Are Food Policy Wonks Giving “Big Food” a Free Pass?
.jpg)
Ten years ago, PLOS Medicine published an examination of the role of “Big Food” in global health with a collection of articles. It was an indictment, to be sure, and this theme continues to resonate today. PLOS Medicine editors summed it up:
“Big multinational food companies control what people everywhere eat, resulting in a stark and sick irony: one billion people on the planet are hungry while two billion are obese or overweight.”
This thinking, which assigns blame for the growing prevalence of global obesity to global food companies, is well-entrenched. It holds that this is an industry not to be trusted – rather, it must be taxed and regulated. The food industry must have no input in food policy because it is too much like big tobacco. It exploits the dependence of humans on food for survival.
A Free Pass
The result may well be that “Big Food” gets a free pass to conduct its business without any concern for health implications. In the global business of food, health outcomes can become irrelevant. The only implication of health is for marketing.
Food policy experts decide what foods are healthy. Then food marketers develop new products that conform to these ideas, carry health claims, and appeal to consumers, who gobble them up.
Right now, we have a dizzying array of plant-based (and ultra-processed) food products that are selling quite well for “Big Food.”
What About Health Outcomes?
Ironically, because this framework assumes “Big Food” is untrustworthy, we find ourselves in a situation where the industry is not really accountable for the health outcomes of their business practices. Instead, food policy wonks rely upon taxes, marketing regulations, and expert guidance about what is healthy and what is not. The assumption is that these policies will make us healthier – not the food industry.
It sounds good. But the problem is that diet-related health outcomes are not improving across the population. Two decades of decrying the role of sugar sweetened beverages in obesity has brought two decades of declining SSB consumption. SSB taxes are becoming more common still. But none of this is putting a dent in obesity. Likewise, there’s lots of hope that food labeling regulations can shape healthier dietary patterns. Maybe marketing regulations will help. But we’ve yet to see any effect on health outcomes.
Instead of holding the food industry accountable for compliance with tax policies and nuanced marketing regulations, perhaps we would do well hold them accountable for contributing to better health outcomes.
That would require getting over the fear of engagement with the big, bad food industry.
Click here for the PLOS Medicine collection on the food industry and health, and here for a more recent analysis of a framework for interaction between the industry and public health.
Subscribe by email to follow the accumulating evidence and observations that shape our view of health, obesity, and policy.
May 15, 2022
May 15, 2022 at 5:08 pm, Andrew Thomas Carey said:
“One billion people on the planet are hungry while two billion are obese or overweight.”
So 4 billion are ok, another billion are overweight which is better than being so-called normal weight based on lots of data.
Still 2/7ths of the planet are doing badly – of which the hungry 1/7th don’t have access to the produce of big bad food.
Your last couple of sentences are right – we should thank Borlaug, Habe, Bosch and big bad food. We are still here, and more of us are living longer than ever.
May 16, 2022 at 1:46 am, Chester Draws said:
because this framework assumes “Big Food” is untrustworthy, we find ourselves in a situation where the industry is not really accountable for the health outcomes of their business practices.
The industry released tens of thousands of new products every year. Almost all of which fail. They fail because people won’t buy them. The industry is entirely directed by the consumer, not the other way round.
Every now and then a major player tries to control the consumer. And you get the “New Coke” fiasco. If Coca-Cola can’t make a product stick, no-one else has any chance.
Making the industry accountable for the consumer simply won’t work. It assumes that they have a power that they do not have.