HACCP and health

I was contemplating this while listening to a dietetics book.

You know the sort "all food industry people are evil" type. But for some reason, this book has got me thinking. While I think the premise they often claim are rubbish, I'm starting to wonder if they have a point, albeit they're putting it in a way to be incredibly off putting to people who work in the industry. 

So go with me on this, don't react yet.

The claim is often that food professionals have deliberately added or removed ingredients, or changed textures to make food hyper palatable and so easy to overeat. This causes multitude of health impacts including obesity, heart disease, cancers etc.

But the reality as I see it is that really tasty food comes out of our processes and those of commercial teams, i.e. you will make food according to the laws of the country you are in or exporting to, and within those boundaries you will make it as tasty as you can. Why wouldn't you? Tasty food will be preferred over the competitor. The aim is not to be overeaten per se, at least not from what I've seen.

So mind is pinging around thinking... 

Then I realise something. Nobody is standing up for the health of the consumer for chronic health conditions caused by poor nutrition. We leave the overall diet decisions to the consumer while knowing full well they will do f. all.

We have HACCP that looks at acute health conditions but also chronic ones where it's caused by a contaminant or even with, say, infant formula or pet food, chronic conditions which are caused by an absence of an ingredient.

BUT nobody is in a food business standing up for the health of a consumer from overeating sugar, salt and fat in any systematic way.

In the UK we use the nutrient profiling model which has gradually drifted into the roles of people who have "responsible business" or sustainability in their portfolios but when you're looking at a new product, are we really looking at the potential health risks of overconsumption? 

I remember a talk years ago by an industry leader saying that the only change to consumers health had been via stealth. The food industry is really good at this. Taking a bit of legislation, e.g. UK HFSS and reformulating to meet that legislation. But if we're honest with ourselves, none of that has worked. Or GLP-1s wouldn't be a thing.

A lot of this is new areas so I can understand why it's not a routine part of our day to day jobs, and, let's face it, there is so much BS being talked about UPFs right now. But in, say 10, 15, 20 years time, I can imagine the food industry and food safety looking very different and food safety potentially encompassing health beyond what we include now.

There was a comment in this book though asking you to look at your typical supermarket and what products are there. So I did. After you get past the homeware stuff, we have a decent fruit and veg section in the UK. Three aisles typically. Then one aisle of meat and fish. Although processed options are creeping in there at the edges. The premarinaded, coated, cured etc. Then one aisle of dairy, probably half processed and half not. The remaining aisles, perhaps 10 of them are mostly really processed foods. Not all terrible for you. Canned pulses are great. Dried grains and nuts, fine. But most of those 10 aisles are foods that if you completely cut them out of your diet, you'd not just fail to suffer ill effects but probably thrive.

Then, I always think this is another interesting thought experiment, if you took all of the brightly coloured packaging off those 10 aisles and didn't allow manufacturers to cheat with food colourings, what would these 10 aisles look like if all shown in clear, colourless packaging? It would be a sea of brown wouldn't it? Boring, unappetising and not as delicious looking as the oranges and apples in aisle 3.

Isn't this all bizarre? 

I do wonder if we're going to be vilified as the tobacco companies of old at some point (but at least on my part with little conscious drive to avoid honesty as they did). But we do have to admit that whether we've been part of it or not, our leaders, our industry representatives have been lobbying governments for years and that lobbying has influenced legislation.

This is all drifting far too far into conspiracy theory for my liking, I'll admit. But I'd welcome your thoughts.