Abstract Weaponisation of food and nutrition communication is no longer speculative as a range of agnotological studies have shown. These cases highlight deliberate strategies to manufacture doubt, re-frame public narratives, and delay or derail public policy. This article draws inspiration from some of these historical cases, and links to the current debate on Ultra-Processed Foods (UPFs) as a contemporary arena in which both good-faith scientific uncertainty and strategic narrative manipulation can co-exist, and which can be compounded by different front of pack labelling schemes. Counteracting measures are examined for their efficacy and ease of use, and the final proposal centres on the least complicated system to deliver the desired outcome. The goal is to re-balance the debate such that transparent, objective and proportionate evidence is presented and backed up by a strategy of pre-bunking and other complementary tools such as verification, clarity kits, and rapid correction norms. This can prevent the effective counter to weaponised communication from becoming a bureaucratic monster.
Niall W G Young (Thu,) studied this question.