Couldn't find what you looking for?

TRY OUR SEARCH!

Table of Contents

Fifty years after the fact, papers reveal that Harvard University researchers were bribed with $6500 by the sugar industry to say that fat caused heart disease. The bribes are thousands of times larger now.

The story of the Sugar Association's paying thousands of dollars to Harvard professors to get the results it wanted is more than ancient history. It is just one example of how nutritional research is slanted by academics who depend on big food companies to pay their bills. And the amounts of money donated by sugar-sweetened soft drink producers today make $6500 in 1965 seem like a pittance. Here is the recent history of just one sugar-sweetened soft drink company, Coca-Cola.

  • In 2014, Coke gave an “unrestricted monetary gift” of $1 million to the University of Colorado Foundation. However, this money was used to fund the Global Energy Balance Network, which promotes its new “science-based” solution to the global obesity crisis: To maintain a healthy weight, get more exercise and worry less about cutting calories. In other words, exercise more and keep drinking Coke.
  • Since 2008, Coke has contributed $4 million to the research laboratories exercise scientist Dr. Steven Blair, a professor at the University of South Carolina whose research over the past 25 years has formed much of the basis of federal guidelines on physical activity, and Gregory A. Hand, dean of the West Virginia University School of Public Health. Federal exercise guidelines emphasize getting enough physical activity to make drinking sweet beverages OK.
  • Dr. Gregory Hand has received $800,000 for a study of "energy flux" to justify the inclusion of sugar in the diet.
  • Coke has funded 100 physical activity centers in schools, including Coke machines.
  • Dietitians are offered payments to promote including Coca-Cola in the diet.
  • An article published in the journal PLoS Medicine found that Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, the American Beverage Association and the sugar industry were
five times more likely to find no link between sugary drinks and weight gain than studies whose authors reported no financial conflicts.

The sugar industry is no longer trying to tell us that fat causes heart disease. The new message is that sugar doesn't really make us fat. After all, the scientists with their sugar daddies tell us, as long as calories in is less than calories out, you'll lose weight. Nobody likes to eat less, so just exercise more. But is that what recent science is really telling us?

In one recent study published in the journal Obesity, scientists recruited 200 overweight people and put them on a rigorous exercise program, telling them not to change what they ate. The participants in the study were monitored to make sure they exercised 5 to 6 hours a week, double the 2.5 hours a week recommended by federal guidelines. At the end of one year, the average weight lost was 3.5 pounds (1.5 kilos) for men, 2.5 pounds (1 km) for women.

We're also told that it's OK to sneak a snack or down a tasty soda if we just get some exercise.

How much exercise does it take to burn off the calories in a bottle of Coke? You just need to walk 6 miles (10 km).

Don't drink the sugar-sweetened Koolaid. Sugar isn't poison, but it does put on weight. Exercise is essential, but you can't lose weight without eating less. Don't let industry shills tell you otherwise.

  • Kearns CE, Schmidt LA, Glantz SA. Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research: A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry Documents. JAMA Intern Med. 2016 Sep 12. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5394. [Epub ahead of print] PMID: 27617709.
  • Nestle, M. Food Industry Funding of Nutrition Research: The Relevance of History for Current Debates. JAMA Intern Med. Published online September 12, 2016. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.5400.
  • Photo courtesy of freepik.com
  • Photo courtesy of freepik.com
  • Photo courtesy of

Your thoughts on this

User avatar Guest
Captcha