Skip to main content

All Access Subscription

Get unlimited access to our full publication and article library.

Get Access Now

Interested in Group Sales? Learn more

<p>An industry-funded study says nutritional guidelines for reducing sugar intake may not be all they&#39;re cracked up to be.</p>

Controversial Study Casts Doubt on Sugar Consumption Guidelines

By Jill Drachenberg, Editor, AHC Media

A new study casting doubt on sugar consumption guidelines is causing plenty of controversy.

The study looked at guidelines for reducing sugar intake from the World Health Organization, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and six other international agencies. Researchers found that guidelines were based on “low-quality evidence” and do not meet criteria for “trustworthy recommendations.”

“All of the reviewed guidelines suggested a decrease in consumption of nonintrinsic sugars. Although the overall direction was consistent, the rationale and evidence used to make each recommendation were inconsistent,” the study authors wrote. “This lack of evidentiary consistency, with various health concerns cited, creates confusion for practitioners and the public about the role that sugar plays in health.”

But the study is coming under fire due to the funding source — the International Life Sciences Institute, an organization funded by companies such as Hershey’s, Kelloggs, Coca-Cola, General Mills, and other food and agro companies. Critics see the study as an attempt by the food and sugar industries to cast doubt on nutritional guidelines recommending lower sugar consumption, and on the role of sugar in obesity and chronic health conditions.

The study also comes on the heels of an exposé of sugar industry funding bias in research in the 1960s to downplay the role of sugar in heart disease.

“I think the public and policymakers need to view any industry-funded research that could be averse to the industry’s bottom line with extreme skepticism,” says Stanton A. Glantz, PhD, co-author of the exposé and professor at the Phillip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies at the University of California, San Francisco. “There is a difference between work that is funded by the NIH or the American Heart Association. It is being supported by organizations that have a fundamental interest in getting the answer correct. [Industry] has a fundamental interest in maximizing profits.”

For more information on the historical exposé of the sugar industry studies, see the November issue of IRB Advisor.