“Draining the Big Food Swamp”, a new report by Feed the Truth and Maplight looks at the size and political clout of one powerful industry that has long dominated Washington politics: Big Food. Big Food is a $1.1 trillion a year industry dominated by a few, highly-consolidated corporations that influence everything from how our food is grown and how we treat essential workers to the health of our children and our ability as a nation to achieve greater racial, gender, and social equity. The report recommends:
- Corporations and trade groups should heed public concern for what it is: outrage with the undermining of democracy.
- The Biden Administration should ensure an end to the revolving door between government and industry.
- Congress should pass the “For the People Act” and other measures that get corporate money out of politics and address revolving doors and conflicts of interest.
- Trade associations and other vehicles for corporate “dark money” must not be allowed to hide the sources of their contributions or expenditures.
- Corporations and their various proxies should immediately open their books and disclose the totality of their political giving across the world.
How can public health professionals and researchers best address the commercial determinants of health, defined by Anna Gilmore as “the ways in which corporations influence human health and inequalities”? At a recent session at the World Congress on Public Health, a panel of researchers discussed this question.
Continue reading Moving Upstream To Advance Understanding of and Ways To Address The Commercial Determinants of Health
The COVID-19 pandemic has harmed people and organizations around the world. For the pharmaceutical industry, however, it has been a more contradictory experience. On the one hand, the pandemic has interrupted supply chains, diminished contact with customers, and threatened stronger government regulation. On the other hand, the virus has created new opportunities for windfall profits, Continue reading COVID-19 and Big Pharma: Tracking the Impact
To identify the corporate political activity (CPA) of food industry actors in South Africa, Mélissa Mialon and her colleagues, writing in the International Journal of Public Health, studied the CPA of ten different food actors in South Africa using a systematic approach to collect and analyze information available in the public domain, including material from the industry, government, academia, and civil society. They found that food industry actors in South Africa established multiple relationships with various parties in and outside the South African government. In addition, the food industry-sponsored community programs, with a focus on poverty alleviation, undernutrition, and food industry actors who influenced science, were directly involved in policymaking and helped frame the debate on diet and public health in South Africa. They concluded with calls for increased transparency, disclosure, awareness of industry strategies, and stronger mechanisms to address and manage industry influence within South Africa.
A new report from two economists at the Federal Reserve concludes that over the last four decades, the U.S. economy has experienced a few secular trends, each of which may be considered undesirable in some aspects: declining labor share; rising profit share; rising income and wealth inequalities; and rising household sector leverage, and associated financial instability. The authors develop a real business cycle model and show that the rise of market power of the firms in both product and labor markets over the last four decades, can generate all of these secular trends. They derive macroprudential policy implications for financial stability.
A webinar at the George Washington University Center on the Commercial Determinants of Health explored the relevance of the commercial determinants of health framework to understanding the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic and the societal response. View the presentation of Nicholas Freudenberg, Distinguished Professor of Public Health at CUNY School of Public Health and the one of Lucy Westerman, Policy and Campaigns Manager, at the NCD Alliance. A video of the session is available here: https://youtu.be/6RqK1a8oT_w
There is overwhelming evidence, writes Jonathan Marks in Bioethical Inquiry, that the opioid crisis—which has cost hundreds of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars (and counting)—has been created or exacerbated by webs of influence woven by several pharmaceutical companies. Opioid companies built these webs of health professionals, patient advocacy groups, medical professional societies, research universities, and others as part of corporate strategies of influence that were designed to expand the opioid market from cancer patients to larger groups of patients with acute or chronic pain. Governments, the academy, and civil society need to develop counterstrategies to insulate themselves from corporate influence and to preserve their integrity and public trust. These strategies require a paradigm shift—from partnerships with the private sector, which are ordinarily vehicles for corporate influence, to a norm of separation.
As the COVID-19 pandemic unfolds at the same time as more people in the United States protest manifestations of systemic racism than at any time in the past, public health activists ask how they can respond to these threats to health and health equity. One way is to explore more fully the connections between systemic racism, defined by NAACP President Derrick Johnson as systems and structures that disadvantage African Americans, and modern capitalism, the global economic and political system that seeks to maximize business profits and increase business control of our economy, society and government. Two recent articles explore these connections.
Continue reading Racism, Capitalism, the COVID-19 Pandemic, and Public Health: Tracing the Connections to Inform Strategy
In an editorial in Global Health Promotion, Kelley Lee and Nicholas Freudenberg call for a clearer and more precise definition of “commercial determinants of health” and new approaches to assessing its influence on the global distribution of health and diseases. Such an approach, they argue, will lead to better understanding of the complex pathways between commercial determinants of health and non-communicable diseases (NCDs), now the leading cause of the global burden of disease and a key driver of health inequities. It will also provide evidence that can expand public health interventions from their current focus on individual and behavioral risk factors to the systemic and structural influences on NCD prevalence and distribution.
In an editorial in BMJ, Ray Moynihan and colleagues describe some of the ways that commercial actors have influenced assessment of the antiviral remdesivir and the heavy involvement of Gilead, the maker of the drug, in designing the trials and promoting the findings of its studies before peer review. Remdesivir is used to treat COVID-19 and Gilead will reportedly charge more than $3,100 to treat a typical COVID-19 patient with private health insurance.
The authors also cite a Call to Action circulated by BMJ calling for more independence from commercial influences in medical research, practice and education. Almost 500 health professionals from around the world have already signed.