Regulators Put the Squeeze on Juice Plus+
The Better Business Bureau and Federal Trade Commission explore the claims of Juice Plus+, a multi-level marketing company.
Big Pharma. Big Ag. Big Tobacco. Big Sugar. Big Alcohol. The list goes on, as do the efforts by industries with multimillion- and even multibillion-dollar advertising, researching funding, and lobbying budgets to hawk their wares and obfuscate and even misrepresent science to pad their own bottom lines.
For example, across the board, a series of studies published in the Annals of Internal Medicine found a statistically significant association between lower consumption of red and processed meats and lower total mortality (meaning living a longer life), lower cardiovascular disease mortality, as well as lower risk of dying from cancer. Yet, remarkably, the authors of these studies concluded that people should ignore all the other dietary guidelines and keep eating meat to their heart’s content––or rather discontent.
This shouldn’t come as a surprise, given that this NutriRECS meat panel was partnered with—and had multiple people on the payroll of—Texas A&M Agrilife, which receives millions of dollars of meat industry money every year.
During my medical training, I got my first experience with the influence of industry. I was offered countless steak dinners and fancy perks by Big Pharma representatives, but not once did I get a call from Big Broccoli. There is a reason you hear about the latest drugs on television: Huge corporate budgets drive their promotion. The same reason you’ll probably never see a commercial for sweet potatoes is the same reason breakthroughs on the power of foods to affect your health and longevity may never make it to the public: There’s little profit motive.
Cherry-picking researching findings, skewing outcomes, and deliberately devising misleading studies are just some of the strategies employed by industries focused on profits rather than sound science or even the health and well-being of its customers.
For substantiation of any statements of fact from the peer-reviewed medical literature, please see the associated videos below.
Image Credit: Pixabay. This image has been modified.
The Better Business Bureau and Federal Trade Commission explore the claims of Juice Plus+, a multi-level marketing company.
Herbalife supplements are considered to be a well-established cause of serious liver injury.
Why do some clinical guidelines recommend chondroitin supplements but others do not?
Billions are spent on glucosamine supplements every year. Do they work? Are they safe?
Can collagen beat out placebo for knee osteoarthritis?
I assumed that collagen proteins would get completely broken down in the digestive tract, but I was wrong.
How might we reduce the risk of premature death from dairy consumption?
Doctors and patients alike vastly overestimate the power of bisphosphonate drugs to prevent fractures.
Aging is arguably one of the most important unsolved problems of humanity, yet less than 0.1 percent of the federal research budget is spent on understanding the aging process.
Why did the makers of Prevagen settle a class action lawsuit in 2020 with the FTC over deceptive business practices and false advertising? Is Prevagen safe?
I discuss the safety and efficacy of the newest Alzheimer’s drug treatments, aducanumab (Aduhelm) and lecanemab (Leqembi).
Soy milk is compared to dairy milk and other plant-based milks.
The optimal intake of dietary cholesterol may be zero.
The composition of breast milk is compared between vegetarian and nonvegetarian women.
Why do the official federal Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommend limiting the intake of dietary cholesterol (found mostly in eggs) as much as possible?
Even nine out of ten studies funded by the egg industry show that eggs raise cholesterol.
How can mandating healthy eating messaging on fast-food ads ironically make things worse?
How might we replicate one of our great public health victories—the reduction of smoking rates—in the field of nutrition?
How was England able to so successfully lower sodium intake, which was accompanied by dramatic drops in stroke and heart disease deaths?
There is little guarantee that a dietary supplement will actually contain what is advertised on the packaging and not have undeclared contaminants.
Why don’t more big payors in health care embrace plant-based eating?
Big Meat downplays the magnitude of meat mortality.
The meat industry’s own study concluded that meat consumption increased the risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and premature death.
The same person paid by Big Sugar to downplay the risks of sugar was paid by Big Meat to downplay the risks of meat.
The meat industry comes up with a perversion of evidence-based medicine.
How legitimate is the common corporate criticism of the scientific nutrition literature that the credibility of observational studies is questionable?
How did Big Corn Syrup and other corporate sugar titans hijack the scientific process?
International Life Sciences Organization, a nonprofit, is accused of being a front group for Coca-Cola and other junk food giants.
Do nut eaters live longer simply because they swap in protein from plants in place of animal protein?
I quantify the risks of colon and rectal cancers from eating bacon, ham, hot dogs, sausage, and lunch meat.
How did the meat industry, government, and cancer organizations respond to the confirmation that processed meat, like bacon, ham, hot dogs, and lunch meat, causes cancer?
Why is hospital food so unhealthy?
The first study in history on the incidence of stroke of vegetarians and vegans suggests they may be at higher risk.
What is the relationship between stroke risk and dairy, eggs, meat, and soda?
Implausible explanations for the obesity epidemic, such as sedentary lifestyles or lack of self-discipline, serve the needs of the manufacturers and marketers more than the public’s health and the interest in truth.
Like the tobacco industry adding extra nicotine, the food industry employs taste engineers to accomplish a similar goal: maximize the irresistibility of their products.
We all like to think we make important life decisions like what to eat consciously and rationally, but if that were the case we wouldn’t be in the midst of an obesity epidemic.
The unprecedented rise in the power, scope, and sophistication of food marketing starting around 1980 aligns well with the blastoff slope of the obesity epidemic.
The rise in the U.S. calorie supply responsible for the obesity epidemic wasn’t just about more food but a different kind of food.
We have an uncanny ability to pick out the subtle distinctions in calorie density of foods, but only within the natural range.