[新聞] 製糖業暗中付錢使哈佛做出對糖正面的研究
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
推
09/13 14:27, , 1F
09/13 14:27, 1F
→
09/13 14:52, , 2F
09/13 14:52, 2F
→
09/13 15:08, , 3F
09/13 15:08, 3F
→
09/13 15:12, , 4F
09/13 15:12, 4F
推
09/13 16:21, , 5F
09/13 16:21, 5F
→
09/13 16:21, , 6F
09/13 16:21, 6F
※ 編輯: ffreakoo (216.228.241.10), 09/13/2016 16:34:46
推
09/13 16:25, , 7F
09/13 16:25, 7F
→
09/13 16:26, , 8F
09/13 16:26, 8F
→
09/13 16:36, , 9F
09/13 16:36, 9F
→
09/13 16:36, , 10F
09/13 16:36, 10F
→
09/13 17:03, , 11F
09/13 17:03, 11F
→
09/13 17:04, , 12F
09/13 17:04, 12F
→
09/13 17:22, , 13F
09/13 17:22, 13F
推
09/13 17:26, , 14F
09/13 17:26, 14F
推
09/13 17:42, , 15F
09/13 17:42, 15F
推
09/13 17:54, , 16F
09/13 17:54, 16F
→
09/13 17:54, , 17F
09/13 17:54, 17F
→
09/13 18:20, , 18F
09/13 18:20, 18F
→
09/13 18:20, , 19F
09/13 18:20, 19F
→
09/13 18:21, , 20F
09/13 18:21, 20F
→
09/13 18:21, , 21F
09/13 18:21, 21F
→
09/13 18:23, , 22F
09/13 18:23, 22F
→
09/13 18:23, , 23F
09/13 18:23, 23F
→
09/13 18:29, , 24F
09/13 18:29, 24F
→
09/13 18:30, , 25F
09/13 18:30, 25F
→
09/13 18:31, , 26F
09/13 18:31, 26F
推
09/13 19:12, , 27F
09/13 19:12, 27F
推
09/13 20:50, , 28F
09/13 20:50, 28F
→
09/13 20:50, , 29F
09/13 20:50, 29F
→
09/13 20:50, , 30F
09/13 20:50, 30F
→
09/13 20:50, , 31F
09/13 20:50, 31F
→
09/13 20:50, , 32F
09/13 20:50, 32F
→
09/13 20:50, , 33F
09/13 20:50, 33F
→
09/13 20:50, , 34F
09/13 20:50, 34F
→
09/13 20:50, , 35F
09/13 20:50, 35F
→
09/13 20:53, , 36F
09/13 20:53, 36F
→
09/13 20:53, , 37F
09/13 20:53, 37F
→
09/13 20:53, , 38F
09/13 20:53, 38F
還有 199 則推文
還有 1 段內文
→
09/14 16:48, , 238F
09/14 16:48, 238F
→
09/14 16:50, , 239F
09/14 16:50, 239F
→
09/14 16:51, , 240F
09/14 16:51, 240F
→
09/14 16:53, , 241F
09/14 16:53, 241F
→
09/14 16:53, , 242F
09/14 16:53, 242F
→
09/14 16:55, , 243F
09/14 16:55, 243F
→
09/14 16:57, , 244F
09/14 16:57, 244F
推
09/14 16:57, , 245F
09/14 16:57, 245F
→
09/14 16:57, , 246F
09/14 16:57, 246F
→
09/14 16:59, , 247F
09/14 16:59, 247F
推
09/14 17:00, , 248F
09/14 17:00, 248F
→
09/14 17:00, , 249F
09/14 17:00, 249F
→
09/14 17:02, , 250F
09/14 17:02, 250F
推
09/14 17:03, , 251F
09/14 17:03, 251F
→
09/14 17:03, , 252F
09/14 17:03, 252F
→
09/14 17:03, , 253F
09/14 17:03, 253F
→
09/14 17:03, , 254F
09/14 17:03, 254F
→
09/14 17:03, , 255F
09/14 17:03, 255F
→
09/14 17:04, , 256F
09/14 17:04, 256F
→
09/14 17:08, , 257F
09/14 17:08, 257F
推
09/14 17:15, , 258F
09/14 17:15, 258F
→
09/14 17:17, , 259F
09/14 17:17, 259F
→
09/14 17:18, , 260F
09/14 17:18, 260F
→
09/14 17:19, , 261F
09/14 17:19, 261F
→
09/14 17:20, , 262F
09/14 17:20, 262F
推
09/14 17:21, , 263F
09/14 17:21, 263F
→
09/14 17:22, , 264F
09/14 17:22, 264F
推
09/14 17:23, , 265F
09/14 17:23, 265F
→
09/14 18:55, , 266F
09/14 18:55, 266F
→
09/14 18:55, , 267F
09/14 18:55, 267F
噓
09/14 19:25, , 268F
09/14 19:25, 268F
→
09/14 19:26, , 269F
09/14 19:26, 269F
推
09/14 19:29, , 270F
09/14 19:29, 270F
→
09/15 10:05, , 271F
09/15 10:05, 271F
→
09/15 10:06, , 272F
09/15 10:06, 272F
推
09/15 20:38, , 273F
09/15 20:38, 273F
推
09/16 07:53, , 274F
09/16 07:53, 274F
→
09/17 13:27, , 275F
09/17 13:27, 275F
推
09/20 11:57, , 276F
09/20 11:57, 276F
推
10/17 19:47, , 277F
10/17 19:47, 277F
討論串 (同標題文章)
以下文章回應了本文 (最舊先):
完整討論串 (本文為第 1 之 3 篇):