• 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 03, 2016 Leave a Comment

Coca-Cola’s Dilemma

In this post for Medium, Dr. David Ludwig explores Coca-Cola’s dilemma as it tries to resolve the conflict “between its responsibility to the public and to its stockholders” given recent events.

While Coca-Cola is no longer a sponsor of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (a decision made by Coca-Cola; it would certainly have been more impactful had it been AND’s decision), PepsiCo still is. Many of the points raised by Dr. Ludwig also apply to PepsiCo — which we still do not think is an appropriate sponsor for any health organization.

Highlights:

  • “Coke has a fundamental conflict between responsibility to the public and responsibility to its stockholders. Corporate actions that benefit public health will undermine their current business model, and those that benefit their business will undermine public health. Coke’s sponsored research on calorie balance is ultimately a ruse that can only serve to deflect attention away from the real issue.”
  • “The solution to this dilemma is for Coke to pivot away from sugary beverages and toward more healthful products. This can begin with a few bold steps:
    • Acknowledge that sugary beverages contribute importantly to obesity when consumed in prevailing amounts.
    • Discontinue all direct and indirect advertising and promotion of sugary beverages — in the US and internationally (so as not to shift the burden of sugar-related diseases to especially vulnerable populations).
    • Stop opposing efforts to limit consumption of sugary beverages (including warning labels and taxes).
    • End sponsorship of research involving individual scientists or their institutions. Any support for genuinely objective research should be directed to the National Academy of Medicine or the National Institutes of Health (as was done by the National Football League to study traumatic brain injury).
    • Call upon other beverage companies to join in these efforts.”

Share this:

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

Related

Categories: Academic Research, Problematic Sponsorship Tags: Coca-Cola, David Ludwig, soda taxes

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