Fizzy drinks makers are suing New York City’s health department after claiming its anti-obesity campaign makes ‘baseless’ attacks on their products.
An industry umbrella group took legal action against the city over claims it improperly withheld evidence for its anti-soft drinks campaign requested through the Freedom of Information Act.
The city has been at the forefront of education efforts in the fight against obesity, with TV and billboard adverts warning of the dangers of excessive sugar consumption.
ABA spokesman Chris Gindlesperger said his group made the same request as the New York Times, but that the newspaper received more information than the ABA.
‘Public health departments are going out and aggressively misrepresenting our products in advertising and using taxpayer money to do that,’ Mr Gindlesperger said.
The soft drinks industry says it is defending its products from ‘baseless’ attacks, and its attorneys have filed at least six document requests with public agencies across the country.
Efforts to deter consumption of sugar-sweetened soft drinks and fatty foods have gained favour in the U.S. as rises in obesity drive up healthcare costs.
Soft drinks
Anti-obesity campaigners say the requests – which can take hundreds of staff hours for cash-strapped governments to satisfy – echo the tactics of the tobacco industry.
‘It is, in our opinion, an effort to overwhelm or smother government employees, who already have too much to do,’ said Ian McLaughlin, an lawyer at the National Policy & Legal Analysis Network to Prevent Childhood Obesity in Oakland, California.
Elsewhere, northern California’s Santa Clara County received a letter in May from law firm Latham & Watkins asking for all records relating to its ‘Rethink Your Drink’ education campaign.
The law firm, which represents the ABA, sent similar requests to Chicago and Seattle county governments for all evidence connected to their fizzy drink education efforts.
Mr Gindlesperger said the municipalities are large enough to handle the requests, which are meant to uncover what the ABA claims is shoddy science used in anti-obesity campaigns.
Based on its Freedom of Information request, the New York Times reported in October on an internal dispute within the New York City health department over what claims it could make based on the science regarding sugar intake and weight gain.
Daniel Peddycord, Santa Clara County’s public health director, stood by his agency’s efforts.
He said: ‘This is one of the things where the science is really clear … Americans are consuming far, far, far too much sugar.’
Roughly two-thirds of adults and one-third of children in the United States are overweight or obese, and rates continue to rise.
Obesity contributes to diabetes and other costly chronic diseases.
Each day, the average American adult consumes roughly 22 teaspoons (90 grams), or 355 calories, of added sugars, well above health guidelines.
Caloric sweeteners in beverages are a key source of excess calories. New U.S. dietary guidelines recommend drinking water instead sugary drinks.
PepsiCo and Coca-Cola Co declined to comment, referring reporters to the ABA.
- Similar posts
- Fast food outlets advise UK government on obesity (15.6%)
- Power lines linked to asthma (9.7%)
- Amphetamines raise stroke risk (9.6%)
- Fizzy drinks alert (9.5%)
- Fizzy drink Aspire claims to burn calories off (8.3%)
Slapping a 10 per cent ‘fat tax’ on soft drinks such as cola would cut consumption and help curb rising levels of obesity in this country, experts say.
The price hike would drive down sales of sugary drinks and encourage consumers to buy healthier alternatives, a study suggests.
A similar rise in the price of full-fat milk would make people drink reduced fat milks instead, researchers told the British Journal of Nutrition.
Four co-authors, including Professor Susan Jebb – who has been the Government’s main adviser on obesity since 2007 – claim the change in policy would result in people making healthier choices.
Denmark became the first country to introduce a fat tax in October, with a surcharge on foods high in saturated fat.
Within days, David Cameron said the Coalition would consider following its example as a way of tackling Britain’s growing obesity levels.
The latest study analyses trends in consumption of drinks by both children and adults in Britain between 1986 and 2009.
‘In testing taxation as an option for shifting beverage purchase patterns, we calculate that a 10 per cent increase in the price of sugar sweetened beverages could potentially result in a decrease of 7.5ml per capita per day,’ the researchers stated.
A similar increase in the cost of full-fat milk would also reduce consumption of it by 5ml per person per day and increase intake of reduced fat milk by 7ml per head every day, their report added.
However, Professor Jack Winkler, a professor of nutrition policy, said the tax would be ‘ineffective’.
Consumers will simply buy larger bottles, use cheaper shops, drink cheaper brands or buy soft drinks on ‘special offer’, he warned.
The soft drinks industry branded the idea ‘ineffective, intrusive and unfair’.
A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘This is one of a number of independent academic papers that looks at the likely impact of taxes on food products. We keep all international evidence under review.’