• HousePanther@lemmy.goblackcat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let me ask for a minute: What angle does this come from? Who funded the study? Sometimes you have to ask yourself these questions because someone may have an axe to grind or money to make by conducting these studies. Just saying…

      • fear@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        They’re asking a valid question everyone should have in the back of their minds when reading study results, no need to eye roll. It’s not some crazy conspiracy theory that corporations will happily fund studies in the hopes of cherry picking results in their favor. It’s bad science and it happens all the time unfortunately. Sometimes bad science makes it into good journals, and it can take years to figure out that the study was flawed due to bias.

        I was just reading this morning about the immunologist Jacques Benveniste who got his study published in Nature, he claimed that water had memory and that antibodies imprinted on diluted water. It was such a bold claim that it made international news and quacks everywhere ran with it. It took some investigation to determine the scientists Benveniste was working with were paid off by a company that sold homeopathic products. There’s also the douche who got the MMR vaccine linked to autism. Despite the study being debunked, it’s an idea that pervades mom groups across the globe and has resulted in a resurgence of measles that never had to happen.

      • HousePanther@lemmy.goblackcat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ah ha! I don’t know why you were down-voted here because this explains a lot. One must always consider the source of the research funding. It’s best to have as independent and objective research as possible. Clearly Big Sugar is concerned about the loss of revenue from the recent improvements in taste and mouth feel of artificial sweeteners.

        • fear@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          this study was funded by the National Institutes of Health and the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute under grant numbers R21 HL135300 and R01 HL150053, as well as by contracts from the NIH/NHLBI funding the four field centers.

          It says right on the study how it was funded, that guy was being sarcastic and rude which is why he was downvoted. If there is a bias in this study, it’s not immediately apparent from the funding.