ArticlePublic health nutrition2020
Evaluating Coca-Cola's attempts to influence public health 'in their own words': analysis of Coca-Cola emails with public health academics leading the Global Energy Balance Network.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Ultraprocessed Food and Corporate Influence: Evidence, Regulation, and Policy Pathways to Address Chronic Disease in the United States.American journal of public health · 2026Article
- Discussing Human and Environmental Health Co-Benefits Related to Diet and Mobility Behaviours in the Primary Care Setting: A Qualitative Exploratory Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Improving National and International Surveillance of Movement Behaviours in Childhood and Adolescence: An International Modified Delphi Study.Sports medicine (Auckland, N.Z.) · 2025Article
- Upstream Determinants of Overweight and Obesity in Europe.Current obesity reports · 2023Review
- The Commercial Determinants of Health and Evidence Synthesis (CODES): methodological guidance for systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses.Systematic reviews · 2023Article
- Interactions Between Nutrition Professionals and Industry: A Scoping Review.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- National Public Health Surveillance of Corporations in Key Unhealthy Commodity Industries - A Scoping Review and Framework Synthesis.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Electoral campaign contributions: an obstacle to sugary drink industry regulation in Brazil?Public health nutrition · 2022Article
- Pouring rights contracts between universities and beverage companies: Provisions related to scientific research.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Three Growth Spurts in Global Physical Activity Policies between 2000 and 2019: A Policy Document Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Sugary drinks taxation: industry's lobbying strategies, practices and arguments in the Brazilian Legislature.Public health nutrition · 2022Article
- "Part of the Solution": Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy.International journal of health policy and management · 2021Review
- Commercial use of evidence in public health policy: a critical assessment of food industry submissions to global-level consultations on non-communicable disease prevention.BMJ global health · 2021Article
- Facilitators of and barriers to collaboration between universities and the food industry in nutrition research: a qualitative study.Food & nutrition research · 2021Article
- Nutrition in New Zealand: Can the Past Offer Lessons for the Present and Guidance for the Future?Nutrients · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveWe evaluate the extent to which Coca-Cola tried to influence research in the Global Energy Balance Network, as revealed by correspondence between the company and leading public health academics obtained through Freedom-of-Information (FOI) requests.
designUS state FOI requests were made in the years 2015-2016 by US Right to Know, a non-profit consumer and public health group, obtaining 18 030 pages of emails covering correspondence between The Coca-Cola Company and public health academics at West Virginia University and University of Colorado, leading institutions of the Global Energy Balance Network. We performed a narrative, thematic content analysis of 18 036 pages of Coca-Cola Company's emails, coded between May and December 2016, against a taxonomy of political influence strategies.
resultsEmails identified two main strategies, regarding information and messaging and constituency building, associated with a series of practices and mechanisms that could influence public health nutrition. Despite publications claiming independence, we found evidence that Coca-Cola made significant efforts to divert attention from its role as a funding source through diversifying funding partners and, in some cases, withholding information on the funding involved. We also found documentation that Coca-Cola supported a network of academics, as an 'email family' that promoted messages associated with its public relations strategy, and sought to support those academics in advancing their careers and building their affiliated public health and medical institutions.
conclusionsCoca-Cola sought to obscure its relationship with researchers, minimise the public perception of its role and use these researchers to promote industry-friendly messaging. More robust approaches for managing conflicts of interest are needed to address diffuse and obscured patterns of industry influence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.