Jane Martin, Executive Manager, Food for Health Alliance.
Jane has worked in public health advocacy for more than thirty-five years covering tobacco control, alcohol policy and obesity prevention.
At a crossroads: Diabetes inquiry’s recommendations offer hope for healthier Australia
The Standing Committee appointed to the landmark Federal Parliamentary Inquiry into Diabetes recently made 23 recommendations on prevention, treatment and management to address the impacts of diabetes and obesity in Australia. Among the recommendations, three stand out to public health experts advocating for improvements to our food environment:
- Protecting children from unhealthy food marketing on tv, radio, gaming and online.
- Introducing a levy based on sugar content in drinks
- Reforming food labelling to display the amount of added sugar clearly on the front of pack.
With this strong blueprint and with the increasing health burden from chronic disease, including two-thirds of Australian adults being above a healthy weight, the Australian Government is now faced with a pivotal opportunity to take action that will improve our food environment and protect public health, now and into the future.
Here’s what the Inquiry recommendations could mean for Australians, and where we go from here.
Limits on junk food marketing
One of the Inquiry’s key recommendations is for the Australian government to regulate to protect children aged under 16 from junk food marketing to children on tv, radio, gaming and online. Currently, the processed food industry spends millions of dollars each year surrounding and targeting Australian children with unhealthy food and drink marketing, day in, day out. This powerful marketing influences what children choose to eat, want, and ask for.
The number of ads our children see daily is staggering. Children aged 5 to 8 years are exposed to at least 827 unhealthy food advertisements on TV each year, while teenagers are exposed to almost 100 online promotions per week. Australia has limited laws and policies to protect children from this harmful marketing. This gives the processed food industry free reign to push fast-food, sugary drinks and confectionary onto our kids through a range of media.
Meanwhile, over a quarter of Australian children aged 5 to 17 years live with overweight or obesity, and 9 in 10 don’t eat the recommended amount of fruit or vegetables. Strong community support exists, with 8 in 10 Australian adults we surveyed agreeing that government needs to prioritise children’s health over the profits of the processed food industry. Introducing limits on junk food marketing to children would be a significant step in the right direction, improving their diets and reducing their future risk of chronic diseases such as type 2 diabetes, stroke, and thirteen cancers.
Introducing a levy on sugary drinks
The Inquiry also recommended introducing a levy on sugary drinks, based on a product’s sugar content. Sugary drinks contribute to about half of all free sugars in Australian diets. With 2.4 billion litres of these drinks consumed by Australians each year, the need to address how often these drinks are consumed and to reduce sugar levels is clear. A levy on sugary drinks would encourage manufacturers to reformulate their products to reduce sugar content and avoid the levy. This was seen on a mass scale in the United Kingdom after they introduced a levy to encourage reformulation in 2018.
Familiar products remained available but with significantly less sugar. More low and no sugar options entered the market with no declines in profits, while consumers were nudged toward healthier options.
With over 100 jurisdictions across the world, including South Africa and Mexico, already taxing sugary drinks, it’s time that Australia adopted this commonsense approach to improve health. Other countries have seen additional benefits from such levies, including lower sugar consumption, improved dental health, indications of reduced obesity, and a decrease in gestational diabetes. Moreover, this policy is expected to raise around $500 million dollars for the Australian government in the first year, which could be reinvested into preventing chronic disease and improving our nation’s health.
Food labelling reforms
Another key recommendation from the Inquiry is that government shakes up how foods are labelled and ensures the amount of added sugar is clearly shown on the front of a packet.
Australians shouldn’t need a magnifying glass and a nutrition degree to understand what’s in the food they buy for their families. With up to sixty different names for sugar and persuasive marketing on packaging that can lead us astray, it can be hard to know at a glance how healthy a product truly is. We’ve seen that displaying diagrams with the number of teaspoons of sugar on the packet can be effective. Not only does this help shoppers visualise how much sugar is in the product they’re about to buy, but it also encourage manufacturers to reduce the sugar in their products.
As Australia looks to improve sugar labelling on packaged foods, it is also crucial that the definition of ‘added sugar’ is comprehensive. This should include sugars derived from fruit, like concentrated fruit pastes, gels, and powders. These ingredients are often marketed by the industry as healthy fruit equivalents, when really they’re just sugar in disguise.
Where to from here?
Now it’s up to the Australian Government to outline which of these recommendations they will act on. These policies would be most impactful if introduced together, as part of a comprehensive approach, to effectively combat rising rates of type-2 diabetes and obesity across the population.
These reforms would have long-lasting implications, improving children’s health, preventing chronic disease and ultimately alleviating pressure on our healthcare system. Bold leadership and a commitment to public health over industry profits is needed, now more than ever, to support the future health of our community.
Learn more at www.foodforhealthalliance.org.au
*************************************
0 Comments