it's all there influencing what people get a chance etc and a large degree they're also influencing the give it a very the practices of big multinational that today's iraq. yeah they're enormously influential in the odd ways but they're written in a euphemism and they're written in euphemisms because it's politically impossible in the united states to advise eating less of anything that has a industry behind it and that makes a lot of money. as i'm going to say over and over again we know what a healthy diet is in these not too much for one for one thing and eating less is very very bad for business it doesn't make anybody rich if people eat less food other coated 19 pandemic has illustrated how reported to do for people

to eat healthily because the people who are at very high risk for this disease are people who are overweight or have chronic diseases already sort of dietary guidelines are extremely important in helping people understand where to eat but they are so heavily criticized it's almost impossible to understand we're being me now i actually want to seize on this point because you're making the a dollar notes on how big corporations are abusing. trade on science on power or on people how but i think it wasn't until because at 19 that the full damage of those practices really hit home as as just sat the lethality of this virus as with many other viruses was super charged by the problems of. diet and g.'s disease and i just wonder if that would

put an additional sort of political entity 'd on those scientists to perhaps at least when it comes to public recommendations to change the advice did. says far as we can tell is going to be pretty much the same as a whole always has been only a little bit more strict in recommend and recommending limits unsaturated fat which is a euphemism for meat. and on salt and sugar and alcohol salt and sugar are you from isn't strong highly processed foods and alcohol but he knows about the new dietary guideline recommendations from the advisory committee are expected to say that people should not drink more than one drink a male who are doing it in order to maximize their health there is a recently aired just a few days ago an article in the washington post which also suggests that that the

board is going to recommend every direction into consumption of added sugars from i think 10 percent of daily calories to 6 percent of the data daily calories if that is true that is actually a reversal of. u.s. policy when it comes to you know it's an extension of the policy the dietary guidelines have always recommended restrictions and sugar this one is much more specific and is the most restrictive that there's ever been but they've always said eat less sugar that's not new what's use is 60 percent which is roughly in the ballpark of what the world health organization recommended a year ago isn't it ironic that the scientists that kind of in the chocolate ministration would recommend something in line to the recommendations of the world health organization that and eyes mean yes but speaking about sugar i

have a crack here i must go quote incidentally works for toxic i whenever we discuss those issues he always tells me not to demonize sugar is it possible to demonize sugar. is there a software that's done more damage to public how that causes more doubts and my bitties not online so i completely disagree i don't think it's it's sugar alone it's carrier if where you're concerned about is overweight or weight is about calories and it doesn't matter with the calories from the columns that hilaly loves the taste and if sugar and he want any foreign oil owner of the foods and has sure the i don't think he should. about sugar i don't think we should be trucking in brett saturated fat and i don't think we should be talking about songs we should be talking about the foods that are the major sources of those nutrients

there are not enough to how is that possible that all calories are equal i mean a calorie of celery if very different seller is very different from candy but the calories are the same and you can get fat eating celery if you eat enough of it it would be difficult but it's possible because obesity is a matter of calories sugar makes you want to eat more sat makes you want to eat normal but if you look at what happens in the body i tell you killer and that's where dietary recommendations are so confusing because they talk about new treatments not foods they are be talking about foods all i add back to disagree respectfully and i personally lost 35 kilograms by having sugar out of my diet and that people who are as you cut your kids. if you cut out the foods that contain sugar or terror carbohydrates or anything else you're going to be cutting jerry if

you go down with him a healthier calories but anyway clearly there is that we disagree on on on this issue of sugar but one of the parts. is that i want to like excuse me we don't disagree i think everyone would be healthier eating less sugar talking specifically about sugar sweetened sugar sweetened beverages there's been a long 5. in the united states to introduce some sort of a tax and some communities haven't managed to do that but by and large policy makers have kept their wrists back to bill distance from there is beverage companies if we actually believe the washington post story but 1st time after the guidelines i'm going to recommend a ban on sugary drinks for children before they get to now this is this is mind boggling i think to the rest of the world because that you don't

need to be a scientist not to keep your here or your baby a coke how did these companies become so powerful so that something like this needs to be actually put them on paper and put in the form of. office i have infant feeding bottles with soft drinks a low wrote with softer glow go some otos of companies so the server companies some years ago marketed directly to the babies made baby bottles with soft drink logos on and there was evidence that he said people who bought those bottles with the softer local the softer. and there's considerable evidence that the united states knew that there are measure who never. saw afternoons that are being given to children to truly good. comedian since you have recommended

against giving some drinks to children they have also not been able to reach consensus on the other important issues for example that apparently a very they couldn't reach a definitive opinion on whether there is any connection between the consumption of sugar and type 2 diabetes. isn't there really possessed because of liberties that's why the killer is is so important. is very strongly related to being overweight and to over consumption of calories and it doesn't matter where the calories come from so the evidence is complicated because whenever you talk about a single through substance here you're already is talking that something. because you must always take. into consideration i mean most of the opponents of let's say peter diet would tell you that saturated fat has been part of our guy who are not

just centuries for millenia i mean our body well you've got saturated fat that's different the bad general also talking about how key facts about and natural foods but also traded sugar is a very very me about this and our bodies have never had the machinery of dealing with it again and that's not that is that no the counter argument against sugar as an unnatural substance. yes except that people love the taste and it's very difficult to ban something that people love eating i don't think i think bodies can handle sugar quite well they just can't handle a lot of that it one time and so any advice to restrict the amount 'd of sugar seems like a really good idea to me or to try to calories you leave the rest of your diet for healthier foods but to tell people not to consume sugar when it's delicious and

everybody loves it seems seem not to make much sense one of the wonderful things about food is that it's one of life's greatest pleasure and personally i like a little sugar in my diet a little not a which i mean that how do you make a difference between a little and. a lot because clearly sugar has addictive qualities i mean there are many many studies that show that it pretty much hijacks the same pathways estj every other right dictates substance i mean maybe your have a particularly strong will or a specific genetics that allow you to stay with it then it but it isn't also the case in those individuals that. statement eating a lot little and not getting addicted to it well food is wonderful life's greatest pleasures and whenever you eat something that is treasure full in that that gives you pleasure it has an effect on your brain and there are people who feel that

they're addicted to sugar they should avoid sugar isn't that also something that the food companies perhaps exploit too much the fact that some people cannot consume in moderation especially when it comes to sugar in the products well i think it's important to understand that companies are not social service agencies and they're not public health agency their business is whose job it is to sell food and if they're potently traded businesses then they have stockholders to please and that is their primary responsibility so to extend it to companies not to mix foods with sugar because it would be better to people skills is quite unrealistic in our current business environment all present then we have to take every very short break now but don't be back in just a few moments. i

1st thought about we do know. from the helicopter folks in iraq. or. i think that downer people are going to be going to its military who have never forgiven or forgotten frater the truth of the book and a little bit of it we saw he was really starting to happen. in the pentagon journalese died as you've heard to see a lot of crimes to outnumber the audience. the idea of developing an anonymous digital top dogs and appliance and media and since it's something that was a friends. i didn't destroy and just retain it with me for

a short while and in the room one of the world's most of the newsroom is very serious and it's going to celebrate founder to the song to the song knowing. that there was a great deal of jealousy the audience for it for the song the for the why won't it be more like oh they have hugh seen all for. instance with a. smile. on. her and. we have julie on assad's in solitary confinement in the prison for terrorists await you know how it's a live person. i don't see him dying you know it's. i don't. know what he's saying. the world is. shaped by one person of those.

thinks. we dare to ask. elizabeth

. bottom back to old apartment marion nestle professor emeritus of nutrition foods that is in public health at new york university professor nestle all of your books are all to mentally about work rate tricks to increase profits and to some extent we expect that part ration to do that but i think with the call that 19 pandemic we all can see be imagined stalled these practices have on both societies at large and personal how they axed analogies as the economist put it a much greater than the profit jesus thing this pandemic provides and nothing to

keep can be got to change things around. well i'm hoping that some good will come out of the code of 911 demagogue not seeing it yet but the hope is that people will have a much greater understanding of food systems work and will. provide much more political support for curbs from country excesses for insistence that foods be healthier and that we have a much more healthy and sustainable food supply i'm keeping fingers crossed about that ever said before it's kind of understandable that corporations what try to preserve their products and then most favorable lie that's the nature of marketing i wonder how where do you draw the line that when. marketing. the deceit and the abuse of the consumers well i think their place where the line

is easiest to draw isn't marketing to children i don't think food companies should marketed children at all actually i don't think that anybody should market to children at all so that's an easy place to draw the line. where the companies are making products that people feel like they are addicted to like soft drinks for example soft drinks are the easiest example because they can change sugars in water and nothing else of nutritional value and they are consumed in very large quantities and advertised very heavily to children among other people and so there i think it's an easy. kind of regular turi situation because you can just say if you're going to buy a soft drink it has to be in a very small amount anything other than softer gets you into

a much more complicated situation because the foods that sugars appear in many of those foods have nutritional value and so rare you draw the line is a complicated one but you could say that you would tax companies on the basis of the amount of sugar in their products countries that are doing that we're finding that people are consuming less sugar in those countries that's a group think now we often hear out from you and other experts that at big foot companies are also using that are for after age or it's you know out of the victim back as playbook. they have an additional argument of saying that food is different from tobacco because you actually need to leave but actually i want to have that applies to processed look because. you know as far as i'm concerned there very few products that let's say coca-cola produces apart from bottled water that doesn't

cost active harm to people how to add the same goes for or out most of those companies that produce cookies and other happily processed foods be called them plebs don't you think that there actually should be a distinction between natural or proper or you know real foods and be processed once well it's a process that really is causing the problem and these are categories of foods that don't resemble the foods from which they were extracted or were created that are not within gritty instead are not found in who kitchens and have a lot of men it's all too sugar and there is now an enormous amount of evidence that shows that consumption of bullshit. processed foods is associated with overweight gaining weight chronic diseases that are associated with overweight and that these are not very healthy products and this is relatively new data that's

only comment molests 5 years and i'm interested to see whether the dietary guidelines say anything about processed foods i hope they do but what's complicated about food and that makes it much more complicated than cigarettes cigarettes are simple don't smoke. foods are more complicated because it's really ok to eat ultra processed foods in small amounts and here you get right back into the same issue of quantity because small on it is really don't matter and give people a lot of pleasure how many cigarettes you once in a while also doesn't cause. there is no lid there's no place at which smoking is healthy and doesn't that apply just as much to your sugar sweetened beverages or let's say the fat ass old ass chocolate in the united states because

it's almost impossible i didn't know any nutritionist who was the slightest bit concerned about an 8 ounce softer and once in a while i think what people are all i want to get is not a scientist he's a journalist but i'm pretty sure if he is somebody who would be well i disagree with him i think the evidence does not indicate that small amounts of sugar or alter presents are harmful is a quantitative issue that's very difficult to talk about conceptually if you're having trouble and it can start to look at added to that to the fact that there is legitimate disagreement among scientists there is also these days that scientists well there are many scientists i know and i have interviewed on this show that strongly disagree. if you're point of view that calories a calorie we have already discussed that but that's not my point that the point i was trying to make is that it's ok for scientists to disagree over things i mean that's how do you really what they're oh paid for and that's how the scientific

knowledge is produced but i think one of the your rich latest book made it makes an excellent point that scientific debate is now being muddled by a very deliberate industry affray to do it to myself any science that goes slightly against that narrative can you talk more about that. well know my most recent book is called unsavory truth and it's about how food companies pay for research that they can use for marketing purposes. so they provide funding and scientists take the funding and do the research and the research that is paid for by industry woolston variably comes out with results that favor of the sponsors commercial interests and this happens not because the companies are buying the scientists it happens because the influence is unconscious it occurs at

a subconscious level there's a huge amount of evidence that shows this and the i don't think this kind of research should be done i wish there were some other way for scientists to get money to do the research that they do now as a russian i have to ask you this question because in that book here share the story of how your name handed out and not clinton's hacked e-mails it just happened so that a woman who was on paper all at coca-cola was also simultaneously providing advice to culinary clinton's campaign and was in active communication where vice president of coca-cola on matters of policy i know you're concerned about you know scientists being influenced by the industry but you have any qualms about. somebody like this collecting a paycheck from one of the largest corporations. advising presidential candidate potentially one of the most part for people who are all well india says who

corporations do they try to influence politicians and in the united states we have an election campaigns that are funded by corporations. with no limit on the amount of money that corporations can give to candidates really even through complicated ways but the supreme court has said. because that's an enormous problem in american politics you mention that. matter factory but this is actually i think if you're going to the russians really are cynical people but this is absolutely mind boggling i mean if you don't go into the story of this depression marshall this lady that was working for the clinton's campaign but with some research i found out that she was providing coke with strategic consulting and marketing work whilst rassi her former credentials as the chief of protocol at the state department bench specifically told them a training on commercial diplomacy commercial sees that not

a euphemism for special interests is not around when you're you happen to remember that the revelations about this from the hacking of hillary clinton's e-mails oh which apparently were done by people in your country and you will have a hard time convincing me that people in your country don't do exactly the same thing maybe we don't know about that but we are not positioning ourselves as the you know shining city on that here but. there is actually a lot of back and forth between the russians and americans about whether the russians or that i'm not the kremlin you perhaps know denies it but in any case do you think it was in in the public's interest for something like this is not why i wrote about it of course it's not in the public interest i don't think that government should be beholden to corporations that's a that's

a method of corrupting government that we fight against all the time in the united states not always successful unfortunately this was a particular example in which i happened to get caught up because some notes on a lecture i had given in australia were forwarded through the. these hacked e-mails . you know in some way that i just had no idea that this kind of thing was going on i actually thought it was quite funny to be caught up in this major political involvement when i'm just an intrusion as you know talking about nutrition and teaching students and writing books i'm not making a case for interfering in anyone's that elections but. it strikes me as not just a political campaign because there's multinational companies operate in the same way abroad and maybe even. cannot possibly be true these companies work

this way in every country in which they're allowed to and you cannot convince me that the same things don't happen in your country they do. they mean i really just have no way of knowing it and my point is different by point russian and fortunately we have ways of knowing. knowing you don't not knowing if the americans publish out that does not benefit from this knowledge unfortunately their whole day used the new dietary guidelines can improve that but anyway we have to leave it there thank you very much for sharing your insights oh my pleasure and thank you for watching poultice here next week on world apart.

is your media a reflection of reality. in a world transformed. what will make you feel safe. high salacious community. are you going the right way or are you being led so. directly. what is true what is great. in a world corrupted you need to descend. to join us in the

depths. or remain in the shallows. join me every thursday on the alex simon short and i'll be speaking to guest of the world of politics sports business i'm showbusiness i'll see you there.

in the stories that shaped the way karen r.t. russia denies britain's accusations of meddling in last year's election or hacking its vaccine research. a damning study in germany sheds light on high bun rubel children were fostered by sex abusers for decades if they were teens apparently aware of what was happening some of the victims told us what they went through. every day was mental and physical mistreatment we were forced to do things we wouldn't normally do because we were threatened our lives are being destroyed we are unable to work and we have become aware that we are just a pile of misery and china vows to retaliate after president trump revokes hong kong's preferential trade status and them.