There’s money to be made in the food business and greed tends to cloud the truth. Clever number skewing, missing details and small survey samples can all be used to whitewash nutritional research findings so that they benefit a certain industry or company. Here’s an example of how the deception works…
Let’s say you have a cancer prevention drug trial including 100 participants and every one of the participants is administered the drug during the trial.
The researchers make an assumption at the outset of the trial that two participants are likely to get cancer. By the conclusion of the trial, only one person actually gets cancer.
If we look at this result from a logical point of view, this drug was only 1% effective because it only “prevented” cancer in one out of 100 people. This calculation is called an “absolute benefit”. However, the drug company that sponsored the trial spent a lot of money and time on this trial. Furthermore, no one is going to buy a drug that is only 1% effective.
So, using the same numbers, but from a different perspective, the drug company will report things this way:
“Since two people were “expected” to get cancer, and the drug prevented cancer in one of those two people (i.e. 1/2), the drug is determined to be 50% effective.”
This is called a “relative benefit” and, completely legally, the drug can be marketed using this number.
This example is derived from a revealing DVD by Mike Anderson, which I highly encourage you to view. It is called Healing Cancer from Inside Out.
Thankfully, smart consumers like you are not taking these findings at face value anymore. Universal internet access, social media sites, blogs, and other online forums have given us unprecedented access to research records and to the work of health advocates who are routinely blowing the whistle on bogus claims.
NEXT WEEK… why breakfast cereal is NOT grrrrrrreat regardless of the health claims on the box!