It has been less than two years since phrases like “flatten the curve,” “contact tracing,” “social distancing” and many others related to the COVID-19 pandemic entered the lexicon and became part of everyday communication. People everywhere have learned more about epidemiology, virology and immunology than they ever expected they would.
Yet, despite the increased attention to public health, few people can name the world’s leading cause of death. That is not an accident.
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) — especially heart disease, stroke, cancer and diabetes — account for more than 40 million deaths per year, strain healthcare systems, and impose significant social and economic costs, but they do not attract nearly the same attention as infectious diseases such as COVID-19, even though they are largely preventable.
It has long been known that tobacco use, alcohol consumption, and diets that are high in fats, sodium and sugars increase the incidence of NCDs, but, despite some progress, particularly in reducing tobacco use, these risk factors do not receive the attention they deserve in discussions worldwide. That is partly because the companies that manufacture, promote and sell these products play a major role in shaping how the public perceives NCDs.
Tobacco, alcohol and food companies have a long history of downplaying their products’ effects on public health and, since the start of the pandemic, they have used COVID-19-related marketing campaigns and corporate social responsibility initiatives to divert public attention further.
A study covering 18 nations, conducted from March to July last year, collected more than 280 examples of ways Coca-Cola, McDonald’s, Nestle and PepsiCo exploited the public health emergency to market unhealthy products to vulnerable populations.
In Brazil, Nestle and Danone donated ultra-processed foods to a government program to provide food to low-income residents. Coca-Cola contributed its sugary drinks for food parcels in South Africa. Colombian food manufacturer Alpina promoted a high-sugar yogurt as essential to improve the immune system.
Similarly, another report showed that tobacco companies used pandemic-related corporate social responsibility activities to expand access to senior government officials and repair their public image. In one audacious example, Philip Morris International donated ventilators to hospitals in Greece and Ukraine.
The incoherence of a system that works hand in hand with some of the biggest contributors to NCDs while trying to respond to COVID-19 should provoke general outrage, but these activities have gone largely unnoticed and unremarked.
It is true that in some cases corporations have stepped in to deliver goods or services that governments failed to provide, but the state’s inability to fill these gaps must not permit corporations to whitewash the harms they cause.
When Big Tobacco or Big Food influence governments with donations of food or medical equipment and other high-profile goodwill initiatives, public health efforts to combat NCDs become futile.
The WHO has documented corporations’ contribution to poor health outcomes and rising inequities worldwide. To tackle the NCD pandemic, their influence on policymaking should be strictly regulated.
Governments must fulfill their obligation to protect their citizens from the harmful activities of third parties — including multinational food, beverage and tobacco industries.
Failure to monitor these corporate activities amounts to a violation of their citizens’ fundamental human right to health.
The experience of Big Tobacco offers some insight into how the international community can approach industry interference in public health. Following the adoption of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in 2005, governments around the world recognized that the industry had been engaging in a concerted effort to undermine and subvert efforts to control tobacco, and some nations adopted measures to address the problem.
In light of the tactics corporations have deployed during the COVID-19 pandemic, legal measures must be adopted to de-normalize activities that, masquerading as displays of “social responsibility,” offer short-term benefits to communities that come at the expense of public health.
Governments must not only ensure public awareness of the harms caused by tobacco, alcohol and unhealthy foods; they must also establish measures to limit policymakers’ interactions with these industries.
As WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus put it, “if tobacco was a virus, it would long ago have been called a pandemic and the world would marshal every resource to stop it. Instead, it is a multibillion-dollar business profiting from death and disease.”
His comment applies no less to other products that contribute to NCDs.
Governments must take decisive action to counter the role of the private sector in undermining public health.
Even when corporations step up to help a community, officials should ensure that this aid does not address problems by creating new ones.
Andres Constantin, an associate with the Healthy Families Initiative, is acting assistant director of the health law LL.M. programs at the O’Neill Institute and an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In the first year of his second term, US President Donald Trump continued to shake the foundations of the liberal international order to realize his “America first” policy. However, amid an atmosphere of uncertainty and unpredictability, the Trump administration brought some clarity to its policy toward Taiwan. As expected, bilateral trade emerged as a major priority for the new Trump administration. To secure a favorable trade deal with Taiwan, it adopted a two-pronged strategy: First, Trump accused Taiwan of “stealing” chip business from the US, indicating that if Taipei did not address Washington’s concerns in this strategic sector, it could revisit its Taiwan
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
Immediately after the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) “Justice Mission” exercise at the end of last year, a question was posed to Indian Ministry of External Affairs spokesperson Randhir Jaiswal regarding recent developments involving the exercises around Taiwan, and how he viewed their impact on regional peace and stability. His answer was somewhat perplexing to me as a curious student of Taiwanese affairs. “India closely follows developments across the Indo-Pacific region,” he said, adding: “We have an abiding interest in peace and stability in the region, in view of our significant trade, economic, people-to-people, and maritime interests. We urge all concerned
In the past 72 hours, US Senators Roger Wicker, Dan Sullivan and Ruben Gallego took to social media to publicly rebuke the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over the defense budget. I understand that Taiwan’s head is on the chopping block, and the urgency of its security situation cannot be overstated. However, the comments from Wicker, Sullivan and Gallego suggest they have fallen victim to a sophisticated disinformation campaign orchestrated by an administration in Taipei that treats national security as a partisan weapon. The narrative fed to our allies claims the opposition is slashing the defense budget to kowtow to the Chinese
RSS