac Organic, analysts say, is largely responsible for the nearly ten fold growth in sales of organic formula from 2005 to 2007. According to the federal Department of Agriculture,which regulates organic labeling, a product can be labeled organic when 95 percent of its ingredients are grown without the use of certain pesticides and herbicides. All infant formulas contain added sugars, which babies need to digest the proteins in cow's milk or soy. Other organic formulas, like Earth's Best and Parent's Choice, use organic lactose as the added sugar. Organic lactose must be extracted from organic milk, the global supplies of which have been severely stretched in the last three years, driving up the price of the lactose.

I do like a lot of the organic products. I didn't use formula, so I didn't have this dilemma, but it makes me wonder if other "organic" food is really the best choice. At least the pesticides aren't in there! I think I need to be more careful about what I buy.

-NewsAnchorMom Jen