Last week, I bemoaned the seemingly infinite amount of conflicting information that exists in this new “information age” and is making it hard for people to find advice they badly need. In thinking about it, I probably should have added a few more specific examples illustrating what I believe to be an important issue.
Then along comes news that Coca-Cola Co., the world’s largest producer of sugary beverages, is backing a new “science-based” solution to the obesity crisis, and a perfect example is now before us. The answers to fighting obesity, the company believes, rest in people getting more exercise and worrying less about cutting calories – even the empty calories found in, say, processed white sugar. The vehicle for this message is a new nonprofit organization called the Global Energy Balance Network, which, with the support of Coca-Cola, is advancing the message in medical journals, at conferences and through social media.
The critical response to this news from Coca-Cola was immediate. Many in the health science community responded by calling this “physical activity” message misleading and part of an effort by Coke to deflect criticism about the role sugary drinks play in the spread of obesity. They further countered that the notion that physical activity can offset a bad diet flies in the face of evidence that shows that exercise has only minimal impact on weight compared with the food people consume.
This current conflict over the science of obesity is also seen by many as nothing more than a strategy to combat a decline in sugary drink consumption brought on by years of public health information campaigns. These efforts appear to be having an adverse effect on the bottom line for the beverage industry in general and Coca-Cola in particular. According to The New York Times, since the late 1990s, the amount of full-calorie soda drunk by the average American has dropped 25 percent.
As calorie consumption from beverages and other foods is dropping, obesity rates – shock – have stopped rising. It’s not nearly enough to stem an epidemic but enough to show the beginning of a trend in the right direction. Sugary drinks are beginning to be removed from schools, and more attention is being placed on how they are marketed to children.
But the beverage industry is using a variety of tactics to spread its message. One of the more troubling recent tactics by Coca-Cola, as noted by the Times, was paying dietitians to write blog posts or articles suggesting that a mini-can of Coke makes a good snack food. Nothing quite so refreshing as a quick drink loaded with 90 nutrient-poor calories. Of course, if you were to splurge on a 12-ounce can, you’d be looking at 140 calories and roughly 10 teaspoons of sugar.
To offset the effects of that, you would need to take a 3-mile walk, according to Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Popkin goes on to suggest that this messaging – and the many millions of dollars of support for the science behind it – is eerily reminiscent of tactics used by the tobacco industry, which enlisted experts to serve as “merchants of doubt” about the health hazards of smoking.
And it’s hard to argue with that conclusion. Studies of physical activity funded by the beverage industry tend to reach conclusions that differ from the findings of studies by independent scientists. It all starts to feel a bit like a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Representatives of Coca-Cola point out that the company has a long history of supporting scientific research related to its beverages. To its credit, the company has donated funds to build fitness centers in more than 100 schools across the country. It also sponsors a program it calls “Exercise is Medicine” in support of its energy balance position, designed to encourage doctors to prescribe physical activity to patients. So I’m willing to cut the company at least some slack in this emerging controversy.
But a hot-off-the-press joint study by the Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity at the University of Connecticut, the African American Collaborative Obesity Research Network and the University of Texas Health Science Center found that African-American and Hispanic children and teens see 70 percent more food-related TV advertising than other kids and twice as many TV ads for candy and sugary drinks.
The report confirms what public health experts have suspected for years. For advertisers of these products, minorities prove to be a vulnerable and lucrative audience. The report is careful not to blame these advertisers for targeting their product to one of the largest and fastest-growing demographic groups in the United States. Food and beverage marketing designed to appeal directly to Hispanic and black consumers is not problematic in and of itself, according to the researchers. It makes good business sense.
But you’d have to say that in this case, the marketers and companies win and these kids lose. As the report points out, black and Hispanic kids are likelier to be obese than their peers.
At the very least, we all should be aware of the continuing bombardment of advertising kids are exposed to for products that could be ruinous to their health. In 2014, on average, children ages 2 to 11 viewed 12.8 food and beverage ads per day on TV, which translates to almost 4,700 ads per year, and for adolescents, it’s even more. That’s a lot for any public health campaign to overcome.
Write to Chuck Norris with your questions about health and fitness. Follow Chuck Norris through his official social media sites, on Twitter @chucknorris and Facebook’s “Official Chuck Norris Page.” He blogs at ChuckNorrisNews.blogspot.com.
