A newly hired health-and-exercise researcher for the University of California San Diego came to the school from a previous job in which he participated in science backed by the Coca-Cola Co. and other producers of sugar-sweetened food and beverages.

The professor, Dr. Michael Pratt, started June 1 at UCSD’s School of Medicine, Division of Global Health. He was hired to provide expertise in physical activity and non-communicable disease policy, according to the division’s website.

Pratt came to UCSD from the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, headquartered — like Coca-Cola — in Atlanta. He has been mentioned in an ongoing debate about industry influence in the academic world.

Critics say industry-funded research is more likely than independent studies to find that diet is less important than exercise in maintaining a healthy weight. UCSD and Pratt say his work has not been influenced by its funders.


At least seven recent papers that Pratt co-authored acknowledge funding from Coca-Cola. Coke has also paid — directly and through nonprofits it funds — some of his expenses to attend industry-sponsored events and conferences.

“My research is focused on physical activity as a global public health issue and how we can increase population levels of physical activity,” Pratt said by email. “Carrying out high quality research on a critically important public health issue such as physical activity in no way downplays the importance of other health behaviors such as diet and smoking.”

Pratt said he does not have proposals or requests for funding submitted to Coca-Cola, and he doesn’t plan any.

The professor worked on a controversial study published last year in the journal Obesity. The study, which listed Coca-Cola as its only funding source, compared various lifestyle behaviors in 9- to 11-year-old children in 12 countries.


Results found “no significant associations between dietary patterns and obesity” in the children studied. Physical activity, sleep, and time spent watching television were identified as more important predictors of obesity than whether the children ate mostly vegetables or diets dominated by processed food and soda.

The paper and the data behind it are part of a broader research project to study childhood obesity at an international level. Coca-Cola contributed $6.4 million in funding between 2010 and 2014, according to the company’s website.

Some independent studies have come to similar conclusions about the importance of exercise versus diet, including a 2011 study in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition funded by a number of Scandinavian foundations.

But a 2013 article in PLOS Medicine, from the group once known as the Public Library of Science, investigated whether food industry funding or disclosed conflicts of interest influenced the results of published systematic reviews on the association between sugar-sweetened drinks and weight gain or obesity. Researchers concluded that reviews with potential conflicts were five times more likely to find no link between sugary beverages and weight gain or obesity.


Coca-Cola officials say the company does not condition funding on academic outcomes and cannot prevent research it funds from being published, based on those outcomes. Spokeswoman Katherine Schermerhorn said via email that the company has funded research for “independent and respected professionals and institutions” to “explore issues that have been raised about our products.”

She said Coca-Cola has not directly funded research at UCSD, according to records that date to 2010.

Along with co-authoring food and beverage industry-funded health studies, Pratt has also advised the International Life Sciences Institute, an industry-sponsored group based in Washington, D.C.

The institute’s North American branch received at least $1.3 million from Coca-Cola between 2010 and 2015, according to the company. Pratt was among the institute’s science advisers and government liaisons for its Technical Committee on Energy Balance and Active Lifestyle. Eric Hentges, executive director of the institute’s North American branch, said the position is unpaid.


“We love to have people of the expertise of Dr. Pratt,” Hentges said by telephone. “Your university got one of the top guys in the field.”

The committee “seeks to define the state of the science and identify research gaps with regard to energy balance and physical activity and its relationship to active/healthy living and weight management,” according to group’s 2015 annual report.

Pratt and UCSD said the institute funded some of his research with grants to his employers — in some cases, covering travel and other expenses.

In 2011, the federal Office of Government Ethics reported the institute’s North American branch paid $1,319 worth of expenses for Pratt’s travel to Tokyo, where the institute invited Pratt “to be a speaker on Energy Balance and Active Lifestyle.”


The institute’s North American branch is partnering with UCSD on an upcoming “tech summit” at the university on “innovative tools for assessing diet and physical activity for health promotion,” according to the nonprofit’s website. Pratt is slated to speak at the two-day event, which starts Nov. 30.

University officials said partners for the event also include the National Institutes of Health, the CDC, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the American College of Sports Medicine.

Pratt has worked for decades at the CDC, where he remains employed as a senior adviser for global health. Pratt is working part-time at UCSD and will continue to do so as he wraps up his work at the CDC through the end of the year, said Scott LaFee, a spokesman for the university. Pratt will be cutting some connections with the life sciences institute, LaFee said.

“In his transition from the CDC and moving to UC San Diego, Dr. Pratt has ended his advisory member activity with ILSI and does not have any research funding from them,” LaFee wrote in an email.


During the recruitment process, UCSD reviewed all Pratt’s outside activities and compensation, and didn’t find any issues, LaFee said.

Pratt’s association with Coca-Cola and the institute came under scrutiny this past summer when his colleague, Dr. Barbara Bowman, left the CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention under a cloud. U.S. Right to Know, an advocacy group, had obtained her emails under the federal Freedom of Information Act and publicized them. In one email, she was giving advice to the founder of the International Life Sciences Institute about how best to “have a conversation” with officials at the World Health Organization, which was issuing guidance about the ill health effects of soft drinks.

Officials at the CDC confirmed that Bowman left her job at the agency at the end of June, but would not comment on the reason for her departure.

In a blog post in August, Carey Gillam, research director at U.S. Right to Know, described Pratt’s work with the institute as “a prime example” of undue influence by Coca-Cola and industry allies at the CDC.


Andy Bellatti, strategic director for the organization Dietitians for Professional Integrity, said by telephone, “It’s no secret that the food and beverage industries’ long-held tactics and strategy is to insert itself into academic research to do damage control, and also control the narrative of how their products are presented. The last thing the industry wants is to paint their products in a negative light because it affects sales.”

LaFee, spokesman for UCSD, said scientific research funding comes from many sources, and does not affect the outcome.

“Coca-Cola and ILSI have provided grants and other funding to numerous research and public service organizations … and many universities, not unlike funders such as the American Cancer Society, Sloan Foundation, Pfizer, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Illumina and others,” LaFee said. “All funding is fully disclosed – and has no bearing on the conduct of the research or subsequent results.”

Bess Marcus, chairwoman of the Department of Family Medicine and Public Health, said, “We are thrilled to have Dr. Pratt join our faculty in Family Medicine and Public Health at UC San Diego. He is dedicated to public health and unbiased in his study design and presentation of results.”