Yogurt Formulations with Clarinol® CLA for Weight Management
Stepan Lipid Nutrition
Tighter regulation of the industry is needed to battle the ever expanding global waistline, says Kelly Brownell.
Increased regulation of the food industry is needed to protect ‘the public good’ and help win the global battle against obesity, according to one obesity policy expert.
Writing an editorial as part of PLoS Medicine’s series on ‘big food’ , Professor Kelly Brownell of Yale University in the USA warns that the idea that collaborative and voluntary efforts are the only solution is a trap.
"The obesity crisis is made worse by the way industry formulates and markets its products and so must be regulated to prevent excesses and to protect the public good," says Brownell.
He argues that left to regulate itself, the food industry has the opportunity, if not the mandate from shareholders, to sell more products irrespective of their impact on consumers. Therefore governments, foundations, and other powerful institutions should be working for regulation, not collaboration, he warns.
“Many political bodies, foundations, and scientists believe that working collaboratively with the food industry is the path for change,” notes the Yale Professor, who is based at the Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.
“The assumption is that this industry is somehow different than others, and that because people must eat, the industry is here to stay, and like it or not, working with them is the only solution.”
“Based on my 30 years of experience in the public health and policy sectors, I believe this position is a trap.”
Is industry action enough?
The obesity epidemic has already received strong attention from industry, with Brownell conceding that food companies “are doing things".
“The question is whether these things are meaningful or are the predictable behaviour of an industry under threat and are designed to stop rather than support public health efforts.”
“The food industry has had plenty of time to prove itself trustworthy,” he claims. “It has been in high gear, making promises to behave better, but minor progress creates an impression of change while larger attempts to subvert the agenda carry on.”
He warns that the bottom line is that the food industry must defend its core practices against all threats in order to produce short-term earnings and sell more products.
Fundamental battle
Brownell argues that the ‘arresting reality’ is that companies must sell less food if the population is to lose weight.
“This pits the fundamental purpose of the food industry against public health goals,” he says.
The Yale expert warns that several tactics need to be employed in order to succeed in the battle against obesity. While ‘respectful dialogue’ with industry is desirable, and can lead to voluntary changes “that inch us forward”, Brownell argues there must be recognition that such tactics will bring only small victories.
“To take the obesity problem seriously will require courage, leaders who will not back down in the face of harsh industry tactics, and regulation with purpose.”
Source: PLoS Medicine
Volume 9, Issue 7, e1001254, doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001254
“Thinking Forward: The Quicksand of Appeasing the Food Industry”
Author: K. Brownell
6 comments (Comments are now closed)
more regulations is not the answer
good lord. that's all we need is more taxes and more regulations. people who are obese should pay higher health insurance premiums in the US/Canada - it's their choice to eat garbage and laze about. why should I pay higher taxes on foods and health care costs, if I eat healthy, exercise, etc? I'm sure people would put a lot more effort into getting off the couch if it hit them directly in the pocket books. blanket taxes on "bad" foods is not feasible....
Report abuse
Posted by Lance
06 July 2012 | 19h59
The Big conspiracy
Professor Brownell gets off to a good start, but doesn't fully list the motivations to keep Americans obese. The food industry is not acting alone. Since bigger bodies require larger amounts of clothing, food manufacturers obviously are in league with the garment industry. Larger bodies need larger, and heavier cars. The gas companies love the resulting lower mpg. Lastly, obese people are more likely 'couch potatoes' so the home entertainment industry is thriving. Against all this resistance, how can meaningful public health goals ever take hold? A starting point might be reminding our citizens of personal as well as corporate responsibility.
Report abuse
Posted by Mark
05 July 2012 | 22h16
An inch gives a mile
Okay, if you give the government sugar, then they'll want to reguloate sodium, fat-content, grains (which I won't touch). And not just restricting quantities, but requiring additives. Before you know it you have government "feed" that we all line up for. It is a TERRIBLE PATH to go down. Let the market determine the truth. Look what happened to Pink Slime - people think it's gross and "poof" it was gone in 5 months of exposure. Frankly if agribusiness and pharma, together with government agencies and NGOs would quit pushing "healthy whole grains" and this high-carb food pyramid we probably wouldn't have the problems we do. I think the FDA/USDA is ALREADY telling us the wrong things to eat. Why give them regulatory authority???
Report abuse
Posted by Gary Miller
05 July 2012 | 21h54
We do know what to regulate
Health professionals and scientists have a large enough body of research to say that soda and candy are not nutritionally necessary for a person to survive and could easily be taxed or regulated. While people need to eat to live, they don't need to eat sugar in the amounts we currently consume. I think we could start there. Keep in mind, no one is talking about banning any food, just making those foods, that are not necessary and in large amounts harmful, more difficult to over-consume.
Report abuse
Posted by Kim Milano
05 July 2012 | 21h15
We know enoug
I disagree Gary. We know enough to start moving. We know people who avoid eating processed foods and eat instead fruits, vegetables, and lean protein foods live healthier less healthcare dependent lives.
Report abuse
Posted by Cynthia Dormer
05 July 2012 | 18h52
Last thing we need
How can they regulate when no one really knows for sure what to regulate! Low-fat or low-carb? Calories matter? Saturated Fats are good or bad? Is cholesterol REALLY linked to heart disease? And there is no ONE SIZE FITS ALL diet for everyone. People, we used to think the world was flat. Let's not let a lobbyist-corrupted government or its agencies tell us what we can or cannot eat.
Report abuse
Posted by Gary Miller
05 July 2012 | 18h17
Read all comments (6)