As the recently released documentsCristin E. Kearns, Laura A. Schmidt, Stanton A. Glantz.Sugar Industry And Coronary Heart Disease Research. A Historical Analysis Of Internal Industry Documents. In the 60-ies of XX century, representatives of the sugar industry paid scientists for them to questioned the deleterious effects of sugar on the heart and found a new scapegoat - saturated fats.
It turns out that for 50 years, many of the findings and recommendations to improve nutrition have been drawn up in such a way as to bring benefits to the industry.
Sugar industry blames on saturated fat
Stanton Glantz (Stanton Glantz), professor of medicine at the University of California in San FranciscoRepresentatives of the sugar industry prevented a discussion about the dangers of sugar consumption for several decades.
According to these documents, in 1967, a trade group called "Sugar Research Foundation» (Sugar Research Foundation), known currently as the Sugar Association, three Harvard bribed scientists. For the publication of a review on the impact of research
Sahara and a variety of fat on the heart they have received an amount equal to 50 thousand dollars by today's standards.All the studies mentioned in the article have been specially selected for the "Foundation study of sugar." The review, which was published in the authoritative edition of the "Journal of Medicine New England" It argued that the use of sugar is almost nothing to do with the emergence of various heart disease. All the blame was placed on the saturated fats.
The consequences of the publication of the review
Since the food industry is not just an influence on the results of scientific research.
In a paper published last year in the "New York Times" articleAnahad O'Connor.Coca-Cola Funds Scientists Who Shift Blame for Obesity Away From Bad Diets. It reported that Coca-Cola, the world's largest producer of sugar-carbonated beverages, has invested millions of dollars in research, which was to disprove the connection between the consumption of such drinks and obesity. As confirmed in June the agency "Associated Press", confectionery manufacturers disburse work scientists, who claim that children who eat sweets, weigh less than their peers, not fond of these dainties.
Harvard scientists and representatives of the "Sugar Research Foundation", which stirred up this mess, is no longer alive. Among them were Dr. Mark Hegsted (Mark Hegsted), head of Food and Nutrition Service of the Ministry of USDA, and Dr. Frederick Stea (Fredrick Stare), head of the department of nutrition at Harvard University.
In response to the publication of documents exposing representatives Sugar Association said that in 1967 year medical journals is not required by researchers to disclose their sources of funding work. In particular, "The New England Journal of Medicine" was the only request such information since 1984.
In my defense association members said they did have to provide their research activities more transparent. However, published in 1967, he presented an overview of the view that had the right to exist. In addition, according to them, the use of large amounts of sugar - not the sole cause of heart disease.
Stanton GlantzThe fact that disclosure of these documents is very important, because the debate about the dangers of sugar and saturated fat are relevant to this day.
For decades, we were advised to reduce fat intake. This led to the fact that many have moved on fat-free products and foods with high sugar content, the use of which, according to modern scholars, led to the rampant obesity.
As stated by Dr. Glantz, scientists have done very cleverly, by publishing the review authoritative edition. Thus a study which in fact did not have an objective basis, has created a real scientific debate.
Data from this study formed the basis of the proposed Hegstedom recommendations on nutrition. These recommendations sugar described as fairly harmless component products harmful except for the teeth.
At present, warnings about the dangers of saturated fat is still occupy an important place among these recommendations. Recently, however, the World Health Organization and other authoritative organizations are concerned increased risk of cardiovascular disease due to abuse of products containing a large amount Sahara.
The reaction to the published documents
Dr. Marion was carrying (Marion Nestle), a professor from New York University, dealing with issues of food culture, health care and study of food habits of people, I wrote an articleMarion Nestle.Food Industry Funding of Nutrition Research. The Relevance of History for Current Debates. , Which commented on the published documents. According to her, the sugar industry was originally initiated the study in order to free themselves from responsibility for the increased risk of coronary heart disease among the population.
Marion was carryingThat's just terrible. I can not give a more egregious example of such behavior.
Professor of Harvard Medical School, a nutritionist Walter Willett (Walter Willett) said that since the 60s of the XX century the rules of professional ethics in the scientific environment has undergone significant changes. However, documents released once again remind us that the research should be funded not a business, and government sources.
According to Dr. Willett, the researchers deliberately did not provide enough data to be able to objectively assess the harm of sugar and saturated fat.
Walter WillettToday we know for sure only that foods containing refined carbohydrates, particularly sugar-containing beverages increase the likelihood of cardiovascular disease. We also know that you should avoid unhealthy fats.
What it was actually found in the found documents
Paper, because of which broke discussion, have been found in the archives of Harvard University, University of Illinois library and other academic libraries. They found Dr. Kristin Kearns (Cristin Kearns) from the University of California. According to these documents, in 1964, one of the leading representatives of the sugar industry, John Hickson (John Hickson) wondered how, using its own scientific research, it is possible to influence public opinion.
While scientists have just begun to talk about the relationship between the abuse of products containing large amounts of sugarAnd increased risk of heart disease in the population.
At the same time there were studies (for example, by the outstanding physiologist Ensel Keyes (Ancel Keys)), nominating a different view. According to these studies, cholesterol and saturated fats are harmful to the heart of a much greater degree than sugar.
Hickson suggested that you conduct your own research, as opposed to the first point of view. So the idea to fund the said review.
According to Hickson, its own research had to take "slander" to the sugar industry.
Hickson personally selected the materials for this review and check drafts. He rather made it clear what he wants from this publication. Knowing full well that interested Hickson, Dr. Hegsted agreed to go at it on occasion. Published fragments of correspondence between a businessman and a scientist show that Hickson was pleased with the results of Hegsteda.
In the end, the truth remains somewhere nearby. We need new studies that could objectively assess the degree of harm to the use of sugar and saturated fat. Similarly, we can only say that the sugar and fats are bad for our health. However, the published documents make us wonder how we can trust the published research.