History of Soy Flour, Grits, Flakes, and Cereal-Soy Blends - Part 5


by William Shurtleff and Akiko Aoyagi

 

A Chapter from the Unpublished Manuscript, History of Soybeans and
Soyfoods, 1100 B.C. to the 1980s


©Copyright 2004 Soyfoods Center, Lafayette, Californi
a

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

HISTORY OF SOY FLOUR, GRITS, AND FLAKES IN THE USA Continued

As of 1980 the cereal-soy blends that had been shipped in the largest quantities since the start of the program were Soy Fortified Bulgur (1,505,800 tonnes total), CSM (1,308,900 tonnes), WSB (519,000 tonnes), Soy Fortified Wheat Flour (287,100 tonnes), Instant CSM (256,300 tonnes), and Soy Fortified Corn Meal (237,000 tonnes). Note that fairly small amounts of soy flour, as such, were exported. Over 4.6 million tonnes of all these foods had been shipped since 1966 (Fig. ??.??). Information on these developments is found in Food for Peace Annual Reports and USDA Agricultural Stabilization and Conservation Service reports.

 

SHIPMENT OF SOY FORTIFIED FOODS

(1,000 Metric Tons)

FY SFB CSM WSB SFWF SFSG ICSM SFCM  CSB SRO SF Total
1966 28
1967 54
1968 54
1969 28?
1970 126.1 5.0 131.1
1971 164.2  14.1 0.1 178.4
1972 221.4 62.6 4.1 288.1
1973 140.2  135.6 74.4 15.9 59.4 10.4 9.1 0.5 445.5
1974 62.6 24.0 54.9 31.3 6.8 45.4 12.2 56.7 2.3 0.9 297.1
1975 190.1 51.3 57.1 41.3 31.8 9.5 87.5 9.5 0.9 479.0
1976 216.8 68.0 6107 82.6 87.1 16.3 18.1 15.0 8.6 4.5 578.7
1977 195.0 86.2 48.5 65.3 53.5 15.4 30.8 23.6 7.3 525.6
1978 283.4 92.5 49.0 75.3 37.2 16.3 55.8 19.1 3.2 631.8
1979 305.7 102.9 63.0 60.3 30.4 29.7 48.0 3.3 19.1 1.6 664.0
1980 91.1 112.4 31.6 44.7 24.9 37.5 49.2 4.0 0.4 395.8
1981 71.5 128.6 35.3 26.7 22.9 32.2 60.9 1.1 7.4 0.3 386.9
1982 39.2 97.9 26.7 9.8 21.8 20.7 37.8 0.9 10.8 0.6 266.2
TOTAL 1505.8 1308.9 519.0 437.7 287.1 256.3 237.0 162.4 95.4 23.4 4469.3

Source: Food for Peace Annual Reports.

Codes: SFB = soy-fortified bulgur; CSM = corn-soy-milk; WSB = wheat-soy blend; SFWF = soy-fortified wheat flour; SFSG = soy-fortified sorghum grits; ICSM = instant corn-soy-milk; SFCM = soy-fortified cornmeal; CSB = corn-soy blend; SRO = soy rolled oats; SF = soy flour.

 

The various cereal-soy blends contained an average of about 20% protein on a moisture free basis (MFB) and 16.5% soy flour (usually defatted). Their protein quality as measured by PER (Protein Efficiency Ratio) averaged 2.38 (or about 95% that of the main milk protein, casein). CSM, for example, containing 20.0% protein and having a PER of 2.40-2.45, consisted of 59.2% precooked corn meal, 17.5% defatted soy flour, 15% nonfat dried milk, 5.5% soy oil, and 2.8% vitamin/mineral premix. Milk was originally used in this product primarily to increase its acceptability; its "neutralizing component" (probably found in the whey) helped mask the soy flavor. There was no reason from a nutritional standpoint to add milk to as corn-soy blend (Jansen 1979a). CSM was used mostly as a cooked gruel or beverage for children. Nutritional information on the main blended foods is given in Figure ??.??. It should be added that most of these foods contained at least 5% soy oil (to add calories, increase nutrient density, and improve flavor) and that more coarsely ground products (such as bulgur and corn meal) were fortified with soy grits (typically 15%) rather than soy flour (Dimler 1969; ADM Milling Co. 1977; J.D. Cook et al. 1980). Dimler (1967) noted that these foods could be thought of as new versions of the corn-soy blends that had long been the most widely used feeds for livestock and poultry.

 

Name Percent Soy Percent PER

Flour/grits Protein

_________________________(MFB) _______________

SFB 15.0 17.3 2.30

CSM 17.5 20.0 2.40

WSB 20.0 20.0 2.40

SFWF 12.0 16.2 1.95

SFSG 15.0

ICSM 23.7 20.0 2.40

SFCM 15.0 13.0 1.80

CSB 22.0 22.0

SRO 15.0

WPC-Soy 35.9

WSD 41.3

These blended foods, each almost completely precooked, could be used in a remarkably wide variety of recipes suited to various countries. In addition to the popular hot cereals, gruels, baby foods and porridges for infants, they were used to enrich baked goods (breads, muffins, cookies) tortillas, chapatis or fried cakes, pasta products, soups and stews, and even beverages such as Latin American atole. In Third World countries, these blended foods were most widely used in state feeding programs, school lunches, and target-group oriented food distribution programs. An additional major result of the widespread use of these foods was that they led to extensive nutritional studies on humans; these demonstrated the effectiveness of soy proteins in supplementing cereal grain proteins, and in combatting protein-calorie malnutrition at low cost.

Another windfall of the program was the extensive research done on using soy flour to improve the quality of bread. In 1973 P.E. Johnson, Chief of AID's Food for Peace Program, discussed this subject in detail. Most of the work was done at Kansas State University's Department of Grain Science and Industry, primarily by Tsen and Hoover, starting in 1967 under an AID contract. In 1971 Tsen, Hoover and Phillips reported that up to 12% soy flour could be added to leavened white bread with no reduction in volume if 0.5-1% of a commercially available dough conditioner and surfactant, sodium stearoyl-2-lactylate (SSL) was also added. This 12% soy fortified bread/wheat flour was approved for use in the Food For Peace Program in 1972, and the first purchases by the US government were made in October of that year. From 1971 Tsen and his group published more than 23 papers on high-protein soy-fortified breads, pasta products, cookies, and biscuits. They found that adding 12% soy flour to white bread increased the quantity of protein in the bread from, 8% to 12% and the PER from 1.00 to over 1.90, compared with 2.5% for casein.

All of these cereal-soy blends were produced under US government contracts by large American soybean and grain processing companies such as ADM Milling Company, Krause Milling Co., Lauhoff Grain Co., and Cargill. Production costs were low. In 1968, for example, CSM was sold to the US government for 16.6 cents a kilogram (7.5 cents a pound), packaged and delivered. Virtually all CSM and WSB were donated rather than sold and 80% were distributed by various American voluntary relief agencies (such as CARE, Catholic Relief Service, Cooperative League of the USA, Church World Service, Luthern World Relief, the Council of Voluntary Associations, and Seventh-day Adventist World Service) rather than being sent from government to government, as by the World Food Program (which started in 1963, was jointly sponsored by the UN and FAO, had headquarters in Rome, and in 1981 had a budget of $750 million). By the late 1970s there was a growing trend toward local processing of cereal grains and legumes in recipient countries to extend the PL 480 Title II blended foods.

During 1967 and 1968, under the Johnson administration, USAID teamed up with many of America's largest milling companies and food manufacturers (Krause Milling, Swift, ADM, General Mills, etc.) to introduce commercial, low-cost protein foods to Third World countries. Many of these were soy fortified (Smith and Circle 1972). Apparently the program was unprofitable, and therefore short lived??

Low Cost Extrusion Cookers. The Food for Peace program, while highly successful by most standards, had basic limitations. It was fundamentally a food giveaway or subsidy program based on surplus or low-cost American commodities and a large dose of American good will. The 1966 amendments to PL 480 had placed strong emphasis on finding new ways to help Third World countries to help themselves, but the Oil Shock of 1973 and the widespread hunger crisis of 1973-74 led to a new understanding of self-sufficiency. The US, on the one hand, had to rely more on overseas sales of soybeans and grains to pay for oil imports. Yet the US also was committed to aiding hungry countries and to furthering their long-range development and eventual food self-sufficiency. The problem was to find new ways of using relatively simple technology to produce large quantities of low-cost, nutritious foods from locally grown crops. Ideally the foods should also be quick and easy to use, and well accepted by those who needed them most: infants, pregnant and nursing mothers, and preschool children (Jansen 1976). An exciting new solution to this problem emerged during the 1970s based on a combination of three new factors: low-cost extrusion cookers (LEC's), soybeans developed by INTSOY with USAID funding (see Chapter 61) that yielded well in tropical or semitropical climates, and the cereal-soy blends developed under the Food For Peace Program.

LEC's represented a relatively simple yet important innovation within the promising new field of extrusion cooking and cookers. They offered affordable, appropriate technology for Third World countries, suited to even small towns or villages. LEC's worked on the same principles as the larger extrusion cookers described previously, however they were smaller, simpler in construction, easier to operate and maintain, and less expensive in terms of capital and processing costs at moderate outputs. LEC's were generally cost effective at outputs of less than one tonne a day; Wenger and Anderson International extruders at outputs of over 1 tonne a day. LEC's were interesting and unique for various reasons. They clearly represented appropriate technology, a concept that was just becoming popular in the mid-1970s; they stood midway between high-tech and low-tech machines in terms of sophistication, ease of use, and cost. In producing cereal-soy blends, they produced a new product that was midway between traditional low-tech roasted soy flour and modern high-tech soy protein products such as solvent-defatted soy flour. LEC's became popular primarily in Third World countries that did not have a soybean solvent extraction industry making low-cost defatted soybean meal.

In a typical LEC making a corn-soy blend, dry raw corn and soybeans (typically in a 70:30 ratio) were first cleaned and dehulled by running them in separate streams through a grain cleaner, destoner, and scourer/aspirator, which discarded the hulls. They were then processed and milled, being run through a proportioner-hammermill and then into the LEC, together with some water. After extrusion, they were cooled, then ground in a hammer mill. For blending and packaging, the milled blend was mixed with vitamins, minerals, and sometimes antioxidants and nonfat dry milk in a blender, run through an insect destroyer, then packaged. Basically the same process was used to make whole (full-fat) soy flour except that a special and fairly expensive hammer mill was required for the final grind, especially for a fine flour that had to pass through a 100-mesh screen. Note that the LEC is only a small part of the total facility (Jansen and Harper 1979).

The earliest LEC's were introduced in 1969. The manufacturers had noticed that, starting in the late 1960s, soybean farmers were selling their beans for oil extraction then having to buy back the defatted meal for feed at a higher price than they received for the original beans. These farmers, the first buyers of LEC's, found they could extrusion cook their "full energy" soybeans on the farm and save money. The earliest LEC models were the Insta-Pro #500 made by the Triple "F" Company in Des Moines, Iowa, and the Brady Crop Cooker #206, developed specifically for cooking "full energy" soybeans by the Koehring Co. in Appleton, Wisconsin. These machines could process 450 kg per hour with a 100 horsepower drive. Both machines were rugged, not too difficult to use and maintain, and remarkably inexpensive; roughly $3,000 in 1972 with no motor. They were designed to be powered with a tractor power drive. Eventually the Brady came to be the most widely used in LEC programs worldwide, since it was less expensive (both absolutely and per tonne of output) and easier to use and to adjust. The Insta-Pro, however, was best for making textured products and whole (full-fat) soy flour. By the mid-1970s hundreds of each machine had been sold internationally.

A major factor in the establishment and success of the LEC movement was the active involvement and funding by the USDA. By 1970 USDA had strengthened its commitment to encouraging food deficit countries to move toward local processing of cereal grains and legumes as a means of extending Food For Peace Title II (donated) blended foods in child feeding programs. As early as 1971 USDA's search for low-cost extrusion equipment began. By 1972 USDA started doing tests on the Brady #206 and by 1973 on the Insta-Pro #500 (Lachmann 1976; Crowley 1979). The originator of the concept of adapting low-cost extruders to the production of low-cost weaning foods in Third World countries was Mr. Paul R. Crowley, of the USDA Economic Research Service's Nutrition and Agribusiness group. The program remained under his guidance from the outset. In 1973 USDA began the first testing of an LEC outside the United States. It was done in India at the United Flour Mills in Calcutta. That year and the next AID/USDA sponsored testing programs for LEC's were initiated at INCAP in Guatemala, EAIRO in Kenya, the Philippine Women's University in Manila, and Bogor Agricultural University (IPB) in Indonesia. Details of these programs are given later under each country.

In 1974 it became clear that much more systematic evaluation and testing need to be done on LEC's. In October of that year AID's Office of Nutrition provided funds through the USDA Nutrition and Agribusiness Group to Colorado State University for the purpose of establishing an LEC research program. The initial contract was with the Department of Agricultural and Chemical Engineering under the direction of Dr. Judson Harper. A year later the agreement was expanded to include the Department of Food Science and Nutrition, under Dr. G. Richard Jansen. Strong support for the project came from Drs. Martin Formon and Irwin Hornstein of AID's Office of Nutrition. For the next 6 years this program did extensive pioneering work by setting up a pilot plant (with a Brady #206 and an Insta-Pro #500) at the university, investigating the capabilities of LEC's, working with Third World countries interested in establishing LEC operations, holding international conferences to bring together workers in this field, publishing extensively on the subject, and generally being the motive force behind a timely and very workable idea. Most active research ended in about 1980 but the program was still providing consulting and other services in 1984. In 1983 the CSU LEC project was awarded USDA's OICD International Honor Award. The CSU LEC program wanted to establish a Technology Transfer Center, a self-supporting LEC consulting service that did feasibility studies and helped to install plants. There was much interest in the concept from Third World countries but, unfortunately, those in greatest need of the services were the least able to pay for them, and AID would not fund the project separately.

The CSU LEC program sponsored two international workshops and symposia. The first, attended by 55 participants, mostly from foreign countries, was held in June 1976 at Colorado State University. The proceedings were published as LEC Report 1 (Wilson 1976). The second, with 45 participants, was held in Tanzania in January 1979, and pervaded by a spirit of optimistic enthusiasm, based on substantial progress. The excellent proceedings were published as LEC Report 7 (Wilson and Tribelhorn), which contained the best summary of the program's work. By 1980 the program had published ten substantial reports, plus two hefty LEC Operation Manuals and plant designs. In January 1977 the LEC Newsletter commenced publication, and was issued twice a year (January and July) thereafter. In addition Harper and Jansen published many excellent independent articles on the subject, and in 1981 Harper published Extrusion of Foods, a 2-volume 410-page book.

The products developed by the LEC program closely resembled the cereal-soy blends used in the Food for Peace program, except that they were always made from whole soy beans instead of defatted soybean meal. Soybeans played a key role in these foods for several reasons: (1) they were the least expensive form of protein in most countries, and their amino acids nicely complemented those founds in corn, (2) they provided both protein and food energy (calories) from their 20% oil (some considered the energy more important than the protein), and (3) a mixture of soybeans and grains was easier to extrude than grains alone. A corn-soy blend (CSB, 70:30) was the most widely produced blended food. Nonfat dry milk (6-17%) was added in some cases to make CSM, and many products contained 5-10% added sugar; both were used to increase acceptability and nutrient density. Well accepted in the countries where they were used, these foods were also highly nutritious, with a PER comparable to casein. Of the total calories, at least 7% came from protein (the same as breast milk) but 9% was preferred, while 14-16% came from fats, and the remaining 75-79% came from carbohydrates. Dehulling was recommended to increase nutrient density (soybeans are 6-7% hulls by weight) and decrease possible gastrointestinal irritation in infants. Less than 2% crude fiber in the finished product was recommended.

Whole soy flour was extensively researched but not widely produced on LEC's, except in Mexico and Costa Rica. While it was not difficult to dehull and extrude the soybeans, the extruded product was quite oily and sticky. To grind it finely (to a 100 mesh flour) required an expensive Alpine Contraplex Mill ($35,000 in 1980). If adequately heated (at 143*C) during extrusion to inactivate its enzymes and optimize PER, the whole soy flour was very stable due to natural antioxidants it contained; it would stay fresh for 6 months in tropical climates. Yet it was difficult to package, as the oil permeated even polyethylene bags, and even if properly packaged, it was difficult to find a market for it (Jansen et al. 1978; Jansen and Harper 1979; Jansen 1980). By 1977 roasting soybeans in sand or salt was being tested at CSU as an alternative to LEC cooking in making whole soy flour. Likewise LEC-extruded snacks, such as soy-fortified corn curls, though they looked promising, were never widely produced. A Brady cooker couldn't produce them consistently and it could not make them in small enough quantities (typically several hundred kg per run).

The cost of making cereal-soy blends using an LEC system was remarkably low, and certainly affordable in Third World countries. Total cost included one-time capital cost plus ongoing processing costs. In 1979 processing costs in most countries for most products were less than 1 cent per kg, and capital costs were less than half those for a drum drying system. In 1982 CSB produced on an LEC in Sri Lanka at the a rate of 2,723 kg/hr (5-month average) cost $0.58/kg or $0.26/lb to make, with all costs included. Processing costs (labor, utilities, maintenance, depreciation) ran less than $0.05/kg. Capital cost for an entire system to make 450 kg/hr was in the range of $130,000; the LEC was only a small part of this, about $4,000 without motor and frames, or $10,500 with them. Interestingly, the average yearly cost of an extruder per tonne capacity was about the same for an inexpensive LEC as for a commercial extruder costing 8-10 times as much initially. Kellogg and Williams (in Goodman 1976) compared costs for LEC operation with those for related types and found them to be very competitive.

The CSU-USDA LEC program was extremely successful in getting LEC's up and running in developing countries. In 1976 the first LEC to produce food in the Third World started operation in Sri Lanka, near Kandy. By far the most successful of any LEC program to date, it has received key technical assistance and support from CSU throughout its duration. Other important LEC programs in which CSU played a major role were with Maisoy in Bolivia (started 1976), three very successful plants in Chihuahua, Mexico (1978-80), Lisha in Tanzania (1978), the CARE project in Costa Rica (1979), and the Guyana Pharmaceutical Project making Cerex in Guyana (1979). Each of these are described in detail later. Of these projects, those with the greatest nutritional impact were Sri Lanka, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Guyana, in approximately that order.

Most of the foods made on LEC's were produced with government funding and distributed at little or no charge to pregnant and nursing mothers, infants, and preschool children. They were used mostly as weaning foods. Although the commercial marketing of these foods was the elusive goal of many programs, few were successful, and their impact was small. Elizabeth Orr (1972, 1977), of the Tropical Products Institute, doing studies commissioned by the UN Protein Advisory Group, diligently followed the successes and failures of such commercial products. She concluded that most of these products were unsuccessful in reaching the low income groups for which they were intended, largely because no effort had been made to discover the basic eating habits and preferences of the target population. One key to successful marketing was found to be the establishment of a quality image rather than that of a food designed just to feed the poor and disadvantaged (Orr 1977). One commercial product that was developed in the US for sale abroad was Global Nutrameal, a corn-soy blend fortified with vitamins and minerals, from Spirit Lake, Iowa.

Soy Flour, Grits and Flakes in America (1960-1980s). Since official government collection and publication of statistics on soy flour and grits production stopped in 1958, all subsequent figures were based on unofficial estimates, usually by industry insiders, published in scientific articles. The pattern that emerges (Figure ??.??) shows production at a 2-decade low of less than 50,000 tonnes during the early 1960s, rising rapidly to an estimated all-time high of 453,000 tonnes in 1977, then falling slightly thereafter. The basic reasons for this rise were (1) the rapid increase after 1966 of cereal-soy blends such as CSM and WSB sent to food deficit countries. In a sense soy flour continued to play its major role after the mid-1960s, as it had in the 1940s, as a relief food; (2) the use of small quantities of soy flour and grits in a wide variety of American processed foods (especially baked goods) either for their functional properties or as a substitute for increasingly expensive milk, eggs, and shortening. Throughout this period production of soy flour greatly exceeded the total production of soy protein concentrates and isolates, and textured soy flours. Few statistics are available concerning what percentage of US-made soy flour was exported and what percentage was used domestically in items such as pet foods. Meyer and Lighter (1963) considered soy flour the only form of soy protein used in human foods in sufficient volume to be significant. Eley (1968) estimated that roughly half of the soyfoods (which were largely soy flour) made in the US were exported. Our calculations (Fig. ??.?) show that the soy in PL 480 cereal-soy blends accounted for roughly 30% of all soy flour and grits made in the USA after 1972. Mustakas (1974 Ref??) estimated that in that year soy flour constituted 42.2% of the soyfoods market in the US. Roughly 10% of the soy flour produced was whole soy flour. In 1978 the US baking industry used as estimated 59,900 tonnes of soy flour, or 20% of the total domestic production.

During this period, many of America's largest soybean crushers made soy flour and grits. In the early 1960s, these included Archer Daniels Midland (ADM), Central Soya, Crest Products, and A.E. Staley. Horan (1967) described the processes used to make flours at that time. By the 1970s the list was expanded to include Cargill, Dawson Food Ingredients, Honeymead Products, and Farmland Industries (Far-Mar-Co.). Most made a variety of products, the most popular of which were defatted soy flours, followed by enzyme-active, low-fat, refatted, lecithinated, and full-fat flours, plus defatted soy grits; some made one type of flour or grits with several nitrogen solubility indexes (high, medium, and low), developed flours for specific applications (such as a high-protein bread or a donut mix), and offered grits in up to five different particle sizes. These products were the least expensive soyfoods in the world.

By the 1960s considerable progress had been made in improving the flavor and general quality of soy flour. Although it was generally agreed that whole (full-fat) soy flour has a much better flavor than hexane-extracted defatted soy flour (which is slightly bitter), the latter was by far the most widely used, due largely to its lower cost, since it was an abundant co-product of soy oil extraction. Flours defatted with ethanol rather than hexane were found to have a much better flavor (Mustakas et al. 1961), but they were never widely produced for lack of demand at the higher cost. A better understanding of the role of lipoxygenase in catalyzing oxidation of soybean lipids and the use of gas-liquid chromatography to measure formation of volatiles aided in improving soy flour quality (Mustakas et al. 1969).

Whole (full-fat) soy flour, so highly regarded in Europe, neared extinction in America during this period. Spencer Kellogg & Sons stopped making it in 1962, El Molino Mills in the early 1970s, and Central Soya in the mid-1970s. The last major manufacturer in America was ADM, which stopped production in 1978 due to lack of demand, although their subsidiary Arkady Soya Mills in England continued to make it. ADM switched to making a refatted soy flour (soy oil was added back into defatted soybean meal) which they could produce less expensively. In the early 1980s, smaller producers of whole soy flour, in approximate order of importance, were Arrowhead Mills in Texas (started in 1972), Farm Foods in Tennessee (started about 1974), and Corn Country in Illinois (1978, just after ADM stopped). All of these were truly whole soy flours, containing even the soybean seed coat. Arrowhead Mills' Old Mill whole soy flour, the largest selling of the three, sold 400,000 pounds (181 tonnes) in 1983, both in 1.5-lb and 31-lb poly-lined paper bags, and in mixes, such as pancake-and-waffle mix and soy-fortified unbleached white flour. Clean soybeans were infrared heated on a sloping "skillet," run through a flaking mill (most hulls were aspirated off), then ground in a Bauer hammermill. Arrowhead Mills private labeled their whole soy flour for Shiloh Farms (in Arkansas) and others. Arrowhead also made pretoasted full-fat soy grits (used in their 7-grain cereal), and 100,000 lb a year of micronized soy flakes (see Chapter 23). Corn Country's whole soy flour, which sold 12,000 lb (5,400 kg) in 1983, was made by roasting the soybeans in a rotary peanut roaster for 20 minutes, cooling them, then grinding them in a stone mill. P.R. Hill (1979) did a lengthy nutritional evaluation of whole soy flour.

Following the misuses of soy flour during World War II, a lengthy educational effort by its manufacturers was necessary to convince producers of other foods that when soy flour was properly made and used, its functional properties could increase the quality and nutritional value of a food, while lowering its cost. In most applications, soy flour and grits were used primarily for their functional rather than for their nutritional properties. By far the lowest-cost protein products on the market, they were utilized in small amounts in a surprisingly large array of popular foods, with their presence noted only in the ingredients listing. Grits were most widely used in meats (especially sausages) and flours in baked goods (primarily as a replacement for nonfat dried milk in breads), but also in pasta and baby cereals. Cotton (1974) reported that 32,200 tonnes (71 million lb) of soy flour were used in baked goods in the US at that time; 70% of this was used in breads, 20% in crackers and specialty items, and 10% in donut mixes and cakes. Typical white breads contained 1.5-2% soy flour. Raw (enzyme active) or lightly toasted soy flour was used as a natural bleaching or leavening agent. The soy flour also increased shelf life with respect to staling, gave the bread crust a richer color, and (because of soy protein's greater water holding capacity) increased bread yields. Up to 3% soy flour could be added to wheat flour with little or no change in the formula or handling. Doughs containing larger amounts required more water, more mixing, and additional yeast and oxidizing agent, but less fermentation time (Diser 1962; French 1977; Hoover 1979). High-fat or full-fat soy flour allowed bakers to cut back on eggs and shortening.

Starting in the late 1960s, with the growing interest in good nutrition and natural or vegetarian foods, together with the increasingly positive image of the word "soy," more and more companies began to feature soy flour and grits prominently on their labels and in their product names, and to use these soyfoods in place of meat or dairy products in foods such as Vegetarian Chili or Soy/o Pancake Mix. Whole grain and soy pasta products such as Soy Spaghetti or Wheat & Soy Lasagna were also popular in the natural- and health-food markets. One leader in featuring soy flour and grits was Fearn Soya Foods of Illinois, which used whole soy flour (they called it "soya powder") or soy grits (which they called "granules") in mixes for Soy/o pancakes, muffins, corn breads, various cakes (carob, spice, carrot), breakfast patties, burgers, corn breads, and cereals. Fearn also packaged soy flour and grits. These products, with "soy" prominently displayed in the name, were widely advertised in magazines for the natural­and health-foods markets. Basically a blending and packaging company, Fearn imported its soy flour and grits from Europe.

Most of the many general soyfoods cookbooks written during the 1960s and 1970s contained creative recipes for using soy flour (Jones 1963). The Farm Vegetarian Cookbook (1975) contained creative recipes for using whole soy flour to make Soy Butter (by whipping oil into simmered soy flour), tofu, and soymilk. In 1978 Farm Foods published a booklet titled "Cooking with Soy Flour" containing these and other recipes (soysage, high-protein soy bread, etc.). Widely distributed Natural Recipes showed how to use soy grits in Soy Loaf and Soyburgers, and soy flour in Sesame-Soymilk and Soy-Tomato Sauce.

The largest overall use of soy grits was in pet foods, even larger than in meats for human foods. In 1975 an estimated 326,000 tonnes of soybean products (meal, grits, flour, concentrates and textured soy flour), accounting for 1.5% of the total soybean crop, were used in commercial US pet foods, which retailed for an estimated $2.5 million and were used to feed 100 million cats and dogs (Levinson and Lemancik 1975). Some chemically-modified soy flours were used as milk replacers for calves, and in 1980 some 91 tons (82.5 tonnes) of specially solvent-extracted soy flour were sold to beekeepers (apiculturists) as a pollen supplement.

 

HISTORY OF SOY FLOUR, GRITS, FLAKES, AND CEREAL-SOY BLENDS IN CANADA

In 1921 Rouest in France reported that there was a factory in Canada making calf milk replacer. It may have been Milque Ltd. (Lohse 1936) and was probably using soy flour. Horvath (1931b) described a soy-flour-based chocolate milk being prepared in Canada. By 1936 MacDowell Brothers in Brockville, Ontario, had started to make soy flour.

During World War II the Canadian navy developed a life raft ration containing biscuits (similar to the "Nazi Food Pills" described earlier) containing soy flour as the main protein source. The flour was made by the Continental Soya Co. of Lachine and the biscuits by Floya Milling Co. of Montreal, Quebec (Doig 1943). In 1951 Brock discussed the ways soy flours were being used to improve the quality of many bakery products.

After World War II Canada began to import large amounts of whole (full-fat) soy flour from the USA. In 1974, for example, 66,600 tonnes were imported. This was twice as much as any other country imported from the US. During the 1980s Canasoy, a natural foods manufacturer, made and marketed a "Soya Macaroni."

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7