logo
Is the plastic industry trying to influence green policies?

Is the plastic industry trying to influence green policies?

The Hindu4 days ago
The story so far: At first glance, tobacco and plastic might seem unrelated. Both industries have historically acknowledged certain health risks, while continuing to scale production and revenue models. Environmental activists and health experts are drawing attention to how the plastic industry, backed by fossil fuel giants, mirrors the tobacco industry's playbook: delaying regulation, deploying PR spin, and shifting blame by muddying public perception.
How does plastic mirror tobacco's playbook?
Both industries have used profit-driven tactics despite evidence of harm.
Shifting responsibility: in many jurisdictions, advertisements for tobacco run with a disclaimer 'smoking is injurious to health' (or similar) while promoting the product, abetted by weak public policy. This places the onus on individual choice. Similarly, plastic-makers have blamed consumers for not recycling while diverting attention from corporate accountability. In both cases, the effect is for systematic harm to be recast as personal failure.
Funding misleading PR and science: Tobacco companies have historically funded studies denying their effects on the body. Similarly, as NPR and PBS have reported, the plastic industry promoted recycling as a resolution from the 1980s despite privately acknowledging its economic and technical impracticality at scale. Yet even as trade groups launched public campaigns around the 'recyclability' of plastic to avert bans, most plastic waste continued to be incinerated, landfilled or dumped in the open.
Greenwashing: In a subsequently discredited strategy, tobacco companies once marketed 'light' and 'mild' cigarettes as safer. Today, the absence of clear, enforceable standards and shortcomings in the country's waste-processing infrastructure render plastic that is, or has been labelled, 'biodegradable' or 'compostable' to not be that way at all. This in turn can give consumers a false impression of these plastics' real-world environmental impact. In the same vein, greenwashing can also take more obvious forms. For example, Coca-Cola was recently accused of greenwashing after quietly dropping its goal of 25% reusable packaging by 2030 and scaling back key recycling targets while continuing to promote its sustainability credentials.
Shifting focus towards the Global South
As regulations to reduce the use of single-use plastics and rationalise the material's use in packaging tighten across the Global North, plastic producers have been focusing on low- and middle-income countries to sustain growth. According to the OECD's 'Global Plastic Outlook' report in 2022, plastic consumption is projected to more than double in Sub-Saharan Africa and triple in Asia by 2060 but grow by only 15% in Europe and 34% in North America in the same period.
Further, while countries in the Global South, including India, have begun moving towards reduction, their efforts face substantial challenges in implementation and enforcement. A 2023 Centre for Science and Environment report noted that India's ban of 19 single-use plastics covers only around 11% of its single-use plastic waste and that enforcement has been inconsistent.
This shift in focus toward the Global South has coincided with weaker environmental regulations, limited public awareness, and inadequate waste management systems, making these regions especially vulnerable to rising plastic pollution.
Regulation and lobbying
The tobacco industry has been known to exaggerate its economic contributions and funding front groups to delay public health measures, tactics documented in WHO's A Global Brief (2012) and a 2022 submission to the U.N. Human Rights Office by the Campaign for Tobacco‑Free Kids and the Global Health Advocacy Incubator.
The plastics industry has used comparable strategies to shape public policy and delay meaningful regulation. Internal documents from major plastic and chemical firms, dating back to the 1970s and 1980s, show companies were already aware of the technical and economic limits of plastic recycling but continued to promote it as a viable solution. This tactic, documented by a 2024 report of the Center for Climate Integrity, helped deflect public and political pressure away from regulating plastic production.
More recently, the plastics and fossil fuel industries have sought to influence negotiations for a global plastics treaty under the U.N. According to the Centre for International Environmental Law, industry influence was evident at the third round of treaty talks (INC-3), where there were 36% more lobbyists from the fossil fuel and chemicals sectors than in the previous round.
Where does India stand on plastics?
In India, the waste management system banks on the lakhs of people, from ragpickers and sorters to grassroot recyclers, in the informal sector responsible for collecting and processing 70% of the plastic that is recycled. But this work often comes at the cost of their health and dignity, exposing them to hazardous materials and toxic fumes, without protective gear, legal recognition or social security.
They face long-term health risks, including respiratory illnesses and infections, and often live below the poverty line, lacking stable incomes and access to basic social protections.
Recognising their role, the Indian government has taken some steps to formalise and protect them. The National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem scheme launched in 2024 aims to integrate waste pickers into formal waste systems by providing safety measures, health insurance under Ayushman Bharat, and access to social security benefits. Per the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, as of May 2025, over 80,000 sanitation and waste-picking workers have been profiled under the scheme, with more than 45,700 handed personal protective equipment and around 26,400 issued Ayushman Bharat health cards.
Extended producer responsibility guidelines under the Plastic Waste Management Rules 2016 (amended in 2022) require manufacturers to take responsibility for plastic they generate, financially, and operationally. However — as with India's ban on 19 single-use plastics — experts have criticised gaps in enforcement, with fewer than half of all producers complying with their obligations.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Is the plastic industry trying to influence green policies?
Is the plastic industry trying to influence green policies?

The Hindu

time4 days ago

  • The Hindu

Is the plastic industry trying to influence green policies?

The story so far: At first glance, tobacco and plastic might seem unrelated. Both industries have historically acknowledged certain health risks, while continuing to scale production and revenue models. Environmental activists and health experts are drawing attention to how the plastic industry, backed by fossil fuel giants, mirrors the tobacco industry's playbook: delaying regulation, deploying PR spin, and shifting blame by muddying public perception. How does plastic mirror tobacco's playbook? Both industries have used profit-driven tactics despite evidence of harm. Shifting responsibility: in many jurisdictions, advertisements for tobacco run with a disclaimer 'smoking is injurious to health' (or similar) while promoting the product, abetted by weak public policy. This places the onus on individual choice. Similarly, plastic-makers have blamed consumers for not recycling while diverting attention from corporate accountability. In both cases, the effect is for systematic harm to be recast as personal failure. Funding misleading PR and science: Tobacco companies have historically funded studies denying their effects on the body. Similarly, as NPR and PBS have reported, the plastic industry promoted recycling as a resolution from the 1980s despite privately acknowledging its economic and technical impracticality at scale. Yet even as trade groups launched public campaigns around the 'recyclability' of plastic to avert bans, most plastic waste continued to be incinerated, landfilled or dumped in the open. Greenwashing: In a subsequently discredited strategy, tobacco companies once marketed 'light' and 'mild' cigarettes as safer. Today, the absence of clear, enforceable standards and shortcomings in the country's waste-processing infrastructure render plastic that is, or has been labelled, 'biodegradable' or 'compostable' to not be that way at all. This in turn can give consumers a false impression of these plastics' real-world environmental impact. In the same vein, greenwashing can also take more obvious forms. For example, Coca-Cola was recently accused of greenwashing after quietly dropping its goal of 25% reusable packaging by 2030 and scaling back key recycling targets while continuing to promote its sustainability credentials. Shifting focus towards the Global South As regulations to reduce the use of single-use plastics and rationalise the material's use in packaging tighten across the Global North, plastic producers have been focusing on low- and middle-income countries to sustain growth. According to the OECD's 'Global Plastic Outlook' report in 2022, plastic consumption is projected to more than double in Sub-Saharan Africa and triple in Asia by 2060 but grow by only 15% in Europe and 34% in North America in the same period. Further, while countries in the Global South, including India, have begun moving towards reduction, their efforts face substantial challenges in implementation and enforcement. A 2023 Centre for Science and Environment report noted that India's ban of 19 single-use plastics covers only around 11% of its single-use plastic waste and that enforcement has been inconsistent. This shift in focus toward the Global South has coincided with weaker environmental regulations, limited public awareness, and inadequate waste management systems, making these regions especially vulnerable to rising plastic pollution. Regulation and lobbying The tobacco industry has been known to exaggerate its economic contributions and funding front groups to delay public health measures, tactics documented in WHO's A Global Brief (2012) and a 2022 submission to the U.N. Human Rights Office by the Campaign for Tobacco‑Free Kids and the Global Health Advocacy Incubator. The plastics industry has used comparable strategies to shape public policy and delay meaningful regulation. Internal documents from major plastic and chemical firms, dating back to the 1970s and 1980s, show companies were already aware of the technical and economic limits of plastic recycling but continued to promote it as a viable solution. This tactic, documented by a 2024 report of the Center for Climate Integrity, helped deflect public and political pressure away from regulating plastic production. More recently, the plastics and fossil fuel industries have sought to influence negotiations for a global plastics treaty under the U.N. According to the Centre for International Environmental Law, industry influence was evident at the third round of treaty talks (INC-3), where there were 36% more lobbyists from the fossil fuel and chemicals sectors than in the previous round. Where does India stand on plastics? In India, the waste management system banks on the lakhs of people, from ragpickers and sorters to grassroot recyclers, in the informal sector responsible for collecting and processing 70% of the plastic that is recycled. But this work often comes at the cost of their health and dignity, exposing them to hazardous materials and toxic fumes, without protective gear, legal recognition or social security. They face long-term health risks, including respiratory illnesses and infections, and often live below the poverty line, lacking stable incomes and access to basic social protections. Recognising their role, the Indian government has taken some steps to formalise and protect them. The National Action for Mechanised Sanitation Ecosystem scheme launched in 2024 aims to integrate waste pickers into formal waste systems by providing safety measures, health insurance under Ayushman Bharat, and access to social security benefits. Per the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, as of May 2025, over 80,000 sanitation and waste-picking workers have been profiled under the scheme, with more than 45,700 handed personal protective equipment and around 26,400 issued Ayushman Bharat health cards. Extended producer responsibility guidelines under the Plastic Waste Management Rules 2016 (amended in 2022) require manufacturers to take responsibility for plastic they generate, financially, and operationally. However — as with India's ban on 19 single-use plastics — experts have criticised gaps in enforcement, with fewer than half of all producers complying with their obligations.

Days after Trump claimed credit, Coca-Cola announces new cane sugar Coke. But classic recipe stays
Days after Trump claimed credit, Coca-Cola announces new cane sugar Coke. But classic recipe stays

Indian Express

time6 days ago

  • Indian Express

Days after Trump claimed credit, Coca-Cola announces new cane sugar Coke. But classic recipe stays

Days after US President Donald Trump claimed he had convinced Coca-Cola to swap out high-fructose corn syrup for cane sugar, the company has confirmed it will release a new version of Coke made with US cane sugar—though its flagship product will remain unchanged. As per CNN, in its quarterly earnings report Tuesday, Coca-Cola said that as 'part of its ongoing innovation agenda,' it would launch a new cane sugar version of its cola in the fall, intended to 'complement the company's strong core portfolio and offer more choices across occasions and preferences.' Some regional versions of Coke, such as the Mexican variant, already use cane sugar. Last week, Trump posted on Truth Social that Coca-Cola had 'agreed' to use cane sugar in its colas. However, the company's announcement clarifies that the traditional Coke recipe sold in the US will continue to include high-fructose corn syrup. The move aligns with a broader push from Trump's Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who has publicly railed against high-fructose corn syrup. As per a report by CNN, in a September appearance on Dr. Jordan Peterson's podcast, Kennedy called it a 'formula for making you obese and diabetic,' as part of his ongoing campaign to eliminate artificial and ultra-processed ingredients from American foods. High-fructose corn syrup has long been used in US-made Coca-Cola because of its low cost and abundance, especially compared to cane sugar. Health experts warn, however, that neither ingredient makes soda healthy. While cane sugar may seem more 'natural,' nutritionists continue to flag sugar-sweetened beverages as major contributors to obesity, diabetes, and other chronic health conditions.

Is diet coke '100x healthier' than sugarcane juice? Experts debunk doctor's viral claim
Is diet coke '100x healthier' than sugarcane juice? Experts debunk doctor's viral claim

Time of India

time7 days ago

  • Time of India

Is diet coke '100x healthier' than sugarcane juice? Experts debunk doctor's viral claim

Days after US President Donald Trump announced that he had convinced the brand Coca-Cola to start using real cane sugar in its US beverages, concerns about soda consumption have increased. On Sunday, a popular content creator, doctor, fitness and preventive healthcare coach, Dr. Anshul Sadhale, shared a post on X (formerly called Twitter) claiming that Diet Coke is healthier than sugarcane juice. Another explanatory post about the same has sparked discussion online and has gone viral. In the now viral post, Dr. Sadhale wrote, "Diet Coke is 100x healthier than sugarcane juice, but Indian society is not ready to discuss that yet because of culture." He also shared a thread of studies and explanations on how there is no evidence that artificial sweeteners harm gut health. Is Coke Zero safe for you? According to the supportive post, Dr. Sadhale made bold claims that coke zero is absolutely safe to consume but its not healthy. He explains, Coke Zero contains Aspartame that breaks down into three components, such as methanol, phenylalanine and aspartic. Methanol can put you in a coma, while phenylalanine causes brain damage and aspartic causes cancer, he says in the video. But then he gives an example of a tomato that contains 6 times the amount of methanol as Coke Zero, moreover, 100 grams of meat contains 32 times of phenylalanine in it, and one egg contains 34 times the amount of aspartic acid as in Coke Zero, Dr. Sadhale mentions. A tomato has 6 times the amount of methanol as Coke Zero 100 grams of meat contains 32 times of phenylalanine One egg contains 34 times the amount of aspartic acid as in Coke Zero According to the FDA, the safe amount of aspartame is about 50mg per kg of body weight in a single day. While one can of Coke Zero contains 85mg of aspartame, for a normal individual, they have to consume about 3500mg of aspartame to cross the safety guidelines of the FDA. The post instantly went viral, raising health concerns. Coke zero is absolutely safe for it is not healthy!Let's understand in detail. Is Diet Coke healthier than sugarcane juice? If 'no', here's why Though it is called 'Diet Coke' and has no sugar or calories, it is loaded with artificial sweeteners and chemicals that may take a toll on gut health and lead to a sluggish metabolism over time. "However, when it comes to sugarcane juice, it is natural but jam-packed with sugar and can raise one's blood sugar levels, especially in the case of those having diabetes. So, the healthy alternative for Diet Coke is lemon water or fruit-infused water," says Dr. Rajeshwari Panda, Head of the Dietetics Department at Medicover Hospital, Kharghar, Navi Mumbai. Does Coke Zero contain artificial sweeteners like aspartame and other chemical additives? Neither Diet Coke nor sugarcane juice is healthy. Hence, it is imperative to avoid both of them. "Understand that even after Diet Coke claims to have zero calories, it is loaded with artificial sweeteners like aspartame and chemical additives that may give a tough time to the gut, lead to cravings, and affect insulin response over time," warns Dr. Panda. Sugarcane juice, though high in natural sugar, is not advisable as well. According to Dr. Panda, "It can fluctuate one's blood sugar levels. So, neither is healthy at all. Diet Coke has no nutritional value. Don't drink Diet Coke in the name of healthy or mindful eating." "There is a hype about Diet Coke, as many videos are circulated online where it is being promoted as a healthy drink. Diet Coke can lead to tooth decay, erode the tooth enamel, headaches, obesity, raise blood pressure, sleep issues, and weakened bones. So, it's better to avoid Diet Coke. It is better to stay alert and say NO to diet soda." Risks of having sugarcane juice often Substituting cane sugar for actual cane sugar with high-fructose corn syrup can make the Diet Coke a bit better, but it won't turn it to a healthy beverage, is what experts. Sugarcane juice, while natural, contains a high amount of sugar and calories. "Frequent consumption can lead to increased blood glucose levels, which poses a risk for developing insulin resistance or type 2 diabetes, especially in individuals predisposed to metabolic disorders," says Dr Manjusha Agarwal, Senior Consultant Internal Medicine, Gleneagles Hospital Parel, Mumbai. Additionally, it lacks essential fibres because it is an extracted liquid, which can lead to spikes in blood sugar without the satiety that whole foods provide. Just because something is natural does not mean it is free from health risks. Regular intake of sugar-laden beverages can contribute to: Weight gain and associated health problems, such as obesity Cardiovascular disease Dental issues "Moreover, while sugarcane juice does contain some vitamins and minerals, over-reliance on it could result in a dietary imbalance. It's important to enjoy sugarcane juice in moderation and balance it with a variety of other nutrient-dense foods to support overall health." Always consult a healthcare professional for personalised advice, especially if you have pre-existing health conditions. Moderation is key for maintaining a healthy diet. Healthy alternatives to both Diet Coke and sugarcane juice Swap sugarcane juice with coconut water, fresh vegetable juices, or homemade lemonade that has less amount of sugar. "It is better to avoid fancy colas that are marketed as healthy and with zero calories. It is nothing but a gimmick to lure the customers. Don't fall prey to such marketing gimmicks that can do more harm than good to the body," explains Dr. Panda.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store