Mandatory legislation is almost twenty times more effective in reducing incidence of Britain's major killer, a study shows. Voluntary industry limits on the salt content of process foods cut ill health from cardiovascular disease by almost one per cent, the Australian researchers say. But the health profit could be radically greater if the government imposed limits, with ill health from cardiovascular disease lessening by as much as 18 per cent. Dr Linda Cobiac, of the University of Queensland, and colleagues said: "Food manufacturer have a responsibility to create money for their shareholders, but they also have a responsibility to society.
"If corporate responsibility fails, may be there is an ethical validation for government to step in and legislate." Her team, whose findings are published in Heart, assess the public health benefits and cost efficiency of different strategies for reducing dietary salt content a factor known to have a key role in the enlarged risk of heart disease and stroke. They looked at the current Australian programme called 'Tick' that enable food manufacturers to buy an authorized logo for use on product packaging to achieve higher sales in return for voluntarily falling their salt content. They also looked at the collision of mandatory reductions in salt content and professional advice to cut dietary salt for those at enlarged and high risk of cardiovascular disease.
They then costed the different strategy in terms of their impact on years of good health over a lifetime, and the related savings in long term health care spend. And they contrast the results with what would happen if none of these strategies were in place. They took into thought the salt content of bread, margarine, and cereals, the tonnage of product sold, average consumption per head of these products, the costs of drafting and enforce legislation and systematic reviews of the proof for the impact of dietary advice from health care professional. Their calculations showed that 610,000 years of strong life could be gain if everyone reduced their salt intake to optional limits of a maximum 6g a day.
useful links : transport rankings
"If corporate responsibility fails, may be there is an ethical validation for government to step in and legislate." Her team, whose findings are published in Heart, assess the public health benefits and cost efficiency of different strategies for reducing dietary salt content a factor known to have a key role in the enlarged risk of heart disease and stroke. They looked at the current Australian programme called 'Tick' that enable food manufacturers to buy an authorized logo for use on product packaging to achieve higher sales in return for voluntarily falling their salt content. They also looked at the collision of mandatory reductions in salt content and professional advice to cut dietary salt for those at enlarged and high risk of cardiovascular disease.
They then costed the different strategy in terms of their impact on years of good health over a lifetime, and the related savings in long term health care spend. And they contrast the results with what would happen if none of these strategies were in place. They took into thought the salt content of bread, margarine, and cereals, the tonnage of product sold, average consumption per head of these products, the costs of drafting and enforce legislation and systematic reviews of the proof for the impact of dietary advice from health care professional. Their calculations showed that 610,000 years of strong life could be gain if everyone reduced their salt intake to optional limits of a maximum 6g a day.
useful links : transport rankings
No comments:
Post a Comment