Home

Australians are unaware of the amount of hidden salt in processed food. Consuming high levels of salt dramatically increases the risk of heart disease and type II diabetes, as well as high blood pressure and hypertension.

The unsuspecting public is consuming almost 75% of their daily salt intake from processed foods.

Most disturbing is the amount of salt contained in such items as bread and cereals, which one would imagine would be low salt. In fact, a study by Flinders University that found that 25% of peoples’ daily salt intake was from bread and cereal.

While the daily-recommended salt (sodium) intake is 920-1600mg, the average Australian consumes much higher levels. The Flinders Uni study showed that 80% of peoples’ salt intake was from commonly consumed foods, not the usual suspects such as take away food.

There is growing awareness in the public domain of the need to reduce salt in processed foods and one organisation that is meeting the challenge is AWASH. AWASH is working closely with food companies to establish agreed guidelines on salt reduction strategies.

The National Heart Foundation has also created some self-regulation guidelines with their tick accreditation process whereby salt contained within submitted products, such as processed and fast food, must meet their standards for each food category.

However, even this system has some inconsistencies. For example, nut seed bars must contain 120 mg per hundred grams or less, while the maximum amount of sodium for bread and breakfast cereals is 400 mg per 100g. This goes against Australian and New Zealand food standards that recommend no more than 120 mg of salt per hundred grams irrespective of the type of food category.

The Heart Foundation does not actually specify the sodium content of their approved products, rather they have a general criteria which states that it must reflect the nutritional guidelines of the category, be challenging and achievable. This gives the Heart Foundation plenty of latitude to vary the sodium requirements based on the food category.

So when buying the more staple food items such as bread and breakfast cereals, check out the nutritional panel to ensure that the daily (sodium) content doesn’t exceed 120mg/100g.

A recent publication by the medical Journal of Australia made a recommendation of a 10% tax on all junk food.

With Australia’s obesity rate now at 60% of Australians are overweight or obese.

The proposed introduction of a junk food tax is based on the findings by Monash University researchers established that junk food had the same misuse and costs to society as alcohol.

The proposed tax is aimed at changing the consumption habits by making the price point a determinant in deciding whether a purchase will take place.

The Federal Governments Preventative Health Taskforce also make a recommendation to introduce a tax against energy dense foods that takes into consideration “fatty” and “sugary” foods.

The Preventative Health Taskforce report also sited that the French Government was to increase their existing value added tax of 5.5% to19.6%, which will capture all foods high in fat, salt and sugar. The premise being that the tax would be applied to foods traditional perceived as being healthy, an example in Australia are the health/muesli bar market.

The great thing about this tax is it doesn’t have to discriminate, it is based purely on the fat, sugar and salt content of the processed food product.

So if their product is low in any of these nutrients, then their is nothing to worry about:))

The great things about the tax is:

1.Price affect demand based on peoples available money, with Australia credit card debt over 40Billion and house affordability creating mortgage stress, something has to give
2.Healthier options become more attractive as the price deferential isn’t as great
3.Big corporates like to maximise shareholder wealth so less demand = less $$$, so recipes will have to be adjusted to maintain sales levels.

However you really need to make junk food something consumed occasional rather than regularly so I would like to see a 50% junk food tax, a substantial increase to really effect buyer behavior.

This would be based on the products having the tax based on the % of fat, sugar and salt per 100gms being over an agreed amount. So instead of buying a chocolate bar every day, they may buy one every second or third day.

This would not impact on those suffering economic hardship as there are healthier cheaper options available.

Well the danger is blogging about The Special K 2 week challenge is it promotes awareness of there product, be it good or bad.

So I like the premise of the challenge but behind it lurks a large multi national who has shareholders, mmm, what do share holder like, seeing healthy people around the globe, eating nutritious food and exercising regularly or maybe buying more Special K products.

Well Kellogg’s mission statement says “To drive sustainable growth through the power of our people and brands by better serving the needs of our consumers, customers and communities”.

So are there any elements of being a socially responsible company with the ultimate goal being focused around improving the health of their customers rather than increasing sales sales or giving the market the type of products they want but don’t need or are marketing about why they need Special K products?

Well if the program didn’t involve buying there highly processed products, it would be awesome but guess what, part of their program involves buying their special breakfast bars and eating Special K.

So lets look at there breakfast suggestions, Special K every morning mixed in with fruit & yoghurt, toast and muffins.

Remember that this company has also made some nutritional claims about Coco Pops “now supports your child’s immunity”