This is a reblog from my old BlogActiv site which is no longer search engine enabled. It was originally published on 3 December 2013. I thought it would be useful to throw this back into the discussion after the Lancet called to exclude experts from the food industry from the scientific dialogue. The Lancet is calling to combat a “Global Syndemic” by setting up a WHO-style “Framework Convention on Food Systems” which must “explicitly exclude the food industry from policy development. Such a commitment would recognise the fundamental and irreconcilable conflict that exists between some food and drinks industries’ interests and those of public health and the environment…” (source). Really now!
Has Richard Horton, editor-in-chief of the Lancet, found religion or has he gone full loopy? Banning the best researchers from the food debate because he watched Vani Hari give a moving speech in Oregon is in no way responsible behaviour, let alone sufficient reason to claim the right to dictate whose evidence should be allowed in scientific debates.
The food industry did not make me fat; I made me fat through a combination of bad decisions, stress and inactivity. This blog will show how the food industry, without any taxes or imposed regulations, gave me the products to allow me to lose 20kg. But I am sure the elitist foodies associated with The Lancet know better.
Original blog from 2013
We hear the warnings every day: Obesity rates exploding. Diabetes epidemic looming. Lifestyle and diet crisis will cut life expectancy rates. And of course: The fast-food industry is making killer profits while killing us!
Should it come as no surprise that in a world where we blame industry for everything else (global warming caused by big oil, chemical companies contaminating us, factory air pollution causing lung disease, irresponsible bank lending, big pharma paying off our doctors …), that we should also blame industry for this obesity epidemic? So no one blinks twice when we share stories of how the food and drink industries have made us fat, clogged our arteries and rendered us incapable of making a healthy choice. We read all of the books, watch the movies and troll the social media pages until we are convinced that the food industry has behaved in a truly awful manner. Poor us.
So convincing is this blame game that the governments have joined in, defending poor us with ideas of revenue-earning “fat taxes”, most recently in Mexico. Maybe some of that tax revenue could be spent on investments on public parks, water fountains for joggers, safe sports facilities in urban areas and public information on nutritional health, but who am I to interrupt a great blame campaign with facts? See the Risk-Monger’s blog prognosticating the doomed results of the Danish “Fat Tax”.
The food and drink industry is not blameless – they produce a wide range of foods and drinks that can stress flavour over caloric sense, coming with tempting marketing campaigns (I have very low resistence when it comes to Belgian chocolate – a weakness responsible for at least 20kg of my body mass). Like everything in this world, there are some in industry who have transgressed (misleading labelling, poor quality ingredients and inappropriate packaging), but these companies usually pay the price of lost trust, lost markets and, as so often seen, lost existence. The large companies know enough to protect their brands with responsible practices and codes of conduct while the shady fly-by-night companies blacken the food industry’s reputation with questionable marketing practices. For sustainable business management, there is no incentive in industry to deceive or cheat.
Food and drink companies have to meet market demands to keep in business. One demand is inexpensive food (and industry seems to have been blamed for achieving this). Another demand is healthy food, and the industry has complied with a wide variety of safe and convenient fruit and vegetables, whole grain pastas and a wide array of nutritionally enhanced products (“nutriceuticals”). None of these evolutions were due to government regulations or taxes. The food industry is meeting market demands, not trying to poison people.
Still I got fat and now I’m angry!
Still I got fat and now I’m angry! Since my government is not taking responsibility and I certainly won’t fess up for what I put in my body or my failure to exercise, so, with the help of my friends who are also refusing to control themselves, we have agreed that the food industry (insert most hated corporate icon here) is to blame and must pay the price (lawsuits, petitions, campaigns to denormalise certain companies …).
What works even better is if these food industry poison campaigns can be linked to environmental destruction and adverse health effects (see campaigns against packaging waste, chemical additives, destruction of the rainforest for unhealthy palm oil, agricultural inefficiencies and food waste). Social media is full of these blame campaigns and we have a long history of successful books and movies (like Food Inc or Supersize Me) to reinforce this confirmation bias.
But what if industry were to provide a solution? The pharma industry has been chasing the Holy Grail of a diet pill that will allow fat to just melt away. We want answers without our own input – the panacea of a pill. We perform surgeries on our stomachs but still the issue doesn’t go away. The food industry provides healthy alternatives, we have exercise programmes and enough information, but still we choose bad habits and external blame. But what if our obesity epidemic is not due to the food we eat, but the way we metabolise it. Recent studies looked at whether obesity is linked to types of bacteria in our guts. For example, researchers from Washington University in St Louis reported in September in the journal Science that having the right type of gut bacteria has a significant influence on body weight.
If it is indeed the case that bacterial imbalances are the key to obesity, then it might well be the food industry that will introduce products to allow us to rectify it (either that or we have a faecal transplant done … something that does not sound too appealing). So will we adopt a more positive attitude toward the food industry (ie, how the food industry is working to innovate and deliver products that will make me thin by putting my gut back into bacterial balance)? Hardly. I am sure that we will complain about price gouging or limited access (the poorest population make up a larger percentage of the morbidly obese). People will object to any non-natural products that will play with our bacterial levels (there will be some fear spread around that adding bacteria will cause other problems). Some organisations will no doubt mislabel or misuse products they market and others will, for obvious interest, demand that it be regulated as a pharmaceutical (biocidal?) substance. Oh, and let’s not forget all of the diet plans and best-sellers!
Then there will be the obvious question of whom we should blame for this bacterial deficiency in the first place. Maybe the cleaning products industry? Or what about the use of antibiotics? Feed the rage!
I made me fat!
Until we learn that we cannot continue to blame others for our weaknesses, we will remain children. The food industry did not make me fat, I most certainly did (… actually it was my wife, but that would be a complicated blame to pull off!). The 20kg that I lost (and kept off) over the last five years was to my credit, but I had help from the food industry with the easy access to high fibres, convenient fresh salads and clear labelling (voluntarily initiated by industry). Running two to three marathons a year didn’t hurt either.
Those like the Risk-Monger who are able to lose weight can afford to be honest. Those who have not been able to keep their weight down continue to feed their depression with an overabundance of sweets, sodas, snacks … and an unhealthy outrage at the food manufacturers. Don’t despair, the food industry will hopefully have an easier solution for you – let’s hope that the fear campaigners don’t interfere with innovations clearly in the public interest. And as for those governments continuing to tax certain food and drinks, maybe they could … OK, forget that one.
This blog is more of an assault on those looking to blame industry and exclude the best science from food debates (which now includes the unscientific precautionistas at The Lancet). Keep in mind that I do not endorse the recent irresponsible behaviour of the European food industry. The best way to prevent obesity, reduce cancer rates and improve health is to make fruit and vegetables cheap and plentiful (especially to those with less means). By embracing the high-margin organic lobby and not standing up to protect European farmers during the recent anti-ag-tech regulatory recidivism (bans on neonicotinoids, innovative seed breeding techniques and restrictions on glyphosate), the European food industry lobby has shown how it is ready to put profit margins above science and integrity. Until they get the spine to stand up to the loudmouthed naturopathic minority and demand evidence in European policy, they are just as disgraceful as the activist zealots at The Lancet.
As I have friends in the food industry, I hope you appreciate my honesty when I tell you to set science-based priorities, respect your supply chain, stop chasing crumbs and get your arse in gear.