Could chocolate milk be a new part of the breakfast of champions?

A study published in the February issue of the International Journal of Sports Nutrition and Exercise Metabolism, and funded in part by the dairy industry, reported that cyclists who drank chocolate milk were able to continue cycling about 50 percent longer than those who drank a specially formulated endurance beverage and about equally as long as those who drank Gatorade.

In three trials administered at one-week intervals, nine male cyclists performed a strenuous workout, then drank one of three drinks, according to DairyNews.net. One  group received standard 2% chocolate milk, another drank fluid- and electrolyte-replenishing Gatorade and a third group drank Endurox R4, a specially formulated beverage with a “patented 4 to 1 ratio of carbohydrates to protein” and other ingredients aimed at replenishing muscle glycogen stores and helping rebuild muscle. After a rest, the cyclists exercised again, this time to exhaustion. Some sports nutritionists weren’t surprised by the results. “I’ve been touting chocolate milk for years,” says Felice Kurtzman, sports nutritionist for UCLA’s athletic department. “Chocolate milk provides carbohydrates, calcium, other trace minerals. And the important thing is that the kids drink it. I can tell you from our training table that football drinks it, swimming drinks it, track drinks it.”

IDFA representatives at May’s annual meeting of 3-A Sanitary Standards Inc. in Milwaukee expressed concern with a newly proposed definition for extended-shelf-life (ESL) products. Under the plant support systems working group’s proposed definition, only products with a shelf life of more than 30 days would qualify as ESL products. The proposal is still under review. State and federal regulators often look to the 3-A standards when setting and enforcing their own regulations. “We oppose this definition as unnecessarily restrictive,” says Allen Sayler, IDFA senior director of regulatory affairs. “This proposal also highlights our concern that more dairy processors need to be involved in 3-A working group activities, to prevent changes like this to 3-A equipment standards and operating practices that are often enforced by state and FDA regulators.” A further example of a potential problem for dairy processors was the working group’s decision to replace all “should” language in the 3-A practice on clean-in-place (CIP) systems with “shall,” making these items a requirement rather than a recommendation. More than 100 state and federal dairy regulators, equipment manufacturers and dairy processing plant representatives attended the annual meeting, including 15 IDFA members. For more information on the annual meeting agenda and the activities, visit www.idfa.org.