7 ms·

Sugar industry secretly paid for favorable Harvard research

222 points by pmcpinto 10y ago

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
agounaris 10y ago
Nooooo such things don't happen, its a lie! :D
jstoja 10y ago
Few weeks ago I had the funny remark from a co-worker saying that among all the stuff we eat, sugar is the most useless one. After thinking a bit about this, it really makes no sense to keep eating that much sugary stuff...
- rurban 10y ago
  Sugar is not useless at all. It's a very powerful and cheap drug, far more effective than cocaine. Just don't overdo it.
  - curiousgal 10y ago
    > Just don't overdo it. And that's where the issue lies. Most processed foods are extremely rich in sugar and we've gotten used to their taste.
    - rurban 10y ago
      Sure. Because the sugar industry knows the effects, and uses it to their advantage. No other country puts that much sugar into everything. Politics and health organizations in the US are complicit.
- TeMPOraL 10y ago
  Wait, among all the stuff we eat, the primary fuel source for our bodies is the most useless one?
  - pennaMan 10y ago
    You are referring to glucose. GP is referring to fructose. One is the primary fuel source of living things while the other one is straight up poison.
fratlas 10y ago
I honestly think a sugar tax would be a great move (even if only on soda, the worst culprit).
- PieterH 10y ago
  Probably, yes, IMO sugar needs to be regulated and taxed like alcohol.
  - raverbashing 10y ago
    What if it was the contrary? What if it was fat (beyond trans fat) that was taxed and regulated based on BS studies?
    - croon 10y ago
      > What if it was the contrary? What if it was fat (beyond trans fat) that was taxed and regulated based on BS studies? I don't understand your posit. Are you saying sugar would be taxed based on BS studies? The topic of discussion is that older studies have downplayed the detrimental effect of sugar, while upplaying the role of fat. If sugar was taxed it would be according to current studies. If fat was taxed it would not be. Is your question a thought experiment or what are you saying?
      - harmegido 10y ago
        She's saying that how can you be so sure that sugar is the culprit? 30 years ago, people were very sure that fat was the culprit. I actually do personally think that sugar is a main driver of these problems, but I get her point.
        kardashian007 10y ago
        Fat is 9 kcal/g, while protein and simple carbs are about 4 kcal/g. And there is a pathway to absorb complex lipid rather than going through the effort of breaking them down. The nuances and complexities come in because of individual genetics, state of health and a myriad of interactions between the complexity of foods and their numerous and unpredictable interactions with a constantly changing system. In order to get a better picture of health and lifestyle consequences will require close to 24x7 monitoring of many parameters (quantified self). So, for example, it may be possible to find out allergies and almost allergies, interactions before they fully occur and inflammation promotion/reduction properties of lifestyle choices. Add software and deep learning, and there are almost endless possibilities for health and lifestyle micro- and macro-optimizations.
curiousgal 10y ago
Whenever the sugar subject is brought up I can't help but recommend watching That Sugar Film. Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uaWekLrilY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uaWekLrilY
PieterH 10y ago
See previous HN discussion from a couple of days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12480733 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12480733
tener 10y ago
Having heard of various crazy class action lawsuits I wonder if someone can sue them for trying (and succeeding) to mislead the public on the health problems due to sugar consumption?
- PieterH 10y ago
  The lawsuits against Big Tobacco are a good template.
amelius 10y ago
I hope this revelation does not only have consequences for the parties involved, but that the systemic problems in science and its relation with industry are addressed. For example, there is no or little incentive right now for researchers to reproduce/validate existing results; even if those results are highly cited. Also, the article speaks of "influential journals", but the source of a publication should not matter in the end.
jcbrand 10y ago
Makes you wonder how many other studies are bought and paid for, such as the recent studies highlighting the evils of allowing cash (or at least high denomination notes) in our society. For example, from this Guardian article: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/15/crime-terrorism-and-tax-evasion-why-banks-are-waging-war-on-cash http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/15/crime-t... > Calls for the eradication of cash have been bolstered by evidence that high-value notes play a major role in crime, terrorism and tax evasion. In a study for the Harvard Business School last week, former bank boss Peter Sands called for global elimination of the high-value note.
- JonnieCache 10y ago
  As much as I agree with your post in general, what reason is there for the €500 note apart from stuffing as much value into a briefcase as possible?
  - iraklism 10y ago
    Because you are afraid that you will either lose a significant amount of your life's savings (Cyprus) or you will no longer have unrestricted access to your account (Greece).
  - ptero 10y ago
    Folks who do not trust banks/governments may want to do cash transactions. Even if it seems highly unusual to pay for a car/vacation/house in cash this is not a reason to outlaw it. Second, with inflation, what seems to be a high sum today may not seem so 15 years down the road. Third, many suspect that after outlawing largest bills we will go to prohibiting largest remaining, etc.
    - Luc 10y ago
      > Even if it seems highly unusual to pay for a car/vacation/house in cash this is not a reason to outlaw it. It's already outlawed in most EU countries. In Italy the maximum cash payment is 3000 euro. In France, 1000 euro. Especially real estate is great for laundering money if cash payment is allowed. > Second, with inflation, what seems to be a high sum today may not seem so 15 years down the road. Inflation in the Eurozone is essentially at zero.
junipergreen 10y ago
At least that kind of thing doesn't happen today. Take this study that says eating lots of pasta doesn't make you fat. Oh wait. (Note the two funding sources in the right-hand column) http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/inmn-pin063016.php http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/inmn-pin06301...
rurban 10y ago
That is known for decades, and this is only the tip of the iceberg. It's the same strategy as used by the tobacco industry and GM (Monsanto). Most obesity researchers are paid by the soda industry. e.g. http://www.alternet.org/food/soda-scandal-journalists-fail-reveal-sources-funded-coca-cola http://www.alternet.org/food/soda-scandal-journalists-fail-r... The best outline is the latest "Sugar" documentary http://thatsugarfilm.com/film/synopsis/ http://thatsugarfilm.com/film/synopsis/ who started to get the word out and of course Yudkin's book. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/diet/10634081/John-Yudkin-the-man-who-tried-to-warn-us-about-sugar.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/diet/10634081... The UNICEF is trying for years to warn against excessive sugar consumption. But only their latest report speaks out: https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/IWP_2016_13.pdf https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/IWP_2016_13.pdf The Soda industry with the help of politicians did effectively destroy all sugar warnings and turn the carb problem into a fitness and fat issue.
- 7sigma 10y ago
  Regarding gmos, thats not really true. While a lot of the research was done by industry (which is how its supposed to, why should the public pay for safety testing of products ?), there is also publicly funded research that confirms that GMOs are no more risky than traditional breeding and mutagenics. The EU funded a 10 year project in that area https://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-... The genera database can also give an indication of the funding by private and government in biotech (i think its 1/3 or 1/2, but can't find the link) https://www.biofortified.org/portfolio/infographic-world-map-of-government-funded-gmo-studies/ https://www.biofortified.org/portfolio/infographic-world-map... Update: Replying to some of the comments, just want to clarify that company should pay for the testing, but the actual scientific research should be done independently. Of course the company will probably have done some initial research of their own (at least you would hope so), but it would need to be replicated independently. Update 2: Grist covered gmos a few years back and here is the part about the regulation http://grist.org/food/the-gm-safety-dance-whats-rule-and-whats-real/ http://grist.org/food/the-gm-safety-dance-whats-rule-and-wha...
Red_Tarsius 10y ago
«Is it really true that food companies deliberately set out to manipulate research in their favor? Yes, it is, and the practice continues,” Nestle added, noting that Coca-Cola and candy makers have both tried recently to influence nutrition research.» Universities need to be held accountable for researchers' ethics. The article suggests that the Sugar Research Foundation merely followed the standard procedure of any other trade group, that is, this was not an isolated incident. Maybe Harvard would be more inclined to avoid such malpractice if its brand and credibility suffered from it. Universities should not act like a PR firm. «Trained as a dentist, Kearns said she was shocked to hear a keynote speaker at a 2007 dentistry conference — on diabetes, no less — tell her there is no evidence linking sugar to chronic disease. She quit her job and devoted herself full-time to uncovering documents that show the sugar industry’s influence over public policy and science.» This quote exemplifies Arendt's banality of evil.
- quantumhobbit 10y ago
  If the the research grant process wasn't already screwed up, it would be the perfect place to enforce ethics. "Sorry we can't approve your grant proposal due to ethical lapses at your institution." It wouldn't take long for universities to wise up and take ethics seriously.
  - merraksh 10y ago
    Sure, but only if those in charge of approving/denying grants (at the NSF, NIH, etc.) also have high ethical standards. And they happen to be researchers and research managers.
cjpb 10y ago
I understand why the sugar industry does this, just fighting fire with fire. The meat, dairy and egg industries have far more to answer for in regards to the current health epidemic in the western world. Do people really think it's the sugar in the soda with all the literature we now have on nutrition? What about the oil laden fries, and the burgers packed with cholesterol, fat and animal protein that seem to be so popular in the western world? Most westerners I know consume overt fat and excess protein at least 2/3 meals each day then wonder why they have health problems. I've seen more obese patients than I can count eat nothing but refined sugar, white rice, fruit juice (The Rice Diet [1]) and come out months later weighing half their original weight while reversing most, if not all of their western disease. Yet the majority of medical professionals continue to ignore the literature and clinical results that work in the LONG term. And I know this is anecdotal - but when I traveled rural Asia, all the leanest and healthiest people I met ate nothing but rice, fruit and vegetables - it's all they could afford (the poorest of the lot just eat rice). They also have bowls of refined sugar on the table instead of salt and drink cane juice/sugary drinks like it's going out of fashion. I personally eat 3000-4000 calories of carbohydrates each day, whether I'm training or not (cycling) and I never put on weight - I'm certainly not scared of soda. Winter just passed here, I trained probably once a week due to rain and actually weigh less than before Winter when I was training daily - most likely due to Thermogenesis [2]. Note too that de novo lipogenesis is so severely inefficient in humans [3] (even when over feeding) that it's laughable to even correlate sugar with obesity or our current health epidemic - especially when the majority are eating excess fat and protein. I for one certainly love having my glycogen stores packed full of ready to use energy and my body producing glucose derived ATP [4,5] on the regular. And I know when I start to conk out on my bike I can just whip out an energy gel (sugar concentrate) or drink some sugar water to keep rolling. I also imagine most folks on HN use their brain for most of the day, so don't forget to get adequate glucose on the daily to keep it humming along optimally [6]. Sugar is your best friend if you haven't already damaged your pancreas. Just make sure to get some basic nutrients and minerals from plant sources and you're good to go. [1] https://www.drmcdougall.com/2013/12/31/walter-kempner-md-founder-of-the-rice-diet/ https://www.drmcdougall.com/2013/12/31/walter-kempner-md-fou... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermogenesis [3] https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/mar/passionate.htm https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/mar/passionate.htm [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate_catabolism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate_catabolism [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine_triphosphate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine_triphosphate [6] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3900881/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3900881/
coldtea 10y ago
Something to keep in mind when people point to GM studies that concluding that everything is perfect (or "pop-sci" apologetics, with arguments like "farmers did it for millennia anyway" conveniently forgetting the several orders of magnitude increased volume, speed, targeting, and the ability to do arbitrary matches -- nobody combined insect genes with fruits in the 12th century...). Back in the day tobacco was a-ok by similar studies. Same for sugar. Of course it's even worse for softer sciences (economics, social studies, urban development studies, etc.).
noir-york 10y ago
Sometimes I think that the best corporate social responsibility program companies can practice is to dismantle their PACs and stop funding lobbyists. Saves them the money and saves us all from biased public policy.
Scirra_Tom 10y ago
People who deliberately mislead the public at the cost of the publics health in the name of profit are some of the worst of the worst. I would like to see the people involved in this punished but it's wishful thinking. It is evil. It's absolutely rampant in the food industry.
tn13 10y ago
An industry paid for favorable research ? Tell me something new. Elon Musk rants about environment. Do you think he does it out of his concern for planet or his company ?
tn13 10y ago
An industry paid for favorable research ? Tell me something new. Elon Musk rants about environment. Do you think he does it out of his concern for planet or his company ?
jmporcel 10y ago
Indeed.

222 points by pmcpinto 10y ago

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

agounaris 10y ago

Nooooo such things don't happen, its a lie! :D

jstoja 10y ago

Few weeks ago I had the funny remark from a co-worker saying that among all the stuff we eat, sugar is the most useless one. After thinking a bit about this, it really makes no sense to keep eating that much sugary stuff...

rurban 10y ago
Sugar is not useless at all. It's a very powerful and cheap drug, far more effective than cocaine. Just don't overdo it.
- curiousgal 10y ago
  > Just don't overdo it. And that's where the issue lies. Most processed foods are extremely rich in sugar and we've gotten used to their taste.
  - rurban 10y ago
    Sure. Because the sugar industry knows the effects, and uses it to their advantage. No other country puts that much sugar into everything. Politics and health organizations in the US are complicit.
TeMPOraL 10y ago
Wait, among all the stuff we eat, the primary fuel source for our bodies is the most useless one?
- pennaMan 10y ago
  You are referring to glucose. GP is referring to fructose. One is the primary fuel source of living things while the other one is straight up poison.

fratlas 10y ago

I honestly think a sugar tax would be a great move (even if only on soda, the worst culprit).

PieterH 10y ago
Probably, yes, IMO sugar needs to be regulated and taxed like alcohol.
- raverbashing 10y ago
  What if it was the contrary? What if it was fat (beyond trans fat) that was taxed and regulated based on BS studies?
  - croon 10y ago
    > What if it was the contrary? What if it was fat (beyond trans fat) that was taxed and regulated based on BS studies? I don't understand your posit. Are you saying sugar would be taxed based on BS studies? The topic of discussion is that older studies have downplayed the detrimental effect of sugar, while upplaying the role of fat. If sugar was taxed it would be according to current studies. If fat was taxed it would not be. Is your question a thought experiment or what are you saying?
    - harmegido 10y ago
      She's saying that how can you be so sure that sugar is the culprit? 30 years ago, people were very sure that fat was the culprit. I actually do personally think that sugar is a main driver of these problems, but I get her point.
      - kardashian007 10y ago
        Fat is 9 kcal/g, while protein and simple carbs are about 4 kcal/g. And there is a pathway to absorb complex lipid rather than going through the effort of breaking them down. The nuances and complexities come in because of individual genetics, state of health and a myriad of interactions between the complexity of foods and their numerous and unpredictable interactions with a constantly changing system. In order to get a better picture of health and lifestyle consequences will require close to 24x7 monitoring of many parameters (quantified self). So, for example, it may be possible to find out allergies and almost allergies, interactions before they fully occur and inflammation promotion/reduction properties of lifestyle choices. Add software and deep learning, and there are almost endless possibilities for health and lifestyle micro- and macro-optimizations.

curiousgal 10y ago

Whenever the sugar subject is brought up I can't help but recommend watching That Sugar Film. Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uaWekLrilY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uaWekLrilY

PieterH 10y ago

See previous HN discussion from a couple of days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12480733 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12480733

tener 10y ago

Having heard of various crazy class action lawsuits I wonder if someone can sue them for trying (and succeeding) to mislead the public on the health problems due to sugar consumption?

PieterH 10y ago
The lawsuits against Big Tobacco are a good template.

amelius 10y ago

I hope this revelation does not only have consequences for the parties involved, but that the systemic problems in science and its relation with industry are addressed. For example, there is no or little incentive right now for researchers to reproduce/validate existing results; even if those results are highly cited. Also, the article speaks of "influential journals", but the source of a publication should not matter in the end.

jcbrand 10y ago

Makes you wonder how many other studies are bought and paid for, such as the recent studies highlighting the evils of allowing cash (or at least high denomination notes) in our society. For example, from this Guardian article: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/15/crime-terrorism-and-tax-evasion-why-banks-are-waging-war-on-cash http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/15/crime-t... > Calls for the eradication of cash have been bolstered by evidence that high-value notes play a major role in crime, terrorism and tax evasion. In a study for the Harvard Business School last week, former bank boss Peter Sands called for global elimination of the high-value note.

JonnieCache 10y ago
As much as I agree with your post in general, what reason is there for the €500 note apart from stuffing as much value into a briefcase as possible?
- iraklism 10y ago
  Because you are afraid that you will either lose a significant amount of your life's savings (Cyprus) or you will no longer have unrestricted access to your account (Greece).
- ptero 10y ago
  Folks who do not trust banks/governments may want to do cash transactions. Even if it seems highly unusual to pay for a car/vacation/house in cash this is not a reason to outlaw it. Second, with inflation, what seems to be a high sum today may not seem so 15 years down the road. Third, many suspect that after outlawing largest bills we will go to prohibiting largest remaining, etc.
  - Luc 10y ago
    > Even if it seems highly unusual to pay for a car/vacation/house in cash this is not a reason to outlaw it. It's already outlawed in most EU countries. In Italy the maximum cash payment is 3000 euro. In France, 1000 euro. Especially real estate is great for laundering money if cash payment is allowed. > Second, with inflation, what seems to be a high sum today may not seem so 15 years down the road. Inflation in the Eurozone is essentially at zero.

junipergreen 10y ago

At least that kind of thing doesn't happen today. Take this study that says eating lots of pasta doesn't make you fat. Oh wait. (Note the two funding sources in the right-hand column) http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/inmn-pin063016.php http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2016-07/inmn-pin06301...

rurban 10y ago

That is known for decades, and this is only the tip of the iceberg. It's the same strategy as used by the tobacco industry and GM (Monsanto). Most obesity researchers are paid by the soda industry. e.g. http://www.alternet.org/food/soda-scandal-journalists-fail-reveal-sources-funded-coca-cola http://www.alternet.org/food/soda-scandal-journalists-fail-r... The best outline is the latest "Sugar" documentary http://thatsugarfilm.com/film/synopsis/ http://thatsugarfilm.com/film/synopsis/ who started to get the word out and of course Yudkin's book. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/diet/10634081/John-Yudkin-the-man-who-tried-to-warn-us-about-sugar.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/wellbeing/diet/10634081... The UNICEF is trying for years to warn against excessive sugar consumption. But only their latest report speaks out: https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/IWP_2016_13.pdf https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/IWP_2016_13.pdf The Soda industry with the help of politicians did effectively destroy all sugar warnings and turn the carb problem into a fitness and fat issue.

7sigma 10y ago
Regarding gmos, thats not really true. While a lot of the research was done by industry (which is how its supposed to, why should the public pay for safety testing of products ?), there is also publicly funded research that confirms that GMOs are no more risky than traditional breeding and mutagenics. The EU funded a 10 year project in that area https://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-funded_gmo_research.pdf https://ec.europa.eu/research/biosociety/pdf/a_decade_of_eu-... The genera database can also give an indication of the funding by private and government in biotech (i think its 1/3 or 1/2, but can't find the link) https://www.biofortified.org/portfolio/infographic-world-map-of-government-funded-gmo-studies/ https://www.biofortified.org/portfolio/infographic-world-map... Update: Replying to some of the comments, just want to clarify that company should pay for the testing, but the actual scientific research should be done independently. Of course the company will probably have done some initial research of their own (at least you would hope so), but it would need to be replicated independently. Update 2: Grist covered gmos a few years back and here is the part about the regulation http://grist.org/food/the-gm-safety-dance-whats-rule-and-whats-real/ http://grist.org/food/the-gm-safety-dance-whats-rule-and-wha...

Red_Tarsius 10y ago

«Is it really true that food companies deliberately set out to manipulate research in their favor? Yes, it is, and the practice continues,” Nestle added, noting that Coca-Cola and candy makers have both tried recently to influence nutrition research.» Universities need to be held accountable for researchers' ethics. The article suggests that the Sugar Research Foundation merely followed the standard procedure of any other trade group, that is, this was not an isolated incident. Maybe Harvard would be more inclined to avoid such malpractice if its brand and credibility suffered from it. Universities should not act like a PR firm. «Trained as a dentist, Kearns said she was shocked to hear a keynote speaker at a 2007 dentistry conference — on diabetes, no less — tell her there is no evidence linking sugar to chronic disease. She quit her job and devoted herself full-time to uncovering documents that show the sugar industry’s influence over public policy and science.» This quote exemplifies Arendt's banality of evil.

quantumhobbit 10y ago
If the the research grant process wasn't already screwed up, it would be the perfect place to enforce ethics. "Sorry we can't approve your grant proposal due to ethical lapses at your institution." It wouldn't take long for universities to wise up and take ethics seriously.
- merraksh 10y ago
  Sure, but only if those in charge of approving/denying grants (at the NSF, NIH, etc.) also have high ethical standards. And they happen to be researchers and research managers.

cjpb 10y ago

I understand why the sugar industry does this, just fighting fire with fire. The meat, dairy and egg industries have far more to answer for in regards to the current health epidemic in the western world. Do people really think it's the sugar in the soda with all the literature we now have on nutrition? What about the oil laden fries, and the burgers packed with cholesterol, fat and animal protein that seem to be so popular in the western world? Most westerners I know consume overt fat and excess protein at least 2/3 meals each day then wonder why they have health problems. I've seen more obese patients than I can count eat nothing but refined sugar, white rice, fruit juice (The Rice Diet [1]) and come out months later weighing half their original weight while reversing most, if not all of their western disease. Yet the majority of medical professionals continue to ignore the literature and clinical results that work in the LONG term. And I know this is anecdotal - but when I traveled rural Asia, all the leanest and healthiest people I met ate nothing but rice, fruit and vegetables - it's all they could afford (the poorest of the lot just eat rice). They also have bowls of refined sugar on the table instead of salt and drink cane juice/sugary drinks like it's going out of fashion. I personally eat 3000-4000 calories of carbohydrates each day, whether I'm training or not (cycling) and I never put on weight - I'm certainly not scared of soda. Winter just passed here, I trained probably once a week due to rain and actually weigh less than before Winter when I was training daily - most likely due to Thermogenesis [2]. Note too that de novo lipogenesis is so severely inefficient in humans [3] (even when over feeding) that it's laughable to even correlate sugar with obesity or our current health epidemic - especially when the majority are eating excess fat and protein. I for one certainly love having my glycogen stores packed full of ready to use energy and my body producing glucose derived ATP [4,5] on the regular. And I know when I start to conk out on my bike I can just whip out an energy gel (sugar concentrate) or drink some sugar water to keep rolling. I also imagine most folks on HN use their brain for most of the day, so don't forget to get adequate glucose on the daily to keep it humming along optimally [6]. Sugar is your best friend if you haven't already damaged your pancreas. Just make sure to get some basic nutrients and minerals from plant sources and you're good to go. [1] https://www.drmcdougall.com/2013/12/31/walter-kempner-md-founder-of-the-rice-diet/ https://www.drmcdougall.com/2013/12/31/walter-kempner-md-fou... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermogenesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermogenesis [3] https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/mar/passionate.htm https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/mar/passionate.htm [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate_catabolism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbohydrate_catabolism [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine_triphosphate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenosine_triphosphate [6] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3900881/ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3900881/

coldtea 10y ago

Something to keep in mind when people point to GM studies that concluding that everything is perfect (or "pop-sci" apologetics, with arguments like "farmers did it for millennia anyway" conveniently forgetting the several orders of magnitude increased volume, speed, targeting, and the ability to do arbitrary matches -- nobody combined insect genes with fruits in the 12th century...). Back in the day tobacco was a-ok by similar studies. Same for sugar. Of course it's even worse for softer sciences (economics, social studies, urban development studies, etc.).

noir-york 10y ago

Sometimes I think that the best corporate social responsibility program companies can practice is to dismantle their PACs and stop funding lobbyists. Saves them the money and saves us all from biased public policy.

Scirra_Tom 10y ago

People who deliberately mislead the public at the cost of the publics health in the name of profit are some of the worst of the worst. I would like to see the people involved in this punished but it's wishful thinking. It is evil. It's absolutely rampant in the food industry.

tn13 10y ago

An industry paid for favorable research ? Tell me something new. Elon Musk rants about environment. Do you think he does it out of his concern for planet or his company ?

tn13 10y ago

An industry paid for favorable research ? Tell me something new. Elon Musk rants about environment. Do you think he does it out of his concern for planet or his company ?

jmporcel 10y ago

Indeed.