US sugar lobby seeks sweet revenge

[Guest guest]

> http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/04/21/1050777210363.html

> US sugar lobby seeks sweet revenge

> April 22 2003

> By Sarah Boseley

> London

>

>

>

>

>

> The US sugar industry is threatening to bring the World Health

> Organisation to its knees by demanding that Congress end its funding

> unless the WHO scraps proposed guidelines on healthy eating.

>

> The threat is being described by WHO insiders as tantamount to blackmail

> and worse than any pressure exerted by the tobacco lobby.

>

> In a letter to Gro Harlem Brundtland, the WHO's director-general, the

> Sugar Association says it will " exercise every avenue available to

> expose the dubious nature " of the WHO's report on diet and nutrition,

> including challenging its funding from Congress.

>

> The industry is furious at the guidelines - due to be published tomorrow

> - which say that sugar should account for no more than 10 per cent of a

> healthy diet. It claims that the review by international experts which

> decided on the 10 per cent limit is scientifically flawed, insisting

> that other evidence indicates that one-quarter of our food and drink

> intake can safely consist of sugar.

>

> " Taxpayers' dollars should not be used to support misguided,

> non-science-based reports which do not add to the health and wellbeing

> of Americans, much less the rest of the world, " the letter says.

>

>

>

> The association, together with six other big food industry groups, has

> also written to US Health Secretary Tommy Thompson asking him to try to

> get the WHO report withdrawn. The coalition includes the US Council for

> International Business, comprising more than 30 companies, including

> Coca-Cola and Pepsico.

> The sugar lobby's strong-arm tactics are nothing new, according to

> Professor Phillip James, the British chairman of the International

> Obesity Taskforce who wrote the WHO's previous report on diet and

> nutrition in 1990.

>

> The day after his expert committee had decided on a 10 per cent limit,

> the World Sugar Organisation " went into overdrive " , he said.

>

> " Forty ambassadors wrote to the WHO insisting that our report should be

> removed on the grounds that it would do irreparable damage to countries

> in the developing world. "

>

> The sugar lobby was unsuccessful that time. Now, he says, " we are

> getting a replay, but much more powerfully based, because the food

> industry seems to have a much greater influence on the Bush

> Government " .

>

> Since his 1990 report, the International Life Sciences Institute,

> founded by Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, General Foods, Kraft and Procter and

> Gamble, has also gained accreditation to the WHO and the UN's Food and

> Agriculture Organisation.

>

> The Sugar Association objects to the publication of a draft of the new

> report on the WHO's website without what it considers " a broad external

> peer-review process " .

>

> It wants a full economic analysis of the impact of the recommendations

> on all 192 member countries and has demanded that the report's launch be

> cancelled.

>

> The report, Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases, has

> already been heavily criticised by the soft drink industry. The industry

> does not accept the WHO's conclusion that sweetened drinks contribute to

> obesity.

>

> The WHO strongly rejects the sugar lobby's criticisms.

>

> An official said a team of 30 independent experts had considered the

> scientific evidence and its conclusions were in line with the findings

> of 23 national reports that, on average, have set targets of 10 per cent

> for added sugars.

>

> - Guardian

>