Coca-Cola got caught. And more than once

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

News feeds flew around last year news of a commissioned study the European Hydration Institute (EHI), for which Coca-Cola paid scientists 7.2 million dollars. The result of this study, of course, was the conclusion that beverages world leader in soda do not contribute to obesity. And what came before Researchers could not prove that such a large amount of sugar, which is "canned" in soft drinks, is detrimental to the heart, blood vessels and other human facets?

According to recently published data, back in 1967, the Sugar Research Foundation, today the Sugar Association, paid three Harvard scientists to publish a series of studies on the effects of sugar and various fats on the heart, an amount equal to 50 thousand dollars. by today's standards. A review published in the New England Journal of Medicine did not link sugar intake to various heart conditions. All the blame was placed on saturated fat.

Since then, food scientists have intervened more than once in research on the effects of sugar on health in various studies on healthy eating.

The Associated Press, for example, has confirmed that carbonated soft drinks have nothing to do with obesity. Conversely, children who consume Coca-Cola are less (40%) less obese than the control group who did not drink soda.

Caught in the deception, the members of the association are justified by the fact that they should have provided their research activities with a greater degree of transparency. However, the findings published in 1967 provided a valid point of view. They also cited high sugar consumption as not the only cause of heart disease.

For years, scientists responsible for healthy eating recommendations have advised reducing fat intake, leading to a switch to low-fat foods, and not necessarily following high sugar levels, which modern scientists believe has led to widespread obesity. After all, sugar, being digested, turns into fat. For the consumption of sugar, a characteristic was chosen that is a rather harmless component of products, only harmful to the teeth.

Today's recommendations from the World Health Organization (WHO) and other authoritative organizations declare the abuse of foods high in sugar as risky for cardiovascular disease.

In talking about the scientists' reaction to the sugar-harboring effect, the sugar industry initially paid for research that exempted them from responsibility for increasing the risk of coronary heart disease in the population.

Hickson personally selected material for his 1967 review and reviewed the drafts. He made it pretty clear what he wants from this publication. Knowing perfectly well what Hickson was interested in, Dr. Hegsted agreed to follow his lead. The published fragments of correspondence between the businessman and the scientist indicate that Hickson was pleased with the results of Hegsted's work.

Now that this information is made public, new, unbiased research is needed to objectively assess the harm of consuming sugar and saturated fat. Already, we can only say one thing: sugar and fats are bad for our health.

The conclusion from the lack of such documents makes you wonder how much you can trust scientific research, especially if it affects thriving food industries.

Vladimir Matveev Source