żìĂš¶ÌÊÓÆ”

Interview: Come eat with me

With a huge image problem and falling profits, McDonald's had to act. Harvey Anderson was among the elite scientists drafted in to save the day

Over the past half-century, millions of people worldwide have chomped through trillions of McDonald’s burgers and fries. But by the turn of the millennium, critics had made the corporation shorthand for everything that’s bad in food in rich countries: over-processed, fatty, unhealthy. Faced with this image problem, and stalling and falling profits, McDonald’s began fighting back. In 2003 – in what will sound to some a deeply ironic gesture – it set up the Global Advisory Council on Healthy Lifestyles. Its role was to reform McDonald’s from within and make the company look like it was taking the global obesity epidemic seriously.

The council recruited some of the world’s most respected scientists: biochemists, nutritionists, policy advisers and epidemiologists, keen to help the food giant transform itself. Given the council’s academic credibility and good intentions, is it wrong to be cynical about McDonald’s’ motivation? And given the hold the company has on the hearts and minds of its many customers, is it better to try to applaud the company for its efforts?

Canadian obesity and nutrition researcher Harvey Anderson thinks so. He is one of the elite scientists working with McDonald’s, so Diane Martindale asked him if we should start trusting the food giant.

Morgan Spurlock’s film Super Size Me showed what happened when he ate McDonald’s meals for 30 days. What did you think of it?

Garbage. The movie was too extreme to be educational. What pleased me was that most people I know thought it was a bit of a joke. They enjoyed it, but it was more of a question: how could he do that to himself? McDonald’s didn’t force-feed him. Spurlock is an anti-obesity advocate picking on the biggest target. He didn’t show the evils of eating at McDonald’s, he showed the evils of over-consumption. Spurlock could have gone to any greasy spoon and done the same thing with the same result. But doing it at a small, unknown restaurant wouldn’t have had much impact, would it?

So why did McDonald’s do away with the “Supersize” option? It was working for them, wasn’t it?

One of the first things the council told McDonald’s was to back off from supersizing: it just happened to coincide with the silly movie. People don’t need Supersize: if the Supersize option is there, people will go for it. Sometimes you have to help them trip over the right choice. We do have a big obesity epidemic and it’s wrong to have large serving sizes.

You are a top nutritionist and obesity researcher. Why did you join a council sponsored by the world’s biggest fast-food chain?

Here’s an organisation serving millions of meals a day and you have a chance to have an impact on the composition of the food, the nutrition and the public’s health. Why not? If I or anyone in public health services was in a position to influence the way the 35 million people in Canada eat, we’d love that opportunity. The trouble is, there’s no organised way of getting at it – McDonald’s is that way. So I’d rather work from within the system to change things rather than simply complaining.

How did you set about changing the company’s billion-dollar-grossing menu?

First, we checked what was in the meal, and figured out what was missing. Was there enough fibre in the buns? Were there things to add to make it more nutritious – say, an apple to the “Happy Meal” and milk instead of a soft drink? We worked with Cathy Kapica, global director of nutrition at the Chicago head office. The most difficult aspect was and is not altering the taste too much, because people complain. McDonald’s criteria covering how its food looks, tastes and its composition is rigorous. If you could take a frozen McDonald’s hamburger, grill and eat it at home, you’d say: “This is the freshest tasting piece of meat I’ve ever had.” It’s just absolutely wonderful.

How do you know?

I’ve tasted it, on my first visit to McDonald’s main testing kitchen in Chicago – what they call Hamburger University – when I joined the council. They grilled me a burger patty and said: “Why don’t you just taste our hamburger meat, without any dressings or bun?” And it was delicious.

What do you think you’ve achieved health-wise?

The Happy Meal used to be a small burger, fries, fizzy drink and toy. Now you can choose: there’s apple, yoghurt, milk or juice as substitutes for the fries, and pop at no extra charge. They say an apple a day keeps the doctor away. We told McDonald’s to add fibre to their buns; now we are encouraging whole grains. Compared with 10 years ago, there is much more fruit and vegetables on the menu.

Are the sales improving?

Yes. People see they can choose to eat a salad at McDonald’s and still have fun. The fact that the choice is there broadens a child’s vision of what fun foods are. If they see other kids eating a salad or an apple, that’s more powerful than mom and dad saying: “Eat your salad!” If people would only select the choice that’s suitable for them – that’s the tricky part.

Is the company image changing?

Yes, I think we are changing people’s perception. People tended to close their minds and say: “I’m just not going there.” But now they say: “Wow, that was a good salad.”

“People who had closed their minds say, ‘Wow, that was a good salad’”

Will there be any scientific papers available showing some independent evidence of this shift?

McDonald’s is evaluating its meals. Cathy Kapica is starting to publish – and presenting data at scientific meetings is a real first for McDonald’s. She presented at the Experimental Biology meeting in San Diego in April and she will present at the International Congress of Nutrition in Durban, South Africa, in September.

Quite a change. But while McDonald’s is now the number one seller of salads in North America, those salads are full of sugar.

There’s nothing wrong with a little sugar. It’s 4 calories per gram of sugar versus 9 calories per gram of fat. People don’t think about that. I eat McDonald’s salads all the time. I just had one of its newer ones, the fruit and walnut – it’s a wonderful little salad. But you do have to choose your salad dressing carefully. McDonald’s is trying to drop the calorie content of some of the dressings because not everyone knows the difference between one made with oil versus one lower in calories.

Is working for McDonald’s like going to the dark side, a sort of career suicide?

Just the opposite. Most people see it as a wonderful opportunity. Others say it’s nice that you are brave enough to take it on. It’s not so much my colleagues that are negative or closed-minded about it. They say to me: “Why don’t you suggest to McDonald’s that they do this or this?” They see it as an avenue to change. That’s comforting. In truth, I did expect that there would be more negative opinions, but most people think we have to work with fast-food companies, we can’t be in an ivory tower throwing darts. It’s friends, acquaintances, or a vegetarian, or someone who never takes their kids to McDonald’s, who say to me: “How could you work for them?” When they say that I give them an educational talk!

Do you eat at McDonald’s?

I probably go there once a week. I like the Happy Meal because it’s a small burger, and I have the yoghurt and juice instead of pop and fries. I like my high-fibre breakfast cereals, but sometimes I’ll just grab a breakfast bagel on the way to work. It’s wonderful, fresh, but I don’t put the mayo on it. It’s a good start to the day. I hope that we’ll eventually get to whole-wheat bagels.

Profile

Harvey Anderson is a professor at the University of Toronto in the department of nutritional sciences and physiology, and the director of the university’s food safety programme. His academic work concentrates on childhood obesity, diet and behaviour. He has contributed to more than 250 publications on food sciences and nutrition.