Nutritional research studies influence the most important health decisions we make—what to eat and drink each day. Findings catalyze critical changes in the system, like removing trans fats from processed foods. They are the basis for better education and a more functional understanding of the complex relationship between nutrition, dietary choices and wellbeing.
These studies are also valuable marketing tools for major food corporations, special interest groups and lobbyists. They earn media. They start conversations. They influence consumers’ purchasing decisions. But as findings grab headlines and dominate discussions, important context falls by the wayside: Who funded the research? Who determined the direction of the study? What conflicts of interest exist?
To professor, author and world-renowned expert in nutritional sciences, Marion Nestle, the answers to these questions are often obvious. Fed-up with seeing a steady stream of industry-funded studies with glaring conflicts of interest, she began tracking them on her blog Food Politics. Her findings are the topic of a Vox article by Julia Belluz entitled “Food companies distort nutrition science. Here’s how to stop them.”
So far, Nestle has tracked 152 industry-funded studies—140 of which report results that favor the funder. For example, a Welch Foods Inc. supported study found that Concord grape juice had brain-boosting properties. Another study funded by the California Walnut Commission found that consuming walnuts can help reduce the risk of diabetes. As Belluz reports, in Nestle’s experience, independent researchers rarely find clear evidence that specific foods have miraculous health effects.
Nestle does not question the knowledge or integrity of the scientists conducting the studies she tracked. Researchers are in need of funding. And industry entities in need of research to back marketing claims are more than happy to help. Along the way, funder-favorable findings are emphasized and negative outcomes are downplayed. The consumer never sees the big picture.
Conflicts of interest in nutrition research work against the interest of public health and safety. It is difficult to identify health risks when studies are funded and structured to prove and promote benefits. Maybe it is time to take a more careful look at who is funding these conclusions.