The relentless marketing, alternately promoting weight loss drugs and foods that lean toward making us fat, wasn’t aimed at the elite athletes strutting their stuff on the world stage. It’s a safe bet they didn’t achieve the peak of human fitness on a diet of pizza and french fries. It’s equally doubtful they require injections of the GLP-1 class of drugs to manage their weight.

Nope, those commercials are aimed at the couch potatoes back home, subjecting us to both temptation and a shortcut to redemption as we bear witness to these feats of human endurance.

These athletes deserve our admiration and respect, but to be fair to the rest of us, most working stiffs don’t have the time, the drive or the resources to devote full-time to the pursuit of extreme fitness.

So we’re left swinging between food-culture extremes, the effects of which filter back through the food chain to the farm. Consider for a moment how the food industry is twisting itself into a pretzel trying to understand how these drugs will affect consumer demand.

Firstly, these products reduce appetites, which means people eat less — so much so that it’s more difficult for them to meet their nutritional needs. It’s also now known that one of the unintended consequences of rapid weight loss is a loss of muscle.

Lately, the focus has shifted to how to support consumers in their post-GLP-1 phase as users move away from the drugs due to factors such as costs or side effects. Recent studies are indicating the weight they lost bounces back four times faster than weight lost through traditional diet and exercise.

That has shifted attention to creating low-calorie, nutrient-dense foods, with a particular emphasis on protein.

How does this affect farmers’ bottom line? Some analysts have pointed to the protein craze as one reason record-high beef prices haven’t had the same dampening effect on demand that they might have in the past.

It’s also creating some longer-term shifts in pricing and production.

A recent Farm Credit Canada analysis outlined how this plays out for dairy farmers, to cite one example. A decade ago, they were told they needed to produce milk with a higher proportion of butterfat, which led to shifts in pricing, genetics and feeding strategies to accommodate.

Now, demand is tipping back to protein, leading marketing boards to once again adjust pricing formulas to incentivise a higher ratio of protein in the milk supply. Change comes at a cost, and those costs eventually find their way into the price of food.

“Does this protein craze have staying power? It will take years and successive generations of breeding to shift the herd towards higher-protein-lower butterfat-producing animals,” FCC economist Graeme Crosbie asked in his article.

That’s a good question. Looking back over the countless extreme approaches grabbing headlines in recent generations — the Atkins Diet, keto, low-fat, high-fat, cabbage, carnivore, meatless, vegan, California, intermittent fasting, anti-ultra processed — to name a few — many have caused food-sector pivots, but ultimately, most had limited staying power.

Remember the Atkins Diet of the early 2000s? Industry statistics show that at its peak, pasta consumption dropped eight per cent and bread by up to 40 per cent.

Meanwhile, food manufacturers responded with a major investment in hundreds of low-carb food products, many of which flourished only briefly.

The jury is still out on the plant-based protein craze, touted as healthier for people and the planet. However, many of the early plant-based products are languishing in the marketplace because of their high cost and blah taste. That industry is reportedly regrouping in a bid to up the flavour profile and rebalance costs.

There are already signs that the GLP-1 drugs are losing their shine. They no doubt still have a place but many are discovering they aren’t the panacea those advertisements make them out to be.

Farmers busy with the day-to-day business of growing food ingredients can’t afford to farm the fads. But it’s still wise to monitor these changing consumer behaviours to find the common threads — such as protein, nutrition and a move away from ultra-processed foods.

Understanding how the middle ground between the different extremes might be shifting gives farmers the upper hand when making strategic investments in their operations.

The post Producers must tread carefully when food fads come calling appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

The vote took place amid a long-running European debate over the designation of plant-based alternatives to animal protein and the associated “linguistic gymnastics”.

A previous proposal to prohibit comparisons between dairy and plant-based foods was rejected. But the EU did decide to reserve the term “dairy” for products derived from animal milk. As a result, companies must now refer to their products as “almond drink” or “plant-based slices”, for example.

In the case of meat, the labelling propositions are part of a broader set of amendments to EU agricultural and food market regulations. These are supposed to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain.

Farmers in Europe have long expressed concerns that plant-based substitutes could threaten traditional farming practices.

But what about the role of the consumer in debates over how meat and its plant-based substitutes should be labelled?

Plant-based food makers fear rebranding

Before the vote, MEPs had discussed a perceived lack of transparency for consumers. It was suggested that terms such as “veggie burger” or “tofu steak” obscure the distinction between meat and plant-based or lab-grown alternatives. These ambiguities, it was argued, could confuse or mislead consumers.

While member states must still negotiate the amendments detailing the labelling changes, the consequences could be significant. Some retailers, like supermarket chain Lidl, are working to increase sales of plant-based foods. This aligns with what the science says about sustainable diets.

After initial growth in the market for plant-based alternatives, sales have plateaued. Many producers fear they may now also face additional costs associated with rebranding and relabelling their products.

In response, a coalition of food producers and retailers have argued that avoiding familiar terms like “steak” or “burger” could actually create more confusion among consumers.

But how misled are consumers really?

Despite concerns on both sides of the debate, our research shows a different reality – one in which many consumers are much more knowledgeable than they are made out to be.

Consumers savvy to ‘greenwashing’

We studied how people reacted to a marketing campaign by Swedish chicken producer Kronfågel. The campaign implied that climate action is the consumer’s responsibility, suggesting that shoppers should switch from beef to chicken to “do something simple for the climate”.

As part of the campaign, an emissions calculation underscored this shift, even leaving the impression it could offset air travel – based on just one meal. While the campaign drew from standardized carbon footprinting, the calculation left more questions than answers.

Through analysis of comments on social media and complaints to the Swedish consumer protection agency, we studied how people reacted to the campaign – rejecting it vehemently. They took issue for a range of reasons, including the corporation’s use of climate science and debates about what constitutes sustainable food consumption and what does not.

The various sources of disagreement illustrate the polarization over food consumption and production. Many people were critical of the suggestion to “offset” flying by eating chicken, while others questioned the appropriateness of a chicken producer, with suppliers in the agricultural sector, demonizing beef production.

The company responded by saying that its intention was to “help consumers navigate” the difficulties of lowering their consumption-related carbon footprint. It also said that it took consumer criticisms about the campaign being misleading to heart and would learn from them. We know of no investigation into the campaign, but we sense a shift towards softer messaging more broadly as companies’ fears of greenwashing accusations increase.

Research conclusions

Our research shows that many consumers are well informed about their choices, actively scrutinizing food products about their health effects, climate impact and production processes. And in debating the advantages and disadvantages of meat and plant-based alternatives, we found that they would openly disagree with each other.

These discussions reveal that there are many relevant perspectives and values involved in choosing the “best” diet – and consumption choices are deeply tied to identity, emotion and culture. In light of this complexity, our research serves as a warning for businesses and other organizations, including political parties, to approach climate messaging with care and to make sure their claims are credible.

So what then to make of the labelling debate? It is of course important to safeguard consumers from harmful or deceptive marketing. However, research has illustrated how powerful people and organizations may stereotype citizens. This may be, for instance, as “responsible”, “misled” or “duped” consumers – often the purpose is to serve their own commercial or political interests.

Politicians, food producers and retailers should be cautious about claims that consumers cannot differentiate meat from plant-based alternatives. Shoppers are often much more switched on than some in the EU debate suggest.

— Friederike Döbbe is an assistant professor in business and society at the University of Bath. Emilia Cederberg is an assistant professor in the department of accounting at the Stockholm School of Economics.

The post Consumers not confused by plant protein ‘burgers’ or ‘milk’, research suggests appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

PwC sent the information to creditors ahead of a Nov. 13 meeting, the first such creditors meeting held since Merit officially filed for bankruptcy on Oct. 23, 2025. PwC was appointed trustee the same day that filing was made.

WHY IT MATTERS: The Prairie plant protein space was rocked in 2023 with news that Winnipeg-based Merit Functional Foods had hit a financial wall.

Merit had been under court-ordered receivership since March 1, 2023, following a February filing from Export Development Canada (EDC) and Farm Credit Canada (FCC). At that time, the two, both secured lenders in the proceedings, said they were owed $58.5 million and $36.5 million respectively, based on debt financing they had provided for the company in 2020.

Merit had opened in early 2021 with major financial backing from Export Development Canada, Farm Credit Canada, CIBC and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, as well as an interest-free $10-million AgriInnovate loan. Shareholders included Burcon NutraScience, Bunge, and a group of former Hemp Oil Canada executives.

PwC, also the appointed trustee for the recievership, has since sold off all the company’s remaining finished and raw inventory and collected most of its accounts receivable. That money was used to pay off Merit’s main operating lender, CIBC, which was owed about $5 million at the start of the process.

Inventory sales brought in about $3.3 million, and PwC recovered roughly $571,000 in receivables, though a small portion couldn’t be collected, according to documents posted on the case by PwC. CIBC had first claim on this money, and other secured lenders agreed to let PwC use the proceeds to clear that debt so it would stop accumulating interest.

Money owed to EDC and FCC, as Merit’s other secured lenders, are listed later in the recent bankruptcy filings.

The company’s Winnipeg plant still remains a question. Court documents from earlier this year showed that PwC had a line on a Manitoba numbered company as a buyer and had requested court approval for the sale. As of the latest filings, no deal had been finalized.

The receiver filed a detailed update with the court, but a judge ordered that part of the report sealed, noting that releasing it during the sale process could hurt the chances of getting the best price. PwC has said the information will be made public once a sale is complete.

Bankruptcy documents

With bulk assets sold during receivership and that money directed to secured lenders, the bankruptcy statement of affairs now contains only the leftover debt. PwC lists $102,398,560 in unsecured claims and $1 in cash remaining.

The unsecured trade creditor list includes more than 200 businesses and organizations. Among the largest amounts are $548,799.98 owed to the RM of Rosser, $331,136.82 owed to Manitoba Hydro, and $188,462.40 owed to Manitoba Hydro International.

Merit’s own filing says rising operating costs, competition, and product issues all played a role in its financial woes.

No farmers, however, have been left unpaid.

The Canadian Grain Commission audited Merit twice in 2023. First in March, then again when the company’s grain dealer licence was not renewed July 1. Both audits confirmed the company had “no outstanding producer liabilities.”

By July, Merit was barred from taking in grain or creating any new obligations to farmers. Producers who still had contracts on paper at the time of receivership received direct notice from PwC with next steps.

Disclosure: Glacier FarmMedia, the parent company of this publication, is listed as an unsecured trade creditor in the bankruptcy filings with a claim of $1,785.

The post Merit bankruptcy proceedings begin appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

Therefore, anyone who claims to understand the “Asian consumer” and what the typical Asian likes to eat probably doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

“There is no such thing as an Asian consumer,” said Andrew Powell, chief executive officer of Asia BioBusiness, a life science company in Singapore that specializes in agriculture and food.

“There are consumers who live in Asia.”

WHY IT MATTERS: Asian markets account for some major export destinations for local agriculture, such as Manitoba pork headed to Japan.

Powell travelled to Manitoba in late September to participate in a panel discussion on the global marketplace for proteins at the Protein Industries Canada annual meeting in Winnipeg.

Understanding the preferences of consumers in Taiwan and how they differ from Indonesia or Malaysia isn’t easy for a small company in Saskatchewan that wants to export a faba bean protein or a roasted lentil snack food across the Pacific.

To help bridge that knowledge gap, Protein Industries Canada has partnered with Nurasa, a firm in Singapore that specializes in food product development and commercialization.

Together, the two have created the Asia-Pacific Market Entry program.

”(It) will fast track opportunities for Canadian plant-based ingredient and food companies to bring their products directly to this important market,” federal agriculture minister Heath MacDonald said in August.

Canadian firms that participate in the program will get help from Nurasa to navigate local regulations and test market their products for consumers in Asia.

Xiuling Guo, Nurasa’s chief executive officer who attended the Protein Industries Canada meeting in Winnipeg, told a story about what she ate at a Winnipeg hotel to illustrate an opportunity for Canadian exporters.

“This morning I had a breakfast with the most delicious granola,” she said, adding the oats in the granola had higher level of protein than she’s accustomed to.

“For me, this is an upgrade…. And the granola tastes really good.”

The granola may be high quality, but Nurasa could help a Canadian food company tweak the recipe or change the marketing so it appeals to consumers in Singapore, Vietnam or Indonesia.

The Asia-Pacific Market Entry program is open until Oct. 15. More information is available online.

The post Targeting plant-based exports to Asia appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

That was the trend that Alejandro Marangoni, food scientist and professor at the University of Guelph, noticed before embarking on a quest to improve the protein metrics of the plant-based product.

“Vegan cheese is one of those things that really hasn’t materialized yet, to the extent that meat and milk have,” Marangoni said.

WHY IT MATTERS: Plant-based protein has seen some booms and busts, but food researchers and governments handing out investment dollars are still very much interested in the developing sector.

Marangoni’s background includes a number of projects in the food sciences, such as chocolate and cocoa butter equivalents, hoping to help address some of the challenges in cocoa production. Others include oil gels that resemble animal fat, such as the gristle in steak.

One of his most recent, high-protein plant-based cheese, was highlighted at the Pan-American Light Sources for Agriculture conference held in Saskatoon, Sask., in late-summer.

Current gaps

Of the multiple options for plant-based cheese, not one has the nutritional value of even a Kraft single cheese slice, he said.

“If you read the rest of the ingredients, it’s just salt and coconut oil and the rest is starch,” he said. “So you’re eating fatty starch with salt and paying a cheese price. And people are being told that this is cheese just because it tastes cheesy.”

For the typical serving size of 30 grams, a dairy cheese like medium cheddar has seven grams of protein. A Kraft single has three grams. Plant-based cheese has a negligible amount.

Plant-based cheese doesn’t have the functionality of dairy-based cheese either, he argued, having done comparison testing of processed cheese, plant-based cheese, and medium cheddar for spread and stretch when warmed.

For spread the cheese “cores” were placed in an oven at 230 C before testing, and for stretch heated to 95 C, then pulled apart to test integrity.

“They (plant-based cheeses) don’t melt because a lot of them use tapioca, and tapioca doesn’t like to yield and melt,” he noted.

“It is rubbery, but it doesn’t yield … I don’t know if you’ve experienced this: you buy a very expensive vegan pizza, you put it in the oven, you take it out, and you can still see the individual pieces of shreds. It hasn’t gone anywhere.”

His goal was to address both of these issues.

Making a better vegan cheese

Marangoni’s research has developed a product that brings those nutritional stats up to 18 per cent protein, 21 per cent fat, and 12 per cent carbohydrate, and has seen gains in functionality, as per the two quality tests noted above.

Under test conditions, their product showed a 35 millimetre stretch and 100 per cent spread. That’s not as good as the medium cheddar, which boasted 143 per cent spread and 95 millimetres of stretch, but a notable improvement from the established plant-based sample, which had shown neither stretch nor spread.

To achieve this, Marangoni and his team turned to the micro-imaging technology offered by the synchrotron at the Canadian Light Source in Saskatoon. The equipment let them visualize the micro-structure and make up of their developing cheese product and other cheeses. The images were segmented and analyzed to identify protein, starch, fat, and the particles sizes, volume and shape factors of the materials.

Under the synchotron’s beamline, they compared cold cheese to warmed cheese and reviewed how the make up performed under the varied conditions. This helped them try to match the melt and stretch characteristics of dairy cheese.

“We discovered that the high-protein cheese, when it’s melted, it’s very similar to what happens to dairy cheese,” the researcher said. “Some coalescence of the fat globules has happened, and some aggregation of the protein has occurred in certain areas too, which is very similar to what happened to the dairy cheese.”

Comparing proteins

Marangoni and his team tested and created the high-protein cheese using pea protein isolate, but had also tested the stretch and melt functionality of two different faba bean proteins.

They found that different plant proteins behave differently.

They tested solubility, water holding capacity and emulsification ability, and determined the best option was a protein with low solubility, high water holding capacity and poor capacity for emulsifying. These qualities all contribute to how the starch, protein and fat mix together to form a functional cheese.

Hitting shelves?

Marangoni counts the research as a major success for learning and product development, but his high-protein plant-based cheese is far from being in the nearest grocery store.

Protein isolates are gaining traction. Canada’s pea proteins market was worth an estimated US$75 million as of 2024, according to a sector analysis from Credence Research. That analysis expects the market to grow to almost US$180 million by 2032.

On the Prairies, a number of plant protein projects have cropped up, notably Roquette and their major pea processing plant in Portage la Prairie.

On a more general scale though, processing is still limited, and an 18 per cent protein plant-based cheese would be out of most consumers’ price range, the Ontario researcher noted.

“High-protein cheese ends up being extremely expensive,” Marangoni said. “And there’s not sufficient availability (of protein isolate). We’re working now with concentrates.”

He added that even at four per cent protein, such a cheese would barely be affordable.

The post Plant-based cheese, but more like cheese appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

In a press release on Feb. 3, Burcon announced its partnership with ProMan, LLC and their plans to purchase the facility early in 2025. There have been no details released on the location of the facility.

“We are excited to join forces with Burcon to deliver their groundbreaking plant-based protein solutions to market,” said John Vassallo, a director and shareholder of Burcon, and the driving force behind ProMan.

“This partnership reflects our strong belief in the future of sustainable, plant-based nutrition and Burcon’s ability to lead in this rapidly expanding industry.”

Kip Underwood, Burcon’s chief executive officer, said the partnership “marks a pivotal step in Burcon’s evolution.”

“By pairing a strategic real estate investment with a proven go-to-market approach, we are seizing the best opportunity in our history to establish a direct route to market for our innovative protein technologies.”

Under the deal, ProMan will complete acquisition of the production facility by April 30, 2025. Burcon will be the exclusive operator of the facility under a seven-year manufacturing agreement, in which time it will produce plant-based proteins derived from pea, canola, soy, hemp, sunflower seeds and other plant sources and will “use ProMan as its exclusive manufacturer of Burcon’s protein products,” according to the release. Burcon must also secure at least $7 million in funding.

After the seven years, the deal transitions to a 10-year lease, in which Burcon will lease from ProMan. If ProMan wishes to sell the facility, they must give Burcon first right of refusal on the purchase of the building.

Burcon expects first-year sales between $1-3 million, “with double digit revenue expected in year two,” the release said. They expect profitability in 2026.

Echoes of Merit

Burcon is probably best known in Manitoba a major shareholder in Merit Functional Foods, the Winnipeg-based pea and canola protein processor, which opened in early 2021 only to go into receivership on March 1, 2023.

Burcon later announced it was working on a bid for the Merit assets, in co-operation with an industry plant protein company, but the identity of the other party was not made public.

Court-appointed receiver PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc. (PwC) said in its report filed on Jan. 23, 2025, with the Court of King’s Bench in Winnipeg, that ongoing efforts to sell the Merit plant had not yet led to an executed asset purchase agreement.

PwC said it “has entertained a number of expressions of interest and conducted a number of site visits throughout 2024,” and that it continues to negotiate with parties expressing interest in acquiring the assets.

Burcon did not respond to requests for further comment as of press time.

The post Burcon announces plant protein facility buy appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.

“In Canada, all information on food labels or in advertisements must be truthful and not misleading. Clear guidance will help industry comply with the legislation and support consistency in how these foods are promoted,” the CFIA said in a news release today.

Plant-based egg alternatives may simulate eggs or egg-based foods or replace them in baking or cooking. They’re often legume-based, such as popular brand JUST Egg, which is made from mung beans.

The CFIA said it’s working to develop clear guidance on how to label and represent these products. For instance, how to differentiate them from egg products and how labeling components should be combined in ways that won’t mislead.

The CFIA said it would like to know if the proposed guidance gives food businesses all the information they need to comply with the legislation. While the proposed guidance is for industry, they’d also like to hear from consumers and other organizations.

The deadline for feedback is October 28, 2024.

The post CFIA launches consultation on labeling of plant-based egg alternatives appeared first on Manitoba Co-operator.