Six of the 19 members of the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN) still hold financial ties to the food industry that the committee’s own rules label “significant”, according to a new investigation for The BMJ by freelance journalist Sophie Borland.

Based on SACN’s latest register of interests, published in June 2026, the investigation found one adviser was until recently a senior figure at a food-industry-backed charity, while four others have taken research funding from the meat, dairy and nut industries. A further three hold “relevant” interests – a lesser category covering things like consultancy work with smaller food firms.

SACN has faced this criticism before. A previous BMJ investigation two years ago found more than half of its members had food industry links, later cited in a House of Lords report on diet and obesity. SACN tightened its code of practice last September, stating that “individuals are only eligible to be SACN members if they do not hold significant interests in relation to the food, drink, diet or supplement industry.”

However, that rule only applies going forward. A Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) spokesperson said existing advisers can’t take on new conflicting interests, and can only be reappointed once they meet the updated standard: “All SACN members are due to meet the new interests policy within the next two years. In the meantime, existing members with any significant interests are excluded from relevant discussions.”

Chris van Tulleken, professor of infection and global health at UCL, told The BMJ: “Research shows that conflicts of interest do affect beliefs and behavior… The problem is structural. SACN’s authority depends on its independence.”

Rob Percival, head of policy at the Soil Association, told The BMJ: “The conflicted members of SACN need to leave the committee immediately and there needs to be open recruitment for non-conflicted members to replace them…”