Mandating health star ratings is a win. But food lobbies still have too much power over our health | Health

Almost 13 years ago and after a decade-long battle between health experts and the food industry, state and federal ministers voted to introduce a health star rating system Helping consumers make healthier food choices.

This was a voluntary decision, with the food industry at the bargaining table and the decision-makers largely being ministers of food, trade and agriculture (rather than health).

At the time, there was an expectation that if adoption of the label was low among food manufacturers, the food industry would be forced to adopt it through legislation.

After more than a decade, state and federal ministers finally voted on Friday to make the label mandatory; This demonstrated the resolve of public health experts in the face of a powerful food and agriculture industry that continues to influence health policy.

Since the introduction of the health star label, food and grocery lobbyists have bemoaned the high cost the practice imposes on the industry, conveniently ignoring the billions of dollars in health costs associated with diet-related diseases. Meanwhile, the industry appears to have large budgets to market the unhealthiest foods, often to children.

_{Sign up: AÜ Breaking News email}

Voluntary uptake of health star ratings is found in only 39%.

The industry also gamed the system.

Because high calories, saturated fats, sugars, and sodium lower the rating, while ingredients such as fiber, protein, fruit, nuts, legumes, and vegetables increase the rating. manufacturers began strategically reformulating products to hide unhealthy ingredients and increase star ratings. This is why plain milk shows a lower star rating than a sugary, processed, fiber-added breakfast drink.

Factors such as whether foods are overly processed or contain additives such as emulsifiers and artificial sweeteners, It’s not even part of the star calculation.

Because the system is voluntary, food manufacturers can choose not to display an unhealthy rating on their packaging.

While many public health groups, including the Australian Medical Association and Dietitians Australia, have rightly celebrated the decision to authorize the star, some experts say the system should move in this direction. be scrapped completely We are in favor of placing clear warning labels on unhealthy foods.

But the majority of health groups agree that, given the decades-long struggle to introduce and now mandate health star ratings, a reboot would only lead to a protracted and nasty struggle in an industry they say has too much power and influence.

Currently, legislation to authorize the star will take about a year to be drafted and approved, and the food industry will try to negotiate a long lead time to make the changes.

There is no doubt that the health star calculation needs to be reformed to better account for production processes and ensure it fairly reflects overall health. Like The science of ultra-processed food is evolvingThis calculation will need to be reviewed regularly.

It won’t be enough. The federal government is currently developing a national food policy with heavy influence from profit-driven food and agriculture industries and little input from independent public health experts.

There continues to be a lack of transparency about who funds politicians and people who lobby policymakers on health issues; including the government’s failure to force harmful industries and their representatives to disclose who funds them when they appear before government inquiries or in budget presentations.

On the contrary Consumes more than 2.2 billion liters Every year, Australia lags behind other countries that impose taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages; This is a measure that international evidence shows is effective and beneficial to health. still measure Faced fierce opposition from the food industry and from both major parties.

In the face of such influence, the claim that people should make smarter food choices is false and outdated.

Talk to anyone trying to feed a family a varied diet full of whole, healthy foods, and you’ll find that the least healthy options are often the cheapest, while cutthroat marketing and obscure additives muddy the waters, making it difficult to make informed choices in the midst of a cost-of-living crisis.

Our food environments and general living conditions are designed to prioritize profit over health, and expecting individuals to handle this without stronger regulations and corporate accountability ignores the structural forces that shape what we put into our mouths. Known as commercial determinants of health.

Giving jobs to health stars is a win. But without the political will for transparency and meaningful corporate accountability, diets of cheap, unhealthy foods and the health problems and inequalities they cause will become more entrenched.