SoylentNews

Freeman [soylentnews.org] writes:

https://arstechnica.com/science/2024/05/deny-denounce-delay-the-battle-over-the-risk-of-ultra-processed-foods/ [arstechnica.com]

When the Brazilian nutritional scientist Carlos Monteiro coined the term “ultra-processed foods” 15 years ago, he established what he calls a “new paradigm” for assessing the impact of diet on health.

Monteiro had noticed that although Brazilian households were spending less on sugar and oil, obesity rates were going up. The paradox could be explained by increased consumption of food that had undergone high levels of processing, such as the addition of preservatives and flavorings or the removal or addition of nutrients.

But health authorities and food companies resisted the link, Monteiro tells the FT. “[These are] people who spent their whole life thinking that the only link between diet and health is the nutrient content of foods ... Food is more than nutrients.”
[...]
In 2019, American metabolic scientist Kevin Hall carried out a randomized study comparing people who ate an unprocessed diet with those who followed a UPF diet over two weeks. Hall found that the subjects who ate the ultra-processed diet consumed around 500 more calories per day, more fat and carbohydrates, less protein—and gained weight.
[...]
“The strategy I see the food industry using is deny, denounce, and delay,” says Barry Smith, director of the Institute of Philosophy at the University of London and a consultant for companies on the multisensory experience of food and drink.

So far the strategy has proved successful. Just a handful of countries, including Belgium, Israel, and Brazil, currently refer to UPFs in their dietary guidelines. But as the weight of evidence about UPFs grows, public health experts say the only question now is how, if at all, it is translated into regulation.

“There’s scientific agreement on the science,” says Jean Adams, professor of dietary public health at the MRC Epidemiology Unit at the University of Cambridge. “It’s how to interpret that to make a policy that people aren’t sure of.”
[...]
In 2023, PepsiCo spent millions of dollars lobbying the US government. According to one disclosure from last July, the Doritos and Tostitos maker spent $1.27 million on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchasing restrictions, the upcoming dietary guidelines, sweeteners, and food labeling, among other issues.

Where legislation is passed that has a direct impact on food multinationals, they have often fought back in the courts. In Mexico, companies including Kellogg’s and Nestlé have sued the government over the introduction of front-of-package warning labels and other restrictions including the use of children’s characters in marketing.

The labels—black octagons that warn about excess of sugars, sodium, trans fat, saturated fat, and calories in products—were rolled out in 2020. A handful of the lawsuits were accepted by the Mexican Supreme Court and are still being fought.

Nestlé said it “supported front-of-pack labeling that helps consumers make informed choices” including government-endorsed labels such as Nutri-Score in some European countries or the traffic light system in the UK.

Original Submission