Building Block Associates

  • Home
  • Products & Solutions
    • View Supplies
    • What's In Season
    • Manage Mie Foodservice Manager
    • Foodservice Webinars
    • Become A Member
  • Online Store
  • Social Chat Blog
    • Foodservices News
  • Contact Us
  • Careers
  • Home
  • Products & Solutions
    • View Supplies
    • What's In Season
    • Manage Mie Foodservice Manager
    • Foodservice Webinars
    • Become A Member
  • Online Store
  • Social Chat Blog
    • Foodservices News
  • Contact Us
  • Careers

Sugar industry withheld health effects nearly 50 years ago, study shows

11/28/2017

0 Comments

 
Picture
A US sugar industry trade group appears to have pulled the plug on a study that was producing animal evidence linking sucrose to disease nearly 50 years ago, researchers argue.
A U.S. sugar industry trade group appears to have pulled the plug on a study that was producing animal evidence linking sucrose to disease nearly 50 years ago, researchers argue in a paper publishing on November 21 in the open access journal PLOS Biology.

Also read, Scientists reveal the relationship between sugar and cancer.

Researchers Cristin Kearns, Dorie Apollonio and Stanton Glantz from the University of California at San Francisco reviewed internal sugar industry documents and discovered that the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) funded animal research to evaluate sucrose's effects on cardiovascular health. When the evidence seemed to indicate that sucrose might be associated with heart disease and bladder cancer, they found, the foundation terminated the project without publishing the results.

In a previous analysis of the documents, Kearns and Glantz found that SRF had secretly funded a 1967 review article that downplayed evidence linking sucrose consumption to coronary heart disease. That SRF-funded review noted that gut microbes may explain why rats fed sugar had higher cholesterol levels than those fed starch, but dismissed the relevance of animal studies to understanding human disease.

In the new paper in PLOS Biology, the team reports that the following year, SRF (which had changed its name in 1968 to the International Sugar Research Foundation, or ISRF) launched a rat study called Project 259 'to measure the nutritional effects of the [bacterial] organisms in the intestinal tract' when sucrose was consumed, compared to starch.

The ISRF-funded research on rats by W.R.F. Pover of the University of Birmingham suggested that gut bacteria help mediate sugar's adverse cardiovascular effects. Pover also reported findings that might indicate an increased risk of bladder cancer. "This incidental finding of Project 259 demonstrated to ISRF that sucrose vs. starch consumption caused different metabolic effects," Kearns and her colleagues argue, "and suggested that sucrose, by stimulating urinary beta-glucuronidase, may have a role in the pathogenesis of bladder cancer."

The ISRF described the finding in a September 1969 internal document as "one of the first demonstrations of a biological difference between sucrose and starch fed rats." But soon after ISRF learned about these results -- and shortly before the research project was complete -- the group terminated funding for the project, and no findings from the work were published.

In the 1960s, scientists disagreed over whether sugar could elevate triglycerides relative to starch, and Project 259 would have bolstered the case that it could, the authors argue. What's more, terminating Project 259 echoed SRF's earlier efforts to downplay sugar's role in cardiovascular disease.

The results suggest that the current debate on the relative effects of sugar vs. starch may be rooted in more than 60 years of industry manipulation of science. Last year, the Sugar Association criticized a mouse study suggesting a link between sugar and increased tumor growth and metastasis, saying that "no credible link between ingested sugars and cancer has been established."

The analysis by Kearns and her colleagues of the industry's own documents, in contrast, suggests that the industry knew of animal research suggesting this link and halted funding to protect its commercial interests half a century ago.

"The kind of manipulation of research is similar what the tobacco industry does," according to co-author Stanton Glantz. "This kind of behavior calls into question sugar industry-funded studies as a reliable source of information for public policy making."

"Our study contributes to a wider body of literature documenting industry manipulation of science," the researchers write in the PLOS Biology paper. "Based on ISRF's interpretation of preliminary results, extending Project 259's funding would have been unfavorable to the sugar industry's commercial interests." SRF cut off funding before that could happen.

SOURCE Science Daily, PLOS
0 Comments



Leave a Reply.

    Go to blog
    Advertisement

    RSS Feed

    News & Updates

    Stay informed with the latest news around foodservice, agriculture and other related food news.

    Do you Enjoy our E-news & Updates?
    Get our foodservice E-news, blogs and LTO's sent to your inbox, SUBSCRIBE HERE.

    Advertisement Opportunities 
    To get your foodservice business in our daily e-news, here.

    Archives

    March 2020
    January 2020
    December 2019
    November 2019
    October 2019
    September 2019
    August 2019
    July 2019
    June 2019
    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018
    April 2018
    March 2018
    February 2018
    January 2018
    December 2017
    November 2017
    October 2017
    September 2017
    August 2017
    July 2017
    June 2017
    May 2017
    April 2017
    March 2017
    February 2017
    January 2017
    December 2016
    November 2016
    October 2016
    September 2016
    August 2016
    July 2016
    June 2016
    May 2016
    April 2016
    March 2016
    February 2016
    January 2016
    December 2015
    November 2015
    October 2015

    Categories

    All
    Agriculture And Food Safety
    All Day Breakfast Menu
    Beans Benefits
    Beverage Company
    Building Construction
    Candy Company
    Carbonated Drinks
    Chicken Farm
    Dairy Production
    Fast Food
    Fast Food Chains
    Food Prices
    Generation Z
    Genetically Modified Organisms
    Gluten Free
    Grocery Retailer
    Healthy Meals For Kids
    Imported Foods
    Imported Foods From Other Countries
    Liquor Licence
    Milk Industry
    Milliennials
    National Food Holidays
    Nut Allergies
    Organic & Natural
    Processed Foods
    Produce Industry
    Restaurant
    Restaurant Management
    Restaurant Ordering System
    Restaurateurs
    Seafood
    Sustainable Resources
    Sweet Snacks
    Sweet Tasting Desserts
    Tree Nuts
    Value Menu Offering
    Ways To Reduce Food Waste

    Picture
    Advertisement
    Picture
Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.