unit_3_reading

The document discusses the concept of 'superfoods,' which are marketed as health-enhancing foods but lack a scientific definition. Despite rising sales and popular belief in their benefits, experts argue that a balanced diet is more important than focusing on individual superfoods. Upcoming European legislation will require food producers to provide evidence for health claims, potentially challenging the superfood marketing trend.

Uploaded by

Morris OET

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

6 views

unit_3_reading

Uploaded by

Morris OET

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 2

Bands 6.5–7.

Unit 3 Reading

Superfoods: fact or fiction?

These days it is almost impossible to open a lifestyle magazine without reading about the latest
health-enhancing foods. But do these so-called ‘superfoods’ really work, or are we being fed empty promises?

Superfoods are supposed to be the nutritional equivalent of comic book heroes. They are the Superman
and Batman of the food world. Eat blueberries, watercress and Brazil nuts, we have recently been told,
and they will save us from the ravages of age and illness. The result is that sales of these so-called
superfoods are soaring. The most recent nationwide figures show that in just one year, British consumers
spent an amazing £95 million on blueberries alone, a 132 per cent rise from just two years previously. In
the same time period, spinach sales went up from £32 million to £42 million, and we bought 31 per cent
more salmon.

Popular superfoods like these have been identified as high in the micronutrients that may reduce the risk
of cancer and heart disease. So, too, have more unusual foods from other, often distant, countries, such
as goji berries from Tibet and acai berries from Brazil. However, the real miracle is that so many people
actually believe these superfoods have special health-enhancing qualities, especially now that the term
itself – ‘superfood’ – is due to be banned by European legislation.

It is a sad fact that too many people are more concerned with eating nutrients than they are with eating
food. Anna Denny, the British Nutrition Foundation’s nutrition scientist, says ‘There is no such thing as
a superfood, only super-diets. Yet some foods are getting marketing treatment. The antioxidants in the
pomegranate now apparently protect against certain cancers, and the omega-3 fatty acids in walnuts
prevent heart disease.’

So how can the food industry get away with claims that many experts would describe as ‘a marketing
trick’? In part, it has been possible because the term ‘superfood’ has no official or scientific definition.
That is all about to change, however. Following recent European legislation to prevent vague and
misleading health claims on food, future claims will have to be backed up by convincing research.
Food producers will need to present the evidence for their health claims to the European Food Safety
Authority. It seems unlikely that most superfoods will survive such scrutiny.

In the meantime, the term ‘superfood’ continues to be seen on food products ranging from cereal bars
to fruit juices. One leading supermarket even has a superfoods section, where customers can buy a large
variety of foods which claim to improve health. It is not just the food producers and supermarkets who
are making a small fortune. One author has built up a small but highly profitable publishing business
specialising in books about superfoods.

Not everyone is driven by money. Some nutritionists are equally enthusiastic to promote the trend, even
though they do not stand to gain financially. Recently, for example, many have been promoting the

Bands 6.5–7.5

benefits of wheatgrass juice, a drink rich in chlorophyll, which is made from the sprouting seeds of the
common wheat plant. Unfortunately, there is considerable debate on whether they are right to do so.
Recent research suggests that the chlorophyll in wheatgrass is not absorbed by the body, and if it was,
it would not be good for us. Furthermore, chemical analysis of wheatgrass juice suggests that when it
comes to other essential vitamins and minerals, a 30 gram serving of cooked spinach or broccoli would
be much more beneficial.

The truth is that for a healthy diet we need the vitamins, minerals and phytochemicals – the non-nutrient
components of plants – that all fruit and vegetables contain. Some foods are high in antioxidants such as
vitamin C, which are known to help combat free radicals – harmful molecules that damage cells and DNA
and can contribute to ageing, heart disease and cancer. Flavonoids, responsible for the colour of
purple fruits such as blueberries and red fruits like strawberries, and other phytochemicals such as
betacarotene, are also known for their antioxidant properties. Once nutritionists made the link
between these properties and their potential for preventing or curing illnesses, they started using the
word ‘superfoods’.

However, scientists and nutrition experts believe too much importance may be attached to how
antioxidant activity protects against disease. Dietician Jacqui Lowdon, spokesperson for the British
Dietetic Association, believes that eating a mixture of foods is just as important because nutrients work in
combination to protect against certain diseases. In other words, nutrients need to interact in order to be
effective. Furthermore, although some foods may prove high in certain micronutrients when measured
in a laboratory test tube, it’s what happens when you eat them that counts. The body only absorbs a
fraction and any more than it needs will be expelled or could become toxic.

We also have to ask who pays for the tests to be carried out. Author Michael Pollan identifies the
superfoods subcategory of nutritional science as one funded by producers or manufacturers of those
foods. The funding is given for research into health benefits that will sell their produce. These studies,
he says, are remarkably successful at finding good reasons for eating the particular food. Some of the
original studies of the effect of blueberries on memory were sponsored by interested groups in the
USA, where most of the blueberries we buy are grown. While blueberries certainly have a high
phytochemical content and are very good for us, there have been no similar tests using our home grown
blackcurrants – or the free hedgerow blackberries from which no commercial interest stands to gain.