💖💖💖SCAM ALERT ABOUT HEART DISEASE AND CHOLESTROL In 2016, a historical analysis published in JAMA Internal Medicine revealed that the sugar industry, specifically the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF), paid Harvard scientists in the 1960s to publish a literature review that shifted the blame for heart disease from sugar to saturated fat and cholesterol.
Key Findings of the 2016 Report:
Strategic Funding: In 1965, the SRF initiated “Project 226,” a literature review aimed at refuting emerging evidence that linked sugar (sucrose) to coronary heart disease (CHD).
Financial Incentive: The SRF paid three Harvard scientists a total of $6,500 (equivalent to roughly $50,000 in 2016 dollars) to conduct the review.
Direct Influence: Internal documents show that the SRF’s vice president, John Hickson, selected the papers for the scientists to review and made it clear that the goal was to favor sugar. One of the lead researchers, D. Mark Hegsted, reassured the industry, stating, “We are well aware of your particular interest… and will cover this as well as we can”.
Intentional Bias: The 1967 NEJM review dismissed studies linking sugar to heart disease as “weak” while giving far more weight to evidence implicating saturated fat. It concluded that the only necessary dietary intervention to prevent heart disease was reducing cholesterol and substituting polyunsaturated fat for saturated fat.
How does this historical context change how you view dietary guidelines? What are your thoughts on industry influence in scientific research? https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5099084/