Culture News Peer review Science

Sugar! Politicization of nutrition nothing new?

Spread the love

Ceramic Carton <em>Sugar</em> Pot - £10.00Last news cycle, skim milk was virtuous; now it’s just a fad.

Meanwhile, from the Ian Leslie at the Guardian:

If, as seems increasingly likely, the nutritional advice on which we have relied for 40 years was profoundly flawed, this is not a mistake that can be laid at the door of corporate ogres. Nor can it be passed off as innocuous scientific error. What happened to John Yudkin belies that interpretation. It suggests instead that this is something the scientists did to themselves – and, consequently, to us.

We tend to think of heretics as contrarians, individuals with a compulsion to flout conventional wisdom. But sometimes a heretic is simply a mainstream thinker who stays facing the same way while everyone around him turns 180 degrees. When, in 1957, John Yudkin first floated his hypothesis that sugar was a hazard to public health, it was taken seriously, as was its proponent. By the time Yudkin retired, 14 years later, both theory and author had been marginalised and derided. Only now is Yudkin’s work being returned, posthumously, to the scientific mainstream. More.

If the damage sugar does to teeth were clearly known when it was first introduced, one wonder if it would be legal today. Just wondering.

Today’s hero is tomorrow’s dog. This is a science?

See also: Salt? We thought one needed to do more to be a denialist

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Leave a Reply