Mark Klempner
04.10.2007
From Chocolate to Global Warming: The Corporate Takeover of Science (1 comments )
If you think the news about chocolate being healthful for your heart and for your brain is too good to be true, you're right: the research is less encouraging than the reporting about it. For instance, a Talk of the Nation public radio feature touted flavanols as the "magic molecules" in cocoa, shown in studies to relax blood vessels and increase their flexibility, yet ignored the obvious fact that when cocoa becomes but one ingredient in chocolate, whatever heath-healthy virtues it possesses are offset by saturated fat and sugar.
Similarly, the San Francisco Chronicle offers its readers "Some Sweet News: Chocolate Could Be Good for Your Memory," but neglects to mention that researcher Ian Macdonald found no difference in cognitive test performance after his subjects drank a cocoa mixture; its only effect, as indicated by MRI scans, was to increase blood flow to the brain. (Decreased cerebral circulation as a natural result of aging or because of a disease condition is associated with memory problems, so it is conceivable that cocoa, as well as other substances with flavanols such as apples, grapes, and green tea, could help with that.)
The cocoa plot thickens when one considers that the researchers themselves may have given their findings an overly positive spin, and that their findings may even be tainted, due to their exceedingly close relationship with the chocolate industry. For instance, Mars Incorporated, one of the world's largest producers of chocolate, funded 3 out of 4 researchers who recently presented at a major scientific conference. Mars also sponsored the symposium at which they presented, and Mars' chief science officer, Harold Schmitz, presided over the panel. Furthermore, the research itself was conducted using CocoaPro® cocoa formulated by Mars to be rich in flavanols. It will come as no surprise that Mars is in the process of producing flavanol-rich chocolate made by the same proprietary process.
...(snip)
In a recently released study, Relationship Between Funding Source and Conclusion among Nutrition Related Scientific Articles by Lenard Lesser et al, the authors conclude that "industry funding of nutrition-related scientific articles may bias conclusions in favor of the sponsors' products with potentially significant implications for public health." Specifically, they found that industry-funded research is 4 to 8 times more likely than independently funded research to result in findings favorable to the sponsor.
This is simply common sense, considering the all-too-frequent conflicts of interest. At the University of California at Davis, for instance, Mars endowed a chair in the nutrition department and has funded at least 20 researchers. The inside/outside boundaries there have become increasingly porous: one faculty member (who was on the panel that recently presented its cocoa research) accepted a position last year at Mars, and Harold Schmitz is currently a visiting professor in nutrition. When one factors in the 10 million dollars that Mars has poured into the institution over the last 10 years, wouldn't these academics feel just a little bit pressured to provide Mars with some good news?
...(snip)...
Our situation is becoming comparable to that of Aldous Huxley's Brave New World, where scientific inquiry is limited to what will fuel consumerism, and distract or pleasure the masses. In Huxley's dystopia, knowledge was once the scientist's highest good, truth "the supreme value." But after society was taken over by a government controlled by industry, pure science was recognized to be potentially dangerous to maintaining the status quo, and had to be "carefully chained and muzzled."
This is where we now find ourselves: it is bad enough that our universities are being paid to research pleasure foods which will be marketed to an often obese population that doesn't eat enough fruits and vegetables. What is worse is the important research that is neglected as university resources are diverted to accommodate corporate agendas. Worse still is the vital research that is being thwarted or suppressed because it will spell trouble for industry's bottom line. .....(more)
The complete piece is at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-klempner/from-chocolate-to-global-_b_45491.html
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
