Coca-Cola Caught Undermining Public Health Initiatives
Soda and other sweetened beverages
have been identified as a major contributor to the obesity1,2 and diabetes
epidemics around the world,3,4
and in light of the scientific evidence, many public health organizations have
started recommending daily sugar limits.
At least 10 countries have
implemented or are working toward implementing taxes on soda in an effort to
reduce consumption and improve public health.
One 12-ounce can of regular soda
contains on average between 8 and 10 teaspoons of sugar, far exceeding 100
percent of your recommended
daily sugar allotment of 6 teaspoons (25
grams).
Considering sugar is as addictive as
cocaine5
and has downright toxic effects on your body when consumed in excess,6
it's no wonder obesity has become such a health crisis.
Previous research conservatively suggests sugary beverages
alone are to blame for about 183,000 deaths worldwide each year, including
133,000 diabetes deaths and 44,000 heart disease deaths.7
What's worse, the death rates associated with sweetened beverages were highest
in those under the age of 45.
Reducing the number of sugary drinks
you consume each day can go a long way toward reducing your risk for metabolic
dysfunction, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, stroke and obesity.
Unfortunately, the continued
profitability of the soda industry depends on public ignorance about the
dangers associated with their products, and evidence reveals companies such as
Coca-Cola are willing to go to great lengths to manipulate public health
organizations and distort science to further their corporate agenda.
How Your Body Responds to Coca-Cola
Two years ago, former pharmacist Niraj
Naik produced an infographic showing what happens in your body within the first
hour of drinking a can of Coca-Cola. At the time, he told The Daily Mail:8
"When I worked as a community
pharmacist I had some great success at helping people get off long term
medication … Many of them [patients] would consume fizzy drinks on a daily
basis. A few on several medications would consume two to three cans a day …
My first advice to them would be to
do a simple swap, replacing fizzy drinks with water with fresh lemon or lime
juice. In many cases just doing this would have a dramatic effect on their
health.
So this indicated to me that fizzy
drinks and sugar were big issues relating to blood pressure and metabolic
diseases like diabetes and heart disease."
![]() |
| Source: The Renegade Pharmacist |
According to Coca-Cola, soda is a
perfectly acceptable rehydration choice, even before, during and after
exercise,9
but based on its physiological effects, this is a hollow claim indeed. You
simply cannot compare clean, pure water to soda when you're thirsty.
Internal Documents Reveal Coca-Cola Works to Undermine Public Health Initiatives
Leaked internal documents and emails
— which have become known as "The Coke Files" — shows the soda
industry is in fact working against public health in a very coordinated and
comprehensive fashion, using well-known tobacco-industry tactics such as:
• Message coordination and
influencing media. As an example of how Coca-Cola deals with journalists
who fail to follow corporate talking points, in a May 2016 email, Amanda
Rosseter, the global group director of strategic communications at the
Coca-Cola Co., wrote:10
"A reporter for Wired reached
out to our media line late last night with a series of questions and an
immediate deadline … The story, however, posted early this morning without waiting
for our input.
The story … focuses on sugar, stevia
and the Company's attempts to offer options to consumers with a pessimistic
tone … We will be reaching out to this reporter to better understand her
decision not to include our perspective, and to build her brain around our
strategy."
• Developing close ties with
influential scientists and experts who then speak on the company's behalf
while presenting themselves as "independent" experts.
As just one example, two years ago,
Coca-Cola Company was outed for secretly funding and supporting the Global Energy
Balance Network, a nonprofit front group that
promoted exercise as the solution to obesity while significantly downplaying
the role of diet and sugary beverages in the weight loss equation.11
• Debunking and manipulating
science. Research has revealed simply funding a study will significantly
influence the results.
As just one example, an
investigation by Marion Nestle, Ph.D. and professor of nutrition, food studies
and public health, found that out of 168 studies funded by the food industry,
156 of them favored the sponsor.12
• Astroturfing — The effort on the part of special interests to
surreptitiously sway public opinion and make it appear as though it's a
grassroots effort for or against a particular agenda, when in reality such a
groundswell of public opinion might not exist.
• Lobbying at every level of
government.
Coca-Cola Fights Soda Tax by Influencing Local Politicians
Not surprisingly, since a soda tax
would reduce sales — and significantly so if countries around the world adopt
the tax strategy — Coca-Cola is fighting tooth and nail to prevent such
measures.13,14
What's disturbing is the level of
political support Coca-Cola and other soda companies are receiving. In a June
2015 email, Lauren Craig, Coca-Cola's senior manager of public affairs and
communications for the greater Philadelphia area, revealed how she successfully
sidelined a 2015 soda tax proposal by rubbing elbows with city officials:15
"Our coalition was actively
engaged to prevent a beverage tax from being introduced. The coalition's
grassroots campaign included small business meetings with council members.
Sources in City Hall indicated that council members were wary of a beverage
industry campaign against a tax.
Our next steps include furthering
relationships with newly elected city council officials to prevent discussion
of beverage taxes in the future. We also have an engagement plan for
Philadelphia Mayoral Democratic nominee, Jim Kenney."
Last year, email evidence also
showed Barbara Bowman, Ph.D., director of the Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention
division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, aided a Coca-Cola
representative in efforts to influence World Health Organization officials to relax its sugar limits.
Soda Industry Has Troubling Ties to Public Health Community
Public health researchers have also
warned that the beverage industry has created deep financial ties to the public
health community over the past several years, and that this was strategically
done to silence critics and gain allies in the fight against regulations.16,17,18,19
A recent study looking into the sponsorship activities
of soda companies suggests the reason for soda
companies' philanthropic interest in health organizations has little to do with
actually supporting measures that would improve public health, and everything
to do with influencing such organizations to further the industry's own agenda:20
"From 2011 to 2015, the
Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo were found to sponsor a total of 96 national health
organizations, including many medical and public health institutions whose
specific missions include fighting the obesity epidemic. During the study
period, these two soda companies lobbied against 29 public health bills
intended to reduce soda consumption or improve nutrition …
These companies lobbied against
public health intervention in 97 percent of cases, calling into question a
sincere commitment to improving the public's health. By accepting funding from
these companies, health organizations are inadvertently participating in their
marketing plans."
According to study co-author Daniel
Aaron, a student at Boston University's medical school, there can be little
doubt that Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo are purposely trying to undermine
public health measures in order to protect profits.
We wanted to look at what these
companies really stand for. And it looks like they are not helping public
health at all — in fact they're opposing it almost across the board …" Aaron told The New York Times.21
Many Health Organizations Compromise Public Health to Satisfy Sponsors
Indeed, the researchers discovered a
number of instances where influential public health organizations either turned
against a soda tax initiative or remained silent on the matter after receiving
an industry donation. Here are just a few examples:
- Save the Children, a nonprofit group that provides health education programs for children, had previously supported soda tax campaigns in several states but suddenly stopped in 2010 after receiving a $5 million grant from Pepsi.
- In 2012, when New York proposed a ban on supersized sodas, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics cited "conflicting research" as the reason for not supporting the measure. That same year, the Academy had received $525,000 from Coca-Cola. The following year, Coke gave them another $350,000.
- Dietitians listed as having received consulting fees from Coca-Cola also participated in a Twitter campaign aimed at defeating the proposed soda tax in Oakland, California.22
- The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the mission of which is to fight for equality for minorities, opposed soda tax initiatives even though black and Hispanic communities have disproportionally high rates of obesity and related health problems.
- The Hispanic Federation has also chosen not to support soda tax initiatives. The reason for their lenience becomes clearer in light of the fact that both of these organizations have received large donations from Coca-Cola. NAACP received more than $1 million between 2010 and 2015, and the Hispanic Federation received $600,000 between 2012 and 2015.
Nigerian Court Rules Coca-Cola Drinks 'Poisonous'
Meanwhile, in Nigeria, a Lagos High
Court Judge has ruled two Coca-Cola products, Sprite and Fanta, potentially
poisonous, as the benzoic acid and sunset yellow used in the products can pose
a health risk when combined with ascorbic acid (vitamin C). (The former is
known to turn into benzene, a carcinogen, when mixed with vitamin C.)23
According to CNN:24
"Justice Adedayo Oyebanji
ordered the Nigerian Bottling Co. … to place written warnings on Fanta and
Sprite bottles against drinking them with vitamin C, and awarded costs of [2]
million naira ($6,350) against the National Agency for Food and Drug
Administration and Control (NAFDAC) for failing to ensure health standards.
'It is manifest that NAFDAC has been
grossly irresponsible in its regulatory duties to the consumers of Fanta and
Sprite manufactured by Nigeria Bottling Company,' the judge said. 'NAFDAC has
failed the citizens of this great nation by its certification as satisfactory
for human consumption products ... which become poisonous in the presence of
ascorbic acid.'"
In response to the ruling, Nigeria's
Consumer Protection Council has initiated its own investigation. Director
general Dupe Atoki said:
"[The council] is extremely
concerned about the questions that have arisen from, and on account of this
judgment. Fanta, Sprite and Coca-Cola have arguably and consistently been the
most widely consumed beverages in Nigeria. The spectrum of consumption is also
perhaps the widest, with consumption starting as early as age [4] and far into
adult years."
Closer to home, Coca-Cola is dealing
with yet another scandal, as machines in a Coca-Cola plant in Northern Ireland
somehow became clogged with human feces.25
Fortunately, it appears no contaminated cans were distributed or sold. The
company has called in police to investigate how the bizarre contamination
occurred.
Diet Soda Is Not the Answer
I firmly believe ditching soda and
other sweetened beverages is one of the most important steps you can take to
improve your weight and health, and this includes avoiding so-called
"diet" drinks as well. Artificially sweetened beverages may in fact
be worse for your health than regular soda.
Research has shown artificial
sweeteners can stimulate your appetite, increase carb cravings, stimulate fat
storage and promote weight gain. In fact, diet sodas may
actually double your risk of obesity, while regular soda (at a rate of one can
per day) is associated with a 60 percent increased risk of obesity.
In addition to that, aspartame is associated with a long list of other harmful effects,
ranging from brain damage to pre-term delivery, while sucralose has been found
to be particularly damaging to your intestines. A study26
published in 2008 found that sucralose:
- Reduces good bacteria in your intestines by 50 percent
- Increases the pH level in your intestines
- Affects a glycoprotein in your body that can have crucial health effects, particularly if you're on certain medications like chemotherapy, or treatments for AIDS and certain heart conditions
In response to this study, James
Turner, chairman of the national consumer education group Citizens for Health,
issued the following statement:27
"The report makes it clear that
the artificial sweetener Splenda and its key component sucralose pose a threat
to the people who consume the product. Hundreds of consumers have complained to
us about side effects from using Splenda and this study ... confirms that the
chemicals in the little yellow package should carry a big red warning
label."
For Optimal Health, Drink More Clean Water
Unfortunately, many are still in the
dark about these health risks. Having healthy gut flora is absolutely vital for
your optimal health so, clearly, any product that can destroy up to half of
your healthy intestinal bacteria can pose a critical risk to your health.
Sugar also promotes unhealthy
bacterial growth, and many are already deficient in healthy bacteria due to
consuming too many highly processed foods. This is why I recommend eating
fermented vegetables every day, or at the very least taking a high-quality
probiotic.
Remember, pure water is a
zero-calorie drink. You cannot find a beverage that contains fewer calories. If
you think about it, why on earth would you choose artificially sweetened water
over regular mineral water? If you want some flavor, just squeeze a little bit
of fresh lemon or lime into mineral water as these citrus fruits have some of
the lowest fructose levels of all fruits.
Sources and References:
- 1 University of California San Francisco, June 2009, Sugar is a Poison, Says UCSF Obesity Expert
- 2 Harvard School of Public Health, Sugary Drinks and Obesity Fact Sheet
- 3 The New York Times October 11, 2016
- 4 World Health Organization, October 2016, WHO Urges Global Action to Curtail Consumption and Health Impacts of Sugary Drinks
- 5 ABC News, February 25, 2015
- 6 Time, October 27, 2015
- 7 CNN March 19, 2013
- 8 The Daily Mail July 29, 2015
- 9 Hydration Tips from the Coca-Cola Company (PDF)
- 10 Docs.google.com Amanda Rosseter Email
- 11 New York Times August 9, 2015
- 12 Nutrition Action March 15, 2017
- 13 A Medium Corporation October 14, 2016
- 14 The Sun March 27, 2017
- 15 Docs.google.com Lauren Craig Email
- 16, 21 New York Times October 10, 2016
- 17 CBS News October 11, 2016
- 18 Mother Jones October 10, 2016
- 19 WebMD October 10, 2016
- 20 American Journal of Preventive Medicine DOI
- 22 Food Mic October 6, 2016
- 23 Grub Street March 2017
- 24 CNN March 28, 2017
- 25 BBC News March 28, 2017
- 26 Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 2008;71(21):1415-29
- 27 GlobeNewsWire.com September 22, 2008


Post a Comment