> there is a serious danger in interpreting the inevitable twists and turns of research and policy as the product of malevolent playbooks and historical derailm

> there is a serious danger in interpreting the inevitable twists and turns of research and policy as the product of malevolent playbooks and historical derailments. Neither malevolence nor conspiracy need be invoked to fear sugar lobby influence. A simple confluence of strong incentives and ambiguity in nutrition science is sufficient. It's entirely possible for sugar lobbyists to believe their products are safe and wholesome and channel funding to scientists and institutions that believe the same. All we need to be concerned is 1. A finding that a powerful and concentrated industry is providing massive funding to research and regulatory bodies at all levels. 2. A recognition that their motivated reasoning is at least as powerful as our own. No mustache twirling villains need apply.