Search results: Coca Cola

Yesterday, 20 family physicians in Contra Costa County, California, ripped up their membership cards in the American Academy of Family Physicians in protest over the AAFP’s partnership with Coca-Cola.

The director of the Contra Costa Department of Health Services, Dr. William Walker, announced that he was resigning his 25-year membership in AAFP.  In his statement, Dr. Walker said:

…I am appalled and ashamed of this partnership between Coca-Cola and the American Academy of Family Physicians. How can any organization that claims to promote public health join forces with a company that promotes products that put our children at risk for obesity, heart disease and early death.

…The AAFP is supposed to be an organization that works to protect the health of children not put them at risk. Their decision to take soda money is all the more unconscionable because, unlike doctors in the 40s, they well know the negative health impact of soda. There is no shortage of documentation that soda is a major contributor to our nation’s obesity epidemic.

…Let me be clear about something: as disappointed as I am with the American Academy of Family Physicians for being duped into thinking that Coca Cola wants to help promote health, the real problem here is our children are being put at risk.

Companies like Coca Cola are polluting our communities with deceptive advertising promoting products that put our children’s health at risk.

…as a family practice doctor and the Health Officer for Contra Costa, I do have a prescription for every parent, teacher, community leader and student:

Look beyond the glitzy advertising that makes you think pouring liquid containing sugar into your body is healthy. Read the label. Look at the ingredients. I’m not suggesting that you boycott sugared drinks, but please make an informed decision about what you are consuming.

I’m calling on every city and neighborhood in our County to fight back against the industry that pushes these harmful products. I ask the American Academy of Family Physicians to end this unhealthy partnership and to join us in leading this important campaign to take back the health of our residents and end the obesity epidemic.

Strong words, indeed.  I hope that the AAFP – and other health and nutrition organizations that might consider food industry partnerships – pay close attention to these words.

* The event was covered in the Contra Costa Times. The Health Department’s website includes the press release and also a video and podcast.

Addendum:

If you, as I am, are shocked by the cost of groceries, we now have the data.  The Economist has been tracking food prices, in this case for a Fourth of July barbecue.

Its “unappetizing conclusion”—

Across the 25 cities in our sample, the basket now costs an average of $81, 12% more than a year ago, the fastest annual increase in a decade …. That far outpaced grocery-price inflation of less than 3%, reflecting the unusually sharp increases in several items in our barbecue basket…Over the past five years the basket has risen in price by over 40%, roughly twice as fast as median pay across the cities surveyed. The typical worker must now labour 16 minutes longer than in 2020 to afford the spread.

The smallest rises have been in pototoes, with potato crisps (chips), beer, pork sausage, and bread also not going up by much.

The sharpest rises are seen for steak, Coca-Cola (really?), and ground beef.

I wish The Economist would do this for a lot more foods.

Lettuce isn’t doing too badly.  Salads everyone?

_____________________

Pub date is September 8. Pre-orders through UC Press get a 30% discount. Use promo code UCPSAVE30.

Vital Strategies has issued two reports about digital marketing of soda and alcohol based on AI analysis of web content: Sick from Scrolling: Protecting the Next Generation from the Flood of Unregulated Social Media Marketing.

Soda and alcohol marketing is flooding social media at a scale that outpaces regulation—embedding brands into sports highlights, influencer content and viral moments that generate billions of impressions…The findings show this marketing is no longer confined to ads—it is woven directly into the content people watch and share every day, creating a constant stream of exposure that largely escapes oversight.

The reports and webinar

I. From Stadiums to Screens: Coca-Cola’s Sportswashing at the 2025 FIFA Club World Cup

Researchers found that 795 posts identified by Canary generated an estimated 3.6 billion impressions, highlighting the reach of FIFA sponsorship. Coca-Cola branding was amplified primarily through sports accounts, broadcasters and streaming platforms resharing match footage that captured brand logos embedded in the frame…Every highlight reel functioned as advertising, with clips circulating online indefinitely.

II. Exposing Alcohol’s Advertising Playbook: Digital Marketing in RESET Alcohol Initiative Countries

Alcohol marketing has undergone a dramatic transformation in the digital age, moving from traditional advertising to sophisticated, algorithm-driven strategies that target consumers with unprecedented precision…Researchers found that nearly 4,000 posts…generated an estimated 2 billion impressions, underscoring the enormous reach of online alcohol promotion.

III.  The Webinar on the reports

Comment

Marketing on the web is challenging to analyze and this report performs a great public service in illustrating its scope and reach—and also its merging into content making advertising and content difficult to distinguish.

Regulation, anybody?

Vital Strategies has just released two of its Canary platform reports based on use of AI.  Here’s its webinar.

• From Stadiums to Screens: Coca-Cola’s Sportswashing at the 2025 FIFA Club World Cup
• Exposing Alcohol’s Advertising Playbook: Digital Marketing in RESET Alcohol Initiative Countries

The findings:

• During the 2025 FIFA Club World Cup (June 14-July 13), Coca-Cola branding appeared in 795 social media posts, generating an estimated 6 billion impressions globally.
• In March 2025 alone, digital alcohol marketing appeared in nearly 4,000 posts generating close to 2 billion impressions.
•  79% of Coca-Cola-linked posts came from sports broadcasters, with branding visible in match highlights, celebrations and interviews, including those featuring child athletes such as the Powerade Ball Crew.
• Alcohol brands amplified reach through influencers and major cultural moments like Carnival, partnering with celebrities such as Luísa Sonza and Anitta to reach tens of millions of followers via their social channels.

Why should we care?

Research shows that such marketing influences consumption. Children exposed to high volumes of digital marketing for unhealthy food and sweetened beverages may develop unhealthy habits for life. Alcohol advertising is linked to earlier initiation, binge drinking and increased consumption.

Two examples

• In the Philippines, Red Horse Beer ads deployed cartoon imagery reminiscent of tobacco’s Joe Camel to appeal to younger audiences—despite carrying small-print “For 18 years old and above only” warnings.   Source: Red Horse Beer on Facebook
•  San Miguel Flavored Beer—available in sweet flavors like apple and chocolate designed to mask the taste of alcohol—markets itself around music festivals through the language of friendship and self-expression, embedding the brand into youth identity and inviting attendees to make “#Sweeeet memories” with their “beshies.” Source: @sanmiguelbeerph on Instagram  

Bottom line: These reports provide further evidence for the need for marketing regulation and policies such as taxes on unhealthy products.

Alert to readers: Amazon.com displays listings for several more workbooks, study guides, and cookbooks purportedly based on my book, What to Eat Now (see previous post on this).  I did not write any of them.  Caveat emptor!

___________________________

From FoodDive: How MAHA transformed the food industry in 2025:  Lawmakers capitalized on anxieties around ultraprocessed ingredients to introduce new regulations, with companies choosing to reformulate or fight back.

To summarize:

• Artificial food dyes: food companies voluntarily said they would get rid of them by the end of 2026 or 2027.  Will they?  We shall see.
• Ultra-processed foods: The first MAHA report mentioned them 40 times.  By the second, the only issue was to define them, and RFK Jr said they might not even do that.
• GRAS loophole: The FDA says it will require better evidence of safety before allowing new additives in food.
• Seed oils: some food companies are replacing them with beef tallow or avocado oil.  How will this affect health?  It depends on the quality of the replacement.
• High fructose corn syrup: Coca-Cola said it would replace it with cane sugar, no doubt at higher cost.  Since both sweeteners have the same sugars and calories, this switch is unlikely to make any difference to health.
• School food: Whole milk is back.  Will this help children maintain healthy weight?  We shall see.
• SNAP: 18 states are restricting sodas (some also restrict candy or desserts) from purchases using SNAP benefits.  Will this encourage SNAP recipients to buy less soda?  I hope states will collect data on this and other points.
• Dietary guidelines: They are expected next week.  We shall see.

The food industry’s response?

• Go along with this if it doesn’t affect the bottom line.
• Fight back if it does.  And sue states if it really does.

So far, most of what is happening in the food arena is either still in the promise stage, voluntary, and unlikely to have much health benefit (See: A MAHA Check-Up: Is The United States Getting Healthier?)

All of what is happening with food must be understood in the context of the devastating destruction of America’s public health and scientific research systems.

MAHA’s work is focused on the dietary choices of individuals.

Any individual who tries to make healthful dietary choices is up against a food system designed for profit, not public health.

Diet matters to health, but healthy diets are not enough to prevent measles.

We need functioning public health systems: CDC, FDA, NIH.  We no longer have them.

Happy new year everyone.  Let’s hope the new year brings us peace, kindness, and public health.

As I noted last May, I get asked all the time about what they will say, but have no inside information.  But this may be a good time to go over the clues.

The process

• A scientific advisory committee reviews the research and writes a report.  This was released in December.
• Unspecified (to date) people in USDA and HHS write the guidelines.

The promises

• They will come out “hopefully early fall” (this did not happen)
• Now, according to Reuters, the new dietary guidelines will be released some time in December.

What they won’t say

• They will not continue the tradition of “leftist ideology”  [I think this must mean plant foods]
• They will not promote seed oils (RFK Jr prefers beef tallow).
• They will not promote sugar; RFK Jr says sugar is poison.  [But declared a MAHA Win for Coca’ Cola’s replacement of high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar]
• They won’t say anything about sustainability [anything about climate change is forbidden]

What they will be about

[According to Reuters] Kennedy said the new guidelines would change the kind of food served to military service members and children in schools, but gave no details on the new recommendations.

“If we want to solve the chronic disease crisis, we have to tackle obesity,” Kennedy said. “Obesity is the number one driver of chronic disease,” he said, adding that 50% of the adult U.S. population was obese or overweight, driving costs up for diabetes care and cardiac diseases.

What they might say

Beef

• In its Plan to Fortify the Beef Industry, the USDA says the 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines will “encourage protein as the foundation for every meal.”
• In an announcement to ranchers, USDA quotes RFK Jr, “we are restoring whole foods as the foundation of the American diet and ending the decades-old stigma against natural saturated fat in beef and dairy products. We will strengthen America’s ranching industry so families can choose nutrient-dense, minimally processed foods.”

Dairy

In a news conference, officials gave some clues.

We are going to be there for the dairy industry…our agencies are about to release more dietary guidelines in the next several months that will elevate those products to where they ought to be…There’s a tremendous amount of emerging science that talks about the need for more protein in our diet, and more fats in our diet, and there’s no industry that does that better than this industry.

Speculation

When RFK Jr first talked about the new guidelines, he said they would ignore the scientific advisory committee report and would be simple, short (5 pages), easy to understand, and out by September.  I’m guessing that the conflict between the science and ideology is proving more difficult to resolve than anticipated.

The science continues to argue for a largely (but not necessarily exclusively) plant-based diet, reduced in meat and ultra-processed foods from current levels.  RFK Jr initially talked about the need to reduce intake of ultra-processed foods, but the second MAHA report merely asked for a definition.

This administration seems obsessed with protein, a nutrient already in excess in US diets.

If it wants to do something about obesity, it needs the guidelines to suggest ways to reduce calories.  Nobody has mentioned that word so far.

As I keep saying, I can’t wait to see what the new guidelines will look like.  Stay tuned.

From last week’s The Guardian: “Inside the Republican network behind big soda’s bid to pit Maga against Maha: A Guardian investigation finds the US soda and snack-food industries, threatened by RFK Jr’s movement to change Americans’ eating habits, have turned to a group of well-connected strategists, shadowy pollsters and ‘anti-woke’ influencers.”

The ongoing influence campaign is being spearheaded by the American Beverage Association with help from the Consumer Brands Association, two prominent trade groups in the food industry. Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Keurig Dr Pepper, the three largest soft-drink corporations in the United States, as well as packaged-food conglomerates like General Mills, Kraft Heinz, Mondelēz and Nestlé, are among those that pay dues for the right to have a say in either or both of the trade groups’ strategies.

All three soda-makers identified the Maha efforts as significant threats to their bottom lines in their most recent annual reports, delivered to investors after Trump nominated Kennedy to be secretary of US Health and Human Services. Coke and Dr Pepper went as far as to suggest such risks would be compounded if unnamed “government officials” were to voice health concerns about their products.The three soda makers did not respond to questions about the lobbying effort.

The article goes on to explain the lobbying methods and paid influencer campaigns, at the federal level but also in states considering legislation on food dyes (which take care of many ultra-processed foods) and restrictions on sodas in SNAP.

Whether the MAHA food agenda is real or a smokescreen (see yesterday’s post), anything useful it tries to do will come up against this kind of concerted, well-funded effort, which may be why the second MAHA report backed off on so many issues.

The President of the United States says Coke should switch from high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) to cane sugar.

My response: this is nutritionally hilarious.

• HFCS is glucose and fructose separated in liquid form.
• Cane sugar (sucrose) is glucose and fructose bonded, but quickly split (so is beet sugar, but the President is not mentioning it).
• Both HFCS and cane sugar are sugar(s).  Both provide about 4 calories per gram.
• There may be people who can taste the difference, but when Coke found that nobody could tell the difference, it switched from sucrose to HFCS.

I’ve written about this previously, most recently in 2014: HFCS politics, continued. Endlessly.

Yes, HFCS is derived from genetically modified corn, but that doesn’t change the basic biochemistry, taste, or health effect.

Note: A 12-ounce Coke has 39 grams of either one.  It doesn’t matter which sugar is used; it’s too much to be consumed at one time.

At the time Coke switched to HFCS, it was much cheaper.  It is still cheapter but less so (because half of corn production is used to produce ethanol).

It will cost Coke more to replace HFCS with cane sugar or even beet sugar (which is identical to cane sugar).  So Coke is not exactly committing to doing this.

As Reuters reports, the switch would raise prices for consumers and be tough on US farmers too.

On this issue, I have to agree for once with the Corn Refiners Association.

This is one of those issues it will be enormous fun to watch.  Stay tuned.