US Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics refutes “conflict of interest” accusations as researchers probe internal finances
27 Oct 2022 --- An investigative study published in the Journal of Public Health and Nutrition is revealing that the US Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) acquired stocks in the same junk food and soft drink giants from which it receives funding. The researchers argue that this apparent conflict of interest clashes with AND’s mission to improve global health and act as a pro-industry voice in policy venues, but the trade association has labeled the report “inaccurate and misleading.”
The report claims to have evidenced that AND invested in stocks in large food corporations such as Nestlé and PepsiCo while also receiving donations from those same organizations. The study analyzed internal AND documents from 2009-2020, including internal emails, financial records and tax returns, which were obtained by investigative group U.S. Right to Know through a Freedom of Information Act request.
Angela Carriedo, co-author of the study and a public health and food and nutrition policy researcher at the University of Bath, UK, tells NutritionInsight that the internal records her team explored show a dismissive attitude to members’ concerns about industry donations and an alarming lack of transparency.
“All the AND documents are public now, so anyone could repeat the exercise and be astonished by what they find. One of many examples in the documents is AND’s relationship with Kraft. The body worked hard to approve and maintain this close relationship, despite members complaining about it,” she says.
The investigation is based on AND’s financial data and internal communication between 2009-2020. However, the Academy insists that the report’s accusations are false, stating that the data is taken out of context and the researchers are missing “the bigger picture.” We reached out to the Academy for further comment beyond its public statement, which it declined to provide.
AND is recognized as an authority on public eating habits, influencing national food policy and training thousands of dietitians.
Conflicts of interest?
The report highlights internal communication documents between key members of the Academy, including “an influential AND member who encouraged corporate connections [and] endorsed Kraft Singles (a processed cheese product) despite its poor nutritional value.”
The investigation also spotlighted an internal email between Donna Martin, previous president of AND, and another executive member in 2014, relating to the body’s investment portfolio: “Everything looks good to me. The only flag I saw was that PepsiCo is one of our top ten stocks. I like PepsiCo and do not have any problems with us owning it, but I wonder if someone will say something about it. Hopefully, they will be happy like they should be! I would be OK if we owned Coke stock!!” Martin reportedly wrote.
However, the Academy claims the report is primarily based on Freedom of Information Act requests for a single board member’s email, thereby limiting the conclusions that can be drawn from the investigation. “Although the authors spent many years (2013-2018) combing through emails, they didn’t have the context, dialogue and decisions that followed,” AND stresses.
Dairy dilemmas
The investigation also claims that AND has repeatedly published “controversial statements,” amended over time to “align with corporate interests.”
The Academy stresses that its financial decisions are handled by an investment company, and that its F&B stock ownership is relatively minor.
“In 2017, Patricia Babjak, the current CEO of AND, mentioned to some directors that she received an email from the president of the National Dairy Council (NDC), concerned about AND's position on vegetarian diets published in the journal. The Council’s president indirectly questioned the science behind the public statement, mentioning that the NDC was funding AND,” the report reads, and exemplifies with a quote attributed to Babjak:
“I heard an earful on the phone from the president of NDC about our Vegetarian position paper that has a line about dairy and meat. Nothing in the paper says ‘don’t eat dairy or meat, or be a vegetarian or vegan.’ Still, she said that NDC is helping us with funding to elevate the Academy’s science and evidence, which is disappointing. I resented the correlation of the sponsorship.”
According to the investigation, this development led to the retraction of the original position paper on vegetarian and vegan diets and the dissemination of a new version without specific mention of animal-based foods.
AND strikes back
The Academy strongly refutes the study, maintaining that it includes “several gross inaccuracies, although it didn’t supply us with detailed information. It also stresses that the information has been taken out of context and the research lacks key interviews, which the researchers also acknowledge in the limitation section of their research.
Although internal communication demonstrates concern among board members, AND argues that the study lacks context.Additionally, AND reiterates that its leaders, programs, decisions and policies are not influenced by sponsors.
“All aspects of sponsorship such as research, consumer messaging or professional education of members align with the Academy’s scientific integrity principles. The Academy does not endorse any company, brand or company products, nor does the Academy’s name or logo appear on any product. Such endorsement is neither actual nor implied,” it affirms.
The Academy adds that its finances are managed by an independent investment company, which has full decision-making authority on investments and equity sales. The body explains that investments made through the investment company on the S&P 500 include all sectors.
Moreover, AND denies that it has invested heavily in food multinational stocks like PepsiCo and Nestlé, claiming that less than 3% of its investments are made in food companies.
The researchers flag internal AND documents from 2015 to 2016 detailing that AND acquired stocks in F&B giants PepsiCo, Nestlé and J.M. Smucker’s Company, as well as several pharmaceutical companies, including Abbott, Johnson & Johnson, Perrigo Co., Pfizer, Allegra and Merck & Co.
By Beatrice Wihlander
