While “Big Soda” might be a bit of a simplification (the problems with nutrition-legislation are much more widespread), research funded by sugar begets sugar propaganda:
Those promoting Big Soda’s view of nutrition consistently claim that chronic disease is “complicated.” Is this true? While all human diseases are “complex” in the sense that they involve detailed and often poorly understood mechanisms in the human body, that isn’t what they mean. Big Soda speaks of the complexity of addressing and identifying the causes of chronic disease. The label of complexity rules out simple treatments like “stop drinking sugar” and makes models of chronic disease based on overconsumption of sugar seem oversimplified and rash. It is true that chronic disease is complex, but Big Soda is using the term to support their false nutrition narrative.
This type of reasoning provides more justification for the toxic mindset that we can’t do anything about our health (we can!) or that our body/genes/disease will always get the best of us (it won’t!). It’s much too complex, Timmy, you couldn’t possibly understand your health issues and how your actions compound them. Your chronic condition is much to complicated to do anything about, Susie, so just lay back and let it eat away at you. Giving up on your health. Giving up on yourself.
License to be sick–exactly the opposite of what they claim to be selling.