IADR Abstract Archives
Sugar Industry Involvement in Cyclamate Research: A Historical Analysis of Internal Documents, 1962-1970
Objectives: Excess free sugars consumption is a risk factor for dental caries, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and cardiovascular disease. Over 130 countries have approved cyclamates, a class of artificial sweeteners, for use in foods and beverages; however, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned them in 1970. The Sugar Research Foundation (SRF), a sugar industry trade group, funded research on cyclamates between 1962-1970 that contributed to the FDA’s decision. The objective of this study was to describe the planning and implementation of SRF’s cyclamate research program.
Methods: We searched the University of California, San Francisco Library Food Industry Documents Archive for internal sugar industry documents that pertained to SRF’s cyclamate research program. We used a snowball strategy to identify related documents and external sources to triangulate and contextualize findings. We chronologically organized relevant documents and identified emerging themes.
Results: Faced with the economic threat of the popularity of cyclamates in the 1960s, SRF’s position was that cyclamates were neither safe nor therapeutic. SRF supported this position by: 1) hiring a public relations firm, 2) engaging scientific advisors to plan a research program, and 3) funding 64 research projects at 14 universities in the US and internationally between 1962-1970. SRF disseminated their position through: 1) 29 scientific publications, 2) press releases, 3) sending spokesman to engage with FDA leadership, 4) correspondence with the FDA, and 5) an advertising campaign.
Conclusions: SRF conducted a sophisticated public relations program with the aim to discredit evidence of the safety of cyclamates and of their efficacy in weight loss, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Further scrutiny of bias in sugar industry funded studies of artificial sweeteners is warranted to ensure that regulatory decisions have been made in the public’s best interest.
Methods: We searched the University of California, San Francisco Library Food Industry Documents Archive for internal sugar industry documents that pertained to SRF’s cyclamate research program. We used a snowball strategy to identify related documents and external sources to triangulate and contextualize findings. We chronologically organized relevant documents and identified emerging themes.
Results: Faced with the economic threat of the popularity of cyclamates in the 1960s, SRF’s position was that cyclamates were neither safe nor therapeutic. SRF supported this position by: 1) hiring a public relations firm, 2) engaging scientific advisors to plan a research program, and 3) funding 64 research projects at 14 universities in the US and internationally between 1962-1970. SRF disseminated their position through: 1) 29 scientific publications, 2) press releases, 3) sending spokesman to engage with FDA leadership, 4) correspondence with the FDA, and 5) an advertising campaign.
Conclusions: SRF conducted a sophisticated public relations program with the aim to discredit evidence of the safety of cyclamates and of their efficacy in weight loss, obesity, and cardiovascular disease. Further scrutiny of bias in sugar industry funded studies of artificial sweeteners is warranted to ensure that regulatory decisions have been made in the public’s best interest.