Coca-Cola Co. actively and successfully lobbied against legislation in multiple countries that would have prevented it from advertising to kids, according to emails released by D.C. Leaks that the anonymous hacker website claims are internal company correspondence.

Coca-Cola would not confirm or deny the legitimacy of the apparently hacked emails. It referred MarketWatch to the company’s policy on marketing to children and industry-sponsored monitoring of that commitment.

But the emails, if legitimate, show the company pushing for the ability to self-regulate, then sticking to a self-imposed commitment not to target advertising toward children up to age 11.

“ ‘It’s so clear that Coca-Cola understands the success of national restrictions on marketing tobacco to kids, and they’re doing everything they can to convince the public and legislators that they should be allowed to self-regulate.’ ” — Kyle Pfister, Ninjas for Health

Coca-Cola KO, +0.36% explicitly chose public-health-minded actions with the intent of preventing regulation, in the face of intensifying public-health crises, the hacked emails suggest.

Several Gulf countries “have some of the world’s highest levels of obesity and diabetes, and therefore concrete industry action is important to avoid regulation,” said an email allegedly written by Michael Goltzman, a Coca-Cola vice president, the day after the company publicly made a pledge to market responsibly in several Gulf countries.

Goltzman, the emails suggest, also discussed potential industry commitments in the region “that could head off regulation,” including caloric changes in its portfolio and support for a healthy lifestyle campaign.

Kyle Pfister, founder of the public-health network Ninjas for Health, compared the actions described in the emails to those of the tobacco industry decades ago. “It’s so clear that Coca-Cola understands the success of national restrictions on marketing tobacco to kids, and they’re doing everything they can to convince the public and legislators that they should be allowed to self-regulate soda advertising themselves,” he said. “They have not earned this trust.”

See more: Hacked emails show how Coca-Cola fights the soda tax at local and global levels

Outside pressure to “establish an age for the child weaken the importance of self-regulation,” said a May 2016 email purportedly written by Coca-Cola’s senior manager of government relations, Sophia Chrysopoulou, regarding regulation being considered in Europe.

The company’s efforts resulted in “no age limit for [marketing to] children” in a proposed European Union regulation, said the email.

That was “a significant win,” according to a subsequent email allegedly written by Wouter Vermeulen, group director for international government relations and public affairs, one that “in turn helps to frame the debate at country level.”

In another email, Vermeulen appeared to go on to discuss the company’s efforts to “rally local industry” to block a Polish restriction on advertising to kids younger than 16.

Kids aged 12 to 14, who are not covered by Coca-Cola’s responsible-advertising policy, are a critical demographic for the industry, said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy with the nonprofit watchdog group Center for Science in the Public Interest. CSPI is a longtime critic of the soda industry and favors barring advertising to kids aged 14 and under.

The “tween” demographic is “making more and more independent decisions and has more money to spend themselves,” Wootan said. “More importantly, they’re influencing what their parents buy.”

Kids are a critical group for food and beverage manufacturers because of how early in life people’s long-term preferences become established.

Their familiarity with certain products has repercussions across institutions such as schools, child-care centers and after-school programs, Wootan said.

Soda is hardly the only source of sugar or the sole poor nutritive source in a typical diet, of course. But unlike unhealthy food, sodas and other sugar-sweetened beverages aren’t filling and aren’t thought of as caloric splurges, she noted — which is why most dietitians will tell clients early on to eliminate them as a not particularly taxing way of cutting down.

Sugary drinks are “a top source of added sugars, which add to our calorie consumption without providing any positive nutritional benefit,” Wootan said. “Beverages play a uniquely problematic role in obesity.”

See:PepsiCo sets goal to reduce sugar and saturated fat in its products by 2025

Coca-Cola, along with PepsiCo Inc. PEP, +0.37% — which recently set goals for reducing added sugar, saturated fat and salt in many of its products — is a powerful force in fighting regulation, Wootan said, with Kraft Heinz Co. KHC, +0.35% and Dr Pepper Snapple Group US:DPS playing relatively minor parts.

Coca-Cola is not the only company engaged in this antiregulatory effort, she conceded, “just the only one with hacked emails.”