Policy Points: Worldwide, more than 70% of all deaths are attributable to noncommunicable diseases (NCDs), nearly half of which are premature and apply to individuals of working age. Although such deaths are largely preventable, effective solutions continue to elude the public health community. One reason is the considerable influence of the “commercial determinants of health”: NCDs are the product of a system that includes powerful corporate actors, who are often involved in public health policymaking. This article shows how a complex systems perspective may be used to analyze the commercial determinants of NCDs, and it explains how this can help with (1) conceptualizing the problem of NCDs and (2) developing effective policy interventions. Context The high burden of noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) is politically salient and eminently preventable. However, effective solutions largely continue to elude the public health community. Two pressing issues heighten this challenge: the first is the public health community's narrow approach to addressing NCDs, and the second is the involvement of corporate actors in policymaking. While NCDs are often conceptualized in terms of individual‐level risk factors, we argue that they should be reframed as products of a complex system. This article explores the value of a systems approach to understanding NCDs as an emergent property of a complex system, with a focus on commercial actors. Methods Drawing on Donella Meadows's systems thinking framework, this article examines how a systems perspective may be used to analyze the commercial determinants of NCDs and, specifically, how unhealthy commodity industries influence public health policy. Findings Unhealthy commodity industries actively design and shape the NCD policy system, intervene at different levels of the system to gain agency over policy and politics, and legitimize their presence in public health policy decisions. Conclusions It should be possible to apply the principles of systems thinking to other complex public health issues, not just NCDs. Such an approach should be tested and refined for other complex public health challenges.

The Public Health Responsibility Deal (RD) in England is a public-private partnership involving voluntary pledges between government, industry and other organisations in the areas of food, alcohol, physical activity, and health at work, and is designed to improve public health. The RD is currently being evaluated in terms of its process and likely impact on the health of the English population. This paper analyses the RD food pledges in terms of (i) the evidence of the effectiveness of the specific interventions in the pledges and (ii) the likelihood that the pledges have brought about actions among organisations that would not otherwise have taken place. We systematically reviewed evidence of the effectiveness of the interventions proposed in six food pledges of the RD, namely nutrition labelling (including out-of-home calorie labelling and front-of-pack nutrition labelling), salt reduction, calorie reduction, fruit and vegetable consumption, and reduction of saturated fats. We then analysed publically available data on organisations' plans and progress towards achieving the pledges, and assessed the extent to which activities among organisations could be brought about by the RD. Based on seventeen evidence reviews, some of the RD food interventions could be effective, if fully implemented. However the most effective strategies to improve diet, such as food pricing strategies, restrictions on marketing, and reducing sugar intake, are not reflected in the RD food pledges. Moreover it was difficult to establish the quality and extent of implementation of RD pledge interventions due to the paucity and heterogeneity of organisations' progress reports. Finally, most interventions reported by organisations seemed either clearly (37%) or possibly (37%) already underway, regardless of the RD. Irrespective of the nature of a public health policy to improve nutritional health, pledges or proposed actions need to be evidence-based, well-defined, and measurable, pushing actors to go beyond 'business as usual' and setting out clear penalties for not demonstrating progress.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a global health problem. Bacteria carrying resistance genes can be transmitted between humans, animals and the environment. There are concerns that the widespread use of antimicrobials in the food chain constitutes an important source of AMR in humans, but the extent of this transmission is not well understood. The aim of this review is to examine published evidence on the links between antimicrobial use (AMU) in the food chain and AMR in people and animals. The evidence showed a link between AMU in animals and the occurrence of resistance in these animals. However, evidence of the benefits of a reduction in AMU in animals on the prevalence of resistant bacteria in humans is scarce. The presence of resistant bacteria is documented in the human food supply chain, which presents a potential exposure route and risk to public health. Microbial genome sequencing has enabled the establishment of some links between the presence of resistant bacteria in humans and animals but, for some antimicrobials, no link could be established. Research and monitoring of AMU and AMR in an integrated manner is essential for a better understanding of the biology and the dynamics of antimicrobial resistance.

If properly implemented and monitored, voluntary agreements can be an effective policy approach, though there is little evidence on whether they are more effective than compulsory approaches. Some of the most effective voluntary agreements include substantial disincentives for non-participation and sanctions for non-compliance. Many countries are moving towards these more formal approaches to voluntary agreements.