House of Lords report urges complete ban on junk food advertising

The UK’s House of Lords has published a report acknowledging the nation’s obesity-related health crisis and asking the government to introduce measures such as increasing taxes on junk food, requiring large food companies to reduce the salt, sugar and calories, as well as an extended ban on junk food ads.

We look at the initial response to this proposal by stakeholders in academia and the F&B sector.

The report, published yesterday, reads: “At the heart of this strategy must be a radically new approach to the food industry. Though the food industry is diverse, a small number of very large multinational companies dominate the market. The industry has strong incentives to produce and sell highly profitable unhealthy products, exploiting the natural human preference for energy-dense foods.”

“Voluntary efforts to promote healthier food have failed because they do not tackle those incentives: the Soft Drinks Industry Levy led to a reduction of more than a third in the sugar content of soft drinks in just four years, while voluntary programs led to little or no change.”

Scientists and activists react

Overall, the scientists, researchers and NGO representatives working in the nutrition, obesity and health space have praised the move.

Martin Warren, professor and an interim director at the UK’s Quadram Institute for food and health research, states: “We welcome the House of Lords’ Food, Diet and Obesity Committee report that highlights that food, diet and obesity are not only a public health crisis but also a major economic problem. Poor diet and health are not only hampering the life chances of many but also costing the NHS and the wider economy billions of pounds every year.”

He points out that in the past few decades, energy-dense food lacking key nutrients has proliferated the country’s food systems. “As a nation, we need to focus on producing and consuming nutrient-dense food. We welcome the recommendation that more research is needed into the mechanisms by which different foods, ultra-processed food or otherwise, influence health.”

fruit not fries

The House of Lords’ Food, Diet and Obesity Committee report highlights obesity as a public health crisis and a major economic problem.

Similarly, a youth activist at the UK food charity Bite Back comments: “I am delighted by the House of Lords’ recommendations to extend junk food advertising restrictions, review school food standards and extend free school meals.”

“If the Government really believes in creating the ‘healthiest generation of children ever, then they need to support us with action and bring these recommendations in as soon as possible. This is an opportunity to change that and protect the futures of millions of children from food-related health problems.”

The Bite Back spokesperson focuses on the proposed ban on junk food adverts, noting that people face the issue in their everyday lives.

“Whether it’s on social media, at bus stops or even on TV, these ads are everywhere,” the spokesperson explains. “Is it any wonder it’s junk food playing a starring role in children’s minds? We’re surrounded by a food environment that sets us up to fail.”

More needs to be done

Meanwhile, Dr. Nerys Astbury, associate professor of diet and obesity at Oxford University’s Nuffield Department of Primary Health Care Sciences, says that the report does not go far enough: “The House of Lords report concludes that obesity and diet-related disease are a public health emergency. While it’s great to have this acknowledged publicly by such a high-profile report, many, including those of us who work on diet and obesity research believe that this is already well established.”

“However, what is needed are immediate, specific and measurable actions which have the potential to reduce obesity and diet-related disease rates which contribute to ill health and have a significant impact on the wider economy,” she continues. “While the report goes some way to suggest several key actions which have the potential to help reduce obesity rates and prevent other diet related diseases, time and political will are needed to envisage these changes.”

Some of these policies suggested may be unpopular, and there will likely be resistance to making some of these changes, particularly from the food industry who try to resist policies which could impact their profit margins.”

Tom Sanders, professor emeritus of Nutrition and Dietetics, King’s College London, critiques: “The report recognizes the impact of new drug treatments of obesity that help patients comply with diets that contain fewer calories. It correctly focuses on prevention of obesity and the lifestyle changes that are needed.”

“However, the report conflates unhealthy diets with excessive calorie intake,” he stresses. “It is an excessive calorie intake not the mix of nutrients that cause obesity.”

Industry remains silent
Meanwhile, many F&B giants who may be affected if the UK government is to take action based on the proposals laid out in the lengthy report are yet to comment.

Among those that acknowledge the issues brought up by the House of Lords is Nomad Foods. CEO Stefan Descheemaeker says: “We welcome today’s report, marking a major step forward in tackling public health and diet. We support measures requiring companies to report on the proportion of their sales that come from healthy products, which we have been doing for the last seven years.”

“On tax, we believe this should be science-based in line with the UK Government’s Nutrient Profiling Model, that determines whether a product is healthy or less healthy based on its overall nutritional profile, rather than focusing on the specific levels of individual nutrients. This model would then help incentivize companies to reformulate to create healthier products. We’d also like to see mandatory front-of-pack labeling, that would help consumers to make more informed food choices.”

Meanwhile, Susan Jebb, chair of the Food Standards Agency (FSA), asserts: “The FSA welcomes the Committee’s comprehensive report. As an independent body set up to safeguard public health and protect consumers in relation to food, we wholeheartedly share the sentiment of this report. From our experience as a regulator, we agree it is important that any targets or requirements on businesses are accompanied by effective monitoring and enforcement to drive positive changes.”

“There is much in this report that warrants detailed consideration and we look forward to discussing these proposals with the Government.”