• Robert O Young DSc, PhD

The Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research - A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry


Abstract

Early warning signals of the coronary heart disease (CHD) risk of sugar (sucrose) emerged in the 1950s. We examined Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) internal documents, historical reports, and statements relevant to early debates about the dietary causes of CHD and assembled findings chronologically into a narrative case study. The SRF sponsored its first CHD research project in 1965, a literature review published in the New England Journal of Medicine, which singled out fat and cholesterol as the dietary causes of CHD and downplayed evidence that sucrose consumption was also a risk factor. The SRF set the review’s objective, contributed articles for inclusion, and received drafts. The SRF’s funding and role was not disclosed. Together with other recent analyses of sugar industry documents, our findings suggest the industry sponsored a research program in the 1960s and 1970s that successfully cast doubt about the hazards of sucrose while promoting fat as the dietary culprit in CHD. Policymaking committees should consider giving less weight to food industry–funded studies and include mechanistic and animal studies as well as studies appraising the effect of added sugars on multiple CHD biomarkers and disease development.


Sugar lobby: "Transparency standards were not the norm"

In a statement, the Sugar Association — which evolved out of the SRF — said it is challenging to comment on events from so long ago."We acknowledge that the Sugar Research Foundation should have exercised greater transparency in all of its research activities, however, when the studies in question were published funding disclosures and transparency standards were not the norm they are today," the association said."Generally speaking, it is not only unfortunate but a disservice that industry-funded research is branded as tainted," the statement continues. "What is often missing from the dialogue is that industry-funded research has been informative in addressing key issues."The documents in question are five decades old, but the larger issue is of the moment, as Marion Nestle notes in a commentary in the same issue of JAMA Internal Medicine:

"Is it really true that food companies deliberately set out to manipulate research in their favor? Yes, it is, and the practice continues. In 2015, the New York Times obtained emails revealing Coca-Cola's cozy relationships with sponsored researchers who were conducting studies aimed at minimizing the effects of sugary drinks on obesity. Even more recently, the Associated Press obtained emails showing how a candy trade association funded and influenced studies to show that children who eat sweets have healthier body weights than those who do not."

Bottomline - Sugar is a Metabolic Acidic Waste! and Should NEVER be Ingested in Any Form Without Serious Health Consequences!

The whole idea that the body cells, especially brain cells run on sugar or need sugar for energy is just a perfect example of the scientific fraud that has been perpetuated in human biology for over a century!Get Over IT!Body cells, including brain cells run on electrons NOT sugar!




To learn more about the anatomy, physiological and functionality of the body read, The pH Miracle, The pH Miracle revised and updated, The pH Miracle for Weight Loss, The pH Miracle for Diabetes, The pH Miracle for Cancer, The pH Miracle for the Heart, and Sick and Tired. You can pick up your copes of Dr. Young's books at: www.phmiracleproducts.com


Reference


[1] JAMA Intern Med. 2016;176(11):1680-1685. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5394

0 views
  • Black Facebook Icon
  • Black LinkedIn Icon
  • Black Twitter Icon
  • Black Pinterest Icon