"I don't think fruits and vegetables prevent cancer, but they're good for you. I don't think there's any food you eat to prevent cancer".

This comment, made during a study of food-related beliefs, demonstrates the often vague understanding of the links between food and health in the UK.

In fact, apart from tobacco use, the largest proportion of avoidable cancers can be attributed to diet. And the biological mechanisms of cancer prevention through diet can be discovered and exploited in the same way as pharmaceutical research for new curative drugs.

However, less than 10 per cent of cancer research funding is focused on prevention.

The annual estimated cost to the NHS of diet-related diseases is in excess of £15 billion. As well as some cancers, these include obesity-related disorders, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis and iron deficiency anaemia.

Diet could be a key component of any preventative strategy, but it is not given the prominence it deserves. Less than one per cent of the £1.6 billion budget for coronary heart disease is spent on prevention. Even the £10 million Department of Health "Five-a-day" programme is just a small slice of the health budget. This is in stark contrast to the long-term rewards that nutritional sciences have to offer.

Investment in a long-term coordinated national programme for nutritional research, combining new post-genomics technologies with established approaches, would help to improve the health of individuals and the nation. It could also be justified by long- term economic benefits alone, rather than waiting for a financial crisis to emerge.

Post-genomic techniques are deepening our understanding of how food influences the health of the human body. We know that an individual's genetic profile determines the way that foods are absorbed and metabolised. In turn, dietary intake and nutritional status influence the way that genes are expressed ? impacting on a person's health, and the diseases they are likely to get.

In the near future, individual dietary advice and bespoke food products could be available to optimise the quality and longevity of people's lives. But there are significant barriers to progress that urgently need to be addressed.

The science itself is complex and substantial resources are needed to move our understanding of nutrition a quantum leap forward. The onset of most chronic diet-related diseases involves many genes and occurs over many years. Moreover, nutrition research spans many disciplines, from molecular biology to social sciences.

Government departments with interests in the field include the Food Standards Agency (FSA), the Department of Health, Defra and the Department for Education and Skills. Several UK research councils and agencies ? including BBSRC and MRC ? fund research by universities and institutes. Non-governmental departments, charitable foundations, health professionals, industry and consumer organisations have an active interest in diet and health.

As yet, no research council or government department has made positive moves to take primary ownership of nutrition research in the UK. With no unifying champion for nutrition, the British population could miss out on opportunities arising from the current exciting era in nutritional science.

A national nutrition strategy in conjunction with regional nutrition initiatives would harness and direct existing efforts, generate a co-ordinated research programme and ensure national funding is optimally deployed.

The UK population is increasingly reliant on ready-prepared meals and fast foods outlets. Meanwhile cookery programmes are a new form of entertainment. Our agricultural heritage is fast disappearing, with sustainable agriculture being given higher priority than food crops.

Many urban children do not know the origin of some foods that we eat; they only know them as pre-packed items on supermarket shelves. Nutrition education in schools is absolutely essential, as is teaching all school-age children how to cook healthy meals.

Food selection and dietary patterns in a growing segment of the population are leading to escalating and, at present, apparently intractable problems of obesity and type 2 diabetes, and there is a rising incidence of some cancers, including prostate and cancers of the gastrointestinal tract. There is considerable debate surrounding the dietary advice and action required, in particular the means to motivate individuals to initiate dietary change.

One of the most controversial areas is the extent of responsibility that should lie with the food industry (such as manufacturers, retailers and caterers), bearing in mind the fact that their primary business is to sell food to consumers and generate profit, not improve the health of the nation.

The government might have to consider introducing legislation or incentives to encourage the food industry to be more proactive in their product development, marketing and pricing strategies.

Nutrition for chronic disease prevention offers no quick fix. It is a long-term insurance policy against chronic disease. This is a difficult concept to sell to policy makers under pressure to realise short-term goals.

The knowledge gained from appropriately directed and coordinated nutrition research and its application will help individuals achieve maximum potential to live a long and healthy life. But it must be accompanied by widespread changes in attitudes and practice in academic, political, industrial and consumer sectors of the UK. Government policy to initiate and facilitate a national strategy for nutrition is long overdue