Since last March around 170 companies have signed up to the responsibility deal and pledged to play their part in improving public health. Commitments include removing artificial trans fat from food and displaying calorie information on restaurant and takeaway menus – something we have been helping small businesses achieve in Lincolnshire through our ‘healthy takeaways programme’. The list of companies pledging is astonishing – McDonalds, Harvester, Greggs, Asda, Aldi… In fact almost every brand or high street name is on the list. But how far have the ‘A list of brands’ gone in a year and how are they really helping the nation?
Focusing on food – most well known brands have opted for calories on menus – great for those ‘healthy eaters, occasional treaters’ and the ‘very health conscious’ who in our research have indicated that they would choose a healthier option on the menu if it was available. Not surprising, most are women and most are educated. Not so many of our A list brands appear to have adopted the ‘health by stealth’ approach – something we advocate at Social Change. This involves reformulation of foods – creating products that taste the same but have reduced fat and less calories and salt. The reason? It is harder and it takes longer to achieve.
What we do know from our own research is that many people just don’t give a fig for figures. Calories, grams, values…. whatever number, it just doesn’t matter. We found that around two thirds of people give no consideration to the overall healthiness of a meal. So it doesn’t matter how many adverts, leaflets or freebies we push, our love for some fatty foods is forever eternal. Quite a predicament for our public health professionals who spend months, even years, exploring ways to get us to give up our favourite foods.
In Sainsburys Cafe last week I witnessed the food dilemma in action. A man and a woman were standing at the cafe counter and looking at the menu, deciding what to have for lunch. The man very quickly chose the chicken and mushroom pie with chips and started moving forwards in the queue. The woman stopped and deliberated for a while. She couldn’t decide between the lasagne and salad or the ham, egg and chips. All of a sudden she picked the ham, egg and chips because it had less calories than the lasagne – something she thought was astonishing. I asked her if she would have chosen the lasagne if the calories were not visible and her answer was yes. There was very little difference in the calories – around 50.
The language of calories is interesting. If fat and salt content of both dishes was available to the woman, would the decision have been different? Do we choose fat over calories or more salt for less fat? Would we know what dish was better for us? The point is, giving information to consumers about what it is their food is affecting behaviour in some people. Whether we understand the language and the consequences of the choices we make is debatable.
We have been reassured by Lansley that artificial trans fats are now not ‘lurking in our food’ from places like Greggs, Costa and McDonald’s and when we place several items in our trolley at the supermarket we are now purchasing items with less salt in. This is all good stuff. Don’t get me wrong, calories on menus is great for people like me who understand the language of food but the brands that will really make a difference are those that are starting on that long journey to change our pallets – by reducing the salt bit by bit and reformulating our favourite foods slowly.
Take Heinz for example. It committed to the public health agenda long before this deal. It started selling reduced salt and sugar tomato ketchup a few years back, attracting people who wanted the great taste of Heinz ketchup but with less of the bad stuff. Sales of that product increased year on year. However, it has also been reducing salt and sugar from its famous recipe in its standard tomato ketchup for nearly a decade, reducing sugar and salt bit by bit and we haven’t noticed. A testament that it can be done and a good example of a company meeting demands for healthier products now – but also recognising that it has a responsibility to deliver a ‘better’ product to millions of its customers.
It is hard to judge whether the responsibility deal has benefited the nation. I think a little more time and a bit more action is needed first before launching into that statement. There are many people who turn their nose up at businesses working with health professionals on the public health agenda. Health charities have been critical of the responsibility deal, questioning the commitment to public health of food and drink companies that profit from brands high in sugar and salt. But lets get real. Brands are big – and they are here to stay. There is no doubt that brands will benefit from being part of the responsibility deal. But only if they act. The real people brokering this deal in the long term will be you and me – the consumer. We are all for pledges but now is the time for action. Hell has no fury like a consumer scorned…
