journalism on the health impacts of food systems. Different forms of research involving a wider range of actors and sources of knowledge are also required to rebalance the playing field and challenge prevailing problem framings.
Third, we need to know more about the positive health impacts and positive externalities of alternative food and farming systems (e.g., agroecological crop and livestock management approaches that build soil nutrients, sequester carbon in the soil, or restore ecosystem functions such as pollination and water purification). It is crucial to document and communicate the potential of alternative systems to: reconcile productivity gains, environmental resilience, social equity, and health benefits; strengthen yields on the basis of rehabilitating ecosystems (not at their expense); build nutrition on the basis of access to diverse foods; and redistribute power and reduce inequalities in the process.
Fourth, we need to adopt and apply the precautionary principle. The negative health impacts identified above are interconnected, self-reinforcing, and systemic in nature. However, this complexity cannot be an excuse for inaction. Disease prevention must increasingly be understood in terms of identifying specific risk factors by the accumulation of evidence from many different studies, from many different disciplines, as well as in terms of the collective strength, consistency, plausibility, and coherence of the evidence base. In this light, there is a clear need to call upon the precautionary principle – developed to manage these complexities and requiring policymakers to weigh the collective evidence on risk factors and act accordingly – to protect public health.
Fifth, we need to build integrated and coherent food policies under participatory governance. Policy processes must be up to the task of managing the complexity of food systems and the systemic health risks they generate. Integrated food policies and food strategies are required to overcome the traditional biases in sectoral policies (e.g., export orientation in agricultural policy) and to align various policies with the objective of delivering environmentally, socially, and economically sustainable food systems. Integrated food policies allow trade-offs to be weighed up, while providing a framework for long-term systemic objectives to be set (e.g., reducing the chemical load in food and farming systems, and devising strategies for tackling emerging risks such as antimicrobial resistance). These processes must be participatory. The general public must become a partner in public risk management and priority setting, and buy into the rationale and priorities underpinning it.
Disclosure Statement
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
References
1FAO, IFAD, UNICEF, WFP, WHO: The state of food security and nutrition in the world 2019. Safeguarding against economic slowdowns and downturns. Rome, FAO, 2019. http://www.fao.org/3/ca5162en/ca5162en.pdf.
2IPES-Food: Unravelling the food-health nexus: addressing practices, political economy, and power relations to build healthier food systems. The Global Alliance for the Future of Food and IPES-Food. Brussels, 2017. http://www.ipesfood/_img/upload/files/Health_FullReport.pdf.
3Elver H: Report of the special rapporteur on the right to food, UN doc. A/HRC/34/48. Geneva, United Nations Human Rights Council, 2017. https://www.ohchr.org/documents/hrbodies/upr/a_hrc_34_2_en.docx.
4UNICEF: Understanding the impact of pesticides on children. A discussion paper. New York, 2018. http://www.unicef.org/csr/files/Understanding_the_impact_of_pesticides_on_children-_Jan_2018.pdf.
5Newman KL, Leon JS, Newman LS: Estimating occupational illness, injury, and mortality in food production in the United States: a farm-to-table analysis. J Occup Environ Med 2015;57:718–725.
6Blainey M, Ganzleben C, Goldenman G, Pratt I: The benefits of strict cut-off criteria on human health in relation to the proposal for a regulation concerning plant protection products 2008 (No. IP/A/ENVI/ST/2008–18). Policy Department Economic and Scientific Policy. Brussels, European Parliament, 2008. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2008/408559/IPOL-JOIN_ET(2008)408559_EN.pdf.
7Attina TM, Hauser R, Sathyanarayana S, Hunt PA, Bourguignon J-P, Myers JP, DiGangi J, Zoeller RT, Trasande L: Exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the USA: a population-based disease burden and cost analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4:996–1003.
8WHO: Fact sheet on food safety. Geneva, WHO, 2019. http://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/food-safety.
9GBD 2017 Diet Collaborators: Health effects of dietary risks in 195 countries, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2019;393:1958–1972.
10HLPE: Nutrition and food systems. A report by the High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition of the Committee on World Food Security. Rome, 2017. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i/7846e.pdf.
11Christopher T, Aggarwal A, Walls H, Herforth A, Drewnowski A, Coates J, Kalamatianou S, Kadiyala S: Concepts and critical perspectives for food environment research: a global framework with implications for action in low- and middle-income countries. Global Food Security 2018;18:93–101.
12Popkin BM, Hawkes C: Sweetening of the global diet, particularly beverages: patterns, trends, and policy responses. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016;4:174–186.
13WHO: Sugars intake for adults and children. Guideline. Geneva, WHO, 2015. https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/guidelines/sugars_intake/en/.
14Institute of Medicine, National Research Council: A framework for assessing effects of the food system. Washington, National Academies Press, 2015. doi: 10.17226/18846.
15WHO: Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2014. Geneva, WHO, 2014. https://www.who.int/nmh/publications/ncd-status-report-2014/en/.
16Forouhi NG, Unwin N: Global diet, and health: old questions, fresh evidence and new horizons. Lancet 2019;393:1916–1918.
17Stender