[新聞] 製糖業暗中付錢使哈佛做出對糖正面的研究

看板FITNESS作者 (Krisch)時間7年前 (2016/09/13 12:37), 7年前編輯推噓75(761200)
留言277則, 34人參與, 最新討論串1/3 (看更多)
http://goo.gl/Q8TVqV 剛剛讀到的一篇報導,指出哈佛兩篇營養學報告的兩位營養學家(均已故)在做研究期間的經費由製糖公司(The Sugar Research Foundation)支持,進而發表對製糖業有利(favorable)的結果。 用手機不方便逐字翻譯,如果大家有疑問可以繼續討論。 精緻的糖真的對身體有害無益,大家趕緊戒掉吧! *** The trade group solicited Hegsted, a professor of nutrition at Harvard’s public health school, to write a literature review aimed at countering early research linking sucrose to coronary heart disease. The group paid the equivalent of $48,000 in 2016 dollars to Hegsted and colleague Dr. Robert McGandy, though the researchers never publicly disclosed that funding source, Kearns found. 兩位哈佛營養學家被發現收了製糖業者相當於現今的$48,000美元 Hegsted and Stare tore apart studies that implicated sugar and concluded that there was only one dietary modification — changing fat and cholesterol intake — that could prevent coronary heart disease. Their reviews were published in 1967 in the New England Journal of Medicine, which back then did not require researchers to disclose conflicts of interest. That was an era when researchers were battling over which dietary culprit — sugar or fat — was contributing to the deaths of many Americans, especially men, from coronary heart disease, the buildup of plaque in arteries of the heart. Kearns said the papers, which the trade group later cited in pamphlets provided to policymakers, aided the industry’s plan to increase sugar’s market share by convincing Americans to eat a low-fat diet. 那兩位哈佛營養學家發表的文獻裡面,唯一的變量(variable)是脂肪跟膽固醇攝取。 但他們沒有揭露利益(因為在那個年代不需要利益揭露) 那個時期剛好是研究者/學者爭論糖跟脂肪哪個造成更多美國人的冠狀動脈心臟病死亡案例。 因為這兩篇biased的研究,影響到執政者,所以執政者開始推行低脂飲食。 Nearly 50 years later, some nutritionists consider sugar a risk factor for coronary heart disease, though there’s no consensus. Having two major reviews published in an influential journal “helped shift the emphasis of the discussion away from sugar onto fat,” said Stanton Glantz, Kearns’s coauthor and her advisor at UCSF. “By doing that, it delayed the development of a scientific consensus on sugar-heart disease for decades.” 五十年後的今天,有些營養學家開始質疑糖對於冠狀動脈心臟病的影響。但是因為這兩位哈佛學者的有利的文獻,使得焦點一直放在脂肪而非糖身上。 ......寫扣的空擋稍微翻譯一下,就算不是醫學/營養學背景的人也可以自己找文獻來看,千萬不要隨著網路上(不具名)自稱專家的偏頗言論起舞。 ----- Sent from JPTT on my iPhone -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 216.228.241.10 ※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/FITNESS/M.1473741449.A.8E0.html

09/13 14:27, , 1F
推!
09/13 14:27, 1F

09/13 14:52, , 2F
真的 !! 精製糖對身體不好 !
09/13 14:52, 2F

09/13 15:08, , 3F
會不會乳清業者也其實在做這種事?....畢竟都是加工品
09/13 15:08, 3F

09/13 15:12, , 4F
樓上反應good!我也懷疑
09/13 15:12, 4F

09/13 16:21, , 5F
我想到Supernatural某一集講利維坦利用人工糖精把人類變成
09/13 16:21, 5F

09/13 16:21, , 6F
廢物.....
09/13 16:21, 6F
※ 編輯: ffreakoo (216.228.241.10), 09/13/2016 16:34:46

09/13 16:25, , 7F
深有同感 減肥之後偶次吃了糖,整天飢腸轆轆,運動不下
09/13 16:25, 7F

09/13 16:26, , 8F
口乾舌燥 那天就像回到仍一百公斤的時候 整天只想著吃
09/13 16:26, 8F

09/13 16:36, , 9F
我從小就是過敏王鼻涕王,戒糖後不會皮膚癢、噴鼻嚏
09/13 16:36, 9F

09/13 16:36, , 10F
不過一吃精緻澱粉馬上打回原形,隔天起床狂流鼻水QQ
09/13 16:36, 10F

09/13 17:03, , 11F
真假的,我也長期鼻子過敏~~
09/13 17:03, 11F

09/13 17:04, , 12F
原po英文讚!
09/13 17:04, 12F

09/13 17:22, , 13F
謝謝你
09/13 17:22, 13F

09/13 17:26, , 14F
精製糖跟complex carbohydrate其實吃進去後果都差不多
09/13 17:26, 14F

09/13 17:42, , 15F
還在乳清業者呵呵,有些人的就是愛酸
09/13 17:42, 15F

09/13 17:54, , 16F
最近有單位拿很紅的on分離去驗蛋白質含量哦,要酸可以去看
09/13 17:54, 16F

09/13 17:54, , 17F
09/13 17:54, 17F

09/13 18:20, , 18F
蛋白質含量是沒問題呀,但其他添加物才是問題,那篇也說
09/13 18:20, 18F

09/13 18:20, , 19F
說了就只有檢舉蛋白質含量而已
09/13 18:20, 19F

09/13 18:21, , 20F
檢驗才對
09/13 18:21, 20F

09/13 18:21, , 21F
而且我不懂為什麼這樣是在酸?乳清跟國家隊一樣碰不得?
09/13 18:21, 21F

09/13 18:23, , 22F
就像這篇講的一樣,你無法抹滅糖帶來的好處,但也不能忽
09/13 18:23, 22F

09/13 18:23, , 23F
略他可能帶來的風險
09/13 18:23, 23F

09/13 18:29, , 24F
而這些可能帶來的風險,會不會可能被業者用同樣手法掩蓋
09/13 18:29, 24F

09/13 18:30, , 25F
掉,這難道不值得思考?還是只要喝乳清就是好棒棒?
09/13 18:30, 25F

09/13 18:31, , 26F
肌肉版就不說了,但這個版不就是最忌諱加工食品了嗎?
09/13 18:31, 26F

09/13 19:12, , 27F
推 其實蜂蜜或太甜的水果也是不要多吃比較好
09/13 19:12, 27F

09/13 20:50, , 28F
加工食品也有豆腐、豆干、饅頭、奶粉,你要不要順便一起檢
09/13 20:50, 28F

09/13 20:50, , 29F
討?莫名奇妙替這個板帶一堆帽子...,喝奶粉怎麼沒人酸奶粉
09/13 20:50, 29F

09/13 20:50, , 30F
業者?說乳清是便宜的蛋白質來源還會被酸是業者、ㄏㄅㄈ的
09/13 20:50, 30F

09/13 20:50, , 31F
代表,這叫理性討論呵呵,這篇講糖硬要偷酸乳清,講不出個
09/13 20:50, 31F

09/13 20:50, , 32F
實質可能的危險性就打模糊仗,要喝乾淨的乳清可以去選台紐
09/13 20:50, 32F

09/13 20:50, , 33F
啊XD,國家隊可以討論啊,但一堆酸民根本只會在家敲鍵盤,
09/13 20:50, 33F

09/13 20:50, , 34F
出去為國家做過什麼努力?然後只會酸選手爛,講不出實質的
09/13 20:50, 34F

09/13 20:50, , 35F
論點,就跟你現在動不動就酸乳清業者一樣好笑
09/13 20:50, 35F

09/13 20:53, , 36F
國外要檢討乳清就是拿乳清去檢驗,你在這偷酸乳清有問題叫
09/13 20:53, 36F

09/13 20:53, , 37F
討論?別上次講不贏,現在就動不動開酸乳清,只會顯得很愛
09/13 20:53, 37F

09/13 20:53, , 38F
記仇
09/13 20:53, 38F
還有 199 則推文
還有 1 段內文
09/14 16:48, , 238F
毒豆干毒豆腐毒麵包毒牛奶毒維他命,這些辜狗就能找到一堆
09/14 16:48, 238F

09/14 16:50, , 239F
有啥好再問的?倒是乳清一直以來都沒出什麼包啊,不值得問?
09/14 16:50, 239F

09/14 16:51, , 240F
另外,那個問一下的不是被酸,而是被抹黑成問這件事就是酸
09/14 16:51, 240F

09/14 16:53, , 241F
3樓問,4樓附議,然後你看看再往下幾樓出現了什麼??
09/14 16:53, 241F

09/14 16:53, , 242F
gonna: 還在乳清業者呵呵,有些人的就是愛酸
09/14 16:53, 242F

09/14 16:55, , 243F
你們這樣從前十推看下來,都不會覺得很奇怪喔??
09/14 16:55, 243F

09/14 16:57, , 244F
我倒是覺得在g那句跳痛又挑釁的推文出現之前,都很正常啊
09/14 16:57, 244F

09/14 16:57, , 245F
乳清沒出過包?可以自己google好嗎,國外一些小廠牌有些還
09/14 16:57, 245F

09/14 16:57, , 246F
會加一堆有的沒的增進體能表現
09/14 16:57, 246F

09/14 16:59, , 247F
整天酸別人業者是誰啊?
09/14 16:59, 247F

09/14 17:00, , 248F
也不算跳痛吧XD,之前就戰過啦其實
09/14 17:00, 248F

09/14 17:00, , 249F
三樓講的乳清業者是指真正的乳清業者吧,又不是在暗諷版友
09/14 17:00, 249F

09/14 17:02, , 250F
板友哪來的能力去賄絡研究單位隱惡揚善?幹嘛聽到業者就跳?
09/14 17:02, 250F

09/14 17:03, , 251F
他都會拿乳清跟ㄏㄅㄈ類比,在這篇糖出事的新聞,順便酸一
09/14 17:03, 251F

09/14 17:03, , 252F
下乳清是不是也搞同樣的事,怎麼沒人去質疑奶粉、豆腐,一
09/14 17:03, 252F

09/14 17:03, , 253F
直說原型食物,不知道吃個Greek yogurt要不要也被酸吃加工
09/14 17:03, 253F

09/14 17:03, , 254F
食品
09/14 17:03, 254F

09/14 17:03, , 255F
如果是themost和gonna以前就有個人恩怨,也不代表t在講g啊
09/14 17:03, 255F

09/14 17:04, , 256F
誰跟他有恩怨呵呵,噓個文就叫恩怨?
09/14 17:04, 256F

09/14 17:08, , 257F
如果是噓到記住彼此id,那我就可以理解啦,這種算常有的事
09/14 17:08, 257F

09/14 17:15, , 258F
有些人下限秀個幾次容易記id就叫恩怨?
09/14 17:15, 258F

09/14 17:17, , 259F
你都不惜用秀下限這種人身攻擊字眼了,還說沒恩怨??
09/14 17:17, 259F

09/14 17:18, , 260F
而且一二樓推文也不是你的,他在三樓推擺明就不是針對你啊
09/14 17:18, 260F

09/14 17:19, , 261F
講乳清壞話就有人會抓狂
09/14 17:19, 261F

09/14 17:20, , 262F
而你十五樓推文裡面的業者和呵呵愛酸那些是針對三樓推文吧
09/14 17:20, 262F

09/14 17:21, , 263F
秀下限叫人身攻擊XD ?
09/14 17:21, 263F

09/14 17:22, , 264F
因為中間五到十四樓都沒有出現什麼乳清或業者的相關字眼
09/14 17:22, 264F

09/14 17:23, , 265F
xxplus又來了啊lol,辛苦大家跟他講這麼久
09/14 17:23, 265F

09/14 18:55, , 266F
竟然71推了而且都跟本文無關@@謝謝大家XD拜託不要噓
09/14 18:55, 266F

09/14 18:55, , 267F
我,小妹只是無聊順手捻來翻譯幾段而已
09/14 18:55, 267F

09/14 19:25, , 268F
紅的明顯 !真的很煩 吵來吵去 版主處理ㄧ下好嗎
09/14 19:25, 268F

09/14 19:26, , 269F
原po拍謝 晚點推回來
09/14 19:26, 269F

09/14 19:29, , 270F
推回來
09/14 19:29, 270F

09/15 10:05, , 271F
不管是果糖還是葡萄糖 只要會讓血糖直往上升的糖都
09/15 10:05, 271F

09/15 10:06, , 272F
只能少量攝取 攝取過多去影響胰島素就會胖
09/15 10:06, 272F

09/15 20:38, , 273F
哇 這篇推文說那麽多 不爽不要吃一句屌打 吵那麽久
09/15 20:38, 273F

09/16 07:53, , 274F
講乳清壞話就是不可以哦哈哈
09/16 07:53, 274F

09/17 13:27, , 275F
乳清是乳酪的副產物...
09/17 13:27, 275F

09/20 11:57, , 276F
乳酪好吃
09/20 11:57, 276F

10/17 19:47, , 277F
戰都戰
10/17 19:47, 277F
文章代碼(AID): #1NruA9ZW (FITNESS)
討論串 (同標題文章)
文章代碼(AID): #1NruA9ZW (FITNESS)