Skip to main content

U.S. Business Coca-Cola accused of tobacco-like deception in lawsuit

Coca-Cola Co. was sued by activists who compare the beverage giant's advertising tactics to the tobacco industry's past efforts in minimizing the health effects of its products and targeting children to replenish the ranks of its customers.

The nonprofit Praxis Project seeks to stop Coke and the Washington-based American Beverage Association from deceptive advertising of sugary drinks, particularly to children, and for the disclosure of documents related to their impact on health. Studies have linked sugary drinks to obesity, Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, the group said.

The lawsuit comes as drinks' manufacturers seek to fend off regulatory assaults on multiple fronts. The U.K. is pressing ahead with a tax on sugary drinks over the objections of the producers, following the example of France, Mexico and Hungary. In the U.S., cities including San Francisco and Chicago have also introduced taxes on sweet drinks, citing what they say is a disproportionate impact on residents' health.

Story continues below advertisement

Praxis, a California nongovernmental organization, is being represented by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, another nonprofit with a long history of litigation targeting the food and beverage industries.

"From the 1950s until the late 1990s, the tobacco industry engaged in an elaborate campaign of disinformation to cast doubt on the science connecting cigarettes to lung cancer and other diseases," Maia Kats, litigation director for the center, said in a statement.

Recruiting Children

"Like the tobacco industry, Coca-Cola needs to replenish the ranks of its customers, and it tries to recruit them young," Praxis said in its complaint, filed Wednesday in federal court in Oakland, California.

Coca-Cola products have labels providing calorie information, spokesman Kent Landers said in an e-mail, dismissing the lawsuit as meritless.

"We take our consumers and their health very seriously," he said. "We will continue to listen and learn from the public health community and remain committed to playing a meaningful role in the fight against obesity."

The American Beverage Association hasn't received the complaint, said William Dermody, spokesman for the group. "We can't comment on something we haven't received yet."

Story continues below advertisement

For soda giants, the need to be healthier is not new. Per capita soda consumption in the U.S. fell to a three-decade low in 2015, according to Beverage-Digest, a trade publication.

Atlanta-based Coca-Cola and its biggest competitors, PepsiCo Inc. and Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc., have pledged to decrease calories in their beverages and increase healthier options. The companies are responding to both new regulations and consumer demands as drinkers in the U.S. and other developed markets have turned away from sugar and artificial ingredients.

Smaller Sizes

Coca-Cola has promoted smaller package sizes and non-cola drinks. It is relying less on soda, pushing into segments such as ready-to-drink coffee, plant-based protein drinks, cold-press juices and dairy. Coke has 200 reformulations in the works to cut back on sugar, including new versions of Fanta and Sprite already on shelves in the U.K.

PepsiCo, the world's second-largest soft-drink company, announced in October that at least two-thirds of the company's beverage volume will have no more than 100 calories from added sugars per 12-ounce serving by 2025. Dr Pepper Snapple acquired Bai Brands in November for $1.7-billion to expand its portfolio of drinks that are advertised as healthier than soda.

Report an error
Tickers mentioned in this story
Unchecking box will stop auto data updates
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to feedback@globeandmail.com. If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to letters@globeandmail.com.

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to letters@globeandmail.com. Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

Comments that violate our community guidelines will be removed.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

Cannabis pro newsletter