And several leading academics raised concerns about processed foods and snacks displacing fresh and minimally processed foods in emerging markets.

Which of your many initiatives is aimed to address this issue, which IMO is one of the major issues as far as your products are concerned? Most beverages contain so much sugar that they should be regarded as dessert items, not beverages that should be regularly consumed to quench one's thirst. As you've heard before, you can make your snacks “healthier”, but that's not necessarily going to make them “healthy”.

I think this sums it all up for me. Pepsico is engaged in these dialogues because they do not want to compromise on their values and beleifs. What this means is that no matter what the science may say, Pepsico will continue to spout off its values and beliefs – that there is nothing wrong with their products, its all about choice and exercise, yadda, yadda, yadda.

But I got news for you. You may not want to compromise your profits but regulators will. No matter how hard you try (and you will try your hardest), the day is near when junk food will be regulated, almost like tobacco. Do you have any idea what you scientists are being used for by Pepsico? Its pathetic.

I get the impression that the ScienceBlogs folks would argue that the necessary means consist of a thick skin, a sense of humor, and a realization that values and beliefs are relatively worthless when compared to evidence. Which, of course, is not to say that they actually practice what they preach.

I was a little disappointed at the lack of content in your posting – it might of been nice to include links to the slides for your presentation or for the presentation of Boyd Swinburn. On the other hand, since you did not provide links, I had to do a search, and the results were probably more interesting. Here is some amusing, if unfair, criticism of Dr. Swinburn. And here is Dr. Swinburn speaking for himself. Notice the very interesting exchange between “fitguy” and “John” in the comments section regarding the proper interpretation of something called the “Women's Health Initiative Dietary Modification Trial”. I would be curious what Dr. Yach thinks about the results of that trial.

One additional question (asked more for my own amusement than because I want a response). You, Dr. Yach, write that we need “action to address the reality that many of the most desired foods are relatively more expensive than those contributing to energy dense products. It appears that the action which Boyd Swinton might favor would be a tax on sugar and HFCS. Do you know of a better choice of action than this?