Most - not all - studies that I've seen on a specific food (blueberries, chocolate, pasta) have been partially or fully funded by industry groups
Interesting coincidence 


-
-
Show this thread
-
As I've said before, industry funding isn't the death knell for research many people think it is, but even so it's fascinating to see the difference when it's drugs that are being researched vs everything else
Show this thread -
Another example - the medical cannabis industry is growing, and funding a lot of trials. Some of them are very good. Still, there's likely to be some industry bias there as wellpic.twitter.com/7i7oVpkrjf
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Big pharma = bad Big supplements = good Until you get sick...
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
agree. It is not whether a study is funded or not - no study generates revenues, so every study needs funding. The question is what was the impact on study design and interpretation of results. I would say this is a difficult topic 1/2
-
I think standards, transparency, audits, peer-review, meta-review, and replication by others can help to ascertain results and build trust in a study, regardless of funding. I would have liked to do research on quality of science, but ironically it is rather under-researched
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But no one is afraid of Big Fruit because they're a natural organic cartel!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.