This sounds more like a headline in the make-believe newspaper that serves a masked, comic-book superhero’s fictitious Gotham City. But it isn’t. This is a real-life study, conducted by a prestigious Ivy League university with figures provided by, none other than the famously corrupt United Nations, which is mostly funded with American taxpayer dollars. .

The U.N.’s health branch, the World Health Organization (WHO), claims that 180,000 obesity-related deaths worldwide are linked to sugary drinks. This includes about 25,000 Americans. Stop the presses! Now it all makes sense; New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg was simply trying to save lives when he created a measure to ban oversized sodas, though a judge axed the effort.

It provided great fodder at last week’s Conservative Political Action (CPAC) conference. In fact, the big hit at the annual event near Washington D.C. came when former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin poked fun a Bloomberg by whipping out a Big Gulp filled with soda during her speech. “Oh, Bloomberg’s not around, our Big Gulp’s safe,” Palin said as the crowd roared. She went on: “Shoot, it’s just pop with low-cal ice cubes in it. I hope that’s OK.”

Actually it’s not OK, if you believe the U.S.-funded U.N. figures that are being cited in a report that was recently presented at the American Heart Association scientific conference. This is heavy stuff that will undoubtedly be used by the Obama administration to control consumption. After all, Michelle Obama got Congress to pass a $4.5 billion law to control what Americans eat under the auspice of tackling an obesity epidemic. If sugary drinks really kill tens of thousands then Uncle Sam must intervene!

Of the deaths linked to drinking sugar-sweetened soft drinks, fruit juice or sports beverages, 132,000 were from diabetes, 44 000 from cardiovascular disease and 6,000 from cancer, according to the study. The fact that ¾ of the deaths were related to diabetes “suggests that limiting sugary-beverage intake is an important step in reducing diabetes deaths,” the study says.

Perhaps not coincidentally, the U.N. figures cited in the new report coincide with the First Lady’s rhetoric. It says that two out of three adults and one out of three children in the United States are overweight or obese and that the nation spends an estimated $190 billion a year treating obesity-related health conditions. “Rising consumption of sugary drinks has been a major contributor to the obesity epidemic,” the study says.

The trade group that represents the non-alcoholic beverage industry in the U.S., the American Beverage Association (ABA), fired back saying the report is “more about sensationalism than science.” Linking sugar-sweetened beverages to chronic diseases like diabetes, cancer and cardiovascular disease is wrong because the facts don’t support it, the group points out. “The researchers make a huge leap when they take beverage intake calculations from around the globe and allege that those beverages are the cause of deaths which the authors themselves acknowledge are due to chronic disease.”

How embarrassing for the administration that, up until a few hours ago, it was set to bestow a special award upon Egyptian “democracy activist” Samira Ibrahim for all her work on behalf of women’s rights. First Lady Michelle Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry were going to present Ibrahim with the International Women of Courage award at a State Department ceremony this afternoon.

The event will go on and “9 extraordinary women” will still be commended, according to a State Department announcement, but Ibrahim was abruptly removed from the original list of 10. The annual International Women of Courage Award is supposed to recognize “women around the globe who have shown exceptional courage and leadership in advocating for women’s rights and empowerment, often at great personal risk.” Since its inception the U.S. has honored 66 women from 44 different countries.

It’s baffling that Ibrahim made the list in the first place, considering her history. Even her country’s English-language news website questioned the nomination earlier this week, pointing out that it was expected to fuel controversy after some foreign media outlets dug up some of Ibrahim’s anti-Semitic and anti-US statements. Also published in Arabic, the Egyptian news site offers some of the outrageous comments Ibrahim has posted on her social media sites.

On the eleventh anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, as a mob attacked the American embassy in Cairo and murdered the U.S. ambassador, Ibrahim posted this on her Twitter account: “Today is the anniversary of 9/11. May [we] every year see the US burning.” On July 18, 2012, after five Israeli tourists were murdered by a Hezbollah suicide bomber, Ibrahim tweeted: “An explosion on a bus carrying Israelis in Burgas airport in Bulgaria on the Black Sea. Today is such a lovely day with a lot of lovely news.”

In separate August 2012 posts, Ibrahim described Saudi Arabia’s ruling family as “dirtier than the Jews” and she seemed to compliment Adolf Hitler: “I have discovered with the passage of days, that no act contrary to morality, no crime against society, takes place, except with the Jews having a hand in it. Hitler.”

With that said, why on earth would the United States even consider honoring this woman? Why didn’t someone in the Obama Administration—an intern or part-time aide, even—vet Ibrahim? Here is what a State Department spokeswoman told reporters this week as the agency scrambled to minimize the damage: “We, as a department, became aware very late in the process about Samira Ibrahim’s alleged public comments.”

It’s as if the administration is obsessed with food. In some cases it argues that an epidemic of obesity requires the government to intervene and provide all children and low-income populations with healthier diets. In others, the administration cites its goal of conquering a hunger crisis by eradicating “food insecure” households.

Regardless, it’s costing American taxpayers a bundle. Michelle Obama got Congress to pass—and her husband to sign—a $4.5 billion law to conquer childhood obesity by asserting that it’s the government’s duty to protect poor and ethnic minority communities that are overwhelmingly obese compared to their wealthier, white counterparts. Under the measure Uncle Sam picks up the tab to provide low-income populations with healthy foods like fruits and vegetables.

On the other extreme is a hunger problem that creates what the administration has coined food insecurity. This requires the government to step in and feed tens of millions of people, some who can well afford to buy their own food. In fact, last summer a federal audit revealed that many who don’t qualify for food stamps receive them under Obama’s special “broad-based” eligibility program that disregards income and asset requirements.

As a result a record number of people—46 million and growing—get food stamps from the U.S. government. In fiscal year 2012 this costs taxpayers a record $80.4 billion, according to the government’s own figures. That’s a whopping $2.7 billion increase from the previous fiscal year! And that doesn’t even include other taxpayer-funded food programs for low-income populations like “Child Nutrition Programs” that received an additional $18.3 billion last year.

The insanity has been created by the First Couple and their mission to eradicate “food insecure households” in the U.S. To accomplish it, the administration has spent millions of dollars on ad campaigns to recruit more food-stamp recipients, even doling out hefty cash rewards to local governments that sign up the most people. One state even bragged about a $5 million performance bonus it got from the feds for its “swift processing of applications.”

Incredibly, this week the administration announced that it is spending more than $75 million on research that will help address food security challenges in the U.S. and globally. The money will go to 21 universities throughout the country that will “find solutions to increasing food availability and decreasing the number of food insecure individuals,” according to an announcement posted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

“Millions of American households lack the resources to access sufficient food, and many of those, including our children, may go hungry at least once this year,” according to USDA Deputy Secretary Kathleen Merrigan.” She says the grants will help policymakers and others “better recognize the food and nutrition needs of low-income communities in our country.”