TITLE: The Biden Administration Says Its Trade Policy Puts People Over Corporations. Documents on Baby Formula Show Otherwise.
https://www.propublica.org/article/baby-formula-regulation-biden-administration-europe-taiwan
EXCERPT: The Biden administration has quietly pushed more than a half-dozen countries to weaken, delay or rethink baby formula regulations aimed at protecting the public’s health — sometimes after manufacturers complained, a ProPublica investigation has found.
In the European Union, the U.S. opposed an effort to reduce lead levels in baby formula. In Taiwan, it sought to alter labeling that highlighted the health benefits of breastfeeding. And in Colombia, it questioned an attempt to limit microbiological contaminants — the very problem that shut down a manufacturing plant in Michigan in 2022, leading to a widespread formula shortage.
“Infant formula companies want to sell more infant formula,” said Marion Nestle, professor emerita of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University. “The idea that governments are aiding and abetting them in their commercial enterprise over the public health interest is really shocking to me.”
The interference, documented in trade letters sent during President Joe Biden’s first two years, represents the latest chapter in the federal government’s long-running support for the multibillion-dollar formula industry, even as the Biden administration has publicly promised a different approach.
As ProPublica reported earlier this year, the U.S. has long used its diplomatic and political muscle to advance the interests of companies like Abbott, which makes Similac, and Mead Johnson, maker of Enfamil, while thwarting the efforts of developing countries to safeguard the health of their youngest children.
Through public records, academic research and other sources, ProPublica found evidence of such meddling in 21 countries, plus Hong Kong, Taiwan and the European Union, over decades. In multiple instances, countries either tabled or changed proposed formula regulations after the U.S. lodged objections.
The stakes for global health are high. Experts say industry advertising — the target of many foreign regulations — often misleads parents about the benefits of formula products and that promotions such as free samples, discounts and giveaways can result in mothers abandoning breastfeeding too soon. Studies show that can lead to more life-threatening infections for babies and a higher risk for long-term conditions like diabetes and obesity.
TITLE: Research highlights importance of dietary education to combat rising childhood obesity rates
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20240718/Research-highlights-importance-of-dietary-education-to-combat-rising-childhood-obesity-rates.aspx
EXCERPT: An alarming and persistent public health concern is that of the growing number of overweight and obese individuals globally.
Recent reports suggest that more than half of European adults (53%) and almost one-third of children (29%; age group – 6 to 9) are overweight (body mass index [BMI] exceeding 25) with the World Health Organization (WHO) estimating that 37 million children under the age of five are overweight as of 2022.
Abnormally high BMI has been previously linked to a heightened risk of chronic non-communicable diseases, including diabetes, cancers, and cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), making addressing this trend is a crucial goal.
Poor dietary choices, in combination with patterns of reduced physical activity, have been highlighted as the main cause of obesity worldwide, with the WHO recognizing the role of excessive sugar consumption in these outcomes and recommending that sugar forms not more than 10% of individuals' total daily calorific intake.
A recent trend among food manufacturers and 'health conscious' consumers has been substituting sugar-based sweeteners with artificial sweeteners.
Despite being marketed as healthier alternatives to sugar, research on the physiological impacts of sugar substitutes remains inconsistent. As a result, the WHO recommends abstaining from their consumption.
"…several studies point to their possible harmful effects in increasing the risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, premature mortality and changes in the gastrointestinal tract."
[A recent study published in Nutrients indicates] that more than half (54%) of the products consumed by children aged one to 14 years contain artificial sweeteners.
TITLE: Which artificial sweetener is the safest choice?
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/heart-health/artificial-sweetener-safety-sugar-research-rcna159983
EXCERPT: Most low-calorie and sugar-free foods contain at least one sugar substitute, and many contain several. These products are growing more popular, especially in the U.S. By 2033, market research suggests sugar substitutes could be worth more than $28.57 billion.
“They’re ubiquitous,” Dr. Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist and professor of nutrition science and policy at Tufts University, said. “And they’re proliferating because people have become so obsessed with avoiding sugar.”
Mozaffarian said these sweeteners soared in popularity following changes to U.S. nutrition labeling requirements in 2016.
The change required manufacturers to list added sugars on a separate line beneath total sugars. The idea was to help consumers differentiate between foods with naturally occurring sugars, like fruit and plain Greek yogurt, and foods that had sugars mixed in.
“Now, the food industry has a big incentive to make that ‘added sugars’ number as small as possible,” he said. “So you’re seeing these compounds in everything, and we still don’t have enough information on them.”
Some products are labeled as “artificial sweeteners” or “natural sweeteners” based on whether they’re derived from natural sources or chemically engineered.
Even natural sweeteners go through heavy chemical processing, said Dr. Maria Carolina Delgado-Lelievre, a cardiologist at the University of Miami.
For example, stevia comes from processed stevia plant extract, monk fruit sweetener comes from processing a chemical in a gourdlike fruit grown in China, and sucralose is a chemically altered version of sugar about 600 times sweeter, according to the FDA.
Aspartame and saccharin are from human-made fusions of amino acids and chemicals.
Many of these sweeteners are so potent in tiny quantities that they’re mixed with xylitol or erythritol to bulk them up and fill a packet, said the Cleveland Clinic’s Hazen.
Given this label confusion, Hedrick said researchers are increasingly using the term “nonsugar sweeteners.”
Sugar, of course, is one of the country’s most pressing public health problems. Especially in soda and juice, excess sugar fuels the ongoing obesity epidemic, contributing to heart disease, liver disease, cancer and diabetes.
However, there’s a big difference between processed, concentrated sugars like high-fructose corn syrup and the natural sugars found in fruits, Dr. Michelle Pearlman, the Miami gastroenterologist, said. Processed sugars are highly addictive.
“Anything with high-fructose corn syrup stimulates the same reward centers in our brain as cocaine and heroin,” she said. “Natural sugars from fruit act differently in the body.”
Sugar’s bad rap has much more to do with the quantity people consume than any intrinsically bad property, experts agree.
“Added sugar is nuanced,” Mozaffarian said. “When you try to take that very real nuance and turn it into a simple message, you get the industry misleading consumers that foods are ‘not good.’”
A little bit of added sugar in otherwise healthy foods, he said — such as lightly sweetened whole-grain cereals — is usually OK.
“The harms of these different nonsugar sweeteners have been greatly underemphasized and the harms of small amounts of added sugar have been overemphasized,” he argued.
The U.S. government’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend that anyone over the age of 2 consume less than 10% of their daily calories from added sugar, or the equivalent of roughly 12 teaspoons of added sugar. In reality, as of 2018, people in the U.S., including children, were consuming about 17 teaspoons of added sugar per day, on average.
Recently, the U.S. Department of Agriculture implemented a new rule limiting added sugars in public school lunches. Michael Goran, a professor of pediatrics at the University of Southern California’s Keck School of Medicine, said he worries that schools will replace sugary foods with artificially sweetened foods to comply with the new rules.
“There’s this general perception that these sweeteners are safe alternatives, but if they’re broadly applied to children, I unfortunately think that’s very risky,” he said.
Mozaffarian said that at their current levels of added sugar, most yogurts would no longer be allowed in school lunches once the new rule goes into effect.
“They’re just above the new limit, so it’s likely these yogurts are now going to be made with a series of sweeteners with uncertain health effects,” Mozaffarian said.
In the meantime, Pearlman said, it’s easy to see they haven’t helped the population become healthier on the whole.
“We have more chronic disease, more diabetes today than we’ve ever had before,” she said. “That shows that despite the diet industry being worth billions of dollars, we’re clearly missing the ball.”