Assessing the Evolution of Functional Foods

Pew Initiative report examines the state of functional foods and the regulatory oversight system that governs them.

By
Joanna Cosgrove
Online Editor

It used to be that the mention of bioengineered foods conjured up images of otherworldly looking fruits and vegetables, but in this day and age, modern consumers know that’s not the case. And like it or not, a vast majority of the foods sold in today’s mainstream supermarkets have already been biologically tinkered with for better pest-resistance, improved color and longer shelf life. Likewise, the quest to optimize the phytochemical, antioxidant and other beneficial properties of fruits, vegetables and grains is rapidly escalating as the regulatory environment tries to keep pace.

“Application of Biotechnology for Functional Foods,” a new study from the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology, a project of the University of Richmond supported by a grant from The Pew Charitable Trusts, examines the potential to develop functional foods through the application of modern biotechnology. Broken into two sections, the first aspect of the report describes a handful of recent scientific advances in bioengineered functional foods that could conceivably wind up on grocery store shelves—from oils that product no trans fats or contain heart healthy omega 3 fatty acids, to cassava with increased protein content to help fight malnutrition in developing nations, to foods with enhanced levels of antioxidants.

According to the report, one of the most famous bioengineered agricultural products developed for the benefit of public health in recent years has been “Golden Rice.” Developed in the late 1990’s, Golden Rice was genetically modified to contain beta-carotene (hence its rich yellow color) and underwent a subsequent “genetic transformation” that further endowed the staple food’s nutritional profile with iron.

The second portion of the study analyzed the legal authorities that could govern the use of biotechnology-derived functional foods. “The analysis of relevant statutory authorities suggests that there is ample legal authority to cover the kinds of functional foods currently being explored in laboratories, but that different authorities may come into play for different kinds of foods and that the application of different authorities can have significant consequences for product developers, food manufacturers and consumers,” commented Michael Fernandez, executive director of the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. “Different authorities impose different safety and labeling standards, have different requirements for regulatory review and clearance or approval, and could result in different levels of transparency to the public. The use of modern biotechnology to produce functional foods will not likely fundamentally challenge existing regulatory structures, but may challenge the boundaries of some regulatory classifications.”

The landscape for bioengineered functional foods is ripe with possibility. So is the evolving global regulatory landscape, especially as these new foods grow closer to bearing viable health and disease claims. “Functional foods produced through biotechnology hold the promise of new consumer benefits, but they may also pose new challenges for the regulatory system,” said Mr. Fernandez. “How different foods are brought to the marketplace will have significant impacts on the way they are regulated, and ultimately on how they are perceived by consumers.”

To view a copy of the entire report, log onto http://pewagbiotech.org/research/functionalfoods/FunctionalFoods.pdf