One of the most tried and true ways global capitalists have convinced low information low IQ rubes that they are cleaning up their act and taking “social” responsibility is through a bait and switch tactic called stakeholder capitalism or multistakeholderism. Under the guise of appearing impartial to their own class interests multinational executives and billionaires have created many multi-stakeholder institutions, such as the World Economic Forum itself, to set public policy discourse. They rely on a facade of independent research and expertise that they themselves pay for to promote solutions that are profitable for themselves. This is very apparent in their proposed solution to world hunger which is a breeding ground for patented GM seeds and crops and cheap ultra-processed foods, which they plan to make worse with the addition of bugs. They are betting on you not figuring out that they are behind the plethora of trade organizations, civil societies, philanthropists and academics that push these solutions at the UN.
A network analysis of 45 food system multi-stakeholder institutions found that nearly 90% of private multi stakeholder institutions and public-private food system partnership institutions had one or more UPF corporations, or corporations with either membership or donor ties to UPF corporations. The WEF was the most common followed by Unilever, the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, WWF, Nestle and PepsiCo. These 45 food system multi-stakeholder institutions have 601 board members; UPF corporation and business association executives hold 263 of those positions (44%), the largest share by far. Over 82% of all board members are from high income countries, predominantly the US and EU countries. Only 7 food system multi-stakeholder institutions had board members from low income countries. Many supposedly intra-government multi-stakeholder conventions such as the UN Food System Summit held in 2021 were steered by UPF corporate interests consolidated by the WEF front group.
The designation of foods as whole foods, culinary ingredients, processed foods and ultra processed foods is defined by the NOVA food classification system as follows:
(1) ‘unprocessed or minimally processed foods’, comprising edible parts of plants, animals or fungi without any processes applied to them or natural foods altered by minimal processing designed to preserve natural foods to make them suitable for storage, or to make them safe, edible or more palatable.
(2) processed culinary ingredients, which are substances extracted from group 1 (e.g., fats, oils, sugars and starches) or from nature (e.g., salt) used to cook and season minimally processed foods, not intended for consumption on their own;
3) processed foods, where industrial products are made by adding culinary ingredients to minimally processed foods (e.g., canned vegetables in brine, fruit in syrup, cheese).
4) Ultra processed foods, which are defined as ‘formulations of ingredients, mostly of exclusive industrial use, that result from a series of industrial processes (hence “ultra-processed”), many requiring sophisticated equipment and technology’ (e.g., sweet and savory snacks, reconstituted meats, pizza dishes and confectionery, among others) . Ingredients characteristic of UPFs include food substances of no or rare culinary use, including sugar, protein and oil derivatives (e.g., high-fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin, protein isolates, hydrogenated oil) and cosmetic additives (e.g., colors, flavors, flavor enhancers, emulsifiers, thickeners, and artificial sweeteners) designed to make the final product more palatable.
When speaking of ultra processed foods we are speaking of food stuff that you cannot make without a factory and millions of dollars in capital. You can make 1 through 3 in your kitchen; that is why it is imperative for UPF manufacturers, retailers and their front groups like the WEF to take over global food governance through the UN, which signed a strategic partnership agreement with the globalist front group in 2019 to implement Agenda 2030, and NGO spin offs like the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa, whose president was appointed special envoy for the 2021 Food System Summit.
Who Pays?
A UPF consuming population is a sicker population. The totality of scientific literature evidencing the multitude of harms caused by UPF is too extensive to include in one post but this narrative review gives us a cross section of many of them. Across 19 European countries every 1% increase in household consumption of UPF is associated with a 0.25% increase in obesity rates. Euromonitor found that, across 80 countries, every 1 SD increase in per capita sugary drink consumption is associated with a 0.2 kg/m2 increase in BMI for men and every 1 SD increase in per capita UPF consumption is associated with 0.3 kg/m2 increase in BMI. In the U.S., U.K. and Canada, individuals in the highest quintile for UPF consumption have the highest risk of obesity and excess weight compared to individuals in the lowest quintile. One RCT conducted among 20 weight stable healthy adults in the U.S. found that participants that ate an 81% UPF diet ate more and gained weight on the UPF diet and ate less and lost weight on a strictly whole foods diet. The highest quartile consumption of UPF is associated with a 31% increase in all cause mortality in the U.S. as well. As I elaborated 5 years ago in How Congress Created Our Obesity and Mental Disorder Epidemics, UPF diets characterized by high concentrations of saturated fats and refined sugars and a lack of nutrient dense foods are not only independently associated obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and hypertension, they are also associated with cognitive impairment and mental disorders. Cohort studies in France and Spain found that young adults in the highest quartile of UPF consumption have a 31% and 33% elevated risk of depression compared to young adults in the bottom quartile of UPF consumption. A case control study in Brazil found regular consumption of UPF at least 5 days a week leads to a 2.35x higher risk of breast cancer. A longitudinal study in France found that 10% increase in UPF consumption leads to a 15% increased risk of type 2 diabetes. A cross sectional French study found a higher risk of irritable bowel syndrome as well.
Who Profits?
Not only do the UPF manufacturers, distributors and retailers profit from higher consumption of nutrition-less garbage but so does Big Pharma from a sicker population that spends more on healthcare. The CDC estimates that 90% of healthcare spending, or about $4 trillion, is spent treating people with chronic diseases and mental disorders which is the majority of Americans. By some estimates 48% of the congressional budget is either directly or indirectly spent on healthcare. As I mentioned in an unrelated answer, the American Heart Association projects that the cost of treating these chronic diseases are expected to more than triple by 2050 and quadruple, quintuple and even sextuple for a few disorders. All of this is promising news for Big Pharma conglomerates ready to sell us their patented treatments at exorbitant prices draining our pockets into their coffers as we get older and sicker as a nation.