A juicy story

After last week’s barrage on sugar, a new salvo has been fired in the battle over the nation’s health.

The National Obesity Forum (NOF) has joined the merry throng of New Year harbingers of doom with its claim that rising obesity rates in the UK could have been underestimated.

It said this could mean obesity rates will surpass even the findings of the 2007 Foresight Report, which were not exactly rosy themselves, predicting that by 2050 50% of the nation could be obese.

The NOF’s findings were met with an array of hysterical headlines; however, The Grocer can reveal that the UK Health Forum, which carried out the original work on the Foresight Report, has accused the NOF of getting its figures wrong – and of failing to back up its claims.

It says an as-yet unpublished analysis in a forthcoming paper will show that on current trends – based on nearly two decades of data (1993 to 2011) from the Health Survey for England – obesity levels in 2050 will be slightly lower than forecast in 2007.

What is more, the Forum suggests the reason for the fall could be down to the work of food and drink companies and the government on slashing fat and sugar from products, as well as improved education on obesity.

Read this: Obesity in the UK: Who’s saying what?

Considering the revised figures still show that nearly half of the nation is on course to be obese by 2050, it is hardly cause for a Mexican wave.

However, it does show how careful we have to be about claims made by the health lobby, just as they rightly warn of caution about accepting the word of industry or government, when it is not backed up by evidence.

Juice in the firing line

The NOF is not the only body making the industry feel uneasy, however.

The government’s own health tsar has been going on the offensive following last week’s Action on Sugar campaign, which called for new targets to reduce the “new tobacco” – sugar.

This time it was not fizzy drinks or chocolate in the firing line but fruit juice. Dr Susan Jebb, who chairs the food network of the Responsibility Deal, has reportedly said fruit juice should be lumped into the same unhealthy heap, banned from the recommended five-a-day menu and possibly even taxed at a higher rate.

Yet just 14 months ago Dr Jebb was urging companies to increase consumer uptake of products, including fruit juice, as part of a DH campaign to improve intake of fruit and veg.

When Dr Jebb was questioned at the time on the benefits of fruit juice and the potential risks of its sugar content, her representatives at the DH responded as follows: “One glass of fruit juice a day with your breakfast will contribute positively to your intake of fruit and vegetables, as it also contains vitamins, minerals and fibre.

“There are other sugary drinks (and foods) which are not so beneficial and could be replaced with lower sugar options that would impact positively on calorie reduction,” they added.

The DH subsequently attracted pledges, including from fruit juice companies, to “do more to create a positive environment that supports and enables people to increase their consumption of fruit and vegetables”.

What must those signatories be thinking now?