Emerging threats of global preemption to nutrition labelling

Preemption in State Tobacco Minimum Legal Sales Age Laws in the US, 2022: A Policy Analysis of State Statutes and Case Laws

Preemptive statutory language within tobacco minimum legal sales age (MLSA) laws has prohibited localities from enacting stricter laws than state statutes. With the recent uptake of state Tobacco 21 laws in the US, the current landscape of preempted MLSA laws is unknown. This study sought to update the status of preemption in MLSA laws enacted in US states between 2015-2022. A public health attorney reviewed state tobacco MLSA laws (n = 50) and state tobacco control codes, searching for language regarding preemption. When statutes were unclear, case law was reviewed by examining local ordinances that were invalidated by state court decisions. Overall, 40 states enacted Tobacco 21 laws, seven of which expanded or introduced preemption when they increased the MLSA; a total of 26 states (52%) included preemption. Six states (12%) retained 'savings clauses' included in the MLSA prior to Tobacco 21, and 18 states (36%) did not mention preemption. Based on the precedent set by state courts, eight of these 18 states may preempt localities from raising their MLSA. Historically, preemption has slowed the diffusion of best practices in tobacco control, and once implemented, the laws are difficult to repeal. The recent expansion of preemption could inhibit the evolution, development, and implementation of effective tobacco control policies.

Do they really support "your freedom of choice"? FoPNL and the food industry in Brazil

Introduction

In 2020, Brazil approved the introduction of a new front-of-package nutrition labeling (FoPNL) in the format of a magnifying glass (MG) after years of discussion. There is currently a lack of understanding of the role of the food industry in that process. This study aimed to describe the corporate political activity (CPA) of the food industry and conflicts of interest situations, as they happened during the development and approval of a new FoPNL system in Brazil.

Materials and methods

We undertook bibliographical and documentary searches using material from food companies, trade associations and front groups involved in the regulatory process. We (1) collected information about the case study context, (2) collected data from documentary sources, and (3) prepared a synthesis of the results and a timeline of key events.

Results/Discussion

During the FoPNL regulatory process in Brazil, the food industry opposed the introduction of warning labels, a model supported by health authorities and implemented with success in other countries in Latin America. The food industry rather promoted a traffic-light labeling system, known to be less effective at guiding individuals to make healthier food choices. Later in the process, when it was evident that its preferred model would not be used, and a MG would rather be introduced, the food industry argued for the use of a different version of this FoPNL model. We found that the food industry, all along the process, was directly involved in and influenced the development of the FoPNL, by providing technical support, advising and lobbying policymakers. The food industry also established relationships with a consumer non-governmental organization and nutrition professional societies. The food industry also produced and disseminated information supporting its position in order to influence public opinion and high-level decision makers, and used the legal system to delay the process.

Conclusion

The FoPNL in Brazil is neither aligned with the recommendations of international health organizations nor with existing independent scientific evidence. The new FoPNL, as adopted in Brazil, reflects some of the preferences of the industry; it is likely that the influence of that sector during the legislative process was pivotal, even if its initial proposal was not adopted.

State Preemption: An Emerging Threat to Local Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxation

We sought to examine the strategies promoting and countering state preemption of local sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes in the United States. Using Crosbie and Schmidt's tobacco preemption framework, we analyzed key tactics used by the SSB industry to achieve state preemption of local taxes identified in news sources, industry Web sites, government reports, and public documents.Starting in 2017, 4 states rejected and 4 passed laws preempting local SSB taxes. The beverage industry attempted to secure state preemption through front groups and trade associations, lobbying key policymakers, inserting preemptive language into other legislation, and issuing legal threats and challenges. The public health community's response is in the early stages of engaging in media advocacy, educating policymakers, mobilizing national collaboration, and expanding legal networks.State preemption of local SSB taxes is in the early stages but will likely scale up as local tax proposals increase. The public health community has a substantial role in proactively working to prevent preemption concurrent with health policy activity and using additional strategies successfully used in tobacco control to stop preemption diffusion.

'I had never seen so many lobbyists': food industry political practices during the development of a new nutrition front-of-pack labelling system in Colombia

OBJECTIVE

To identify and monitor food industry use of political practices during the adoption of nutrition warning labels (WL) in Colombia.

DESIGN

Document analysis of publicly available information triangulated with interviews.

SETTING

Colombia.

PARTICIPANTS

Eighteen key informants from the government (n 2), academia (n 1), civil society (n 12), the media (n 2) and a former food industry employee (n 1).

RESULTS

In Colombia, the food industry used experts and groups funded by large transnationals to promote its preferred front-of-pack nutrition labelling (FOPL) and discredit the proposed warning models. The industry criticised the proposed WL, discussing the negative impacts they would have on trade, the excessive costs required to implement them and the fact that consumers were responsible for making the right choices about what to eat. Food industry actors also interacted with the government and former members of large trade associations now in decision-making positions in the public sector. The Codex Alimentarius was also a platform through which the industry got access to decision-making and could influence the FOPL policy.

CONCLUSIONS

In Colombia, the food industry used a broad range of political strategies that could have negatively influenced the FOPL policy process. Despite this influence, the mandatory use of WL was announced in February 2020. There is an urgent need to condemn such political practices as they still could prevent the implementation of other internationally recommended measures to improve population health in the country and abroad, nutrition WL being only of them.

Preemption in Tobacco Control: A Framework for Other Areas of Public Health

Preemption-when a higher level of government limits the authority of a lower level to enact new policies-has been devastating to tobacco control. We developed a preemption framework based on this experience for anticipating and responding to the possibility of preemption in other public health areas. We analyzed peer-reviewed literature, reports, and government documents pertaining to tobacco control preemption. We triangulated data and thematically analyzed them.Since the 1980s, tobacco companies have attempted to secure state preemption through front groups, lobbying key policymakers, inserting preemption into other legislation, and issuing legal threats and challenges. The tobacco control community responded by creating awareness of preemption through media advocacy, educating policymakers, mobilizing national collaborations, and expanding networks with the legal community. Ten of the 25 state smoke-free preemption laws have been fully repealed. Repeal, however, took an average of 11 years.State preemption has been detrimental to tobacco control by dividing the health community, weakening local authority, chilling public education and debate, and slowing local policy diffusion. Health scholars, advocates, and policymakers should use the framework to anticipate and prevent industry use of preemption in other public health areas.

Removing the last billboard for the tobacco industry: Tobacco standardized packaging in Ireland

The World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) implementation guidelines recommend that governments adopt plain packaging (also known as standardized packaging (SP)) along with pictorial health warning labels covering 50% or more of the tobacco package. The 2014 revised European Union Tobacco Product Directive also supports EU member states to introduce SP. Following these developments and recommendations, in 2013 the Department of Health launched a "Tobacco Free Ireland" policy which aimed to reduce the smoking prevalence rate to less than 5% by 2025. Tobacco Free Ireland set out 60 recommendations and measures to reach the 2025 target, including introducing SP. Tobacco companies and trademark and intellectual property organizations opposed the SP proposal claiming it would; 1) not work to reduce smoking levels, 2) increase illicit tobacco trade, 3) create unnecessary problems for retailers, and 4) violate domestic and international laws governing trademarks. However leading health groups in Ireland presented evidence on how SP would communicate the harms of tobacco to smokers and discourage young people from beginning to smoke. These efforts combined with strong political will helped Ireland to become the second country in the world to enact standardized packaging for all tobacco products.