Obesity prevention and personal responsibility: the case of front-of-pack food labelling in Australia

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>In Australia, the food industry and public health groups are locked in serious struggle for regulatory influence over the terms of front-of-pack food labelling. Clear, unambiguous labelling of the nutritional content of pre-packaged foods and of standardized food items sold in chain restaurants is consistent with the prevailing philosophy of 'personal responsibility'. An interpretive, front-of-pack labelling scheme has the capacity to encourage healthier patterns of eating, and to be a catalyst for improvements in the nutritional quality of food products through re-formulation. On the other hand, the strength of opposition of the Australian Food and Grocery Council to 'Traffic Light Labelling', and its efforts to promote a non-interpretive, voluntary scheme, invite the interpretation that the food industry is resistant to any reforms that could destabilise current (unhealthy) purchasing patterns and the revenues they represent.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This article argues that although policies that aim to educate consumers about the nutritional content of food are welcome, they are only one part of a broader basket of policies that are needed to make progress on obesity prevention and public health nutrition. However, to the extent that food labelling has the capacity to inform and empower consumers to make healthier choices - and to be a catalyst for improving the nutritional quality of commercial recipes - it has an important role to play. Furthermore, given the dietary impact of meals eaten in fast food and franchise restaurants, interpretive labelling requirements should not be restricted to pre-packaged foods.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Food industry resistance to an interpretive food labelling scheme is an important test for government, and a case study of how self-interest prompts industry to promote weaker, voluntary schemes that pre-empt and undermine progressive public health regulation.</p

Influence of Salmonella enterica Serovar Typhimurium ssrB

Although Salmonella has been isolated from 7.4 to 8.6% of domestic raw oysters, representing a significant risk for food-borne illness, little is known about the factors that influence their initial colonization by Salmonella. This study tested the hypothesis that specific regulatory changes enable a portion of the invading Salmonella population to colonize oysters. An in vivo promoter probe library screen identified 19 unique regions as regulated during colonization. The mutants in the nearest corresponding downstream genes were tested for colonization defects in oysters. Only one mutation, in ssrB, resulted in a significantly reduced ability to colonize oysters compared to that of wild-type Salmonella. Because ssrB regulates Salmonella pathogenicity island 2 (SPI-2)-dependent infections in vertebrate macrophages, the possibility that ssrB mediated colonization of oyster hemocytes in a similar manner was examined. However, no difference in hemocyte colonization was observed. The complementary hypothesis that signal exchange between Salmonella and the oyster's native microbial community aids colonization was also tested. Signals that triggered responses in quorum sensing (QS) reporters were shown to be produced by oyster-associated bacteria and present in oyster tissue. However, no evidence for signal exchange was observed in vivo. The sdiA reporter responded to salinity, suggesting that SdiA may also have a role in environmental sensing. Overall, this study suggests the initial colonization of live oysters by Salmonella is controlled by a limited number of regulators, including ssrB