Food is the new tobacco – my message to sixth formers in 2004

The Government's anti-obesity measures have been a long time coming.

In 2004 I was invited to give a speech at ISOS (Independent Seminar on the Open Society), a one-day conference for sixth-form students organised by the Adam Smith Institute.

My subject was 'Food is the new tobacco' and I have posted an edited version of what I said below.

It was an issue we addressed several times on our old Free Society website, and subsequently as part of our Action on Consumer Choice campaign.

In July 2013, addressing guests during Smoke On The Water, Forest's annual boat party, the then Conservative MP David Nuttall said:

"Do not think this battle is over. It will be coming for other products, it will be coming for your other freedoms next."

Another guest, the IEA's Chris Snowdon, said:

"I think it's undeniable now, absolutely undeniable, that the anti-tobacco blueprint is being rolled out to every other industry that may cause some possible risk."

The reality is that every recent government has toyed with the idea of banning fast food ads and 'value' promotions.

Likewise manufacturers have come under increasing pressure to reduce product sizes or reduce sugar content, and several have relented.

Regrettably, instead of offering consumers more choice that would allow us to make our own decisions (I switched to Diet Coke years ago, appreciative of the fact that the original drink was still available to those who wanted it), some products have been 'down-sized' or had their ingredients changed with little or no consultation with consumers.

Alternatively they have been taken off the shelves completely and we have been forced to accept what can only be described as a fait accompli.

Inevitably perhaps the current pandemic has proved a godsend for public health campaigners and politicians who see it as the perfect opportunity to play on people's fears and force upon us a new wave of regulation whether we like it or not.

Chris Snowdon's latest article on the subject can be read here – Boris Johnson’s absurd nanny state crusade (The Spectator).

Rewinding the clock 16 years, here is an edited version of my 2004 speech to sixth formers. (Where are they now, I wonder? It's not impossible that one or two are MPs.)

Food is the new tobacco

'More than 30,000 lives are being lost each year because of weight-related diseases'; 'Children as young as three are showing signs of obesity which will condemn them to a life of ill health'; 'Researchers claim that Britain is "heading for an epidemic of obesity" because of poor diets and sedentary lifestyles'; It has been estimated the cost of obesity to the National Health Service at £500 million a year.

Sound familiar? It should do. For years we have been told that 120,000 Brits die each year from 'smoking-related diseases'; in England alone 1,000 people a day are admitted to hospital with a smoking-related disease; smoking costs the NHS £1.75 billion a year; smokers should 'quit or die', blah, blah, blah.

Few would deny there are health risks associated with smoking. However, to suggest that smoking automatically leads to an early grave is absurd. It's just one reason why the health police appear increasingly foolish on this and other issues.

Nevertheless the same exaggerated tactics that have been used to tackle smoking are now being used to target our eating habits. Incredibly, we are told that one fifth of Britain's population will be clinically obese within the next ten to 15 years and by 2040 half the population will be 'superfat' and in danger of dying early.

The problem with these outlandish claims is that they are being used as an excuse for restricting freedom of choice through social engineering and censorship.

Demos, a New Labour think-tank, has argued that a tax on 'fatty, highly processed and fast foods' will encourage people to eat more healthily. A similar argument has been used in the smoking debate. Increase tobacco taxation and people will be forced to change their lifestyle. The result? Under successive governments tobacco taxation has soared to record levels with the elderly and the low paid being the hardest hit.

Another tactic is to restrict then ban product advertising. In 2002 the advertising and promotion of all tobacco products was outlawed in the UK, although there is little evidence to suggest that it encouraged people to start smoking. Now some MPs and campaigners want to make it an offence to promote 'less healthy' foodstuffs to children.

Politicians like to stress that health campaigns and associated legislation are designed to help us give up (whatever it is they don't like us doing). Far from helping, it creates a culture that actively encourages discrimination.

A few years ago Forest discovered that some companies were advertising for 'non-smokers only'. We subsequently reported that a man had been sacked after one day in his new job, not because he defied the company's no-smoking policy but because his employer discovered that he smoked, in his own time, in his own home.

In 2002 a report by the Association for the Study of Obesity found that excessively fat students are 65 per cent less likely to get a place at the university of their choice than thinner applicants. They are also less likely to get a job and less likely to be promoted at work. Obese women are said to be paid, on average, five per cent less than their slimmer colleagues.

Truth is another casualty of today's health wars. One anti-smoking campaign famously featured cigarettes oozing globules of fat from a blocked artery. According to Private Eye (no fan of Big Tobacco), 'Some experts are worried that although the condition highlighted, atherosclerosis, is linked to smoking, the mechanism by which the one causes the other is still debated. We all get fatty deposits in our arteries as we get older. Worse, the scene in which we cut to a pair of latex-clad hands squeezing goo from an artery in to a petri dish, like toothpaste from a tube, is highly exaggerated.'

If food is the new tobacco, as many people fear, we can no doubt look forward to similar campaigns aimed at fat people. The trick is getting the balance right between tackling health scares and preserving freedom of choice. In recent years this balance has come under serious threat.

When beef on the bone was temporarily outlawed in the Nineties one hotelier was successfully prosecuted for serving it to his customers who knew about the tiny health risk but still demanded that he keep it on the menu. A listeria scare in cheese provoked a similar knee-jerk reaction from government, which temporarily banned unpasteurised cheeses until it was discovered that the listeria was present in pasteurised cheeses as well!

In Scotland the Food Standards Agency threatened to ban the use of sheep's intestine in the production of haggis because of a similar (ie minute) health risk. The then first minister Jack McConnell subsequently announced that changing the eating habits of the Scottish nation was to be his personal political crusade!

The very idea that politicians, or even health professionals, should dictate our individual tastes and preferences is preposterous. Sadly, far from encouraging a tolerant, civilised society that celebrates freedom of choice and cultural diversity, the politics of health is leading us in the opposite direction.

In America, while some companies breathalyse staff to see if they've had a cigarette en route to work, others monitor what their employees eat in the staff canteen. This may seem excessive and remote, but what happens in America often influences policy in the UK.

Yes, people should be informed about the health risks of smoking or eating fatty foods, or drinking too much alcohol, or climbing a mountain, or indulging in promiscuous sex, but if you choose to ignore the risks that's your concern, as long as you don't harm other people.

Antony Worrall Thompson, restaurateur, TV chef and patron of Forest, says, "Everything in moderation and a little bit in excess. The nanny state is completely wrong. I am who I am and it will be my choice when to give up smoking and when to lose weight."

Fellow TV chef Clarissa Dickson Wright [1947-2014] agrees. She says, "Nobody tells me what to eat. Freedom is a simple choice, it is quite straightforward. All you have to do is say no."

I'll drink to that.

Comments

[Rose2]

Simon

Food IS the new Tobacco and David Kessler ex of the FDA is key.

How the Food Makers Captured Our Brains
2009

“As head of the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. David A. Kessler served two presidents and battled Congress and Big Tobacco. But the Harvard-educated pediatrician discovered he was helpless against the forces of a chocolate chip cookie.

In an experiment of one, Dr. Kessler tested his willpower by buying two gooey chocolate chip cookies that he didn’t plan to eat. At home, he found himself staring at the cookies, and even distracted by memories of the chocolate chunks and doughy peaks as he left the room. He left the house, and the cookies remained uneaten. Feeling triumphant, he stopped for coffee, saw cookies on the counter and gobbled one down.”

“Why does that chocolate chip cookie have such power over me?” Dr. Kessler asked in an interview. “Is it the cookie, the representation of the cookie in my brain? I spent seven years trying to figure out the answer.”

During his time at the Food and Drug Administration, Dr. Kessler maintained a high profile, streamlining the agency, pushing for faster approval of drugs and overseeing the creation of the standardized nutrition label on food packaging.

But Dr. Kessler is perhaps best known for his efforts to investigate and regulate the tobacco industry, and his accusation that cigarette makers intentionally manipulated nicotine content to make their products more addictive.
In “The End of Overeating,” Dr. Kessler finds some similarities in the food industry, which has combined and created foods in a way that taps into our brain circuitry and stimulates our desire for more.”
“Dr. Kessler isn’t convinced that food makers fully understand the neuroscience of the forces they have unleashed, but food companies certainly understand human behavior, taste preferences and desire.”

“Food companies “design food for irresistibility,” Dr. Kessler noted. “It’s been part of their business plans.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/23/health/23well.html

Previously

US ruling turns smokers into junkies
1994

"Over the past few months, the FDA’s commissioner, David Kessler, has been campaigning for tobacco to be regulated in the same way as many other drugs.
To do so legally, he must demonstrate that nicotine is a powerful drug,and that the tobacco companies depend on nicotine’s addictiveness to keep smokers smoking."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg14319381-300-us-ruling-turns-smokers-into-junkies/

To get the ruling they had to redefine the traditional meaning of addiction to exclude intoxication.

Why food?

Tobacco Funds Shrink as Obesity Fight Intensifies
2010

"When the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation decided in 1991 to take on Joe Camel, it became the nation’s largest private funding source for fighting smoking. The foundation spent $700 million to help knock the cartoon character out of advertisements, finance research and advocacy for higher cigarette taxes and smoke-free air laws and, ultimately, to aid in reducing the nation’s smoking rate almost by half.

But a few years ago, the Johnson foundation, based in Princeton, N.J., added another target to its mission, pledging to spend $500 million in five years to battle childhood obesity. As the antiobesity financing rose to $58 million last year, a new compilation from the foundation shows, the organization’s antismoking grants fell to $4 million."

"The steep drop-off in private funds illustrates the competition under way for money as public health priorities shift. In the race for preventive health care dollars, from charities and from federal and state government sources, the tobacco warriors have become a big loser..."
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/health/policy/28obesity.html

[Dunhillbabe]

We foretold ALL of this.
Years ago.