To assess and compare the favourability of healthy public policy options to promote healthy eating from the perspective of members of the general public and policy influencers in two Canadian provinces.

The Chronic Disease Prevention Survey, administered in 2016, required participants to rank their level of support for different evidence-based policy options to promote healthy eating at the population level. Pearson’s χ2 significance testing was used to compare support between groups for each policy option and results were interpreted using the Nuffield Council on Bioethics’ intervention ladder framework.

Alberta and Québec, Canada.

Members of the general public (n 2400) and policy influencers (n 302) in Alberta and Québec.

General public and policy influencer survey respondents were more supportive of healthy eating policies if they were less intrusive on individual autonomy. However, in comparing levels of support between groups, we found policy influencers indicated significantly stronger support overall for healthy eating policy options. We also found that policy influencers in Québec tended to show more support for more restrictive policy options than their counterparts from Alberta.

These results suggest that additional knowledge brokering may be required to increase support for more intrusive yet impactful evidence-based policy interventions; and that the overall lower levels of support among members of the public may impede policy influencers from taking action on policies to promote healthy eating.

To indicate why the world's most powerful nation state and one powerful sector of the food and drink production and manufacturing industry are determined to demolish the 2004 WHO (World Health Organization) global strategy on diet, physical activity and health, and to disassociate it from the 2003 WHO/FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) expert report on diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases, which with its background papers is the immediate scientific basis for the strategy. To encourage representatives of nation states at the 2004 WHO World Health Assembly to support the strategy together with the report, so that the strategy is explicit and quantified, and responds to the need expressed by member states at the 2002 World Health Assembly. This is for an effective global strategy to prevent and control chronic diseases whose prevalence is increased by nutrient-poor food low in vegetables and fruits and high in energy-dense fatty, sugary and/or salty foods and drinks and also by physical inactivity. Of these diseases, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancers of several sites are now the chief causes of morbidity and mortality in most countries in the world.

A summary of the global strategy and its roots in scientific knowledge accumulated over the last half-century. Reasons why the global strategy and the expert report are opposed by the current US government and the world sugar industry, with some reference to modern historical context. A summary of the trajectory of the global strategy since its first draft made in early 2003, and a further summary of its weaknesses, strengths and potential.

The 2004 WHO global strategy and the 2003 WHO/FAO expert report are perceived by the current US administration as an impediment to US trade and international policy, within a general context of current US government hostility to the UN (United Nations) system as a brake on the exercise of its power as the world's dominant nation. Policy-makers throughout the world should be aware of the contexts of current pressures put on them by powerful nation states and sectors of industry whose ideologies and commercial interests are challenged by international initiatives designed to improve public health and to leave a better legacy for future generations.