Snacks and soda are as bad as cigarettes, says documentary

Consuming ultra-processed foods is just as harmful as smoking. Here is an impact statement, which appears right at the beginning of the documentary “Big Food”.

The film, of just 22 minutes and 47 seconds, exposes the undeniable power of transnational corporations that produce industrial food, cheap and of low nutritional quality. Worse, they infiltrate the political debate to influence public food guidelines.

“Big Food: the Power of Ultra-Processed Industries” is a production by Coletivo Bodoque and Idec (Brazilian Consumer Defense Institute), released in November for free exhibition by appointment. It builds its plot based on the testimonies of academics from Brazil and the United Kingdom, as well as members of the institute itself.

Teresa Liporace, former executive director of Idec, compares the food industry to tobacco. Several chronic diseases, from diabetes to certain types of cancer, have been associated with the consumption of ultra-processed products.

It is boring, but necessary, to open parentheses to explain this concept.

The “Food Guide for the Brazilian Population”, prepared by USP researchers for the Ministry of Health, divides food into four categories: fresh (or minimally processed), culinary ingredients, processed and ultra-processed.

The film uses four corn states to illustrate the division: corn on the cob (in natura), corn oil (a cooking ingredient as well as other fats, salt and sugar), canned corn (processed) and corn chips (ultra-processed).

Ultra-processed products have a high content of sugar, sodium and/or fat, in addition to chemical additives foreign to traditional cooking. Breakfast cereals, stuffed cookies, snacks, sweets, frozen dishes and soft drinks, among other items.

Okay, we know these foods suck. But… as harmful as cigarettes? It seems like an exaggeration to compare smoke with bad food.

In a telephone interview, Ana Paula Bortoletto, technical consultant at Idec (Consumer Defense Institute), put the comparison into perspective: “The damage is equivalent, if we take into account the size of the affected population”.

Fewer and fewer people smoke. Everyone eats. And almost everyone eats badly from time to time. Fair enough, but it’s a consideration that was left out of the film.

Compacted in less than half an hour, “Big Food” fails to develop arguments and explore the themes it addresses.

His best moments are archival images that show the promiscuity of the government with the food industry – in one of them, São Paulo governor João Doria attends the opening of a Mars factory and says that his chocolates are “delicious”.

For most of its short duration, however, “Big Food” shoots out catchphrases and figures of impact. There are only ten companies that supply supermarkets around the world. In Brazil alone, the food industry has an annual turnover of R$ 700 billion. Like that, vapt-vupt, and skip to the next club.

Had it been longer, maybe “Big Food” could have been more sober, less pamphleteering, less Michael Moore. And, thus, expose in detail some terrible facts that may even seem like conspiracy theory.