• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Dietitians for Professional Integrity

  • Home
  • Our Team
  • Resources
    • Advocacy & Action Toolkit
    • Conflict-Free CEUs
    • Distinguished Dietitians
    • Ethical Sponsorship
    • FNCE Guides & Reports
    • Like-Minded Organizations
    • RD Resource Toolkit
    • Statements of Concern
    • Understand The Issues
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog
  • Donate
  • Search

Feb 18, 2014 Leave a Comment

Big Soda’s Fear Mongering

It is important for health advocates to look at the full scope of a food company’s behaviors and actions. After all, it is to be expected that when communicating with health organizations and health professionals, industry puts forth a message of “being part of the solution”, “championing wellness”, and “working together.” Real intentions are seen when industry is away from the gaze of health professionals.

Big Beverage has been on the defensive lately as a result of coming under rightful scrutiny from public health and nutrition advocates. To say that soda is undergoing a public relations crisis would be an understatement.

In this Beyond Chron article, school food advocate Dana Woldow details the many ways in which Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics partners Coca-Cola and PepsiCo (hiding behind The American Beverage Association) are staunchly opposing a proposed soda tax in San Francisco with fearmongering and spin.

“Opponents of the tax, amply funded by the American Beverage Association, and hiding behind the vague name ‘Coalition for an Affordable City’, have been out in force trying to sign up small businesses to protest the measure. The Coalition for an Affordable City has been asking small business owners to display in their shop windows a flyer featuring a bold, all-caps headline “SAN FRANCISCANS SHOULDN’T HAVE TO PAY MORE” followed by numerous unsubstantiated claims that the American Beverage Association hopes will scare folks into opposing the tax. “

In the article, Woldow expertly eviscerates the following myths put out by Big Beverage:

Myth #1: “City government should be focusing on more important issues.”

Myth #2: “When it comes to our food and beverage choices and the choices we make for our families, we don’t need the city government’s input.”

Myth #3: “This tax could negatively impact existing nutrition and recreation funding.”

Myth #4: “San Francisco consumers are taxed enough already.”

Myth #5: “This tax won’t just affect soda – it will impact hundreds of beverages.”

It’s a shame that, by and large, the Academy has remained tight-lipped about this ever-growing public health issue. Imagine what a powerful statement the Academy could make by educating its members on why Big Beverage’s hyperbolic fears about a soda tax are misguided and incorrect.

Share this:

  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Related

Categories: Recommended Reads Tags: American Beverage Association, Coca-Cola, Dana Woldow, PepsiCo, soda tax

Reader Interactions

Leave a Comment Cancel

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

sidebar

Blog Sidebar

Social Media

FacebookTwitter

Subscribe to receive our quarterly newsletter and other breaking news!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Browse by Topic

  • Academic Research
  • Advocacy
  • Distinguished Dietitians
  • Ethical Sponsorship
  • Industry Spin
  • Industry-Funded Research
  • Interviews
  • Photos
  • Problematic Sponsorship
  • Recommended Reads
  • Reports
  • Statements of Concern
  • Uncategorized

Tags

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics American Beverage Association Andy Bellatti Big Tobacco California Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Center for Science in the Public Interest CEUs Civil Eats Coca-Cola ConAgra conflicts of interest Corn Refiners Association FNCE front groups General Mills Global Energy Balance Network Hershey's industry-funded research junk food Kellogg Kids Eat Right Kraft Kraft Singles lobbying Marion Nestle marketing marketing to children Mars McDonald's meat industry Michele Simon moderation National Dairy Council Nestlé New York Times PepsiCo policy soda soda tax soda taxes sugar The Sugar Association Unilever World Health Organization Yoni Freedhoff

Footer

Subscribe to receive our quarterly newsletter and other breaking news!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Recent Posts

Farewell to Our Supporters

Dear DFPI Supporters, Since February of 2013, we at Dietitians For Professional Integrity have been a voice for uplifting the registered dietitian credential at a time when corporate influences - both overt and covert Read More

Highly Processed Foods Can Negatively Impact Health

Good read from New York Times on how highly processed foods (and the ingredients in many of them) can negatively impact health by creating an imbalance in the gut microbiome. This is the future of nutrition. The fact Read More

Social Media

FacebookTwitter

RSS

  • RSS - Posts

© 2022 Dietitians for Professional Integrity