Junk food that’s good for you?

Manufacturers may gain the power to fortify products with nutrients

by Cathy Gulli on Friday, May 15, 2009 12:17pm - 10 Comments

If you think that “nutritious chocolate bar” sounds like an oxymoron, you may be surprised to learn of a controversial proposal Health Canada is reviewing that would give the food industry “discretionary” authority to fortify junk food with vitamins and minerals such as iron and calcium.

In its latest issue, the Canadian Medical Association Journal describes the debate. On the one hand, critics say that this is a cheap way of making junk food seem healthy. They worry that it will encourage consumption and further aggravate Canada’s rising obesity problem. Supporters, on the other hand, argue that if people are going to eat junk food anyway then it might as well contain nutrients.

Wise to the dicey situation, Health Minister Leona Aglukak apparently intercepted changes to the Food and Drugs Regulations before they appeared in the Canada Gazette on Mar. 31, so that they could be further considered. A Health Canada spokesperson told the CMAJ she “balked at the prospect of being labelled the Fortified Junk Food Queen.”

Fortification has been going on for decades in Canada. But historically it’s only occurred when there has been a clear and  widespread deficiency of a nutrient throughout the greater population. Vitamin D has been added to milk since the 1970s to alleviate the incidence of rickets in children; white flour for bread has long been enriched to replace the nutrients lost during processing.

Junk food fortification, however, is misguided, says Dr Yoni Freedhoff, a weight expert in Ottawa, because it won’t address a specific deficiency crisis. If anything, he told the CMAJ, these changes will improve things for processed food companies more than for Canadian consumers. “With the fortification, the food industry will have ample ammunition with which to advertise how helpful their food has now become.”

What’s more, some dissidents are concerned that junk food fortification could put Canadians at risk of consuming dangerously high levels of certain nutrients when these products are eaten in excess or in combination with other nutrient-rich or fortified products, including multivitamin supplements. That’s why Health Canada has so far controlled fortification strictly.

But Health Canada told the CMAJ that “stakeholders” have repeatedly complained that the current regulations are too strict, and actually stunt the development of new products that could be beneficial to Canadians. These proponents point to other countries, including the U.S., where fortification of foods is more open and available to consumers. That means that fortified junk food could lead to more commercial trade of goods.

And Canadians themselves may be in favour of such a move. Focus group testing by Health Canada revealed that people who already consumed junk food said they’d eat fortified versions if the price and taste were the same. “But they did not indicate they would consume more,” a Health Canada spokesperson pointed out to the CMAJ.

Of course, the absence of such a statement by focus group participants doesn’t mean it wouldn’t happen.

Bookmark and Share
  • BCLaurie56

    Changing regulations to make “Junk Food” more acceptable to the public is the WRONG FOCUS for Healthcare.
    Promoting whole food diets, without the NEED for fortification, should be what Health Canada advocates.

    Study after study show that a diet of fresh vegetables and fruit, and whole grains is the key to staying healthy, and within the correct BMI range. Healthy people need less healthcare, and there is less stress on the healthcare system.

  • Sylvie

    I Totally agree with Laurie. This is no better than tapping a multi-vitamin to my Coke bottle.

    • lynh

      While the two of you are absolutely right, the fact remains that the fast food industry (which contains mostly – “junk”) is the fastest growing industry worldwide. Obesity is on the rise and our society has become all about the “quick fix”. We’re never going to eliminate junk food from out store shelves as long as the demand is high. Since government cannot regulate what we eat (and thank the lord for a democratic society – we’re not communists) I say kudos to whomever came up with the idea to make junk foods a little healthier. Afterall, change takes time and if people want to continue to load up on junk food, lets be happy that at least that junk food is a little healthier for them.

      • Patrick

        Communists would not regulate what you eat. It’s an egalitarian system that we (as a society) should strive towards: the equal sharing of ownership and ideally equal participation of the populace for the greater good.

        Back on topic; I do have concerns about the overabundance of fortified products. For the most part, too much of most vitamins and minerals is released from your system through your waste, but there are some that could be toxic in high doses. It is a slippery slope to allow junk food this option. Then again, chips that would be good for me? mmmmmm…

  • hosertohoosier

    If people are going to eat crappily anyway – and they will – why not make those things slightly less crappy? Sure, by all means educate the public: “if you eat this you will be fat, but you won’t get scurvy or anemia”.

  • Cory

    In theory this could be a good idea to have junk food being slightly more healthy. However, making it more healthy (even very slightly) makes eating it more justifiable. Generally speaking consumers already view "light" options as more healthy whether or not they really are. Its true that you cannot control what people eat but that does not mean we should be giving people any more reason to eat junk food – especially considering that in our society nutrient deficiency is a very minor concern in relation to obesity.

  • max

    The problem is that people don't have time to cook or are too lazy.

  • http://fulldiziizle.biz dizi izle

    thank you very much :)

    • Carlos

      Olá

  • Dave

    We already have an obesity epidemic with all its inherent expenses to our overburdened healthcare system – to be able to promote previously recognized “empty calorie” products as nutritious because some vitamins and minerals were added is only adding to the problem. To point to the U.S. as an example of where this is already occurring (so we should too) is laughable because the U.S. is the one country whose obesity levels and healthcare costs exceed our own.

From Macleans