1Nestlé

The unrepentant chocolatier
不思悔改的巧克力制造商

Oct 29th 2009 | LAUSANNE AND VEVEY
From The Economist print edition

The world’s biggest food company is betting on an emerging class of health and nutrition products to spur its growth. But risks abound
世界头号食品公司将宝压在健康营养产品的新兴阶层以促进公司壮大。然而，危机四伏

IT IS a curious blend of kitchen and laboratory. From one room wafts the bittersweet smell of chocolate being gently heated and stirred by chocolatiers. Around the corner it is all science. A double row of cubicles contains human guinea pigs who sniff and taste from little tubs, scoring each on criteria such as sweetness or bitterness to produce complex flavour charts. Down the corridor, women in comfortable chairs talk about how chocolate makes them feel. Cameras and microphones record their most minute gestures for the scrutiny of psychologists and anthropologists

这种厨房与实验室的结合着实新奇。制造商将巧克力微微加热，使其散发出甜中带苦的口味。事情虽小确是科学。两排小隔间的实验对象嗅闻、品尝小盒中的食物，并根据甜、苦等标准打分，制造商据此创造复杂的口味系列。穿过走廊，很多女士坐在舒服的座椅上，描述吃巧克力的感觉。她们每一个细微的动作都被摄像机和麦克风记录下来，稍后心理学家和人类学家将对这些数据进行仔细分析。

This is the science behind Nestlé’s 110-year-old chocolate factory next door, which each morning exhales the aroma of roasting almonds and cocoa beans over Broc, a chocolate-box-perfect Swiss village where even the weeds in an overgrown lot seem orderly. It is in these laboratories, where a pinch of art is mixed with SFr25m ($23.6m) of technology, that new chocolate recipes are devised. At another Nestlé research centre in Lausanne, meanwhile, researchers have been working out how chocolate affects metabolism and the behaviour of gut microbes—in other words, analysing chocolate as a pharmaceutical product, rather than a treat

这就是雀巢110年巧克力工厂的科学之道。每天早上布罗克村都飘散出烘烤杏仁和可可豆的芳香气息。布罗克是瑞士的巧克力之乡。在这，即使是空地上蔓延生长的杂草似乎也井然有序。就是在这些实验室里诞生了新的巧克力配方。（也是在这里有少数艺术与身价2500万瑞士法郎约合2360万英镑的技术相结合）。与此同时，在雀巢的另一家研发中心洛桑市，研究者们一致在研究巧克力如何影响新陈代谢和肠道微生物行为。换言之，把巧克力当做药物来分析，而不是食品。

Investment in this kind of research may seem indulgent, particularly in a recession. But it exemplifies Nestlé’s strategy for future growth. Although the company is best known for chocolate, ice-cream and sugary snacks, Peter Brabeck-Letmathe, the firm’s chairman, and Paul Bulcke, its chief executive, hope to transform the food company into the world’s leading health, nutrition and “wellness” firm. It is tempting to dismiss this as a mere marketing stunt—an effort to make people feel better about eating things they really shouldn’t. Yet there is a sound commercial logic behind Nestlé’s shift towards health and nutrition.

在这种研究上投入资金似乎是败家之举，尤其是在经济萧条时期。然而，这是雀巢为促进未来成长的战略缩影。虽然雀巢是以巧克力、冰激凌、甜食著称，但是董事长Peter Brabeck-Letmathe和执行官Paul Bulcke希望把公司从食品企业转为世界顶级保健、营养和“健康”公司。人们很容易将此举理解为营销的愚蠢行为（努力让消费者觉得吃不应该吃的食品没什么大不了的）。然而，在雀巢转型成为保健、营养型公司的背后有一套行之有效的商业逻辑

Sales of foodstuffs that have been intentionally modified and improved by manufacturers to provide claimed health benefits—known as “functional foods”—are, in many cases, growing far more quickly than foods sales as a whole. Sales of functional foods in western Europe grew by 10.2% a year between 2004 and 2007, whereas sales of packaged food grew by 6.3% a year over that period (see chart 1), according to Euromonitor, a market-research firm. Some categories are growing even faster. In America, sales of functional foods that promote “gut health”, for example, grew by an average of 15.8% a year between 2002 and 2007, according to a recent PricewaterhouseCoopers report, compared with overall food-sales growth of 2.9% a year, according to Datamonitor (see chart 2). The PricewaterhouseCoopers report predicts that the global market for functional foods will grow in value from $78 billion in 2007 to $128 billion in 2013.

“功能性食品”即经过制造商刻意修改和改进、宣传有益健康的食物。这类食品的销售额在大部分情况下增速远远快于其他食品的整体销售增速。市场调研公司欧睿的调查显示，功能性食品在西欧的销售额在2004至2007年期间保持着每年10.2%的增速，而包装类食品在同期的增速为每年6.3%（见图一）。有些种类的增速甚至更快。例如，普华永道最近的一份报告显示，促进“肠道健康”的功能性食品在美销售额在2002年至2007年的年平均增速为15.8%，而欧睿的调查显示同期美国食品的总体销售额增速只有2.9%。普华永道在报告中还预测功能性食品的全球市场将从2007年的78亿美元扩大到2013年的1280亿美元。

Looking further ahead, Nestlé sees great potential in the idea of “personalised” nutrition. Just as drugs companies have long talked of devising drugs that take account of genetic variations between people, the firm wants to do the same with food. That is why it is investing in the nascent fields of metabolomics and proteomics with the aim of providing foods, diets, devices and even services for particular subgroups of the population. It forecasts that by 2017, global sales of nutrition for “specific need states” could reach $100 billion. Existing examples include Musashi whey-protein supplements and PowerBar snacks for athletes; Sondalis and Nutren Glytrol liquid diets for diabetics; and Optifast powders and shakes for dieters.

雀巢看到在未来“个性化”营养的潜力巨大，医药公司一直在谈论的、根据个体基因的不同改造药物的做法，而雀巢打算在食物上采也取同样做法。这就是该公司在代谢学和蛋白质组学的新生领域投资的原因，其目的在于通过这项研究，雀巢能够为特定人群提供特定的食物、节食食品、器具甚至是特定的服务。该公司预计到2017年，能够达到“特定需求状态”的营养食品的销量将达到1000亿美元。目前这类食品包括Musashi乳清蛋白补充剂、运动员专用PowerBar点心、糖尿病人专用的Sondalis 和 Nutren Glytrol流食以及为节食人群设计的Optifast牌奶粉和奶昔。  

Switching to a new diet
转做新型食品

This shift in emphasis towards health and nutrition will, Nestlé hopes, transform it from a purveyor of low-margin, commoditised foodstuffs into a provider of high-margin products and services. (It already owns Jenny Craig, a chain of American weight-loss centres, which it is now expanding globally.) The firm needs new sources of growth. Sales of bottled water, which are about 10% of its business, are falling in rich countries because of the recession. They may yet bounce back, but analysts fret that bottled water, which is now firmly in the sights of environmental groups, may go the way of the fur trade.

雀巢希望通过这次重点向保健和营养的方向转型能够把公司从一个售卖利低廉食品的公司转型为高利润产品和服务的供应商。（雀巢已经将美国减肥中心Jenny Craig收归旗下，该公司目前正在全球扩张。）雀巢需要新的增长点。瓶装水的销量目前占整个销售业务的１０％，但是由于经济衰退这一数字在发达国家正在下降。销售额可能会回升，但是分析人士担心由于瓶装水现在被环保组织紧紧盯上了，最后可能会重蹈裘皮贸易的覆辙。

Nestlé also seems to be losing market share in other products, though company officials dispute the assertion. Pablo Zuanic, an analyst at JPMorgan, reckons that in the second quarter of 2009, 44% of Nestlé’s product lines lost market share in America, and none of its products gained market share there, according to surveys of retail-data by ACNielsen, a market-research firm. Scepticism about Nestlé’s prospects can also been seen in its share price: its shares trade at a lower multiple of earnings than those of its main European competitors. One reason is that investors are concerned that it may invest some or all of the SFr30 billion it is likely to receive next year from selling its share in Alcon, an eye-care firm, in businesses that are less profitable than the ones it already has.

似乎雀巢其他产品的市场份额页在下降，虽然公司高管对此予以否认。摩根大通的分析师Pablo Zuanic表示，根据市场调研公司ACNielsen,的零售数据显示２００９年二季度４４％的雀巢产品线在美国的市场占有率下降，所有产品的市场占有量无一上升。人们对雀巢未来的担忧在股价上便可见一斑：股票盈利低于其主要欧洲竞争对手数倍。原因之一是投资者担心明年雀巢可能将抛售Alcon公司（眼部护理公司）的股份收益（３００亿瑞士法郎）部分或全部投资到比目前利润更低的业务上。

Investors are also worried that Nestlé has become too large and unwieldy. The firm has 30 product lines that each generate more than SFr1 billion in annual sales, from Nescafé coffee and Nesquik milk to Purina pet food and Pure Life, a bottled water that is sometimes made from stuff that comes out of taps, rather than out of the ground. Consumers have been trading down to cheaper, unbranded foods in recent years, a trend that accelerated in the recession, potentially undermining the value of owning big brands.

投资者还担心雀巢已经变得过于巨大而笨重不堪。该公司目前有２０条生产线，每条生产线每年的销售额都在１０亿瑞士法郎之上。其中包括雀巢咖啡、雀巢巧伴伴、Purina宠物食品和纯净生命（有时用自来水而非地下水灌装的瓶装水）。几年来，消费者开始减少消费，购买价格更加低廉，无品牌的食品。这一趋势由于经济衰退而愈演愈烈，导致大品牌的价值悄然缩水。

So the company has seized upon evidence that incorporating healthier ingredients into its products could help it get its sales moving in rich countries again, and win over hearts and minds in emerging markets, too. These ingredients include live bacteria in yogurt, extra calcium of a form that is more easily absorbed by children’s bodies, and sterols (a kind of plant fat) that reduce blood cholesterol.

所以雀巢指望在产品中添加保健成分能够帮助该公司在发达国家的销量能够再次上升，同时赢得新兴市场消费者的青睐。这些保健成分包括酸奶益生菌、儿童更易吸收的钙以及降低血液胆固醇的固醇（一种植物脂肪）

A study by Harvard Business School found that between 2004 and 2007, sales of Nestlé’s products containing such “functional” ingredients increased by 23.7% a year, compared with growth of 6.2% a year for its ordinary foods. Sales of Nestlé’s functional foods grew by 20% in 2008. And on October 22nd the company announced that in the difficult year to September 2009, in which the underlying growth rate (stripping out price changes and currency movements) across its food and beverage product lines was 0.7%, functional foods still managed to eke out growth of 4%.

哈佛商学院的研究显示2004年到2007年期间雀巢公司旗下产品含有“功能性”成分的产品销量的年增长率为23.7%，而普通食品的增长率只有6.2%。2008年功能食品的增长率为20%。10月22日雀巢公司宣布从经济危机开始到2009年9月该公司所有食品和饮料生产线的实际增长率（除去价格变动和资本流通因素）为0.7%，而功能食品仍然实现了4%的增长率。

Other companies are benefiting from the same trend. Results released on September 23rd by Danone, a French diary and yogurt company, showed that its bestselling yogurts are those with live bacteria that are said to strengthen immunity or ease constipation. Even drugs companies are eyeing this new market. In March the chairman of Sanofi-Aventis, a French drug firm, mused about acquiring food and nutrition firms as a way to pursue growth.

其他公司也从这一趋势中受益。法国乳品和酸奶公司Danone于9月23日发布的结果显示含有益生菌能够增强免疫力或缓解便秘的酸奶最畅销。甚至连医药公司都盯上了这块新市场。法国医药公司Sanofi-Aventis的总裁三月份曾表示意欲兼并食品和营养企业以促进公司增长
。
Few companies, however, are spending the sort of money that Nestlé is to develop foods that are tailored to improve health. Even so, Mr Brabeck-Letmathe’s grand plan to reinvent his company must navigate several dangers. Does it make sense to invest in costly, long-term research for a market that may not materialise? Another risk is that a sceptical public will not be convinced by Nestlé’s grand health claims, prompting a backlash强烈反对集体反对 from the public or activists. There is also a danger that the new strategy might damage the firm’s blockbuster已经成功的 legacy brands, such as Nescafé, which have taken decades to build.

然而，鲜有公司效仿雀巢的做法投资开发能够改善健康的食品。尽管如此，Brabeck-Letmathe先生重新打造公司的庞大计划也存在着诸多危险因素。耗费巨资长期研究一个可能不会成型的市场是否有意义？另一个危险因素是雀巢产品保健功效的宣传可能无法打消公众的疑虑，反而招致公众或激进分子的强烈反对。新战略可能对也已成功的传统品牌造成损害，例如雀巢咖啡，这个牌子耗费了数十年才建立起来。

Profit or peril?

利润还是危险？

Start with the cost of research. If Nestlé were content to battle it out with Kraft, the world’s second-largest food firm, in the business of just selling food, then its outlay on research and development (R&D) would be difficult to justify. But Mr Brabeck-Letmathe saw a decade ago that the food industry was becoming a commoditised grind with diminishing margins and little scope for disruptive innovation. So he began pushing Nestlé to develop functional foods with higher profit margins, and he increased spending accordingly. In 2008 Nestlé spent just under SFr2 billion on R&D, a sum that has more than doubled since 1998. At about 2% of sales, this is considerably more than rivals are spending: in 2007 Danone spent about 1% of its sales on R&D, and Kraft spent about 1.2%.

首先是研究费用。如果雀巢满足于和卡夫（世界第二大食品公司）在产品销售领域的竞争，则该公司的研究费用难以估算。但是早在十年前Brabeck-Letmathe先生就意识到食品行业的利润在下降，产品创新的空间有限。所以，他开始将公司转向生产利润丰厚的功能食品，并相应增加其相关投入。雀巢2008年的研究费用为将近20亿瑞士法郎，这一数字是1998年以来的2倍，大约是销售额的2%，相对于竞争对手来说，这个数字相当可观：Danone2007年的研究费用为其销售额的1%，卡夫大概是1.2%。

Richard Laube, the head of Nestlé’s nutrition business and a former pharmaceuticals executive, describes a “pipeline” of some 75 research projects. Borrowing terminology from the drugs industry seems appropriate, given the time required to develop these new products. Unlike the quick development cycles usually seen in fast-moving consumer goods, which typically take one to two years, products in Nestlé’s nutrition pipeline may take four to six years to develop.

之前是医药公司执行官，现在雀巢营养业务的负责人的Richard Laube对大约75个研究项目“渠道”进行了描述。考虑到开发这些产品的时间，从医药行业借用专业术语似无不妥。与快速消费品的研发周期只有1至2年不同，雀巢营养渠道产品可能需要4至6年方可成功。

Mr Laube acknowledges that the pursuit of functional foods means that R&D expenditure must go up, not least because regulators on both sides of the Atlantic are taking a tougher line towards them. In October, America’s Food and Drug Administration warned that it was reviewing health claims made by food companies; it plans to announce stricter guidelines soon. The European Commission has forged ahead with strict rules on nutrition claims, and is in the process of tightening up the claims allowed on health grounds too. Companies wishing to make claims related to disease (“reduces blood pressure”, “cuts risk of heart attacks”, and so on) will have to provide solid scientific evidence to back them up. That takes time and money.

Laube先生表示研发功能食品意味着必须增加研究费用，很大程度上时因为欧美两边的管理者都对功能食品实施更加严格的规定。美国食品药品监督局10月份发出警告，该组织正在检查食品公司的保健功效是否属实，并计划很快出台更加严格的指导方针。欧洲委员会已经先行一步，制订了严格条例，规范营养功效的真实性。该委员会正着手采取更加严格的规定。对于与疾病有关的功效必须提出确凿的科学依据予以支持，既耗时间又耗经费。

But it will be worthwhile if consumers prove willing, as they seem to be, to pay more for products with health benefits. Another benefit to such long-term research, observes Mr Laube, is that it tends to produce the sorts of innovations that pay dividends for longer than the minor, fleeting improvements made to consumer goods. He points to the formulas for whey protein, used in Nestlé’s PowerBar range, and for hypoallergenic baby food. In both cases consumers continue to pay premium prices for these products a decade after their initial introduction.

如果消费者愿意（消费者似乎愿意）花更多钱购买具有健康功效的产品，则之前的努力便是值得的。Laube认为这种长期研究的另一个好处是更容易产生长期红利的创新科技，并完善了消费者产品。他指的是用于雀巢PowerBar系列和低过敏性婴儿食品的乳清蛋白。在以上两种情况下，消费者在产品打入市场10年之后仍然愿意继续花费高额费用购买这些产品。

Nestlé is used to playing a long game. Take Nespresso, an almost instant espresso that is made by machine from a little capsule of coffee. Nestlé started working on the technology in 1970 and filed its first patent in 1976. It was another decade before it was ready to start selling Nespresso pods and machines. Thereafter the business lost money for a decade. But now it is one of Nestlé’s fastest-growing products. Sales have been increasing by 30% a year (even though Nespresso is a premium brand) and are expected to reach nearly SFr3 billion this year. Consumers are, presumably, making coffee at home and trading down from more expensive coffees sold by the likes of Starbucks. “It took off very, very slowly,” says Mr Bulcke. “It was 20 years of conviction that got us there.”

雀巢惯常打持久战。以机器加工成小袋的雀巢速溶咖啡为例。这项技术始于1970年并于1976年申请了第一个专利。而开始销售这种速溶咖啡和和机器又花费了十年的时间。此后，这项业务一直处于亏损状态长达10年之久，然而现在却是雀巢增长速度最快的业务之一。销售额的年增速在30%。（虽然速溶咖啡是较高端的品品牌）。今年的销售额有望达到将近30亿瑞士法郎。消费者很可能在家自制咖啡，像星巴克这种的昂贵咖啡销量便走下坡路了。“这一过程相当缓慢，大概要花费20年时间，才能看到效果。” Bulcke先生如是说。

The tighter regulatory outlook for functional foods could, in fact, benefit Nestlé because few of its rivals have the deep pockets necessary to invest in such research. The Swiss firm could end up in a strong position—provided, that is, it can develop functional foods with genuine benefits that consumers are willing to pay for. “The more science wins, the stronger Nestlé’s position,” reckons Peter Killing of IMD, a Swiss business school.

功能食品的规定越来越严格，这样的监管前景对于雀巢实际上是有利的。因为鲜有竞争对手有如此雄厚的经济实力进行这种研究。而雀巢这家瑞士公司最后很可能占据市场高位，只要其生产的功能真的有效，消费者买张即可。“科技月发达，雀巢的地位越稳固”瑞士商学院发展学院的Peter Killing如是说。

Another risk to Nestlé’s strategy is that of overreach, arising from two particular vulnerabilities. One is the legacy of the firm’s past scandals involving the sale of milk powder in poor countries, which led to painful boycotts. The other involves the food industry’s experience of a backlash against genetically modified (GM) crops.

雀巢战略的另一个潜在风险是过度扩张的危险，源于两个致命的弱势：一个是公司过往丑闻造成不良影响。其中包括在穷国销售奶粉导致当地居民联合抵制，造成的影响颇著。另一个问题是民众对转基因食物的抵触。

“Breastfeeding is best! We will salute and say this every day, but the world won’t believe us,” laments Mr Laube, describing the lingering suspicions harboured by some about the company’s behaviour in the developing world. The firm’s founder developed its trademark milk substitute not to replace mother’s milk, which health experts agree is the best food for babies, but to feed only those newborns who cannot be breast-fed safely. This is not company propaganda: the World Health Organisation confirms that “there will always be a small number of infants who have to be fed on breast-milk substitutes.” But the firm was caught in Africa and elsewhere promoting its milk powders so aggressively that they did, in fact, replace mother’s milk inappropriately—hurting the health of babies and, when the powder was mixed with unsafe water or in too weak a dose, leading to malnourishment or death. The firm insists it has mended its ways.

Laube先生在描述公司在发展中国家的不良作为而遗留的长期不信任时悲叹道：“母乳喂养是最理想的。我们每天都在宣传这个。但是没人相信我们。”雀巢研制的母乳替代奶粉并非意欲替代母乳。母乳是健康专家公认的喂养儿童最好的食品。只有那些母乳喂养导致危险的儿童才需要母乳替代奶粉。“有一部分婴儿不能母乳喂养，只能和母乳替代奶”这是世界卫生组织证实的事实，并非雀巢的宣传噱头。但是在非洲和其他地方，雀巢销售奶粉的力度过大，实际上取代了母乳的地位，有损儿童健康。当用不安全的水冲奶粉或剂量太少将导致婴儿营养不良或死亡。雀巢表示已经在尽力补救了。

Nestlé’s deep reach in the developing world goes back decades and gives it a head start over most of its rich-world competitors when it comes to exploiting growth. Its early embrace of globalisation had less to do with planning than with the coincidence of being based in a small country and selling a highly tradable commodity. As early as 1919 Nestlé’s condensed-milk business had exhausted the supply of milk from local farmers, forcing it to open factories in Australia, England, Germany and Norway. Soon afterwards it bought the leading 27 condensed-milk factories in America, prompting this newspaper to note that year that Nestlé “is no longer a Swiss milk company; it is a very powerful international investment trust.”

雀巢在发展中国家的深厚基础源自几十年前。该公司在起跑线上就领先于大多数发达国家的竞争对手。雀巢早期融入全球化并非计划使然，而是出于巧合：恰巧在一个小国家，售卖相当受欢迎的商品。早在1919年，雀巢浓缩奶百年消耗了本国农民生产的所有牛奶。迫于情势，雀巢在澳大利亚、英国、德国、挪威建立了分厂。此后不久，又并购了美国27家浓缩奶工厂。这不禁让本报想起当年雀巢“不再是瑞士的奶业公司”；而是一个强大的国际投资信托公司。

Today less than 2% of Nestlé’s sales are in its home market, compared with 60% of Kraft’s. Enforced globalisation taught Nestlé far earlier than its rivals just how markedly tastes differ across the world. Its trademark line of Nescafé instant coffees, for instance, comes in a bewildering array of more than 500 flavours. The legacy of its powdered-milk scandals, however, is that Nestlé actions in poor countries are scrutinised like those of few others. That means any grand new effort to rebrand the firm’s offerings as “healthy” will face scepticism, in emerging markets in particular.

今日的销售额只占总额的不到2%，而华夫则为60%。强大的全球化早早教会了雀巢研制独特口味方可行销世界的道理。其他竞争对手则后知后觉。例如雀巢速溶咖啡的产品线有多个繁杂的系列，500多个不同的口味。然而，奶粉丑闻的影响犹在，所以雀巢在贫穷国家的各种行动都受到严密的监督，享受如此“如荣”的企业寥寥无几。这就意味着任何重塑公司“健康”形象的举动都会受到质疑，在新兴市场尤其如此。

Nestlé’s strategy this time round is to work more closely with health authorities across the world. Its aim is to localise “wellness” in much the way it has adapted its coffees to various markets. It is, for instance, greatly expanding its efforts to add essential micronutrients—ranging from iodine and iron to vitamin A and zinc—to its basic foodstuffs. Some 2 billion people suffer from deficiencies of such vitamins and minerals, with impacts ranging from blindness to premature death. The firm had dismissed infant cereal as a niche product, but now its researchers are using that product as a “carrier” for probiotics and vitamins for children. It is also developing cheap, single-serving packets of nutrient-rich food for the very poor, another market it had previously stayed out of. Mr Laube says the defensiveness of the past is gone: “Now we have a noble cause.

这次雀巢的策略是与健康机构紧密合作，目的是沿用咖啡适应各地市场的方式将“健康”本地化。例如，雀巢正在努力将微量元素（从碘、铁道到他命A和锌）加入普通的食品当中。大约有20亿民众正在承受维他命和矿物质缺乏带来的病痛，从失明到早衰。雀巢曾经把婴儿谷物产品当做滞销产品，但是现在的研究人员却把这种产品当做为婴儿补充益生菌和维他命的“载体”，同时也在开发价格低廉，营养丰富一次性包装食品。这个市场是雀巢不曾染指之地。Laube先生说过去保守的时代已经过去了：“现在我们做的是崇高的事业”

That may help in the poor world, but could Europe’s hysteria over Frankenfoods (as the British media dubbed GM foods) also stand in the way of Nestlé’s wellness products, if they are perceived to involve too much scientific meddling? The firm is treading carefully. Peter van Bladeren, head of Nestlé’s main research centre in Lausanne, insists its functional foods will “only improve nature” by adding healthy ingredients: “no weird stuff”. Unlike GM crops, which mainly benefit farmers, functional foods are intended to provide benefits to consumers. And the need to produce solid evidence of benefit to satisfy regulators should reassure shoppers, says Eric Scher of Sanford Bernstein, a research firm.

那也许能够帮助贫穷世界，但是如果人们认为雀巢产品的科技干涉过多，欧洲人对转基因食物的过度热情会妨碍雀巢保健食品的发展吗？雀巢正在小心前行。位于Lausanne的雀巢总研究中心的负责人Peter van Bladeren坚持认为功能产品只有通过增加健康元素才能改善自然：没有古怪的东西。转基因植物主要对农民有利，而功能食品则对消费者有利。研究公司Sanford Bernstein的Eric Scher表示：必须出具确凿的证据才能达到管理者的要求，令消费者放心。

Stretching the brand

Finally, there is a risk that Nestlé’s new strategy could damage the firm’s blockbuster brands, which have taken decades to establish. This could happen in several ways. If some of the firm’s functional foods fail to pass muster with the regulators or, worse, turn out to cause harm rather than do good, then consumers could turn against all its products, even those that make no health claims at all. That could hurt, because most of its revenues will still come from selling treats like chocolate, ice-cream, coffee and flavoured milk.

最后，雀巢的新战略可能会损害耗费数十年建立起来的畅销品牌。有可能以几种方式呈现。如果雀巢的功能食品有几项未能通过审核，或者更糟，被证明对人体有害而不是有益。如果真是如此，消费者会抵制雀巢旗下的所有产品，非功能性产品也不能幸免。雀巢可能因此蒙受重创，因为雀巢的利润主要来源于像巧克力、咖啡和各种口味的牛奶等甜品的销售。

That points to导致 another potential snag问题困难. If a company known for selling indulgence wants to reinvent itself to symbolise wellness, does that not send mixed messages to the consumer? Mr Bulcke insists that there is no contradiction, and that taste will always trump nutritional benefits in the development of new products. Carmakers, after all, see no problem with marketing new cars on the basis that they produce fewer greenhouse-gas emissions without compromising on performance.

这又可能引发另一个问题。如果一个以推销放纵著称的公司将自己重塑为推销健康的公司，消费者就不会收到好坏混合的信息吗？Bulcke先生坚持认为毫无自相矛盾之处，在开发新产品的过程中口味将取代营养功效的地位。毕竟，汽车制造商只要能够研制出温室气体排放量低却不影响表现的轿车就不会在推广新车的时候遇到问题。

Mr Brabeck-Letmathe is convinced that all of Nestlé’s brands can be made to fit into the wellness strategy. “You don’t have to stretch,” he insists, “if the discipline of every product is to be healthier.” Every product must undergo what he calls a “sixty-forty-plus” analysis: at least 60% of those tasting it must prefer it to a rival product or the one it is replacing, and it must also be more nutritious. The company has, for instance, produced a new way of churning its ice-cream that produces much smaller ice crystals than the usual method. As a result it can still taste creamy even though it has half the fat.
Brabeck-Letmathe先生坚信雀巢所有品牌的产品都可以通过调整减刑健康战略。他坚持认为“如果每个产品的标准越来越健康，你就没必要调整。”每个产品都必须经过他所谓的“六十、四十、加”分析：至少有60%的人在品尝之后钟爱这款产品，而非竞争对手的产品或是这款产品正在取代的竞争对手的产品，而且这款产品必须更加富有营养。例如，雀巢已经研发出一种新型的生产冰激凌的方法，优点在于比传统方法相比产生的更小的冰晶。而且虽然脂肪含量只有传统冰激凌的一半，但是口味依旧甜美。

Critics question, however, whether, in aggregate, Nestlé can deliver on its ambitious health and wellness promises. “The goals of food companies and the goals of public health are fundamentally different,” says Marion Nestle (no relation), a nutrition expert at New York University who is a noted critic of big food firms. “There is very little evidence that eating these things makes people healthier. If you want to do something for your health, you don’t eat as much, and you don’t eat processed food.”
然而，批评家怀疑雀巢是否能够大体实现其雄心勃勃宣扬地保健和健康功效。“食品公司和公共健康机构的目标大相径庭。实用这些食品有益人体健康基本是不可靠的。若要健康，则少食，并且不吃加工食品”纽约大学营养学家、以批评大型食品公司著称的Marion Nestle（与雀巢无关）如是说。

That might indeed be healthier—but for many, perhaps, less pleasurable too. Mr Brabeck-Letmathe, a former ice-cream salesman from Austria, is unrepentant. Every single morning, he says, he enjoys dark chocolate and coffee made by Nestlé: “We don’t have to be ashamed.”

这样也许确实更加健康，但是对于许多人来说，也许吃饭就变得无趣了。从前是澳大利亚冰激凌销售人员的Brabeck-Letmathe就顽固不化。他说，自己每天早上都要吃雀巢出品的黑巧克力和咖啡：“没什么丢人的啊。”