Junk Food and Emerging Food Laws

Junk Food and Emerging Food Laws

Junk Food, Children Health and Role of Policy and Law Makers

What should be India’s approach to minimize the Impact of Junk food on Public Health?

By:

Priyanka Sardana

Advocate and Patent Attorney

 Vice President, Supreme Court Women Lawyers Association,

Supreme Court of India, New Delhi

&

Vijay Sardana

PGDM (IIM-A), M.Sc. (Food Tech.)(CFTRI), B.Sc. (Dairy Tech.)

PG Diploma in International Trade Law and ADR (ILI), Justice (Harvard)

Leading International Agri-Food Business and Policy Expert

Convenor, Food Security & Sustainable Agriculture Foundation, New Delhi

Table of Contents:

1. Why this article, now?
2. Why products with negative nutrition impact are considered as “food”?
3. Right to Balanced and Nutritious Food is part of Fundamental Human Right
4. Protein-calorie ratio is vital for good health:
5. Role of Shareholders and Corporate Governance:
6. Lobbing to influence policies is the norm in Junk food trade:
7. Why UN is not trusting Voluntary guidelines and piecemeal nutrition initiatives?
8. Developing Countries like India are new dumping ground of Junk foods:
9. Why Junk Food Industry not willing to change but willing to exploiting loopholes in law?
10. Proper Laws & proper policies for the elementary school food & beverage environment
11. Why we need clear Law to control Junk Food?
12. Enforcement is must to protect Child health:
13. What is happening World over?
14. Why US are becoming strict with junk food now?
15. Live case study from USA:
16. Junk food adding Obesity by big numbers:
17. How did USA Get Here? Is India going the same way towards disaster?
18. What other countries are doing?
19. Media measures
20. Let’s Move! – A Citizen – Government Joint Initiative
21. Junk Food Situation in India:
22. What is the way forward?
23. Why we are targeting junk food industry when many other products are harmful?
24. Win-win situation is possible:
25. Let us discuss some option before these companies:
26. Who will drive the change?

Introduction:

“You are what you eat” is well known fact in food and nutrition science. In fact since, since beginning of mankind, significance of good food is well documented.

Oh, God, Give us food which does not cause any disease and also give us strength.

-Yajurveda.

He, who takes food in proper measure lives a long life and lives without disease, gets strength and alertness of mind. However, his children are born healthy and without any deformity or disease.

-       Mahabharatha

Still companies’ make products which are not good for health of people mainly children. Are we saying commercial considerations are more important than health of Children or mankind itself? Is this behaviour logical in educated and civilized society?

Why this article, now?

Delhi High Court is debating a serious issue about health of school kids and impact of junk foods on the health of school kids. I got the chance to read the reports submitted to documents and reports submitted to the committee appointed by Hon’ble High Court. It seems that expert committee missed some very vital aspects of food marketing and food nutrition while placing arguments before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. There are some serious gaps in the report submitted to the Hon’ble High Courts in relation to terms of reference given to the expert committee.

In the high decibel debate, somewhere we lost the focus from the objective of this Public Interest Litigation which is under consideration by the Hon’ble High Court.

In fact these issues have to be addressed at two levels:

1. Junk Food or unhealthy foods and related food laws
2. Junk Food and marketing and promotion Laws

The report submitted by expert group to Hon’ble court failed to address the concerns of people of this country. The reason is the compensation of expert group itself was lacking the understanding and commitment for the cause.

Why products with negative nutrition impact are considered as “food”?

My first point is, should we call or classify such products as “foods” which are not healthy as per nutrition science.

Food is term which should convey something which is good for health and body. What should be the term for products which are not good for health and body? This debate needs clear thinking. In current debate, such products are referred as “Junk food”.

In the name of food manufacturing, how much freedom manufactures should have to play with public health? If we go by the logic of Consumers Right of “Right to Choose”, in that case we should have very extensive and detailed requirement of disclosure for such products so that an adult and educated consumers should make an informed decision. Many companies are using legal provisions to hide the facts, but if these products are not good for health or have doubtful implication for health, should we grant them benefit of secrecy?

The sale of cigarettes and alcohol clearly indicates that consumers are not always making the right decision and we need a law to prevent the diseases and to control the spread of health hazards in the society, even if it means controlling the consumption by law. Larger good of society is more important than individual choice in some cases. The problem with junk food consumers, smokers and alcoholic people is first they make wrong choice, then they fell ill and then they become burden of society and medical system of the country. In place of tax payers money doing to schools and welfare of society goes for the treatment of such consumers those who can’t make right choice. First they burn their personal money and then they become liability for tax payers and society at large. Should we allow such freedom of choices? I think this is why America and other countries are bringing law to control the ale and promotion of junk foods in line with Alcohol and cigarettes.

Right to Balanced and Nutritious Food is part of Fundamental Human Right

In modern days, when faced with the public health crisis, we continue to prescribe medical remedies: nutrition pills and early-life nutrition strategies for those lacking in calories; slimming pills, lifestyle advice and calorie counting for the overweight, physical activities etc. But very often we ignore the source of the problem. We must tackle the systemic problems that generate poor nutrition in all its forms,” the independent expert said as he presented his report on nutrition to the UN Human Rights Council.

“The right to food means not only access to an adequate quantity of food, but also the ability to have a balanced and nutritious diet,” Mr. De Schutter underlined. “Governments must not abstain from their responsibility to secure this right.”

Mr. De Schutter identified five priority actions for placing nutrition at the heart of food systems in the developed and developing world:

·         taxing unhealthy products;

·         regulating foods high in saturated fats, salt and sugar;

·         cracking down on junk food advertising;

·         overhauling misguided agricultural subsidies that make certain ingredients cheaper than others; and

·         Supporting local food production so that consumers have access to healthy, fresh and nutritious foods.

“Urbanization, supermarketization and the global spread of modern lifestyles have shaken up traditional food habits. The result is a public health disaster,” the Special Rapporteur said. “Governments have been focusing on increasing calorie availability, but they have often been indifferent to what kind of calories are on offer, at what price, to whom they are accessible, and how they are marketed.”

Mr. Olivier De Schutter, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the right to food, highlighted, for example, that in 2010 U.S. companies spent $8.5 billion advertising food, candy and non-alcoholic beverages, while $44 million was budgeted for the U.S. Government’s primary standing healthy eating program.

Protein-calorie ratio is vital for good health:

Junk food not only bad in their own composition but they also destroy the required protein calorie ratio in diets. It means even if you consumes good food after consuming junk food the protein-calorie ratio in diet remains disturbed and impact health of consumer.

Other than disturbing the protein calorie ration, these products are have excessive sodium, saturated fats, trans-fats, sugar, and other ingredients like acids and other stabilizing chemicals which may go unnoticed.

Most of the junk foods fail on this vital nutrition parameter.

Role of Shareholders and Corporate Governance:

It is true that government and Public health authorities have to play their role, but what is more important and the fundamental questions are:

1.    Why companies make unhealthy food and target vulnerable sections like children through their advertisements and marketing gimmicks?

2.    What is their motivation to make unhealthy foods?

3.    What is their priority as corporate citizen?

It is high time we as citizen should ask these question to Board of Directors of these companies and celebrities when they endorse such unhealthy products. Concerned citizens should pose this question to all the learned managers and directors of such companies to understand what is the motive of having such products in the market place which are not good for people mainly kids.

The justification by companies is we are offering choice to consumers. We are not forcing people to consumer. Yes, the promoters of such products have their point. Unfortunately, for them profit for shareholders from the sale of unhealthy food is more important than the health of a children and public health.

Lobbing to influence policies is the norm in Junk food trade:

Unfortunately, unhealthy foods or Junk foods are highly profitable because they use the cheapest ingredients to make these products compared to their nutritious counterparts. Due to these profits they hire some of the best opinion leaders, policy influencers to silence their critics and also undertake limited social work to silence NGOs and Policy makers. The best example is checking the name of people on the roles of such companies and their associations and NGOs. You will find people those who can full the strings of power and policy makers. If they are actions and activities are good for society, why they have to do all this at all. It means they themselves know they are on weak wicket. I ask all of you to pick-up the list of eminent people on their panel and advisory group. They are not motivating these companies to stop making junk food; in fact they all are there to cover-up the crime against society by these companies. To use these influential peoples are used as toys and puppets by these companies and willing to spend any money for this cover-up.

The Special Rapporteur highlighted, for example, that in 2010 U.S. companies spent $8.5 billion advertising food, candy and non-alcoholic beverages, while $44 million was budgeted for the U.S. Government’s primary standing healthy eating program.**

Why UN is not trusting Voluntary guidelines and piecemeal nutrition initiatives?

According to UN Reports and experts, “We have deferred to food companies the responsibility for ensuring that a good nutritional balance emerges. Voluntary guidelines and piecemeal nutrition initiatives have failed to create a system with the right signals, and the odds remain stacked against the achievement of a healthy, balanced diet,” he said.

The Special Rapporteur also identified the abundance of processed food as a major threat to improving nutrition. “Heavy processing thrives in our global food system, and is a win-win for multinational agri-food companies. Processed items can be produced and distributed on a huge scale, thanks to cheap subsidized ingredients and their increased shelf life.”

“But for the people, it is a lose-lose,” he stressed. “Heavily processed foods lead to diets richer in saturated and trans-fatty acids, salt and sugars. Children become hooked on the junk foods targeted at them. In better-off countries, the poorest population groups are most affected because foods high in fats, sugar and salt are often cheaper than healthy diets as a result of misguided subsidies whose health impacts have been wholly ignored.”

Developing Countries like India are new dumping ground of Junk foods:

As the western work is waking up to the reality about Junk foods, now these corporations have to look for new dumping ground to meet the demands of their selfish and greedy shareholders.

The UN expert noted that the West is now exporting diabetes and heart disease to developing countries, along with the processed foods that line the shelves of global supermarkets. By 2030, more than 5 million people will die each year before the age of 60 from non-communicable diseases linked to diets.

“We should not simply invest our hopes in medicalizing our diets with enriched products, or changing people’s choices through health warnings. We need ambitious, targeted nutrition strategies to protect the right to adequate food, and such strategies will only work if the food systems underpinning them are put right,” the Special Rapporteur said.

Why Junk Food Industry not willing to change but willing to exploiting loopholes in law?

Long the target of people who blame soda’s calories and popularity among young people for contributing to rising childhood obesity, the nation’s largest beverage distributors say they will stop selling non-diet sodas to schools and start serving reduced sizes of other drinks.

“This one policy can add years and years and years to the lives of a very large number of young people,” said former President Bill Clinton, whose foundation announced the deal Wednesday and has targeted childhood obesity for the past year.

The beverage companies agreed to sell only water, unsweetened juice and low-fat and non-fat milk, flavoured and unflavoured, in elementary and middle schools. Diet sodas and sports drinks will be sold in high schools.

“I don’t think anyone should underestimate the influence this agreement will have,” said Susan Neely, president and CEO of the American Beverage Association. “I think other people are going to want to follow this agreement because it just makes sense.”

The deal was brokered by the Alliance for a Healthier Generation, a collaboration between the William J. Clinton Presidential Foundation and the American Heart Association, and involves industry leaders Cadbury Schweppes PLC, Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. as well as the beverage association, which together control 87 percent of the public and private school drink market. Officials said they hoped the other 13 percent would follow suit.

If Junk food industry is reluctantly willing to fall in line in USA, why they don’t want to stop selling in schools in India. Are Children of US dearer to them than Children in India? Why people supporting junk food industry don’t answer the facts?

Proper Laws & proper policies for the elementary school food & beverage environment

State policies and state laws help reduce the availability of sugar- and fat-laden foods and beverages in elementary schools, according to a study published online in JAMA Pediatrics.

Researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago looked at the association between established policies and laws and the availability of candy, baked goods, ice cream, chips, sugar-sweetened beverages, and soda sold outside the school meal program. More than 1,800 elementary schools in 45 states responded to surveys during the 2008-2009 and 2010-2011 school years.

The researchers found that in schools without district or state guidelines limiting sugar content in foods, 43.5 percent sold sweets. When both district and state guidelines restricted the sale of sweets, only 32.3 percent of schools — nearly a quarter fewer — sold these foods.

Why we need clear Law to control Junk Food?

The study shows that “only proper policies can improve the elementary school food and beverage environment, and state and district policies are often reinforcing one another,” says Jamie Chriqui, lead author of the study and senior research scientist at UIC’s Institute for Health Research and Policy.

Sugar-sweetened beverages were available in only one-fourth as many schools that had a district-wide ban as in those that had no policy (3.6 percent and 13.1 percent of schools, respectively). But the availability of sugar-sweetened beverages was not influenced by state policies.

Public elementary schools are required, through an unfunded federal mandate, to have a wellness policy with nutritional guidelines for “competitive” foods and beverages — those that vie with items in the school meal program.

“Given the problems we have with overconsumption of sugar-sweetened beverages by children and youth, the fact that unfunded district policies are actually helping to change the availability of sugar sweetened beverages in elementary schools is a really positive sign,” said Chriqui.

Enforcement is must to protect Child health:

However, the study also revealed that the policies are not being fully implemented. For example, the researchers found that of the 121 surveyed schools that were in states with laws prohibiting sale of sugar-sweetened beverages in elementary schools, 22 schools — all in southern states — still sold sugar-sweetened beverages despite the state-wide bans.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is working to implement nationwide standards governing competitive foods and beverages in schools as part of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.

“There is a lot of room for continued progress,” said Chriqui, who noted that the study provides promising data to guide the USDA’s efforts to impose new federal standards for competitive foods and beverages.

What is happening World over?

Why US are becoming strict with junk food now?

The driving force is the first lady of US and she is concerned about Children as mother, not the President of US, because all political parties take funds from junk food producers and polluters

Live case study from USA:

In USA, starting July 1, schools will no longer be able to sell unhealthy junk food in cafeterias, vending machines or at bake sale fundraisers that occur during school hours, according to a new mandate from the USDA. Schools will have to replace the junk with nutritious items. But that healthy food has its own set of requirements.

“The idea here is simple—our classrooms should be healthy places where kids aren’t bombarded with ads for junk food, Because when parents are working hard to teach their kids healthy habits at home, their work shouldn’t be undone by unhealthy messages at school.” Obama said in a statement.

According to the USDA website, “The Smart Snacks in School standards stipulate that all snack foods sold in school must be 'whole grain rich,' meaning they contain 50% whole grains or have whole grains as the first ingredient, or have as the first ingredient a fruit, a vegetable, a dairy product or a protein-rich food. Combination foods that contain at least ¼ cup fruit and/or vegetable or naturally contain 10% of the daily value (DV) of calcium, potassium, vitamin D or dietary fiber will also be accepted.”

The site goes on to add that the Smart Snacks in School rules don’t apply to foods brought from home or to special occasions, including “birthday parties, off-campus fundraisers, athletic events and school plays or foods sold during non-school hours (30-mins after school).”

Junk food adding Obesity by big numbers:

Over the past three decades, childhood obesity rates in America have tripled, and today, nearly one in three children in America are overweight or obese. The numbers are even higher in African American and Hispanic communities, where nearly 40% of the children are overweight or obese. If we don't solve this problem, one third of all children born in 2000 or later will suffer from diabetes at some point in their lives. Many others will face chronic obesity-related health problems like heart disease, high blood pressure, cancer, and asthma.

How did USA Get Here? Is India going the same way towards disaster?

Thirty years ago, most people led lives that kept them at a healthy weight. Kids walked to and from school every day, ran around at recess, participated in gym class, and played for hours after school before dinner. Meals were home-cooked with reasonable portion sizes and there was always a vegetable on the plate. Eating fast food was rare and snacking between meals was an occasional treat.

Today, children experience a very different lifestyle. Walks to and from school have been replaced by car and bus rides. Gym class and after-school sports have been cut; afternoons are now spent with TV, video games, and the internet. Parents are busier than ever and families eat fewer home-cooked meals. Snacking between meals is now commonplace.

Thirty years ago, kids ate just one snack a day, whereas now they are trending toward three snacks, resulting in an additional 200 calories a day. And one in five school-age children has up to six snacks a day.

Portion sizes have also exploded- they are now two to five times bigger than they were in years past. Beverage portions have grown as well- in the mid-1970s, the average sugar-sweetened beverage was 13.6 ounces compared to today, and kids think nothing of drinking 20 ounces of sugar-sweetened beverages at a time.

In total, we are now eating 31 percent more calories than we were forty years ago –including 56 percent more fats and oils and 14 percent more sugars and sweeteners. The average American now eats fifteen more pounds of sugar a year than in 1970.

Eight to 18-year old adolescents spend an average of 7.5 hours a day using entertainment media, including, TV, computers, video games, cell phones and movies, and only one-third of high school students get the recommended levels of physical activity.

Now that’s the bad news. The good news is that by making just a few lifestyle changes, we can help our children lead healthier lives–and we already have the tools we need to do it. We just need the will.

Should India wait for disaster to happen or should take precautions now itself.

What other countries are doing?

France

In 2005, vending machine selling soft drinks and chocolate bars were banned from schools in France.

Since the beginning of March 2007, advertisements for unhealthy food and beverages in France must carry health messages. Advertisers, who ignore the new legislation and do not run the message, will have to pay a fine of 1.5 percent of the cost of the advertisement.

This applies to newspapers, television, radio, magazine and online advertisements. However, some health and consumer organisations believe that this will not be particularly effective and consumers will ignore the messages.

Ireland

Last year, Ireland imposed a ban on TV adverts for sweets and fast food, as well as prohibiting the use of celebrities and sports stars to promote junk food to children.

Latvia

In 2006, Latvia became the first EU country to completely ban the sale of junk foods in schools and nurseries. The ban includes the sale of food and drinks containing artificial colouring agents, sweeteners, preservatives, amino-acids, and caffeine is forbidden in all Latvian state schools and kinder gardens.

As part of the program, the ministry will also promote healthy foods such as milk, juice and fruits.

Sweden and Norway

25 years ago Sweden, the only EU member with a total ban on advertising for children, banned the advertising of junk food aimed at children under 12. Norway has a similar regime.

School measures

United Kingdom

In 2005, vending machine selling soft drinks, crisps and chocolate bars were band from schools in the UK. A year later, confectionery, crisps and fizzy drinks were banned from being included in school lunches. The standards established were:

·         No confectionery should be sold in schools

·         No bagged savoury snacks other than nuts and seeds - and these must be without added sugar or salt

·         A variety of fresh fruit and vegetables should be available

·         All children should have access to free, fresh, chilled water at all times, and this should not be in the toilet block.

·         The only other drinks available should be bottled water, low fat milk, pure fruit juices, yoghurt and milk drinks with less than 5% sugar, or drinks made from these such as smoothies, tea or coffee. Artificial sweeteners will be allowed but only in these types of drinks.

Media measures

From April 2007, "junk food" adverts will not be allowed during or close to programmes that target children, or those with a higher than normal proportion of viewers aged between 4 and 9 years. From January 2008, this will be extended to cover programmes that target children up to 15.

The UK is also planning to ban junk food companies from advertising in magazines aimed at the under-16s.

On the 3rd May 2007, ten UK organisations sent a letter to the UK Government urging it to step in to protect children from irresponsible food marketing tricks

Let’s Move! – A Citizen – Government Joint Initiative

"The physical and emotional health of an entire generation and the economic health and security of our nation is at stake." - First Lady Michelle Obama at the Let’s Move! Launch on February 9, 2010.

Let’s Move! Is a comprehensive initiative, launched by the First Lady, dedicated to solving the challenge of childhood obesity within a generation, so that children born today will grow up healthier and able to pursue their dreams? Combining comprehensive strategies with common sense, Let's Move! Is about putting children on the path to a healthy future during their earliest months and years. Giving parents helpful information and fostering environments that support healthy choices. Providing healthier foods in our schools. Ensuring that every family has access to healthy, affordable food and helping kids become more physically active, by avoiding junk foods.

Everyone has a role to play in reducing childhood obesity, including parents, elected officials from all levels of government, schools, health care professionals, faith-based and community-based organizations, and private sector companies. Your involvement is vital to ensuring a healthy future for our children.

Junk Food Situation in India:

National Institute of Nutrition of Indian Council of Medical Research has developed Recommended Daily Allowances for most of the items suitable for Children.

Junk food not only bad in their own composition but they also destroy the required protein calorie ration in diets.

Recommended Protein-Energy Ratio for Good Health

Group	Recommended protein Intake (Gms/day)	Recommended Energy Intake (Kcal/day)	Protein Energy Ratio (in %)
Preschool children:
1-3 years	21	1240	6.8
4-6 years	29	1690	6.9
7-9 years	40	1950	8.2
Adolescents:
13-15 years Boys	67	2450	10.9
13-15 years Girls	62	2060	12.0
16-18 years Boys	75	2640	11.4
16-18 years Girls	60	2060	11.7
Adult (Moderate Activity)
Man	60	2900	8.3
Woman	50	2200	9.1
Pregnant Woman	65	2500	10.4
Lactating Women (0-6 months)	75	2750	10.9

Now let us see what the protein energy ratio in popular junk foods, most of them have just calories and no protein. The reason is simple, protein sources are expensive and addition of protein to their recipes will increase cost of production and will reduce their profitability.

That is why, while designing product criteria is profitability is the sole criteria and not health of consumer. Otherwise, there is no reason why better formulations cannot be developed for consumers. If this is the motive, only law can change the situation. There will be no motivation to follow any voluntary compliance in this regard. For junk food manufacturers, money is God. They are keen worshipper of their Money God. Because once they have money they can buy policy makers, legal brains and anything which is for sale.

What is the way forward?

There is very little hope from policy makers that they will go against big corporates because their financial power of corporates is more powerful than intellectual power and public health and service desire of policy makers.

Civil society has to raise the voice at all levels to protect their own health. This is a long battle against mighty corporates. Hopefully, one day the day civil society voice becomes more powerful and impactful, only then policies may change. Till then common man has to suffer from commonly popular junk foods.

The important point is how much time policy makers will take to change the situation. Use of social media and development of counterforce against junk food is the key for tilting the balance in favour of society in place of corporates.

Why we are targeting junk food industry when many other products are harmful?

Junk food industry is thinking that they are unfairly targeted. When there are many products which are harmful to consumers. In my view, we should see the track record of companies and products. If they have modified their recipes to meet the nutritional requirement or improve the nutrition profile of the product we should take their case separately with lenient view. But where products are not modified after many decades of debate it means these product manufacturers are not keen to improve the product or these products cannot be improved. In this situation stricter conditions can be imposed. In other cases we should ask companies to improve the formulations and give an undertaking by when they will be able to improve the content of their products to address the concerns expressed by nutrition experts and consumer groups.

Win-win situation is possible:

The same companies can also make good food in place of junk food. We are not against their technical skills what we want is to motivate them to make good food. Let them make little less profit and deliver good food. This will be win-win situation for all.

Let us discuss some option before these companies:        

Many company those who are blamed for manufacturing junk food also has some important strength. They have created product with little food value and made them a marketing success. Image what wonders they can do if they develop sensible products and promote the same among masses. The same companies can also do great service to the society. These companies have infrastructure, skill sets, research capabilities, marketing and distribution strengths, etc. The only thing which they need to address is the demand of shareholders for super normal profit at the cost of public health. I am sure Board of Directors can discuss this issue in their Annual General Body Meeting and seek the direction from shareholders.  

Once they decide to move into sensible products they can also do similar wonders in market place what they have done with junk foods.

Who will drive the change?

There are two options for any change –

1.    Self-motivated change

2.    Law induced changes, including tax laws

3.    Change under social pressure

It is surprising why people resist change for good health for everyone. Globally we have seen all forces work in support of each other for a positive change. Whether Commercial considerations and corporate powers are more influential at the cost health of children or healthy food for all is priority. Let us see what happens in India and in Indian Courts. We must ensure that all should get a chance to contribute for the improvement in health and life of people.

This subject is under serious discussion in India at all levels. Let us hope we should be able to find a way out which is good for health of children and open new opportunities for currently considered as junk food manufacturers.

Please do let us know your views on the same. If more inputs are required, we will be happy to share the same.

@ @ @