The energy drink market, which has been zooming through the beverage industry like a tooled-up muscle car, has just been given the caution flag. Yesterday Anheuser-Busch announced that it would reformulate its alcoholic energy drinks, Tilt and Bud Extra, by removing the caffeine and other stimulants that were their draw. The decision came after an investigation by 11 state attorneys general and the nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest concluded the brewer was marketing the drinks to minors and using misleading health claims.

At the heart of the investigation is the assertion that, with their sweet taste and stimulating effects, beverages like Tilt and Bud Extra are especially attractive to underage drinkers, encourage binge drinking and offer up a skewed sense of inebriation that can — among other things — lead people to drive when they’re in no condition to do so.

CSPI and the attorneys general stated they plan to target other manufacturers of alcoholic energy drinks. One of these is likely to be Miller Brewing Company, which markets a drink called Sparks.

This isn’t the first time this segment has run afoul of regulators, and likely won’t be the last. Even without the alcohol, minors imbibing these drinks have been ending up in emergency rooms, over stimulated by the multiple doses of caffeine, guarana and taurine in each can. Names like Monster, Full Throttle and Rockstar appeal to a particular demographic that often isn’t aware of the contents, and ignore the warnings that are posted on cans. But the drinks have always sold well, and always will. Marketers know this, retailers know this, and consumers themselves do, too.

The best thing the industry can do is to build a high wall between those beverages marketing themselves as teenage mutant ninja hyperdrinks and those that truly aim to refresh, replenish and rehydrate. The choices aren’t the problem here. What’s worrisome to regulators, medical practitioners and consumers is the lack of transparent marketing.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued an update this week announcing that the number of Americans with diabetes increased to 24 million, up more than 3 million in approximately two years. That’s nearly 8% of the entire U.S. population.

From the report: Among adults, diabetes increased in both men and women and in all age groups, but still disproportionately affects the elderly. Almost 25% of the population 60 years and older had diabetes in 2007. And, as in previous years, disparities exist among ethnic groups and minority populations including Native Americans, blacks and Hispanics. After adjusting for population age differences between the groups, the rate of diagnosed diabetes was highest among Native Americans and Alaska Natives (16.5%). This was followed by blacks (11.8%) and Hispanics (10.4), which includes rates for Puerto Ricans (12.6), Mexican Americans (11.9%), and Cubans (8.2%). By comparison, the rate for Asian Americans was 7.5% with whites at 6.6%.

The CDC report spins the numbers into something good, noting that more people are becoming aware of the condition, and taking steps to get tested and treated. This explains some of the steep increase, but not all of it. The disease is still on the upswing on its own.

SN Whole Health devoted a cover story to the diabetes epidemic in 2006 (then, the number of diabetes sufferers was roughly 15 million). At that time, we spoke with a number of retailers who were implementing various programs and services to help these special-needs shoppers navigate the store in a more healthful way.

For a condition so closely tied to food and lifestyle, it’s imperative that supermarkets get more deeply involved in education, testing and disease management. There are plenty of fantastic programs out there in stores right now, and lots of caring professionals leading the way. But the condition is continuing to worsen, and so it’s time to reassess and update diabetes-related education materials, product selection and outreach programs.

“I think we have a tremendous opportunity to be able to influence peoples’ lifestyle choices through diet,” said one of the retailers quoted in our 2006 story. To be sure, it’s an opportunity we can’t miss.

The green marketing revolution has certainly tapped a cultural vein, but it appears the flood of messages coming our way is putting us in danger of an overdose. Recent studies indicate that people are feeling a bit overwhelmed with eco messages, and marketers know this means trouble: The ensuing confusion will not only harm the cause, it’ll take a bite out of sales, too. One report cited in a recent story in The New York Times stated that consumers are buying as much as 55% fewer green products, due in part to the message overload. And a Harris Poll from last week showed that many consumers want to help the environment, but don’t know how.

Supermarkets contribute to all the “green noise” (as it’s come to be known) simply because they’re outlets for other peoples’ products. With them come the label claims, promotional signs and product packaging all shouting for attention. Which is greener? Which is better for the environment? Which is safer for my family? Which is best for this green-stress headache I suddenly have?

The questions are vexing to consumers, and potentially troublesome for the industry, because we all know that shoppers who can’t decide what to buy often end up not buying at all.

It doesn’t have to be this way. Just as retailers have begun to guide consumers on how to make healthy food choices, so too can they help them make green decisions. It all starts with focusing on the lifestyle as opposed to the products. Make a list of ten things that shoppers can do to reduce their carbon footprint, for example, and post it in circulars and around the store. Or hire a regional eco coordinator to develop promotions and stay up on top of trends.

Customers are looking for answers right now, and so they’ll appreciate any help they can get. They’ll also be happy not to have another green product pitch thrown their way.

While in Dallas this past week attending the Healthy Foods International Exposition and Conference, we had the opportunity to visit a few retailers in the area, including a all-out tour of a Market Street store, part of the United Supermarkets family. The Lubbock, Texas-based company also operates United Supermarkets, as well as a Hispanic format called Amigos United.

Market Street, the chain’s upscale banner, demonstrates United’s commitment to health and wellness. This particular store, #563, opened just this past February inside a green retail development on West Bethany Drive in Allen, just north of Dallas. There’s a dedicated Living Well boutique, located between the in-store pharmacy and HBC. The section is staffed and includes an informational kiosk and a service desk.

Even in dry grocery, the Living Well program was present, with set-off signage and bronze-colored shelves marking natural/organic/better-for-you choices within the conventional aisles. This is the type of integrated-segregated planogram increasingly favored by mainstream retailers as they bring their wellness products from a separate section into the regular aisles.

Shelf tags served as additional identifiers, with colored symbols denoting whole health or special needs choices. One of the more noticeable tags was the green organic mark. Green was also the color of the reusable bags for sale for $0.99. They were displayed prominently along the front end, as well as in the wine section. The latter bags were smaller and had a divider sewn in to hold up to six bottle — no clanking.

And while this has little to do with health, one of the most notable features of this store was the quality of the endcap displays. No on-ad products stuffed on shelves, covered with loud promotional signs. These displays worked: A baked bean display promotes barbecue and the Red Raiders of Texas Tech; another eye-catching shelf hawks condiments, arranged neatly beneath a full-size grill (also for sale, naturally). Many of the props were pulled from the store’s gift section, serving as an opportunity to cross-merchandise these high-ticket items, too.

It’s encouraging to see this kind of effort going into merchandising. Deep in the heart of Texas, here’s proof that a thoughtful, comprehensive approach can create success in the area of whole health. And it doesn’t hurt to have fun endcaps, either.

Food and fuel prices have driven consumers to conserve and repurpose like they’ve never had to before. As the Washington Post reported earlier this week, for example, more people have started buying meat en masse from local farms, and then packaging and freezing everything so it’ll last for the next year or so. Apparently the savings can add up to a couple hundred dollars.

Supermarkets and other companies are repurposing as well, and they’re finding it has the added bonus of being environmentally friendly. According to today’s Richmond Times-Dispatch, Ukrop’s will start turning leftover soy oil from the chicken fryers at its 11 Richmond stores into biodiesel for its delivery trucks. In all, this should produce around 65,000 gallons of fuel, or one quarter of what the retailer’s fleet consumes each year. It will also save the company $50,000 a year.

And Ukrop’s isn’t the only one. Online retailer FreshDirect, which delivers in the New York City area, is also working to turn excess kitchen grease into fuel for its trucks. “It makes us happy because it’s a closed loop system, and we’re also learning a lot as we go along about putting that process in place for a big fleet like the one that we have,” said Leitha Matz, FreshDirect’s head of environmental initiatives, in a recent interview.

Taking things a step further are companies like Straus Family Creamery, which powers its dairy with the help of a state-of-the-art “methane digester”. What’s a methane digester, you ask? Why, it’s a machine that converts cow poop into electricity. Laugh all you want, the machine generates 300,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity and saves Straus $40,000 each year.

As the urgency surrounding climate change builds — and it will — full-circle energy systems like the ones described here could become a vital next step for retailers. And I’m not just speaking in promotional terms.

No doubt, the need to source sustainable seafood is an urgent one for the food industry. Populations are depleting as a result of over fishing, and destructive practices such as bottom trawling have damaged fragile underwater ecosystems. Knowing how and where to find a truly sustainable catch is difficult, however. Retailers have price and supply concerns, and conscientious shoppers are having trouble sorting through the various certifiers out there.

Activist organization Greenpeace wants to help further the issue with its latest report, which rates 20 major supermarket chains according to how sustainable their seafood selection is. “Carting Away the Oceans: How Grocery Stores are Emptying the Seas” covers 75 pages, though I’ll go ahead and give away the plot right now (if you couldn’t figure it out from the title): They all failed. Even Greenpeace’s top scorer Whole Foods, which has worked closely with the respected Marine Stewardship Council since 1999, only dredges up a 4 out of 10 on the scorecard. Publix and Price Chopper, two retailers who have made great strides in health and wellness over the years, scored at the very bottom.

The report actually makes a lot of excellent points. Sustainable sourcing is nowhere near where it needs to be, considering the rate of aquaculture depletion right now. A number of retailers — Whole Foods included — have admitted as much. It also states, rightly, that supermarkets need to have a supply plan in place, as well as standards.

But it’s not a very constructive critique. Indeed, Greenpeace doesn’t recommend any species of fish or certification programs as alternatives — just that consumers and retailers abstain from its “Red List” of 22 different varieties of fish, as well as other unsustainable choices. That’s suspicious advice, especially since, as Los Angeles Times food writer Russ Parsons says, “the list paints with a very broad brush, and in the the confusing world of seafood that can lead to some serious oversimplifications.” It also snuffs a lot of highly reputable organizations working to certify and promote sustainable seafood.

As I mentioned, a lot of retailers have acknowledged that they need to do more to promote the health of aquaculture. That’s a good step, and they need to work hard and make sure they follow through with it. Otherwise, there might not be a seafood section years from now.

Whenever I tell people about what I do for a living, I seem to get the same question again and again: What exactly is “organic”? It used to be I would give a general overview of the requirements, including no pesticides for fruits and vegetables, and no hormones or antibiotics for meat. Sometimes I’d get into what I knew about the conversion process, certifying agencies…

Now, I just tell people to think about what the word “organic” means, and they’ve got the basic idea.

That’s boiling things way down, of course, especially given the proliferation of organic products over the years. But it gets to the essence of the ideal. People, I think, are convinced that “organic” as a standard is more complicated than it really is — something that only foodies and that crunchy relative who went to Woodstock would take the time to understand. A recently released report that came across my desk validates this point: According to marketing agency BBMG’s Conscious Consumer Report, nearly half of all shoppers have a strongly favorable response to eco claims like locally grown, biodegradable and cruelty free, while only 26% voiced approval of the USDA’s organic label.

Do they know that organic encompasses a lot of these same eco claims that consumers supposedly prefer? That it’s, essentially, devoted to simpler forms of production and agriculture? I don’t think they do. Organic is mysterious. Organic, with its official seal and marketplace buildup, hints at way more than meets the eye.

Which is true, in a way. Certifying food and getting it to the store shelf is always complex equation. But in the end, organic is just….organic.

There’s been a bunch of stories crossing the wires this past week about the growing number of consumers food shopping for home consumption. No big surprise, right? The economy’s wallowing, gas prices are sky high and job security is tenuous. It’s not exactly a great time to be splurging at restaurants.

We noted a few entries back that sales of Spam luncheon meat grew 10%, as are sales of frozen and canned foods. The Food Marketing Institute noted in a recent report that 83% of consumers are eating home-cooked meals at least three times a week. And this includes wealthier households, which the survey found more likely than less-affluent households to buy food for home consumption.

In a specific example of retailer activity, Publix has cranked up its already-successful Aprons Simple Meals program by posting more than 500 recipes to its website. The promotion notes many of the dishes can be made in as little as 15 minutes — a direct appeal to time-starved households looking to get dinner on the table quickly after a long day at work because it’s too expensive to go out and eat.

Then there’s news that consumers are surfing the web more often to get coupon savings. According to Hitwise, an online measurement firm quoted in The Wall Street Journal, online coupon hunting as increased 56% for the week endng June 6, compared with the same week in 2007. Coupons.com, CouponMountain.com and Eversave.com were some of the most popular coupon destinations, according to the article.

So, what’s it all mean? It’s a promising time to be in the supermarket business. But it’s also more than that. It’s an ideal opportunity to reconnect with shoppers by offering true solutions — not just in terms of food budget solutions, but overall lifestyle. Remember, people are still trying to stay healthy so they avoid those high insurance premiums and co-pays. Stay the course on wellness merchandising. If you need to, tweak the sets and selection, play with pricing — but make sure you keep whole health a focus. Your preoccupied, worried customers will thank you when this weird period of our history is over.

If you haven’t already, make sure to check out Sam Fromartz’s interview with Whole Foods CEO John Mackey on Fromartz’s Chews Wise blog. It’s divided into two parts — the first focusing on financials and the current economy, the second on ethics, standards and some of the top trends that are influencing the business.

As always, Mackey is as brazen as he is insightful. Right off the bat, he said that if he could go back in time he wouldn’t do the Wild Oats deal because of the regulatory sparring it caused with the Federal Trade Commission. The ordeal has cost Whole Foods millions of dollars in legal fees, not to mention the unearthing of Mackey’s embarrassing online alter ego, “rahodeb”. Given where things stand, though, Mackey wants to see the former Oats stores and its employees through a full transition.

Mackey’s regret may have made for a quote of the day, but it was his discussion about humane certification that proved most interesting from a trade perspective. This summer, he said, Whole Foods will start to employ a third-party rating system for its meat products. Based on a one-through-five scale (one being the lowest, five being the highest), the program looks to award high marks to manufacturers that practice the ethical ideal for their market. That means, as Mackey implies, that the “free-range” chicken that actually roam on pasture will be rated noticeably higher than the “free-range” chicken that is confined to a barn and just have access to pasture.

This is yet another step for the in-store rating system movement (Hannaford’s Guiding Stars, Topco’s ONQI), which seeks to hold manufacturers to higher standards and, in Whole Foods case, cut down on the wriggle room within such label claims as free range and organic. Mackey also said he and Whole Foods officials want to expand their sustainable seafood initiatives, though how exactly they’ll go about this seems to be something they struggle with.

It’s nice to see Mackey talking — and blogging — again. He’s one of the most interesting minds in the business, and though he may have a tendency to spout off and get himself into trouble, he can also be refreshingly honest and on target.

About a year ago we had the opportunity to cover the building tension between government regulators and raw milk drinkers. We spoke to Mark McAfee, who operates perhaps the largest raw-milk dairy in the country (in California). One of the first points he made concerned the term “raw.” He prefers “living whole foods” in describing unpasteurized dairy: “The word ‘raw’ has too much of a roadkill connotation to it,” he told me.

We also checked in with Sally Fallon, president of the Weston A. Price Foundation, which runs the national Campaign for Real Milk She described the lengths some people will go to in order to get raw milk. They’ve developed some pretty interesting ways of skirting state and federal law. Some farmers allow people to buy “shares” of an actual cow, and as a part owner, these folks are entitled to the, er, proceeds.

Practices like this may be coming to an end. The Associated Press picked up the story this week, noting the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is investigating whether McAfee’s dairy illegally shipped raw milk over state lines. In Pennsylvania, authorities raided two farms allegedly selling raw milk, the AP update noted.

Raw milk fans say pasteurization of dairy products kills the nutrients that humans need to build healthy immune systems, and that raw milk is a powerful health beverage that cures a number of conditions. Government regulators say raw milk can contain dangerous bacteria, including E. coli.

Some 22 states ban raw milk sales, while the rest allow sales and consumption. California is one of the latter, and Whole Foods Market has gone on record as supporting raw milk, and even sells it in some stores.

Good for them. Education is a foundation of the entire wellness movement, which prides itself on its vigilant self-policing. Unscrupulous suppliers are rooted out and exposed. It’s no different in this case. Consumers of raw milk very likely understand the potential risks when they make their first purchase, because retailers selling legal product in their stores have signs and pamphlets and their own quality control protocols (note that 2 deaths have been attributed to raw milk consumption between 1998 and 2005). Along with farmers themselves, retailers are ideally suited to perform the role of educator and gatekeeper. It’s a role no one relishes, but it’s the only way if you’re going to sell raw milk.

The government’s role here should be confined to creating educational materials and setting up a mechanism for quality control. Instead, it’s yet again stifling consumer choice.