A billion people watched the opening match of the FIFA World Cup in Sao Paulo, Brazil, and hundreds of millions more will tune in at some point during the month-long tournament. For FIFA’s six major partners and the event’s eight official sponsors, this audience is nothing short of a gold mine. These enterprises pay tens of millions in the hope that some of the magic of the “beautiful game” will rub off on their brands — and it very well may. However, for viewers, that is probably not a good thing.
The run-up to the tournament’s kickoff was not without drama for at least one of FIFA’s partners, Budweiser, which was accused of compelling the Brazilian government to overturn a national law banning the sale of alcohol inside soccer stadiums.
Despite widespread opposition to repeal of the law, soccer’s world governing body was resolute: “Alcoholic drinks are part of the FIFA World Cup, so we’re going to have them.”
Sponsorship by companies like Budweiser, McDonald’s, Coca-Cola and convenience food giant Moy Park brings millions in revenue to the game, but what message does it send to the global audience?
Promoting alcohol, sugary drinks and fast food may mean massive profits for corporations, but it also means worse health for individuals and a costly burden on countries’ healthcare systems.
Instead of focusing exclusively on alcohol’s potential to fuel violence inside stadiums, the media should be emphasizing the damage that alcohol and processed foods are causing to the world’s population every day.
Consumption of such products continues to rise — not least because of multibillion-dollar global advertising campaigns.
Over the past decade, global soft drink sales have doubled, per capita alcohol consumption has risen and tobacco use has increased. Making matters worse, most of this growth is occurring in low and middle-income countries, which are the least equipped to handle the coming health crisis.
One factor underlying such threats to public health is classification.
Health experts have traditionally lumped diseases into two categories: communicable diseases, which are caused predominantly by infection, and non-communicable diseases, that is, everything else.
Among non-communicable diseases, there are four conditions that contribute the most to early death or disability: cardiovascular disease, chronic lung conditions, cancer and diabetes.
In 2010, these four conditions caused 47 percent of all deaths, including 9 million deaths of people under 60.
The main risk factors for developing these conditions — smoking tobacco, excessive alcohol consumption, being overweight and insufficient physical exercise — reflect deeply ingrained unhealthy behaviors.
Given that these are precisely the kind of behaviors that companies like the World Cup sponsors are encouraging, a better disease classification would be pestilentia lucro causa (PLC), or “profit-driven disease.”
The overconsumption of alcohol, tobacco and energy-rich processed foods are often framed as lifestyle “choices,” but the determinants of such choices are often removed from people’s immediate control.
The strong associations between profit-driven disease and factors such as poverty or gender suggest that wider social forces exert considerable pressure on individual behaviors that affect health.
Addressing profit-driven diseases calls for a new approach to health and to the organizations charged with protecting it. The current system does not empower the UN and other technical agencies concerned with health governance to confront the determinants of poor health effectively.
Large corporations have resources, lobbying power, advertising budgets, networks and supply chains that the UN can only dream of commanding. And while the WHO skimps by on US$2 billion a year, the tobacco industry rakes in US$35 billion in annual profits.
What steps can be taken to level the playing field?
As any soccer pundit will tell you, success depends on teamwork. First and foremost, consumers must be better informed about the long-term impact of sponsors’ products.
After all, the most effective way to compel companies to change is to stop purchasing what they sell.
When people raise their voices — say, to ban advertising for breast-milk substitutes or to demand access to life-saving drugs — big corporations often listen.
Second, policymakers must be realistic. While there is certainly room for optimism about technological advances that will help to control treatment costs, treating a growing share of the world’s population simply is not feasible.
The World Economic Forum estimates that the four major profit-driven diseases cost the global economy US$3.75 trillion in 2010, more than half of which was spent on medical care. In this context, prevention strategies are crucial.
Third, businesses have a critical role to play. Beyond being a key aspect of corporate social responsibility, curbing profit-driven diseases — and thereby ensuring the health and productivity of current and future generations — is in firms’ interest.
Voluntary codes to limit sugar in soft drinks and reduce salt levels in processed foods are a positive step, but they are far from adequate.
Finally, every successful team needs a strong manager.
In the battle against profit-driven diseases, international and national regulatory authorities must fill this role, setting and enforcing the rules of the game to protect the health of people worldwide.
The World Cup has a profound social impact, including on global health.
FIFA has a responsibility to ensure that the tournament’s viewers are not receiving a message that could make them sick.
Kent Buse is head of political affairs and strategy at UNAIDS. Sarah Hawkes is reader in global health and Wellcome Trust senior fellow in international public engagement at the Institute for Global Health, University College London.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
As China steps up a campaign to diplomatically isolate and squeeze Taiwan, it has become more imperative than ever that Taipei play a greater role internationally with the support of the democratic world. To help safeguard its autonomous status, Taiwan needs to go beyond bolstering its defenses with weapons like anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles. With the help of its international backers, it must also expand its diplomatic footprint globally. But are Taiwan’s foreign friends willing to translate their rhetoric into action by helping Taipei carve out more international space for itself? Beating back China’s effort to turn Taiwan into an international pariah
Typhoon Krathon made landfall in southwestern Taiwan last week, bringing strong winds, heavy rain and flooding, cutting power to more than 170,000 homes and water supply to more than 400,000 homes, and leading to more than 600 injuries and four deaths. Due to the typhoon, schools and offices across the nation were ordered to close for two to four days, stirring up familiar controversies over whether local governments’ decisions to call typhoon days were appropriate. The typhoon’s center made landfall in Kaohsiung’s Siaogang District (小港) at noon on Thursday, but it weakened into a tropical depression early on Friday, and its structure
Since the end of the Cold War, the US-China espionage battle has arguably become the largest on Earth. Spying on China is vital for the US, as China’s growing military and technological capabilities pose direct challenges to its interests, especially in defending Taiwan and maintaining security in the Indo-Pacific. Intelligence gathering helps the US counter Chinese aggression, stay ahead of threats and safeguard not only its own security, but also the stability of global trade routes. Unchecked Chinese expansion could destabilize the region and have far-reaching global consequences. In recent years, spying on China has become increasingly difficult for the US
Lately, China has been inviting Taiwanese influencers to travel to China’s Xinjiang region to make films, weaving a “beautiful Xinjiang” narrative as an antidote to the international community’s criticisms by creating a Potemkin village where nothing is awry. Such manipulations appear harmless — even compelling enough for people to go there — but peeling back the shiny veneer reveals something more insidious, something that is hard to ignore. These films are not only meant to promote tourism, but also harbor a deeper level of political intentions. Xinjiang — a region of China continuously listed in global human rights reports —
RSS