Sugar-Coating Science

Deborah BailinGretchen GoldmanPallavi Phartiyal How the Food Industry Misleads Consumers on Sugar May 2014 Whether or not you believe that Lucky Charmscereal is “magically delicious,” that “life tastes good”when you drink a Coke, or that “there’s a lot of joyin Chips Ahoy,” the odds are good that you haveheard these and other advertising slogans forsugary foods and drinks. 2014; Hellmich 2012). As discussed in our forthcomingreportAdded Sugar, Subtracted Science: How IndustryObscures Science and Undermines Public Health Policy onSugar, scientific evidence increasingly confirms a relationshipbetween sugar consumption and a rise in the incidence ofchronic metabolic diseases—obesity, diabetes, cardiovasculardisease, high triglycerides, and hypertension (Basu et al. 2013;Lustig, Schmidt, and Brindis 2012; Tappy 2012; Stanhope et al.2011; Johnson et al. 2007; Jacobson 2005). Also, new researchsuggests that a higher percentage of calories from sugar isassociated with an increased risk of heart disease, independentof the link between sugar and obesity (Yang et al. 2014). Billions of dollars are spent annually by food and beveragemanufacturers along with industry-supported organizationssuch as trade associations, front groups, and public relations(PR) firms (hereafter “sugar interests”) on emotional appealssuch as these. Such ads insert the brands and products intoour everyday lives, infuse our psyches with manufacturedcravings for them, and shape the complex relationship wehave with food. Evading Science, Engineering Opinion This scientific evidence has led several scientificand governmental bodies, including the World HealthOrganization, the American Heart Association, the U.S.Department of Health and Human Services, and the U.S.Department of Agriculture, to recommend sugar intakelimits far below typical American consumption levels. InMarch 2014, the World Health Organization proposed newdraft guidelines that recommend, as did the organization’s2002 guidelines, that sugar should not exceed 10 percentof a person’s total energy intake per day (which amountsto a maximum of 50 grams per day or 12 teaspoons for a2000-calorie diet). The 2014 guidelines further suggest thata reduction of sugar to below 5 percent of the total calorieintake per day—that is, six teaspoons—would have additionalbenefits, especially in slowing tooth decay, which is nowglobally prevalent (WHO 2014). While it should be no surprise to consumers that cookies andsoda contain added sugar, food companies also engineer theimage of many foods to appear healthier than they actuallyare. Many unlikely products contain surprising amounts ofadded sugar. These foods include breads, crackers, pastasauces, salad dressings, yogurts, and a wide variety of otherprocessed foods. Yogurt, for example, has nutritional benefits,and General Mills wants us to eat its brand Yoplait becauseit “tastes SO good” (Yoplait 2014). However, whether wechoose the healthy-sounding Blackberry Harvest flavor orthe more dessert-themed Boston Cream Pie, Yoplait Originalyogurt contains 26 grams of sugar per serving—more thansix teaspoons of sugar, which surpasses the American HeartAssociation’s recommendations for a woman’s total dailyconsumption. Yoplait Light contains 10 grams of sugar per90-calorie serving, still a lot of sugar-laden calories for aproduct marketed for its healthfulness. Yet despite the existence of a great deal of scientificevidence linking excessive sugar intake to a range of healthproblems, and despite these science-based recommendationsby prominent national and international organizations,Americans have continued to consume high levels of addedsugar. One factor that has kept our sugar consumption sohigh is the deceptive and exploitative marketing strategies ofindustry sugar interests. Through advertising, marketing, and Scientific research shows that the overconsumptionof added sugar in our diets—not just the actual calories butthe sugar itself—has serious consequences for our health.Added sugars—whether from corn syrup, sugar cane, or sugarbeets—are a source of harmful calories that displace caloriesfrom other, more nutritious foods, especially at the levelthese sugars are consumed by most Americans (O’Callaghan PR, sugar interests influence public opinion and consumerbehavior at the cost of scientific evidence. Together, sugar interests’ actions interfere with howthe public responds to scientific information about addedsugar, distorts our understanding of our food choices, andcontributes to our continued high consumption of foodswith added sugar. Their tactics trigger psychological, behavioral, social, andcultural responses that distract and manipulate consumersand divert their attention away from science-based healthand nutrition information. Some companies have engaged inblatantly false advertising, and major industry trade groupshave financed sophisticated PR campaigns that emphasizeconsumer freedom but facilely overlook the influence of sugarin