I’m speaking at the Aspen Ideas Festival: Health. I’ll be interviewed by Helena Bottemiller Evich of FoodFix from 9:00 to 9:50 a.m.. Topic: “Making sense of nutrition science.”
As regular readers know, I’ve been posting studies funded by food companies with results favorable to the companies’ interests whenever I run across five of them. Since mid-March, I’ve posted 7 such collections for a total of 37 studies (two of the posts listed 6 studies). These are all papers published since March.
With each set, I asked readers to send examples of studies that do not favor the sponsor’s interest.
They are rare, but do exist. I’ve been sent two so far. I’m guessing it will be a long time before I collect five, so have a look:
Butter increased total and LDL cholesterol compared with olive oil however resulted in higher HDL cholesterol than habitual diet. Sara Engel and Tine Tholstrup. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, July 1, 2015, doi: 10.3945/ajcn.115.112227.
Influence of Pistachios on Performance and Exercise-Induced Inflammation, Oxidative Stress, Immune Dysfunction, and Metabolite Shifts in Cyclists: A Randomized, Crossover Trial. David C. Nieman, Johannes Scherr, Beibei Luo, Mary Pat Meaney, Didier Dréau, Wei Sha, Dustin A. Dew, Dru A. Henson, Kirk L. Pappan. PLoS One, November 19, 2014. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0113725
This second study came out last year but I’ll take any of these I can get. Please do send.
But if I’m just counting since March, the ratio is 37 studies favoring the sponsor’s interest, to 1 that doesn’t. Coincidence? I’m not convinced.