Do Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Cause Obesity and Diabetes? Industry and the Manufacture of Scientific Controversy

@article{Schillinger2016DoSB,
  title={Do Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Cause Obesity and Diabetes? Industry and the Manufacture of Scientific Controversy},
  author={Dean Schillinger and Jessica Tran and Christina V. Mangurian and Cristin E. Kearns},
  journal={Annals of Internal Medicine},
  year={2016},
  volume={165},
  pages={895-897}
}
This article has been corrected. The original version (PDF) is appended to this article as a Supplement. Background: The outcomes of recent regulatory initiatives, tax measures, and federal nutritional guidance designed to curb consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs) have hinged on whether these beverages are a proven cause of obesity and diabetes. The SSB industry has opposed such initiatives, claiming that causation is scientifically controversial (1). We comprehensively surveyed the… 
Do Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Cause Obesity and Diabetes?
  • J. Slavin
  • Medicine
    Annals of Internal Medicine
  • 2017
TO THE EDITOR: I was contacted by a reporter who wanted to know more about my sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) industry sponsorship/conflicts of interest that were listed in the Supplement of
Do Sugar-Sweetened Beverages Cause Obesity and Diabetes?
  • M. Jack
  • Medicine
    Annals of Internal Medicine
  • 2017
TLDR
The authors found several deficiencies with Schillinger and colleagues' methods, including their inconsistent application of exclusion and inclusion criteria to studies and literature reviews, omissions of relevant studies, and mischaracterizations of study conclusions.
Position paper on taxes to nonessential energy-dense foods and sugar-sweetened beverages
TLDR
Analysis of the scientific evidence linking the consumption of these products to chronic diseases and the studies that have evaluated the observed and expected impact of food taxes in Mexico suggest taxes to unhealthy foods should be strengthened and remain a crucial part of the national strategy to reduce obesity and chronic diseases.
Guidelines to Limit Added Sugar Intake: Junk Science or Junk Food?
TLDR
The review concluded that the guidelines do not meet criteria for trustworthy recommendations, judging the evidence supporting each recommendation to be of low quality, and suggests that placing limits on junk food is based on junk science, a conclusion favorable to the F&B industry.
How does the British Soft Drink Association respond to media research reporting on the health consequences of sugary drinks?
TLDR
The public comments and press releases of the British Soft Drinks Association (BSDA) since May 2014 illustrate the BSDA reliance on arguments of causation to discredit research and avoid policy interventions.
Impact of sugar‐sweetened beverage taxes on purchases and dietary intake: Systematic review and meta‐analysis
TLDR
Based on real‐world evaluations, SSB taxes introduced in jurisdictions around the world appear to have been effective in reducing SSB purchases and dietary intake.
Industry funded studies are less likely to link sugary drinks to obesity, review finds
  • S. Mayor
  • Medicine
    British Medical Journal
  • 2016
Research studies funded by companies that make sugar sweetened beverages are significantly less likely to find links between sugary drinks and obesity or diabetes related outcomes than independently
Dietary and Health Correlates of Sweetened Beverage Intake: Sources of Variability in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES)
TLDR
The results suggest that caution is warranted in design and interpretation of studies using NHANES data to examine dietary and health correlates of sweetened beverage intake, and how heterogeneity in beverage categorization may impact the outcomes of published analyses.
Sugar industry sponsorship of germ-free rodent studies linking sucrose to hyperlipidemia and cancer: An historical analysis of internal documents
TLDR
The sugar industry did not disclose evidence of harm from animal studies that would have strengthened the case that the CHD risk of sucrose is greater than starch and caused sucrose to be scrutinized as a potential carcinogen, and the influence of the gut microbiota in the differential effects of Sucrose and starch on blood lipids, as well as the influences of carbohydrate quality on beta-glucuronidase and cancer activity deserve further scrutiny.
...
1
2
3
4
...

References

SHOWING 1-5 OF 5 REFERENCES
Sugar consumption, metabolic disease and obesity: The state of the controversy
  • K. Stanhope
  • Medicine
    Critical reviews in clinical laboratory sciences
  • 2016
TLDR
The evidence and lack of evidence that allows the controversy to continue are discussed, and the conclusions from several meta-analyses suggest that fructose has no specific adverse effects relative to any other carbohydrate.
Corporate Funding of Food and Nutrition Research: Science or Marketing?
TLDR
In preparation for what I intend to be a more systematic analysis of corporate funding of nutrition research, a convenience sample of studies funded by food and beverage companies or trade associations as they appear in journals I happen to be reading are collected.
Relationship between Funding Source and Conclusion among Nutrition-Related Scientific Articles
TLDR
Industry funding of nutrition-related scientific articles may bias conclusions in favor of sponsors' products, with potentially significant implications for public health.
Science and Public Health on Trial: Warning Notices on Advertisements for Sugary Drinks.
TLDR
An ordinance requiring billboards advertising sugarsweetened beverages (SSBs) to include a notice: “Warning: drinking beverages with added sugar(s) contributes to obesity, diabetes, and tooth decay” represents the first such SSB warning notice law in the world.
Relationship between Research Outcomes and Risk of Bias, Study Sponsorship, and Author Financial Conflicts of Interest in Reviews of the Effects of Artificially Sweetened Beverages on Weight Outcomes: A Systematic Review of Reviews
TLDR
Review sponsorship and authors’ financial conflicts of interest introduced bias affecting the outcomes of reviews of artificially sweetened beverage effects on weight that could not be explained by other sources of bias.