The journal of the Canadian Medical Association – CMAJ – published an editorial this week, “Partnerships between health organizations and the food industry risk derailing public health nutrition” (link takes you to pdf file). It was written by an Ottawa obesity expert and by the editor-in-chief of the journal.
Excerpt:
“Highly processed, nutritionally deprived and calorie-rich foods tend to be the profit drivers most heavily marketed by their manufacturers. Their promotion and consumption contradict government guidance on healthy food choices and the aims of health organizations fighting an epidemic of childhood and adult obesity. Why then do many health organizations allow their messages and reputations to be tarnished by partnerships with food companies?”
The editorial includes an appendix that itemizes some of the partnerships in question, such as:
American Academy of Family Physicians & Coca Cola
American Diabetes Association & Cadbury-Schweppes
British Nutrition Foundation & Cadbury-Schweppes
UNICEF & Cadbury-Schweppes
Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation & Boston Pizza
The Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada & Boston Pizza
Susan G. Komen For the Cure & Kentucky Fried Chicken
American Dietetic Association & Hershey’s
Canadian Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance & PepsiCo
The editorial concludes:
“Obesity is a pressing public health concern worldwide. The epidemic is primarily fueled by the consumption of excess calories, including healthy ones — a message that will not resonate with corporate sponsors. When they partner, health organizations become inadvertent pitchmen for the food industry. They would do well to remember that corporate dollars always introduce perceived or real biases that may taint or distort evidence-based lifestyle recommendations and health messages.”
(Thanks for the tip to Marilyn Mann.)
Opinions on other issues in news, journals, PR, advertising, marketing
Come on, NY Times; you must do better than this. Important research doesn’t need hype and the “breaking news” BS doesn’t help readers or patients. https://www.healthnewsreview.org/2022/03/nyt-proclaims-breaking-news/
Our editorial team was blessed to have Sharon as a contributor during our best years. As this obit states, she was “kind, patient, wise, thoughtful and generous.” Thank you, Sharon; now rest in peace. https://journalism.wisc.edu/news/in-memoriam-sharon-dunwoody-1947-2022/
We’ve written about the hype of liquid biopsies for years (see link in comment below). And now this…. https://www.statnews.com/2022/01/12/medicare-shouldnt-cover-liquid-biopsies-early-cancer-detection/
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Marilyn Mann
February 4, 2011 at 11:21 amI also recommend Dr. Freedhoff’s excellent blog, Weighty Matters. http://www.weightymatters.ca/
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like