328 W. Claiborne St.
P.O. Box 964
Monroeville, Alabama 36460
(251) 575-4203
Health Policy & Advocacy
Basic InformationMore InformationLatest News
FDA Considers Lowering Nicotine Levels in CigarettesDoctors Facing Challenge to Help Needy While Protecting PracticesPharmacists Encouraged to Learn More About Herbal SupplementsBan Menthols to Help Some Smokers QuitStem Cell Clinics Pitch Pricey, Bogus 'Cures' for Knee PainMany Americans Think Docs Order Too Many Tests, MedsIs Herbal Drug Kratom a Health Friend or Foe?Early Studies Often Show Exaggerated Treatment EffectStrong Tobacco Laws May Weed Out Vapers, TooUnderstanding Rx Nonadherence Can Improve AdherenceBystander Use of Defib Device Doubles Chances of Surviving Cardiac ArrestNew Research Debunks Two Medical Marijuana MythsTake Early Clinical Trials With a Grain of SaltCould Hackers Target Heart Devices?Protecting Your Electronic Health RecordsAfter Another Shooting Tragedy, 'Stop the Bleed' Kits Urged for SchoolsPatients Want Physicians to Have Greater ConnectivityYour Tax Dollars Fund Research on Hundreds of New MedsFour Best Practices Outlined to Prevent Health Care CyberattacksMany Patients Know Too Little About Their MRI, CT Scans: StudyUnsafe Water Found in Faucets Across the U.S.Health Tip: Prevent Exposure to LeadHealth Tip: Online Pharmacies You Should AvoidDon't Count on an American to Do CPRPoll: Personal Beliefs Shouldn't Allow Doctors to Refuse to TreatFDA Says U.S. Will Now Produce Critical MRI ComponentPicking a New Primary Care DoctorUber, Lyft Rides May Not Help Boost Doc Visits for Poorer Patients2018 Immunization Schedule Issued for U.S. ChildrenA Hidden Source of 'Superbugs' in Hospitals?2018 Immunization Schedule Issued for U.S. AdultsTop Three Challenges Identified for Pharmacists in 2018Responding to Opioid Crisis, FDA Puts More Restrictions on ImodiumMonkey Deaths Prompt FDA Probe, New Controls on Animal ResearchCDC: Many U.S. Adults Have Never Been Tested for HIVHealth Tip: Performing CPRPublic Health Workforce to See Large TurnoverSevere Flu Season, Tough Winter a Double Whammy for Blood Banks24-Hour Primary Care Clinics Would Improve Continuity of CareBrochure Can Improve Opioid Disposal Rates After SurgeryReminder, Recall Systems Improve Immunization UptakeSatisfaction Higher in Providers Who E-Mail PatientsRestaurant Bans Have Big Impact on Smoking RatesReduce Legal Blood-Alcohol Limit to Cut Drunk Driving Deaths: ReportFrom Birth On, One Sex Is HardierIs Obesity Slowing Gains in U.S. Life Spans?Health Tip: Perform Regular Skin ChecksFewer Hospitals Closed After Obamacare Expanded MedicaidProgress in Fighting Antibiotic Resistance Shown in CDC MapUSPSTF Questions Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Screening
Related Topics

Health Insurance

Report: Industry Hid Decades-Old Study Showing Sugar's Unhealthy Effects

HealthDay News
by By Dennis Thompson
HealthDay Reporter
Updated: Nov 21st 2017

new article illustration

TUESDAY, Nov. 21, 2017 (HealthDay News) -- Big Sugar seems to have copied the Big Tobacco playbook, a new report contends.

More than four decades ago, a study in rats funded by the sugar industry found evidence linking the sweetener to heart disease and bladder cancer, the paper trail investigation reports.

The results of that study were never made public.

Instead, the sugar industry pulled the plug on the study and buried the evidence, said senior researcher Stanton Glantz. He is a professor of medicine and director of the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education.

Glantz likened this to suppressed Big Tobacco internal research linking smoking with heart disease and cancer.

"This was an experiment that produced evidence that contradicted the scientific position of the sugar industry," Glantz said. "It certainly would have contributed to increasing our understanding of the cardiovascular risk associated with eating a lot of sugar, and they didn't want that."

In response to the investigation, The Sugar Association issued a statement calling it "a collection of speculations and assumptions about events that happened nearly five decades ago, conducted by a group of researchers and funded by individuals and organizations that are known critics of the sugar industry."

The new paper focuses on an industry-sponsored study referred to as Project 259 in documents generated by the Sugar Research Foundation and its successor, the International Sugar Research Foundation, and dug up decades later by Glantz and his colleagues.

Researchers at the University of Birmingham in England conducted Project 259 between 1967 and 1971, comparing how lab rats fared when fed table sugar versus starch. The scientists specifically looked at how gut bacteria processed the two different forms of carbohydrate.

Early results in August 1970 indicated that rats fed a high-sugar diet experienced an increase in blood levels of triglycerides, a type of fat that contributes to cholesterol.

Rats fed loads of sugar also appeared to have elevated levels of beta-glucuronidase, an enzyme previously associated with bladder cancer in humans, the researchers said.

Months after receiving these results, the International Sugar Research Foundation failed to approve an additional 12 weeks of funding that the Birmingham researchers needed to complete their work, according to the authors behind the new investigation.

"The investigator they funded came back to them with preliminary results, which were showing these adverse effects of sugar and said, 'I need a few more weeks to finish the study,'" Glantz said. "They just looked at it and said no, and shut the whole thing down. As far as we can tell, nothing was ever published."

Project 259's timing was critical, said Glantz and lead author Cristin Kearns, a postdoctoral fellow with the UCSF School of Medicine who reportedly discovered the industry documents.

During that period, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration was weighing whether to take a hard line on high-sugar foods.

"Had those results been made public, sugar would have gotten a lot more scrutiny than it did," Kearns said.

The Sugar Association says Project 259 was significantly delayed and over budget, "and the delay overlapped with an organizational restructuring with the Sugar Research Foundation becoming a new entity, the International Sugar Research Foundation," according to its own review of archive material.

"There were plans to continue the study with funding from the British Nutrition Foundation, but, for reasons unbeknown to us, this did not occur," the industry trade group's statement says.

"Throughout its history, the Sugar Association has embraced scientific research and innovation in an attempt to learn as much as possible about sugar, diet and health," the statement continues. "We know that sugar consumed in moderation is part of a balanced lifestyle, and we remain committed to supporting research to further understand the role sugar plays in consumers' evolving eating habits."

Nutritionist Sharon Zarabi is director of the bariatric program at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City. She said the new investigation reveals "the power food industry lobbyists have on government guidelines that instruct us on what to eat."

Zarabi noted that "most research studies that support specific foods are funded by industry and this oftentimes skews the results."

Although these revelations might produce a media furor, they're unlikely to change the recommendations coming from dietitians, said Kelly Hogan, clinical nutrition and wellness manager at the Mount Sinai Dubin Breast Center in New York City.

That's because subsequent research has revealed the effect that diets high in sugar can have on long-term health. People need to follow a balanced diet if they want to eat healthy, and that doesn't mean just focusing on added sugars, she said.

"You can't point out one single thing and blame that on any sort of health crisis, either now or 40 years ago," Hogan said. "It's never just one thing, whether that's sugar or saturated fat or whatever the trendy thing might be."

The new paper was published online Nov. 21 in the journal PLOS Biology. It was funded by a grant from the U.S. National Cancer Institute, among others.

More information

For more on eating healthy, visit the American Heart Association.

328 W. Claiborne St.
P.O. Box 964
Alabama 36460
Tel: (251)575-4203

powered by centersite dot net