How Much Nutrition Research is Industry-Sponsored?
Image by aetb (Envato Elements)
It’s no secret that food industry involvement in peer-reviewed research is quite common. The involvement is often in the form of financial support for the research being conducted, though other “involvement” is possible too, including research investigators who consult for industry. On the specifics of financial support, there’s technically a difference between industry “sponsored” and industry “supported” as outlined in this publicly shared slide deck from Tufts Medical.
But what about nutrition research more specifically?
Examining 10 Nutrition-Related Journals
Well, we’re in luck. A group of investigators (with no declared conflicts of interest BTW!) set out to answer this very question with their paper: The characteristics and extent of food industry involvement in peer-reviewed research articles from 10 leading nutrition-related journals in 2018.
Food industry involvement was determined based on examination of author affiliations, declared funding sources, declarations of interests, and acknowledgments within each research article. The researchers classified “favorable/unfavorable” findings to the food industry based on an assessment of the researchers and research involved. After looking at nearly 1,500 papers in 10 nutrition-related journals, the key findings include:
13.4% of the published articles examined reported food industry involvement
Of articles with food industry involvement, 55.6% reported findings “favorable” to relevant food industry interests, compared to just 9.7% of articles with no food industry involvement
40% of studies looking at processed food had food industry involvement with dietary supplements at 28% closely followed by dairy at 27%
The authors concluded that “…this study adds to the growing empirical evidence that food industry involvement in nutrition research likely influences research agendas to focus disproportionately on topics of importance to the industry, potentially at the expense of topics of greater public health importance.”
The Prickly Part
Based on data like these, some say industry-sponsored research should simply be banned, period. Others, wielding a less blunt instrument, argue that industry-sponsored research should at least be disallowed from the scientific evidence used to formulate important policy documents, like dietary guidelines. In fact, Canada decided back in 2015 that no research papers “commissioned by industry or an organization with a business interest” would be included in the evidence-based review process used to craft their national dietary guidelines. The same is not true for the Dietary Guidelines for Americans process. Meanwhile, others have routinely asserted that because industry-sponsored research in peer review journals has, in fact, been reviewed by peers that it should be left to stand on equal footing with the non-sponsored papers.
In my own experience, having been involved in industry-sponsored research, I can see equal parts upside and downside for industry, researchers, and consumers alike. I’ve witnessed firsthand how hard well-intentioned industry individuals worked to stand back and let the research team do their job “independently” to help ensure the integrity of the findings. I’ve also witnessed how those same industry individuals sometimes pushed timelines rather aggressively to try and hurry up the proceedings because of a looming market-driven deadline. This may have unintentionally compromised portions of the research process, especially with the data analysis portion as that occurs closer to the end of the investigation. On the other hand, I’ve watched prolonged analysis paralysis resulting in a lack of any publication or data sharing. All is to say, research with industry involvement has messy realities, just like research sans industry involvement.
I’ve also interacted with various individuals, including some of my students for example, who expressed comfort with industry-backed research…if (and only if!) the industry providing funding represented “healthy” foods or ingredients. In other words, research from a nut commission is fine, but research from an association representing sugar is not so fine.
The Net
Industry will continue to sponsor research that supports and advances their own interests. At the same time, nutrition research will continue to remain underfunded with investigators seeking viable avenues for funding to successfully remain in their chosen career path.
For me, the key is transparency and diligence with disclosure. Right now, such information is typically required at the end of a peer review paper so the reader can easily see who among the researchers has what industry ties, if any. Such information could theoretically also include financial specifics like the dollar amount of the supporting grant(s). Other options include the idea that journals presenting studies with industry ties could put them in a separate section whether that’s in print or digitally in order to easily discern industry-backed from the rest. Media sharing the research findings could choose to disclose this type of information in reliable and consistent ways. And lastly, additional countries could follow suit with Canada and exclude industry-backed research from the formal dietary guidelines process.