'The Food Industry is an Enemy of Public Health'

NTNU Professor Steinar Krokstad Sharply Criticises Big Ag and Big Food, and I agree: Let's all 'Follow the Science™' on This One

I’m a wee bit short on time today, hence but a translation, with emphases added, and a few bottom lines.

---

Eight Years of Promises About Healthier Food: Professor Considers the Food Industry an Enemy of Public Health

By Sverre Lilleeng, NRK, 11 March 2024 [source]

In 2016, various governments collaborated with the Norwegian food industry to make our food healthier. But the result has not been quite as hoped.

The shopping trip will soon be over. On top of the cart are milk, minced meat, and everything else that was on the shopping list.

As you approach the checkout, you have to pass the store's latest temptations: large chocolate bars on offer. Take three, pay for two! Snack are placed right next to the ice cream.

It is Hard to Resist

But the goal of the collaboration between the authorities and those who make and sell the food [sic] is actually that you should resist.

Because it will be ‘easier for the consumer to make healthier choices’, sums up the Directorate of Health [fat chance for ‘food’ that makes most people addicts due to a long laundry list of additives].

The Sell What People Buy

But despite eight years of intentions, we eat less fish, less fruit and berries, and still take in too much salt. The sugar content in the food has not changed much. The same applies to saturated fat and the use of coarse flour and vegetables.

‘The results are in. We are going in the wrong direction’, says NTNU professor Steinar Krokstad. He is clear about why this is so.

We have a business community that does not distinguish between health-promoting and health-damaging goods, and sells what pays. They are an enemy of public health.

Almost two thirds of the population are now overweight. And almost a quarter of adults are obese.

If we had managed to follow the dietary advice, society could save over NOK 154 billion [divide by 10 to arrive at US$ equivalents] per year, according to a calculation from 2017.

Big Food Cares Little About What People Eat [why should they?]

Krokstad was part of an expert group which, right after the New Year, gave the authorities new advice on what should be done to improve our diet. Here he only speaks on behalf of himself as a public health researcher.

Among other things, the expert group suggested increasing the taxes on drinks with added sugar, giving free fruit and vegetables to children at school and, introducing proper labelling of our food [the last item makes sense, the second one I’m unsure about in terms of creating a habit of dependency, and taxes on consumption items are also only partially a good idea—what about levelling more dues on the importation of certain ingredients for the producers?].

Krokstad believes that the food industry, both the shops and the industry, have gotten away too cheaply:

They want to sell anything to increase turnover and care little about what people eat [so, what about individual responsibility, then?].

Because they have a great opportunity to influence us through advertising and the way they offer goods in the shops [this reeks of collaboration by retailers, jus’ sayin’].

Unfortunately, I have no confidence that those who sell food really have any intention of helping with public health issues [what took you so long to realise this?].

The professor believes that stronger incentives [sic…if public health officialdom wouldn’t be so single-mindedly focused on jabbing everyone, perhaps they’d have more time?] are needed to get the food industry to contribute to a healthier diet [also, why would a drug pusher ‘contribute to a healthier’ lifestyle of his clieets?].

I believe that there must simply be consequences for them financially, if they do not follow through on the letter of the law. Because otherwise, as it is today, they really do as they want.

Neither those who produce the food nor the grocery chains recognise the criticism from the professor, or the claim that they are enemies of public health. Read what they say further down in the case.

Meetings and Workshops

Special adviser Ole Berg in the Directorate of Health says that the food industry has worked closely with the authorities after the first agreement was concluded in 2016 [what’s the technical term for such close cooperation between Big Gov’t and Big Business? Here’s a hint].

They have attended meetings and attended workshops and so on. Some have worked to change the recipes of the goods they sell, or made other moves in the stores.

At the same time, he says that the Directorate knows that there are commercial interests that business takes into account [oh, you’re all so smart]:

They make choices that are not always in the best interest of public health. But that's how it should be in a free market [what an indictment of the consumer].

Berg admits the authorities and the business world have not reached the goals they have set themselves, even though a lot of good work has been done.

So it may indicate that you also need other means to achieve them.

Tax on Sugary Drinks

Petter Brubakk in NHO Mat og drikke [an industry lobby association] is proud of the cooperation that the industry has with the authorities:

I don't think you will find any other European country where the authorities and the business community work so closely to achieve good results [again, what’s the technical term for such cooperation? Here’s the hint again].

You are called enemies of public health. What do you say to that?

[Brubakk] That way of characterising a serious industry is very unwarranted and not very conducive to a good debate about the way we ensure better public health [I’m sure it also hurt their feelings].

Those who produce drinks have ensured that there are now largely sugar-free variants of any beverage you want [the key word here is ‘largely’].

In the decade before the letter of intent was signed, sugar consumption in Norway plummeted. In 2016, the decline has flattened out.

But Brubakk does not want a new tax on sugary drinks, even though it is recommended by both the World Health Organization [muahahahahahaha] and the Norwegian expert committee.

We have tried the tax instrument. All the challenges we have with public health and diet today have therefore arisen while we had taxes.

He also places part of the responsibility on the consumers:

Many products have been developed which unfortunately have only remained on the shelves for a few weeks or months, because not enough people wanted them [here, NRK could have continued down this rabbit-hole, but for ‘whatever reason’, they didn’t—shame on them].

Good with Customers Who Live Long

At Coop [a large Norwegian cooperative grocery chain; full disclosure, I’m a member], Ingvill Størksen says that they are aware that they have an important role to play. And she is aware that the goals in the letter of intent have not yet been reached:

At the same time, it is also the case that our role is not to refuse people to buy what they want [so, Big Food produces addiction-inducing ‘food’, which is what ‘people want to buy’—as a thought experiment, replace ‘food’ with ‘illicit substance of your choice’; you’re welcome].

Having healthy customers who live a long time is good for both us and the customer, so to speak [ouch, that one hurts].

We have to do what we can to get customers into our store. When customers are in our store, we also ‘nudge’ them towards healthier choices. But we are not supposed to decide what the customers should choose.

---

Bottom Lines

The above may be summarised as follows:

• ‘Experts™’ know that a lot of what is sold as ‘food’ is a lot of things but healthy.

• Retailers also know that, and they also offer ‘alternatives’.

• Government and public health officialdom also knows these things, but for whatever reason elects to collaborate with Big Business instead of regulating it.

And here we are: Big Food sells ‘products’ that make people addicted and/or sick, and people buy these items ‘because they want it’, if only due to propaganda (‘advertising’, if you’re sensitive to the truth) and the addictive qualities of the ingredients.

Be reasonable, buy unprocessed foodstuffs, if possible directly from the producer.

If possible, produce as much of your own food as possible.

Most importantly, try to resist your urges and vices when at the grocery store.

Your life may very well depend on it.