Protect the health of large food multinationals

Nestle, the food and beverage giant, recently updated its “responsible marketing practices to children.” As part of this new policy that will go into effect in July, the company says it will limit the marketing of unhealthy and ultra-processed foods to children under the age of 16, praising itself for being “one of the first food and beverage companies to adopt standards this strict on a voluntary basis.”

Nestlé’s strategy should not surprise us. Faced with the threat of government scrutiny, companies and industry associations often trumpet self-regulation as the most effective way to protect public health. However, it is probably just the opposite. For example, a recent study de Priceless SA and researchers from the University of the Witwatersrand School of Public Health in Johannesburg, South Africa, reviewed 20 voluntary measures taken by food and drink companies in low- and middle-income countries, and found that such initiatives “often serve to protect the interests of the sector rather than to improve public health”.

Africa’s ongoing fight against chronic disease underscores the urgent need for its governments to penalize big food corporations, just as they did Big Tobacco. Today non-communicable diseases –such as hypertension, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancer– account for 51% of deaths in South Africa and close to 37% in sub-Saharan Africa. The number of African adults with diabetes, currently at 24 million, is expected to increase by 129% by 2045.

Recent experiences in South Africa offer policymakers useful lessons about the risks of self-regulation. In 2018, the country introduced a tax on sugary drinks called the “health promotion tax”. Although it is very low, there are studies that indicate that it has already had a positive effect, reducing the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages.

Before the introduction of the tax, and with childhood obesity on the rise, Coca-Cola announced that it would not sell its products to children under 12 and would no longer supply carbonated sugary drinks to college and high school stores. Two years after the announcement, a study examining 105 public schools across the country found “some preliminary evidence that voluntary promises by commercial entities are not enough to eliminate [las bebidas azucaradas] and their school mailers” and recommended a ban on sales and advertising. The authors concluded that government measures were more likely to be much more effective.

Indeed, it is hard to see how authorities could trust large food and drink manufacturers to regulate themselves when they routinely circumvent national laws and regulations themselves. For example, in 2012 South Africa announced new rules restricting the marketing of milk preparations for children under three years of age, a measure that was in line with the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) to regulate breast milk substitutes. Nestlé has ignored these regulations time and time again by sponsoring conferences and events on child nutrition.

In 2021, Nestlé teamed up with prominent South African media outlets to host an online forum that the company claimed would “benefit all mums, grannies, aunts and guardians of little ones” by teaching them everything they need. know about nutrition for babies and children. Those who participated could be in with a chance of winning a supermarket coupon worth 500 rand (about 25 euros), an effective tactic at a time when food prices were soaring. After protests from nutrition experts and civil society groups who claimed that the event violated the prohibition of offering “incentives, incentives or invitations of any nature that could encourage the sale or promotion” of breast milk substitutes, the event ended. to be cancelled.

These types of exploitative tactics are not limited to South Africa or Nestlé. In addition to events for mothers and fathers, these companies are also breaking regulations by targeting new mothers on social media. A multi-country, WHO-commissioned study examining the US$55 billion baby formula industry reveals the “shocking breadth” of these practices, which include, among other things, payment to influencers and social media platforms to “have direct access to pregnant women and mothers at some of the most vulnerable times of their lives.”

He marketing of unhealthy and ultra-processed food and beverages creates unhealthy eating environments. There is overwhelming evidence that these foods and drinks, along with the insidious practices of marketing of the sector, contribute to obesity and mortality in the population and hinder the efforts of the authorities to control non-communicable diseases.

Governments must take strong action to reduce such diseases. The failure of voluntary pledges demonstrates that there are no substitutes for strict, evidence-based regulation of the marketing of ultra-processed foods and beverages. At a time when non-communicable diseases are on their way to becoming the leading cause of death in sub-Saharan Africa, the stakes are too high to prioritize the interests of corporate giants, rather than health policy public.