The China Study (44 page)

THE (HINA STUDY
288
business developing testimony for the Federal Trade Commission and
the National Academy of Sciences in their court case against General
Nutrition, Inc. I argued that specific health benefits for chronic diseases
could not be claimed for isolated vitamins and minerals in supplement
form. For this, I took a lot of heat from my colleagues who believed
otherwise. Now, more than fifteen years later, after hundreds of millions
of dollars of research funding and billions of dollars of consumer spend-
ing, we now have this conclusion from a recent survey of the evidence:
The u.s. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) concludes that
the evidence is insufficient to recommend for or against the use of
supplements of A, Cor E; multivitamins with folic acid; or antioxi-
d a n t combinations for the prevention of cancer or cardiovascular
disease.49 • 5o
How many more billions of dollars must be spent before we under-
s t a n d the limitations of reductionist research? Scientific investigations
of the effects of single nutrients on complex diseases have little or no
meaning when the main dietary effect is due to the consumption of
an extraordinary collection of nutrients and other substances found in
whole foods. This is especially true when no subjects in the study popu-
lation consume a whole foods, plant-based diet when it is this diet that
is most consistent with the biologically-based evidence, supported by
the most impressive array of professional literature, consonant with the
extremely low disease rates seen in the international studies, far more
harmonious with a sustainable environment, possessed of the power to
heal advanced disease, and has the potential, without parallel, for sup-
p o r t i n g a new, low-cost health care system. I categorically reject the idea
of doing reductionism research in this field without seeking or under-
s t a n d i n g the larger context. The endless stream of confusion generated
by misinterpreted reductionism undermines not only the entire science
of nutrition, but also the health of America.

____ _____ ____1_ _____________.___________._..
__
_            5                           __
The "Science" of Industry
WHAT DOES EVERY AMERICAN SPEND money on several times a day? Eating.
After a lifetime of eating, what do we all do? Die-a process that usu-
ally involves large costs as we try to postpone it for as long as possible.
We're all customers of hunger and death, so there's a lot of money to be
spent and made.
Because of this, the food and health industries in America are among
the most influential organizations in the world. The revenue generated
by the companies that produce food and health products is stagger-
ing. Many individual food companies have over $10 billion in annual
revenues. Kraft has revenues of roughly $30 billion a year. The Danone
Group, an international dairy company based in France, operates the
Dannon brand and has revenues of $15 billion a year. And of course,
there are the large fast food companies. McDonald's has revenues in ex-
cess of $15 billion a year, and Wendy's International generates almost $3
billion a year. Total food expenditures, including food bought by individu-
als, government and business, exceed $700 billion a year. l
The massive drug company Pfizer had $32 billion in revenue in 2002,
while Eli Lilly &:. Co. chalked up over $11 billion. Johnson and Johnson
collected over $36 billion from selling their products. It's not an over-
s t a t e m e n t to say over a trillion dollars every year is riding on what we
choose to eat and how we choose to treat sickness and promote health.
That's a lot of money.
There are powerful players that compete for your food and health
,
289

290                          THE CHINA STUDY
dollars. Individual companies, of course, do what they can to sell more
of their products, but also there are industry groups that work to in-
crease general demand for their products. The National Dairy Council,
National Dairy Promotion and Research Board, National Fluid Milk
Processor Promotion Board, International Sprout Growers Associa-
tion, American Meat Institute, Florida Citrus Processors Association,
and United Egg Producers are examples of such industry groups. These
organizations, operating independently of any Single company, wield
significant influence-the most powerful among them have yearly bud-
gets in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
These food companies and associations use whatever methods they
can to enhance their products' appeal and grow their market. One way
to accomplish this is to claim nutritional benefits for the food products
they sell. At the same time, these companies and associations must
protect their products from being considered unhealthy. If a product is
linked to cancer or some other disease, profits and revenue will evapo-
rate. So food business interests need to claim that their product is good
for you, or, at least, that it's not bad for you. In this process, the "sci-
ence" of nutrition becomes the "business" of marketing.
THE AIRPORT CLUB
While I was getting the China Study off the ground, I learned of a com-
mittee of seven prominent research scientists who had been retained
by the animal-based foods industry (the National Dairy Council and
the American Meat Institute) to keep tabs on any research projects in
the u.s. likely to cause harm to their industry. I knew six of the seven
members, four of them quite well. A graduate student of mine was visit-
ing with one of these scientists and was given a file on the committee
activity. I have never learned exactly why the file passed hands. Perhaps
the scientist's conscience was getting the better of him. In any case, the
file was ultimately given to me.
The file contained minutes of committee meetings, the latest being
held at Chicago's O'Hare Airport. From then on, I have called this group
of scientists "The Airport Club." It was run by Professors E. M. Foster
and Michael Pariza, faculty members of the University of Wisconsin
(where AU Harper was located), and was funded by the meat and dairy
industry. This committee's main objective was to have members observe
projects that might do "harm" to their industry. With such surveillance,
the industry could more effectively respond to unexpected discoveries

THE ·SCIENCE" OF INDUSTRY                       291
from researchers that might make otherwise unanticipated news. I had
learned well that, when the stakes are high, industry was not averse to
putting its own spin on a story.
They listed about nine potentially damaging projects, and I had the
dubious distinction of being the only researcher responsible for two
of the projects. I was named once for the China Study, which one of
the members was assigned to watch over, and once for my association
with the American Institute for Cancer Research CAICR), especially my
chairing of the review panel that decided which research applications
on diet and cancer got funded. Another panel member had the task of
keeping an eye on the AICR activity.
After learning of The Airport Club, and of the individual aSSigned to
watch over me at the AICR grant meetings, I was in a position to see
how his spying was going to unfold. I went into the first AICR review
panel meeting after learning of the Club with an eye on the spy who was
keeping an eye on me!
One might argue that this industry-funded "spying" was not illegal,
and that it is prudent for a business to keep tabs on potentially damag-
ing information that might affect its future. I agree completely, even if
it was disconcerting to find myself on the list of those being spied on.
But industry does more than just keep tabs on "dangerous" research. It
actively markets its version, regardless of potentially disastrous health
effects, and corrupts the integrity of the science to do so. This is espe-
cially troubling when academic scientists do the spying and hide their
intentions.
POWERFUL GROUPS
The dairy industry, one of the sponsors of The Airport Club, is particu-
larly powerful in this country. Founded in 1915, the well-organized,
well-funded National Dairy Council has been promoting milk for al-
m o s t a hundred years. 2 In 1995, two major milk industry groups put
a new face on their old establishment, renaming it Dairy Management,
Inc. The purpose of this new group was "to do one thing: increase de-
m a n d for U.s.-produced dairy products," to cite their Web site. 3 They
had a 2003 marketing budget of more than $165 million to do it. 4 In
comparison, the National Watermelon Promotion Board has a budget
of $1.6 million. 5 A Dairy Management, Inc., press release includes the
following items4 :

THE (HINA STUDY
292
Rosemont, Illinois-National, state and regional dairy producer
directors have approved a budget of $165.7 million for a 2003
Unified Marketing Plan (UMP) designed to help increase dairy
demand ....
· . . Major program areas include:
Fluid Milk: In addition to key ongoing activities in advertising,
promotion and public relations efforts targeted to children ages six
to twelve and their mothers, 2003 dairy checkoff efforts will focus
on developing and extending partnerships with major food mar-
keters, including Kellogg's®, Kraft foods® and McDonald's® .. . .
· .. School Marketing: As part of an effort to gUide school-age
children to become life-long consumers of dairy products, 2003
activities will target students, parents, educators and school food-
service profeSSionals. Programs are underway in both the class-
r o o m and the lunchroom, where dairy checkoff organizations look
to widen the success of last year's School Milk Pilot Test ....
· . . Dairy Image/Confidence: This ongoing program area aims
to protect and enhance consumer confidence in dairy products
and the dairy industry. A major component involves conducting
and communicating the results of dairy nutrition research show-
ing the healthfulness of dairy products, as well as issues and crisis
management ....
If I may paraphrase the dairy industry'S efforts: their goals are to 1)
market to young children and their mothers; 2) use schools as a chan-
nel to young customers; 3) conduct and publicize research favorable to
the industry.
Many people are not aware of the dairy industry'S presence in our
schools. But make no mistake: on nutrition information, the dairy in-
d u s t r y reaches young children more effectively than any other indus-
try.
The dairy industry has enlisted the public education system as the
primary vehicle for increasing demand for its products. The 2001 Dairy
Management, Inc., annual report stated6 :
As the best avenue to increase fluid milk consumption long-term,
children are without a doubt the future of dairy consumption.
That's why the dairy checkoff continues to implement school milk
marketing programs as one way to help increase kids' fluid milk
consumption.

293
THE "SCIENCE" OF INDUSTRY
Dairy producers ... launched two groundbreaking initiatives in
2001. A yearlong school milk research program that began in the
fall of 2001 examines how improved packaging, additional flavors,
coolers with merchandising and better temperature regulation can
affect fluid milk consumption and kids' attitudes toward milk both
in and out of school. The study concludes at the end of the 2001-
02 school year. Also, dairy producers and processors worked to-
g e t h e r to conduct a five-month vending study in middle and high
schools in five major U.S. markets. The study revealed that many
students would choose milk over competitive beverages if it were
available when, where and how they wanted.
Many other successful school programs continue to encourage chil-
d r e n to drink milk. Nutrition education programs, such as "Pyramid
Explorations" and "Pyramid Cafe," teach students that dairy products
are a key part of a healthy diet; the "Cold Is Cool" program teaches
school cafeteria managers how to keep milk cold, just how kids like
it; and the checkoff is helping expand dairy-friendly school breakfast
programs. In addition, the popular "got milk" campaign continues to
reach children at school and through such kid-focused media outlets as
Nickelodeon and the Cartoon Network.
These activities are far from small-scale; in 1999, "Chef Combo's
Fantastic Adventures," an "educational" (marketing) set of lesson
plans produced by the dairy industry, "was placed in 76% of preschool
kindergarten sites nationally."7 According to a dairy industry report to
Congress,8 the dairy industry's "nutrition education" programs are do-
ing quite well:
"Pyramid Cafe®" and "Pyramid Explorations™,'' targeted to sec-
o n d and fourth grades, reach over 12 million students with mes-
sages that milk and dairy products are a key part of a healthy diet.
Survey results continue to show a very high utilization rate for
these two programs, currently at over 70% of the instructors that
have the programs.
America is entrusting the important task of educating our children
about nutrition and health to the dairy industry. In addition to ubiquitous
nutrition lesson plans and "educational" kits, the industry supplies high
schools with videos, posters and teaching gUides regarding nutrition; it
runs special promotions in cafeterias to increase milk consumption in
,.

294                          THE CHINA STUDY
thousands of schools; it distributes information to principals at national
conferences; it runs back-to-school promotions with over 20,000 schools;
and it runs sports promotions targeted toward youth.
Should we be worried? In a word, yes. If you are curious as to what
kind of "education" is being taught by the dairy industry, take a look at
their Web site. 9 When I visited the site in July 2003, one of the first bits
of information to greet me was, ''July is National Ice Cream Month."
Upon clicking for more information on National Ice Cream Month, I
read, "If you're wondering if you can have your ice cream and good
nutrition too, the answer is 'yes'!"9 Great. So much for combating child-
h o o d obesity and diabetes!
The Web site is divided up into three sections, one for educators, one
for parents and one for food service professionals. When I looked at the
Web site in July 2003 (the Web site regularly changes its content), in
the educator portion of the site, teachers could download lesson plans
to teach nutrition to their classrooms. Lesson plans included making
hand puppets of cows and dairy foods and doing a finger play. Once
the puppets are made, the teacher should "[ tl ell the students they're
going to meet five special friends, and these friends want boys and girls
to grow up to be strong and healthy."9 Another lesson was "Dairy Treat
Day," where each child gets to taste cheese, pudding, yogurt, cottage
cheese and ice cream.9 Or teachers could lead their classes in making
"Moo Masks."9 For the more advanced fourth grader, teachers could do
a lesson plan from Pyramid Explorations in which students explore the
five food groups, and their health benefits, as follows 9:
Milk Group (Build strong bones and teeth.)
Meat Group (Build strong muscles.)
Vegetable Group (Help you see in the dark.)
Fruit Group (Help heal cuts and bruises.)
Grain Group (Give us energy.)
Based on the evidence presented in the previous chapters, you know
that if this is what our children are learning about nutrition and health
then we are in for a painful journey, courtesy of Dairy Management,
Inc. Obviously neither kids nor their parents are learning about how
milk has been linked to Type 1 diabetes, prostate cancer, osteoporosis,
multiple sclerosis or other autoimmune diseases, and how casein, the
main protein in dairy foods, has been shown to experimentally promote
cancer and increase blood cholesterol and atherosclerotic plaque.