» Articles » PMID: 25756179

Sugar Industry Influence on the Scientific Agenda of the National Institute of Dental Research's 1971 National Caries Program: a Historical Analysis of Internal Documents

Overview
Journal PLoS Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2015 Mar 11
PMID 25756179
Citations 34
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: In 1966, the National Institute of Dental Research (NIDR) began planning a targeted research program to identify interventions for widespread application to eradicate dental caries (tooth decay) within a decade. In 1971, the NIDR launched the National Caries Program (NCP). The objective of this paper is to explore the sugar industry's interaction with the NIDR to alter the research priorities of the NIDR NCP.

Methods And Findings: We used internal cane and beet sugar industry documents from 1959 to 1971 to analyze industry actions related to setting research priorities for the NCP. The sugar industry could not deny the role of sucrose in dental caries given the scientific evidence. They therefore adopted a strategy to deflect attention to public health interventions that would reduce the harms of sugar consumption rather than restricting intake. Industry tactics included the following: funding research in collaboration with allied food industries on enzymes to break up dental plaque and a vaccine against tooth decay with questionable potential for widespread application, cultivation of relationships with the NIDR leadership, consulting of members on an NIDR expert panel, and submission of a report to the NIDR that became the foundation of the first request for proposals issued for the NCP. Seventy-eight percent of the sugar industry submission was incorporated into the NIDR's call for research applications. Research that could have been harmful to sugar industry interests was omitted from priorities identified at the launch of the NCP. Limitations are that this analysis relies on one source of sugar industry documents and that we could not interview key actors.

Conclusions: The NCP was a missed opportunity to develop a scientific understanding of how to restrict sugar consumption to prevent tooth decay. A key factor was the alignment of research agendas between the NIDR and the sugar industry. This historical example illustrates how industry protects itself from potentially damaging research, which can inform policy makers today. Industry opposition to current policy proposals-including a World Health Organization guideline on sugars proposed in 2014 and changes to the nutrition facts panel on packaged food in the US proposed in 2014 by the US Food and Drug Administration-should be carefully scrutinized to ensure that industry interests do not supersede public health goals.

Citing Articles

The Metabolic Syndrome, a Human Disease.

Alemany M Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(4).

PMID: 38396928 PMC: 10888680. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25042251.


Development and Testing of the Novel Sugar Meter for Informing Sugar Intake Guidelines to Parents of Three- to Six-Year-Old Children: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Kannan J, Jawdekar A Cureus. 2023; 15(10):e47409.

PMID: 38022204 PMC: 10658758. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.47409.


Representational shifts: increasing motivation for bottled water through simulation-enhancing advertisements.

Claassen M, Papies E BMC Public Health. 2023; 23(1):2209.

PMID: 37946180 PMC: 10634071. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-17109-1.


The Commercial Determinants of Health and Evidence Synthesis (CODES): methodological guidance for systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses.

Petticrew M, Glover R, Volmink J, Blanchard L, Cott E, Knai C Syst Rev. 2023; 12(1):165.

PMID: 37710334 PMC: 10503085. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-023-02323-0.


Let the Chips Fall! Public Nudging Arrangements, Coercion, and the Role of Independent Shopkeepers.

Hayry M, Ahola-Launonen J, Takala T Society. 2023; :1-14.

PMID: 37362038 PMC: 10177725. DOI: 10.1007/s12115-023-00844-x.


References
1.
Brownell K, Warner K . The perils of ignoring history: Big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food?. Milbank Q. 2009; 87(1):259-94. PMC: 2879177. DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-0009.2009.00555.x. View

2.
BIBBY B . Methods for comparing the cariogenicity of foodstuffs. J Dent Res. 1970; 49(6):1334-8. DOI: 10.1177/00220345700490062901. View

3.
Bero L . Implications of the tobacco industry documents for public health and policy. Annu Rev Public Health. 2002; 24:267-88. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.24.100901.140813. View

4.
FitzGerald R, JORDAN H, STANLEY H . Experimental caries and gingival pathologic changes in the gnotobiotic rat. J Dent Res. 1960; 39:923-35. DOI: 10.1177/00220345600390052701. View

5.
Parascandola M . A turning point for conflicts of interest: the controversy over the National Academy of Sciences' first conflicts of interest disclosure policy. J Clin Oncol. 2007; 25(24):3774-9. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2006.09.2890. View