Embed Size (px)
Madhu SahasrabudheAgriculture Canada
The plenary sessions were of considerable interest and the followingsummary was prepared by Linda Ewanyk of the Alberta Department ofAgriculture.
PLENARY SESSION ON RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OF FOOD
Dr. Powrie of the Department of Food Science at the University ofBritish Columbia, defined Research as the retrieval and gaining of knowledge - planning and execution; Development - as the use of scientificknowledge for new products and processes. Research, therefore, leads todevelopment. He stated that the Federal Government spent $680 millionon in-house research and $335 million on University and Industry research in 1975. Agriculture received $79 million. in in-house researchfunds, yet the Food and Beverage industry is the largest manufacturingindustry in Canada. Of the $9 billion in food products, $3 billion is valueadded due to processing, yet only 4% of research in Canadian agricultureis for food technology.
The emphasis of research on production has been justified as beingdue to the large numbers of farmers. However, 85% of food processorshave less than 15 employees and Dr. Powrie questioned whether theywere not in the same position when it came to research. The NationalResearch Council has placed a low priority on food technology perhapsexpecting Agriculture Canada to do it! Dr. Powrie concluded that therewas an urgent need for the government to establish scientific policy forresearch and development in foods.
Dr. Earl of the Food Products Development Centre, a new institutefor Research and Development in Manitoba noted that although food isin the public spotlight and demands for safety, nutrition etc. are heavy,the industry remains extremely conservative. He cited the need for management and research skills in Rand D, emphasizing 6 main elements forinnovation:
1. Technical knowledge2. User needs and acceptance3. Advocates4. Resources5. Risk factors6. Timing.Innovation is not the sole prerogative of large industry, but mecha
nisms are needed to disseminate Rand D information across Canada. Hementioned conserving energy costs, heavy costs of regulatory tests andrisk-benefit analyses as important areas for consideration.
In Canada, there has been a reduction in new development, exceptfor:
I. Hotel-Restaurant Industry. A total of20 to 25% of food in Canadais for the HRI, 33% of meals are consumed away from the home. Rand Dneeds better and faster feconstitution, improved packaging etc.
2. Developing Countries. The needs of developing countries couples
PLENARY SESSION ON THE CONSUMERDr. J. F. Mustard of the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University
of Toronto referred to how consumers appeared to be changing theirfood habits, in that a recent survey showed that less convenience tyPefoods were being purchased. He predicted a decline in animal protein inWestern countries, and a return to a vegetable diet with meat served as acondiment. Dr. Mustard viewed this favourably and noted that in hisfield of study, heart disease is the principal- cause of illness and death, fol.lowed by accidents, mental illness and cancer.
Dr. Mustard took a critical look at public education (an area thatfood scientists, consumer advocates, nutritionists and health agencies areall talking about, but question their achievements) and considered that itwas of questionable effect. Only 50% of patients on prescribed drugs forany length of time will take them reliably. This percentage can be in.creased by a reward system - for example, have heart patients take theirown blood pressure to check their achievement on medication. He notedthat public policy is necessary to ensure a nutritious diet for Canadians _producers, processors and government must cooperate to produce an ap.propriate policy - as has been done in Sweden.
Carol Allen of Homemaker's Magazine was the other speaker in thissession. She referred to the contradictory information facing consumers.She noted that consumers cite food additives as their primary concemabout foods, while obesity as a consumer concern is considered "old hat".She considered that a dictionary for consumer educators and the media isneeded, that would cover food additives in a form understandable to thelayman.
Carol Allen raised the questions heard so often from consumers are flavourings and colourings in food there because of need or demandcreated by manufacturers? (No one replied). She stated that the consumerhad the responSibility to know more about food products, and that theyshould learn more and not accept food products meekly.
ViseyoGordon Royal Maybee Award winners Carl Ross andwith Dave Clark.
W. J. Dyer receiving the W. J. Eva Award from John deMan.
More than 600 persons were in attendance at the President's Banquet. Dave Clark performed two functions, one as the President and theother as the comedian.
Press coverage was good, we had 6 to 7 journalists from CanadianPress, CBC Radio, Globe and Mail and 2 local papers in Ottawa coveringthe conference. Publicity, Printing and Public Relations were handled bythe undersigned with assistance from a committee of 3 and press officers David Smithers (Agriculture) and Rene Mercier (Health & Welfare).
A number of organizations supported the various functions and activities of the conference by generous donations for which we are indeedvery grateful.
The success of the conference was reflected in the smiling faces ofthe Conference Chairman (Manny Somers) and the Vice Chairman (AlexHunt).
ASl J. Inst. Can. Sci. Technol. Aliment. Vol. 9, No.3, 1976
the food probfem with economic realities. Of the world food production,90% is consumed near the production source, yet Canada I?roduces 23%and the U.S.A. 65% of the world food. Rand D therefore m this area isneeded for small farmers in their home lands, not high energy inputs athigh cost. Food aid must not discourage innovators in developing countries.
Mr. G. Nelson of the Research and Development Division of General Foods Ltd. considered the philosophy ofR and D. He indicated howRand D at General Foods Ltd. in Canada had been adaptive, but now itis balanced, with basic, technical and product development. Groups ofdecentralized expertise work on different types of research and development. He stated that 1% of net revenue is necessary leadership in RandD. The Rand D should c\lver: development for now, for the future; andfor a world wide perspective.
PLENARY SESSION ON DEVELOPMENT OF VALUEThis session included presentations by Mr. J. V. Cross of the POS Pi
lot Plant Corporation in Saskatoon and Dr. P. Melnychyn of FBI Foods.The CIFST Journal plans to include information on the POS Pilot Plantin the Institute Affairs Section in an early issue, hence the presentation byMr. Cross will not be reviewed at this time. However, this corporation isto be used by member companies, hopefully improving the balance ofgovernment to industry ratio of Rand D work in Canada.
Dr. Melnychyn reported that there are less than 300 food processinggraduates working in Canada, and that Rand D is allocated 30¢/$100sales in Canada compared to 9O¢/$100 in the U.S.A. He reported that thefood industry in Canada has the lowest research expenditure of any industry.
The industry is faced with a downgrading of fabricated foods by consumers, despite a demand for specialty and convenience foods. Coffeewhiteners now have 30% of the market, non-dairy whip 60% of that market. Ingredients are needed to keep fabricated foods going, but they mustbe safe, affordable and readily available. The ingredient industry is big,with $1.6 billion in sales, $80 billion in worth. Innovative research and development is necessary in this industry to comply with government regulations, supply problems and energy costs.
This interesting series of plenary sessions came full circle, presentingchallenges to government and industry. These sessions were supported byan impressive range of research reports. The Sensory Analysis and Consumer Acceptance interest group held a successful workshop prior to theconference, and this might well set an additional trend in CIFST conferences. Those who attended Ottawa in 1976 will surely be looking forwardto the meetings at Guelph in 1977.
MEAT INTEREST GROUPThe Meat Interest Group of the C.I.F.S.T. met June 1st, in the Mac
Donald Salon, Chateau Laurier after the Meat Technology Session. Dr.Jean Moreau announced that there are now 101 members in this group.The following persons were elected as the Meat Interest Group executivefor the 1976-1977:
Chairman: - Jean MoreauChairman Elect: - Leon RubinSecretary: - Gail EvansDirectors: - Ruth Diamont, Rick BottaLiaison officer: - Ron UsborneAny comments or suggestions for this year's activities are welcomed
and may be sent to the secretary for distribution to the executive.
STUDENT ACTIVITIESStudents' activities at the conference this year were upgraded from
previous years and were more intimate with the professional body than inthe past. This was largely due to an excellent job of pioneering by the pastStudent Affairs Committee (SAC) Chairperson Sharon Fleming and heraide Vicki Collard.
Events consistent with past conferences included:1. Reduced conference fees for students (subsidized by the CIFST)2. Low-cost student accommodation with meals.3. Student's luncheon, organized by the students for the CIFST
body.4. Student meeting and pre-dinner mixer.Events innovated at the conference this year included:1. A student common room which served as a "place to put your feet
up" and meet other students during conference proceedings.2. A student poster competition entitled "A Visual Expression of the
Role of Students in the CIFST", where students from across Can-
Can. Ins\. Food Sci. Techno!. J. Vo!. 9, No.3, 1976
ada illustrated their life style pictorially.3. A student-organized seminar on "Is Graduate Training Necessary
for Career Development in Food Science and related fields?"4. Monetary awards for the best undergraduate and graduate papers
given at the conference.A short summary of events is given in the following few paragraphs:The pre-conference mixer on Sunday evening was well enjoyed as
most of us used the time to meet people from government, industry andeducational institutions. Many of the students who were at the nationalconference for the first time were surprised to find that the professionalsaccepted them readily into their discussions during the mixer, and soonlearned that the interest between the two factions is mutual and consistentwith CIFST functions. At the very least, it set the stage for a very intere~ting conference as far as the students were concerned. Monday's activities included conference opening ceremonies, technical papers, an awardsluncheon (where noted food scientists and technologists from across thecountry were acknowled~ed) and a student meeting. The S.A.C. was chosen from students attendmg the meeting and was a success with 40 out ofthe 55 students at the conference present.
Chairman: G. Brown, Food Science, U. of Guelph.Advisor: Dr. E. Gullett, Fam. & Con. Studies U. of Guelph.Member: L. Sullivan, Food & Dairy Sci. U. of Alberta.Member: L. Leeming, Fam. & Con. Studies, U. of Guelph.Member: G. Dayton, Science de Vivres, U. de Laval.Ex. Officio Members: R. Simonski, U. of Guelph (1977 Conference
Committee Representative)Clayton Spalding, U of M (Employment Survey).Activities for next year's conference in Guelph (August 13-17, '1977)
were discussed over ale supplied by the CIFST. In general, the studentspresent got a pretty good Idea of the students role in the CIFST in thismeeting.
Tuesday's activities included more technical papers, a chance to lookaround Ottawa and a very plush president's banquet. The seminar mentioned above took the form of a panel discussion and the panel consistedof a student's view (Ivy Chung, U. of Alberta), a view from industry (BillMason, General Foods), a view from the government (Norm. Tape,c.D.A.) and a view from an educational institution (Barry McConnell, U.of Manitoba). While the opinions were diversified, it was generally feltthat graduate studies were necessary to guide and direct innovative R. &D. It was also pointed out that fulfillment of graduate studies does notguarantee tremendously higher salaries and therefore should only attractinterested students. Discussions after the seminar led to the suggestionthat the student seminar next year should be "Women in the food industry -is there prejudice and is it justified?" Please feel free to write meabout this choice as a topic for the seminar. Other suggestions are alsowelcome.
Wednesday's activities were climaxed by the annual CIFST meetingand student luncheon. Dr. J. Francis from U. of Massachusetts was guestspeaker at the luncheon and gave a very interesting talk on World FoodSupplies. He indicated some of the potential problems that should be investigated by students such as cooling trends in the future, political unrestin the have-not countries and possible food embargos against the oil-producing countries.
Chairman, Student Affairs Committee (1976-1977)Gord A. Brown
ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETINGThe annual meeting of CIFST was held at the Chateau Laurier Ho
tel in Ottawa on June 2, 1976. President David Clark called the meetingto order, welcomed the members present and declared that there was aquorum of voting members.
It was moved by Elizabeth Larmond and seconded by M. R. Sahasrabudhe that the minutes of the 1975 Annual Meeting be approved asprinted in the July 1975 issue of the Journal.
Dr. Clark reported that it had been a privilege and a career highlightto be President of the Institute. He thanked all those who had worked forthe Institute including the retiring officers, E. G. Bligh and Elizabeth Larmond, the Editor of the Journal and his staff, chairmen of National Committees, Section Executive members, F. J. Francis the 1FT representativeand E. Somers and the 1976 Conference Committee.
REPORT OF COUNCIL.The Secretary, Elizabeth Larmond, presented the report of Council: