Confronting potential food industry 'front groups': case study of the international food information Council's nutrition communications using the UCSF food industry documents archive.
Commercial determinants of Health
Industry influence
Public Health and nutrition communication
Vested interests
Journal
Globalization and health
ISSN: 1744-8603
Titre abrégé: Global Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101245734
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 02 2022
12 02 2022
Historique:
received:
09
12
2020
accepted:
14
01
2022
entrez:
13
2
2022
pubmed:
14
2
2022
medline:
22
4
2022
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There are growing concerns that the public's trust in science is eroding, including concerns that vested interests are corrupting what we know about our food. We know the food industry funds third-party 'front groups' to advance its positions and profits. Here we ask whether this is the case with International Food Information Council (IFIC) and its associated Foundation, exploring its motivations and the potential for industry influence on communications around nutritional science. We systematically searched the University of California San Francisco's Food Industry Documents Archive, for all documents pertaining to IFIC, which were then thematically evaluated against a science-communication influence model. We identified 75 documents which evidence that prominent individuals with long careers in the food industry view IFIC as designed to: 1) advance industry public relations goals; 2) amplify the messages of industry-funded research organizations; and 3) place industry approved experts before the press and media, in ways that conceal industry input. We observed that there were in some cases efforts made to conceal and dilute industry links associated with IFIC from the public's view. Instances suggesting IFIC communicates content produced by industry, and other industry-funded organisations like ILSI, give rise to concerns about vested interests going undetected in its outputs. IFIC's deployment to take on so-called "hard-hitting issues" for industry, summating evidence, while countering evidence that industry opposes, give rise to concerns about IFIC's purported neutrality. IFIC's role in coordinating and placing industry allies in online and traditional press outlets, to overcome industry's global scientific, legislative, regulatory and public relations challenges, leads also to concerns about it thwarting effective public health and safety measures. IFIC's promotion of evidence for the food industry should be interpreted as marketing strategy for those funders. Effective science communication may be obfuscated by undeclared conflicts of interests.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
There are growing concerns that the public's trust in science is eroding, including concerns that vested interests are corrupting what we know about our food. We know the food industry funds third-party 'front groups' to advance its positions and profits. Here we ask whether this is the case with International Food Information Council (IFIC) and its associated Foundation, exploring its motivations and the potential for industry influence on communications around nutritional science.
METHOD
We systematically searched the University of California San Francisco's Food Industry Documents Archive, for all documents pertaining to IFIC, which were then thematically evaluated against a science-communication influence model.
RESULTS
We identified 75 documents which evidence that prominent individuals with long careers in the food industry view IFIC as designed to: 1) advance industry public relations goals; 2) amplify the messages of industry-funded research organizations; and 3) place industry approved experts before the press and media, in ways that conceal industry input. We observed that there were in some cases efforts made to conceal and dilute industry links associated with IFIC from the public's view.
DISCUSSION
Instances suggesting IFIC communicates content produced by industry, and other industry-funded organisations like ILSI, give rise to concerns about vested interests going undetected in its outputs. IFIC's deployment to take on so-called "hard-hitting issues" for industry, summating evidence, while countering evidence that industry opposes, give rise to concerns about IFIC's purported neutrality. IFIC's role in coordinating and placing industry allies in online and traditional press outlets, to overcome industry's global scientific, legislative, regulatory and public relations challenges, leads also to concerns about it thwarting effective public health and safety measures.
CONCLUSIONS
IFIC's promotion of evidence for the food industry should be interpreted as marketing strategy for those funders. Effective science communication may be obfuscated by undeclared conflicts of interests.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35151342
doi: 10.1186/s12992-022-00806-8
pii: 10.1186/s12992-022-00806-8
pmc: PMC8841072
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
16Commentaires et corrections
Type : ErratumIn
Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
Obes Rev. 2015 Jul;16(7):519-30
pubmed: 25988272
Public Health Nutr. 2020 Aug;23(11):2032-2040
pubmed: 32416734
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Nov 06;17(11):e251
pubmed: 26545927
Public Health Nutr. 2018 Jun;21(9):1594-1607
pubmed: 29560842
Lancet. 2013 Feb 23;381(9867):670-9
pubmed: 23410611
Mayo Clin Proc. 2014 Jun;89(6):763-71
pubmed: 24809761
J Public Health Policy. 2019 Mar;40(1):5-16
pubmed: 30626895
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2018 Sep;72(9):761-763
pubmed: 29540465
Global Health. 2019 Jun 3;15(1):36
pubmed: 31155001
BMJ. 2019 Jan 9;364:l4
pubmed: 30626587
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2021 Apr 1;46(2):235-276
pubmed: 32955566
R Soc Open Sci. 2020 Oct 14;7(10):201199
pubmed: 33204475
Am J Public Health. 2007 Mar;97(3):419-27
pubmed: 17267719
BMJ. 2017 Apr 20;357:j1934
pubmed: 28428177
Sci Adv. 2020 Oct 21;6(43):
pubmed: 32978142
BMJ. 2015 Dec 04;351:h6590
pubmed: 26637498