Global Study Links Commercial Products to One-Third of Annual Deaths, Rise in Chronic Diseases
An international research team, led by a scientist from Sydney, has published a paper in the New England Journal of Medicine linking five commercial product categories to nearly one-third of global annual deaths. The study also asserts that corporate practices related to these products contribute to a substantial increase in chronic diseases worldwide.
This marks the first time the journal has recognized corporations manufacturing and marketing health-harming products as primary vectors for non-communicable diseases.
Key Mortality Findings
An analysis of global burden of disease data indicates that five commercial product categories are significant factors in an estimated 31% of all annual deaths. An additional 600,000 deaths annually are attributed to drug use, primarily opioids.
The study estimates the following annual death tolls:
- Fossil fuels (including plastics manufacturing): 8.1 million deaths.
- Tobacco: 7.2 million deaths.
- Ultra-processed foods: 2.3 million deaths.
- Chemicals (used in commerce and pesticides): 1.8 million deaths.
- Alcohol: 1.8 million deaths.
Rise in Chronic Diseases
The research team stated that chronic diseases, which now account for 74% of global mortality, have seen a substantial rise. Dr. Nicholas Chartres, the lead author and a corporate harm researcher at the University of Sydney, noted a correlation between the increase in health-harming products and the rise in certain chronic diseases.
In Australia, between 1990 and 2023, diagnoses for several chronic conditions increased significantly:
- Diabetes: 115%
- Parkinson's disease: 182%
- Cancer: 151%
- Alzheimer's disease: 162%
Corporate Practices and Influence
The research team asserted that companies have concealed data and influenced governments, which they state has contributed to the rise in chronic diseases. The authors identified three key strategies, termed the "Tobacco Playbook," reportedly employed by corporations, drawing parallels with historical tobacco industry tactics:
- Knowledge Capture: This involves suppressing unfavorable study results and funding industry-sponsored research that the authors state diverts responsibility from their products. Research based on industry documents revealed that tobacco company executives were aware for decades of the link between smoking and cancer and nicotine's addictive properties but withheld this information from the public.
- Regulatory Capture: This refers to influencing policies through lobbying organizations and maintaining access to government officials.
- Shaping Public Narratives: This includes using marketing and unbranded campaigns, often targeting vulnerable populations.
Examples cited by the authors highlight these tactics:
- The sugar industry funding research that reportedly shifted blame for heart disease to fat.
- The tobacco industry fighting tax increases and regulations.
- Opioid manufacturers allegedly encouraging opioid use among children.
The study also noted that as anti-smoking policies became effective, some U.S. tobacco manufacturers acquired companies producing ultra-processed foods.
Regulatory and Legal Responses
In the United States, research based on tobacco industry documents led to significant policy changes, including local tobacco bans, increased national and state taxes, smoke-free policies, and a federal investigation. This was followed by a reduction in smoking rates in high-income countries and an estimated 37 million lives saved.
Australia has also implemented restrictions on politicians' ability to consult with the tobacco industry following its lobbying efforts. However, the study points out that other industries continue to be consulted on relevant policies. An example cited is the food industry's lobbying against a proposed traffic-light food labeling system, which resulted in the current health-star rating system.
In the United States, legal actions have been initiated:
- San Francisco is suing Kraft and other food companies for allegedly deceptive marketing of unhealthy ultra-processed foods.
- California is suing ExxonMobil over claims of deceptive recycling promotion.
Proposed Solutions
The paper proposes several solutions to safeguard policy from corporate influence and address the identified health risks:
- Transparency and Independent Research: Dr. Chartres suggested increasing transparency in research funding and enacting laws to prevent legislators from being lobbied by companies they regulate. He also proposed a government levy to fund independent product safety studies.
- Policy Restrictions: Co-author Tracey J. Woodruff, co-founder of the Center to End Corporate Harm, advocated for enacting similar restrictions on policy influence for all health-harming industries. The paper also proposed implementing rules that prohibit health-harming industries from engaging in policy via a global treaty, similar to the tobacco treaty.
- Financial Accountability: Recommendations include developing databases to track and expose industry payments to scientists and policymakers, and governments prohibiting financial ties between industry and researchers.
- Research Prioritization: The authors stated that the medical and health fields should prioritize research and communication regarding health risks associated with corporate activity.
Industry Responses
Industry representatives provided comments in response to the paper's claims:
- A Minerals Council of Australia spokesperson stated that the council engages ethically and transparently with the government and adheres to strict air quality regulations.
- Alistair Coe, chief executive of Alcohol Beverages Australia, stated that the paper reflected an ideology and disregarded the industry's high regulation in Australia, noting declines in risky and underage drinking.
- Chemistry Australia stated that Australia has a comprehensive chemicals management framework and strong regulatory agencies.