There is a dark side to corporate branding and food companies have been notorious for doing all they can to hide the real dangers of the ingredients in their packaging by clever wording and tricky marketing.

Once again, the Heart Foundation’s ‘tick’ has come in for a scathing, albeit, honest critique, this time from Dr. Rosemary Stanton in an article published online in the Medical Journal of Australia.

Among other comments, Dr. Stanton said “It is not the role of health organisations, such as the Heart Foundation, to keep these companies profitable.” Food manufacturers pay a license fee to use the ‘Tick’ logo for products that might be less healthy than alternatives and “by tweaking products (where necessary) and paying for the tick, companies gain credibility by linking their brand to the positive emotions attached to the Heart Foundation.”

Perhaps next time we go to the supermarket, we should take greater care and think before we buy. If the product indicates ‘healthy’ because you see a credible organisation’s branded endorsement, think twice about it – would that endorsement appear if there was no financial inducement in the deal?

We understand how these deals work, but when it affects people’s health and wellbeing, then it’s a serious concern for all of us to be properly informed about the decisions we make regarding our health. For all our sake, we need to read the ingredients on the labels (even if we need to purchase a magnifying glass) and get educated, otherwise our wellbeing may be at risk.

Expert attacks ‘healthy’ food tick