Be sure to catch our special coverage of Natural Products Expo West starting this Thursday through Sunday.

We’ll reporting from our special Total Access site. Click here to visit.

If it’s natural, organic or green, it’ll be at the show, with more than 3,000 booths and 50,000 industry attendees. The show itself turns 30 years old this year, and much of the talk will be on how far the industry has come in this relatively short period of time.

We’ll resume regular postings on Refresh next week. Until then, see you in Anaheim!

A trio of beverage reports out this week all come from different sources, and consider different questions — but there’s a common thread that ties all of them together: obesity.

Two of the studies focus on carbonated soft drinks and other sugary beverages in our nation’s schools. The first compares deliveries of soda and full-sugar beverages to schools in 2004 to those this year. The numbers are down a whopping 95%. The ongoing initiative — headed up by the American Beverage Association (and big manufactures like Coke and Pepsi), the Clinton Foundation and the American Heart Association — has stressed 100% juice drinks, teas and flavored waters (though high school-age kids can additionally opt for diet drinks).

The program was introduced formally in 2006, in response to data showing that two-thirds of all Americans, including one in three children, have serious weight problems.

Against that backdrop, a second report unveiled at a heart disease convention this week shows that the increase in full-sugar beverage consumption has brought about 130,000 cases of diabetes and 14,000 cases of heart disease over the past decade.

The study’s lead author says that the greatest risk right now is to younger people, age 35 years and under.

“No one argues that these drinks are not fine in moderation, but over the past decade their consumption has been on the rise, while consumption of other beverages has declined,” Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, senior study author and an associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, was quoted as saying in a Reuters story. more

The FDA has sent out warning letters to 17 food manufacturers claiming that certain products violate the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The development follows last October’s statement by FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg urging companies to review their nutrition claims.

Yesterday’s letters serve as a reminder that the agency is serious about holding manufacturers accountable for the promises they make to their customers. The vast majority of companies making health claims have been careful to include studies, research findings and other data supporting their claims on their websites, or otherwise make them available to consumers.

Even so, the FDA is saying companies continue to overreach, or neglect to balance their claims with statements that point out other nutritional aspects that are not so healthy.

For example, many of the manufacturers on this most recent list were cited for making claims such as “0 grams of trans fat” – a statement that, in and of itself, is accurate. However, many of these products contain significant amounts of saturated (bad) fats, or cholesterol, or sodium. FDA regulations state that if these nutritional elements exceed a certain amount, then manufacturers must include an ancillary notice next to any front-panel health declarations that directs the consumer to the Nutrition Facts panel.

There, they’ll see that the product does not have any trans fats as stated but, Wow, it’s loaded with saturated fat, cholesterol or sodium. No thanks, I’ll pass. more

Attempting to quantify the health-related costs associated with foodborne illness is, at best, an inexact science. There are so many variables to weigh. Some, like medical expenses and lost wages, are fairly obvious and easy to calculate. Research can reveal some pretty concrete numbers for those types of factors.

What about pain and suffering? Or the cost of financial burdens placed on a family whose primary wage-earner died as the result of a foodborne pathogen?

This “Big Picture” approach was taken with the new report: Health-Related Costs from Foodborne Illness in the United States (no mistaking the topic here, eh?). The study was authored by Robert Scharff, an assistant professor in the Department of Consumer Sciences at Ohio State University (and a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration economist). The report itself was sponsored by the Produce Safety Project at Georgetown University.

The most astounding revelation in this study is that Scharff came up with a new number for the cost of foodborne illness: $152 billion. What makes that figure such an eye-opener? Past official government estimates have topped only $35 billion.

“The cost of foodborne illness is significantly greater in this report than in some past studies, but only because this study included costs of all pathogens and a more comprehensive measure of economic cost,” wrote Scharff in the report. “It is my hope that the improvements made here will lead to better decision-making, both at the legislative and regulatory level.”

more

Don’t ask me why, but 2015 has all of a sudden become the year for green transformations.

Last week, Wal-Mart said it plans to cut 20 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions from its supply chain by 2015. It will do this by going through stores category-by-category, rooting out the products responsible for the highest carbon output, and then working with suppliers to reduce the amounts. This could mean Wal-Mart’s vendors need to revisit how they source ingredients, the way they ship their products; changing whatever process is using the most energy.

The changes could be big, and manufacturers, many of whom have worked with the retailer on its packaging scorecard, may not be enthused about Wal-Mart calling the shots like this. But Wal-Mart argues, compellingly, that such changes would put them ahead of the regulatory curve and into consumers’ good graces.

“As we help our suppliers reduce their energy use, costs and carbon footprint, we’ll be helping our customers do the same thing,” said Wal-Mart CEO Mike Duke, in a statement.

The Bentonville retailer has made strides with this and other efforts to tame emissions — but it’s not the most ambitious company out there. That title arguably belongs to Great Britain’s Marks & Spencer, which announced today that it aims to become the world’s most sustainable retailer by 2015. more

It took five years of on-and-off sparring, but organic supporters are raising a nice, tall glass of organic milk after the U.S. Department of Agriculture issued revised rules governing the “access to pasture” guidelines contained within the National Organic Program.

Mark Kastel, co-founder of the Cornucopia Institute, a small farm advocacy group and one of the most vocal critics of the original regulations, was quoted in our print issue of SN as saying, “Flashing forward to a year from now, when this rule will be fully in place and enforced, we hope to be able to say that 100% of the name brands and private labels all meet the rigorous standards that consumers expect” from the USDA-certified organic label.

There are two reasons everyone is pleased. The first one, of course, is that the rule was changed. Starting in June, the USDA’s revised access to pasture regulation will require farmers to allow their cows to graze at least 120 days per year, and the cows must also get at least 30% of their food from pasture during the local grazing season. The old version simply — and vaguely — required “access to pasture,” with no further specifications as to how much or when.

Critics of the old rule claimed that large-scale dairies were taking advantage of the hazy wording to circumvent the spirit of the regulations but still calling their dairy products certified organic. Groups like the Cornucopia Institute and the Organic Consumers Association were tenacious in petitioning the USDA for investigations of specific big dairy operators and filing lawsuits. more

Most of the attention at food shows goes to the fun, “around the plate” foods like chocolates and cheeses, teas and olive oils. “Center of the plate” offerings are usually few and far between. But this year, I am already noticing a handful of companies offering items that answer the daily question, “What’s for dinner?”

One company in particular caught my eye and piqued my interest with its steamable, sustainable seafood entrees like Japanese Black Sesame Wild Ahi Tuna, Veracruz Style Tilapia and Wasabi Ginger Wild Salmon. These are not your chemical-feast TV dinners of yore; instead, they are all-natural, flavorful meals with seafood as the protein of choice. These products were in trays, but more and more steamable meals are popping up in grocers’ freezers in bags that perform the same function.

Another company out of the Chicagoland area is producing restaurant-quality meals much like you can find in high-end European retailers like Picard in France. They are starting with high-quality ingredients to produce an upscale meal — also in a steam bag — that you would be proud to serve to your family and friends.

Interestingly enough, this steamable technology cropped up first in private label offerings from Europe before it was adopted by frozen vegetable producers. The frozen veggie manufacturers have been on board with steam-in-the-bag offerings for the past few years now, so it’s a natural transition that the entrée manufacturers would follow suit. Now that most households in America cannot “cook” without a microwave, we’re seeing new item introductions with microwave-only instructions. The day of the dual microwave or oven tray seems to be a thing of the past. more

There have been numerous efforts over the years to tackle childhood obesity in this country, but nothing so ambitious as what First Lady Michelle Obama announced on Tuesday. The new initiative she’s spearheading, dubbed Let’s Move, seeks to bring together government agencies and the private sector — basically, anybody and everybody that impacts children’s health — to combat the problem. The ultimate goal: Eliminate childhood obesity within a generation.

No doubt, it’s a sweeping response to a sweeping problem, with one in every three children in this country considered “obese”. As the name suggests, Let’s Move looks to get kids off the couch and moving around. There are many thoughtful food-related proposals, as well.

Expanding access to healthy foods is one of the major themes. Schools, for one, could soon see reform as the new plan looks to update the National School Lunch Program to include more healthy options. Neighborhoods where fresh, healthful food is hard to find, known as “food deserts” (which we wrote about here), are also a focus. Listen up, supermarkets: The administration’s 2011 budget calls for a $400 million investment to bring grocery stores to these underserved neighborhoods. That’d probably include generous tax breaks for any retailers that move in.

The Let’s Move agenda also looks to invest in educating consumers and enhancing transparency at the shelf level. more

As the economy improves in 2010, consumers may be more interested in (and willing to pay a premium for) healthy convenience foods. In 2009, only one in four identified frozen entrees as key to buy organic. We expect those percentages to increase in 2010…first with more customers shifting to organics when buying frozen fruits and vegetables and then to healthy convenience foods.

Retailers can get ahead of the trend by expanding their offerings of organic prepared foods and offering more healthy take-out options. Premium quality store brand and private label organics will be an important part of the product mix for 2010 as consumers will continue to look for value in their natural and organic purchasing.

As for name brand organics, they’ll be looking to coupons, consumer education and promotions to maintain consumer loyalty.

Movies like Food Inc. and the continuing popularity of books such as The Omnivore’s Dilemma and Michael Pollan’s latest release Food Rules: An Eater’s Manual should continue to build consumer focus on both healthy eating and safe, sustainable agricultural methods. That means consumers will be looking for more locally raised food, clear labeling and signage introducing new health- and earth-conscious products.

For all the attention that the organic industry gets, it’s easy to forget just how small it really is. We got a reminder earlier this week when the U.S. Department of Agriculture offered up the results from its first ever wide-scale survey of organic farming.

According to the results, less than 1% of all farms in the U.S. are organic. The survey tallied 14,540 organic farms covering 4.1 million acres of land, with total sales of $3.16 billion in 2008.

A few other interesting findings from the report:

- No surprise, California led the nation with 20% of all organic farms and 36% of total sales.

- Organic farms bring in an average of $217,675 in sales, compared to $134,807 for all other farms.

- Expenditures for organic farms are higher, however, at $171,978 per farm compared to $109,359 for other farms.

- 44% of organic farms sold their products within 100 miles from where they were grown.

- 83% of organic farm sales came from wholesale channels, 10% direct from retailers, and only 7% of sales came directly from consumers. more