Corporations' use and misuse of evidence to influence health policy:A case study of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation

Background: Sugar sweetened beverages (SSB) are a major source of sugar in the diet. Although trends in consumption vary across regions, in many countries, particularly LMICs, their consumption continues to increase. In response, a growing number of governments have introduced a tax on SSBs. SSB manufacturers have opposed such taxes, disputing the role that SSBs play in diet-related diseases and the effectiveness of SSB taxation, and alleging major economic impacts. Given the importance of evidence to effective regulation of products harmful to human health, we scrutinised industry submissions to the South African government's consultation on a proposed SSB tax and examined their use of evidence. Results: Corporate submissions were underpinned by several strategies involving the misrepresentation of evidence. First, references were used in a misleading way, providing false support for key claims. Second, raw data, which represented a pliable, alternative evidence base to peer reviewed studies, was misused to dispute both the premise of targeting sugar for special attention and the impact of SSB taxes on SSB consumption. Third, purposively selected evidence was used in conjunction with other techniques, such as selective quoting from studies and omitting important qualifying information, to promote an alternative evidential narrative to that supported by the weight of peer-reviewed research. Fourth, a range of mutually enforcing techniques that inflated the effects of SSB taxation on jobs, public revenue generation, and gross domestic product, was used to exaggerate the economic impact of the tax. This "hyperbolic accounting" included rounding up figures in original sources, double counting, and skipping steps in economic modelling. Conclusions: Our research raises fundamental questions concerning the bona fides of industry information in the context of government efforts to combat diet-related diseases. The beverage industry's claims against SSB taxation rest on a complex interplay of techniques, that appear to be grounded in evidence, but which do not observe widely accepted approaches to the use of either scientific or economic evidence. These techniques are similar, but not identical, to those used by tobacco companies and highlight the problems of introducing evidence-based policies aimed at managing the market environment for unhealthful commodities

Health in the age of asset manager capitalism

A relatively small number of for-profit asset managers—financial intermediaries that invest capital on behalf of other investors—have emerged in recent decades to become some of the most influential commercial actors in the global political economy. Despite their important role in society, asset managers have received little attention from a public health perspective. In this article, we aimed to propose a conceptual framework of potential pathways and mechanisms through which asset managers may influence health and equity. The framework included asset class-specific pathways related to investments in publicly listed corporate equity, private equity, ‘real assets’ (e.g. housing, hospitals, farmland) and commodities. The framework also included more generalized pathways, focusing on ways in which the large and highly concentrated asset management sector can drive economic inequities, influence policy and political decision-making and shape the global ‘development’ agenda. We argue that measures challenging so-called ‘asset manager capitalism’, such as promoting and protecting the public ownership of companies and assets in essential sectors, are imperative to address the commercial determinants of ill health and inequity

Nutrient profiling interventions targeting obesity prevention : role and potential impact

This thesis outlined the role and potential impact of a range of policy options for obesity prevention. It provided evidence that population-wide interventions, such as changes to food labelling and taxes on unhealthy foods, are likely to offer excellent \u27value for money\u27 for governments from an obesity prevention perspective

Economics of obesity - learning from the past to contribute to a better future

The discipline of economics plays a varied role in informing the understanding of the problem of obesity and the impact of different interventions aimed at addressing it. This paper discusses the causes of the obesity epidemic from an economics perspective, and outlines various justifications for government intervention in this area. The paper then focuses on the potential contribution of health economics in supporting resource allocation decision making for obesity prevention/treatment. Although economic evaluations of single interventions provide useful information, evaluations undertaken as part of a priority setting exercise provide the greatest scope for influencing decision making. A review of several priority setting examples in obesity prevention/treatment indicates that policy (as compared with program-based) interventions, targeted at prevention (as compared with treatment) and focused “upstream” on the food environment, are likely to be the most cost-effective options for change. However, in order to further support decision makers, several methodological advances are required. These include the incorporation of intervention costs/benefits outside the health sector, the addressing of equity impacts, and the increased engagement of decision makers in the priority setting process

Food policies for physical and mental health

Noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) account for the largest burden of early mortality and are predicted to cost the global community more than US $30 trillion over the next 20 years. Unhealthy dietary habits, in large part driven by substantial changes to global food systems, are recognised as major contributors to many of the common NCDs, including cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes. Recent evidence now indicates that unhealthy diets are also risk factors for mental disorders, particularly depression and dementia. This affords substantial scope to leverage on the established and developing approaches to the nutrition-related NCDs to address the large global burden of these mental disorders and reinforces the imperative for governments take substantial actions in regards to improving the food environment and consequent population health via policy initiatives

'Maximising shareholder value’: a detailed insight into the corporate political activity of the Australian food industry

Objective: To gain deeper insight into the corporate political activity (CPA) of the Australian food industry from a public health perspective. Methods: Fifteen interviews with a purposive sample of current and former policy makers, public health advocates and academics who have closely interacted with food industry representatives or observed food industry behaviours. Results: All participants reported having directly experienced the CPA of the food industry during their careers, with the ‘information and messaging’ and ‘constituency building’ strategies most prominent. Participants expressed concern that food industry CPA strategies resulted in weakened policy responses to addressing diet-related disease. Conclusions: This study provides direct evidence of food industry practices that have the potential to shape public health-related policies and programs in Australia in ways that favour business interests at the expense of population health. Implications for public health: This evidence can inform policy makers and public health advocates and be used to adopt measures to ensure that public interests are put at the forefront as part of the policy development and implementation process

How food companies influence evidence and opinion–straight from the horse’s mouth

The tactics used by the food industry to influence public policy have been well documented, but there is little direct evidence of the rationale behind food industry actions and their level of support from within individual companies. This paper provides an analysis of an email exchange (from 2015) between former senior executives of Coca-Cola to gain insider insight into ways in which the food industry seeks to influence policy-makers as well as scientific evidence and opinion with respect to nutrition and non-communicable disease (NCD) prevention. The results provide direct evidence that senior leaders in the food industry advocate for a deliberate and co-ordinated approach to influencing scientific evidence and expert opinion. The paper reveals industry strategies to use external organisations, including scientific bodies and medical associations, as tools to overcome the global scientific and regulatory challenges they face. This evidence highlights the deliberate approach used by the food industry to influence public policy and opinion in their favour. It also demonstrates the importance of identifying and managing potential conflicts of interest when assessing the evidence base and when making policy decisions related to nutrition and NCD prevention

A review of methods and tools to assess the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments for preventing obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases

BACKGROUND: Policies to create healthy food environments are recognized as critical components of efforts to prevent obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases. There has not been a systematic review of existing methods and tools used to assess the implementation of these government policies. The purpose of this study was to review methods and tools used for assessing the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments. The study conducted a systematic literature search. Multiple databases as well as the grey literature were searched. All study designs and review papers on assessing the implementation of government policies to create healthy food environments were included. A quality assessment of the methods and tools identified from relevant studies was carried out using the following four criteria: comprehensiveness, relevance, generalizability and feasibility. This quality assessment was completed by two independent reviewers. RESULTS: The review identified 52 studies across different policy areas, levels and settings. Self-administered questionnaires and policy checklists were most commonly applied to assess the extent of policy implementation, whereas semi-structured interviews were most commonly used to evaluate the implementation process. Measures varied widely, with the existence of policy implementation the aspect most commonly assessed. The most frequently identified barriers and facilitators for policy implementation were infrastructure support, resources and stakeholder engagement. The assessment of policy implementation on food environments was usually undertaken in combination with other policy areas, particularly nutrition education and physical activity. Three tools/methods were rated \u27high\u27 quality and 13 tools/methods received \u27medium\u27 quality ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Harmonization of the available high-quality methods and tools is needed to ensure that assessment of government policy implementation can be compared across different countries and settings and over time. This will contribute to efforts to increase government accountability for their actions to improve the healthiness of food environments