Shortly after the removal of two Harvard scientists with financial conflicts of interest, the national agency that convenes a panel to evaluate evidence on drinking and health has selected four new panelists, including another Harvard professor who also has financial ties to the alcohol industry.
The committee’s work, sponsored by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine, will be used to inform the federal government’s dietary guidelines, which advise Americans about diet and nutrition, including how much they should or shouldn’t eat. they drink.
Scientists at universities across North America study the health effects of alcohol, and many do not receive industry funding. Instead, the National Academies chose two Harvard colleagues who have also published research that strongly suggests drinking in moderation is good for you, critics said.
“How could they appoint someone with a history of alcohol funding after removing the other two because of alcohol funding?” said Dr. Michael B. Siegel, professor of public health and community medicine at Tufts University School of Medicine. Dr. Siegel has long been a critic of industry-sponsored alcohol research.
Many of the other 12 temporary committee members are experts in biostatistics and data analysis whose research is not primarily focused on alcohol and health. (One is studying the effect of alcohol on prenatal health.) Therefore, the Harvard researchers are likely to influence the committee, Dr. Siegel said.
While it’s undisputed that heavy alcohol consumption is bad for your health, some studies have found cardiovascular benefits from moderate alcohol consumption. But in recent years critics have questioned the methodology used in some of these studies, many of which were conducted by scientists who have received financial support from groups funded by the alcohol industry.
The World Heart Federation issued a report last year stating that even small amounts of alcohol can increase the risk cancer, injuries and heart disease, including coronary heart disease, stroke and heart failure.
In 2020, when the US Dietary Guidelines were last updated, the government rejected the advice of its scientific advisers to recommend lower alcohol consumption. Guidelines now recommend one drink a day for women and two for men.
“There was consensus that moderate alcohol consumption had health benefits. Now there’s no longer a consensus — there’s a controversy,” said Tim Stockwell, a scientist at the Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research, whose work challenges the idea that there are benefits to moderate drinking.
“But if there is a dispute, get an expert on each side,” he added. Several organizations and individuals had nominated Mr Stockwell for the committee, but he said he was never approached.
Canadian health officials overhauled their drinking guidelines last year, saying no level of alcohol consumption is healthy and urging people to cut back as much as they can.
“I think they are concerned that the American dietary guidelines will follow Canada’s lead,” said Dr. Stockwell for Industry.
Among the four new nominees is Dr. Luc Djousse, an associate professor at Harvard’s TH Chan School of Public Health, who has studied the effects of moderate alcohol consumption on cardiovascular disease.
While he has received grants from the National Institutes of Health for his work, he has also received is funded by the Alcoholic Beverage Medical Research Foundation, an industrial group. He was recently a distinguished speaker at a Beer and Health Symposium placed by beer producers.
Dr. Djousse is also a member of the International Scientific Forum for Alcohol Research, an organization once closely linked to the alcohol industry, and signed letter written on behalf of the organization published in a medical journal. The group says it no longer receives money from the alcohol industry.
He has authored many papers with Dr. Kenneth Mukamal and Dr. Eric Rim, the Harvard researchers whose nominations were withdrawn from consideration last month.
Dr. Djousse did not respond to requests for comment. nor did Todd Datz, communications officer for the TH Chan School of Public Health.
Dana Corsen, director of media relations at the National Academies, said the committee’s roster remained tentative through a public comment period that ends Thursday. The first committee meeting is scheduled for the following day.
Ms. Korsen did not immediately respond to questions about Dr.’s funding. Djousse from the alcohol industry. “As with all study committees, the first meeting will include discussion of compliance with our conflict of interest and disclosure policies,” he said in an email.
He declined to name National Academies officials directly involved in the nominations and declined requests for interviews with them.
The lack of transparency “raises the question of whether the National Academies have once again found themselves co-opted,” said Diane Riebe, who co-founded the American Alcohol Policy Alliance, which translates alcohol policy research into public health practice. .
Dr. Djousse has written several papers on moderate drinking and its potential benefits with Dr. Mukamal, who led a $100 million clinical trial on moderate drinking that was supposed to resolve questions about its benefits or harms.
In 2018, the National Institutes of Health canceled the trial after the New York Times reported that Dr. Mukamal and officials at the NIH’s National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism had solicited $68 million from alcohol and beer producers to undertake the research. a conflict of interest and a violation of federal policy.
“Dr. Djousse is a close colleague of Dr. Mukamal,” wrote Dr. Siegel in a recent blog post. “Having him on the panel is the next best thing to Dr. Mukamal himself.”
The other Harvard candidate is Dr. Carlos Camargo, a professor of emergency medicine and epidemiology who has also studied moderate drinking and was chairman of the USDA’s 2005 Dietary Guidelines Alcohol Committee.
He has also written numerous papers with Dr. Mukamal finding benefits in light alcohol consumption. He declined to comment, referring a reporter to the National Academies.
The two other new candidates are Dr. Bruce N. Calonge, associate dean for public health practice at the Colorado School of Public Health and chief medical officer of the Colorado State Department of Public Health and Environment, who was tapped to head the committee on an interim basis. and Linda Snetselaar, professor of epidemiology and director of the nutrition center at the University of Iowa College of Public Health, and editor-in-chief of the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
Members of The public has until the end of the day Thursday to comment in the nominations. Ms. Korsen, of the National Academies, did not respond to questions about how the agency would consider public comments coming in less than 24 hours before the committee’s first meeting.
The committee’s task is to review the accumulating evidence on the relationship between alcohol consumption and a wide range of health issues, including obesity, cancer, heart disease, cognitive health, and all-cause mortality.
It will also look at the effects of drinking during breastfeeding, including the impact on postpartum weight loss, milk composition and quantity, and infant development.
Although moderate consumption, especially of red wine, has long enjoyed a health halo, more rigorous research in recent years and concerns about industry funding have raised doubts.
Even light drinking can slightly increase a woman’s risk of breast cancer, as well as a common type of esophageal cancer. Heavy alcohol consumption is associated with a significantly higher risk of cancers of the mouth and throat, voice cancer, liver cancer and, to a lesser extent, colon cancer.
The National Academies were never involved in updating the dietary guidelines, but they were given $1.3 million by Congress to do the job. Dr. Siegel called for an investigation into the commission’s formation now that investigators with industry ties have been appointed twice.