Just recently, we mentioned a study advising European and North American adults not to change anything in their habits regarding their consumption of red meat. However, the tumultuous past of the principal researcher of this same study has resurfaced, so much so that the latter finds himself accused of conflict of interest!
Since 2015, red meat and cold cuts have been considered by the WHO to be carcinogenic to humans. This qualification was motivated by an evaluation based on more than 800 studies carried out around the world. However, a publication in the Annals of Internal Medicine October 1, 2019 allowed about twenty researchers to provide a surprising conclusion.
According to them, adults living in Europe and North America should not change anything about their consumption current red meat. In other words, an average consumption of three to four servings per week would be acceptable. This review of studies made it possible to reach the same conclusion with regard to charcuterie. In addition, the recommendations usually circulating on the risks concerning this type of diet have been minimized, even denied.
In response to these conclusions contrary to the many studies already conducted on the subject, we announced that these should not be followed much by the competent authorities and organisations. For example, the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) quickly indicated not wanting to change its instructions.
October 4, 2019, the New York Times made a revelation about the lead researcher of the study , a man named Bradley Johnston. The latter is part of the Department of Community Health and Epidemiology of the Faculty of Medicine at Dalhousie University (Canada). However, the person concerned declared to the journal in which the study was published, that he had not participated in studies involving risks of conflicts of interest for the past three years.
However, in 2016 Bradley Johnston led a very dubious study questioning the risks associated with the overconsumption of sugar . This research was funded by the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), an institution funded by junk food pundits – Coca-Cola, McDonald’s and PepsiCo in the lead.
The researcher replied by indicating that he was legal because the money from the ILSI had been paid to him in 2015, four years ago. According to him, he was not required to declare this case past. Furthermore, the journal Annals of Internal Medicine seems to have kicked in touch. Indeed, the editor of said that no one verifies the claims of researchers and that posts were based on trust.
Let's not forget to remember that if Bradley Johnston is accused of conflict of interest, he is still accompanied by a whole team of researchers. Moreover, as the New York Times points out , the ILSI has already been talked about previously. Indeed, the WHO noted that this institute had already contradicted its recommendations several times to defend the interests of its funders.
Related Articles:
