The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recently announced a three-year, multi-million dollar alliance with Cadbury Schweppes Americas Beverages (CSAB) to help combat obesity and diabetes in America by stressing the importance of making smart nutritional choices.

According to an ADA press release sent to national media outlets, CSAB will support local and national ADA programs, such as "America's Walk for Diabetes" and "Weight Loss Matters." The release does not state, however, that the CSAB will be permitted to use the ADA logo on its diet soft drink products in exchange for this multi-million dollar contribution.

While the ADA and CSAB have published releases putting a positive spin on their alliance, many public interest groups have some problems with the partnership. Although CSAB is only allowed to print ADA's logo on its diet sodas, it is still the third-largest soft drink manufacturer in the world and a major producer of sugary candy. Both categories of products contribute to the United States' problem with obesity and diabetes.

Gary Ruskin, executive director of Oregon-based Commercial Alert, a website that monitors commercial culture, called the ADA's partnership with CSAB "corrupt" and demanded that the contribution be returned to CSAB immediately. "If Cadbury Schweppes really wanted to reduce the incidence of obesity and diabetes, it would stop advertising its high-sugar products, and remove them from our nation’s schools," said Ruskin. "This is just another attempt by a major junk food corporation to obfuscate its responsibility in the epidemic of obesity and diabetes in the United States."

Another public interest group, the Corporate Crime Reporter (CCR), recently published an interview with Richard Kahn, the ADA's chief medical and scientific officer. CCR asked Kahn, "Why exactly is the ADA taking money from big corporate donors, including junk food pushers?" Kahn revealed that the association's so-called "multi-million dollar" alliance was actually only slightly more than one million dollars. In exchange for that sum of money, Cadbury-Schweppes can put the ADA's label on all of its diet soda products. According to Kahn, however, CSAB cannot use the association's logo on any product not nutritionally approved by the ADA, nor on any product specifically marketed toward diabetics.
Related book:
How to Halt Diabetes In 25 Days
A down-to-earth guide on halting type-2 diabetes using natural methods: nutrition, food choice, medicinal herbs and more. Provides a 25-day plan for radically altering your body physiology to literally reverse type-2 diabetes.

The Food Timing Diet
by Mike Adams

Lose weight for good without diet pills or gimmicks.

The Food Timing Diet works with your natural biochemistry to promote healthy, permanent weight loss!

* Shed excess body fat at a healthy rate of one to two pounds per week.
* Accelerate your metabolism to burn more calories 24/7.
* Reprogram your body to burn more fat with your natural genetic blueprint for energy management.
* Eat more frequently so that you never feel deprived of food.
* No supplements or pills to take.

Click here to start losing weight now.
Despite the terms of the alliance, in a press release posted on www.beverageworld.com, CSAB Senior Vice President of Marketing Jim Trebilcock implied that products with the ADA logo will be marketed toward diabetics. "I acknowledge that it is a little bit of a tricky dance here, given that we also sell sugared beverages," says Trebilcock, "but it's about communicating the choice. And it's also really about doing the right thing. And the right thing is we do offer products that are great for diabetic patients or people who are overweight and we want to get that message out, but done in a way that contributes to an overall solution."

When CCR asked Khan why ADA takes money from food companies at all, he replied, "If we want to prevent diabetes, reduce the prevalence of obesity, help find the cure for diabetes, we have to get funds from someplace." Khan further added that the ADA was not promoting any of CSAB's products, including those carrying ADA's logo. It seems possible, however, that the public might be misled to believe that ADA does in fact promote products carrying its logo, such as common Schweppes' diet beverages Diet Dr. Pepper, Diet Snapple and Diet Rite.

Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of this alliance is the evident change in the ADA's stance on obvious diabetes-promoting substances such as sugar. The strong connection between sugar and diabetes has been commonly accepted among the medical public. However, when CCR stated that sugar is connected to diabetes, Khan quickly denied the link, saying, "What is the evidence that sugar itself has anything to do with diabetes? There is no evidence. There is not a shred of evidence that sugar, per se, has anything to do with getting diabetes."

The ADA's website even features supposedly safe ways for diabetics to consume sugar on its "Sweeteners and Desserts" page. "If you have diabetes, that doesn’t mean you can’t eat sweets. People with diabetes can eat desserts, use sweeteners, and still keep their blood glucose (sugar) levels in their target range," the site reads. "In the past, people with diabetes were warned to avoid sugar. Experts believed eating sugar would rapidly increase blood glucose, resulting in levels that were too high. Some people even thought eating sugar caused diabetes, an idea that we know now isn’t true. Research has shown that sugar has the same effect on blood glucose levels as other carbohydrates."
Related book:
The Real Safety Guide to Disease Prevention
More than 80% of all chronic disease is preventable, but only if you know how. Learn the proven, yet simple prevention strategies for cancer, heart disease, diabetes, depression, Alzheimer's and many other degenerative health conditions.
Khan's statements denying that sugar can cause diabetes came in the same week that the Journal of Pediatrics published a study blaming much of childhood obesity and type 2 diabetes on over-consumption of sugary sodas. The study found that sugared sodas contribute about 20 teaspoons of sugar per day to the diets of American teenagers.

Although he did not state that sugar is connected to diabetes, Khan did admit that weight is connected to diabetes. Khan said that calories (not sugar) are connected to the disease, and that weight is simply a measure of calories in and calories out. According to Khan, whether those calories come from sugar, fat or protein is unimportant. If more calories go in than come out, obesity will occur, which can lead to the onset of type 2 diabetes.

Throughout the interview, whenever CCR made a connection between sugar, or sugary soda, and diabetes, Khan quickly mentioned a different, equally bad or even worse food for diabetics than sugar or soda, referring to foods such as bacon cheeseburgers or doughnuts. Khan also repeatedly pressed the idea that the ADA only approved of diet and sugar-free foods and drinks, such as CSAB's diet sodas, which contain aspartame, a substance highly debated for its safety. When CCR asked for the ADA's official position on the safety of aspartame, Khan replied, "I don’t think that there is any artificial sweetener on the market that has been shown to be unsafe."

Russell L. Blaylock, MD, author of "Health and Nutrition Secrets" disagrees. Dr. Blaylock writes, "Diabetics who drink large amounts of aspartame-sweetened drinks are more likely to go blind. Aspartame is composed of the excitotoxin aspartic acid, methanol (also a known eye toxin) and the amino acid phenylalanine. Given this evidence, then, why do the American Diabetes Association and thousands of doctors encourage their diabetic patients to use aspartame? At least where the American Diabetes Association is concerned, it may have something to do with the fact that the organization has received large monetary contributions from Monsanto, the manufacturer of NutraSweet®!"
Related book:
Grocery Warning
How to recognize and avoid the common foods (and food ingredients) that cause disease. Names all the exact ingredients that directly cause heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, depression, osteoporosis, arthritis, high blood pressure, ADHD, behavioral disorders, mood swings and many more.

This forms an interesting cycle. The ADA gets money from Monsanto and, suddenly, no research can be found on the negative effects of aspartame. Although the ADA website assures readers that sugar is actually safe for diabetics to consume and that there is no research to the contrary, it specifically urges diabetics to replace sugar with artificial sweeteners. "The low-calorie sweeteners in the United States all underwent extensive testing before they were approved," the ADA site reads. "Results showed that low-calorie sweeteners are safe for everyone, including children and pregnant women." Similarly, the ADA has now accepted money from CSAB, and no research can afterwards be found on the negative effects of sugar. While this change in attitude appears suspicious, Khan did admit that type 2 diabetes has become an "epidemic" and that childhood type 2 diabetes is a "serious problem."

According to "Life without Bread" authors Christian B. Allan and Wolfgang Lutz, "Diabetes is currently the only noninfectious disease designated by the World Health Organization as an epidemic. The International Diabetes Federation and the American Diabetes Association estimate that more than 15 million people in the United States and at least 100 million people worldwide have type 2 diabetes."

Diabetes is an epidemic of frightening proportions. What can be done? According to Khan, little to nothing. The ADA publicly supports Senator Ted Kennedy's (D -- Mass.) proposed legislation restricting children's access to junk food during school via vending machines, but Khan said that the ADA would not outright support an additional tax on sodas as Tennessee, Arkansas and West Virginia have already done. According to Khan, the problem of obesity cannot be solved by singling out soda for taxation over other junk foods, such as cheeseburgers and doughnuts.

Although the ADA does not actually support taxing soda, the association does support "considering" taxation. After all, who's to say which foods deserve to be taxed? Khan explained, "Before anyone starts taxing anything, we ought to look at the entire food supply and ask: Can we distinguish good foods from bad foods?" Many scientists seem to believe we can, and they seemed to have unanimously condemned soda to the "bad foods" category.
Related article
How to be a skeptical health consumer and avoid bad health advice
Perhaps other questions need asking, such as: Why accept money from companies that raise the question of ethics within the ADA? Why should the public trust an organization to designate good nutritional choices when that very same organization makes an alliance with and accepts money from a junk food company? Regarding the financial aspect of this issue, Khan said that only seven percent of the ADA's total budget comes from large corporations. Is seven percent of a $215 million budget worth calling many years of research and public trust into question? Better yet, is the slightly more than a million dollar contribution from CSAB worth it?

The ADA claims that its objective in the partnership with CSAB is to put Cadbury Schweppes' money to use in programs educating the public about diabetes and proper foods; yet, 30 to 40 percent of the ADA's budget already goes to prevention and education programs, according to Khan. Is it worth risking the denigration of ADA's ethical standing for less than two million dollars from CSAB? According to Larry Ellingson, the ADA's Chair of the Board, it is. He says, "CSAB is taking an important step by demonstrating that a company can lend its infrastructure, marketing tools and consumer connections to assist an organization like ADA in extending the reach of its messages. We hope this will serve as a model for other industries."

A model? Ruskin sure hopes that's not the case. In fact, he's disgusted with the ADA's actions enough to elicit a comparison to the phony defenders of the tobacco industry. “Saying that sugar has nothing to do with diabetes is like saying that tobacco has nothing to do with emphysema,” said Ruskin. “The American Diabetes Association has been so corrupted that they have sunk to the mentality of ‘tobacco scientists’ who denied the link between tobacco and lung cancer.”