Monday, February 28, 2011

Update: BPA-Free Tomato Products at Whole Foods & Eden

Earlier this month I wrote about the Bisphenol A (BPA)-free aluminum cans Muir Glen has begun to use for its canned tomato products. (BPA is an endocrine-disrupting chemical used in many plastics and aluminum cans. Muir Glen cans with expiration dates of 2013 may be BPA-free.)

I recently called Whole Foods and Eden Foods to find out what these progressive companies are doing on the BPA front.

Whole Foods, according to a spokesperson, is “searching for alternatives” to its house brand (365 Everyday Value) cans, which contain BPA. Aseptic boxes and glass jars are possibilities.

Whole Foods understands consumers’ concerns about BPA, she said, but it doesn’t want to “jump into something that doesn’t have a proven track record.” (This sounded like a critique of Muir Glen’s new cans, but the spokesperson said it wasn’t.)

Eden Foods, on the other hand, started using amber glass jars for some of its tomato products last month. Even though Eden has offered beans in BPA-free cans since 1999, a spokesperson made it sound like Eden’s can supplier, Ball Corporation, isn’t close to formulating a BPA-free can for highly-acidic tomato products.

According to an Eden press release, “[t]he driving force at Eden Foods for these amber glass jars of tomatoes was the avoidance of bisphenol-A (BPA) in high acid food cans, and failure of the can manufacturers to make BPA free cans for tomatoes.”

Should the responses from Whole Foods and Eden make me wonder about Muir Glen’s cans or are they just expected reactions from those late to the BPA-free-aluminum-cans-for-tomato-products party?

Friday, February 25, 2011

Can Don Huber Save Us from Monsanto? Will Vilsack Listen?

Yesterday I wrote about Mark Bittman, the New York Times writer whose new platform discussing food politics is a win for society, thanks to its pressing content and extensive reach. (His piece Wednesday on McDonald’s attempt at oatmeal is still the most e-mailed article from the paper’s website).

But for every Bittman and Michael Pollan, it’s important to know that there are thousands of people—all with no chance of ever appearing on Oprah—who are working tirelessly to make our food, water, air and soil safer (read: less toxic).

Just this morning, thanks to Food Safety News, I learned about veteran soil scientist Don Huber, a “plant pathologist and a professor emeritus from Purdue University . . . [who] coordinates the Emergent Diseases and Pathogens Committee of the American Phytopathological Society as part of the USDA National Plant Disease Recovery System.”

Huber recently wrote a letter to U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack warning of a new pathogen linked to Monsanto’s Roundup pesticide (as if the danger list isn’t long enough already), which is used in conjunction with Monsanto’s genetically modified Roundup Ready soybean and corn seeds.

(Huber’s letter was sent before Vilsack’s USDA approved the use of genetically modified alfalfa. Alfalfa is an essential feed component for dairy farms. You do the math.)

According to Huber:

“[The] pathogen . . . appears to significantly impact the health of plants, animals, and probably human beings.”

“The organism is prolific in plants infected with two pervasive diseases that are driving down yields and farmer income.”

“Laboratory tests have confirmed the presence of this organism in a wide variety of livestock that have experienced spontaneous abortions and infertility.”

Whenever challenged, Monsanto’s response is part denial and part stonewall, but hopefully Vilsack will take this plea from Huber to heart:

“For the past 40 years, I have been a scientist in the professional and military agencies that evaluate and prepare for natural and manmade biological threats, including germ warfare and disease outbreaks. Based on this experience, I believe the threat we are facing from this pathogen is unique and of a high risk status. In layman’s terms, it should be treated as an emergency.”
Click here to read Huber’s letter in full.

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Mark Bittman's New York Times Platform a Boon for Us All

For the past day, Mark Bittman’s online commentary in yesterday’s New York Times about McDonald’s (lame) attempt at oatmeal has been the most e-mailed article from the paper’s online version.

At the same time that both the Middle East (political upheaval) and our brains (cell phone upheaval) are exploding, Bittman’s savvy attack on the latest McDonald’s ridiculousness is what we are sharing and discussing.

There are many people doing great work trying to fix our very broken food system, but the fact that The New York Times has given Bittman such a far-reaching platform to discuss essential issues is a boon for us all. After just a few opinion pieces, it’s clear that Bittman isn’t afraid of the omnipresent multinational corporations and their dollars:
"There’s a feeling of inevitability in writing about McDonald’s latest offering, their “bowl full of wholesome” — also known as oatmeal. The leading fast-food multinational, with sales over $16.5 billion a year (just under the GDP of Afghanistan), represents a great deal of what is wrong with American food today. From a marketing perspective, they can do almost nothing wrong; from a nutritional perspective, they can do almost nothing right, as the oatmeal fiasco demonstrates."
I wholeheartedly believe that Bittman’s intelligent and timely work could take the real food movement to a new level, akin to the impact Michael Pollan had with “The Omnivore’s Dilemma” five years ago. Pollan, through his further writings and numerous television appearances, has become the de facto spokesman for the movement. Bittman, I think, has the potential to do the same.

If you haven’t read Bittman's oatmeal piece yet, do so. If you like it, share it; the more people that know the truth about our food supply, the better.

Unlike Mubarak and Qaddafi (maybe), McDonald’s and Gatorade aren’t leaving us anytime soon. But that doesn’t mean they have to be a part of our lives.

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Buying and Cooking Shrimp: Some Practical Information

Shrimp are a great go-to when you are looking to make a quick meal, whether it is an Asian stir fry, pasta sauce or basic sauté.

Unfortunately, like every food item, buying and preparing shrimp isn't as straightforward as it should be. Here are some tips:

• Shrimp will cook in just a few minutes, so be careful not to overcook them. To be safe, add shrimp last to a dish, when possible. Don’t forget about carryover cooking; shrimp cooked to 80 percent will usually finish cooking on their own.

• Purchase only wild shrimp; farmed, or “industrial-scale shrimp production, often with hefty doses of antibiotics and pesticides, creates a series of food safety concerns,” according to Food & Water Watch. Wild shrimp can be difficult to find, so make sure to buy them when you see them.

• Buy shrimp with their shells on. In addition to being cheaper than shelled, they should have more taste. While sitting on ice, shelled shrimp will soak up water, diluting their flavor.

• I do not devein. I’d rather spend my time peeling shells or making another part of the meal from scratch.

• Shrimp come in many different sizes, but names (small, extra jumbo, colossal, etc.) aren’t uniform. The industry’s way of labeling shrimp is by the number per pound. For example, 16-20’s (a very popular size) means that there are 16 to 20 of these shrimp in a pound.

• In the United States, the majority of shrimp are sold without heads. However, along with the tails and shells, the heads have great flavor.

Tuesday, February 22, 2011

New York City's Anti-Sugary Drinks Subway Ads

It’s unlikely that New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg will persuade as many kids (and adults) to stop drinking Gatorade as basketball great Michael Jordan will entice to start, but you have to give Bloomberg credit for trying.

Ads like this one (click on it for more detail) have been seen on the city’s subway cars for several weeks now, part of a campaign to raise awareness about the health dangers of sodas, sports drinks, sweetened coffees and their like.

Some argue that this is an overreaching intervention into our private lives by a nanny-like government, but I see it as a necessary counterbalance to the incessant marketing put forth by all-powerful, for-profit corporations.

The ads are costing the city less than $200,000 (a private fund is paying a portion as well), a drop in the bucket compared to the hundreds of millions of dollars spent over the years brainwashing kids (and adults) to believe that Gatorade is an essential part of a workout.

If Bloomberg, by way of the subway shock ads, can get one person to stop drinking any of these overly sugared drinks, he has succeeded, in my opinion. Even if the ads only work to start a conversation about the issue, that’s a win as well.

Monday, February 21, 2011

A Presidents' Day Musing

A quick thought for Presidents' Day: While I agree with the saying that all politics is local, is it necessary for all presidential candidates to eat absolute garbage everywhere on the campaign trail?

Any chance of a political career for yours truly would be out the window the second I asked the diner waiter if the hamburger bun was made with bleached or unbleached flour.

Friday, February 18, 2011

More Truth from Jack LaLanne, My New Hero

I love Jack LaLanne!

I can't believe I never knew his message, but I am now officially addicted. LaLanne was spot on in a direct and forceful way that would not be possible in today’s world of entertainment, marketing and showmanship. Watching short clips from LaLanne’s television show from 50 years ago has been a revelation. (Thank you, YouTube.)

Below is a new favorite I just found. I also love one viewer’s comment: “[LaLanne] rocks big-time. They should take all of the crap being broadcast on prime-time tonight off of the air and replace it with this.”

Unfortunately there is no chance of that happening, so you’ll just have to watch it here.

Thursday, February 17, 2011

Mark Bittman: "Why Aren’t G.M.O. Foods Labeled?"

In the burgeoning world of food politics writing, an old voice has gained a new, high-profile pulpit.

Mark Bittman (aka The Minimalist), a longtime New York Times food writer, has begun writing opinion pieces for the paper (in print and online) about the prevalent topics that, thankfully, more and more of us are becoming aware. Bittman’s coverage—whether you agree with it or not—will only increase knowledge and discussion, which, I believe, is the first step in changing our broken system.

Earlier this week Bittman wrote about genetically modified (or engineered) crops and, specifically, whether foods containing them should be labeled as such.

This is an issue we should all be cognizant of (and which I've written about), and Bittman’s piece is a good primer for the current state of affairs.

Here are the first three paragraphs:

"If you want to avoid sugar, aspartame, trans-fats, MSG, or just about anything else, you read the label. If you want to avoid G.M.O.’s — genetically modified organisms — you’re out of luck. They’re not listed. You could, until now, simply buy organic foods, which by law can’t contain more than 5 percent G.M.O.’s. Now, however, even that may not work.

"In the last three weeks, the U.S. Department of Agriculture has approved three new kinds of genetically engineered (G.E.) foods: alfalfa (which becomes hay), a type of corn grown to produce ethanol), and sugar beets. And the approval by the Food and Drug Administration of a super-fast-growing salmon — the first genetically modified animal to be sold in the U.S., but probably not the last — may not be far behind.

"It’s unlikely that these products’ potential benefits could possibly outweigh their potential for harm. But even more unbelievable is that the F.D.A.and the U.S.D.A. will not require any of these products, or foods containing them, to be labeled as genetically engineered, because they don’t want to “suggest or imply” that these foods are “different.” (Labels with half-truths about health benefits appear to be O.K., but that’s another story.)"
Click here to read the rest of Bittman’s article.

Wednesday, February 16, 2011

How to Make Your Own Pancake Mix (No Boxes!)

In the past week we’ve seen that young children’s diets play a role in their intelligence and palates. For those looking to make some small changes in what their kids eat, breakfast is a good place to start. Homemade pancakes (no boxes!) are quick, easy and cheap to make, plus they are healthier (if the correct ingredients are used) and taste much better:

Here's how easy it is to reproduce what is in the box. Don’t forget to add one mixed egg and ¾ cup of milk:

Tuesday, February 15, 2011

The Early Diet's Role in Our Children's Later Eating Habits; Money's Role in C.C. Sabathia's Revamped Off-season Diet

Today’s post was going to be solely about the recent study showing that many children’s palates are already hooked on sugary, salty and fatty foods by the time they are as young as three.

I’m not sure we need a university study to tell us what seems like common sense, but if we connect the dots, it’s obvious why so many older children and teenagers run for the hills if forced to eat real food with real flavor and texture.

There’s a chance children will never eat well if their early taste buds—starting in their moms’ wombs and continuing with breast milk or formula, pureed food and solid food—are bombarded with the omnipresent sugary drinks, yogurts and cereals, plus salty snacks and frozen foods.

But it seems there may be a cure for poor eating habits, even after years of habitual junk food consumption. Money.

Just ask C.C. Sabathia, one of baseball’s best pitchers, what the lure of even more dollars can do to one’s diet. Sabathia is entering the third year of a guaranteed seven-year, $161 million contract, but he can opt out of the deal after this season and become a free agent. It’s possible he would improve upon his current $23 million annual salary.

Sabathia, to prepare for the upcoming season and another possible jackpot, lost 25 pounds to get himself down to 290. According to Ben Shpigel of The New York Times, “Consulting with a chef and a nutritionist, Sabathia cut out sports drinks, soda and cereal from his diet – especially Cap’n Crunch, which he sometimes ate a box at a time.”

Banking on your kid to throw 95 miles per hour may not be the best of strategies to get him to eat better; an early diet of apples, broccoli and avocados is probably the safer play.

Monday, February 14, 2011

What's for Dinner? Don't Be Afraid to Ask!

When eating out, don’t be afraid to ask your waiter questions about the food on the menu. Is the striped bass wild or farmed? Are the eggs organic? If the answers are important to you, do not be intimidated and have the waiter ask the chef for a definitive response, if necessary.

Over the weekend, we went to a restaurant that I had read served grass-fed beef. After confirming that the meatballs and skirt steak were indeed grass-fed, the waiter volunteered “We try to be as organic and free range as possible.” (This actually worried me a bit, since “free range” is a very nebulous term; I’ll discuss it later this week.)

A homemade pizza also caught my attention, but, despite the waiter’s declaration of wholesomeness, I wanted to make sure it wasn’t made with bleached flour.

“It’s whole grain,” he said confidently. “The dough comes out dark.”

I shot him a quizzical look that screamed “Uh, that’s what happens when you cook dough!”

“I’ll find out for sure,” he said.

After a quick consultation with the kitchen, he returned.

“They are checking, but the chef told me we use generic all-purpose flour.”

Generic all-purpose flour used by restaurants and other food service operations is going be bleached almost all of the time. Needless to say, I didn’t order the pizza.

About five minutes later, the waiter, on his way to another table, humbly delivered the final verdict.

“It’s bleached flour.”

Friday, February 11, 2011

Must See TV: Jack LaLanne on the Dangers of White Sugar

Jack LaLanne, the founder of the modern physical fitness movement, died last month at the age of 96.

LaLanne, like many who challenge prevailing societal beliefs, was at first dismissed by the so-called experts, as recounted in his obituary that appeared in The New York Times.
“‘People thought I was a charlatan and a nut,’ he remembered. ‘The doctors were against me — they said that working out with weights would give people heart attacks and they would lose their sex drive.’”
LaLanne’s nutritional beliefs were also quite prescient, evidenced in this clip from his television show. While the 1950’s production qualities are nothing but quaint, realize that LaLanne’s indictment of white sugar rings even truer now than it did a half century ago.

Listen to LaLanne’s passionate words:

Thursday, February 10, 2011

EU'S Dacian Cioloş to President Obama: "WTF?" (JK)

While the American government ignores the public’s concerns and continues its inexorable march toward becoming the haven for genetically modified crops and their accompanying pesticides (thank you, USDA and Monsanto), Europe remains true to its people’s wishes.

As Philip Brasher reported yesterday on the Des Moines Register Green Fields blog, European Union Agriculture Commissioner Dacian Cioloş (photo, right) sounded like the anti-Tom Vilsack, the American Secretary of Agriculture.

Some of Cioloş’s comments:

“We have our tradition for food and we have our appreciation for what it means for the quality of food.”
“When you ask the citizens they want to use more sure products, consume more sure products, more quality products. They buy the food, so they have the right to choose this food.”
Also, according the Brasher, “Cioloş told reporters the biotech issue ‘is a preoccupation of American authorities’ and that they are following the ‘scientific analysis from one side, the producer of this GMO.’ GMO, a common acronym for biotech crops, stands for genetically modified organism.”

Is it possible that the esteemed commissioner was being politically correct, especially since he was speaking in English? My Romanian isn’t too good, but I think what he really wanted to say was:
“Hey, Obama, WTF with your kissing of Monsanto’s ass? USDA approval of genetically engineered alfalfa AND sugar beets within a week? Dude, doesn’t that sort of run counter to the organic garden on your front lawn?”

Wednesday, February 9, 2011

Some Nutritional Advice: A Grain of Salt Needed

Sometimes I am amazed at the advice doled out by so-called nutrition experts.

A client recently told me that a dietitian had recommended Skinny Cow “ice cream” as an acceptable dessert. Excuse me? Here is the ingredient list for the chocolate fudge brownie flavor that my client had in her freezer:
Skim milk, sugar, corn syrup, cookie bits [bleached wheat flour, sugar, palm oil, cocoa processed with alkali, corn syrup, natural and artificial flavor, baking soda, salt, soy lecithin], polydextrose, cocoa processed with alkali, cream, whey protein, microcrystalline cellulose, Propylene Glycol Monostearate, Sodium Carboxymethylcellulose, monoglycerides, guar gum, sorbitol, carob bean gum, carrageenan, citric acid, salt.
I am sorry, but this is not ice cream. Ice cream needs to be only milk, cream, sugar, egg yolks and a flavoring, the principle behind the Hä
agen-Dazs Five ice creams. Are the calories and grams of fat saved worth the awful flavor and the health dangers posed by the unpronounceable chemicals that are used to (poorly) imitate the texture and taste of real ice cream?

Know that, even in high-quality ice creams, add-in flavors (such as the "cookie bits" listed above) are often the source of questionable ingredients. Stick with the simpler flavors and, as always, read the ingredient list.

By the way, my client also eventually told me that the dietitian drank Diet Coke. Enough said.

Tuesday, February 8, 2011

Study: Junk Food Diets in Early Childhood May Lower IQ

We all know that packaged and processed foods cause a myriad of health issues. but it seams their iz alot more two it.

According to a study published online yesterday in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health using data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC), diet in the first three years of life has an influence on intelligence levels at age 8½.

Interestingly, the ALSPAC data suggests that an improved diet between ages four and seven won’t counter the earlier, poor eating. (But that doesn’t mean we should let our kids eat crap; click here for an article linking school lunches with obesity.)

The study’s conclusion:
"There is evidence that a poor diet associated with high fat, sugar and processed food content in early childhood may be associated with small reductions in IQ in later childhood, while a healthy diet, associated with high intakes of nutrient rich foods . . . may be associated with small increases in IQ."
I guess more than just marketing helps our kids think “froot” is a correctly spelled word.

(Note: ALSPAC, according to its website, “is one of the most important long-term health research projects ever undertaken. Over 14,000 mothers agreed to take part during their pregnancies in 1991 and 1992, and the study has followed the health and development of their children ever since.”)

Monday, February 7, 2011

"Give Me a Break": Americans Against Food Taxes TV Ad

While a bit of today's water cooler conversation will be spent mulling over yesterday’s Super Bowl commercials, there’s another commercial—with a decidedly political message—that I wanted to discuss.

It’s a spot created by a group called Americans Against Food Taxes to counter the movement to tax sugary drinks, including sodas and sports drinks:

Americans Against Food Taxes is a consortium comprised predominantly of industry groups and businesses—i.e. Burger King, the Society of the Plastics Industry, the Florida Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association, Delta Air Lines—that have huge financial stakes in the sugary drink business.

The entire spot infuriates me, but the “They want to put new taxes on a lot of groceries I buy” line may be the most clandestinely deceiving, especially for those who don’t know the details of the larger conversation.

Consider the visuals, including the actor’s shopping cart. Sorry, but no new taxes are being discussed for pineapple, peppers and beef. Any tax would be levied on the saccharine drinks that are making us sick and putting an undue burden on our health care system.

If the taxes go to offset the huge financial burdens placed on our health care system because of these drinks, I am in favor. Our always ballooning health care premiums and taxes are ridiculously high, thanks in part to soda and its kin. I’d much rather have my tax dollars fund afterschool sports programs and extended hours for the public library instead of drugs and surgical procedures needed to fight unnecessary (soda-induced) diabetes and obesity.

Two arguments against the tax are that we should be educating hard-working Americans about proper food choices—not creating more financial burdens with more taxes—and that the government should not be interfering in our personal lives.

Those arguments are, in theory, admirable, but reality proves—witness Pepsi’s Refresh Project—that most of the educating and interference is really done by the beverage companies, which are more interested in their financial health (via the continual harvesting of new generations of customers) than society’s well-being.

Your thoughts?

Friday, February 4, 2011

Two New Haven Schools Get Salad Bars

It's not all doom and gloom in the world.

Two public schools in New Haven, CT instituted salad bars yesterday, part of Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move! campaign.

Specifically, the program has a Salad Bars to Schools initiative, which has helped nearly 400 schools implement salad bars.

Click here to read the New Haven Register coverage of the salad bar opening at Mauro-Sheridan Science, Technology and Communications School.

Be forewarned that an advertisement accompanying the story will start immediately. Several are running in rotation; one warrants further commentary, which I'll discuss Monday.

Thursday, February 3, 2011

DO NOT Use Antibacterial Soap, Rinse, Repeat

Do not use antibacterial soap.
Do not use antibacterial soap.
Do not use antibacterial soap.

Sure, writing it once would have sufficed, but there are three major reasons to not use antibacterial soap. Any of the three alone would be enough to stop using it, but the triptych should make us run for the hills.

Reason #1: Antibacterial soap, according to a study published in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases, is “no more effective than plain soap at preventing infectious illness symptoms and reducing bacterial levels on the hands.”

Reason #2: Triclosan, the main chemical in the majority of antibacterial soaps, may actually be weakening our defenses by helping to create even stronger bacteria. (This is similar to how small doses of antibiotics administered to our livestock are linked to the development of bacteria resistant to our current roster of antibiotics.)

Reason #3: Triclosan, according to Karl Tupper, Staff Scientist at the Pesticide Action Network, gets “washed down the drain [and] ultimately ends up in sewage sludge, which is then spread on farm fields as fertilizer.” This wouldn’t be so bad for our food and for us, Tupper says, if triclosan wasn’t “an endocrine disruptor that affects thyroid function, sperm production and the immune system.” Oh, and it also affects fetal development.

Thankfully, the EPA is now reviewing a public petition to remove triclosan from consumer products.

Click here to send an email to the EPA demanding the end of triclosan. While we wait for the EPA’s decision, we should all replace our antibacterial soap with regular soap and tell our friends to do the same.

Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Nestlé Water Replacing Larger Plastic Jugs Containing BPA

Continuing yesterday’s theme, another company shifting away from packaging containing Bisphenol A (BPA) is Nestlé Waters North America.

BPA has traditionally been found in the company’s three- and five-gallon plastic jugs (marked with a “7” in the recycling logo) that are popular in offices and homes. All smaller plastic bottles (marked with a “1” or “2”) are free of BPA.

Citing the public outcry over BPA, Nestlé is slowly replacing the old #7 containers with newer #1 jugs (made from a different type of plastic) in all of its regional brands, which include Poland Spring in the Northeast, Zephyrhills in Florida and Arrowhead in the West. The process will take two years and will be completed by June 2012.

However, #7 bottles are still being delivered; Nestlé does not share any information about the change on its website. Customers are left to their own devices to find out.

I learned about the swapping program from one of my clients, who, after realizing her unopened five-gallon bottles were #7 plastic, called Poland Spring to cancel her service. Immediately, she was told that #1 bottles would be promptly delivered to her home to replace the old containers.

For those customers not in the know, the type of bottle one gets depends on chance and the inventory of local distributing branches. Customers requesting the newer bottles receive them if they are available.

Replacing the bottles must be costing Nestlé a fortune and demand can’t outpace supply, but the current roll-out process doesn’t seem completely forthcoming and judicious.

What do you think?

Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Mubarak Out? (Some) Muir Glen BPA-Free Tomato Cans In!

Hosni Mubarak’s time as Egyptian president may be limited, but it’s not all bad news for him. In the near future, Mubarak (and all of the hoi polloi) will be able to eat canned tomatoes free of Bisphenol A (BPA).

BPA is an endocrine-disrupting chemical used in many plastics and aluminum cans, and according to Rodale News, is “linked to male infertility, diabetes, heart disease, aggressive behavior in children, and other ills.” (BPA is number six on Rodale’s recent “7 More Household Toxins You Should Banish from Your Home” list.)

BPA was always deemed essential in canned tomato products because of the tomatoes’ high acidity. For home cooks, this was troubling, as canned tomatoes are essential in tomato sauces, chilies, stews and other dishes. (Organic jarred tomatoes are available, albeit more expensive and more difficult to find.)

Thankfully, relief is on the way. Muir Glen, the maker of high-quality organic tomatoes, started using BPA-free aluminum cans for last summer’s tomato harvest. These cans can now be found at supermarkets.

However, identifying which Muir Glen tomato products are BPA-free is not straightforward, as no labeling or coding exists for the BPA-free cans.

According to Muir Glen, the only indicator of a BPA-free product is the can’s expiration date. If the expiration date is in 2013, then the can may be BPA-free. Cans with earlier expiration dates contain BPA.
To reiterate, at this time, not all cans with a 2013 expiration date are BPA-free.

Muir Glen has no time frame for the changeover’s completion, but the company will make a formal announcement when the transition to BPA-free cans is finished.