Ain't it sweet! Don't hear much about this in North America!
Bitter battle over sugar findings JILL STARK AND JACQUI GODDARD http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=460322003 Tue 22 Apr 2003 IN MIAMI THE US sugar industry has been accused of blackmailing the World Health Organisation by threatening to withdraw funding if healthy-eating guidelines, due to be published tomorrow, are not scrapped. Members of the Sugar Association were incensed by a WHO report, Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases, stating that sugar should account for no more than 10 per cent of a balanced diet. They have described the findings as dubious and their political muscle-flexing could cost the WHO a staggering $406 million (£260 million). Industry executives have exerted intense pressure on the US Congress to block the organisation's funding unless the report's guidelines are retracted. In a letter to the WHO's director general, Gro Harlem Brundtland, the Sugar Association threatened to "exercise every avenue available to expose the dubious nature" of the WHO's report on diet and nutrition. It goes on to say the report, compiled by a panel of international experts, is scientifically flawed and the industry's own research proves that 25 per cent of a safe, daily diet can be sugar-based. The letter states: "Taxpayers' dollars should not be used to support misguided, non-science-based reports, which do not add to the health and well-being of Americans, much less the rest of the world. "If necessary, we will promote and encourage new laws, which require future WHO funding to be provided only if the organisation accepts that all reports must be supported by the preponderance of science." The Sugar Association, backed by six other big food industry groups, including Coca-Cola and PepsiCo, has also asked the US health secretary, Tommy Thompson, to use his influence to stop the report. The sugar lobby's threat comes at a time when the industry is embroiled in a cash-for-favours row over the pollution of the Florida Everglades. Governor Jeb Bush, the younger brother of the US president, George, has been accused of being "badly briefed and badly misled" over a bill sponsored by "Big Sugar" that, if passed through the state legislature, would push back the deadline for cleaning up the US's second-largest national park by another 20 years. Harmful levels of phosphorus run into the area from nearby sugar-cane farms and the governor made an election promise to mount a large scale clean-up operation. Environmental campaigners claim the sugar industry poured more than $800,000 (£510,000), into the 2002 Florida elections, and are now demanding a return on their investment. Meanwhile, those with intimate knowledge of the WHO's row with the sugar lobby say the industry is renowned for its "bully-boy tactics". In 1990, a WHO report on healthy eating made the same recommendation for a 10 per cent limit to be placed on sugar intake but the industry reacted furiously, demanding the report be retracted. Professor Phillip James, who wrote the document and is now the British chairman of the International Obesity Taskforce, said the sugar industry hired one of Washington's top lobbying companies to exert intense political pressure. He said: "Forty ambassadors wrote to the WHO insisting our report should be removed, on the grounds that it would do irreparable damage to countries in the developing world." Although the lobby failed in its attempts to have the report retracted, Prof James believes they could achieve their objective this time around. He said: "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." The power of the sugar industry to affect world health guidelines has been bolstered since the 1990 report, by the accreditation of the International Life Sciences Institute, to the WHO and the UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation. The influential coalition was founded by Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, General Foods, Kraft and Procter and Gamble. The soft drinks industry has been one of the most vocal opponents of the new report. Condemning the WHO's recommendation on sugar as "too restrictive", the Washington-based National Soft Drink Association has called for a 25 per cent limit and rejected the conclusion that sugary drinks contribute to a spiralling world obesity problem. The WHO remains undeterred and has strongly refuted the sugar lobby's criticisms, claiming their findings concurred with the conclusions of 23 national reports which have, on average, set targets of 10 per cent for added sugars. Cheers! -- Han Tacoma ~ Artificial Intelligence is better than none! ~ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
