31 Oct 2023 --- Public health and the environment is being “polluted” by sugar, argues a  new report by the British charity Action on Sugar and the environmental organization Feedback. Experts claim the UK’s current demand-side policies to curb sugar consumption do not go far enough.

“The UK’s Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition recommends free sugars intake should be 5% of total energy intake, but consumption is double this level. Intakes are especially high among children over four years old and teenagers. Among these groups, over 12% of energy intake is from free sugars,” Harriet Burt, senior policy and international projects officer at Action on Sugar, tells Nutrition Insight. 

“Climate change is another key issue: industrial agriculture or the food system is the largest driver of climate change. So growing food we do not need isn’t a sensible use of the carbon budget,” Krysia Woroniecka, sugar and soils project manager at Feedback Global, tells us. 

The new nclick="updateothersitehits('Articlepage','External','OtherSitelink','Action on Sugar and Feedback Global call for food policy leadership to curb UK “sugar pollution"','Action on Sugar and Feedback Global call for food policy leadership to curb UK “sugar pollution"','337462','https://feedbackglobal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/Feedback-Sugar-Pollution-23-Report-Final.pdf', 'article','Action on Sugar and Feedback Global call for food policy leadership to curb UK “sugar pollution"');return no_reload();">report refers to the effects of the overproduction, import and consumption of sugar in the UK as “sugar pollution.” It is stated that the country’s annual sugar supply is equivalent to over two-and-a-half times what is needed to meet the entire population’s maximum recommended intake. 

Damaging public health and the environment 
The report recommends the UK government take urgent action to reduce the nation’s sugar consumption by close to two-thirds if it is to meet the UK Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition safe consumption recommendations to reduce the overconsumption of the ingredient, which is a significant cause of diet-related illnesses.

“Sugar consumption causes tooth decay, the most common non-communicable disease globally, taking a particular toll on children: oral diseases are the leading reason four to five-year-olds in the UK are admitted to hospital. Sugar consumption also increases the risk of obesity. This, in turn, is closely associated with the onset of conditions such as type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and 13 cancers,” Burt says. 

The excessive production of sugar is also having a negative environmental impact. The farming of sugar beets, used in the domestic development of sugar, is claiming the country’s topsoil and damaging biodiversity through insecticides, namely neonicotinoids. Domestically produced sugar makes up the majority of sugar consumed in the UK. 

On the potential long-term consequences for the UK’s environment if sugar production continues at its current rate, Feedback’s Woroniecka explains: “Soil loss is the key one, and the threats to food security from topsoil damage is huge. Producing just 1 cm of topsoil takes 200–400 years — for this reason, it is considered a non-renewable resource.”

“Yet the process of harvesting sugar beet can lift hundreds of thousands of tons of topsoil from UK fields every year, in the form of soil tare, which is caused by the soil clinging to the beet and machinery during harvest. All root crops involve soil loss from crop harvesting.”

Woroniecka highlights that sugar beet is a greater culprit than comparable crops, such as potatoes, because it is harvested later in the year when soils are wetter and more prone to sticking to the crop and farm machinery. “This topsoil is bagged up and sold to golf courses: it leaves the food system completely.” 

“The UK currently faces hard trade-offs around land use — the discussions taking place right now around how land will be used involve extreme trade-offs between nature, climate and food security. It makes no sense to be growing ingredients for processed foods in this context, and the only explanation for this is industry influence, in my opinion,” she adds.

Personal responsibility is not enough 
Despite the country-wide oversupply of sugar, policies aiming to ease the many public health concerns associated with high-sugar diets have attempted to address the issue by reducing demand for products with a high sugar content. These policies have yet to be successful.

“There is support for food policy leadership. Yet many parliamentarians still subscribe to the narrative that obesity is an issue of personal responsibility and does not consider the effect of food environments on people’s choices,” Woroniecka explains. 

“The food industry spends billions influencing people’s dietary decisions because those methods work. This view of ‘it’s up to me what I decide to do with my body’ assumes a level of wealth and an abundance of time that most people do not have, so we first need to educate parliamentarians about this issue and continue to showcase the wealth of solid evidence on this that already exists.” 

She underscores that the current food environment is “far from neutral”, adding that significant intervention is required to neutralize the efforts of the food industry in this area.

Policies in action 
The critical policy recommendation found in the report is reducing the overall supply of abundant and affordable sugar. Woroniecka points out that the policies aimed at curbing sugar production and intake in the UK can be effective, but ultimately, more is needed to address the root problem.

“Every country that addresses sugar supply can be used to take lessons from, including the UK with the Sugary Drinks Levy. Multiple countries have tackled specific product categories - most commonly soft drinks, but the oversupply of sugar is a global issue. Hence, the need to reduce beet and cane sugar consumption.”

“There is also the related issue of ensuring adequate vegetable supply to provide a healthy diet to everyone that needs it.”

She outlines another issue relevant to implementation: the affordability of healthy food.