Re: news flash, another corrupt "scientist"

From: tcomeau (tunderbar_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 07/28/04 

Date: 28 Jul 2004 07:29:56 -0700

This is what I appreciate. Their database of "scientists" and their
connections to industry:

http://www.cspinet.org/integrity/index.html

I haven't followed or been aware of the stuff you just showed me.
Thanks for the heads up.

TC

rangerhasten@yahoo.com (Wolfbrother) wrote in message news:<6eb8f6eb.0407271143.70d2ccc2@posting.google.com>...
> tunderbar@hotmail.com (tcomeau) wrote in message news:<b550f406.0407200553.c802b86@posting.google.com>...
> > As much as I appreciate the role that CSPI is playing in the
> > scientific market place, they've gotten it wrong when it comes to
> > hfcs.
>
> You appreciate them? As far as I can tell they are and have always
> been an corrupt and despicable organization that has done immense harm
> to the public.
>
>
> http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/cspi.html
>
>
> By Mary G. Enig, PhD
>
> Oh Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, who's the most revisionist of us all?
>
> Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) provides the classic
> example of chutzpah, like when the child who murders his parents
> pleads for mercy in court because he is an orphan! In this case, the
> crime is the complete ruination of the food supply with the
> replacement of healthy traditional saturated fats with partially
> hydrogenated soybean oil, and the victim is the unsuspecting public,
> suffering from ever-increasing rates of cancer, heart disease,
> infertility, impotence, asthma, allergies, learning disabilities, bone
> problems, digestive disorders, diabetes and obesity.
>
> On October 20, 1993, CSPI had the chutzpah to call a press conference
> in Washington, DC and lambast the major fast-food chains for doing
> what CSPI coerced them into doing, namely, using partially
> hydrogenated vegetable oils in their deep fat-fryers. On that date,
> CSPI, an eager proponent of partially hydrogenated oils for many
> years, even when their adverse health effects were apparent, reversed
> its position after an onslaught of adverse medical reports linking
> trans fatty acids in these processed oils to coronary heart disease
> and cancer. Instead of accepting the blame, CSPI pleaded "not guilty,"
> claiming that the fault lay with the major fast-food chains?including
> McDonald's, Burger King, Wendy's and Kentucky Fried Chicken, because
> they "falsely claim to use '100% vegetable oil' when they actually use
> hydrogenated shortening." (Actually, a fat or oil or mixture of fats
> and/or oils is called a "liquid shortening" when it is used in baking
> and frying; similarly, when poured over lettuce and tomatoes, it is
> called a "salad dressing.")
>
> According to the CSPI press release, "In 1984, CSPI organized the
> first national campaign to pressure fast-food restaurants and food
> companies to stop frying with beef fat and tropical oils, which are
> high in the cholesterol-raising saturated fats that increase the risk
> of heart disease. After six years of public pressure?including
> full-page newspaper ads placed by Nebraska millionaire and
> cholesterol-crusader Phil Sokolof?the industry finally relented in
> 1990. But instead of switching to vegetable oil for frying, CSPI's
> research shows, the companies opted for hydrogenated shortenings,
> which have a longer shelf life and can be used longer in deep-fat
> fryers."
>
> To understand the depth of the hypocrisy and deception perpetrated on
> the public, let's look at the sordid history of CSPI's
> anti-saturated-fat campaign.
>
> ANTI-SATURATE RHETORIC
> One of America's most influential and vocal consumer-advocacy group,
> CSPI was founded in 1972, the year that Michael Jacobson, CSPI's
> Executive Director, published Eaters' Digest, a book filled with
> anti-saturated-fat rhetoric.
>
> CSPI's well publicized campaign against "saturated" frying fats,
> especially those used by fast-food restaurants, was launched in 1984
> and was continued in 1986 when CSPI added the "tropical oils" to their
> list of supposed villains in the American diet.
>
> The whitewash of trans fatty acids began in 1987 with an article by
> Elaine Blume, published in CSPI's Nutrition Action newsletter. Wrote
> Blume: "From margarine to Tater Tots, partially hydrogenated vegetable
> oils play a major role in our food supply. . . . In fact, hydrogenated
> oils don't post a dire threat to health. . . . Improving on Nature. .
> . . Manufacturers hydrogenate. . . these vegetable oils so they won't
> become rancid while they sit on shelves, or during frying. . . . it
> seems unlikely that hydrogenation contributes much to our burden of
> heart disease. . . The fact that hydrogenated oils appear to be
> relatively benign is cause for thanks, because these fats are
> everywhere."
>
> In 1988, CSPI published a booklet called Saturated Fat Attack, which
> defended trans fatty acids and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils
> and called for pejorative labeling of "saturated" fats. The booklet
> contained a section called "Biochemistry 101," which claimed that only
> tropical oils were dangerous when hydrogenated. "Hydrogenated (or
> partially hydrogenated) fats are widely used in foods and cause untold
> consternation among consumers. . . [they] start out as plain old
> liquid vegetable oils (usually soybean), which are then reacted with
> hydrogen. . . converting much of the polyunsaturated fatty acids to
> monounsaturated fatty acids. . . [with]. . . small amounts. . .
> converted to saturated fatty acids. . . [e.g.], stearic acid, which
> seems to have no effect on blood cholesterol levels.
>
> "Overall, hydrogenated fats don't pose a significant risk. . .
> exceptions are hydrogenated [tropical oils, which are made]. . . even
> worse after hydrogenation."
>
> Obviously, the individuals writing the booklet were completely
> ignorant (or pretended to be ignorant) of lipid science. Modern
> hydrogenation methods create trans fatty acids rather than
> monounsaturated fatty acids, and very few saturated fatty acids. By
> 1988, the adverse effects of trans fats were well known. The article
> points out that stearic acid has no effect on blood cholesterol
> levels, yet CSPI continued to accuse beef tallow, which is rich in
> stearic acid, of "raising cholesterol and increasing the risk of heart
> disease." As for the tropical oils, they do not need to be
> hydrogenated!
>
> Blume was at it again in March 1988 with another article, "The Truth
> About Trans ." "Hydrogenated oils aren't guilty as charged. . . . All
> told, the charges against trans fat just don't stand up. And by
> extension, hydrogenated oils seem relatively innocent.. . . . As for
> processed foods, you're better off choosing products made with
> hydrogenated soybean, corn, or cottonseed oil. . . " This article was
> widely disseminated; Michael Jacobson provided it as a handout to
> members of the Maryland Legislature during hearings when the
> University of Maryland group tried to introduce labeling of trans
> fatty acids in the State.
>
> But by 1990, CSPI could no longer defend the indefensible. In October
> of that year, Bonnie Liebman, CSPI Director of Nutrition, published an
> article "Trans in Trouble" which referred to recent studies by Dutch
> scientists showing that trans fats raised cholesterol. "That's not to
> say trans fatty acids are artery-cloggers," she wrote, ". . . the fats
> in our foods may affect cholesterol differently than those used in the
> Dutch experiment. . . . The Bottom Line. . . Trans , shmans. You
> should eat less fat. . . Don't switch back to butter. . . use a soft
> tub diet margarine. . . . "
>
> REVISIONISM
> In May, 1991, I wrote a letter to the editor of Nutrition Action,
> outlining and correcting Ms. Liebman's numerous errors, including her
> claim that consumption of trans fatty acids in the US typically ranged
> from 4 to 7 grams per day. By 1991, many Americans eating processed
> foods were consuming over 50 grams of trans fats per day.
>
> The revisionism began in December 1992 when Ms. Liebman wrote: "We've
> been crying 'foul' for some time now, as the margarine industry has
> tried to convince people that eating margarine was as good for their
> hearts as aerobic exercise. . . . And we warned folks several years
> ago that trans fatty acids could be a problem. . . . That's especially
> true now that we know that trans fatty acids are harmful, but we don't
> know how much trans are in different foods." Of course, CSPI had
> issued no such warning, but had been defending trans fats for more
> than five years. And there's no apology for falsely demonizing
> traditional fats. "Don't switch back from margarine to butter," wrote
> Ms. Liebman, ". . . try diet or whipped margarine. . . use a liquid
> margarine."
>
> In November 1993, Bonnie Liebman coauthored an article with Margo
> Wootan called "The Great Trans Wreck," which would have been in
> preparation well before Michael Jacobson's infamous press conference,
> in which they asked, "Why do companies love hydrogenated fat if it's
> so unhealthy? . . . . despite the claims on many packages, most
> companies switched not to vegetable oil, but to vegetable shortening.
> And that created a problem."
>
> Jacobson's press conference was an attempt to deceive CSPI's own
> readers and the public in four distinct ways:
>
> 1. He wanted laymen to think that vegetable oil and vegetable
> shortening are two essentially different things
>
> 2. He claimed that CSPI recommended vegetable oils only (and not
> shortenings containing trans fatty acids) during its anti-saturate
> campaign
>
> 3. He accused the fast food chains of lying when they used
> shortenings, but advertised vegetable oils
>
> 4. He asserted that CSPI thought the chains were using vegetable oils
> and not shortenings.
>
> These are just a few elements in the tissue of lies, false innuendoes,
> and cover-ups in the Great Deception orchestrated by Liebman, Wootan
> and Jacobson, for in CSPI's January 1991 Nutrition Action, Jacobson
> reviewed CSPI's twenty-year history and gloated: "Last year, Nutrition
> Action provided members with postcards to send to McDonald's and
> Burger King criticizing the frying of potatoes in beef fat. The
> postcard was timed to coincide with full-page ads sponsored by the
> National Heart Savers Association criticizing the way McDonald's fries
> its potatoes. The companies, which were besieged with bad publicity
> and barraged with thousands of postcards, changed their shortening
> (emphasis added)."
>
> This statement, presented to CSPI's readers during the height of their
> anti-saturated-fat campaign, destroys the myth that CSPI began to
> promulgate in 1993, namely, that CSPI did not know that the chains had
> switched to shortenings, which for all practical purposes meant
> shortenings mainly composed of partially hydrogenated fats and oils.
> In fact, as early as 1986, when CSPI announced that "McDonald's
> restaurants in New York will stop frying Chicken McNuggets and fish
> filets in beef fat and will use vegetable oil instead," I wrote to
> Bonnie Liebman warning her that vegetable oil is almost always
> partially hydrogenated.
>
> DAMAGE DONE
> CSPI's 1988 publication, Saturated Fat Attack, contains a long list of
> processed foods said to be made with coconut oil, palm oil, tallow,
> butter or lard. Actually, processors used mostly partially
> hydrogenated oil for snack foods and baked goods, but often included a
> small amount of other fats and oils, which were, of course, listed on
> the label. There were a few hold outs, however: Hi Ho crackers were
> made with coconut oil, Uneeda biscuits were made with lard, Sara Lee
> croissants were made with butter and Pepperidge Farm used a blend that
> contained a lot of coconut oil.
>
> But it was the fast food chains that received the brunt of Jacobson's
> wrath, because they used a blend of 91-95 percent beef fat or 100
> percent palm oil for frying. He orchestrated well publicized
> demonstrations in front of McDonald's and a post card campaign to the
> corporate offices of the fast food chains to protest the use of these
> "artery-clogging" saturated fats for frying.
>
> It is impossible to measure the hazards and grief that Liebman and
> Jacobson?the leaders of the major nutrition "activist" consumer
> organization?have inflicted on many millions of an unknowing
> public?because CSPI's campaign was wildly successful. Thanks to CSPI,
> healthy traditional fats have almost completely disappeared from the
> food supply, replaced by manufactured trans fats known to cause many
> diseases. By 1990, most fast food chains had switched to partially
> hydrogenated vegetable oil. In 1982, a McDonald's meal of chicken
> McNuggets, large order of fries and a Danish or pie contained 2.4
> grams of trans fat, out of a total of 54 grams of fat. In 1992, that
> same meal contained 19.2 grams trans fats, a 700 percent increase.
> After his victory with the fast food chains, Jacobson went after the
> popcorn in movie theatres and our last good dietary source of coconut
> oil?-one of the supremely healthy fats on the planet?disappeared.
> "Today," brags Jacobson, "'no tropical oils' is a badge of honor worn
> by many food packages."
>
> COINCIDENCE OR CONSPIRACY
> Who benefits? Soy, or course. Eighty percent of all partially
> hydrogenated oil used in processed foods in the US comes from soy, as
> does 70 percent of all liquid oil. CSPI claims that its support comes
> from subscribers to its Nutrition Action newsletter, which continues
> to issue hysterical warnings against "artery-clogging" fats in steak,
> whole milk and fettucine Alfredo. One million subscribers provide more
> than 70 percent of CSPI's $13 million annual income, according to a
> recent report, but CSPI is extremely secretive about the value of its
> assets, salaries paid and use of its revenues. If CSPI has large
> donors, they're not telling who they are, but in fact, in CSPI's
> January, 1991 newsletter, Jacobson notes that "our effort was
> ultimately joined. . . by the American Soybean Association."
>
> Jacobson's latest crusade? A new meat substitute called Quorn, made
> from protein produced by a fungus, which has proved popular in Europe.
> Thanks to Jacobson's opposition, Quorn wil l not compete with
> imitation meat products made from soy in the US.