Lentis/Public Health, Sugary Drinks, and the US Beverage Lobby

Introduction Soda occupies a unique place in American culture, serving as both a beloved indulgence and a growing public health concern. This article examines soda's evolution from an 18th-century health tonic to a staple of modern consumer culture. The historical context outlines its rise and cultural significance. The health effects section explores its link to chronic diseases. Regulatory efforts and industry lobbying highlight tensions between public health and corporate interests. Finally, the role of technology reveals soda's impact on consumer behavior and health equity. Together, these elements offer a concise look at public health, sugary drinks, and the role of the beverage lobby. Historical Context: The Rise of Soda in America Origins of Soda as a Health Tonic Soda originated in the 18th century as a health tonic, inspired by the therapeutic properties of natural mineral waters. Early carbonation pioneers, like Joseph Priestley in 1767, created the first artificially produced carbonated water using chalk and acid.Who Invented Sparkling Water? A Comprehensive History Guide https://sodasense.com/blogs/bubbly-blog/history-of-sparkling-water-invention?srsltid=AfmBOopBljLKuAbuXx1LrCncgbMTLvILzwHSUpywVKbRt0mm-qHjtcJZ 2024-11-26 Soda Sense en The 19th century introduced the bottling of soda water (1835) and the invention of the soda fountain (1819) by Samuel Fahnestock, making carbonated beverages more accessible.How Did Soda Shift From a Health Drink to a Health Crisis? https://www.thoughtco.com/introduction-to-soda-pop-1992433 2024-11-26 ThoughtCo en Initially marketed as health tonics, sodas were sold in pharmacies alongside medicines, symbolizing the intersection of science, technology, and health culture. Emergence of Iconic Soda Brands By the late 19th century, soda shifted from a health tonic to commercial success. Coca-Cola, created in 1886 by Dr. John S. Permberton, and Pepsi-Cola, developed in 1898 by Caleb Bradham, introduced sweetened flavored sodas that redefined the industry.How Did Soda Shift From a Health Drink to a Health Crisis? https://www.thoughtco.com/introduction-to-soda-pop-1992433 2024-11-26 ThoughtCo en During Prohibition (1920-1933), soda became a "wholesome" alcohol alternative, cementing its role in America social life. Soda fountains flourished, serving as gathering spots for families and teenagers while promoting soda as a safe and enjoyable indulgence.The Soda Fountain: A Mid-Century Icon https://www.heywoodwakefield.com/blogs/blog/soda-fountain-mid-century-icon 2024-11-26 Heywood-Wakefield en Industrialization and Mass Production The 20th century introduced technological advances that made soda a household staple. Innovations like vending machines (1920s), six-pack cartons (1923), and aluminum cans (1950s), made soda widely accessible.How Did Soda Shift From a Health Drink to a Health Crisis? https://www.thoughtco.com/introduction-to-soda-pop-1992433 2024-11-26 ThoughtCo en These developments integrated soda into daily life and solidified its cultural significance by the mid-century, symbolizing how technology reshaped consumer habits and societal norms. Public Health Concerns Health Effects Sugary drink consumption is strongly linked to obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), and certain cancers. High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), commonly used in sodas, bypasses key regulatory steps in glucose metabolism, leading to unchecked fat production, elevated triglycerides, and insulin resistance. These metabolic effects are associated with increased risks of obesity and CVD.Brown C. M. Dulloo A. G. Montani J.-P. December 2008 Sugary drinks in the pathogenesis of obesity and cardiovascular diseases https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19079277/ International Journal of Obesity (2005) 32 Suppl 6 S28–34 10.1038/ijo.2008.204 1476-5497 19079277 Sugary drinks are also implicated in cancer risk. A study published in The BMJ revealed that a 100 mL/day increase in sugary drink consumption, including 100% fruit juices, raised the risk of overall cancer by 18% and breast cancer by 22%. This is attributed to the high glycemic load of sugary beverages, which promotes insulin resistance and chronic inflammation, key factors in cancer development.Chazelas Eloi Srour Bernard Desmetz Elisa Kesse-Guyot Emmanuelle Julia Chantal Deschamps Valérie Druesne-Pecollo Nathalie Galan Pilar Hercberg Serge Latino-Martel Paule Deschasaux Mélanie Touvier Mathilde 2019-07-10 Sugary drink consumption and risk of cancer: results from NutriNet-Santé prospective cohort https://www.bmj.com/content/366/bmj.l2408 BMJ en 366 l2408 10.1136/bmj.l2408 0959-8138 31292122 Cardiometabolic and Cancer Risks Sugary beverages heighten the risk of type 2 diabetes, hypertension, and metabolic syndrome through mechanisms such as increased systemic inflammation and insulin resistance. Chronic consumption also raises uric acid levels, which can lead to hypertension and CVDs.Qian Shiru 2024-06-18 Effects of Sugary Drinks (Sugar Substitutes) on the Human Body https://drpress.org/ojs/index.php/HSET/article/view/21133 Highlights in Science, Engineering and Technology en 99 16–20 10.54097/b6ebqm60 2791-0210 These findings underscore the need for public health measures to reduce sugary drink consumption. Regulatory Efforts and Industry Responses Soda Taxes A sugar tax is an excise tax placed on distributors of sugary beverages, placing a $0.01-$0.02 tax per ounce of liquid. This tax is placed on several types of distributed goods, including sodas, energy drinks, fruit juices, and sweetened coffee and tea beverages.Roache Sarah A. Gostin Lawrence O. 2017-06-14 The Untapped Power of Soda Taxes: Incentivizing Consumers, Generating Revenue, and Altering Corporate Behavior http://ijhpm.com/article_3376.html International Journal of Health Policy and Management en 6 9 489–493 10.15171/ijhpm.2017.69 2322-5939 PMC5582434 28949460 Some successful benefits to the surrounding community include tax allocations to community services, subsidization of healthier options, healthier “defaults” presented on kids' menus, and healthcare savings.Muth Natalie D. Dietz William H. Magge Sheela N. Johnson Rachel K. AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS SECTION ON OBESITY COMMITTEE ON NUTRITION AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION Bolling Christopher F. Armstrong Sarah C. Haemer Matthew Allen Rausch John Conrad Rogers Victoria Weeks Abrams Steven A. Kim Jae Hong 2019-04-01 Public Policies to Reduce Sugary Drink Consumption in Children and Adolescents https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/143/4/e20190282/37217/Public-Policies-to-Reduce-Sugary-Drink-Consumption?autologincheck=redirected Pediatrics 143 4 e20190282 10.1542/peds.2019-0282 0031-4005 With a sugar tax projected to generate upwards of $133 million in a year for a large city like Chicago,Taxing sugary drinks https://www.healthyfoodamerica.org/taxing_sugary_drinks#:~:text=Raises%20revenue%20for%20important%20programs,,%20and%20universal%20pre-k 2024-12-10 Healthy Food America this tax revenue can be allocated to address health and social disparities within the community. For example, Philadelphia used sugar tax revenue to fund pre-kindergarten programs for underserved communities. These revenues can also be used to subsidize untaxed, healthier options such as water, milk, fruits, and vegetables. Along with food and drink, programs such as child health and obesity prevention can be subsidized with this revenue.Promoting Healthier Purchases: Ultraprocessed Food Taxes and Minimally Processed Foods Subsidies for the Low Income https://healthyeatingresearch.org/research/promoting-healthier-purchases-ultraprocessed-food-taxes-and-minimally-processed-foods-subsidies-for-the-low-income/#:~:text=A%20sugar-based%20tax%20on,purchases%20without%20substantially%20increasing%20calories. 2024-12-10 Healthy Eating Research en-US With taxes on sugary beverages and the movement to protect child health, restaurants are more likely to abstain from serving sugary drinks to children, replacing them with untaxed, healthier options on menus and in kids’ meals. Regarding healthcare, estimates suggest that, over 10 years, a tax on sugary drinks in the US would result in more than $17 billion in healthcare cost savings.Taxes on sugary drinks: Why do it? https://iris.who.int/bitstream/handle/10665/260253/WHO-NMH-PND-16.5Rev.1-eng.pdf World Health Organization Implementation in the US and Industry Countermeasures Case 1: Berkeley, CA The first stories of success in implementing a sugar tax originate in Mexico and Chile. Inspired by the success of other countries, Berkeley, CA was the first city in the US to implement a similar sugar tax. This effort was spearheaded by community grassroots organizations, gaining public support and implementing the tax with 75% of community members’ approval.The Impact of Taxes and Price Promotions on Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Consumption https://doi.org/10.17918/00001054 Drexel University Libraries Yichen Zhong A study encompassing 26 grocery stores in Berkeley found that after one year, sales of sugary drinks fell by 9.6%, sales of untaxed drinks increased by 3.5%, and there was no increase in grocery bills or revenue lost in grocery stores.  The soda industry tried to counteract the success of the sugar tax by spending over $2.4 million in community efforts.Berkeley Soda Tax Campaign Ecology Center https://ecologycenter.org/berkeley-soda-tax-campaign/ 2024-12-10 en-US However, they were unsuccessful, as the sugar tax had garnered overwhelming community support. Case 2: Cook County, Il The sugar tax in Cook County, Il was implemented by the city council, as a $0.01 per ounce tax levied on the consumer, rather than the distributor. The tax also was placed on artificially-sweetened beverages along with sugar-sweetened beverages. Immediately, the tax faced public backlash, with 87% of locals opposing the tax.2017-08-09 Haterade: 87% of residents disapprove of new Cook County soda tax https://www.illinoispolicy.org/haterade-87-of-residents-disapprove-of-new-cook-county-soda-tax/ 2024-12-10 Illinois Policy There were many issues in implementation, resulting in multiple lawsuits against businesses and companies that incorrectly implemented the tax. The result of organizational dysfunction and public disapproval led to the sugar tax being repealed with an overwhelming 15-2 vote.Cook County Sweetened Beverage Tax – What’s so Hard about It??? https://www.salestaxinstitute.com/resources/cook-county-sweetened-beverage-tax-whats-so-hard-about-it 2024-12-10 Sales Tax Institute en-US In response to the initial implementation, Coca-Cola tried to counteract the tax by donating $3 million to establish fitness programs in Chicago. However, it was the efforts of businesses and the public that caused the tax to be repealed. The Role of the Beverage Lobby Lobbying Strategies Leading companies in the beverage industry, such as Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, have employed aggressive lobbying strategies to oppose regulations, shape research, and create public narratives. In 2020, Coca-Cola allocated $5.48 million to lobbying, making it the lead spender amongst food and beverage companies. PepsiCo followed closely, with $3.69 million in lobbying expendituresPost Share Post Print Email License Where the dollars go: Lobbying a big business for large food and beverage CPGs https://www.fooddive.com/news/where-the-dollars-go-lobbying-a-big-business-for-large-food-and-beverage-c/607982/ 2024-12-09 Food Dive en-US. These substantial allocation highlight the companies’ commitment to protecting their interests at the expense of public health Influence on Public Policy Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and other beverage companies have heavily lobbied against soda taxes around the world. For instance, in California, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo supported legislation that banned local governments from implementing new soda taxes for 12 years, stalling the public health efforts2018-07-02 California agrees on last-minute compromise to ban soda taxes for 12 years https://www.beveragedaily.com/Article/2018/06/25/California-agrees-on-last-minute-compromise-to-ban-drink-taxes-for-12-years/ 2024-12-09 BeverageDaily.com en. Similarly in Mexico, the industry launched campaigns that warned of economic harm to low-income families by framing soda taxes as regressive. This aimed to undermine public support, which delayed the adoption of policies that could improve public healthPedroza-Tobias Andrea Crosbie Eric Mialon Melissa Carriedo Angela Schmidt Laura A. 2021 Food and beverage industry interference in science and policy: efforts to block soda tax implementation in Mexico and prevent international diffusion https://gh.bmj.com/content/6/8/e005662? BMJ Global Health en 6 8 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005662 2059-7908 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005662 Between 2010 and 2015, the two companies sponsored 96 national health organizations, specifically, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)2016-10-12 Big soda sponsoring US health organizations is a conflict of interest: BU study https://www.beveragedaily.com/Article/2016/10/13/Big-soda-sponsoring-US-health-organizations-is-a-conflict-of-interest/ 2024-12-09 BeverageDaily.com en. By funding these renowned health entities, they positioned themselves as contributors to health related initiatives suggesting that their branches are socially responsible and invested in public health. However, this mass funding served as a means to influence public health narratives and shape policy. Coca-Cola’s funding of the Global Energy Balance Network (GEBN) highlights this approach. The GEBN was a nonprofit organization that promoted the narrative that obesity was primarily caused by the lack of physical activity rather than poor diet. By shifting the focus away from dietary habits, Coca-Cola deflected scrutiny from its high-sugar products and put the spotlight on individuals and their lack of exerciseHuehnergarth Nancy Fink Emails Reveal How Coca-Cola Shaped The Anti-Obesity Global Energy Balance Network https://www.forbes.com/sites/nancyhuehnergarth/2015/11/24/emails-reveal-how-coca-cola-shaped-the-anti-obesity-global-energy-balance-network/ 2024-12-09 Forbes en. This narrative undermined public health campaigns that sought to educate the public about the dangers of excessive sugar consumption and its direct link to obesity, diabetes, and other metabolic disease. Transparency and Conflict of Interest The funding practices of Coca-Cola and Pepsi-co have raised significant concerns regarding transparency and conflicts of interest in public health initiatives. Despite their public claims of advocating for public health and wellness, analysis of their funding reveals a lack of disclosure regarding their contribution to research and non profit organizationsMagazine Smithsonian Blakemore Erin New Study Highlights Coke and Pepsi's Uncomfortable Links to Health Organizations https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-big-soda-tries-influence-health-organizations-180960731/? 2024-12-09 Smithsonian Magazine en. For instance, studies have shown discrepancies between the Coca-Cola self-reported funding and the actual extent of its financial involvement in shaping research outcomes, particularly through entities like the GEBNPeters Abby Day The Benefits of Research Partnerships 2019-03-08 https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315233987-8 Winning Research Funding 77–84 2024-12-09 Routledge 978-1-315-23398-7. These practices undermine the credibility of scientific research and promote distrust in health campaigns and the policymaking process. Technology and Society Interface Technology in Marketing Industry companies use marketing to specifically target marginalized groups to promote their sugary drinks. Hispanic and African American youth are the susceptible populations for advertising sugary drinks and fast food. Beverage companies strategically brand culture into their commercials, linking their products to cultural topics such as sports or emotions like happiness.Carbonating the World https://www.cspinet.org/resource/carbonating-world 2024-12-10 Center for Science in the Public Interest en Specifically, these companies mostly target African American male adolescents whose parents had a high school education or less. The advertisements used to target this demographic often portray black characters promoting habits such as snacking and eating fast foods, and these ads failed to include adults, overweight characters, or foods in line with dietary recommendations.  Societal Implications The use of targeted ads towards marginalized populations is one of the causes of the disproportionate consumption of sugary beverages within income levels. In a survey conducted by journal The Conversation, they found that little more than a third of people with the highest incomes said they drink at least one sugary drink a week, compared to almost two-thirds of respondents with the lowest income.Zagorsky Jay L. Smith Patricia 2020-07-17 Poorest Americans drink a lot more sugary drinks than the richest – which is why soda taxes could help reduce gaping health inequalities https://theconversation.com/poorest-americans-drink-a-lot-more-sugary-drinks-than-the-richest-which-is-why-soda-taxes-could-help-reduce-gaping-health-inequalities-142345 2024-12-10 The Conversation en-US Industry’s use of targeting in marketing can lead to long-term health disparities. A study by Preventative Medicine Reports shows that Hispanic and Black youths have consistently shown the highest consumption of sugary drinks from 2009 to 2017.Jiang Nan Yi Stella S. Russo Rienna Bu Daniel D. Zhang Donglan Ferket Bart Zhang Fang Fang Pagán José A. Wang Y. Claire Li Yan 2020 Trends and sociodemographic disparities in sugary drink consumption among adults in New York City, 2009–2017 https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S2211335520301224 Preventive Medicine Reports en 19 101162 10.1016/j.pmedr.2020.101162 PMC7369330 32714777 These trends can lead to much larger health disparities between ethnicities and income groups in the future. Therefore, it is important to have policies in place, such as a sugar tax, to counteract the targeting of marginalized communities by beverage companies.