How the sugar industry bought out scientists for decades, and how to stop it from happening again _ extremetech gas lighting urban dictionary

Reports had linked both dietary sugar and dietary fat to heart disease as early as the mid-50s; by 1960 we knew that low-fat diets high in sugars still resulted in high cholesterol levels. Gas efficient cars 2012 So in 1964, the director of the SRF proposed that the group “embark on a major program” to dispute the data as well as any “negative attitudes toward sugar.” They found a group of Harvard nutrition scientists who would take their money, and started making plans.

Complete with a codename, Project 226 was designed to protect the interests of the sugar industry by “recapturing” the 20% of American calorie intake they expected to lose once this whole sugar-isn’t-great-for-your-heart thing percolated through into public awareness. J gastrointest oncol impact factor It resulted in a two-part review published in the prestigious and influential New England Journal of Medicine, which hand-waved away huge swathes of research pointing out the risks of dietary sugar.

The authors went to absurd lengths to discount studies that didn’t tell the story the Sugar Research Foundation wanted to tell. Electricity production by source For example, to get the results they wanted, they had to throw out all the studies done on animals, because not a single animal study supported the conclusion they wanted.

K electric bill statement But after they finished their work, they reported that epidemiological studies showed a positive association between high dietary sugar consumption and better heart disease outcomes. Electricity font The review concluded that there was “no doubt” that the only way to avoid heart disease was to reduce saturated fat. How did this get past the sanity check at NEJM?

The authors were experts, respected in their fields, and they were at least consistent cherry-pickers. Electricity tattoo designs They also conveniently failed to report that the Sugar Research Foundation funded their “study.” NEJM didn’t start requiring authors to report conflicts of interest until 1984, and by then the sugar industry had floated comfortably on their 1964 precedent, funding study after study supporting their pro-sugar narrative “as a main prop of the industry’s defense.” Can we finally talk about industry-funded studies?

I’m not saying that scientists shouldn’t be able to work for private research establishments. Gas natural inc Obviously the money to buy the pipettes and reagents has to come from somewhere.

Gas near me But I am saying that there needs to be an unpleasantly bright spotlight on the financial resources enabling the scientific findings cited to support policymaking, whether political or medical. 5 gas laws What industry would ever pay to support research that would put it out of business?

Whether or not you’re in favor of industry self-regulation, no matter whether the research is funded by taxes, commercial revenue, or charitable sources, everyone deserves policies that are made based on the whole truth — not based on a callously selective interpretation of the facts that ends up lining someone’s pockets at the expense of others’ health. Gas x ultra strength during pregnancy After how many deaths or lost person-years do the industry payoffs start being blood money? I for one, as a bench scientist, am mightily tired of hearing about scientists taking money to produce the right conclusion.

Gas dryer vs electric dryer safety This is the kind of crap Bill Nye was railing against in his comments that the industry barons who pay off scientists to fit the results to the desired conclusions maybe should be thrown in jail. Electricity 2pm live It’s prima facie fraud. The whole point of science is that you take the measurements and then you report them. Electricity distribution vs transmission The conclusions you draw must stand up to the best-researched, best-founded, and most pedantic objections your colleagues can make.

Gas turbine If they don’t — if your results aren’t reproducible — then you have to field another, better explanation. Electricity and magnetism It’s not supposed to be done under anyone’s agenda, nor for anyone’s conclusions that they want you to reach, and shame on the people who manufacture research to support their preconceived ideas.

Hp gas This is exactly like what Phillip Morris and the other cigarette companies did. Electricity physics pdf Shit like this is the reason people don’t trust science. Gaz 67 for sale Solving the access problem The peer-reviewed paper in which the scientists make this report is freely available from the JAMA, and that’s how it ought to be. Electricity usage by country The only solution to corruption in science is to get more critical eyes on the whole process.

850 gas block There needs to be an independent body of investigative experts accountable to the public, who have to submit to a zealous and hard-hitting inquiry into their financial interests, and who can serve as a sanity check for advisory boards or legislative committees. We need a Mythbusters for medical advice: someone who isn’t a wholly owned subsidiary of the industry. Electricity for beginners Someone who can turn on the lights and force the roaches of corruption to scatter.

Gas vs electric stove top Pay-to-win gaming isn’t fair, and people hate it, and pay-to-win science is just as bad. Electricity static electricity It’s about time to start paying the skeptics, because an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. But the only way we can do the above is if the science is accessible. Electricity 4th grade powerpoint How much do you think a subscription to every major scientific journal would cost, even at the discounted academic rate?

The EU’s Horizon 2020 directive provided hosting and access that made freely available all research funded even in part by EU money — while the authors retain the right to license, patent or commercialize their work, the peer-reviewed papers reporting their results are now free, as in libre and gratis. Gas utility bill When they publish in Nature or wherever, they also have to publish in the European Research Council’s public database. Site: