Food companies are driving a global rise in ultra-processed food consumption that is damaging our health, and also preventing government action that could limit its harm, an international study reveals.
The three-part series on ultra-processed foods (UPFs) published today in The Lancet says evidence of UPFs harms justifies immediate public health action and outlines a roadmap for change towards impactful government regulation, community mobilisation and affordable healthier diets.
Forty-three experts from across the globe, including researchers from the University of Melbourne, Deakin University and the University of Sydney, were involved in the landmark series.
UPFs include convenience foods like chips, sweets and ready meals. Made from processed ingredients and additives, they often contain high levels of sugar, salt and saturated fat, with limited nutritional value.
University of Melbourne Associate Professor Gyorgy Scrinis, from the School of Agriculture, Food and Ecosystem Sciences, who co-led the series, said confronting ultra-processing demands a bold, coordinated global response.
"Only by combining stricter regulation of poor-quality food products with realistic support for more nutritious choices can we truly promote better diets for all," Associate Professor Scrinis said.
Paper one, co-authored byDeakin University Dr Priscila Machado, from the Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN),reviews the scientific evidence that shows UPFs are displacing long-established dietary patterns, worsening diet quality, and are associated with an increased risk of multiple chronic diet-related diseases.
"There is well-established evidence that ultra-processed foods are displacing healthy diets and harming health globally," Dr Machado said. "In the face of vested interests, we must be bold and address the issue to protect our collective health."
Paper two, led by Associate Professor Scrinis, outlines the coordinated policies needed to regulate and reduce UPF production, marketing, and consumption.
"Policies must ensure that healthy, whole and minimally processed foods are accessible and affordable to all – not just for those with time to cook, but for busy families and individuals who rely on convenient options," Associate Professor Scrinis said.
The authors propose stronger marketing restrictions – especially for adverts directed at children, on digital media, and at the brand level – as well as banning UPFs in public institutions such as schools and hospitals and placing limits on UPFs sales and shelve space in supermarkets.
"Governments should be considering policies like restricting UPF marketing directed at children, placing front-of-pack warning labels on products, and getting UPFs out of hospitals and schools," Professor Mark Lawrence, also from IPAN at Deakin University, said.
The third and final paper led by University of Sydney Dr Phillip Baker, from the School of Public Health, who also co-led the Series, explains how global corporations, rather than individual choices, are driving the rise of UPFs.
The experts say food companies use cheap ingredients and industrial methods to cut costs and combine this with aggressive marketing and appealing designs to boost consumption.
The study also outlines the tactics that food companies use to influence legislation through lobbying politicians, coordinating hundreds of interest groups worldwide, making political donations and using litigation to delay policies.
"As their global annual sales top $1.9 trillion, big food companies are making huge profits by replacing whole and minimally processed foods in diets with unhealthy ultra-processed foods," Dr Baker said.
"Like the coordinated efforts to challenge the tobacco industry, we need a strong global public health response that stands up to corporate power, safeguards policy decisions from political lobbying, and builds powerful coalitions that advocate for healthy, fair and sustainable food systems."
