How the sugar industry funded and shaped scientific literature to protect its commercial interests.
What the evidence says
- In 1965, the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) sponsored a literature review by Harvard researchers, published in NEJM in 1967, that minimized sugar's role in heart disease and blamed dietary fat instead[1]
- The SRF paid Harvard researchers $6,500 (~$48,900 in 2016 dollars) for the review; funding was not disclosed in the publication[1]
- The SRF set the review's objective, contributed articles for inclusion, and received drafts — its vice president stated the goal was to counter claims that sucrose made "an inordinate contribution" to metabolic disease[1]
- The review applied less critical evaluation to evidence supporting the fat hypothesis than to evidence implicating sugar[1]
- The 1980 Dietary Guidelines for Americans focused on reducing fat rather than sugar[1]
- *THE LIMIT cjm01 STATES AND THIS FILE MUST CARRY:* the evidence that the industry shaped the review's conclusions is CIRCUMSTANTIAL — there is no direct evidence the SRF wrote or altered the manuscript, and the key actors are deceased[1]
- The SRF spent $600,000 ($5.3M in 2016 dollars) on messaging that "sugar is what keeps every human being alive"[1]
- Industry tactics paralleled tobacco: funding favorable research, attacking critics, manufacturing doubt, capturing regulatory bodies[1]