New scorecards show fast-food companies failing nutrition efforts

Ten restaurant chains had their nutrition policies and practices assessed by Deakin University's Global Centre for Preventive Health and Nutrition GLOBE in the Institute for Health Transformation (IHT), and only one company scored higher than 50 out of a possible 100.

The restaurants assessed included McDonald's, KFC, Hungry Jack's, Domino's Pizza, Subway, Pizza Hut, Red Rooster, Oporto, Nando's and Guzman y Gomez.

The highest scores were achieved by Nando’s (51 out of 100) and Guzman y Gomez (48 out of 100), while Red Rooster (26 out of 100), Oporto (24 out of 100) and Hungry Jack's (19 out of 100) recorded the lowest scores.

GLOBE Professor of Public Health Gary Sacks said company scorecards had improved slightly from the first assessment in 2018, with average scores climbing from 24 to 36, but the improvement was not enough to make any real difference to population health.

'Unhealthy diets and obesity are among the leading contributors to poor health in this country. Most fast-food companies now acknowledge they need to be part of the solution to improve population diets, but they continue to add to the problem,' Professor Sacks said.

'Fast-food menus are dominated by unhealthy options, they heavily discount their unhealthiest products, and fast-food companies are big sponsors of sports and other activities popular with children, at both elite and community levels.

'Australians spend almost a third of their food budgets on fast-food and eating out, and if we want to improve what Australians eat, we need to set higher standards for how major fast-food chains operate.

'Our kids' lives are inundated with ads for fast-food, and they associate their favourite sports with fast-food brands. It’s no wonder that only 8% of Australian kids eat healthy diets.

'It is common to see price discounts and meal deal incentives on the least healthy products, such as free chips and $1 Frozen Cokes.

'These marketing strategies need to be turned around so that price promotions and loyalty bonuses are used to incentivize healthier selections. Combination meals, particularly children's meals, could be made healthier simply by offering healthier sides and drinks as the default choice.'

The fast food scorecard published today, Inside Our Quick Service Restaurants, aims to recognise and encourage good practice, note key areas for improvement, and advocate for sector-wide changes so that food companies can better contribute to improving population health.

Each company was scored out of 100 for their nutrition policies and practices, according to information provided by publicly available websites and company sustainability reports.

The healthiness of each chain's menu items was not part of the assessment, although company policies and efforts towards offering healthier items was a key focus of the assessment.

Areas of assessment included: (1) corporate strategy, (2) policies to improve product healthiness, (3) nutrition information, (4) marketing of unhealthy products and brands, especially to children, (5) accessibility and affordability of healthy menu options, and (6) transparency of external relationships.

Information was measured against industry benchmarks and public health best practice. Each company was invited to verify the data, and six of the ten companies accepted that invitation.

Professor Sacks said while most major fast-food companies now publicly state their commitment to improving nutrition and have a range of internal nutrition policies in place, their actions fell far short of best practice recommendations.

'The current government strategy around nutrition relies heavily on retailers acting voluntarily but it's clear these companies are not taking the required steps to improve our food environments,' Professor Sacks said.

'Increased regulation is desperately needed, and keeping our sports fields and TV broadcasts free from unhealthy fast-food brands would be a good place to start.'