How sugar makers switched to saturated fat

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

As recently released documents show, in the 1960s, the sugar industry paid scientists to question the harmful effects of sugar on the heart and found a new scapegoat: saturated fat.

It turns out that over the course of 50 years, many of the research results and recommendations for improving nutrition have been crafted to benefit the industry.

The sugar industry blames saturated fat

Sugar industry officials have obstructed discussion of the dangers of sugar consumption for several decades. Stanton Glantz, professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco

According to these documents, in 1967 a trading group called the Sugar Research Foundation, now known as the Sugar Association, bribed three Harvard scientists. For the publication of a review of studies on the effects of sugar and various fats on heart function, they received an amount equal to 50 thousand dollars by today's standards.

All studies mentioned in this article were specially selected by the Sugar Research Foundation.

A review, which was published in the respected New England Journal of Medicine, argued that sugar consumption has little to do with heart disease. All the blame was placed on saturated fat.

Consequences of the publication of the review

Since then, the food industry has influenced scientific research on more than one occasion.

An article in The New York Times last year [2] reported that Coca-Cola, the world's largest producer of sugar-sweetened sodas, has invested millions of dollars in research to disprove the link between drinking and obesity. The Associated Press confirmed in June that confectionery makers pay for scientists who claim that children who eat sweets weigh less than their peers who are not addicted to the sweets.

The Harvard scientists and representatives of the Sugar Research Foundation who made this mess are no longer alive. Among them were Dr. Mark Hegsted, head of the USDA's Food and Nutrition Service, and Dr. Fredrick Stare, head of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard University.

In response to the disclosure of the revealing documents, the Sugar Association said that in 1967, medical journals did not yet require researchers to disclose the sources of funding for their work. In particular, the New England Journal of Medicine began to request such information only since 1984.

In their defense, the members of the association stated that they really should have provided their research activities with a greater degree of transparency. However, a review published in 1967 presented a point of view that had a right to exist. Plus, they say eating a lot of sugar isn't the only cause of heart disease.

The fact that these documents were made public is very important because discussions about the dangers of sugar and saturated fat are relevant to this day. Stanton Glantz

For decades, we have been advised to reduce our fat intake. This has led many to switch to low-fat and high-sugar foods, the use of which, according to modern scientists, led to widespread obesity.

According to Dr. Glantz, the scientists acted very cleverly by choosing a reputable publication to publish the review. Thus, the study, the results of which actually did not have an objective basis, gave rise to real scientific disputes.

The findings from this study formed the basis for Hegsted's proposed dietary recommendations. In these recommendations, sugar was described as a fairly harmless component of products, harmful only to the teeth.

At the moment, warnings about the dangers of saturated fat still figure prominently among these recommendations. Recently, however, the World Health Organization and other reputable organizations have worried about the increased risk of cardiovascular disease due to the abuse of foods high in sugar.

Reaction to released documents

Dr. Marion Nestle, a New York University professor of nutrition, health, and human dietary habits, wrote an article [3] in which she commented on published documents. In her opinion, the sugar industry initially initiated research to absolve itself of responsibility for the increased risk of coronary heart disease in the population.

That's just terrible. I cannot cite a more egregious example of this behavior. Marion Nesl

Harvard Medical School professor and nutritionist Walter Willett said that since the 1960s, the rules of work ethics in the scientific community have undergone significant changes. However, the published documents once again remind us that research should be funded not by business, but by government sources.

All we know for sure today is that foods containing refined carbohydrates, especially sugar-sweetened beverages, increase the likelihood of heart disease. We also know to avoid unhealthy fats. Walter Willett

What was actually found in the found documents

The papers that sparked the controversy were found in the archives of Harvard University, the University of Illinois Library, and other academic libraries. They were found by Dr. Cristin Kearns of the University of California. According to these documents, in 1964, one of the leading representatives of the sugar industry, John Hickson, wondered how he could use his own scientific research to influence public opinion.

At that time, scientists were just beginning to talk about the connection between the abuse of foods high in sugar and an increased risk of heart disease in the population.

At the same time, studies emerged (for example, the work of the eminent physiologist Ancel Keys) that put forward a different point of view. According to these studies, cholesterol and saturated fat damage the heart much more than sugar.

Hickson proposed to conduct his own research as opposed to the first point of view. This is how the idea came about to finance the mentioned review.

According to Hickson, his own research should have removed the "defamation" of the sugar industry

Hickson personally selected the material for this 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.

As a result, the truth remains somewhere near. New research is needed that can objectively assess the harm from eating sugar and saturated fat. We can only say for sure that both sugar and fats are harmful to our health. However, the published documents make us wonder how much credibility can be put in published scientific research.

Read also: Natural Caries Treatment

1. Cristin E. Kearns, Laura A. Schmidt, Stanton A. Glantz. Sugar Industry And Coronary Heart Disease Research. A Historical Analysis Of Internal Industry Documents.

2. Anahad O'Connor. Coca-Cola Funds Scientists Who Shift Blame for Obesity Away From Bad Diets.