JACN Did you know that you can get alerts when a new issue is online?
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hasler, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hasler, C. M.
Journal of the American College of Nutrition, Vol. 19, No. 90005, 499S-506S (2000)
Published by the American College of Nutrition

The Changing Face of Functional Foods

Clare M. Hasler, PhD

Functional Foods for Health Program, University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois

Address reprint requests to: Clare M. Hasler, PhD, University of Illinois, Functional Foods for Health Program, 1302 West Pennsylvania Avenue, Room 103 Agricultural Bioprocess Laboratory; M/C 640, Urbana, IL 61801. E-mail: c-hasler{at}uiuc.edu


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 FOOTNOTES
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 Conclusion
 REFERENCES
 
Consumers began to view food from a radically different vantage point in the 1990s. This ‘changing face’ of food has evolved into an exciting area of the food and nutrition sciences known as functional foods. Functional foods can be defined as those providing health benefits beyond basic nutrition and include whole, fortified, enriched or enhanced foods which have a potentially beneficial effect on health when consumed as part of a varied diet on a regular basis at effective levels. Interest in functional foods skyrocketed in the last decade due to a number of key factors, including the growing self-care movement, changes in food regulations and overwhelming scientific evidence highlighting the critical link between diet and health. The interest in functional foods has resulted in a number of new foods in the marketplace designed to address specific health concerns, particularly as regards chronic diseases of aging. In addition to new foods designed specifically to enhance health, however, functional foods can also include those traditional, familiar foods for which recent research findings have highlighted new health benefits or dispelled old dogma about potential adverse health effects. An excellent example is the American egg-Nature‘s original functional food. Eggs have not traditionally been regarded as a functional food, primarily due to concerns about their adverse effects on serum cholesterol levels. Furthermore, it is now known that there is little if any connection between dietary cholesterol and blood cholesterol levels and consuming up to one or more eggs per day does not adversely affect blood cholesterol levels. Finally, eggs are an excellent dietary source of many essential (e.g., protein, choline) and non-essential (e.g., lutein/zeaxanthin) components which may promote optimal health. Nutrition in the new millennium will be dramatically different than it was in the 20th century. Completion of the human genome project will facilitate the identification of humans predisposed to diet-related diseases. Targeted or ‘prescription’ nutrition will become the norm, enabling the food and medical industries to provide timely and individualized approaches to disease prevention and health promotion. The egg will continue to play an important role in the changing face of functional foods.

Key words: functional foods, eggs, consumers, nutrition, health, diet

Key teaching points:

• Functional food include whole, fortified, enriched or enhanced foods which have a potentially beneficial effect on health when consumed as part of a varied diet on a regular basis at effective levels.

• Key factors driving the interest in functional foods include the growing self-care movement, changes in food regulations and overwhelming scientific evidence highlighting the critical link between diet and health.

• Eggs can be viewed as nature‘s original functional food because they are an excellent source of high quality protein in addition to other nutrients, such as choline, which may be important for cognitive functioning.

• Eggs are a good source of lutein/zeaxanthin, carotenoids which have been linked to reduced risk of age-related disease of the eye (e.g., macular degeneration).

• Functional foods are among the leading trends in the food industry today and eggs will continue to play an important role in this rapidly developing and exciting field.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 FOOTNOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
Conclusion
 REFERENCES
 
In the last decade of the 20th century, consumers began to view their diets from a radically different vantage point. Food is no longer viewed merely as a means to satisfy hunger, prevent diet-deficiency diseases or to provide the essential building blocks of nutrition (e.g., water, protein, carbohydrate, fat, vitamins, minerals) for the maintenance and/or repair of body tissue; it has become the primary vehicle to transport us along the road to optimal health and wellness. We have begun to view our diets as a first lines of defense in the prevention of various chronic diseases of aging, including cancer, heart disease, osteoporosis, arthritis and age-related macular degeneration. Under this ‘positive‘ or ’pro-active‘ eating paradigm, the kitchen cabinet is now being viewed as the medicine cabinet. This self-care phenomenon, currently a leading factor motivating healthy food purchasing decisions [1], will continue to grow as aging, health-conscious baby-boomers continue to dominate the marketplace for the next 30 years [2]. This ‘changing face‘ of food has given way to the most exciting area in food technology today—functional foods—and eggs have begun to crack their way into this healthy eating market [3].

Defining Functional Foods
Functional foods have been defined as foods that, by virtue of the presence of physiologically-active components, provide a health benefit beyond basic nutrition [4]. Currently, dozens of physiologically-active functional food components, from plants (i.e., phytochemicals) as well as animals (i.e. zoochemicals), are under investigation for their potential role in disease prevention and health promotion [5] as shown in Table 1. The potential beneficial role of functional foods in the American diet was emphasized in a recent position paper by the American Dietetic Association [6] which also underscored the fact that these whole, fortified, enriched or enhanced foods should be ‘...consumed as part of a varied diet on a regular basis, at effective levels.‘ This whole food concept is in contrast with that of ‘nutraceuticals‘ which have recently been recognized as ‘those diet supplements that deliver a concentrated form of a presumed bioactive agent from a food, presented in a nonfood matrix, and used to enhance health in dosages that exceed those that could be obtained from normal food [7].


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Examples of Functional Components

 
Without question, formulating foods for health is one of the hottest trends in the food industry today. Food Processing Magazine‘s 1998 Top 100® R&D Survey [8] ranked nutraceuticals/functional foods as the most important food category for the next five years. In 1999, it was ranked number two [9]. Several factors are driving the intense interest in this area in both the private and public sector [10], including the following:

Aging Baby-Boomers and the ‘Self-Care‘ Movement
Of the factors listed above, the growing ‘self-care‘ movement has likely played the most significant role in the growth of the functional foods trend. More than ever before, consumers are taking charge of their own health. In a 1998 International Food Information Council survey of 1,000 consumers, 95% expressed the belief that certain foods provided benefits that could reduce disease risk or improve health [11]. The 1999 Prevention/Food Marketing Institute (FMI) survey found that nearly six in ten (57%) consumers were either moderately or highly involved in self-care, up from 51% in 1998 [12]. Furthermore, 66% of theses shoppers had purchased foods within the past month with the intention of reducing the risk of a specific health condition (Table 2). In a recent survey of 792 adults conducted by the American Dietetic Association, nearly nine out of 10 people (85%) said diet and nutrition were important to them personally, while 59% ranked diet and nutrition as either ‘very important‘ or ‘somewhat important‘ [13]. Given these statistics, it is not surprising that between 1990 and 1997, the use of alternative medicine in the United States increased from 20 to 40 percent [14]. The use of botanicals, in particular, is at an all time high. In a Consumer Reports survey of 46,000 readers, almost 35% (16,000) had used alternative therapies within the past two years [15]. The self-care movement will undoubtedly continue to drive the functional food trend well into the next millennium [16].


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 2. Factors Motivating Purchasing Decisions

 
Aging Baby Boomers—individuals born 1946 to 1963—are turning 50 at the rate of one every 7.7 seconds. This segment of the population is clearly leading the quest for wellness through food. By the year 2010, those over the age of 50 will increase by 48%, compared to 16% for the 13 to 24 age group [17]. Contrary to previous older populations, however, the current baby-boomer segment is at the peak of its earning power, with $150 billion in discretionary income [18]. Thus, its members are able to afford those products priced at a premium because of the health benefit they are designed to deliver.

What health benefit do consumers try to achieve through food? According to the FMI/Prevention survey [12], 72% chose foods to lower cholesterol (Table 2), a primary risk factor for heart disease. Americans are well advised to be concerned about elevated cholesterol, as 51% have a total cholesterol value which exceeds 200 mg/dL, while 20% have a total cholesterol value greater than 240 mg/dL. These sobering statistics explain why heart disease is still the leading cause of death in the United States [19]. With an aging population, however, many other age-related chronic diseases in addition to those affecting the heart and circulatory system will have an increasingly greater impact on public health. According to a recent Gallup survey, those aged 50 to 64 are expected to experience greater than a 30% increase in the incidence of stress, prostate cancer, lack of energy and digestive problems [20]. Age-related eye diseases would also be expected to increase. Interestingly, healthy eyesight was the leading health concern noted by 85% of respondents in a survey conducted by Applied Biometrics, with optimal vision also identified as one of the ten up-and-coming nutraceutical markets [21]. Thus, it‘s not surprising that lutein, a carotenoid that selectively accumulates in the macula of the eye and whose intake has been inversely associated with reduced risk of cataracts [22, 23] and age-related macular degeneration [24] is being recognized as an ‘up-and-coming star in the phytochemical arena’ [25] and is being added to a variety of products [26]. Eggs are naturally a significant dietary source of lutein and one of the reasons this food is being examined for its potential as a functional food.

Increasing Health Care Costs Exacerbated by Aging Demographics
During the 20th century, the number of Americans who are over the age of 65 increased eleven-fold; by the year 2035, some 70 million people will be age 65 and older [27]. With an aging population, increasing healthcare costs related to chronic diseases of aging are inevitable. More than 3/4 of those over the age of 65 suffer one or more chronic diseases, while half have two or more. Unfortunately, investment in research has not kept pace with the exponential growth of healthcare for our aging population. In 1998, more than $1.146 trillion was spent on US healthcare, while only $1 billion was spent on aging research [28]. The paradigm of the functional foods philosophy is a greater emphasis on the prevention of chronic diseases of aging before treatment is required, which is usually costly and, in many eases, may not improve quality of life. A focus on prevention of disease through dietary modification will not only increase our nation‘s lifespan, more importantly, it will increase the ‘healthspan‘ of the population.

Biotechnology and Nutritional Genomics
Numerous technological advances have facilitated the growth of the functional foods industry, including biotechnology. Biotechnology can improve the quality, reliability and productivity of plant crops which will, in turn, benefit farmers, food processors, consumers and the environment [29]. An example of a recent development in biotechnology with enormous implications for public health worldwide is the development of golden rice, the first rice genetically engineered to provide augmented levels of ß-carotene and iron which will have a tremendous impact on the health of millions of the world‘s vitamin A and iron-deficient individuals [30]. Consumer understanding and acceptance of biotechnology will be essential to its success in the US. A 1999 IFIC survey found that two out of three US consumers support food produced through biotechnology and 63% felt that biotechnology would provide benefits to their families in the next five years [31].

A more significant technological advance in the 21st century will be nutritional genomics—research conducted at the interface of plant biochemistry, genomics and human nutrition [32]. The race to clone the human genome is nearly complete, with all major goals for the first five years of this project (1993–1998) completed. A rough draft of the complete DNA sequence was announced by Celera Genomics and the Human Genome Project of the National Institutes of Health on June 26, 2000 [33]. This technological advancement will have an enormous impact on health care in the new millennium. In the near future, the technology will be available to design diets specifically targeted to a defined genetic profile, allowing very a individualized approach to diets to prevent many diseases [34]. An understanding of the relationship between genetic variation and disease risk, also referred to as ‘nutrigenomics‘ [35], promises to change significantly the future prevention and treatment of disease. Targeted or ‘prescription nutrition‘ will become the norm and will shape the future of functional foods.

The 1990‘s: A Whirlwind Decade of Changing Food Regulations
Although functional foods are not a legally recognized food category in the US, three major legislative changes passed during the 1990‘s dramatically increased the amount of information that could be disseminated to consumers via product labels regarding the functional benefits of foods: (1) the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act of 1990 (NLEA), (2) the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 (DSHEA) and (3) the FDA Modernization Act of 1997 (FDAMA). Because of these changes, the line between foods, drugs and dietary supplements has become very blurred.

The Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act defines food and drugs, respectively as ‘...articles used primarily for taste, aroma or nutritive value...‘ [36] and ‘...articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment or prevention of disease...‘ [37]. However, the gap between foods and drugs narrowed significantly with the 1990 passage of the NLEA [38]. This legislation legally allows statements on food labels which characterizes the relationship between a food substance and a disease or health-related condition, also known as a ‘health claim.‘ Currently, 12 health claims are allowed under the NLEA (see Table 3), the most recent being one which links the consumption of 25 grams of soy protein per day with a reduced risk of coronary heart disease [39]. The health claims approval process is a lengthy one with stringent regulatory guidelines. The FDA must review ‘the totality of the publicly available evidence‘ for the diet disease relationship in question and also determine whether there is ‘significant scientific agreement‘ among experts qualified by scientific training and experience to warrant the proposed health claim. In addition, health claims also require pre-market approval by the FDA prior to their use on food labels. However, under amendments to the NLEA resulting from the passage of FDAMA, ‘authoritative statements‘ published by certain US government bodies responsible for public health protection or human nutrition research (i.e., the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control, the National Academy of Sciences) may be used on food labels in lieu of health claims without FDA pre-approval [40]. These statements still must be authorized by the agency, however, and manufacturers must notify the FDA at least 120 days in advance of marketing a product bearing the proposed claim. The first and only authorized health claim under FDAMA was awarded to General Mills on July 8, 1999 [41] for the relationship between fiber consumption and reduced risk of coronary heart disease and cancer, thus allowing the following claim on food labels: ‘diets rich in whole grain foods and other plant foods and low in total fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol may reduce the risk of heart disease and certain cancers.‘


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 3. Health Claims Authorized by the FDA Under the NLEA

 
Of the regulatory changes enacted in the last decade of the 20th century, none has had a more profound effect on stimulating the growth of the functional foods market sector than DSHEA [42]. This legislation created a new dominion for the regulation of dietary supplements, which were previously regulated either as foods or drugs. Under DSHEA, statements of nutritional support, so-called ’structure/function‘ claims, can be made on dietary supplements without FDA pre-approval as long as the company manufacturing the product notifies the FDA within 30 days of going to market that the product bears such a claim. Structure/function claims are statements that ‘describe the role of a nutrient or dietary ingredient intended to affect the structure or function in humans‘ or that ‘characterizes the documented mechanism by which a nutrient or dietary ingredient acts to maintain such structure or function‘ [43]. The structure/function claim must also be accompanied by the following disclaimer: ‘This statement has not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.‘ There has been a great deal of controversy regarding the fine line separating structure/function claims, which don‘t require FDA pre-market approval, from health claims which do. Because of this fine line, many companies are positioning functional foods as dietary supplements under DSHEA to circumvent the health claims approval process, a practice which has been criticized as a major loophole in the current regulatory environment by further blurring the line between foods and drugs [44].

Functional Foods: A Distinct Market Opportunity
Clearly, health sells, and foods which deliver a well-recognized health benefit to consumers are now a significant market opportunity. For example, oatmeal sales began to increase in 1997 following the approval of the health claim. Since 1995, oatmeal sales increased approximately 19% and were up 9% for most of 1999 [45]. This is in stark contrast to the anemic figures for wholesale food prices in 1999, which for the 11 month period between January 1 and December 1 remained at 0.6% [46]. Soy seems to be showing similar success in the marketplace, which has clearly influenced the number of new product introductions. New 1999 food products with soy featured on the package or ingredient level doubled from 170 in 1998 to well over 300 in 1999 [47]. Sales of soy-based products have grown 20% per year since 1995, and sales of soy-based meat alternatives have grown more than 45% each year since 1997, according to a study by Soyatech and SJH & Co. [48]. A health claim is not necessary to sell a product, however. For example, research highlighting the coronary benefits of purple grape juice [49] has contributed to sales of Welch‘s grape juice, which have increased 41% during the past four years [50].

The US market for functional foods and beverages has been valued at $6 billion in 1999 with an annual growth rate of 12.8% [51], while the global market for the functional foods was estimated at $31.6 billion in 1999 [52] and is expected to reach $51.3 billion by the year 2004. The market for foods positioned for their health benefits will continue to be strong for the next several decades.

Good Science Is the Key to the Success of Functional Foods
Of all the factors driving the functional foods trend discussed above, research documenting the health benefit for a food or food component is the most important one and will be the key factor in the continued success of this market as well as in the eyes of the consumer. A 1998 survey by Decision Reports, Inc. [53], identified research and/or clinical trials as the leading factor necessary for the commercial success of functional foods, surpassing even that of an FDA-approved health claim. Sound scientific criteria for health claims on functional foods is essential if society is to take full advantage of the potential public health benefits that these foods can provide [54]. The ‘gold standard’ of good science is randomized, placebo-controlled human clinical intervention trials. Such studies are necessary for approval of a health claim as indicated in FDA‘s recently released guidance document on what constitutes significant scientific agreement [55]. Sound science is also necessary to prevent consumer confusion about the role specific foods can have in a comprehensive lifestyle approach to good health. An example is the American egg, which has had a negative image for more than 30 years. However, recent scientific developments warrant a re-evaluation of this dietary staple as a functional food [56].

Eggs as a Functional Food
Eggs have not traditionally been regarded as a functional food because of their link with adverse effects on blood cholesterol. However, in a meta-analysis of 224 studies covering more than 30 years of research, it was demonstrated that dietary cholesterol has only a limited effect on plasma cholesterol [57]. Moreover, in the largest epidemiologic study conducted to date on the relationship between egg consumption and coronary heart disease, involving more than 118,000 men and women from both the Nurses‘ Health Study and the Health Professional Follow-Up Study, consumption of up to one egg per day did not have a substantial overall impact on the risk of coronary heart disease and stroke [58]. Furthermore, very recent research demonstrated that persons who reported eating more than four eggs per week had a significantly lower mean serum cholesterol than those who reported eating one or fewer eggs per week [59]. Clearly, the widely accepted dogma to limit eggs to no more than three per week to maintain a healthy cholesterol level deserves reexamination.

Eggs are also an excellent, inexpensive and low calorie source of high quality protein and several important nutrients, including riboflavin (15% RDA), selenium (17% RDA) and vitamin K (31% RDA) [60]. In addition, one egg contains approximately 2000 mg choline, a nutrient for which the National Academy of Sciences established a recommended daily intake level in 1998 [61]. Choline is currently under investigation for its beneficial effects on cognitive function [62], particularly when present during early brain development [63]. Eggs are also a good source of lutein and zeaxanthin, with one yolk providing between 200 and 300 µg of these antioxidant carotenoids [64], which have been linked with a reduced risk of age-related macular degeneration, the leading cause of irreversible blindness in the US [65].


   Conclusion
TOP
 FOOTNOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 Conclusion
REFERENCES
 
Because of the beneficial role that eggs can play in the diet, this tried and true American staple—which fell from grace more than 30 years ago—has begun to make a comeback [66]. Per capita egg consumption, which declined from 320 a year in 1967 to a low of 233 in 1991, is expected to bounce back to 258 this year [67] and may continue to increase as new research findings continue to not only uncover new health benefits, but also to dispel old dogma about the ’dysfunctional‘ aspects of nature‘s original functional food. Functional foods is the hottest topic in the food industry today and will continue to be a leading trend as health-conscious, aging baby boomers prevail in the quest for wellness through their diet. Eggs will continue to play an important role in the changing face of functional foods.


   FOOTNOTES
TOP
 FOOTNOTES
ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 Conclusion
 REFERENCES
 
An honorarium was provided for support of this manuscript by the Egg Nutrition Center.

Received June 1, 2000.
   REFERENCES
TOP
 FOOTNOTES
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 Conclusion
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Sloan AE: The top 10 functional food trends. Food Technol 54: 33–62, 2000.
  2. Sloan AE: The new market: foods for the not-so-healthy. Food Technol 53: 54–60, 1999.
  3. Kent A, Mellentin J: Eggs aim to crack healthy eating market. New Nutr Bus 4: 25, 1999.
  4. International Life Sciences Institute North America Food Component Reports. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 39: 203–316, 1999.[Medline]
  5. Hasler CM: Functional foods: their role in disease prevention and health promotion. Food Technol 52: 63–70, 1998.
  6. American Dietetic Association: Position of the American Dietetic Association: Functional Foods. J Am Diet Assoc 99: 1278–1285, 1999.[Medline]
  7. Zeisel S: Regulation of ‘nutraceuticals.’ Science 285: 1853–1855, 1999.[Free Full Text]
  8. Meyer A: The 1998 top 100 R&D® survey. Food Proc 59: 32–40, 1998.
  9. Dahm L: The 1999 top 100 R&D® survey. Food Proc 60: 45–52, 1999.
  10. Hasler CM: Functional foods: the western perspective. Nutr Rev 54: S6–S10, 1996.[Medline]
  11. Schmidt D: Message understood? Functional Foods 2: 24–26, 1999.
  12. Food Marketing Institute. Shopping for Health 1999: The growing self-care movement. Prepared by Roper Starch Worldwide for the Food Marketing Institute/Prevention Magazine, Washington, DC.
  13. American Dietetic Association: Nutrition and You: Trends 2000, American Dietetic Association, Chicago, IL, 2000.
  14. Eisenberg DM, Davis RB, Ettner SL, Appel S, Wilkey S, Van Rompay M, Kessler RC: Trends in alternative medicine use in the United States, 1990–1997. Results of a follow-up national survey. JAMA 280: 1569–1615, 1998.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Anonymous: The mainstreaming of alternative medicine. Consumer Reports, May:17–25, 2000.
  16. Sloan AE: Top ten trends to watch and work on for the millennium. Food Technol 53: 40–60, 1999.
  17. Anonymous: Feeding the health concerns of the aging baby-boomers. New Nutr Bus 5: 27–33, 1999.
  18. Hollingworth P: Food priorities for an aging America. Food Technol 53: 38–40, 1999.
  19. American Heart Association: 1999 Heart and Stroke Fact Statistical Update. American Heart Association, Dallas, TX.
  20. Gallup 1998: The 1998 Gallup focus repot on food and nutritional trends and their implications for the pharmaceutical industry. Gallup Organization Multi-Sponsor Surveys, Inc. Princeton, NJ.
  21. Sloan EA: Hot! Hot! Hot! The top ten up-and-coming nutraceutical markets. Nutraceuticals World 2: 58–71, 1999.
  22. Brown L, Rimm EB, Seddon JM, Giovannucci EL, Chasan-Taber L, Spiegelman D, Willett WC, Hankinson SE: A prospective study of carotenoid intake and risk of cataract extraction in US men. Am J Clin Nutr 70: 517–524, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Chasen-Taber L, Willett WC, Seddon JM, Stampfer MJ, Rosner B, Colditz GA, Speizer, FE, Hankinson SE: A prospective study of carotenoid and vitamin E intakes and risk of cataract extraction in US women. Am J Clin Nutr 70: 509–516, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Seddon JM, Ajani UA, Sperduto RD, Hiller R, Blair N, Burton TC, Farber MD, Gragoudas ES, Haller J, Miller DT, Yannuzzi LA, Willett W: Dietary carotenoids, vitamins A, C, and E and advanced age-related macular degeneration. JAMA 27: 1413–1420, 1994.
  25. Broihier K: A look at lutein. Food Proc 60: 92–93, 1999.
  26. Madley RH: Seeing is believing. A closer look at nutraceutical ingredients for eye health. Nutraceuticals World 3: 34–42, 2000.
  27. Dychwald K: Age power. In Tarcher JP (ed): ‘Age Power. How the 21st Century Will Be Ruled by the New Old.’ New York: Putnam, pp 1–29, 1999.
  28. Smith S, Freeland M, Heffler S, McKusick D, and the Health Care Projection Team: J. Health Affairs 17: 128–140, 1998.
  29. Liu K: Biotech crops: Products, properties, and prospects. Food Technol 53: 42–49, 1999.
  30. Gura T: New genes boost rice nutrients. Science 285: 994–995, 1999.[Free Full Text]
  31. Schmidt DB: A positive spin on the GMO issue. Food Proc 61: 22, 2000.
  32. DellaPenna, D: Nutritional genomics: Manipulating plant micronutrients to improve human health. Science 285: 375–379, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Hensley S, Lyeck S: Genome groups complete rough draft. Wall Street J June 27, pp. A3 and A6, 2000.
  34. O‘Sullivan J: Impact of genetic engineering on the profession of dietetics. Top Clin Nutr 14: 1–5, 1999.
  35. Fogg-Johnson N, Merolli A: Nutrigenomics: the next wave in nutrition research. Nutraceuticals World 3: 86–95, 2000.
  36. 21 C.F.R. § 170 (0) 1995.
  37. 21 U.S.C.§ 321(g)(1)(B) and (g)(1)(C).
  38. Pub. L. No 101-535, 104 Stat. 2353 (1990) codified at 21 U.S.C.§ 343(q) and (r).
  39. Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration. 21 CFR Part 101 [Docket No. 98P-0683]. Food labeling: health claims; soy protein and coronary heart disease. Federal Register 64 (No. 206): 57700–57733, 1999.[Medline]
  40. Food and Drug Modernization Act, Pub. L. No. 105-115, 111 Stat. 2296 (codified at 21 U.S.C. § 343 (r) (3) (C) and (D).
  41. Anonymous: General Mills whole-grain foods health claim sets precedents. FDA Week 5: 13, 1999.
  42. Pub. L. No. 103-417, 108 Stat. 4325 (codified at 21 U.S.C. § 321 et seq.
  43. Department of Health and Human Services: Food and Drug Administration. 21 CFR Part 101 [Docket No. 98N-0044]. Regulations on statements made for dietary supplements concerning the effect of the product on the structure or function of the body. Federal Register 65 (No. 4): 1000–1050, 2000.[Medline]
  44. The International Association of Consumer Food Organizations: Functional foods. Public health boon or 21st century quackery? An international comparison of regulatory requirements and marketing trends. Washington, DC: 1999.
  45. Anonymous: Oatmeal sales starting to heat up. Food Inst Rep 73: 4, 2000.
  46. Anonymous: Wholesale food prices flat: Year-to-date gain at only 0.6%. Food Inst Rep 72: 1, 1999.
  47. Neff J: The joy of soy. Food Proc 61: 48–50, 2000.
  48. Ohr LM: A magic bean sprouts. Prep Foods 169: 60–62, 2000.
  49. Stein JH, Keevil JG, Weibe DA, Aeschlimann S, Folts JD: Purple grape juice improves endothelial function and reduces the susceptibility of LDL cholesterol to oxidation in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation 100: 1050–1055, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Demetrakakes P: The grapes of wealth. Food Proc 61: 61–64, 2000.
  51. Anonymous: US functional food market to top $10 billion in 2004. Nutraceuticals Intl 5: 4, 2000.
  52. Anonymous: Euromonitor predicts healthy growth for world functional foods industry Nutraceuticals Intl 5: 4, 2000.
  53. Decision Reports: Roadmaps to market: commercializing functional foods and nutraceuticals. Waltham, Massachusetts: Decision Resources, Inc., 1998.
  54. Clydesdale FM: A proposal for the establishment of scientific criteria for health claims for functional foods. Nutr Rev 55: 413–422, 1997.[Medline]
  55. U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Office of Special Nutritionals. Guidance for industry. Significant scientific agreement in the review of health claims for conventional foods and dietary supplements. December 22, 1999.
  56. Hasler CM. Eggs as a functional food: technology update. In Sim JS, Nakai S, Guenter W (eds): ‘Egg Nutrition and Biotechnology.‘ New York: CABI Publishing, pp. 243–251, 2000.
  57. Howell WH, McNamara DJ, Tosca MA, Smith BT, Gaines JA: Plasma lipid and lipoprotein responses to dietary fat and cholesterol-a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 65: 177–1764, 1997.
  58. Hu FB, Stampfer MJ, Rimm EB, Manson JE, Ascherio A, Colditz GA, Rosner BA, Spiegelman D, Speizer FE, Sacks FM, Hennekens CH, Willet, WC: A prospective study of egg consumption and risk of cardiovascular disease in men and women. JAMA 281: 1387–1394, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  59. Kerver JM, Bianchi LJ, McNamara DJ, Song WO: The nutritional contributions of eggs to the American diet in the 90‘s. FASEB J 14: A 220 (# 161.1), 2000.
  60. United States Department of Agriculture Human Nutrition Information Service: Handbook No. 8, Supplement, 1989.
  61. Food and Nutrition Board. Institute of Medicine: Dietary Reference Intakes for thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, vitamin B6, folate, vitamin B12, pantothenic acid, biotin, and choline. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998.
  62. Blusztajn JK: Choline, a vital amine. Science 281: 794–795, 1998.[Free Full Text]
  63. Zeisel SH: Choline: an important nutrient in brain development, liver function and carcinogenesis. J Am Coll Nutr 11: 473–481, 1992.[Abstract]
  64. Handelman GJ, Nightingale ZD, Lichtenstein AH, Schaefer EJ, Blumberg JB: Changes in plasma lutein and zeaxanthin following dietary supplementation with egg yolk. Am J Clin Nutr 70: 247–251, 1999.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  65. Klein R, Klein BE, Jensen SC, Meuer SM: The five-year incidence and progression of age-related maculopathy. Ophthalmology 104: 7–21, 1997.[Medline]
  66. Kaufman M: Return of the good egg. Washington Post, Tuesday, September 17: 12–16, 1999.
  67. Wasson H, Laird B. Egg consumption rising. USA Today, Tuesday, February 15, 2000.



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Nutr.Home page
B. Shatenstein, H. Payette, S. Nadon, and K. Gray-Donald
An Approach for Evaluating Lifelong Intakes of Functional Foods in Elderly People
J. Nutr., July 1, 2003; 133(7): 2384 - 2391.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hasler, C. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Hasler, C. M.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS