Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE SUGAR INDUSTRY began funding research designed to play down sugar’s role in heart disease as early as the 1960s, according to an exposé of newfound documents.
The analysis is based on correspondence between a sugar trade group and researchers at Harvard University, and is the latest example showing how food and beverage makers attempt to shape public understanding of nutrition.
In particular, they did so by pointing the finger at fat.
In 1964, the group now known as the Sugar Association internally discussed a campaign to address “negative attitudes toward sugar” after studies began emerging linking sugar with heart disease, according to documents dug up from public archives.
The following year the group approved “Project 226,” which entailed paying Harvard researchers today’s equivalent of $48,900 for an article reviewing the scientific literature, supplying materials they wanted reviewed, and receiving drafts of the article.
The resulting article published in 1967 concluded there was “no doubt” that reducing cholesterol and saturated fat was the only dietary intervention needed to prevent heart disease.
The researchers overstated the consistency of the literature on fat and cholesterol, while downplaying studies on sugar, according to the analysis.
In a letter to one of the authors, an employee of the sugar industry group wrote:
Let me assure you this is quite what we had in mind and we look forward to its appearance in print.
The sugar industry’s funding and role were not disclosed when the article was published by the New England Journal of Medicine. The journal did not begin requesting author disclosures until 1984.
Sugar not fat
In an editorial, New York University professor of nutrition Marion Nestle has noted that for decades following the study, scientists and health officials focused on reducing saturated fat, not sugar, to prevent heart disease.
While scientists are still working to understand links between diet and heart disease, concern has shifted in recent years to sugars, and away from fat, Marion Nestle said.
A committee that advised the federal government on dietary guidelines said the available evidence shows “no appreciable relationship” between the dietary cholesterol and heart disease, although it still recommended limiting saturated fats.
The American Heart Association cites a study published in 2014 in saying that too much added sugar can increase risk of heart disease, though the authors of that study say the biological reasons for the link are not completely understood.
The findings, published last night, are part of an ongoing project by a former dentist, Cristin Kearns, to reveal the sugar industry’s decades-long efforts to counter science linking sugar with negative health effects, including diabetes.
Transparency
The latest work, published in the journal JAMA Internal Medicine, is based primarily on 31 pages of correspondence between the sugar group and one of the Harvard researchers who authored the review.
In a statement, the Sugar Association said it “should have exercised greater transparency in all of its research activities,” but that funding disclosures were not the norm when the review was published.
The group also questioned Kearns’ “continued attempts to reframe historical occurrences” to play into the current public sentiment against sugar.
The Sugar Association said it was a “disservice” that industry-funded research in general is considered “tainted.”
Coca-Cola
Companies including Coca-Cola and Kellogg’s, as well as groups for agricultural products like beef and blueberries regularly fund studies that become a part of scientific literature, are cited by other researchers, and are touted in press releases.
Companies say they adhere to scientific standards, and many researchers feel that industry funding is critical to advancing science given the growing competition for government funds.
But critics say such studies are often thinly veiled marketing that undermine efforts to improve public health.
Nestle, a longtime critic of industry funding of science, wrote:
Food company sponsorship, whether or not intentionally manipulative, undermines public trust in nutrition science.
The authors of the analysis note they were unable to interview key actors quoted in the documents because they are no longer alive.
They also note there is no direct evidence the sugar industry changed the manuscript, and that the documents provide a limited window into the sugar industry group’s activities.
They also said the roles of other industries and nutrition leaders in shaping the discussion about heart disease were not studied.
Nevertheless, they say the documents underscore why policy makers should consider giving less weight to industry-funded studies.
Although funding disclosures are now common practice in the scientific community, the role sponsors play behind the scenes is still not always clear.
Disclosure
In June, the Associated Press reported on a study funded by the sugar industry’s trade group in the US that found children who eat sweets tend to weigh less than those who don’t.
The National Confectioners Association, which touted the findings in a press release, provided feedback to the authors on a draft – even though a disclosure said it had no role in the paper. The association said its suggestions didn’t alter the findings.
In November, the AP also reported on emails showing Coca-Cola was instrumental in creating a nonprofit that said its mission was to fight obesity, even though the group publicly said the soda maker had “no input” into its activities.
A document circulated at Coke said the group would counter the “shrill rhetoric” of “public health extremists.”
Coca-Cola subsequently conceded that it had not been transparent, and the group later disbanded.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
“You’ve had enough dirt(chocolate, ice cream, sweets) for today.”
“Eat the fat, it’s the best part.”
My granny, c1980 something.
This made me smile. My granny was the same. I used to cut the fat off and she would eat it off my plate. She wasn’t one bit overweight either and lived until she was 92. Healthy as a horse. Had a very bad stroke and the only thing that kept her going was her strong heart for 3 weeks after it.
Makes you wonder why else we’ve been lied to about and what we’re still being told today?
“what” else I meant sorry. Damn autocorrect. You always end up posting some thong you didn’t Nintendo. Lol
Global warming perhaps
Eh Eircode :)
Oh its politically incorrect to call it global warming. Its climate change now. Because some parts of the planet are getting colder now.
“Fluoride is a nutrient” I reckon thats a lie too.
Nah the greatest lie of all; a supernatural being created heaven and earth in a few days and according to Messer Healy Rae he is alone in controlling the weather ;-)
Diesel fumes, in the future we’ll look back thinking how the fook we were allowed to breathe in that crap..
The banking system, religion, government – all a former of BS in one form or another designed to keep us under control.
Toothpaste.
Finally people are getting accurate information about sugar and fat. Robert Ludwig is worth watching regarding the effects sugar has on the body.
Tell the dopes in Safefood Ireland, still recommending sugar laden low fat Yogurt for schoolkids. Chief nutritionist there caught in the 1970s mentality.
I love the New York professor’s name; Marion Nestle. Very apt.
The food industry corrupting the truth?
Never??
Next the will be telling us the pharmaceutical industry is corrupt.
Next we will learn cigarettes are actually good for you.
One of my all time favorite movies.
Still waiting for the orgasmatron…….
Did you know doctors smoke camel cigerettes more than any other brand? A man of medicine must know a good cigerette https://youtu.be/gCMzjJjuxQI
Sugar is slowly and eventually toxic on the human body and human brain. Some people tolerate it better than others. Fir most, it is damaging. It is a factor in some dementias.
I got a very high triglycerides reading. My GP recommended reducing fat. I gave up added sugar, gave up fresh orange juice, cut down refined starches and within 6 weeks my triglycerides.,
Don’t keep us in suspense Michael…
What happened to your triglycerides? ?
He just had the big one…
Must have gone the same way as Endas Mogo.
and within 6 weeks my triglycerides.,fully supported my position on the 8th Amendment.
Reduced my triglycerides to below healthy average.
The point is that sugar in my case elevated bad cholesterol.
My GP was genuinely astonished. I are more fat, including saturated fats, and the only change was elimination of sugar, avoidance of fruit drinks, not fruit, and reduction in processed starches.
The salt industry have been telling us for years to take a pinch of their stuff when it comes to “University” studies and recommendations on food and health. I’ve been doing just that. My frekin blood pressure is sky high though
Try pink Himalayan salt, tastes the same but is actually good for you. I don’t have a link, just google it.
I suggest watching two very interesting, very different videos on this topic if you’re interested:
1) Fathead.
An amateur documentary about dieting, the misconceptions and the great switch to carbs (a slow acting sugar) we made in the 70s off the back of the “saturated fats cause heart attacks” panic.
2) Sugar: The Bitter Truth
A lengthy but detailed medical talk about sugar from a dietitian who helps extremely overweight children become healthy about exactly what sugar does to your body.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM
Also check out Sugar Crash from RTE on iplayer and That Sugar Film, made by an Aussie and exposing the effects of sugar on the body. Thatsugarfilm.com
A classic.
Only a simpleton doesn’t no that eating too much of anything is bad for you. If you eat bananas all day you may as well be eating Mars bars.
Eat too many bananas and you’ll go ape shït eventually
Eat too many carrots and you will turn into an Orange man or Woman.
That cliche is all well and good but there is nutritional benefits to banana’s. There is no nutritional benefits to Mars bars. Moderation is fine the problem is how many people think there is sugar in almost every processed item? The average person thinks they have a balanced diet not knowing there actual sugar intake is much more then they thought.
I meant to say how many people realise how much sugar they actually consume.
There is just as much sugar in a bannna then a snickers bar. Sorry to burst your bubble. Sugar is in all fruit its a natural substance.
The only nutritional benefit in a banana is potassium.
List the nutritional benefits if the ingredients in a marsbar and then compare them to fruit. You will be supprised.
Are you actually serious? Fructose is a natural sugar, not a refined processed sugar found in a Mars bar. If you believe that a Mars bar and a piece of fruit are nutritionally the same then that’s just bonkers.
Yes i am. I have worked in the fitness industry for 10 years and helped 100s of people to loose weight and change there lives around. Not for much profit but for sustainable and realistic weight loss and that is always my reward.
and Neil you are right in what you say but when you get out in to the real world(out of college) away from stats and figures and dealing with people you will realise these studies do nothing for nobody.
The idiot brigade has struck again. Eating far to many bananas is far more beneficial that Mars bars any day. However the potassium benefit is essential for muscle coordination that is found in bananas and not in mars bars. As it is potassium and sodium that are essential in muscle nerve neuron function. Why do athletes eat a banana during a performance competition golfers especially. Far better that a Mars bar.
Note most fruits are high in fructose which is the sugar cannot use immediately and more often is stored as fat. The harvest for mist animals is where we included put on weight for the long lean winter ahead. The very same harvest sugar is HFCS or more commonly called high fructose corn syrup. This is a manufactured sugar from corn starch which is a chemical process developed by a Japanese scientist in the 80′s.
This has replaced cane sugar in almost all sugar additives to everything as it is heavenly subsidized by the US farm bill. Gets weirder this same sugar is responsible with the highest levels of obesity In the developed world Plus child type 2 diabetes.
Most fruit should only be consumed in autumn through to Jan /feb and rarely after that. Sugar should rarely consumed ad should be treated as poison except in the odd occasion.
You be better giving you kids cans of beer that cans of coke or any other pop product. The alcohol beverage will do them less damage long term!
And this is only the start. There is so much more but you’ll have to buy the book. All of which is based on empirical scientific data.
Congrates Jim. Your able too copy and post. Type 2 diabetes is hereditary by the way. As are all diseases associated with obesity. Just out of curiosity who gave us the guidelines to diagnose obesity?
Listen you moron or what ever stupidity planet you came down from. You know fu€k all about the food industry. I’m out here in Idaho working in the very industry that’s responsible for what’s wrong with our food today. And your wrong about the causes of type 2 diabetes. Along with most of your comments now fu€k right off you ignorant moron
Vincent you are actually so badly misinformed that I don’t know we’re to start. Are you actually telling clients that chocolate bars and fruit are nutritionally the same? Fitness instructors are not nutritionists either for that matter.
This is just plain wrong.
6 Week course and you are a fitness instructor, 4-year degree and you are a dietitian, just saying.
dietician – ugh
Vincent, in no way is a banana the same as a Mars Bar and I genuinely hope you don’t advise your clients of same. I assume, since you have said that you have helped loads of people lose weight that you actually advise them to steer clear of both and use the sugar content as your argument, and that’s a different matter. In actual fat, the amount of potassium found in a banana is quite low compared to mushrooms or avocado, which would be more beneficial for weight loss anyway, even with the avocado’s (good!) fat content. Don’t write bananas off completely though and have a Mars bar in place as bananas are a good source of fibre and nutrients and the body also has to work much harder to break it down than it would a Mars bar.
That’s the problem with scientists.
No ethics or morals.
Is body of christ low fat or high carb?
It’s not just sugar.
It’s all carbs found in food, which is transformed by our body in glucose. Too much glucose might lead to cells not accepting any more glucose, and then: metabolic syndrome, high cholesterol, diabetes.
In the last years, we are pointing the finger at sugar, when, in fact we should change our paradigm from “eat less fat” to “be more careful with carbs”. Rice, potatoes, pizza, bread, sugary drinks should have less proportion in our diet.
We have been intoxicated for 50 years that fat makes us fat, our fat consumption kept droping year after year, yet obesity kept rising. Let’s not fall in the same trap by blaming only sugar.
And our own dairy council lovein telling us that milk is a strong source of calcium..
A line which suits only very few people i.e hte dairy industry..
If the government were worried about calcium and bones, they should be telling us about other sources – leafy greens for example, which we could grow in our own gardens, but there would be no money in that now.
venus gummy de milo.. gummy artisans
Put a huge tax on these researchers, and politicians for all theories and misinformation!
#their
The AP have been listening to “stuff you should know” podcast.
How about doing some real journalism journal instead of telling old news all the time. Sort of like investigating etc?
The most important things the media should be telling us aren’t things that just happened yesterday. They’re things that have been happening for years.
And in other news,blue mixed with yellow turns to green!
Mr Wonka is not happy ;)
There is sugar in beer and in bread, the next big thing will be Potassium sorbate?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potassium_sorbate
have your say