News Brief: Wholemeal bread not always high fiber

Wholemeal bread does not necessarily equate with high fibre, the Consumers’ Foundation (消基會) announced yesterday, and often contained more fat, according to a front-page report in the Liberty Times (Chinese language article here)

With its claims to high fibre and low calories, wholemeal bread has become popular with Taiwan’s consumers, the foundation said. But a survey of bread retailers, grain stores and convenience stores in the greater Taipei area since July this year showed that this ingrained impression is not necessarily true, and sometimes oil added to increase bread’s flavour and fragrance mean they can be high fat rather than high fibre.

Fat levels of 20 samples ranged from 0.2 percent to 9 percent. Of these, the French handmade bread (法蘭西手工全麥大圓) sold by Carrefour had the lowest fat content, while the “wholemeal toast” (全麥吐司) sold by Yjysheng (一之軒) had high fat content. Eating 200g (2 or 3 slices) of this latter contained the equivalent of three teaspoons of oil, which the foundation claimed represented around half of the daily fat allowance as recommended by Taiwan’s Department of Health (衛生署).

With dietary fibre content of 3 percent to 7 percent, wholemeal bread can help reduce cholesterol, promote intestinal peristalis and reduce excessive appetite. The Foundation discovered that Mr. Mark Bakery Co.’s (馬可先生) rye and mixed grain bread (黑麥雜糧麵包) and Taiwan Yamazaki’s (台灣山崎) wholemeal toast (全麥吐司) had dietary fibre content between 6 percent and 7 percent, whereas the above-mentioned French handmade bread from Carrefour had dietary fibre only slightly higher than regular white bread, at around 3 percent to 4 percent.

The foundation said that 200g of mixed grain bread could provide up to 8-14 g of dietary fibre, representing up to half of the DOH recommended daily value of 20-30 g, compared to just 6-7g by eating 200g of white bread.






                                                              Text and photos © Jiyue Publications 2011

News Brief: Legal Rammifications of May's Food Scare

Two items relating to the toxic-food-additive scandal in May this year were reported yesterday:

The first reported the sentencing of members of the family at the centre of the scandal which involved unknowable numbers of people consuming tainted foods and drinks, undermined consumer confidence at home and abroad, and has already led to changes in the food sanitation act (full story Taipei Times here).

Chen Che-hsiung (陳哲雄), owner of Pin Han Perfumery Co in New Taipei City, was sentenced by the Banqiao District Court to 13 years in prison for fraud after using diisononyl phthalate (DINP) in clouding agents.

His wife, Wang Fen (王粉), was sentenced to 10 years, while sons, Chen Wei-cheng (陳威丞) and Chen Wei-chuan (陳威銓), were found not guilty on multiple violations of the Act Governing Food Sanitation (食品衛生管理法).

Following legislative amendments, the future maximum fine for violations has been raised from NT$300,000 (ca. US$10,000) to NT$6 million (ca. US$200,000)

The second piece reported that the Consumer’s Foundation (消費者文教基金會) is preparing a class-action suit on behalf of consumers against the companies responsible for May’s food scare (full Taipei Times article here).

Chairperson Joann Su (蘇錦霞) said the foundation, working with the Consumer Protection Commission (消費者保護委員會) under the Executive Yuan, has already settled about 2,000 complaints. Most have yet to reach agreements with dealers, she said.

With the cost of legal proceedings estimated at about NT$6 million (ca. US$200,000), funding would come in part from fund-raising, Su said, but that the foundation would also solicit support from the Executive Yuan’s reserve funds.

Su called on the government to amend third-party insurance regulations and approve legislation for a Consumers’ Protection Foundation Fund to protect consumers’ rights. Existing insurance provision has not helped consumers affected by the plasticizer incident, Su said.