Public health advocates are used to their ideals colliding with the pragmatism of the public.
Charged with protecting the health of the population, their job does not make them popular. But they felt stung and surprised by the vociferous response to their well-meaning opposition to a Ronald McDonald House being included in the new Dunedin Hospital. It seemed as if few issues had galvanised the public in recent times as much as the conviction Public Health South and the Public Health Association really had gone too far this time.
Their stance was denounced as impractical, ideological, ridiculous. But University of Otago National Addiction Centre Director Prof Doug Sellman believes the corporation was probably whipping up the outrage in a covert fashion. He admits he has no proof, but he suspects it was there in some form stoking the ire directed towards public health advocates in hundreds of online comments.
No stranger to drawing the ire of the alcohol industry in particular, Prof Sellman is one of the country’s most controversial and dedicated public health activists. McDonald’s strongly denies his accusation.
The rhetoric continued to ramp up this week when Canterbury Medical Officer of Health Alistair Humphrey, in a letter to the Otago Daily Times, likened McDonald’s to drug dealer and narcoterrorist Pablo Escobar.
Public Health Association chief executive Warren Lindberg resorted to blaming the media, accusing the ODT of having led "contagious outrage".
"A thesaurus of epithets were thrown at us on the assumption, initiated by the ODT, that we opposed support services for families of children with serious conditions admitted to hospitals, because we objected to the Ronald McDonald branding," he wrote in a PHA newsletter.
The PHA’s Otago-Southland branch initiated contact with the ODT last month, furnishing an unsolicited press release calling on Southern District Health Board to shun links with McDonald’s, before later claiming its view was misrepresented.
Rather than attacking a newspaper, Prof Sellman is concerned by the potential role industry plays in seeding social media.
Fake comments prodded genuine online commenters to think, ‘That’s right’, provoking an online storm of indignation, he suggested.
"I think you will find there will be Ronald McDonald advocates, people with shares, or some connection.
"If you could do the investigative journalism — and you won’t have the time to do it — but somewhere in the background of the noise coming out of [Otago and Southland] there will be the corporation itself.
"A lot of comments in social media are the industry."
McDonald’s spokesman Simon Kenny said Prof Sellman’s accusation was "very concerning and very disappointing".
"Any suggestion that McDonald’s pays people to criticise other people on social media is ridiculous. It’s not something we would ever do, and we’re concerned Prof Sellman is making comments like this, without any proof.
"The suggestion we would is ridiculous, but not surprising given [Prof Sellman’s] ideology.
"It’s concerning the level of misinformation in this conversation."
Prof Sellman’s comments are also likely to annoy parents who say the houses helped them survive a distressing and traumatic experience. Indignant parents say there was neither overt branding, nor unhealthy food in the houses. Asked if the emotive issue was the right battle for public health advocates, Prof Sellman said: "Every battle’s worth fighting."
Precedent?
Counties Manukau DHB’s decision to drop plans for a Ronald McDonald House from setting up in Middlemore Hospital opened a new frontier in the war between public health advocates and industry.
Its decision emboldened southern public health advocates to oppose the idea of a Ronald McDonald House in the rebuilt Dunedin Hospital.
There is no firm proposal for a Dunedin house at this stage, but the corporate charity has indicated it is keen to have a presence in the new hospital.
It is no surprise perhaps the precedent of sorts was set in South Auckland, where the obesity and diabetes epidemic is at its most intense.
Earlier this year, Middlemore Hospital intensive care specialist Dr David Galler said doctors had coined the term "South Auckland Full House" to describe obese patients with the "full hand" of related illnesses. The spectre of the corporation’s mascot in the public health system was perhaps a step too far in an area whose proliferation of fast food outfits has drawn condemnation from community leaders. Professor of Population Nutrition and Global Health, Boyd Swinburn, of the University of Auckland, said the link bestowed a dangerous "health halo" on McDonald’s.
"For the hospital to tacitly approve a brand of fast food while it’s struggling to deal with all the health consequences of fast food and unhealthy diets is a bit of a conundrum."
"Counties Manukau were faced with that. They got advice from their public health physicians.
"They responded to that by agreeing with the public health physicians that there was a need for the service, but no need to give this brand of fast food a health halo."
The health halo was unacceptable whether bestowed in Dunedin or South Auckland.
"I know Otago’s wonderful, but I’m afraid you do have an obesity and diabetes problem."
Counties Manukau feels the biggest burden of diabetes and obesity because of their location.
"It might heighten [the concern], but the issues and the principles are still the same."
He was more circumspect than Prof Sellman when asked about the likelihood of McDonald’s actively stirring up the opposition.
However, he said, they both knew first-hand the consequences of taking on certain industries where profits could be threatened.Profs Swinburn and Sellman and a third health academic are taking a defamation case against blogger Cameron Slater, Food and Grocery Council head Katherine Rich and PR specialist Carrick Graham arising from the 2014 book Dirty Politics. The case includes an allegation the Food and Grocery Council paid for social media content to be posted on Mr Slater’s blog. Last month a High Court judge refused to throw the case out of court.
What does McDonald's give?
Prof Swinburn is frustrated by what he believes is a public perception McDonald’s forks out the full cost of the houses.
"There is this perception that it’s a whole pile of money given by McDonald’s.
"In fact, it provides about a quarter of the houses’ foundation and running costs.
A true philanthropist would contribute to the cost without expecting naming rights, he said.
"That’s the acid test to see whether this is marketing or philanthropy.
"If you think back to 30 or 40 years ago, it’s like having Benson and Hedges sponsorship in hospitals."
Mr Kenny, McDonald’s spokesman, said relinquishing branding rights "sounds simple" but was not.
"RMHC New Zealand is part of a global charity that runs independently of McDonald’s.
"Any discussion of this nature would require conversations at a global level.
"We’ve offered to meet with the Public Health Association and discuss this further, but they haven’t responded as yet."
Last year McDonald’s contributed just under $2million to Ronald McDonald House Charities New Zealand, through a range of fundraising activities with franchisees, staff and customers.
"The proportion of the corporation’s overall New Zealand profit it represented was unclear.
"As a franchised business, McDonald’s does not report total profit figures in New Zealand," Mr Kenny said.
Prof Swinburn hopes Southern District Health Board follows the advice of its public health arm.
"I’m pleased to say Counties Manukau has seen both sides and made a considered judgement. I hope that Dunedin is able to do the same."
Related Stories
Comments
Hold the clown.
Make that drop the clown. Scaring punters since 1978.
So-called 'public health' is one of the most academically fraudulent movements going around --- it's ideologically-motivated witchcraft unencumbered by any scientific analysis. And Sellman and Humphries are its high priests.
Goodness. Which doctor? I thought he was a GP.
Good writing, C, even if one disagrees.
The public health association are just a bunch of academics who are desperate to cling onto their well paid jobs doing little other than telling people how they should lead their lives.
Just a part of the whole industry that fought against tobacco and are going against anything that will keep them employed. Anti Alcohol, anti sugar. The very same zealots who told us eggs, coffee and potatoes would kill us - wrong then, wrong now.