Work

Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research (2016)

JAMA Internal Medicine article by Cristin Kearns, Laura Schmidt and Stanton Glantz, built on Sugar Research Foundation documents.

3 links, 0 backed by primary records

The debate

What it found

The SRF set the review’s objective, contributed articles for inclusion, and received drafts. The SRF’s funding and role was not disclosed.1

Who disputes it

The Sugar Association 12 Sep 2016
Generally speaking, it is not only unfortunate but a disservice that industry-funded research is branded as tainted.2
The statement also acknowledges that the foundation should have been more transparent; it does not take issue with the documents themselves.

Each side is quoted in its own words. Whether a finding holds is not decided here.

Connections 3

The Sugar Association 12 Sep 2016 According to The Sugar Association Self-published 2
The statement also acknowledges that the foundation should have been more transparent; it does not take issue with the documents themselves.

Timeline 2 dates

12 Sep 2016 The Sugar Association disputes a finding of Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research (2016) According to The Sugar Association
Nov 2016 Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research (2016)

Proof 2 sources

Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research: A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry Documents (JAMA Internal Medicine 176(11)), Kearns, Schmidt and Glantz, JAMA Internal Medicine (author manuscript via PubMed Central), Nov 2016. Scholarship & press
The SRF set the review’s objective, contributed articles for inclusion, and received drafts. The SRF’s funding and role was not disclosed.
We are well aware of your particular interest in carbohydrate and will cover this as well as we can.
The Sugar Association statement on the Kearns JAMA study, The Sugar Association (statement on its website), 12 Sep 2016. Self-published
Generally speaking, it is not only unfortunate but a disservice that industry-funded research is branded as tainted.
We acknowledge that the Sugar Research Foundation should have exercised greater transparency in all of its research activities, however, when the studies in question were published funding disclosures and transparency standards were not the norm they are today.

Page history 1 change