Deakin study reveals the big business tactics making us fatter

The study, compiled by researchers at Deakin's Global Obesity Centre in the School of Health and Social Development, interviewed public health advocates and former policy makers to examine the corporate political tactics 'Big Food' uses to fatten up its bottom line.

But lead researcher Dr Gary Sacks said the Australian population were also being fattened up as a consequence.

"In Australia, unhealthy diet is the biggest contributor to the burden of disease, with one in four children now overweight or obese," Dr Sacks said.

"The food industry has a major influence on the products people choose to eat and drink. The powerful junk food industry is highly political and uses carefully designed strategies to influence policy and public opinion in its favour.

"These tactics, often intentionally, undermine efforts to prevent and control obesity and diet-related disease."

Dr Sacks said one way the industry did this was by shaping the evidence base on diet- and public-health related issues, sometimes with dodgy science.

"Several of our study participants said the food industry did not systematically follow international research standards, and cherry-picked results that suited their position," he said.

"And while their research is often not published in peer-reviewed journals, policy makers and the media still give it equal weight to independent research that does.

“Then we see professional associations like The Nutrition Society of Australia and the Dietitians Association hold conferences with sponsorship from the who’s who of junk food companies. It’s a really bad look and undermines the integrity of these professions.

"The food industry also directly supports the major political parties. Our research came across examples of how proposed new health policies and industry regulations were axed because politicians didn’t want to upset major political party donors."

Dr Sacks said the junk food industry also worked to pit researchers against each other in ways that discredited public health advocacy that was bad for their business.

"One participant explained that the food industry would set up antagonism between people working on physical activity and those working on nutrition so that they debate against each other instead of working together," he said.

"They will then get people who argue that physical activity is more important than nutrition, and that debate becomes the focus publically, instead of perhaps a call for greater industry regulation."

Dr Sacks said it was important to note that all of these methods were legal ways for a big business to improve its financial performance.

"But the significant risk that these practices pose to public health must be mitigated as a matter of urgency," he said.

"Small steps could be for the food industry to disclose the funding they provide to researchers, professional bodies, community groups and political parties.

"The government could introduce stronger conflict of interest processes to prevent commercial vested interests dominating public policy development. They could also require more detailed disclosure of information in the Register of Lobbyists in Australia, such as amount spent on lobbying and issues discussed.

"Sunlight is a great disinfectant."

‘Maximising shareholder value: a detailed insight into the corporate political activity of the Australian food industry’ was published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health this week.