What is a &quot;health&quot; product or not is of no value to the discussion here I think, we can debate all day long about what way of eating is correct or not, then let me put it in broader terms: Targeting different groups with different products that actually might have nothing in common or even be antagonists in a way, is nothing immoral or unusual. I used the term &quot;health product&quot; as an antagonist to their sugary products.<p>I did not in any way say Nestle is not selling the cause and the solution, I was trying to make that point that this in itself is meaningless and in no sense immoral.<p>As kazinator brilliantly put it:<p>&quot;Yamaha wants to sell you noise-canceling headphones, and a motorcycle.&quot;[1]<p>We can talk about a tax on sugars, we can talk about a different regulatory framework, but I see nothing wrong with what Nestle is doing here given the current legal and regulatory situation.<p>And people make their choices, if Nestle wouldn&#x27;t sell product x, someone else would in some form, they are trying that you choose their product, that&#x27;s all, that&#x27;s called competition.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11659815" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=11659815</a>