[0:00]Even if they want to cut down, even if they know it's killing them, they find they can't stop. My name's Chris van Tulican. I'm an NHS doctor, I'm a scientist, and I'm part of a growing group of doctors and academics who are increasingly worried about the effect that the global food system is having on all of us. When it comes to obesity, the way that we've understood the problem is it's a failure of willpower. People are just making bad choices. They're somewhat lazy. It's basically their fault. This is American government data for men and women of all different ages, the different lines of different ages for obesity. What you see is between 1960 and 1975, there's a fairly steady percentage of obesity in the population. But in the mid-1970s, obesity starts going up in all of the groups simultaneously. Now, if you're saying willpower is responsible, what you're proposing is that all of these groups of people simultaneously lost moral responsibility, and that's not plausible. Something else happened to our food in the mid-1970s to make it irresistible to people. My name's John Ruff, and I've spent 40 years in the food industry across seven different countries. Companies spend a lot of time optimizing all aspects of their product, the flavor, the taste, the texture. People want their product to be as good if not better than the competitor, so it will sell more. We use trained sensory panels to give us ratings. Is it squishy? Is it hard? Is it soft? Is it crunchy? That's very much how the food industry operates. One thing many people don't realize is that factory processing changes the textural properties of food. The interesting fact about soft food is you're not chewing it as much. That actually short circuits the normal satiety mechanisms that you would have if you were actually chewing food properly. So you're bypassing a normal mechanism that tells you that you're full. Once you're able to play around with the texture of food, making it softer, tricks that normal satiety or fullness mechanism, clearly there's there's an opportunity there for some kind of callous behavior in making food softer, so that people will eat more, and therefore you sell more of your product.
[2:25]So much of the packaged food that we eat is incredibly soft.
[2:35]My kids love these. You don't typically think of this as being a soft food, because it's a bit crunchy. But actually after that initial crunch, you can just crush it with your tongue, right? It's got no resistance at all. But in terms of the calories per gram, it's got way more calories than even a very fatty burger. So the softness and the energy density mean that you consume it incredibly quickly. And there's a food industry term for these very light, puffy foods that melt in the mouth. It's called vanishing caloric density. Gone.
[3:16]The thing that makes us eat a lot isn't just what we do to the food. It's also about logos, marketing, branding, the box the food comes in.
[3:35]Eating is a multi-sensory experience.
[3:40]There's the look of the food, there's the smell of the food, there's the feeling of the food on your fingers. Even the sound of food matters.
[3:53]When you open a fizzy soda, you've got two noises, you've got the click and the tear. Sound engineers and manufacturers work really hard to get that sound just right, and that's sonic branding. Many companies have asked me to work on sonic branding for them, and I think I can mention when I was working with Kellogg, they said, "Oh, what sonic branding?" And I said, "You invented this." Most people will remember as children the experience of lifting a bowl to their ear. And what are they listening for? Snap, crackle, and pop. That's sonic branding at its best, and that's the original. There's a lot of competition out there, and food companies make their money by the amount of products we consume from them. So there's a stomach share that they're fighting for, and they're hours in the day in between breakfast, lunch, and dinner. What happens between those hours, they want us to snack. You wake up and this is what you have. Snack number one, breakfast shake, ultra-processed. This is heavily marketed for you to have on the go, do not sit down, do not take time to crunch through something. Snack number two of the day. It's empty calories, energy dense, nutrient poor. Mid-day, you're starting to get a little bit peckish, and what do you have? Veggie straws. This is a good example of a health claim snacking product. Whereas before, we would have had food, actual food, now we are marketed into believing that this is actually a healthy replacement. Some snacking products have now been made to be linked with being physically active, so after the gym, I have a high protein, low sugar bar instead of having a healthier option. You finish having dinner, and you have these snacks that are sold to you as more to share, where in fact, you can just finish them watching the TV by yourself. I do like them. I cannot stop eating them. And I literally can't. Oh God. I think one of the biggest problems with this kind of food is that so many of us struggle to stop eating it. Hi everyone. I'm so thrilled to be here today to speak with you on my research that looks at parallels between addictive substances and ultra-processed food. When we look at the sorts of foods that trigger those key diagnostic indicators of addiction, it's really clear what it's not. It's not minimally processed foods like fruits or vegetables or beans or lean meats like chicken breast. It's really processed foods. It's chocolate, it's ice cream, it's pizza. It's foods that don't exist in nature. The potency and the reward power of these ultra-processed foods can trigger an addictive response that leads them to consume these in such a compulsive way, that even if they want to cut down, even if they know it's killing them, they find they can't stop. Imagine you're trying to cut down on ultra-processed food, or avoid it altogether. For start, it might be the only food you can afford, and that is true for millions of people. But it's everywhere. And it's engineered and then marketed by some of the smartest people on Earth to be irresistible. So if someone is watching this and they are struggling with their weight, with diet-related disease, I just want to reach out and grab them and go, this is not your fault. It is not you. It is the food. The Food and Drink Federation declined our request for an interview, but provided this statement: "Food and drink manufacturers take the issue of obesity and poor diets very seriously, and we know we have a key role to play in helping people to eat balanced diets. Our members continue to invest hundreds of millions in pounds in creating healthier products for shoppers. As a result, UK shopping baskets now contain significantly less salt, sugar and calories than they did a decade ago. Companies are also working to raise the fiber, fruit and vegetable content of their products... It's of course up to government if they want to introduce new taxes or warning labels. However, taxes will push up the cost of food and could disincentivize ongoing investment in healthier products. We think there are more effective ways to encourage positive dietary change. On labelling, we believe the UK's traffic light system is a more positive way of nudging consumers towards healthier choices than 'warning' labels, where global evidence suggests the longer-term impact is limited. However, we would support a labelling review, including to test whether consistent, positive labelling on all healthier products would help consumers. ...The Government's Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition has said there's insufficient scientific evidence on the concept of 'ultra-processed foods' for it to be used for dietary guidance or policy making, and that further research is needed. If research comes to light that processing is a cause for concern, the food industry will act quickly to change their ingredients or processes."
