More than half of the UK government’s nutrition advisers are paid by food companies, research shows

At least 11 of the 17 members of the Scientific Advisory Committee for Nutrition (SACN) have conflicts of interest with the likes of Nestle, sugar manufacturer Tate and Lyle, and the world’s largest ice cream producer, Unilever, reports Sophie Borland in The BMJ.

And six of the 11 members of the SACN Subgroup on Maternal and Child Nutrition have ties to food businesses, including baby food manufacturers and formula milk brands.

SACN is a powerful group of people appointed as independent experts to advise the government, which influences policy, Borland explains. Since its inception in 2000, it has produced high-profile guidelines on daily salt and sugar intake, vitamin D supplements, and infant feeding.

But there are concerns that SACN—and previous governments that have reviewed its recommendations—has not done enough to curb rising levels of obesity and food-related ill health.

The BMJ looked at the interests declared by SACN members—in publicly available documents published on the government’s website—over the past three years.

Among them is David Mela, a retired senior scientist from Unilever, who has done consulting work for Unilever, Tate and Lyle, Israel’s Coca Cola franchise CBC Israel, and Cargill, which produces cocoa and chocolate products among other things.

Another member, Julie Lovegrove, chairs an expert group at the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Europe, which includes Pepsico, the owner of Cadbury, Mondelez, the US owner of Cadbury, and General Mills, the American firm behind Cheerios and Haagen Dazs. in its member companies.

Members of SACN’s Maternal and Child Nutrition sub-group include Ann Prentice, council member of the Nestle Foundation, and Marion Hetherington, who has worked for Danone and baby food brand Ella’s Kitchen, the latter on an unpaid basis. The group’s chairman, Ken Ong, has received research funding from formula milk maker Mead Johnston Nutrition.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) responded on behalf of SACN and all members named in this article, saying that SACN members are required to declare any potential conflicts of interest annually—and new ones at the first appropriate committee meeting, which is included. in the minutes and published on the SACN website.

He added, “No members of the committee are directly employed by the food and drink industry, and all have a duty to act in the public interest and to be independent and impartial.”

But Chris van Tulleken, associate professor at University College London and author of a best-selling book on ultra-processed food, says, “Even small financial conflicts affect behavior and beliefs in subtle or unconscious ways,” and Rob Percival, a the policy. at the Soil Association, says, “We are concerned that these links to the food industry could undermine the committee and its integrity.”

Experts tell The BMJ the composition of SACN needs to be reviewed in light of the members’ links to the food industry. However, Kat Jenner, director of the Obesity Health Alliance, says that these links are partly the result of the lack of money for relevant research.

Alison Tedstone, former chief nutritionist for Public Health England, also suggests that refusing to allow experts with industry links on SACN would “diminish” their expertise and could delay future legislation.

But Van Tulleken argues that “Despite twenty years of work by SACN to the contrary, suffering and death from diet-related diseases is on the rise in the UK, so I don’t think it’s credible to claim that the committee has been very effective . .

“There are some excellent independent experts but they are a minority and, in my opinion, their work has been hampered by conflicts of interest with the industry that has created this health crisis. SACN must become independent of the food industry.”