Cancer, heart disease, chronic respiratory conditions, diabetes and stroke now approx Three quarters of all deaths Investigating the causes of those diseases globally has never been more necessary to public health.
But this research poses a direct threat to corporate power and profitability. This may result in increased recognition of the necessity to manage commodities. Associated with these conditionsespecially alcohol, tobacco and ultra-processed food and beverages.
Our New paperPublished in Health Promotion International, it describes how researchers presenting evidence of the harms of those industries have been intimidated for his or her work.
We have mapped the extent to which researchers and advocates have been subjected to intimidation tactics by tobacco, alcohol and ultra-processed food (UPF) corporations and their associates. Tactics described include public defamation, legal threats, complaints, abusive use of freedom of knowledge laws, surveillance, cyber-attacks, bribery and even physical violence.
Looking at evidence from the past 20 years, we identified 64 sources published between 2000 and 2021 that detailed threats to researchers and advocates working within the tobacco, alcohol and UPF spaces.
Two-thirds of those were peer-reviewed sources with examples of threats. Most of the papers weren't specifically about threats, but mostly about corporate interference in policy approval or implementation. The rest were third sources resembling blogs, newspaper articles, news in peer-reviewed journals, case studies, press releases, recorded seminars and a book.
The level of threat we now have found is probably going the tip of the iceberg. Many people might be too afraid to publicly reveal that they've been intimidated due to their work.
We found a wide selection of threats in all three sectors, perpetrated by corporations themselves and their third parties. In essentially the most serious types of intimidation, the perpetrators remain unknown.
Discrediting experts
Public defamation was essentially the most common type of intimidation. Researchers and advocates were called an extended list of derogatory names to undermine their popularity: Extremists, Prohibitors, “Food Fascist”, “The Gestapo of the Stomach”and “The Devil of Mighty and Moral Righteousness”.
He has been portrayed in various types of media. Unbelievableineligible, Hungry for money, weird or not Having the right body Criticizing the food industry.
An educational Made a personal statement Number of such defamation:
My integrity was recently challenged by a micro-organization with a high-sounding name, whose website showed exactly one blogger, and which is affiliated with groups with a history of tobacco funding. They made impressions that were dirty and false – but attracted media coverage, which was probably intended.
Critical discussion of research is welcome and essential. But the incidents reported in our study go far beyond that, amounting to character assassination and intimidation.
Legal risks and challenges, complaints from individuals, their employers and governing bodies, are also outstanding in each the tobacco and food sectors. Such methods could be used to stop researchers from generalizing their findings, and to stop advocates from pushing for public health interventions that may reduce tobacco use and sugar consumption. .
In one case, in Colombia, there was an instructional. Censor After creating an commercial showing the quantity of sugar in a can of soda. According to at least one report:
The response was intense. A Colombian government agency, responding to a criticism by the country's leading soda company that called the ad misleading, ordered it to be taken down. Then the agency went further: It is prohibited. [the researcher] and his colleagues under a $250,000 superb from publicly discussing the health risks of sugar.
Legal challenges and risks
Freedom of Information requests were used to delay work and stop progress. Those receiving them needed to spend time answering them as a substitute of going about their normal work. Such applications a A well-worn industry tactic.
In New Zealand, an industry-paid consultant working for tobacco, alcohol and UPF corporations sent Freedom of Information Act requests to researchers and advocates and used the resulting information to discredit them. What did Three researchers successfully one A suit for defamation Against counsel
The consultant admitted under oath that a lot of his CFIO requests and subsequent defamatory blog posts were geared toward damaging the popularity of researchers and advocates on the behest of the industries that paid him to achieve this. had been
Africa_pink/Shutterstock
Although less frequent, more serious types of intimidation were also reported in all sectors. We received reports of surveillance, where researchers and lawyers and their families were followed, and cyber-attacks where computers and mobile phones were hacked. Some have reported being offered bribes to maintain them from working Threats of violence.
In Nepal, tobacco control advocates described receiving Death threats This happened over the phone after he refused offers of bribes to stop being energetic in policymaking efforts. In an extreme case, violence against anti-smoking activists took place in Nigeria. Two deaths.
Cooling effect
All of the threatening activities we identified had a chilling effect on critical public health work. Researchers and lawyers took time to reply to complaints or requests for information, or needed to stop or change their work, at the very least temporarily, while legal proceedings ran their course.
Researchers defined public stigma as: False, unfair, offensive, libelous and defamatory. Others said it was. Tiresome, unpleasant, intimidating and annoying.
In Latin America, a lawyer reported the sensation. “Very disappointed” That the industry can say what it wants but advocates cannot report the reality about sugar.
There were also documented financial impacts. There was an advocacy group. Successfully prosecuted by a corporation. to insult. Another spent. $20,000 USD (about £16,000) to guard yourself. And one The lawyer faced financial ruin If the industry case against them is successful.
However, a very powerful theme within the literature was persistence and deviance. About half of the sources in our study actually talked about how the targets of the threat responded. And most of them reported fighting back by exposing the tactics, correcting misinformation and launching their very own legal challenges against the perpetrators.
In most cases, even when delayed, researchers reported continuing their public health work.
Our findings show that corporate interests have worked tirelessly to thwart regulation of their products and practices by utilizing intimidation tactics against public health researchers. But despite the numerous personal and skilled costs of working in an environment where their credibility is always questioned, researchers and advocates persevere.