In a 15-page letter to the Secretaries of the the United States Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services, The Sugar Association supports its view that sugar in moderation is “a safe and useful part of a balanced diet and healthful lifestyle.”

The letter – authored by Andy Briscoe, president and CEO of The Sugar Association – draws its conclusions from a “preponderance of scientific evidence” and the organization’s ongoing work monitoring nutrition science and educating consumers about sugar’s role in a healthy diet. It will be used to help determine the “2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.”

Andy Briscoe, president and CEO of The Sugar Association.

Briscoe contends that dietary advice that says food is less healthy just because it contains sugar is misleading and not science based.

“All-natural sugar/sucrose is a valuable ingredient worldwide,” says Briscoe. “Sugar is used in food not only because it provides sweet taste, but sugar also provides essential functional properties required in food formulation, especially the microbiological safety required in today’s global food supply.”

The Sugar Association’s message comes at an important time, when awareness and concern over obesity grow. Briscoe says that according to scientific literature, there is no causal link between sugar intake and obesity.

Here are some key findings submitted by The Sugar Association to the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC), as well as comments on the DGAC’s preliminary report:

• Every comprehensive review of the scientific literature concludes that, with the exception of dental caries, no causal link can be established between the intake of sugars and lifestyle diseases, including obesity.
• The DGAC cited no scientific evidence proving a verifiable correlation between amounts of sugars consumed and a verifiable negative health impact.
• Scientific evidence finds no direct inverse association between micronutrient intake and sugars content because sugars make many healthy foods palatable, which increases intakes of many of the essential micronutrients whose intakes the public is advised to increase and, more importantly, discounts the fundamental influence of total diet.
• Intake, as well as food supply data, confirms sugars intake is not a major contributing factor to increased caloric intakes.

The letter goes on to point out that added sugars are shown to contribute significantly less to total food supply calories in 2007 than in 1970. Trend data also show there has been a nearly 10 percent decline in per capita consumption from total sugars since 1999, whereas per capita energy supply has risen to an unprecedented 4,000 calories per day, with a significant contribution from fat.

In moderation, sugar is an important part of a healthy diet.

According to USDA research, “More calories are available for consumption—and Americans are consuming more calories than they did 10 years ago. The increase in the amount of calories available for consumption is due mainly to a 28-percent increase in the amount of fat contributing to caloric levels, from 148 to 190 grams per day during this period.” (USDA, CNPP, Nutrient Content of the U.S. Food Supply, 2005, Home Economics Research Report No. 58)

Briscoe sums up the Association’s perspective, saying: “Clearly, sugars intake is not a major contributing factor to increased rates of U.S. obesity. Americans need to understand that if they consume too many calories – no matter the source – weight gain is inevitable. Obesity is the result of consistently eating too much and sedentary lifestyles, not sugars intake.”

The Sugar Association, founded in 1943, represents United States sugar cane growers and refiners and sugar beet growers and processors. Association members account for more than 90 percent of sugar production in the United States.

Consumers continue to clamor for foods and drinks sweetened with all-natural sugar. Products such as Heinz and Hunt’s ketchup, Pepsi Throwback, Snapple, Gatorade, and Wheat Thins are just a few of the household names to answer the call. Click here for a current list.

Andy Briscoe, President & CEO, The Sugar Association.

Starbucks, one of the nation’s biggest restaurant chains, summed up its decision to use sugar in its food products: “We heard loud and clear from our customers that they want food, when they purchase food at Starbucks, to be made of high quality ingredients and from simple recipes.”

Of course, those same consumers would probably be fuming if many of these same manufacturers scrapped all-natural sugar and replaced it with artificial or man-made sweeteners, such as neotame, sorbitol, and polydextrose.

A recent Harris Interactive poll found that 52 percent of parents make a conscious effort to avoid artificial sweeteners, yet few are actually able to identify common sweeteners used in food products.

With such overwhelming evidence that consumers want natural products like sugar, you might think a move to artificials would never happen. Think again.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans are currently being revised, and the federal government is under pressure to recommend limiting Americans’ sugar intake to as little as possible. If this happens, manufacturers would be left with little recourse but to reformulate their recipes.

And if they reformulate, many consumers may not even realize it.

When shown the ingredient label of a popular children’s product, given to dehydrated infants, only four percent of parents could identify all the sweeteners. About one in seven (13 percent) parents couldn’t identify any of the four sweeteners used.

Considering 87 percent of parents say the sweetener used in a product is at least somewhat important to them when making food decisions for their kids, they have a desire and right to know what sweeteners they are feeding their family.

The Sugar Association has petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to follow Canada’s lead and clear up consumer confusion with front-of-package labeling for artificial sweeteners. For nearly five years, this petition has been tangled in government red tape while new sweeteners come on the market each year and some even change their names to be less recognizable.

Andy Briscoe, President and CEO of the Sugar Association said, “We know consumers are confused by the more than 25 sweeteners being used in the U.S. market. Consumers have a right to know what is in their food, and the current FDA labeling standards aren’t working.”

We’re confident that when given all the facts, Americans will make the same choice people have made for more than 2,000 years: sugar.

Andy Briscoe, President & CEO of the Sugar Association at an industry meeting.

After years of getting a bad rap, sugar usage – and demand – are on the rebound.

World sugar prices are the highest they’ve been since 1982 – around 30 cents a pound as of this writing. The current price partly reflects decreased production from some of the world’s largest sugar producing countries because of weather problems or poor crop conditions. But there’s something else afoot that could keep demand strong in the months ahead.

Consumers increasingly are on the lookout for natural sweeteners, and major food and beverage manufacturers are responding with a return to sugar-based products.

Andy Briscoe, President & CEO of the Sugar Association, shared his thoughts on the resurgence of sugar in a recent interview with ISC Newsroom.com:

What are some of the key factors behind the uptick in sugar usage?

Eighty percent or more of all foods and beverages are purchased because of taste. So the primary driver in my mind is people like and demand the quality taste of sugar. Sugar is also a natural sweetener and has been safely used for more than 2,000 years.

Why the increased interest in sugar now?

Today, more than ever, consumers want to know what they are eating and what they are feeding their families. Sugar is a time-tested and safe sweetener – a natural ingredient shoppers can pronounce. And we know consumers prefer natural ingredients.

For the same reason, I think there’s a growing negative perception around the use of chemical artificial sweeteners. Today, the U.S. has 27 sweeteners and many of them are man-made, chemical sweeteners.

The Sugar Association recently conducted a Harris Interactive poll of 1200 parents in the U.S. and found half of the parents did not want their children consuming artificially sweetened products. We also found most parents could not identify the sweeteners that are in their children’s foods.

While sugar consumption has been targeted as a scapegoat for childhood obesity, an Institute of Medicine study of carbohydrates in 2002 reported the data available on dental caries, behavior, cancer and risk of obesity shows there is insufficient evidence to set an upper level for total or added sugars. The same lack of evidence was re-confirmed in a European Food Safety Authority scientific review in March 2009.

How did the introduction of high fructose corn syrup affect the demand for sugar?

Around 1980, high fructose corn syrup was rapidly replacing sugar in U.S. soft drinks and beverages. As a result, the sugar industry lost about 2.5 million tons in annual deliveries to beverages during the next six years. It’s taken us from 1986, when deliveries hit bottom, to climb back up to about 10.5 million tons in total U.S. deliveries in 2008 and 2009 (see attached WASDE chart and Total U.S. Sugar Deliveries 1980-2008 chart).

While overall demand for sugar is back up, the actual per capita consumption of sugar has gone down about 40 percent since 1970. That is partly due to population increase, but also because of other caloric sweeteners coming into the marketplace, such as high fructose corn syrup, glucose syrup, dextrose, etc. This reduction in sugar consumption has occurred at the same time the obesity rate has tripled (see attached chart). So this definitely shows sugar has not been the cause of obesity as some have inferred.

In what ways is sugar making a comeback today?

Several food and beverage manufacturers are switching from the use of high fructose corn syrup to sugar – Snapple, Gatorade, Pepsi Throwback, Heritage Dr Pepper. Most recently, Heinz announced a move back to sugar with their Simply Heinz product. Consumer preference, taste, and sugar being all natural are the key drivers for these switches.

There’s also a major trend among manufacturers to simplify product ingredients – to have five or less ingredients helps reduce confusion for consumers. The idea is to get back to contents people can recognize and feel comfortable feeding their children. Consumers should not have to have a chemistry degree to be able to read the ingredients on some of today’s labels. Sugar, however, is a natural ingredient people quickly recognize and trust.

What does the future hold for the sugar industry?

We’re already into 2010 and everything still looks strong for current usage trends.

Usually, in the sugar industry, when demand exceeds production, the farmers rise to the occasion either by planting more or doing what they can to increase the yield of their crops. This cycle takes about 18 months or so, which gets us through one growing season. This last year, for example, U.S. beet and cane growers increased production by roughly five percent on average. If demand continues to be strong, growers will continue their efforts to increase acreage and production as best they can.

So whether it’s 2011, 2012 or longer when production catches up to demand, I don’t know. Today, I don’t have any sense of sugar demand tracking down, at least for the near term.

As an industry, I’d like to think we’re in a better position demand-wise than we’ve been in the last 25 or 30 years. We’ve cycled back to where we were in 1980. I would assume most sugar growers and processors are pleased. The Sugar Association will continue to work hard for the industry – to promote sugar as part of a balanced diet and healthy lifestyle.

(More information about sugar and the Sugar Association can be found at www.sugar.org.)

Looking forward in 2010, there are several driving factors that can and will influence sugar consumption here in the U.S. and globally. These factors include: the economy, the continued movement away from high fructose corn syrup back to all natural sugar, strong end users’ demand, the trend to natural foods, and the consumer demand for simpler ingredients as well as ingredients consumers can recognize.

Andy Briscoe, Sugar Association

Historical deliveries show sugar is the sweetener “gold standard” in market share with 38 percent. High fructose corn syrup is at 31 percent. Artificial sweeteners account for about 18 percent of the market share. Based on what is being published in the papers and decisions by food and beverage manufacturers, continued movement to all natural sugar in 2010 looks strong. For example, Pepsi Throwback and Mountain Dew Throwback will help the first two months of 2010 with their second consumer “limited” test. Based on general comments from consumers, the hope is to continue the Throwback products in some way. Snapple has already made the move to “the Good Stuff” – all natural sugar. Gatorade announced it would be moving its products to sugar in 2010. Dr Pepper has rolled out Heritage Dr Pepper. Additionally, the San Francisco Chronicle reports that the SF School District cafeterias are moving back to sucrose/sugar in their chocolate milk. So, just based on the beverage sector products that have made commitments to sugar, the trend for sugar usage seems be to positive.

This news reinforced a recent statement by the President of the National Confectioners Association Larry Graham saying, “We’ll see some increases in demand in 2010 as the economy picks up, people start going back to stores…everybody seems to be looking forward to a stronger 2010.” 90-95 percent of all candy products involve sugar. Larry Graham’s comments are good news for the sugar industry.

Yes – sugar will have more sweetener competition in the U.S. There are currently 27 other sweeteners including the chemical artificials and polyols – all man-made. Stevia-based products are gaining some attention by marketing their natural, no-calorie traits. But there are still concerns with stevia that were revealed in a UCLA study and were ignored during the FDA approval process. Taste and functionality of the product are still in question, too.

As I have said many times, sugar is the only sweetener that is all natural, only 15 calories per teaspoon, used safely for over 2,000 years, and oh by the way, a sweetener you can pronounce!

Bottom line, in 2008, the USDA Economic Research Service showed we delivered 10.5 M tons of sugar for domestic food use. In 2009, the estimated deliveries show basically the same – 10.4 M tons, which provides us with a good positive trend for sugar. How long it will continue cannot be determined. But with continued movement toward all natural sugar as indicated, 2010 should still be a solid year. Stay tuned.

“I’m excited that Pepsi’s making the move and testing the water with consumers,” said Andrew Briscoe, association president and CEO.

Pepsi last issued the sugar-sweetened Throwback containers of pop in March, he said. Now it’s providing them from Dec. 28-Feb. 22.

“I haven’t heard of anyone who’s tried the Throwback product who hasn’t liked it or enjoyed it more than what they were used to drinking,” said Briscoe, who was visiting Idaho.

Gatorade and Snapple are also among the companies moving into sugar, he said.

“A lot of products are looking at us,” Briscoe said.

Read the whole story in AG Weekly.

Andy Briscoe, Sugar Association

Among the 22,000 or so associations, non-profit organizations and non-government agencies in Washington, D.C., is the Sugar Association. Imperial Sugar Company is a member, but what exactly is this organization and what are some of its key areas of focus?

To get answers, we spoke with Andy Briscoe, president and CEO of the Sugar Association, and a man with more than two decades of experience working public policy initiatives in Washington:

Q: What is the Sugar Association?

A: The Sugar Association is a non-profit trade association based in Washington, D.C., and represents the sugar industry in the United States, both beet and cane sugar. We represent sugar from three perspectives – scientific, public policy and a public relations perspective … helping to promote the benefits and attributes of all-natural sugar.

If consumers have a question about how sugar is used, we are a premier source of information. We have an in-house library of books, studies and articles about sugar so we can help consumers and industrial users from that perspective.

If they have any questions about other types of sweeteners, we can refer them to someone with answers if we don’t have it.

From an overall standpoint, we represent the 146,000 or so farmers and folks who work hard to produce the sugar that we consume in the United States. From a regulatory standpoint, we aim for accuracy in labeling so that when you look at a food product in a grocery store, you know that it contains sugar – or you know what type of sweetener is used by reading the ingredients section of the label. We have petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to adopt a more informative, consumer-friendly label involving all 28 sweeteners used in foods and beverages here in the U.S..

As it relates to artificial sweeteners, we believe they should be put on the front of the package so consumers can realize that a product contains an artificial sweetener … just as they have done in Canada.

We promote sugar as being all natural and only 15 calories. The more consumers find out that sugar is only 15 calories, they say: “Why do we need artificial sweeteners?” And I respond, “Exactly.”

From the standpoint of science, we are always looking for ways to understand how our product is used in the marketplace, both in beverage and foods, how it interrelates with other ingredients in a product, how it provides the taste and certainly the quality industrial users and consumers demand.

We like to think of ourselves as a watchdog as it relates to sugar and primarily sugar consumption. And we like to be pro-active in our food and nutrition initiatives.

Q: In the watchdog role, how do you compete against other sweeteners, like high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) that has become ubiquitous in America’s foods and beverages over the last two decades?

A: We are into a consumer education effort. In 2004, we did a Gallup survey and asked people just to tell us what sweeteners they were aware of, and in the top six sweeteners, HFCS was not mentioned.

We have worked hard on educating consumers that the major soft drinks do not have sugar in them and four years later, in 2008, we asked consumers the same question about sweeteners and up to 88 percent are now aware of HFCS.

The next question is: If it has HFCS, what percentage of consumers is going to purchase the product now? Consumers have responded and roughly 63 percent of consumers said that if they were aware it had HFCS in it, they would probably not purchase the product. So, we have come a long way in a relatively short period of time.

Consumers are the ultimate customer for the sugar industry and we want them to feel good about the taste, safety and caloric value of sugar. And we want consumers to feel good about continuing to use sugar or coming back to sugar.

For access online to more information relating to The Sugar Association, sugar or educational information relating to sugar, please access: www.sugar.org.

Andy Briscoe, President and CEO, Sugar Association

By Andy Briscoe, President & CEO, The Sugar Association

There is an old saying, what goes around comes around. In the 1980s total sugar deliveries slid from 10.5 M tons to under 8 M tons in 6 years. Beverages making the switch from sugar to high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) were in full swing. After taking action to implement an industry-wide, national sugar promotion program in 1986, sugar deliveries began a slow climb back up averaging a 1.9% growth over the next 10 years. In 2000 and 2001, sugar deliveries were just above 10 M tons.

However, with the increase in other competitive sweeteners, primarily artificials, sugar deliveries again drifted downward to around 9.75 M tons in 2003. Then the “natural” movement kicked in and helped move sugar deliveries back up to 10.1 M tons in 2006 and ultimately back to a high in 2008 of 10.5 M tons again … after 28 years.

Now the two leading sweeteners, of the 28 presently used in foods and beverages in the U.S., are sugar and HFCS. In 2008, sugar once again took the dominant position as the sweetener of choice with 38.8% market share. HFCS slid to 31.1%. Artificial sweeteners have an 18.0% share. For the purpose of this article, I’d like to focus on the change that has been underway for a few years – the movement by industrial manufacturers and consumers away from HFCS toward all natural sugar.

At the Sugar Association Board meeting in April 2003, Association staff provided a literature review of numerous published studies in which concerns with high levels of fructose were reported. Very little science had directly compared sugar and HFCS. However, what science was available highlights three health concerns with high, free-fructose concentrations:

1. It could contribute to an increase in triglycerides (blood fat);
2. Influence appetite control hormones leading to overeating; and
3. It contributes to malabsorption in the body. Since then, internal and external literature reviews reinforce these initial findings.

Even today, we continue to find limited science directly comparing sugar and HFCS. Yet, the media has picked up on the concerns over fructose, and this has ultimately led to consumer perceptions that HFCS is not healthy and certainly not natural. This negative consumer perception has been a key driver in getting major food and beverage manufacturers to choose sugar as their sweetener of choice.

The first official company to go public with the switch from HFCS back to sugar was Seattle-based Jones Soda in December 2006. As reported in the Wall Street Journal, “The move by Jones, which churns out Blue Bubble and Twisted Lime sodas, along with an energy drink … aims to capitalize on the bad publicity surrounding high-fructose corn syrup, which some scientists have linked to rising U.S. obesity rates.”

Sweetened sodas with sugar instead of HFCS “truly differentiates Jones and provides the consumer with a healthier alternative,” Peter van Stolk, the company’s president & chief executive said in announcing the switch. Next Ocean Spray moved back to sugar and in the last 3 years, over 100 products now profess “NO HIGH FRUCTOSE CORN SYRUP” or “NO HFCS” on the front of their packaging … as a marketing tool to capture customers’ attention.

Now several additional beverages have made the jump – Hansens Natural Soda, Snapple, and SoBe Lifewater, for example. Recently, as you know, Pepsi has been testing consumer support of Pepsi Throwback and Mountain Dew Throwback as well as the Pepsi Natural product. As of June 20, Pepsi has begun the process of deciding its next steps with sugar-based products based on test results of the Throwback campaigns. Announced in June 2009, the latest company to take action is Starbucks removing all HFCS from their food product line.

U.S. sugar deliveries to the beverage sector have gone from 228,000 tons in 2006 to 340,000 tons in 2008, a growth of 112,000 tons (49.1% growth). Over the last 7 years (2004-2009), HFCS deliveries have decreased 631,000 tons (-12.7%) while sugar deliveries have increased 996,000 tons (+10.4%).

Will it continue?

In 2004, when consumers were asked about sweeteners they recognized, HFCS was not among the top 6 mentioned. By 2008, consumer familiarity with HFCS had climbed to as high as 88%. Up to 63% of consumers said, if a product contained HFCS, they were less likely to purchase that product … which would support the continued movement away from HFCS.

The ethanol boom of 2008 also put upward pressure on the price of HFCS. It is now priced at $32.95 per 100-wt (Milling & Baking News 6/8/09). White sugar is priced at $34.25 per 100-wt., or a difference of $1.30 per 100-wt ($0.0011 per can). So for an individual 12 oz. beverage, the difference is minimal. This drive for renewable fuels is not going away, so we would have to assume the higher price of HFCS would support a continuance of the HFCS to sugar movement.

The Corn Refiners Association, which represents HFCS processors, is now investing $20M – $30M to improve the image of their product. After a year, they continue to fight an uphill battle. HFCS deliveries continue to decline having fallen another 57,000 tons (-2.8%) in the first three months of 2009. So the challenges continue for HFCS.

Bottom line, change will continue to occur in the sweetener marketplace. The trend for food and beverage makers to switch from HFCS to sugar seems to be continuing. However, USDA’s WASDE June report projects a substantial drop in sugar deliveries (-525,000 tons) in 2010, which was attributed to high sugar prices and the resultant move back to HFCS by some food manufacturers.

A Pepsi decision to maintain their Throwback products or Pepsi Natural would be a strong boost to the 3-year old movement from HFCS to sugar. So keep an eye on what Pepsi does after June 20 as a sign of what may or may not come next. And keep an eye on WASDE delivery reports to see how 2010 deliveries are projected in the coming months. Also keep an eye on the prices of sugar and HFCS. Interestingly, price has not been the driver in the recent switches. Taste and consumer preference rule the day. And if that’s the case, it would seem the trend from HFCS to sugar will continue.

To learn more from the Sugar Association, click here.