Do Researchers Manipulate Data To Prove Their View Point?

The debate for and against different types of fat (particularly against SAFA and for n-6 PUFA aka vegetable oils) and how it relates to health has been a never ending one. Debates are fine. However, when researchers start manipulating the actual data just to promote what one wants to promote then there comes a big question mark as far as these studies go. Here's one link on one such case:

It is things like these that now has started coming to fore and Ancel Keys was the master of "Science And Art" of data manipulation just because "he thought" saturated fat is bad. Researchers pooled the results of 72 studies that had looked at the link between fatty acids and coronary disease and none could prove that there's a link between saturated fat and coronary disease and here's the URL:

But, surprising part is that they still want you to eat what you have been eating so far and getting all sorts of health issues. They want more studies to be done, where as when they had to demonize SAFA, they just followed one Ancel Keys study. Surprising indeed! This is what "Good Science Bad Science" is all about. Bad science picks up one data and formulates a dietary guideline and that cannot be broken despite 72 Good Science data.

Diabetics who live LCHF lifestyle globally, eat saturated fat, do not really look at what the dietary recommendations are because it is the same recommendation which lead them to diabesity (not considering Type 1 thugh even Type 1 live LCHF lifestyle). The best way to get diabetes and other disorders is follow the ADA/AHA dietary recommendations.

Last edited by

5 Replies

  • So Sydney Diet Heart study data was manipulated and this got exposed only upon recovering the tapes of the nuked data.

  • gphillip - In this case, they did manipulate and threw the discarded data on a magnetic disk in a garage, just to prove that saturated fat is bad -- so perhaps vegetable oil industry sponsored research tying to show that n-6 PUFA replacing SAFA is good, but exposed.

  • Yep Certainly. Wherever there is corporate interest in 'Research', data will always be manipulated. Sometimes deliberately and sometimes unwittingly. Often research is designed to find a specific thing and so the focus goes onto that thing whatever it is. But of course not al research is publicised. Dupont were fined 11 million because they performed research to see if Teflon was toxic, it was and they covered it up. Pharmaceutical companies are probably the worst offenders in this area.

  • @NulaWidger -

    Glaxo Smith Kline went through $3 billion settlement for drug fraud, including the anti diabetic drug Avandia which killed diabetics through heart attacks. Rightly said, Pharma companies are biggest offenders. J&J, Pfizer, ... you name it and they are involved in some fraud or the other.

  • Couldn't agree more

You may also like...