More than half of experts on the UK government’s nutrition advisory panel have ties to the food industry, research has found.
At least 11 of the 17 members of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) have ties to companies including Nestle and the world’s largest ice cream maker, Unilever.
The conflict of interest has raised questions about impartiality, with concerns that it could lead to an ‘explosion of suffering and death from diet-related diseases in the UK’.
The SACN is a powerful group of people appointed as independent experts to advise the government, which in turn influences policy.
‘Healthy Food’ advisers to the Government have been working with companies that sell junk food, such as Nestle, a study has found.
Since its establishment in 2000, it has produced high-profile guidelines on daily salt and sugar intake, vitamin D supplementation and infant feeding.
But with the level of obesity and related health, there is criticism of the SACN and the officials who reviewed the recommendations that it has not done enough to prevent this.
BMJ researchers looked at the interest declared by SACN members in publicly available documents published on government websites, over the past three years.
He discovered that David Mela, a retired senior scientist from Unilever, had done consulting work for Unilever, Tate and Lyle, the Israeli franchise of Coca Cola CBC Israel, and Cargill, which produced chocolate and chocolate products.
Another member, Julie Lovegrove, is chair of an expert group at Europe’s International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), whose member companies include Pepsico, the US owner of Cadbury Mondelez, and General Mills, the American company behind Cheerios and Haagen Dazs.
At least six of the 11 members of the SACN subgroup on maternal and child nutrition have ties to food companies, including baby food manufacturers and formula milk brands.
These include Ann Prentice, a board member of the Nestle Foundation, and Marion Hetherington who has worked for Danone and baby food brand Ella’s Kitchen, the latter unpaid.
Nutritionist Ann Prentice is a board member of the Nestle Foundation, reports the BMJ investigation
The group’s chairman, Ken Ong, also received research funding from Mead Johnston Nutrition, which makes formula milk, according to the investigation.
Last night, experts criticized the association, suggesting it may be inadvertently hindering progress in improving the nation’s diet.
Chris van Tulleken, associate professor at University College London and author of a best-selling book on ultra-processed foods, said: ‘Even small financial conflicts affect behavior and beliefs in unconscious or unconscious ways.
‘Despite two decades of work from the conflicted SACN, there has been an explosion of suffering and death from diet-related diseases in the UK, so I don’t think it’s credible that the committee has been very effective.’
He added: “There are some excellent independent experts, but they are in the minority and in my view, their work is hampered by a conflict of interest with the industry that is creating this health crisis. SACN needs to be independent from the food industry.’
David Mela, a retired senior scientist from Unilever, has done consulting work for Unilever, Tate and Lyle and chocolate maker Cargill
Rob Percival, head of policy at the Land Association, said: ‘We are concerned that the committee and its integrity could be undermined by its links with the food industry.’
However, others defended the link, saying it is partly the result of a lack of money in relevant research.
Alison Tedstone, former chief nutritionist for Public Health England, also suggested that rejecting experts with industry links to the SACN would ‘diminish’ their expertise and could delay future legislation.
The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) responded on behalf of SACN and all members named in this article, saying that members must disclose potential conflicts of interest.
The spokesperson said this was recorded in the committee meeting minutes which were also published on the SACN website.
He said: ‘None of the committee members is directly employed in the food and drink industry, and all have a duty to act in the public interest and to be independent and impartial.’
