Impacts of removing seed oils from U.S. food supply striking
Soybean industry releases studies showing a seed oil ban would not bode well for the food supply, consumers or economy.
The results of a soybean industry project to examine the impacts of a potential seed oil ban in the U.S. food supply are in — and the answers are not good, the American Soybean Association (ASA) said in a news release. The seed oil study was funded by the United Soybean Board and conducted by the World Agricultural Economic & Environmental Services (WAEES).
The study points to the many concerns and impacts an arbitrary ban on seed oils could have for soybean farmers and the U.S. food supply and economy.
WAEES maintains agricultural economic models that allow it to examine potential industry changes, and what it found forecasting a ban was this: The seed oil industry, which primarily includes soybean, canola, corn, cottonseed, grapeseed, rice bran, safflower and sunflower, would see a sizable drop in consumption for domestic products, while imported palm oil would likely flourish. In the meantime, consumers would have a hard time making apples-to-apples substitutions given price surges, product availability, allergen issues and usage constraints.
WAEES routinely projects supply and demand of agricultural products, farm income, consumer expenditures and other variables for 10 years out. Against that baseline, two scenarios for a seed oil ban were considered:
1. Flat U.S. fat and oil consumption. This scenario removed seed oils from human consumption but assumed consumption of fats and oils per capita would remain roughly unchanged — ignoring the fact that many fats and oils are not directly substitutable. For instance, tallow and palm oil cannot be used in salad dressing, as they are solid at room temperature. Certain nut oils also bring allergy concerns.
Assuming people would find a way to consume fats and oils without worrying about their form, this scenario found:
A 58 lb. per-capita loss of seed oil would be filled primarily by increased palm oil consumption (53 lb.), which would have to be imported. Global palm area would likely increase by 3.3 million acres.
The Consumer Price Index for fats and oils would, in turn, increase by 28.7%; consumer expenditures on vegetable oils and fats would increase by $7.7 billion per year on average — a 43% increase.
2. Substitution constraints. Again, fats and oils are not fully substitutable in practice. This scenario assumed consumers would only be willing to spend 8% more on fats and oils and would reduce consumption to fit within that budget constraint:
In this case, the 58 lb. loss of seed oils is only partially offset. Per-capita consumption of fats and oils would fall by 21 lb., or 29%. The study did not look at any resulting health consequences of the dramatic drop.
The Consumer Price Index for fats and oils would increase by 35.1% amid the lack of available alternatives.
In both scenarios, the effects of reduced consumer vegetable oils and fats consumption would cause additional consumer and farm-level losses:
Soybean prices would fall by an average of more than 3% per year and farmer returns by about 7%. Overall crop cash receipts would drop by $3 billion per year, and farm income would fall by about $2 billion. Soybean area would decrease by a yearly average of 2.8 million acres.
Meat supplies to consumers would also fall by more than 12 lb. per year, as higher meal prices from lower oilseed processing margins would increase feed costs for animals, whose diets depend heavily on soy meal.
To explain why a switch to non-seed oils is not readily feasible, ASA chief economist Dr. Scott Gerlt noted: “Simply put, there is not enough production. Fats are largely a byproduct of meat production and represent only a small share of the value of the processing. Capacity to produce tallow is also limited, even if the value of the fats increased significantly. For lard, over 80% is already used in food, and 30% of white grease currently goes to food.”
Similarly, olive oil production is limited and costly, and peanut oil is not widely traded and creates allergen issues for many people.
ASA president and soybean farmer Caleb Ragland said of the study, “This work simply confirms what we already knew: A ban on seed oils, including soy, is going to have costly impacts for farmers and costly impacts for consumers — and I don’t just mean in the wallet. There is the potential here that we lose consumer choice based on conjecture, and that should not be something we condone in the U.S. or anywhere, for that matter.”
The Food & Drug Administration has recognized the potential health benefits of soybean oil through a scientific review process that supports replacing saturated fats with unsaturated fats found in soybean oil to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease. With this positive FDA qualified health claim for soybean oil, Ragland questioned why “rock that boat” of banning seed oils without any scientific reason, especially at the expense of consumer choice and the domestic soybean oil market?
ASA said it continues to support regulatory decisions that are grounded in science and risk-based assessments and that enable farmers to continue their operations while supporting consumer choice.
Soy Checkoff fighting misinformation
The United Soybean Board also came to the defense of seed oils in its own news highlighting the essential role of soybean oil in American diets, which it emphasized benefits consumer health and drives profitability for U.S. farmers. Scientific research continues to reaffirm the health benefits of seed oils such as soybean oil, emphasizing its value in the food industry and to strengthen consumer trust.
With the recent misinformation about seed oils, the Soy Checkoff is leading efforts to set the record straight. Through a strategic collaboration with Soy Nutrition Institute Global, the corn and canola commodity groups and leading nutrition researchers, the checkoff is making sure the latest science-based findings are widely available.
“The Soy Checkoff invests to protect U.S. soybean farmers’ stake in the edible oils market and uphold the reputation of the healthfulness of soybean oil,” said Sara Stelter, United Soybean Board farmer-leader, SNI Global board member and Wisconsin farmer. “Together with our partners, we’re working to reclaim the narrative around seed oils and make sure consumers have a correct understanding of decades of research supporting seed oils.”
Soybean oil plays a critical role in the food supply, as 45% of the market is used in cooking oils, baking, frying, salad dressings and margarine, the board pointed out.
Recent peer-reviewed studies coordinated by SNI Global published in the British Journal of Nutrition and Nutrition Today confirm that seed oils high in unsaturated fatty acids — such as soybean oil — offer significant health benefits. Linoleic acid, the primary omega-6 polyunsaturated fatty acid in soybean oil, has been shown to lower cholesterol levels and reduce the risk of chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes.
The news release additionally pointed to the qualified health claim backed by FDA that eating about 1.5 tablespoons daily of soybean oil may reduce the risk of coronary heart disease.
“Emerging research highlights the significant health benefits of seed oils, particularly those rich in the essential omega-6 fatty acid linoleic acid, such as soybean oil,” said Dr. Mark Messina, director of nutrition science and research for SNI Global. “These oils not only contribute to lowering cholesterol levels but also play a crucial role in reducing the risk of chronic diseases when included in a balanced diet. The evidence underscores their value as an important component of heart-healthy eating patterns.”