The chilled foods underground

Prepared Foods, July, 1992 by Claudia Dziuk-O'Donnell

I thought I had left behind confrontations between technical services and marketing when I left my position as director of quality control at Orval Kent Foods (Whitman/Pet). Not so. When I'm not worrying about commas and split infinitives at Prepared Foods, I get to spar with marketing minds - and some of the best, at that.

At a meeting last month, for example, I took exception with the position of our New Product News editor, Marty Friedman. In an article entitled "Can chilled foods rise from the new product grave" (see PF April 1992), Marty discusses the high profile failures in the chilled foods market. In his absence, Lynn Dornblaser, publisher of New Product News, rose to the defense of Marty's position. I argued that chilled foods, in a variety of forms and varying degrees of technological complexity, pervade the industry.

Now that the guns have cooled, I have to say I understand their position. The refrigerated case has, indeed, sported some high profile failures: Kraft's Chillery and General Foods' Culinova - both pre-KGF experiments - and Campbell's Fresh Chef, to name a few. But the smoke from these headline crashes has clouded quiet success across the industry.

I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT

I do follow this market closely. From my work at Orval Kent and a previous position as director of R&D with Alex Foods, both chilled foods manufacturers, I'm well versed in the culture of manufacturing chilled foods.

Many foodservice, retail and industrial food processors find this category of foods profitable.

If this contradicts the belief that chilled foods is a "dog" of a category to enter, the problem is in how the category is defined. When I spoke at the R&D Associates Annual Spring Meeting in Washington, D.C., a few months ago, a FDA staff member told me he gave up efforts to describe chilled foods after the definition grew to several pages in length.

My definition is simple: Chilled foods rely mainly on refrigeration for safety and have shelf lives longer than those traditionally associated with the food.

Therein lies the rub.

Market tracking systems from Infoscan to Find/SVP have difficulty quantifying a market so subjectively defined. Specialty channels - convenience stores, commissary operations, warehouse clubs, and vending machines - all distribute a plethora of safe, chilled foods. In addition, high profile chilled foods are produced using the same technologies that have delivered low profile chilled foods for decades.

TECHNICAL TINKERING

Critical steps to control microbial levels and extend shelf life involve concepts such as water activity (Aw), pH, irradiation (ultraviolet/ionizing), preservatives, altered atmosphere (MAP, CAP or vacuum), times and temperatures, and prevention of microbial contamination (sanitation). New technologies (ohmic heating, ultra high pressure, microwave pasteurization, natural and innovative preservatives) increase the number of options available to food processors well versed in the production of chilled foods.

Like magicians, those of the technical persuasion conjure products that impede microbial growth to provide safety. A Contadina pasta uses Aw, MAP and perhaps the heat treatment after extrusion to knock off psychrophiles; Oscar Mayer's Lunchables with cured cooked chicken, sodium lactate and MAP takes a different, though now widely copied path.

Central kitchens also enter the foray. Through processing techniques like cook-fill-chill and careful sanitation, operations at Ukrop's differ little from those at a multimillion dollar processor like Orval Kent Foods.

Sous-vide, a package-pasteurize-chill process that excludes headspace, gets much attention as a risky food technology new to the U.S. (See Idle Wild Farms, page 98.) However, many food scientists see the same package-pasteurize-chill process that excludes headspace and is used by deli meat processors such as Sara Lee's Bilmar as a decades old, reliable technology. Go figure.

Meanwhile, as you read my articles, know that my views tend to be those of a food scientist - I leave the marketing approach to Lynn and Marty. And...oh yeah, please don't check for split infinitives or commas.