I am writing this note today because I was notified of a press release that concerns the ethical standards of our scientific research on nutrition.

If you search for the latest “Project 259” news, you will begin to see the deception practiced behind the scenes to cover up sound research into nutritional science.

Yesterday’s press release by researchers at the University of California shows the extent that industry groups push their biases into research results. The International Sugar Research Foundation (ISRF) blocked the publication of results from a 1968 study with key findings into sugar’s link to cancer and coronary heart disease.

The researchers at the University of California uncovered internal emails that implicate the ISRF in terminating funding for its own study that was on the verge of creating a public relations nightmare for the sugar industry.

The findings of the study would have added to the already mounting evidence that sugar was a key factor in coronary heart disease by increasing triglycerides. See our article here that explains the process of metabolizing sugar, which is half glucose and half fructose.

According to the report, the sugar industry had a very clear objective of steering the research away from sugar’s negative effects and continue with research to support the hypothesis that all calories are equal. See our article here that discusses the “calories in, calories out fallacy.”

This is not the first time!

Last year, the ISRF was also shamed when news of its payments to Harvard scientists were conditional on obscuring the relationship between sugar and heart disease. The ISRF was pushing to blame saturated fats instead. Sound familiar?

Why should we be surprised?

This happened with Big Tobacco, it happened with Big Oil, and it is still happening today with many industries funding scientific research to obstruct political action against these groups. It amazes me that some people will still defend sugar and attack fat as the primary cause of heart disease. It is like saying tobacco does not increase the risk of lung cancer.

Where do we go next

Bogus research on nutrition is everywhere, and it is in our nutritional guidelines. It governs food labeling, it controls what schools feed our children, and it even directs doctors to do what contradicts basics learned in their biochemistry courses before they started their careers.

If it took 50 years to uncover a lie like that, imagine what remains hidden today. I challenge you to research, understand and make up your own mind about what is a healthy diet and what is not. There are plenty of honest scientists out there that are making a lot more sense now.