• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Is this an unbiassed report?

Oldvatr

Expert
Messages
8,453
Type of diabetes
Type 2
Treatment type
Tablets (oral)
https://docs.wbcsd.org/2018/10/FReSH_Sustainable_and_Healthy_Diets_web.pdf

Your attention is drawn to Page 2.

This reports is being held up by some as being an unbiassed, evidence based treatise, and with No conflict of interest.

What do you think of it?

This study is being used as the basis of world action for future sustainable food supplies and is being discussed by governments including our own.
 
The outcome will be corrupted by all those food companies.... you couldn't have a bigger conflict of interest.
 
Usually this information is hidden away in a short para or it has to be found from info sources outside of the article, but these guys seem to actually be proud of what is signifies, How strange.

Maybe this is fake news being circulated as a meme.
 
Maybe the idea is that plastering corporate logos all over it lends credence to the message in the minds of the naive?
 

Knew who Unilever, Danone and Nestle were but the other 2 turn out to be a supplements company (amongst other things) and Evomix which seems to be a chemicals company offering artificial sweetners...
Ironic that the word Fresh is used a lot when we are talking about companies that make stuff with a half life similar to plutonium. Will read on with interest.
 
Kellogs are also given a mention, I believe. And Arla.

Cargill are a major Agribusiness supply chain support network group. Sigma are I believe a Life Science company but I do not know them. IFF are a research company, presumably involved in producing the report, so probably the only bona fide recipient of this accolade.

Edit to add: As regards the half life of plutonium. don't forget that many foods now are irradiated to kill the bugs and extend the shelf life, salad days are here again and here to stay, and stay, and glow in the dark.....
 
Last edited:

 
Dreadful stuff and the usual promotion of carbs. It's appalling but not surprising that this nonsense is being 'exported' overseas. It reminds me to avoid foods from those companies whose logos were on display.
 
Sweetners half-life - what?
 
The acknowledgement page tells you that wbcsd is a business funded by about 200 big corps to prepare them for a Vegan world; its about making big companies getting ready for the Vegan future. I imagine part of its job is to inform the masses about how wonderful it will be in the future to have no meat. The big players are getting organised.
I think brunneria posted a flow chart not so long ago showing the Vegan conspiracy going all the way to the top of the WHO an UN.
 
The article does indeed reference EAT, which is psrt of the EAT-Lancet Collaboration who do indeed have an agenda to turn the world vegan. If you look at the list of named members of this collaboration as posted on their website, you will find that indeed there is WHO and UN involvement. Most of the named scientists being quoted turn out to be either vegan or vegetarian, but the study reports that they publish declare them to be free of any COI, It has become very blatant, but the world seems to be sleepwalking into this new Utopia.

I as a T2D have tried using vegan recipes from the Michael Greger cookbook, and I can personally vouch that for me they represent a significant adverse risk of early death and comorbidities. For example, my bgl currently averages out at around 7 mmol.l a day. A beef stew will push me up by a couple of mmol.l at the 2 hr, but it drops back to normal at 4 hrs. A chinese takeaway a couple of days ago, with sweet&sour chicken balls and special fried rice pushed me up by about 4 mmol.l . But twice a vegan stew a la Greger gave me a bgl rise of around 20 mmol.l, and I was still up above 10 mmol.l the next morning. Quite apart from the fact that I did not enjoy the vegan meal at all, the inredients required for it were more expensive than my beef variant.
 

Not me!

But I think I saw the post - just can't remember who posted it...
 
Ok. Thanks. Rereading my post I feel a bit like a zeitgeist nutter. But this IS how it starts!!!!!
 
Antechinus said:
Ok. Thanks. Rereading my post I feel a bit like a zeitgeist nutter. But this IS how it starts!!!!!
Click to expand...
The scientific papers and the published symposium agenda seem to point to something that has physical reality. The people listed do exist and do produce videos of their presentations, The Eat-Lancet site is active, and does openly support the reduction in livestock farming to save the planet. They are very careful to not mention their vegan credentials, but most of the participants do have an internet persona that can be reviewed and provides evidence of vegan ot vegetarian interests. These same names occur as authors or co-authors of many so called scientific studies that have been discussed in this forum and other media as being very poor quality or having bias / or having incorrect methodology or analysis methods These reports are now entering the national archives,and appear to be accepted as gold standard trials, but do not appear to have had independant peer reviews. So we are beginning to suffer fake news on a large scale.
 
It was probably @Indy51
Post 13 on this thread
https://www.diabetes.co.uk/forum/threads/the-guardian.160142/#post-1960004
 
Antechinus said:
Ok. Thanks. Rereading my post I feel a bit like a zeitgeist nutter. But this IS how it starts!!!!!
Click to expand...

Haha! No worries.

I'm rather undecided on the this kind of thing, myself.

I mean, I don't criticise butchers for eating meat and claim they are immoral for working in an industry and eating the product.
And I don't criticise people like Malhotra and Trudi Deakin for eating the same way they advise others to eat. Which is low carb or keto.
I accept that if they are personally convinced that the advice they give out is valid, then they will be following their own advice.
Same with cholesterol researchers who choose to eat in a way they understand will improve their cholesterol ratios.

Clearly, the same is going to apply to anyone (including vegans) who are personally convinced that their way of eating is the way to health and longevity.

Longo does his Fasting Mimicking Diet.
Weber eats vegan.
Cummins suggests we all make up our own minds, and live with an awareness that insulin resistance is a driver of many conditions - and he himself eats appropriately.

I am fine with all of that. I actually give them all kudos for living the life they believe to be best (even if I don't share their beliefs).

What I am not fine with is non-declared conflicts of interest involving research, research grants, underlying (and undeclared) motives in supposedly impartial research foundations, universities and other scientific bodies. Including any undeclared religious or political affiliations and funding.
 
Todays Daily Telegraph reports that Tamara Lucas wrote in the UK's The Lancet "Strong evidence indicates that food production is among the largest drivers of global environmental change by contributing to climate change"

The reports chief author Tamra wants people to drastically cut back on eating red meat immediately and has even called for global veganism by 2050.

No comment that overpopulation is driving environmental change, and a consumption based economic theory leading to world pollution.

Hmmmm.
 
Following a few greenhouse gas and agricultural scientists on Twitter has convinced me that the vegan movement vastly over-sell the amount of GHG created by livestock in particular. All sectors pale into insignificance compared to the amount produced by the oil and gas industries. It's a red herring IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…