Thursday, 1 October 2015

American Academy of Pediatrics decides relationship with Coke is not so sweet Video PBS

American Academy of Pediatrics decides relationship with Coke is not so sweet


Youtube Link Below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz_HbF-SYjc




JUDY WOODRUFF: Now we look at a second health story, one about childhood obesity, the role of sugary drinks in fueling the epidemic and corporate influence.
A series of reports is putting a fresh spotlight on the spending and role of Coca-Cola, a company that’s known for its sweet products.
Hari Sreenivasan has more from our New York studios.
HARI SREENIVASAN: Coke is the world’s largest producer of sugary beverages, so you might not think the American Academy of Pediatrics would partner with the company. But that had indeed been the case until this week. It was a main sponsor of the academy’s Web site, healthychildren.org, and a past sponsor of the group’s national conference.
It’s provided over $100 million in financial support to other professional medical and health groups as well. The Academy is now ending its relationship with Coke. And it comes after a recent story in The New York Times laid out how the company has paid for scientific research that plays down the role of soda in obesity.
Anahad O’Connor has been working on these stories, joins me now.
So, I guess the first story — or the most recent story first, what’s the connection between Coke and the Academy of Pediatrics?
ANAHAD O’CONNOR, The New York Times: So, the first story I did was looking at Coke’s — the money that they were paying a lot of researchers and institutions to do research that, you know, was downplaying the role of sugary drinks in obesity.
And in response to that story, the CEO of Coca-Cola said, we’re not trying to deceive the public. We’re trying to work with institutions to promote active healthy living, and we are going to release all of the funding that we provided to scientists, universities, to health groups over the past five years.
And so they released a trove of data showing this extensive number of grants. And in that data, we saw that the American Academy of Pediatrics was in there, and Coke had provided something like $3 million to the Academy, at least over the past five years.
HARI SREENIVASAN: And how do the pediatricians feel?
ANAHAD O’CONNOR: So, the actual members of the Academy — and there’s more than 64,000 pediatricians who are part of this Academy — it’s very prestigious — a lot of them are very upset. When I spoke to them, they said they couldn’t believe that the Academy had partnered with Coke or worked with it to any extent, because sugary drinks are considered a very major factor in the obesity epidemic, especially among children.
These pediatricians see the effects of it firsthand. They see type 2 diabetes, hypertension. You know, all these diseases that used to occur in middle age and later in life, they see them in children now. And they think that sugary drinks are a primary influence of that. So, pediatricians were very upset.
HARI SREENIVASAN: And yet they are — here they are at a conference, and they’re carrying around bags that have Coke in it while they’re trying to tell their patients don’t feed your kids sugary drinks.
ANAHAD O’CONNOR: Yes, so some pediatricians said it was analogous to, you know, a major lung association group or university partnering with, you know, the tobacco industry. It just was completely contradictory.
HARI SREENIVASAN: So, what’s the correlation? Is there influence on academic research? You point to a case in Louisiana.
ANAHAD O’CONNOR: So there was a case in Louisiana at the Pennington Biomedical Center at Louisiana State University.
They actually were one of the largest recipients of Coke money. They took something like $7 million over the past five years. And they just recently released the results of a major worldwide study that looked at obesity in children and the major factors of the epidemic. And they found that some of the major causes were a lack of sleep, a lack of exercise, television
The one thing they didn’t mention was sugary drinks. And that seemed very striking, because you look at other independent research, and it’s all pointing to sugary drinks. But the universities and institutions that are taking Coke money, many of them are, you know, seeming to exclude sugary drinks from, you know, the obesity epidemic.
HARI SREENIVASAN: And how singular is Coke in this? I mean, in the past, there have been companies, industries, lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill. Certainly, that still happens. Are there other food companies or beverage companies that are trying this?
ANAHAD O’CONNOR: So, Coke is certainly part of several lobbying and trade groups where — that are — also include other large corporations and food and industry players.
But Coca-Cola really seemed to have been out front on this. I talked to one expert, Marion Nestle at NYU, who wrote a book called “Soda Politics” and studies the beverage industry and the food industry, and she said that she had never seen another corporation that had such a hand in so many public institutions.
You know, Coke has partnered with all of these academic and medical groups. They have partnered with the Boys and Girls Club. They have partnered with minority groups like the NAACP and the Hispanic Federation. And, you know, they’re winning loyalty and allies.
So, for example, when Michael Bloomberg, you know, tried to introduce his, you know, soda cap and restrictions in 2012, the beverage industry, supported by Coke, filed a lawsuit against Michael Bloomberg, and the NAACP and the Hispanic Federation actually filed amicus briefs supporting the beverage industry against Bloomberg.
And that was very shocking, because the minority communities have a disproportionately high prevalence of obesity, and, you know, they seemed to be able to benefit the most from soda restrictions. And yet these groups were siding with industry.
HARI SREENIVASAN: Anahad O’Connor of The New York Times, thanks so much for joining us.
ANAHAD O’CONNOR: Thank you for having me.

Rudd Center -Health Digest September 2015

September 2015 Rudd Center Health Digest
View this email in your browser
Health Digest - September 2015

Rudd Center Recent Publications

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Succeeding But Efforts Needed to Improve Nutrition Quality

The federal Supplemental Nutrition Program (SNAP), commonly referred to as the food stamp program, is successful in alleviating hunger and helping lower-income Americans afford enough calories, according to a new study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity at the University of Connecticut. The study, published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine, found that the amount of calories consumed is about the same for SNAP participants compared to higher-income Americans. However, according to lead study author Tatiana Andreyeva, the Rudd Center's Director of Economic Initiatives, "... SNAP participants' diets are of lower nutritional quality than those of income-eligible and higher-income non participants." This new comprehensive review, she said, can help SNAP advocates and policy makers ensure that future policies related to this vital food assistance program address dietary quality while continuing to reduce food insecurity.











 
Children's Exposure to TV Ads for Candy Increased Substantially After Companies Promised Not to Advertise to Kids

Despite voluntary pledges from candy makers not to advertise to children 11 and under, children viewed substantially more TV ads for candy than they did four years earlier, when the promises went into effect, according to a new study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity at the University of Connecticut. From 2008 to 2011, children's exposure to candy ads on U.S. TV increased 74 percent, according to the study, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the Rudd Foundation, and published in the journal Appetite. "Although companies that belong to the (voluntary program) publicly state that candy should not be advertised directly to children, these findings clearly demonstrate that they have found many ways to advertise candy to children without technically violating their pledges not to do so," said Jennifer Harris, the study's lead author and the Rudd Center's Director of Marketing Initiatives.
Rudd Center in the News

 

 
Time magazine featured our new study on children's exposure to TV ads for candy, in a Sept. 10 article headlined, "Kids See More Candy Ads on TV Now Than in The Past."  The study shows that candy companies were exploiting loopholes in the voluntary pledges they made not to advertise candy to young children, and the need for tightening the definition of child-directed advertising so that the pledges are meaningful. 
 
UConn Today published a Sept. 11 piece on the report, "Empty Promises: Kids' Exposure to TV Ads for Candy."  Medical Daily also covered the new report on Sept. 11. Study author and Rudd Center Research Associate Megan LoDolce was quoted, "Despite candy companies' promises in 2007 to not advertise to children under 12 on TV, children saw substantially more." 

MSN ran a Sept. 8 article on how fat-shaming can lead to weight gainRudd Center Deputy Director Rebecca Puhl is quoted in this story, "Stigma and discrimination are really stressors, and, unfortunately, for many people, they're chronic stressors. And we know that eating is a common reaction to stress and anxiety --- that people often engage in more food consumption or more binge eating in response to stressors, so there is a logical connection here in terms of some of the maladaptive coping strategies to try to deal with the stress of being stigmatized." New York Magazine published the story on Sept. 8.

Slate published an article on fat-shaming on Sept. 11, explaining how weight bias and stigma can impact health and behaviors. "When people are made to feel stigmatized or shamed, they are more likely to turn to food or avoid physical activity," Dr. Puhl said in the piece. "Individual choices and behavior are small pieces in a larger puzzle, and if we focus on them we're ignoring everything else."
 
Rudd Center Director Marlene Schwartz commented in a Sept. 10 CNN Money article on the staggering number of school children receiving free lunch. "I think that the people that are trying to make those small amounts of money stretch and feed all of these children have one of the hardest jobs...It would be great if there was more funding for them."
 
The Washington Post published a Sept. 13 editorial, "Don't let lobbyists decide what your children eat at school," citing our recent study showing kids are eating healthier and throwing out less food since updated school meal standards took effect.

 

News to Chew On

 
The New York Times 
‘Serving Up School Lunches of Tomorrow’
 
Civil Eats
Why Food Belongs in Our Discussions of Race
 
NBC News
New Yorkers to Get Salt Warnings on Menus

Yale Daily News
TVs in bedroom raise kids’ sugary drink consumption

About.com
Weight Stigma Awareness Week is September 21-25, 2015

USA Today
Kids consume 12% of their calories from fast food, study shows
 

 

What's Simmering with Our Friends

 
 
 


 


 
 
 
Share With A Friend - Sign Up for Our Newsletter Here
Facebook
Facebook
Twitter
Twitter
Website
Website
YouTube
YouTube
Copyright © 2015 UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity, All rights reserved.
Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

Our mailing address is:
UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity
One Constitution Plaza
Suite 600
Hartford, CT 06103

Add us to your address book


unsubscribe from this list    update subscription preferences

Email Marketing Powered by MailChimp

Too many newsletters? You can unsubscribe.