1. Are Food Companies Responsible for the Epidemic in Diabetes Cancer, Dementia and Chronic Disease and Do Their Products Need to Be Regulated Like Tobacco? Is It Time for a Class Action Suit?
- Author
-
Harvey, Richard
- Subjects
Coca-Cola Co. (Atlanta, Georgia) ,Food additives industry -- Health aspects ,Tobacco products -- Health aspects ,Soft drink industry -- Health aspects ,Produce industry -- Health aspects ,Class actions (Civil procedure) -- Health aspects ,Chronic diseases -- Health aspects ,Lung cancer -- Health aspects ,Cancer -- Health aspects ,Genetics -- Health aspects ,Disease susceptibility -- Health aspects ,Smoking bans -- Health aspects ,Health - Abstract
Ultra-processed food and the companies that produce them contribute significantly to the epidemic in diabetes, cancer, dementia and chronic disease. Ultra-processed foods,[Text not reproducible] many constitutes a majority of calories ranging from 55% to over 80% of the food they eat, contain chemical additives that trick the tastebuds, mouth and eventually our bra:[Text not reproducible] those processed foods and eat more of them. These processed foods and companies that produce them need to be regulated like tobacco to protect the health of the American[Text not reproducible] Why are one third of young Americans becoming obese and at risk for diabetes? Why are heart disease, cancer, and dementias occurring earlier and earlier? Is it genetics, environment, foods, or lifestyle? Is it individual responsibility or the result of the quest for profits by agribusiness and the food industry? Like the tobacco industry that sells products regulated because of their public health dangers, is it time for a class action suit against the processed food industry? The argum[Text not reproducible] not only to the regulation of toxic or hazardous food ingredients (e.g., carcinogenic or obesogenic chemicals) but also to the regulation of consumer vulnerabilities. Addressi[Text not reproducible] vulnerabilities to tobacco products include regulations such as how cigarette companies may not advertise their products for sale within a certain distance from school groun[Text not reproducible] Is it time to regulate nationally the installation of vending machines on school grounds selling sugar-sweetened beverages? Students have sensitivity to the enticing nature of and/or conveniently available consumable products such as 'fast foods' that are highly processed (e.g., packaged, preserved and practically imperishable). Whereas 'processe[Text not reproducible] have some nutritive value, and may technically pass as 'nutritious' food, the quality of processed 'nutrients' can be called into question. For the purpose of this blog other im[Text not reproducible] questions to raise relate to ingredients which, alone or in combination, may contribute to the onset of, or the acceleration of a variety of chronic health outcomes related to va[Text not reproducible] of cancers, cardiovascular diseases, and diabetes. It may be an overstatement to suggest that processed food companies are directly responsible for the epidemic in diabetes, cancer, dementia and chronic disease and need to b[Text not reproducible] regulated like tobacco. On the other hand, processed food companies should become much more regulated than they are now. More than 80 years ago, smoking was identified as a significant factor contributing to lung cancer, heart disease, and many other disorders. In 1964 the Surgeon Generals' re[Text not reproducible] officially linked smoking to deaths of cancer and heart disease (United States Public Health Service, 1964). Another 34 years pased before California prohibited smoking[Text not reproducible] restaurants in 1998 and, eventually inside all public buildings. The harms of smoking tobacco products were well known, yet many years passed with countless deaths and si[Text not reproducible] which could have been prevented, before regulation of tobacco products took place. Reviewing historical data, there is about a 20-year delay (e.g., a whole generation) befo[Text not reproducible] rates decrease in relation to when regulations became effective and smoking rates decreased, as shown in figure 1., During those interim years before government actions limited smoking more effectively, tobacco companies hid data regarding the harmful effects of smoking. Arguably, the 'Big[Text not reproducible] industry paid researchers to [...]
- Published
- 2024