Big Sugar is having its tobacco moment — The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

29 Янв 2014 | Author: | No comments yet »
Bavaria 29

Big Sugar is having its tobacco moment

By Kieron Rooney

Updated October 29, 2013 07:55:31

Photo: Just like Big Tobacco, Big Sugar could be the next big public health campaign. (ABC TV/Catalyst)

Should we treat food and drinks high in added sugars like we do alcohol and demand separate areas to sell them? Kieron Rooney thinks so.

There is not a single study showing that added sugar is good for you.

These words are from investment banking firm Credit Suisse .

While many may question nutritional advice from a group of economists, few could dispute their ability to identify accurate trends in data.

In a report on global sugar consumption, Credit Suisse has identified growing negative views towards sugar which it says provides green shoots for dietary changes and social health advancement.

The report is a warning to the food and beverage industry and specifically to companies with an economic model that is dependent on products manufactured with added sugar.

The Credit Suisse warning suggests these companies should prepare for government-imposed changes to the way they operate their businesses including regulations on sugar-sweetened foods, taxation or greater opportunities for consumers to self-regulate sugar consumption by providing ‘healthier’ alternatives including products manufactured with non-sugar sweeteners.

Ultimately, the investment bankers believe taxation would be the best approach and will provide the best outcome.

If all this tax and regulation sounds familiar, well, it is.

Calls for the government to intervene to regulate excess sugar consumption have been compared to the anti-smoking movement.

Just like Big Tobacco, Big Sugar could be the next big public health campaign.

Some have suggested that the sugar industry is approaching its Tobacco Moment — when regulators need to step in to protect society before any more harm is done.

The Credit Suisse report argues that regulators should adopt strategies from the battle against smoking to fight the looming war with sugar.

The template would include restricting advertising space to hurt marketing appeal, increase tax on foods containing added sugar, and including health warnings on labels.

Diabetes and obesity — associated with excess sugar consumption — would provide imagery that is just as confronting as the smoking-related conditions that now decorate cigarette packaging.

The suggestion is that these measures would be used concurrently with public education programs that highlight the dangers of excess sugar consumption (see the rethinksugarydrink campaign as an example).

The silver lining for the sugar industry, according to Credit Suisse, is the potential to develop businesses that produce non-sugar sweeteners. In this way the sugar industry — which can shift from Big Sugar to Big Sweetener — may be protected, unlike tobacco which had nowhere to turn.

This is where we need to remind ourselves that Credit Suisse is an expert in investment, not public health.

I would dispute the sense of encouraging a switch from sugar to sweetener for three reasons.

Firstly, a comprehensive understanding of the direct metabolic effects of consumption of these alternative sweeteners is not known.

Secondly, we don’t know the indirect metabolic or behavioural effects of consumption of these alternative sweeteners.

And most importantly, by justifying the production and consumption of low/non caloric sweeteners as healthy alternatives, the food and beverage industry further encourages the consumption of manufactured foods over fresh natural foods.

But the sugar industry has one other advantage over tobacco: does anybody care about passive sugar consumption?

The movement against tobacco smoking was helped by growing public concern over passive smoking and the idea that someone else’s smoking habit could impact the health of the non-smoker sitting near them.

This is not likely to occur with sugar consumption because if someone else is consuming excess sugar then that is unlikely to have any impact on my health.

The effective regulation of sugar consumption needs to focus on the individual.

This is where plain packaging, health warnings on labels and public education campaigns are likely to have great impact. But could we go further?

Could we treat foods and drinks high in added sugars like we do alcohol?

After all, national dietary guidelines suggest we limit both sugary foods and alcohol in our diets. Both are implicated in fatty liver and cardiovascular diseases.

Just as we have bottle shops for alcohol, imagine dedicated party shops or segregated areas in supermarkets where sugar-laden foods such as confectionary, sweetened beverages, bottled sauces and breakfast cereals would be sold. The goal would be to drive home awareness of the prevalence of added sugar in foods and its negative impact on our health.

In a number of places the Credit Suisse report notes that scientific evidence against sugar’s role in driving metabolic disease is inconclusive.

It appears that the surge of negative public opinion towards sugar is one of the driving forces behind changing trends in sugar consumption and what that might mean for investment in the food and beverage industry.

This is a powerful message which seems to be saying that society is not prepared to wait for slow-moving governments, regulators (and, dare I say, academia) to provide conclusive evidence of sugar’s detrimental effects.

There is a community desire to force profiteering food and beverage companies into changing for the good of public health.

Empowering individuals with knowledge about the impact of food choices on their own health is of primary importance if we are to improve community health.

For best health Australians need to be encouraged at every occasion to choose fresh, whole natural foods over the packaged, manufactured option.

What makes this particularly difficult is that our ‘choice’ is influenced strongly by marketing and branding that has society either convinced that these packaged foods are good for us or at the very least are a convenient necessity despite having very little if any nutritious benefit.

We need to get something straight then.

There is no metabolic, physiological or nutritional need for added sugar in foods. As such, an avoidance of manufactured foods and drinks with added sugar can be and should be achieved for optimal health.

This awareness is at the crux of the negative opinion towards sugar identified by Credit Suisse.

Allowing consumers to make choices free from brand influence would be a vital first step.

Kieron Rooney is a senior lecturer in the University of Sydney’s Faculty of Health Sciences. He has been a named chief investigator on research grants that have received funding from: the National Health and Medical Research Council; Meat Livestock Australia; NSW Sporting Injuries Committee and PepsiCo Australia New Zealand. He has not received any personal financial or in kind payments from any of these companies or others that may be related to the article. View his full profile here .

First posted October 28, 2013 15:59:16

Comments (276)

Auntie Joan:

28 Oct 2013 4:21:58pm

I agree. As well as reducing the high intake of sugar in the diet, any campaign should aim to also reduce the amount of processing that is done to sugar. Keeping food as natural as possible is best.

Mr Zeitgeist:

Bavaria 29

28 Oct 2013 6:07:16pm

Oddly enough, AJ, it is fruit juice that is one of the biggest culprits.


29 Oct 2013 8:49:07am

what about adds for products like roll ups. showing squashed fruit when it’s only one step above or beside lollies

Kangaroo Edward:

29 Oct 2013 9:40:13am

Agree, those things turned my little kids from adorable munchkins into raging monsters the one and only time I bought them.

They are a toxic cocktail of artificial additives, flavours and colourings.

I give my kids lollies once a week on a Friday night but I would never, ever give them a ‘roll up’ again.

Fool me once.

Bill Door:

29 Oct 2013 1:17:52pm

The sugar in fruit is fructose and is processed by the body in a very different way to refine sugar.

The recent attacks on fruit and its juice as being the same or worse than refined sugar is bogus.

But yes fruit juice that contains added sugar is nasty.


29 Oct 2013 2:25:29pm

Actually fructose is no different to cane sugar really. Fructose doesn’t have high satiety, meaning you can eat a heap and not feel full even though it is high in energy. Fruit is different as it contains a heap of fibre as well as the fructose, and the fibre makes you feel full.

A cup of apple juice contains the juice of about 4 apples. However, eating just one apple will make you feel fuller. So I guess the moral of the story is eat fruit, not fruit juice.


29 Oct 2013 3:12:51pm

Fructose is a monosaccharide. Its what we taste as being sweet. Its metabolism in the liver is poorly understood at this stage, but obviously a lot of research is going into it.

Refined sugar (sucrose) is a disaccharide, consisting of glucose (energy) and fructose (sweetness) in roughly equal portions. Glucose metabolism is pretty well understood. Sugar is broken into its monosaccharide components through interaction with saliva, digestive enzymes (sometimes called sucrase) and other gastric juices. The monsaccharides then go through their metabolic pathways.

A piece of fruit, while sweet actually has a fairly low amount of fructose. Sugar is roughly 50% fructose.

25g of sugar in a soft drink or fruit juice drink gives about 12g or so of fructose. This is multiples of what naturally occurs in a piece of fruit.

So while most store bought fruit bought fruit juices are made from concentrate, by dehydration and then the addition of sugar to balance the fruit acids, these products are high in sugar and best avoided (to reduce energy intake AND to reduce fructose intake the impacts of which are poorly understood).

Bavaria 29
Bavaria 29
Bavaria 29
Bavaria 29
Bavaria 29
Bavaria 29

Interesting Articles

Tagged as:

Here you can write a commentary on the recording "Big Sugar is having its tobacco moment — The Drum (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)".

* Required fields
All the reviews are moderated.
Our partners
Follow us
Contact us
Our contacts

Born in the USSR


About this site

For all questions about advertising, please contact listed on the site.

Boats and Yacht catalog with specifications, pictures, ratings, reviews and discusssions about Boats and Yacht