Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Why the Bush administration and the global sugar industry are determined to demolish the 2004 WHO global strategy on diet, physical activity and health

  • Geoffrey Cannon (a1)
Abstract
AbstractObjective:

To indicate why the world's most powerful nation state and one powerful sector of the food and drink production and manufacturing industry are determined to demolish the 2004 WHO (World Health Organization) global strategy on diet, physical activity and health, and to disassociate it from the 2003 WHO/FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization) expert report on diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases, which with its background papers is the immediate scientific basis for the strategy. To encourage representatives of nation states at the 2004 WHO World Health Assembly to support the strategy together with the report, so that the strategy is explicit and quantified, and responds to the need expressed by member states at the 2002 World Health Assembly. This is for an effective global strategy to prevent and control chronic diseases whose prevalence is increased by nutrient-poor food low in vegetables and fruits and high in energy-dense fatty, sugary and/or salty foods and drinks and also by physical inactivity. Of these diseases, obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and cancers of several sites are now the chief causes of morbidity and mortality in most countries in the world.

Method:

A summary of the global strategy and its roots in scientific knowledge accumulated over the last half-century. Reasons why the global strategy and the expert report are opposed by the current US government and the world sugar industry, with some reference to modern historical context. A summary of the trajectory of the global strategy since its first draft made in early 2003, and a further summary of its weaknesses, strengths and potential.

Conclusion:

The 2004 WHO global strategy and the 2003 WHO/FAO expert report are perceived by the current US administration as an impediment to US trade and international policy, within a general context of current US government hostility to the UN (United Nations) system as a brake on the exercise of its power as the world's dominant nation. Policy-makers throughout the world should be aware of the contexts of current pressures put on them by powerful nation states and sectors of industry whose ideologies and commercial interests are challenged by international initiatives designed to improve public health and to leave a better legacy for future generations.

    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Why the Bush administration and the global sugar industry are determined to demolish the 2004 WHO global strategy on diet, physical activity and health
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Why the Bush administration and the global sugar industry are determined to demolish the 2004 WHO global strategy on diet, physical activity and health
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Why the Bush administration and the global sugar industry are determined to demolish the 2004 WHO global strategy on diet, physical activity and health
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Corresponding author: Email geoffreycannon@aol.com
References
Hide All
1World Health Organization (WHO). Shaping the Future. World Health Report 2003. Geneva: WHO, 2003.
2World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF)/American Institute for Cancer Research (AICR). Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Cancer: A Global Perspective. Washington, DC: WCRF/AICR, 1997.
3World Health Organization (WHO). Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Report of a Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation. Technical Report Series No. 916. Geneva: WHO, 2003. Also available at www.who.int.hpr.
4Oxfam. Rigged Rules and Double Standards. Trade, Globalization and the Fight against Poverty. Oxford: Oxfam, 2002.
5Sen A. Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor Books, 1999.
6 International Union of Nutritional Sciences. Statement to the FAO COAG meeting, Rome, 9 02 2004. Available at www.iotf.org.
7 World Health Organization. Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health, 04 2004. Available at www.who.int.hpr
8Cannon G. Food and Health: The Experts Agree. An Analysis of the Findings of 100 Authoritative Expert Reports on Food, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases Published between 1961 and 1991. London: Consumers' Association, 1992.
9World Health Organization (WHO). Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases. Report of a WHO Study Group. Technical Report Series No. 797 Geneva: WHO, 1990.
10Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations/World Health Organization (WHO). International Conference on Nutrition. World Declaration and Plan of Action for Nutrition. Rome: FAO/WHO, 1992.
11Nishida C, Shetty P, eds. Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases: scientific background papers of the Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation (Geneva, 28 January – 1 February 2002) [Special Issue]. Public Health Nutrition 2004; 7(1A): 99250.
12 World Health Organization, World Health Assembly 55th meeting. Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health. Resolution WHA55.23, 2002. Available at www.who.int.hpr
13World Health Organization (WHO). Reducing Risks, Promoting Healthy Life. World Health Report 2002. Geneva: WHO, 2002.
14World Health Organization (WHO)/United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). Global Strategy on Infant and Young Child Feeding. Geneva: WHO/UNICEF, 2004.
15 UN General Assembly. Road Map Towards the Implementation of the United Nations Millienium Declaration . Report of the Secretary General A/56/326,2001. Available at http:// www.millenniumindicators.un.org/unsd/mi/mi_goals.asp
16 World Health Organization. Integrated prevention of noncommunicable diseases. Global strategy on diet, physical activity and health, 11 2003. Formerly available at www.who.int.hpr
17 Government of the USA. Statement to WHO, 27 02 2004. Available at www.who.int.hpr
18Trowell H, Burkitt D, eds. Western Diseases: Their Emergence and Prevention. London: Edward Arnold, 1981.
19Cannon G.. The Fate of Nations. Food and Nutrition Policy in the New World. London: Caroline Walker Trust, 2003. Also available at cwt@tinyworld.co.uk
20Brillat-Savarin J. In: Fisher M, trans. The Physiology of Taste. Or, Meditations on Transcendental Gastronomy. Washington, DC: Counterpoint, 1999.
21Skidelsky R. John Maynard Keynes. Economist, Philosopher, Statesman. London: Macmillan, 2003.
22Monbiot G. The Age of Consent. A Manifesto for a New World Order. London: Flamingo, 2003.
23Stiglitz J. Globalization and its Discontents. London: Allen Lane, 2002.
24Soros G. George Soros on Globalization. Oxford: Public Affairs, 2002.
25Hardt M, Negri A. Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2000.
26Magdoff H. Imperialism without Colonies. New York: Monthly Review Press, 2003.
27Phillips K. American Dynasty. Aristocracy, Fortune and the Politics of Deceit in the House of Bush. New York: Viking, 2004.
28Johnson C. Blowback. The Costs and Consequences of American Empire. New York: Henry Holt, 2000.
29US Department of Health and Human Services. Blueprint for Action on Breastfeeding. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 2000. Also available at www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding.
31 US Department of Health and Human Services. Requests for changes in the WHO global strategy ‘inal’ draft of 25 09 2003. Letter to WHO. Undated, Unpublished. Available from this writer.
32 US Department of Health and Human Services. Letter to WHO Director-General, 5 01 2004. Unpublished. Available at www.commercialalert.org.
33 Statements from 52 members states on the Global Strategy on Diet, Physical Activity and Health. Available at www.who.int.hpr
34Blum W. Rogue State. A Guide to the World's Only Superpower. London: Zed, 2000.
35Johnson C. The Sorrows of Empire. Militarism, Secrecy and the End of the Republic. New York: Henry Holt, 2004.
36Smith N.. American Empire. Roosevelt's Geographer and the Prelude to Globalization. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press, 2003.
37Zimmerman W. First Great Triumph. How Five Americans made their Country a World Power. New York: Farrar, Straus Giroux, 2002.
38Davis M. Late Victorian Holocausts. El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World. London: Verso, 2001.
39Mintz S. Sweetness and Power. The Place of Sugar in Modern History. London: Viking Penguin, 1985.
40Revill J, Harris P. US sugar barons ‘block global war on obesity’. The Observer, 18 01 2004.
41 International Sugar Association. Joint WHO/FAO technical report on: ‘Diet, Nutrition and the Prevention of Chronic Diseases’. Memorandum (04)05 from the Executive Director. Unpublished. Available from this writer.
42 Sugar Association. Sound science and prospects for sugar consumption. Presentation to the Agricultural Outlook Forum, 28 01 2004. Available from this writer.
43UK Department of Health. Nutritional Aspects of Cardiovascular Disease. Report of the Cardiovascular Review Group, Committee on Medical Aspects of Food Policy. London: HMSO, 1994.
44Cannon G. The Politics of Food. London: Century, 1987.
45 World Bank. Sugar Policies: Opertunities for Change . World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3222, 02 2004. Available at www.econ.worldbank.org
46Margetts B. Editorial. Public Health Nutrition 2004; 7(3): 361–3.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Public Health Nutrition
  • ISSN: 1368-9800
  • EISSN: 1475-2727
  • URL: /core/journals/public-health-nutrition
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 10
Total number of PDF views: 374 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 535 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 16th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.