Slashdot Mirror


How the Sugar Industry Tried To Hide Health Effects of Its Product 50 Years Ago (theverge.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: About 50 years ago, the sugar industry stopped funding research that began to show something they wanted to hide: that eating lots of sugar is linked to heart disease. A new study exposes the sugar industry's decades-old effort to stifle that critical research. Researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, recently analyzed historical documents regarding a rat study called Project 259 that was launched in 1968. The study was funded by a sugar industry trade group called the International Sugar Research Foundation, or ISRF, and conducted by W. F. R. Pover at the University of Birmingham. When the preliminary findings from that study began to show that eating lots of sugar might be associated with heart disease, and even bladder cancer, the ISRF pulled the plug on the research. Without additional funding, the study was terminated and the results were never published, according to a study published today in PLOS Biology. The study in question investigated the relationship between sugars and certain blood fats called triglycerides, which increase the risk of heart disease. The preliminary results from the research, called Project 259, suggested that rats on a high-sugar diet, instead of a starch diet, had higher levels of triglycerides. The rats that ate lots of sugar also had higher levels of an enzyme called beta-glucuronidase in their urine, which at the time was thought to be potentially linked to bladder cancer, says study co-author Cristin Kearns, an assistant professor at the UCSF School of Dentistry.

3 of 283 comments (clear)

  1. Re:There's even more evidence by reboot246 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The love of money is the most addictive. Nicotine, heroin, opioids, sex, and all the others pale in comparison.

    It makes me wonder if the same universities are doing the same thing today with other "research" - bought and paid for.

  2. Re:Wasn't my fault by blindseer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I got addicted to Frosted Flakes in the Army. I never had Frosted Flakes as a kid, Mom just wouldn't buy it. When in garrison we'd be given our choice of cereals at the dining facility and I'd just pick what I grew up with, shredded wheat. It started with the day we had field chow and they ran out of shredded wheat. When in the field we didn't have much of a choice, it was often just Frosted Flakes or nothing.

    I didn't know what it was at first. I thought I just had a certain enjoyment of field training and sleeping under the stars. I looked forward to breakfast, which is normal since running around in the woods carrying a 50 pound rucksack can make a man tired and hungry. I then found myself eating Frosted Flakes when in garrison. When in the field I'd volunteer for chow duty so I could hide a box of Frosted Flakes for myself since sometimes we'd run out before I could eat, the people serving the food always ate last. Do you understand that? I volunteered for chow duty so I could eat Frosted Flakes!

    After my discharge I found myself eating Frosted Flakes every day for breakfast. One bowl at first. Then two. Then three. Some mornings I'd empty the whole box. It got real bad. I had to stop. So I quit cold turkey. It was real hard, I craved Frosted Flakes so bad.

    I still catch myself reaching for the Frosted Flakes at the grocery store only to stop myself at the last second. I had to stop going down that aisle. I can't even eat shredded wheat any more since it's next to the Frosted Flakes on the shelf. Now I only dare go as far down the aisle to get some oatmeal for breakfast. Sometimes I absentmindedly go down the aisle and I catch the sight of that tiger on the box calling for me to pick up the box and put it in my cart.

    Friends don't let friends eat Frosted Flakes.

    --
    I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
  3. Re: HFCS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Barring some freak side effect like a potato taking up a heavy metal from the soil the ability for a GMO to pose any health risk is non-existent. GMOs don't suddenly gain the ability to produce some crazy chemical structure.

    1) Roundup-ready GMOs on average get sprayed with more Roundup than non-resistant plants would, leading to a higher load of pesticides (which get absorbed into the plant), not because the GMO produces them, but because the GMO allows them.

    1.a) This overuse leading to Roundup resistance in weeds, then needing even more pesticides, has also been published for a number of years.

    2) "BT" GMOs contain genes from Bacillus thuringiensis, expressing an insecticide. B. thur. is used in organic farming (spores and Cry proteins sprayed on crops) because it is deemed mostly safe to the environment, but it seems research of effects on human health is "insufficient". I would think there is a bit of a difference between a topical application that can be washed off, and a systemic production of the insecticide.