Industry funding has no effect on research quality!

August 20, 2008

I love the way sponsored science works. We now have data claiming that there is no difference in the quality of controlled clinical weight loss trials whether they are funded by industry or independently. The senior author on this comparative study is the very same person who was relieved of his responsibilities as head of a national obesity society because he wrote a letter opposing calorie labeling without disclosing that he was paid to do it (see previous post on this topic).  NIH paid for this study in part (the other parts aren’t attributed).  For this study, as the paper says, “Ethical approval is not required.”


3 Comments

  1. […] Original post by What to Eat […]

    Pingback by Weight Loss » Blog Archive » Industry funding has no effect on research quality! — August 20, 2008 @ 7:52 pm

  2. Perhaps ethical approval is not required, but boy wouldn’t it be nice? Or, if not ethical approval, how about just good old fashioned ethical behavior? What happened to just doing the right thing because it was the right thing, regardless of whether there was somebody else around to give approval?

    Comment by Sheila — August 21, 2008 @ 3:09 pm

  3. I am disturbed by how this is being reported and discussed. Is there something actually wrong with how this study is conducted? Or is it somehow “unethical” even to conduct such a study? This just seems like a case of “guilt by association” and of judging the outcome by whether you like the results or not. If CSPI did a similar study and found that industry-sponsorship affected the reporting of weight loss trials, would you be similarly skeptical, since CSPI benefits financially from making various sensationalistic claims? How about some scientific critique instead of just “oh I don’t like these results so they must be no good and even unethical.”

    Comment by Carolyn — August 30, 2008 @ 7:34 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Topics

activity additives agriculture alcohol Alice Waters allergies American Dietetic Association animals antibiotics antioxidants beef bisphenol A books Bottled Water breast feeding Brian Wansink burger king calcium calorie labels Calories Canada Cancer cdc center for consumer freedom Cereals childhood obesity China chocolate climate change cloned animals Coca Cola colbert consolidation corn corn sweeteners Country of Origin Labeling CSPI Dairy diabetes diet and energy drinks dietary guidelines diets e coli eat less move more eating liberally farm policy fast food fats and oils FDA fiber fish food art food assistance Food Composition food crisis food deserts food industry food marketing food miles food policy food safety food stamps food systems Framingham Heart Study Fruits and Vegetables FTC functional foods GAO genetically modified grassfed health claims hfcs Hugo drinks hyperactivity India infant formula Interviews irradiation juice drinks junk food kellogg kids diets King Corn Korea krill Labels lawsuits mad cow maps Margarines marketing to kids McDonalds Meat meat safety media melamine Michael Pollan Monsanto movies natural New Zealand obama action obesity obesity in kids Omega 3 Fats organic fish organic standards organics partnerships peanut butter PepsiCo pesticides pet food Phil Lempert photos Portion sizes price fixing price of food pyramid Quotes from What to Eat restaurants revolving door salt San Francisco Chronicle school food scoring systems soft drinks sponsorship stevia Sugars supermarkets supplements surveys sweeteners taste taxes television tomatoes toxins trans fat USDA vegetarian and vegan Vending machines videos vitamins wall street Whole Foods Whole Grains WIC Yearly Kos