LatinoPoliticsBlog.com

Latino issue organizations side with soft-drink and fast food industry

February 9th, 2010 · 26 Comments

These days you really cannot turn on the news, whether on the radio or television, without hearing about the obesity epidemic and how it is taxing the health care system. At the same time, we are bombarded with advertising for junk food, sugary snacks, fast and convenience food. It is no wonder that we have become large.

The Latino community has been impacted by the obesity epidemic, and Hispanic preschool children are at a higher risk of being overweight or obese. Back in 2006, a study published in the American Journal of Public Health found the following:

“Thirty-two percent of the white and black tots were either overweight or obese, vs. 44% of the Hispanics.

Why were the Hispanics at higher risk? Kimbro checked a long list of factors, from children’s TV habits to whether mothers had easy access to grocery stores. Nothing could fully explain the difference. “We were surprised,” she said.

Children were particularly at risk if their mothers were obese. So were those who still took a bottle to bed at age 3, as did 14% of the Hispanic youngsters, 6% of the whites and 4% of the blacks.”

So given the state of our community’s fat issues that start hindering us from the get-go, it was a little surprising for me to learn that Latino organizations such as the Hispanic Alliance for Prosperity, the National Hispana Leadership Institute, and the League of United Latin American Citizens, along with the National Hispanic Medical Organization have been recruited by a coalition, Americans Against Food Taxes, to oppose taxes on sugary and fast foods. These organizations are arguing that taxes on these foods would disproportionately affect the poor.

I wasn’t the only one surprised:

“Public health analysts were surprised to find that the list included the National Hispanic Medical Association, which represents 36,000 Latino doctors and focuses on health issues such as obesity-related diabetes that’s hitting Latino youth especially hard.

‘Why in the world would a Hispanic health advocacy group do this?’ asked Kelly Brownell, the director of Yale University’s Rudd Center on Food Policy and Obesity.

Nearly all the Hispanic groups, including the Medical Association, had received beverage industry money in the past or have industry representatives on their governing boards.”

Once again, our advocacy groups have been tainted by the money coming from industries that contribute to our health problems. We have seen this with the alcohol industry and their continued sponsorship of organizations like MALDEF and NCLR.

I’m neither for or against a fast food or soft-drink tax, but I do think that it is worth exploring, as a way to offset the costs of health care. The evidence that such a tax would help curb unhealthy habits is not very conclusive, but continuing to accept money from food companies that produce goods that aren’t of much nutritional value muddles the messages of organizations like Hispanic Alliance for Prosperty and LULAC.

My thought is that the food and soft-drink industry is salivating at our growing population and growing hunger and thirst for their products. They want to make sure that we have been effectively bought off so that we will oppose taxes on sodas and convenience foods. Frankly, all of us would be better off eating more unprocessed foods, which can actually be cheaper when purchased at local farmer’s markets and produce stands. I just don’t see a benefit to promoting the “crap food” industry any more than is already done. This issue is particularly timely given First Lady Michelle Obama’s kick off of the “Let’s Move” campaign to conquer childhood obesity. But what are your thoughts?

Share

Tags: Civil Rights · community organizing and activism · health care · LULAC · MALDEF · Michelle Obama · National Council of La Raza

26 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Michaelr // Feb 9, 2010 at 12:59 pm

    This accurately depicts where MALDEF and NCLR’s priorities lie in regards to the Latino community at large. Their definition of public service is always slanted to benefit Corporate America rather than working to empower members of the Latino community. The same thing can be said about the vast majority of the members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, and Latino politicians working in Sacramento. Until the Latino community embraces higher education as a means of elevating their social class status and getting politically involved, there will never be any parity amongst ethnic groups and the Latino community will always be at the bottom looking up.

  • 2 Brent Wilkes // Feb 9, 2010 at 1:50 pm

    It is unfortunate that you have bought into the bash the Latino groups mentality that is so prevalent among elitist anglo dominated groups that only think about divirse communities when they want to dish out criticism.

    LULAC has a long history of doing what’s right for the Latino community regardless of what our sponsors or the political establishment think. We do not promote the consumption of sugared drinks or other fast foods. In fact, we have a health education campaign that encourages families to eat healthy foods and to exercise more.

    But of course when it comes to Latinos, the white elite would rather use the stick instead of the carrot. So let’s stop to think for a second if taxing low income Latino consumers to pay for our health care bill so we don’t have to tax wealthy Americans makes sense.

    We know for a fact that a tax on sugared drinks would hurt low income families the most. We also know that this proposal was floated as a way to pay for health care reform without imposing higher taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year. What we don’t know is whether it would have any effect on consumption or not. The evidence suggests that Latinos would continue to consume these beverages anyway absent a health education campaign to explain why sugared drinks are not healthy.

    But why should the white establishment need any proof that the tax would work? They didn’t need proof that punative immigration measuers would work before we built a fence so long it made the Berlin wall look quaint and they didn’t need proof that our war on drugs was working before passing Three Strikes and You’re Out and stuffing our prisons full of Latinos and blacks.

    When it comes to passing bills that punish low income Americans and minorities no proof is necessary. And if a Latino or black group opposes the tax because it’s regressive and ineffective? Well then just accuse them of being bought off and pat yourself on the back.

    In our opinion, there has got to be a better way for us to address the obesity epidemic than to use the stick on low income people yet again. If the goal is to find some revenue while increasing the price of sugar then lets stop subsidizing corn production in the United States.

  • 3 cindylu // Feb 9, 2010 at 3:27 pm

    I do understand that such taxes affect the poor the most, but I don’t understand why any of those national organizations would be willing to lobby against such a bill. Do you know if any of these organizations have public health and education components that promote healthier eating habits and regular exercise? Poor diets will hurt us down the line too when it comes to increased medical costs.

  • 4 IE // Feb 9, 2010 at 5:51 pm

    Ok, so I started to think about the last comment that was posted by Mr. Wilkes.

    I can understand that imposing a fast food/soft drink tax would impose some hardship on the poor; however, if we’re truly trying to help individuals by reforming our healthcare system, then I don’t see it being a problem having the very people we’re trying to help also take on some of the burden of reforming our healthcare system. So if taxing fast food and soft drink companies more would burden the poor, Latino or not, so be it.

    I can say from personal experience, that if my sister knew that all that damn fast food that she feeds her kids would cost her more of her hard earn dollars, then maybe my niece wouldn’t be some damn overweight.

  • 5 Anna // Feb 9, 2010 at 9:57 pm

    Brent Wilkes: “We know for a fact that a tax on sugared drinks would hurt low income families the most.”

    Poor people shouldn’t buy soda at all!! Are you for real?! Soda has no nutritional value and is full of high fructose corn syrup.

    High fructose corn syrup is metabolized through the liver, and studies are showing that the livers of obese children are hardening, just like the livers of old alcoholics. This stuff is poison and you have the nerve to come here and try to peddle food company BS.

    Diabetes is an epidemic among Latinos. 50% of Latinos born in the year 2000 are expected to get diabetes at some point in their lives.

    It’s really sickens me that the National Hispanic Medical Association and LULAC are bought off. All of these Hispnaic groups are good for nothing.

    There is a website called Latino Nutrition sponsored by Monsanto and they have the most fattening, sugar filled recipes on their website.

    It’s gotten to the point that anybody can create a group and claim to speak for Latinos.

    1) Don’t drink soda, eat fast food or consume any product with High Fructose Corn Syrup in it. Don’t buy foods with sugar or add sugar to any of your food. That includes honey. Cook at home. If you are desperate for a hamburger and fries, etc then make it yourself at home. At least it won’t be full of chemicals.

    Read “The End of Overeating” by David Kessler MD.

    Did you know that the food industry hires scientists to tell them what ratio of fat, salt and sugar will make you eat until you are stuffed?

    2) Excercise!!!!!!!!

  • 6 Anna // Feb 9, 2010 at 10:03 pm

    http://www.timesherald.com/articles/2009/05/22/opinion/doc4a16286354d0a528676632.txt

    Hispanic youth a marketing target
    Published: Friday, May 22, 2009

    Last September, Donna Maldonado-Schullo reported in Al Día of Philadelphia on a Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) report that one soda a day can add up to 15 pounds of weight gain in a year. Of the foods we commonly consume, soda is responsible for the largest percentage of calories. Sodas contain large amounts of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) used as a sweetener, increasing the risk of obesity and diabetes.

    Children are particularly vulnerable because HFCS has high levels of reactive compounds that cause tissue damage, which in turn can lead to diabetes.

    Soft drinks with HFCS have high levels of reactive carbonyls, a compound associated with “unbound” fructose and glucose molecules believed to damage tissue. In contrast, common table sugar is “bound” and chemically “stable…”

    Meanwhile, as U.S. population percentages continue to decline among all children, evidence suggests that producers like Cadbury Schweppes look for market growth by expanding and intensifying marketing efforts directed toward Hispanic youth.

    This “low hanging fruit,” as one trade journal referred to the Hispanic market, at least called them something nutritious. They could have called them big sweet-tooth bears.

  • 7 Anna // Feb 9, 2010 at 10:12 pm

    Sugar: The Bitter Truth

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

  • 8 Anna // Feb 9, 2010 at 10:25 pm

    Further information:

    Diabesity, by Francine R. Kaufman, MD
    The End of Overeating, by David A Kessler, MD
    The Fat Burning Workout by Joyce Vedral

    Simply Raw: Reversing Diabetes in 30 Days
    http://www.rawfor30days.com/themovie.html

  • 9 Cockroach People // Feb 10, 2010 at 6:30 am

    As a fat guy, I know the power of sugar and fast food. I only recently gave up soda and fast food. But obesity is only part of the problem. Fast food chemical additives and sugar are like crack to an addict. Giving up these thing was the best thing I ever did. Mental clarity is a great thing.

    That said, I do see some reason in the LULAC, NCLR stance. Healthy food is very expensive. The movie Food Inc. has a great scene where they follow a Latino family to Burger King and to a grocery store. It’s tough when you can get so much more “food” at BK for $1!!! It’s easy to say “they” ought to buy healthier stuff.

    I do, however, support taxes that reduce consumption of things that negatively effect society–such taxes merely make the price of bad products reflect the actual cost to society. If poor people consume, hypothetically, more alcohol than others, then so be it. That’s not an excuse for no tax on alcohol. It just means there is a lot of education to be done plus fighting for resources to prevent alcoholism…

    What LULAC ought to be doing is lobbying for some sort of tax credit for healthy food purchases or as Brent said above, fighting against the corn subsidy.

  • 10 Anna // Feb 10, 2010 at 11:58 am

    Re: “Healthy food is very expensive.”

    In CA, where we have great weather all year, anybody with a yard can grow vegetables. Fruit isn’t that expensive. Neither are beans and whole grains. It just takes work to shop, cook and exercise.

    I know that people living in apartments, or in extremely dangerous neighborhoods, or who are on welfare can’t do these things, but that’s not the majority of Latinos. At least not in CA. There is really no excuse to be obese in this state.

    Wilkes manages to turn this into a tax on poor people, and on food for poor people, when it was a tax on soda. Soda has no nutritional value whatsoever, and if it becomes too expensive for people to afford, then that’s a good thing.

  • 11 Cockroach People // Feb 10, 2010 at 3:51 pm

    Anna, I just got back from California. I agree about the importance of growing stuff at home. My grandmother has fruit trees and many vegetables.

    As for obesity it’s more complex than your “shop, cook, exercise” paradigm. I agree with you on the tax stuff, but don’t allow judgmental pronouncements to cloud the good part of your argument.

    Also, allow me to point out the obvious: not all Latinos live in California.

  • 12 BettyM // Feb 10, 2010 at 4:31 pm

    Anna – I agree with you!!!

  • 13 Lisa Maldonnado // Feb 10, 2010 at 10:46 pm

    I really hate to see LULAC and NCLR not only being so obvious in their corporate vendido ways but then being so disingenuous as to play the race card and accuse anyone who calls them on it of being “elitist Anglos” PUHLEASE! You sold your own peeps out and now you want to make us feel guilty for calling you on it! I am a working class mexicana and I think your orgs are sin verguenza!

  • 14 Quan // Feb 11, 2010 at 8:49 am

    In the history of colonialism, there is a stage in the freedom process, where the mandarinate ruling class was used by colonialists to exploit their own people. Lest we see the cyclical repetition of these sad days in the continuing chapters of democracy in this nation, it is time Coke, Pepsi, Philip Morris, all corporate entities which prey on the young, the elderly and the ethnic communities realize that their days are numbered and dumbing down the people for profiteering will extend the Cheney generation only a few more years, but they are on the way out. Invest in the truth and the truth will make your corporation free, and real. As far as LULAC and other organizations of its type are concerned, I will not speak ill against a brother, but I can always close my door and tell my brother he needs to grow up.

  • 15 Jim // Feb 11, 2010 at 4:29 pm

    Brent,
    Don’t excuse complicity. Most of our taxes are regressive, and fall hardest of those who live in the shadows due to their “undocumented” status. Two wrongs do not make a right. Take corporate money, run health education programs, but do not defend corporations which poison people, especially people who don’t have the luxury of health insurance!

  • 16 What The.. // Feb 11, 2010 at 11:03 pm

    Really, another tax is not going to curve fast food use, thats the illusion they want you to believe. The fact is they will piggy back on this train ride and laugh all the way to the tax bank, because people will continue to eat fast food regardless. In a free society, we make choices; no one makes them for us. We can choose what we want to eat, drink, what we want to do in life etc. without someone telling us otherwise. I sure don’t want anybody telling me how much of something I can eat or drink. I eat fast food because I can, I eat healthy because I can. The cost of this freedom is that we are totally responsible for results. If you decide you don’t want that freedom then allow government to decide what you should eat, drink, go to the bathroom etc. Go for it, embrace socialism. But remember both have their limitations…

  • 17 As a follow up to the previous post, LatinoPolitics speaks with Brent Wilkes of LULAC // Feb 12, 2010 at 8:17 am

    [...] XHTML ← Latino issue organizations side with soft-drink and fast food industry [...]

  • 18 Anna // Feb 12, 2010 at 5:58 pm

    Re: ‘The fact is they will piggy back on this train ride and laugh all the way to the tax bank, because people will continue to eat fast food regardless.”

    And who ends up paying for their health care? If people want to drink soda and eat fast food then they should pay higher taxes on those items to offset the increased health care costs.

    And enough with calling anything you disagree with “socialism.” People use that word now without even knowing what it means.

  • 19 What The.. // Feb 13, 2010 at 11:44 pm

    “And who ends up paying for their health care? If people want to drink soda and eat fast food then they should pay higher taxes on those items to offset the increased health care costs. ” Well no one pays for their health care in a free society. Health care is a priviledge not a right. Freedom does have its draw backs so does a society who agrees that health care should be right.
    “The money must come from somebody.If people want to drink soda and eat fast food then they should pay higher taxes on those items to offset the increased health care costs.” You sound controlling; if I choose to drink soda and eat fast and gain 200 pounds I should have the right to do so, in a free society.
    “And enough with calling anything you disagree with “socialism.” People use that word now without even knowing what it means.” Niche, Stalin, Marxism; maybe your right I don’t know about socialism, therefore please enlightment my igonorance…

  • 20 Anna // Feb 14, 2010 at 4:10 pm

    Re: “Well no one pays for their health care in a free society. Health care is a priviledge not a right.”

    Oh please. If somebody walks into an emergency room they will receive treatment, and somebody pays for that. Doctors will not turn anybody away.

    You have a very perverse notion of freedom. We have the freedom to govern ourselves, and that means taking responsibility for oneself. Sorry, but filling up on alcohol and fast food and gaining 200 pounds is not taking responsibility. And when you don’t take responsibility for yourself, somebody else has to pick up the slack.

    And when you abuse alcohol, drugs and sugar (fast food, soda) you are not in control. You are not free. You are setting yourself up for ill health, poverty and an early death.

    These foods are now full of chemicals that are making people sick. Diabetes is an epidemic. Get a clue.

  • 21 chalan // Feb 16, 2010 at 2:54 pm

    As an old timer I remember when LULAC and G.I. Forum were community organizations instilling pride and fighting for issues which were important to the Latino community. They are more interested in being in the limelight and congratulating them selves then doing any work. When was the last time anyone heard of or saw either of these 2 organizations working in the community and not in front of the tv cameras? They qiut being relevnt years ago./ They should re-examine their roots and return to them.

  • 22 ERocha // Feb 18, 2010 at 6:30 am

    Wow Mr. Wilkes, I give you a hand for knowing your talking points by heart. I hear once that “echo chamber” is created, people suddenly repeat it. And for some, if they repeat it long enough they actually believe it.

    You said “We also know that this proposal was floated as a way to pay for health care reform without imposing higher taxes on those making more than $250,000 a year.”

    First of all, this sort of news to mean. Damn that media for leaving it that out. The funny thing, there is only one person who made that claim, Rep Tom Coburn.

    Kelly Brownell, Yale Researcher, a one-cent-an-ounce tax would cut consumption by 10%, reduce medical costs by $50 billion in a decade and raise $150 billion over the period.

    A broader tax on junk food could raise $500 billion over 10 years, according to a study done by University of Virginia scholars Carolyn Engelhard and Arthur Garson and the Urban Institute’s Stan Dorn.

    You said : “What we don’t know is whether it would have any effect on consumption or not. The evidence suggests that Latinos would continue to consume these beverages anyway absent a health education campaign to explain why sugared drinks are not healthy.”

    Well d’uh!! For one, I guess global warming doesn’t exist either. For one, it is obvious there needs some kind physical activity to reduce weight. That line of thinking is as foolish believing that you only eat Subway, you would be as successful as Jarad. He even said it, he would walk from his house to Subway.

    From Children Now:
    Despite industry claims that food marketing to children would be limited to healthier products through the initiative, this study finds that more than two-thirds (68.5%) of all advertising by participating companies is for foods and beverages in the Whoa category, the lowest category of nutritional quality. These Whoa products should be consumed only on “special occasions, such as your birthday.”

    Licensed characters are increasingly used to promote nutritionally poor food and beverage products to children.

    Research shows that licensed characters are particularly effective at influencing children because children trust the characters they see in program content. Consequently, the Institute of Medicine’s report recommended that licensed characters should be used “only for the promotion of foods and beverages that support healthful diets.” Yet companies participating in the initiative have nearly doubled their use of licensed characters over the past four years, from 8.8% in 2005 to 15.2% in 2009, and roughly half of all ads with such characters (49.4%) are for nutritionally poor Whoa products.

    Despite the industry’s self-regulatory pledges, which specify that participating companies will only use licensed characters to promote their “better-for-you” products, none of the healthier foods and beverages they marketed with licensed characters qualify as a Go product that children can consume every day.

    Well, it is good to know my niece is in good hands.[sic]

    Was there even a discussion during the national assembly? I find hard to believe it would have been fully supported.

    Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting information that is intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion, the industry has done more than endanger the health of the child. It has undermined democracy.

    Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness.

    Although all public relations professionals are bound by a duty to not knowingly mislead the public, some have executed comprehensive campaigns of misinformation on behalf of industry clients on issues ranging from tobacco and asbestos to seat belts.

    Now, these fringe players have turned their efforts to creating confusion about childhood obesity. This PR campaign could not be accomplished without the compliance of media as well as the assent and participation of leaders in government, business and community.

    People have a right to know who is paying the deniers. It is difficult to deceive or confuse a well-informed person. As a former officer and member of a LULAC council and a grandson of Laredo’s original LULAC council, I will be monitoring.

  • 23 ERocha // Feb 18, 2010 at 6:44 am

    Americans Against Food Taxes Coalition Members
    7-Eleven, Inc.
    Advantage Vending Equipment
    Alabama Beverage Association
    Alabama Grocers Association
    Alcan Packaging
    Allen Beverages, Inc.
    American Advertising Federation
    American Beverage Association
    Americans for Prosperity
    Arizona Beverage Association
    Arkansas Beverage Association
    Arkansas Grocers and Retail Merchants Association
    Bernick’s Beverages and Vending
    Beverage Association of Mississippi
    Beverage Association of Tennessee
    Beverage Association of Vermont
    Beverage Truck & Trailer, LLC
    Brinker International
    C. C. Clark, Inc.
    California-Nevada Soft Drink Association
    Can Manufacturers Institute
    Canada Dry Bottling Co. of New York
    Caribbean American Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc.
    Carolinas Food Industry Council
    Chesterman Company
    Clark Beverage Group
    Coca-Cola Bottling Co. Consolidated
    Coca-Cola Bottling Co. High Country
    Coca-Cola Bottling Co. United, Inc.
    Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Fort Wayne, IN
    Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Minden, Inc.
    Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of Winona, MN
    Coca-Cola Bottling Works, Inc.
    Coca-Cola Company, The
    Coca-Cola Enterprises, Inc.
    Colorado Beverage Association
    Colorado Retail Council
    Connecticut Food Association
    Corinth Coca-Cola Bottling Works, Inc.
    Corn Refiners Association
    Cornelius
    Council for Citizens Against Government Waste
    Cowan Systems, LLC
    Coyote Bait & Tackle
    Darden Restaurants, Inc.
    Domino’s Pizza
    Dr Pepper Bottling Company of Dublin
    Dr Pepper-Royal Crown Bottling Co.
    Dr Pepper Snapple Group
    Enterprise Leasing Company of Georgia
    Entravision Communications
    First Choice Vending
    Florida Beverage Association
    Florida Maritime Leadership Coalition
    Florida Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association
    Florida Restaurant and Lodging Association
    Food Industry Association Executives
    Food Marketing Institute
    G&J Pepsi-Cola Bottlers
    Georgia Agribusiness Council
    Georgia Association of Convenience Stores
    Georgia Beverage Association
    Georgia Chamber of Commerce
    Georgia Food Industry Association
    Georgia Retail Association
    Georgia Restaurant Association
    Global Closure Systems OBRIST Americas
    Graphic Packaging International, Inc.
    Great Dane Trailers
    Grocery Manufacturers Association
    Hispanic Media Council
    Hoosier Beverage Association
    Idaho Soft Drink Association
    Illinois Beverage Association
    Illinois Food Retailers Association
    Illinois Retail Merchants Association
    Independent Buyers’ Co-op
    Indiana Grocery and Convenience Store Association
    Indiana Restaurant Association
    Institute for Liberty
    International Dairy Foods Association
    International Dairy Queen, Inc.
    Iowa Beverage Association
    Kansas Beverage Association
    Kansas Restaurant and Hospitality Association
    Kentucky Beverage Association
    Kwik Trip, Inc.
    L & E Bottling Company
    Lakeside Pepsi-Cola
    Lancer Corporation
    LinPepCo Partnership
    Louisiana Beverage Association
    Louisiana Retailers Association
    Mack II, Inc.
    Maine Beverage Association
    Maine Restaurant Association
    Maryland Retailers Association
    MD/DC/DE Beverage Association
    Massachusetts Beverage Association
    MeadWestvaco Corporation
    MEI, Inc.
    Meridian Coca-Cola Bottling Co.
    Mexican American Grocers Association
    Michigan Chamber of Commerce
    Michigan Food and Beverage Association
    Michigan Grocers Association
    Michigan Soft Drink Association
    Mid-Wisconsin Beverage, Inc.
    Minges Bottling Group
    Minnesota Beverage Association
    Minnesota Grocers Association
    Mississippi Automatic Merchandising Association
    Mississippi Hospitality and Restaurant Association
    Missouri Beverage Association
    Missouri Retailers Association
    Montana Beverage Association
    National Association of Convenience Stores
    National Association of Manufacturers
    National Association of Theater Owners
    National Automatic Merchandising Association
    National Confectioners Association
    National Council of Chain Restaurants
    National Grocers Association
    National Restaurant Association
    National Supermarket Association
    National Taxpayers Union
    Neighborhood Market Association
    Nebraska Beverage Association
    Nebraska Retail Federation
    Nei Bottling Group, Inc.
    New Hampshire Grocers Association
    New Hampshire Soft Drink Association
    New Jersey Food Council
    New Mexico Beverage Association
    North Carolina Beverage Association
    North Carolina Restaurant and Lodging Association
    North Carolina Retail Merchants Association
    North Dakota Grocers Association
    Ohio Chamber of Commerce
    Ohio Council of Retail Merchants
    Ohio Grocers Association
    Ohio Restaurant Association
    Ohio Soft Drink Association
    Oregon Beverage Recycling Cooperative
    Oregon Soft Drink Association
    Original Roadhouse Grill
    Pace Global Energy Services
    Pennsylvania Beverage Association
    Pennsylvania Food Merchants Association
    Pennsylvania Restaurant Association
    Pepsi Bottling Group
    Pepsi Bottling Ventures
    PepsiAmericas, Inc.
    PepsiCo, Inc.
    Pepsi-Cola & National Brand Beverages
    Pepsi-Cola of Florence, LLC
    Pepsi-Cola of Rochester, MN
    Pepsi-Cola Bottlers Association
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Central VA
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Hastings
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Hickory, NC
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of LaCrosse
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Logansport
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of New York
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Pipestone, MN
    Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co. of Roxboro, NC
    Pepsi-Cola Decatur, LLC
    Pepsi-Cola Dr Pepper Bottling Co.
    Pepsi-Cola of Northeast Wisconsin
    Quail Mountain, Inc.
    Quality Retail Services, Inc.
    Rehrig Pacific Company
    Retail Merchants of Hawaii
    Rexam, Inc.
    Rhode Island Beverage Association
    Ron’s Towing, Inc.
    SandenVendo America, Inc.
    Seneca Wholesale Co., Inc.
    Sherm’s Thunderbird Markets, Inc.
    Snack Food Association
    South Carolina Beverage Association
    South Dakota Beverage Association
    Streva Distributing Co. of New Iberia, Inc.
    Sun Drop Bottling Co.
    Swire Coca-Cola
    Temple Bottling Company
    Tennessee Grocers and Convenience Store Association
    Texas Beverage Association
    Texas Grocery and Convenience Association
    Texas Roadhouse
    Towerwall, Inc.
    U.S. Chamber of Commerce
    Utah Beverage Association
    Varsity Beverage
    Venmart, Inc.
    Vermont Grocers’ Association
    Virginia Beverage Association
    Virginia Chamber of Commerce
    Vitro Packaging, LLC
    Walton Beverage Company
    West Virginia Beverage Association
    West Virginia Oil Marketers and Grocers Association
    Western Kentucky Coca-Cola Bottling Co., Inc.
    Wilson Corporation
    Wisconsin Beverage Association
    Wisconsin Grocers Association
    Wisconsin Petroleum Marketers and Convenience Store Association
    Wisconsin Restaurant Association
    WP Beverages, LLC
    Wyoming Beverage Association
    Yum! Brands, Inc.

  • 24 Meggie // Feb 18, 2010 at 10:15 pm

    In San Antonio Texas, diabetes capital of the world, where there are signs for diabetes ‘medicine’ or dialysis centers can be found literally on every corner, where many people are blind or amputees, a town surrounded by sugar mills, state home of Dr. Pepper and some godawful chemical sugary drink called ‘Big Red’, you will see even construction workers working in the heat of day with a huge gallon full of soda they swig, instead of water. Ah, sugar, you treacherous bastard, along with the corporate latino bottom-feeders, whose own family members are undoubtedly affected by the illnesses of sugar and dyes. Are LULAC and the National ‘Hispanic’ Medical Organization advocates? Perhaps. But for what? (the lining of their pockets?) Asco!

  • 25 Anna // Feb 19, 2010 at 12:20 pm

    People should just drink water. Eliminate the soda, and the ‘sports drinks,’ and the fruit juice. All of that is just liquid sugar.

    And they need to get this garbage out of the schools. When I was in elementary school, there were no vending machines on campus at all. The school didn’t serve breakfast, or sell any food at recess. Recess was just recess–not midmorning snack time. If you were thirsty, you drank water from the water fountain.

    The school sold lunch. You could buy it there, or bring your own from home. When lunch was over the school cafeteria closed for the day.

    And after school nobody stopped at the store to buy candy, etc. People went home, or stayed at school for sports, etc.

    A good book is “Live Young Forever” by Jack Lalanne. Too bad they don’t show reruns of his old show. People need to see it!

  • 26 Romy // Jan 2, 2012 at 6:18 pm

    It makes me so sad when stuff like this happens. Let’s make it better! These organizations should be protecting their community not allowing themselves to be bribed into destroying it.

Leave a Comment