• image.alt
  • With Mayo Clinic nutritionists

    Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.

    read biography

Mayo Clinic Health Manager

Get free personalized health guidance for you and your family.

Get Started

Free

E-Newsletter

Subscribe to receive the latest updates on health topics. About our newsletters

  • Housecall
  • Alzheimer's caregiving
  • Living with cancer
  • Nutrition-wise blog

  • June 27, 2009

    Blog: Fortifying junk food

    By Jennifer Nelson, M.S., R.D. and Katherine Zeratsky, R.D.

7 comments posted

Goiter. Rickets. Pellagra. Anemia. Neural tube defects. All were rampant health problems that afflicted — even killed — people less than 100 years ago. Today these have been mostly eradicated by the deliberate addition of vitamins and minerals to foods — either through enrichment or fortification.

Enrichment means adding back nutrients that are lost during processing. For instance, adding B vitamins to milled flour. Fortification means adding nutrients beyond what a food naturally contains — either adding more of a nutrient or adding a nutrient that wasn't in the food originally. Examples include adding iodine to salt, and adding vitamins A and D to milk.

No one is arguing much about enrichment — after all nutrients are just being replaced. However, fortification is another story.

For example, in late 2008 the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sent a warning letter to the Coca-Cola Company about Diet Coke Plus, which is fortified with vitamins and minerals, stating that it's inappropriate to fortify snack foods such as carbonated beverages. The letter went on to say that the product's label did not provide the required information to justify the use of the health claim "plus." And concerns about allowing manufacturers to fortify junk food lead the Canadian government earlier this year to postpone proposed changes that would loosen regulations governing food fortification.

What are the concerns? Some nutritionists fear that consumers will prefer fortified junk food over naturally healthier options — like whole grains, fresh fruit, low-fat milk or even water. Others worry that allowing discretionary fortification of foods could result in over- or under-fortification in consumers' diets and create nutrient imbalances in the food supply.

On the surface adding nutrients to foods seems simple, but look a little deeper and complex questions arise. What's your opinion? Do you favor fortified foods? Should there be limits on which foods can be fortified?

7 comments posted

blog index
  • July 9, 2009 9:41 a.m.

    I think we should provide the information about these products and allow people to make their own choices about what they eat or do not eat. Our society is becoming wonderfully informative and overly protective.

    - Teri

  • July 7, 2009 8:12 p.m.

    Much of the junk food that has been fortified has just enough fortification to make them able to say it is. It will do nothing except fool people and make companies big profits. Also when you extract a vitamin from its original source in many cases it becomes close to useless. Without the support of its natural surroundings its value is diminished

    - danny

  • July 3, 2009 6:28 p.m.

    People will eat food, whether it is healthy or not. Better to do anything possible to extend nutritional benefits in commercial products. Best is to educate on the healthy choices available and why we should practice good nutrition.

    - arlene

  • July 2, 2009 12:43 a.m.

    No junk foods should be fortified .There is no meaning in this. Because eventhough they are fortified , still they are high in calories. So it may lead to obesity, diabetes and other metabolic syndromes.By god's grace we are blessed with natural foods which are nutrient dense.So why should we need ''fortified junk foods''

    - Geethu Sanal

  • July 1, 2009 3:03 p.m.

    This will always be a concern as long as we are reliant on the manufactuer to tell the consumer if thier food is "good" or "bad". Until the public learns what makes "good" food good and "bad" food bad, it won't matter what the food companies do.

    - Michelle

  • July 1, 2009 8:41 a.m.

    No junk food should be fortified because in the end as it's name says it is still "JUNK". The health community should stand up for the uneducated majority of citizens and work toward "fast nutritious foods" vs "fast junk foods or barely nutritious fast foods". The health of this country is at stake and encouraging the production and consumption of junk foods whether fortified or not is not in its best long term interest.

    - Lynda Elliott

  • June 28, 2009 8:43 p.m.

    No junk food should have added nutrients in it unless there are no ingredients that will casue us problems to begin with/ hence junk food. These companies are not limited from adding a better food product to their list of production and many have done so. Junk food verses good food products should have a labling system so the buyer is reminded that a product they are buying is just that, good or bad for the body. I like the idea I heard about raising the prices of junk food and applying that extra money to the good food list so people can afford the better foods in their grocery list.

    - Sally Smart

Post a comment

Text Size: smaller largerlarger