The Sugar Industry Paid Harvard Scientists To Lie About Its Harmful Effects
Experts are constantly changing their views of which foods are "healthy."
One day, we're told our favorite snack is the new superfood, and then the next day, it's deemed as an unhealthy snack that's sending us to an early grave.
When you pair these fickle food findings with the fact that manufacturers often hype up the health benefits of their products, it can be pretty hard to figure out which foods are actually good for you.
So then, who should you listen to when it comes to finding the best foods to put on your plate?
Unfortunately, it seems no one can be trusted these days, not even scientists.
A new study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) just revealed that we've all been living a sweet lie when it comes to eating healthy.
The study claims that in the 1960s, the sugar industry paid Harvard researchers to discard evidence linking sugar consumption to coronary heart disease and to instead pin the blame on fat.
After looking over 340 documents relating to the sugar industry and the literature produced by Harvard scientists, researchers at the University of California, San Francisco determined the sugar industry was aware of the correlations between sugar and heart disease.
Knowing this, the sugar industry then proceeded to commission a Harvard study called Project 226, which conveniently found the only way to prevent heart disease was to reduce dietary cholesterol and consumption of saturated fats.
Apparently, the Sugar Research Foundation, known today as the Sugar Association, paid the Harvard researchers a pretty penny for these misleading findings, totaling to an amount that would equal about $50,000 today.
In response to the eye-opening report, Jim Krieger, executive director of Healthy Food America stated,
If there's one thing we can learn from this whole ordeal, it's that you should probably take health studies with a grain of salt, or in this case, sugar.