Search

Background: Despite widespread use of the short-video social media platform TikTok©, limited research investigates how alcohol is portrayed on the platform. Previous research suggests that a driver of alcohol content on TikTok©, in part, comes from bartenders demonstrating how to make drinks. This study aims to explore the characterizing patterns of how bartender influencers on TikTok© feature and incorporate alcohol in their videos. Methods: We identified the global top 15 most followed bartenders on TikTok© in 2021 (cumulative 29.7 million subscribers) and the videos they posted in November and December 2021, the period just before Christmas and New Year, when alcohol tends to be more marketed than in other periods. The videos were coded based on five criteria: (1) the presence of alcohol or not; (2) alcohol categories; (3); alcohol brand(s) if visible; (4) the presence of candies and other sweet products; (5) presence of cues that refer to young people's interests. Results: In total, we identified 345 videos, which received 270,325,600 views in total, with an average of 18,021,707 views per video. Among these 345 videos, 92% (n = 317) displayed alcohol in their cocktail recipes (249,275,600 views, with an average of 786,358 views). The most common types of alcohol present in videos were liquor, vodka, rum, and whiskey, all of which are high-ABV beverages. 73% (n = 230) displayed or mentioned an alcohol brand. 17% (n = 55) associated alcohol with sweet products such as different types of candy (53,957,900 views, with an average of 981,053 views per video). 13% (n = 43) contained cues appealing to young people (e.g., cartoons, characters) (15,763,300 views, with an average of 366,588 views per video). Conclusions: Our findings suggest a large presence of positively framed alcohol content posted by popular bartenders on TikTok©. As exposure to digital marketing is related to an increase in alcohol consumption, particularly among young people, regulations are needed to protect the public from alcohol-related harms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To measure incidence of conflicts of interest (COI) with food and pharmaceutical industry actors on the advisory committee for the 2020–2025 US Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) and assess the adequacy of current mechanisms to disclose and manage COI among the committee's members. Design: We compiled longitudinal data from archival sources on connections between members of the DGA's advisory committee and actors. We hypothesised that these committee members, who oversee the science for the most influential dietary policy in the USA, might have significant COI that would be relevant to their decision making. Disclosure of COI on this committee was recommended in 2017 by the National Academies of Sciences in order to increase transparency and manage bias, but public disclosure of the committee's COI does not appear to have taken place. Setting: The committee was composed of twenty experts. Participants: None. Results: Our analysis found that 95 % of the committee members had COI with the food and/or pharmaceutical industries and that particular actors, including Kellogg, Abbott, Kraft, Mead Johnson, General Mills, Dannon and the International Life Sciences, had connections with multiple members. Research funding and membership of an advisory/executive board jointly accounted for more than 60 % of the total number of COI documented. Conclusions: Trustworthy dietary guidelines result from a transparent, objective and science-based, process. Our analysis has shown that the significant and widespread COI on the committee prevent the DGA from achieving the recommended standard for transparency without mechanisms in place to make this information publicly available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As evidence mounts that corporate actor engagement in United Nations (UN) policy-making processes leads to weaker and shallower public health commitments, greater attention is being paid to how to minimise undue interference and manage conflicts of interest (CoI). While we welcome efforts to develop normative guidance on managing such conflicts, we argue that there is the need to go further. In particular, we propose that an index be developed that would assess the health impacts of individual corporate actors, and those actors who fail to achieve a set benchmark would not have engagement privileges. We further propose the establishment of an independent panel of experts to advise on corporate actor engagement as well as on ambiguous and potentially health-harming commitments in text under negotiation in the UN. Recognising that the implementation of such measures will be contested, we recommend a number of practical steps to make their implementation more politically palatable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]