Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34413076›Full record

ReviewBMJ global health2021

Food and beverage industry interference in science and policy: efforts to block soda tax implementation in Mexico and prevent international diffusion.

Andrea Pedroza-Tobias, Eric Crosbie, Melissa Mialon, Angela Carriedo, Laura A Schmidt

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMJ global health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Andrea Pedroza-TobiasInstitute for Global Health Sciences, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-7158-3667
Eric CrosbieSchool of Community Health Sciences, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6219-298X
Melissa MialonTrinity Business School, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0002-9883-6441
Angela CarriedoWorld Public Health Nutrition Association, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0193-6199
Laura A SchmidtPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA Laura.Schmidt@ucsf.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-4346-7260

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Mexico is the largest soft drink market in the world, with high rates of obesity and type 2 diabetes. Due to strains on the nation's productivity and healthcare spending, Mexican lawmakers implemented one of the world's first public health taxes on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) in 2014. Because Mexico's tax was designed to reduce SSB consumption, it faced strong opposition from transnational food and beverage corporations. We analysed previously secret internal industry documents from major corporations in the University of California San Francisco's Food Industry Documents Archive that shed light on the industry response to the Mexican soda tax. We also reviewed all available studies of the Mexican soda tax's effectiveness, contrasting the results of industry-funded and non-industry-funded studies. We found that food and beverage industry trade organisations and front groups paid scientists to produce research suggesting that the tax failed to achieve health benefits while harming the economy. These results were disseminated before non-industry-funded studies could be finalized in peer review. Mexico still provided a real-world context for the first independent peer-reviewed studies documenting the effectiveness of soda taxation-studies that were ultimately promoted by the global health community. We conclude that the case of the Mexican soda tax shows that industry resistance can persist well after new policies have become law as vested interests seek to roll back legislation, and to stall or prevent policy diffusion. It also underscores the decisive role that conflict-of-interest-free, peer-reviewed research can play in implementing health policy innovations.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2TaxesBeveragesCarbonated BeveragesHealth PolicyHumansMexicodiabeteshealth policynutritionpublic health

Identifiers

PMID34413076
PMCPMC8378381

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.