Pretty much every documentary I’ve ever seen about food (What the Health, Game Changers etc.) descends into a discussion of scientific funding by food companies. If scientific findings are bad, then we can identify that when the finding fails to replicate. Whether a study was funded by corporations gives no information about whether the study is well done. The funding is basically irrelevant. So why the fixation?
“If scientific findings are bad, then we can identify that when the finding fails to replicate. Whether a study was funded by corporations gives no information about whether the study is well done. The funding is basically irrelevant.”
\^Oof. These statements do not amount to anything factual.
You must be new to research. There is a crisis of replication across ALL of science thanks to industry funded papers getting churned out (whomever pays for the research also is solely responsible for analyzing it and assessing it). Great example is the statin issue. There is a single massive study concluding that statins are effective, safe, and necessary. This data has always been locked away from other scientists. Emergent data disputes the claims from the original study, and the original study author just goes on to legally threaten, harass, and sow doubt over the credentials of all questioning his data. To this day there has never been a second look at the statin data, yet they are frequently given out like candy and said to be safe. Academia is one of the most politicized and corrupt industries thanks to the lack of regulation of research. Blame big Pharma mostly, but also every other industry which has allowed this to happen.