This morning, I received a query from a scientist:
I have been following your documentation of industry-funded research on health benefits. I’ve been thinking about this issue from the perspective of fruits and vegetables. We know that they are good in general, but how does one fund research to demonstrate that clinically? In particular, how does one get specific about the form and amount that his helpful for specific health benefits? You may be interested in this press release from the raspberry industry telling about the papers at the Society for Experimental Biology meetings that are relevant to the health benefits of eating raspberries. This seems to be approaching what a good model might look like. I’m interested in your perspective. Furthermore, are the results relevant to nutritionists?
Here’s how I answered it:
Thanks for sending. I guess my question would be something along the lines of why getting specific about form and amount of specific fruits and vegetables is important for public health. People don’t eat just raspberries. They put them in cereal or on desserts. Raspberries are expensive. Wealthy, educated and, therefore, healthy people are likely to consume them. So this looks like marketing research to me—selling raspberries as a superfood. If you think there is a special benefit to raspberries and that it would be good to quantify it, the best strategy would be to get the research funded by an independent agency. Otherwise, it’s clearly marketing research (hence the press release). At least that’s how I see it.
This, of course, gets us back to the question of sponsored research which, as my collection of sponsored studies has shown, almost inevitably produce results favorable to the sponsor. I love raspberries and don’t doubt for a minute that they are healthy, but a superfood? I don’t think so.
I’m still working on the descriptive analysis of the year’s collection of sponsored studies. I will also be giving more thought to such questions, so send them along.