Why our food is making us fat

We are, on average, 3st heavier than we were in the 60s. And not because we're eating more or exercising less we just unwittingly became sugar addicts ac!ues "eretti guardian.co.u#, $onday %% une &0%& '( a ric#ety staircase at the )ewar#e *ouses $useum in +eicester, ,ngland hangs a (ortrait o- .ritain's -irst obese man, (ainted in %/06. 0aniel +ambert weighed 13st 2331#g3 and was considered a medical oddity. 4oo heavy to wor#, +ambert came u( with an ingenious idea5 he would charge (eo(le a shilling to see him. +ambert made a -ortune, and his (ortrait shows him at the end o- his li-e5 a--luent and res(ected a celebrated son o- +eicester. 4wo hundred years on, 6'm in a bariatric ambulance 2an alternative term -or obese, -avoured by the medical world because it's less shaming to (atients3 investigating why the '7 is in the midst o- an obesity crisis. 4he crew (ic# u( a do8en 0aniel +amberts every wee#. 9i-ty:three stone is nothing s(ecial, it's at the lower end othe weight s(ectrum, with only the /0st (atients worthy o- mention when a shi-t -inishes. 4he s(ecially designed ambulance carries an array o- bariatric gi8mos including a ;s(atula; to hel( with (eo(le who have -allen out o- bed or, on a recent occasion, an obese man jammed between the two walls in his hallway. As well as the ambulance, there's a convoy o- su((ort vehicles including a winch to li-t (atients onto a rein-orced stretcher. 6n extreme cases, the cost o- removing a (atient to hos(ital can be u( to <%00,000, as seen in the recent case o- 63st teenager =eorgia 0avis. .ut these (eo(le are not where the heartland o- the obesity crisis lies. >n average, in the '7, we are all every man, woman and child three stone heavier than we were in the mid:60s. We haven't noticed it ha((ening, but this glacial shi-t has been ma((ed by bigger car seats, swimming cubicles, ?+ trousers dro((ed to + 2+ dro((ed to $3. An elasticated nation with an ever:ex(anding sense o- normality. Why are we so -at@ We have not become greedier as a race. We are not, contrary to (o(ular wisdom, less active a %&:year study, which began in &000 at "lymouth hos(ital, measured children's (hysical activity and -ound it the same as 10 years ago. .ut something has changed5 and that something is very sim(le. 6t's the -ood we eat. $ore s(eci-ically, the sheer amount o- sugar in that -ood, sugar we're o-ten unaware o-. 4he story begins in %AB%. Cichard )ixon was -acing re:election. 4he Dietnam war was threatening his (o(ularity at home, but just as big an issue with voters was the

soaring cost o- -ood. 6- )ixon was to survive, he needed -ood (rices to go down, and that re!uired getting a very (ower-ul lobby on board the -armers. )ixon a((ointed ,arl .ut8, an academic -rom the -arming heartland o- 6ndiana, to bro#er a com(romise. .ut8, an agriculture ex(ert, had a radical (lan that would trans-orm the -ood we eat, and in doing so, the sha(e o- the human race. .ut8 (ushed -armers into a new, industrial scale o- (roduction, and into -arming one cro( in (articular5 corn. 'E cattle were -attened by the immense increases in corn (roduction. .urgers became bigger. 9ries, -ried in corn oil, became -attier. Forn became the engine -or the massive surge in the !uantities o- chea(er -ood being su((lied to American su(ermar#ets5 everything -rom cereals, to biscuits and -lour -ound new uses -or corn. As a result o- .ut8's -ree:mar#et re-orms, American -armers, almost overnight, went -rom (arochial small:holders to multimillionaire businessmen with a global mar#et. >ne 6ndiana -armer believes that America could have won the cold war by sim(ly starving the Cussians o- corn. .ut instead they chose to ma#e money. .y the mid:B0s, there was a sur(lus o- corn. .ut8 -lew to a(an to loo# into a scienti-ic innovation that would change everything5 the mass develo(ment o- high -ructose corn syru( 2*9FE3, or glucose:-ructose syru( as it's o-ten re-erred to in the '7, a highly sweet, glo((y syru(, (roduced -rom sur(lus corn, that was also incredibly chea(. *9FE had been discovered in the 10s, but it was only in the B0s that a (rocess had been -ound to harness it -or mass (roduction. *9FE was soon (um(ed into every conceivable -ood5 (i88as, coleslaw, meat. 6t (rovided that ;just ba#ed; sheen on bread and ca#es, made everything sweeter, and extended shel- li-e -rom days to years. A silent revolution o- the amount o- sugar that was going into our bodies was ta#ing (lace. 6n .ritain, the -ood on our (lates became (ure science each (rocessed milligram twea#ed and sweetened -or maximum (alatability. And the general (ublic were clueless that these changes were ta#ing (lace. 4here was one (roduct in (articular that it had a dramatic e--ect on so-t drin#s. *an# Fardello, the -ormer head o- mar#eting at Foca:Fola, tells me that in %A/G, Fo#e in the 'E swa((ed -rom sugar to *9FE 26n the '7, it continued to use sugar3. As a mar#et leader, Fo#e's decision sent a message o- endorsement to the rest o- the industry, which !uic#ly -ollowed suit. 4here was ;no downside; to *9FE, Fardello says. 6t was two:thirds the (rice o- sugar, and even the ris# o- messing with the taste was a ris# worth ta#ing when you loo#ed at the margin, es(ecially as there were no a((arent health ris#s. At that time, ;obesity wasn't even on the radar; says Fardello. .ut another health issue was on the radar5 heart disease, and in the mid:B0s, a -ierce debate was raging behind the closed doors o- academia over what was causing it. An American nutritionist called Ancel 7eys blamed -at, while a .ritish researcher at the

'niversity o- +ondon "ro-essor ohn Hud#in, blamed sugar. .ut Hud#in's wor# was rubbished by what many believe, including "ro-essor Cobert +ustig, one o- the world's leading endocrinologists, was a concerted cam(aign to discredit Hud#in. $uch o- the criticism came -rom -ellow academics, whose research was aligning -ar more closely with the direction the -ood industry was intending to ta#e. Hud#in's colleague at the time, 0r Cichard .ruc#dor-er at 'F+ says5 ;4here was a huge lobby -rom Ithe -oodJ industry, (articularly -rom the sugar industry, and Hud#in com(lained bitterly that they were subverting some o- his ideas.; Hud#in was, +ustig says sim(ly, ;thrown under the bus;, because there was a huge -inancial gain to be made by -ingering -at, not sugar, as the cul(rit o- heart disease. 4he -ood industry had its eyes on the creation o- a new genre o- -ood, something they #new the (ublic would embrace with huge enthusiasm, believing it to be better -or their health ;low -at;. 6t (romised an immense business o((ortunity -orged -rom the (otential disaster o- heart disease. .ut, says +ustig, there was a (roblem. ;When you ta#e the -at out o- a reci(e, -ood tastes li#e cardboard, and you need to re(lace it with something that something being sugar.; >vernight, new (roducts arrived on the shelves that seemed too good to be true. +ow:-at yoghurts, s(reads, even desserts and biscuits. All with the -at ta#en out, and re(laced with sugar. .ritain was one o- the most enthusiastic ado(ters o- what -ood writer =ary 4aubes, author o- Why We =et 9at, calls ;the low:-at dogma;, with sales roc#eting. .y the mid:/0s, health ex(erts such as "ro-essor "hili( ames, a world: renowned .ritish scientist who was one o- the -irst to identi-y obesity as an issue, were noticing that (eo(le were getting -atter and no one could ex(lain why. 4he -ood industry was #een to (oint out that individuals must be res(onsible -or their own calorie consum(tion, but even those who exercised and ate low:-at (roducts were gaining weight. 6n %A66 the (ro(ortion o- (eo(le with a .$6 o- over 30 2classi-ied as obese3 was just %.&K -or men and %./K -or women. .y %A/A the -igures had risen to %0.6K -or men and %G.0K -or women. And no one was joining the dots between *9FE and -at. $oreover, there was something else going on. 4he more sugar we ate, the more we wanted, and the hungrier we became. At )ew Hor# 'niversity, "ro-essor Anthony Ecla-ani, a nutritionist studying a((etite and weight gain, noticed something strange about his lab rats. When they ate rat -ood, they (ut on weight normally. .ut when they ate (rocessed -ood -rom a su(ermar#et, they ballooned in a matter o- days. 4heir a((etite -or sugary -oods was insatiable5 they just carried on eating. According to "ro-essor ean:$arc Echwar8 o- Ean 9rancisco hos(ital, who is currently studying the (recise way in which the major organs o- the body metabolise

sugar, this momentum creates ;a tsunami; o- sugar. 4he e--ect this has on di--erent organs in the body is only now being understood by scientists. Around the liver, it coalesces as -at, leading to diseases such as ty(e:& diabetes. >ther studies have -ound that sugar may even coat semen and result in obese men becoming less -ertile. >ne researcher told me that, ultimately, (erha(s nothing needs to be done about obesity, as obese (eo(le will wi(e themselves out. 4he organ o- most interest, however, is the gut. According to Echwar8 and Ecla-ani, the gut is a highly com(lex nervous system. 6t is the body's ;second brain;, and this second brain becomes conditioned to wanting more sugar, sending messages bac# to the brain that are im(ossible to -ight. 4he Eugar Association is #een to (oint out that sugar inta#e alone ;is not lin#ed to any li-estyle disease;. .ut evidence to the contrary a((ears to be emerging. 6n 9ebruary, +ustig, +aura Echmidt and Flaire .rindis o- the 'niversity o- Fali-ornia wrote an o(inion article -or the journal )ature citing the growing body o- scienti-ic evidence showing that -ructose can trigger (rocesses that lead to liver toxicity and a host o- other chronic diseases, and in $arch, the )ew Hor# 4imes re(orted a study that had been (ublished in the journal Firculation, which -ound that men who dran# sweetened beverages most o-ten were &0K more li#ely to have had a heart attac# than those who dran# the least. 0avid 7essler, the -ormer head o- the 'E government's most (ower-ul -ood agency, the 90A, and the (erson res(onsible -or introducing warnings on cigarette (ac#ets in the early A0s, believes that sugar, through its metabolisation by the gut and hence the brain, is extremely addictive, just li#e cigarettes or alcohol. *e believes that sugar is hedonic eating it is ;highly (leasurable. 6t gives you this momentary bliss. When you're eating -ood that is highly hedonic, it sort o- ta#es over your brain.; 6n +ondon, 0r 4ony =oldstone is ma((ing out the s(eci-ic (arts o- the brain that are stimulated by this (rocess. According to =oldstone, one o- the by:(roducts oobesity is that a hormone called le(tin ceases to wor# (ro(erly. )ormally, le(tin is (roduced by the body to tell you that you are -ull. *owever, in obese (eo(le, it becomes severely de(leted, and it is thought that a high inta#e o- sugar is a #ey reason. When the le(tin doesn't wor#, your body sim(ly doesn't realise you should sto( eating. +e(tin raises a big !uestion5 did the -ood industry #nowingly create -oods that were addictive, that would ma#e you -eel as though you were never satis-ied and always wanted more@ 7essler is cautious in his res(onse5 ;0id they understand the neuroscience@ )o. .ut they learned ex(erientially what wor#ed.; 4his is highly controversial. 6- it could be (roved that at that some (oint the -ood industry became aware o- the long:term, detrimental e--ects their (roducts were having on the (ublic, and

continued to develo( and sell them, the scandal would rival that o- what ha((ened to the tobacco industry. 4he -ood industry's de-ence has always been that the science doesn't (rove its cul(ability. Eusan )eely, (resident o- the American .everage Association, a lobby grou( -or the so-t:drin#s industry, says5 ;there's a lot o- wor# to try to establish causality, and 6 don't #now that 6've seen any study that does that.; .ut it loo#s as though things might be changing. According to "ro-essor 7elly .rownell at Hale 'niversity, one o- the world's -oremost ex(erts on obesity and its causes, the science will soon be irre-utable and we may then be just a -ew years away -rom the -irst success-ul lawsuit. 4he relationshi( between the -ood industry and the scientists conducting research into obesity is also com(licated by the issue o- -unding. 4here is not a great deal o- money set aside -or this wor# and so the -ood industry has become a vital source o- income. .ut this means that the very same science going into combating obesity could also be used to hone the (roducts that are ma#ing us obese. $any o- the scientists 6 s(o#e to are wary about going on the record because they -ear their -unding will be ta#en away i- they s(ea# out. 4he relationshi( between government and the -ood industry is also -ar -rom straight-orward. *ealth secretary Andrew +ansley wor#ed, until &00A, as a non: executive director o- "ro-ero, a mar#eting agency whose clients have included "i88a *ut, $ars and "e(siFo. 6n o((osition, +ansley as#ed (ublic health ex(ert "ro-essor Eimon Fa(ewell to contribute to -uture (olicy on obesity. Fa(ewell was ama8ed at the degree to which the -ood industry was also being consulted5 the e!uivalent, he says, ;o(utting 0racula in charge o- the blood ban#;. +ansley has made no secret o- his wor# -or "ro-ero, and denies a con-lict o- interest, saying that he did not wor# directly with the com(any's clients. And the government argues, not unreasonably, that it's essential to have the industry on board to get anything done. .ut the relationshi(s are not always #e(t at arms length. "ro-essor ames was (art o- a W*> committee to recommend global limits on sugar in %AA0. As the re(ort was being dra-ted, something extraordinary ha((ened5 the 'E secretary o- state -or health 4ommy 4hom(son -lew to =eneva to lobby on behal- o- the sugar industry. ;4hose recommendations were never made,; says ames. 6n )ew Hor#, $ayor .loomberg is currently (lanning to reduce so-t drin# su(er: si8ing while last wee#, a -ormer executive at Foca:Fola 4odd "utman s(o#e (ublicly about the need -or so-t drin# com(anies to move their -ocus to ;healthy (roducts;. .ut it's not going to be easy to bring about change. A (revious attem(t to bring in a soda tax was sto((ed by intense lobbying on Fa(itol *ill. 4he so-t:drin#s industry (aid -or a new

ward at "hiladel(hia Fhildren's *os(ital, and the tax went away. 6t was a children's obesity ward. Why has 7essler, when he has had such success with his warnings on cigarette (ac#ets, not done the same thing -or (rocessed -oods high in sugar@ .ecause, he tells me, when the warnings came in on cigarettes, the game was already u( in the west -or the tobacco industry. 4heir new mar#ets were the -ar east, 6ndia and Fhina. 6t was no concession at all. 4he -ood industry is a di--erent matter. 9or one thing, the -ood lobby is more (ower-ul than the tobacco lobby. 4he industry is tied into a com(lex matrix oother interests5 drugs, chemicals, even dieting (roducts. 4he (ano(ly o- satellite industries that ma#e money -rom obesity means the -ood industry's relationshi( to obesity is an incredibly com(lex one. Anne $ilton, the minister -or (ublic health, tells me that legislation against the -ood industry isn't being ruled out, because o- the escalating costs to the )*E. "revious governments have always ta#en the route o- (artnershi(. Why@ .ecause the -ood industry (rovides hundreds o- thousands o- jobs and billions in revenue. 6t is immensely (ower-ul, and any (olitician who ta#es it on does so at their (eril. ;+et's get one thing straight,; $ilton tells me, however. ;6 am not scared o- the -ood industry.; And 6 believe her, because now, there is something -ar bigger to be -rightened o-. ,ventually, the (oint will be reached when the cost to the )*E o- obesity, which is now <1bn a year, outweighs the revenue -rom the '7 snac#s and con-ectionery mar#et, which is currently a((roximately </bn a year. 4hen the solution to obesity will become very sim(le