The House of Lords publishes review of ultra-processed food
I rose at the crack of dawn this morning, eager to review the report from the Food, Diet, and Obesity Committee of the House of Lords.
Throughout the first half of this year, the committee took evidence from a diverse group of voices (including mine), and on contentious and polarised issues – they listened to over 50 hours of oral evidence and received 150 written submissions from across industry, civil society and academia – and I am pleased that they’ve landed on a set of recommendations that could radically shift the dial on the UK’s public health crisis. Given our near five-year campaign on ultra-processed food, I was especially pleased how much attention is given to promoting a shift to minimally processed foods.
Several of the Soil Association’s headline recommendations have been adopted by the Committee, with our evidence cited in support. Most notably, the inquiry recommends that Government:
Introduce a multi-pronged, joined up, coherent food strategy
This isn’t a novel recommendation but it’s necessarily the headline – decades of piecemeal government policy have failed to address obesity or support better dietary health. “The government must publish a comprehensive and integrated food strategy, led at the highest level, setting targets for a healthy food system and plans to achieve them” . The committee says the strategy should prioritise industry regulation, should harness the potential of school meals, and should work to promote consumption of whole and minimally processed foods.
Regulate the food industry to provide a level playing field
“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... Voluntary efforts to promote healthier food have failed… Further mandatory regulation is now needed.”
We’re cited in support of mandatory regulation: “the Soil Association argued that robust mandatory regulation of the food industry was necessary, as ‘voluntary invitations to the industry to improve its product portfolio by reformulating have failed. They have sucked up huge amounts of policymaker time and industry attention and got us nowhere.’”
And protect the policymaking process
The report includes a robust analysis of industry influence over policymaking and recommends that government should respond. “One symptom of the problem is the way that the food industry seeks through sophisticated lobbying strategies to influence both Government policymaking and academic research for its own ends. Evidence suggests that such lobbying has been influential… Industry exerts a powerful influence over the policymaking process, using tried and tested lobbying techniques.” We are again cited in support: “The Soil Association agreed that industry lobbying had successfully: “sought to frame the acceptable, ‘good,’ policy solution as being individual-focused, with targeted interventions aimed at individual behaviour change through, for example, education and information. … The unacceptable, ‘bad’, policy solution has been framed as being whole-population-based and statutory.” In response, the committee recommends tighter restrictions on industry engagement: “food businesses that fail to meet healthy sales targets must be excluded from any discussions on the formation of policy on food, diet and obesity prevention.”
Act to promote minimally processed foods
The inquiry heard a predictably polarised set of views on ultra-processing and reached a balanced stance, oriented around the benefits of minimally processed foods. They recognise that “the definition of ultra-processed foods was not developed as a consumer tool or a policy instrument, but rather to test the hypothesis that an influx of industrially processed foods was causing an epidemic of diet-related disease”. Nevertheless “the rapidly growing epidemiological evidence showing a correlation between consumption of UPFs defined using the NOVA classification and poor health outcomes is alarming.” They say in response that government should invest in further research, and “act to ensure that the food industry reduces sales of less healthy foods and makes healthier, largely unprocessed and minimally processed foods affordable and accessible for all.”
Harness the potential of schools to promote healthy diets
The committee highlights that “too many schools are failing to offer food of an acceptable standard for children and young people.” In response, they state that “Monitoring of compliance with improved school food standards and support for schools to procure healthier food must be brought in.” In addition to reviewing Free School Meal policy, Government should also “Immediately take forward reforms to the Government Buying Standards for Food and Catering Services to ensure that schools as well as other public sector organisations must procure healthier food.”
Food for Life is cited in this context: “Naomi Duncan drew attention to the Soil Association’s voluntary Food for Life accreditation: “We need something like that for every school so that we know that there is a minimum level of quality.” The Soil Association said that this scheme “emphasises fresh preparation, positively shaping children’s taste preferences, minimising harmful additives, and embedding food education.” It estimates that if every school in England took up the Food for Life accreditation, one million more children would be eating their five-a-day.”
Prioritise infant and maternal health
The committee also recognised that unhealthy eating behaviours are established at the earliest age. They recommend in response that Government “Set goals for improving maternal and infant nutrition to prevent childhood obesity, develop a comprehensive and integrated strategy by the end of 2025… Legislate by the end of 2025 to set strong mandatory compositional and marketing standards for commercial infant foods [and] … Immediately review food standards for early years settings, making them mandatory, supporting early years settings to meet them and establishing a performance framework.”
