Fat Chance!

New Zealand is facing a serious obesity problem. Are food marketers to blame?

According to the 2022/23 New Zealand Health Survey, around one in three adults, (1.4 million or 32.6%) and 110,000 children aged 2–14 years (13.5%) were classified as obese in New Zealand This is one of the highest rates in the OECD, and it has significant implications for the well-being, productivity, and health care costs of the population.

Among children, Māori (21.7%), Pacific (27.8%) and children living in the most deprived neighbourhoods (26.4%) were most likely to be classified as obese.

Obesity is a complex and multifaceted issue, influenced by a range of biological, environmental, social, and psychological factors. However, one of the key drivers of obesity is the consumption of unhealthy foods and beverages, which are often high in energy, fat, sugar, and salt, and low in fibre, vitamins, and minerals.

These foods and beverages are widely available, affordable, and heavily marketed in New Zealand, creating an obesogenic environment that encourages overeating and discourages healthy eating. As such, food marketers have a crucial role to play in addressing this problem. As the creators and promoters of food products, they have the power and the responsibility to influence consumer choices and behaviours.

They can do this by adopting ethical and socially responsible marketing practices that support the health and well-being of their customers and the wider society. Some of the possible actions include reformulating their products to reduce the levels of energy, fat, sugar, and salt, and increase the levels of fibre, vitamins, and minerals; providing clear and accurate nutrition information and labelling on their products, using standardised and easy-to-understand formats; limiting the marketing of unhealthy foods and beverages, especially to children and vulnerable groups, and complying with the relevant codes and regulations; promoting healthy foods and beverages, and highlighting their benefits and attributes, in a truthful and appealing way; and supporting and collaborating with public health initiatives and campaigns that aim to raise awareness and educate consumers about healthy eating and obesity prevention.

By taking these steps, food marketers can not only contribute to the fight against obesity, but also enhance their reputation, customer loyalty, and competitive advantage. They can also create new opportunities for innovation and growth, by responding to the increasing demand and preference for healthy and sustainable food products among consumers.

Food marketers have to take ownership of the obesity problem and adapt their marketing accordingly, for the sake of their business and society.

Foods potentially contributing to cellular dysfunction are mostly highly processed foods,  often containing high amounts of sugar, unhealthy fats, and artificial additives, which can trigger inflammation and oxidative stress, harming cellular function.

Excessive red meat and processed meats can contribute to the formation of harmful compounds like nitrosamines and advanced glycation end products (AGEs), linked to cellular damage, while refined carbohydrates, sugary drinks, white bread, and pastries can cause rapid blood sugar spikes and contribute to insulin resistance, both of which can be detrimental to cellular health.

We all understand that moderation is key and occasional indulgence in these foods may not have significant consequences, but it's the chronic overconsumption that poses the main risk. The question is, “Is this overconsumption being driven by the marketing and advertising industry?”

As marketers and advertisers, we cannot just wash our hands of the responsibility. People have different genetic predispositions and health conditions, influencing how their bodies respond to certain foods, and marketing often emphasises taste and convenience over health, and claims can be misleading or exaggerated. In the light of this, it's crucial to critically evaluate marketing messages.

Marketing tactics, like targeting children with sugary cereals, raise ethical concerns, and we need to be more critical of food marketing messages, educating ourselves about healthy eating practices. At the moment, food companies often employ sophisticated marketing tactics to target demographics considered more susceptible to their messaging, such as low-income communities, ethnic minorities, and individuals struggling with weight management. These groups may be more receptive to promises of convenience, affordability, and taste due to various social and economic factors.

Unethical marketing can exacerbate existing health disparities in New Zealand, where obesity rates are rising, particularly among Maori and Pasifika populations. This has contributed to a higher prevalence of diet-related chronic diseases like type 2 diabetes and heart disease.

In addition, individuals with obesity are all too often targeted with campaigns emphasising weight loss or "healthy" versions of processed foods, which can be misleading and perpetuate unrealistic expectations.

If we don’t adapt to the obesity epidemic, the regulators will do it for us. Regulation and policy changes are likely, with stricter regulations on food marketing, particularly towards vulnerable groups, which could limit misleading claims and unfair targeting practices.

The types of regulations being advocated for include restrictions on advertising time and placement. Banning or limiting unhealthy food advertising during times when children are likely to be watching or listening, or on specific channels and mediums like schools and public transport.

Prohibiting the use of manipulative tactics like cartoon characters, celebrities, and free gifts to target children, and regulating claims about health benefits and portion sizes are also a possibility, as is the requirement for clearer and more prominent labeling of sugar, salt, and fat content on food packaging, and banning misleading health claims.

Implementing taxes on sugary drinks and unhealthy processed foods, and subsidies for fruits, vegetables, and whole grains to make healthier options more affordable appear to be unlikely in the present political climate.

Examples of policies in other countries are interesting to monitor. Chile implemented a comprehensive ban on advertising of unhealthy food and drinks to children, along with mandatory warning labels on sugary drinks and processed foods. The United Kingdom restricted junk food advertising on television before 9pm and online near schools and banned promotions and licensed characters on packaging aimed at children. Mexico introduced a tax on sugary drinks and a labeling system with warning symbols for high levels of sugar, salt, and saturated fat.

The arguments for stricter regulations are becoming louder but opponents question the effectiveness of regulations, arguing they may not significantly change consumer behavior. Whatever the outcome, the cost to businesses from stricter regulations will increase compliance costs.

In New Zealand, several aspects of stricter regulations on unhealthy food marketing are under discussion and actively implemented to varying degrees.

There are some limitations on advertising unhealthy food to children, like a ban on television ads before 9 pm and restrictions on product placement in certain school environments. However, advocates are calling for stricter measures, like those implemented in the UK or Chile, with wider time and placement restrictions and a complete ban on manipulative tactics targeting children.

Regulations on online advertising and marketing in public spaces like public transport are also being debated.

New Zealand currently uses a "Health Star Rating" system on packaged foods. However, concerns exist about its effectiveness in clearly communicating health information. There are discussions about adopting stricter and more standardised labeling systems like those used in other countries. Calls for clearer labeling of added sugars and portion sizes are also ongoing.

While not currently implemented, proposals for taxing sugary drinks and unhealthy processed foods are being discussed. The revenue generated could be used to subsidise healthier options like fruits and vegetables, making them more accessible and affordable.

The New Zealand Food & Grocery Council has its own responsible marketing code, but concerns remain about its effectiveness and enforcement. Advocates emphasise the need for stricter industry-wide standards and independent monitoring.

Grassroots efforts promoting healthy eating and access to fresh produce in vulnerable communities are gaining traction. These initiatives complement regulatory measures by empowering individuals and communities to make healthy choices.

Overall, the discussion in New Zealand involves a multifaceted approach, pushing for stricter regulations on advertising, clearer labeling, potential taxation, and industry self-regulation, while emphasising the importance of community-based initiatives.

While some regulations are already in place, advocates call for a more comprehensive and impactful approach to protect children and vulnerable populations from the negative influence of unhealthy food marketing. Perhaps we should be listening!