Beverage assoc: using tobacco industry methods?

Okay, I have an issue with these guys and their egregious blog, “Sip and Savour.”  Today’s entry is “weird science” and how consumer don’t know what to think about all these conflicting studies regarding the health impact of soft drinks.  They cast a negative light on the Harvard School of Public Health by saying, “(you have to love the science-by-press-release of today; adds even more to public cynicism).”

Um, its their job to release information about new scientific research.  How is that adding public cynicism?  And talk about bias?  The trade association for big corporate beverage companies is talking about bias?  That’s rich.

“Sip and Savor” blog entry

Tags: , ,

5 Responses to “Beverage assoc: using tobacco industry methods?”

  1. Blair Porter Says:

    I think it does go underreported that some of these universities repackage old or misleading information and try to play it off as “new” or “dangerous.” Just like anyone trying to get media coverage, they can be susceptible to overhyping their own stuff. Why is Harvard calling for the creation of a class of low-calorie beverages? There are a ton already on the market.

    • Randy Wilson Says:

      But who do you trust more; a university with a long and respectable scientific tradition or a trade association formed to promote big corporate interests? I know where I stand.

  2. Blair Porter Says:

    These are scientists who use every study as an excuse to attack food and drinks. Most people recognize that overconsuming anything is bad for you, and that moderation is the key to good health. These studies just try to shift blame for obesity where it doesn’t belong. I know where i stand, and it’s not with the university, no matter how long and respected their scientific tradition may be.

  3. Christian Says:

    C’mon, comparing beverages to tobacco? That’s obscene. They’re not even in the same universe.

    • Randy Wilson Says:

      I’m not comparing soft drinks to tobacco as products but how these industries respond to criticism. Both industries are very good at changing the terms of the debate to make themselves look better. They don’t address the criticism head-on but attempt to obfuscate and attack the messenger.

      Thanks for comments!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: