More than half of UK nutrition consultants are paid by food companies, it has been revealed

At least 11 of the 17 members of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) have conflicts of interest with companies including Nestle, sugar makers Tate and Lyle and the world’s largest ice cream maker Unilever, reports Sophie Borland. BMJ.

At least six of the 11 members of SACN’s Maternal and Child Nutrition Subgroup have links to food companies, including baby food manufacturers and formula milk brands.

SACN is a powerful group of people appointed as independent experts to advise the government, and this influences policy, explains Borland. Since it was founded 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 both the SACN and previous governments that reviewed its recommendations have not done enough to reduce rising rates of obesity and food-related health problems.

BMJ It looked at the interests declared by SACN members over the last three years in public documents published on the government’s website.

They include David Mela, a retired senior scientist at Unilever who has advised companies including Unilever, Tate and Lyle, Coca-Cola’s Israeli subsidiary CBC Israel and Cargill, which makes cocoa and chocolate products.

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

Members of SACN’s Maternal and Child Nutrition subgroup include Nestle Foundation councillor Ann Prentice and Marion Hetherington, who has undertaken pro bono work for Danone and baby food brand Ella’s Kitchen. The group’s chairman, Ken Ong, has also received research funding from formula milk maker Mead Johnston Nutrition.

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

“None of the committee members are directly employed in the food and drink sector and all have a duty to act in the public interest and to be independent and impartial,” it said.

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

Experts say BMJ The structure of the SACN needs to be reviewed in light of its members’ links to the food industry, but Kat Jenner, director of the Obesity Health Alliance, says these links are partly a result of a lack of money for relevant research.

Alison Tedstone, former chief nutritionist at Public Health England, also suggested that not allowing experts with industry links to join the SACN would “diminish” the agency’s expertise and could delay future legislation.

But Van Tulleken says: “Despite two decades of work by a contentious 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 to claim that the committee has been very effective.”

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