Now that I’ve wedged open the door on the “research” that informs our total confusion and obfuscation around nutrition, let me follow with some good news. There is, at least with respect to one agent in nutritional studies, some consistency.
In a meta analysis of nutrition research appearing in the established medical literature, we have been able to conclusively identify the one potent agent that is the primary explanatory variable in the outcome of nutritional research:
The source of the research funding!
Yes. And I’m not just being histrionically cynical. It’s true. If you want to know in advance how a particular research study will come out, just look at who’s paying for it.
If the study is financed by the dairy industry, the results will show favorable outcomes for dairy consumption.
If the study is financed by the poultry industry, the results will show favorable outcomes for poultry consumption.
If the study is financed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the results will show favorable outcomes for the products of the industries that lobby congress most lavishly.
If the study is financed by the pharmaceutical industry, the results will demonstrate the relative efficacy of drug intervention in comparison with nutritional modification.
By the way, are you still looking for that one unsponsored study that supports the safety of consuming dairy products? You won’t find it. But you will find a multitude of dairy industry studies that glorify the phony health benefits of dairy consumption, while hiding the health dangers of this most perverse source of “nutrition.”
Does this mean that every industry-sponsored study yields results that are favorable to the industry? No. It only means that those supportive of the industry are the only results that will ever be published!