No story today, just a picture….
This may look like the line up for a bodybuilding supplement expo…
But it’s not.
Instead, it’s the sponsorship list for an upcoming scientific conference on sports nutrition.
I’m not commenting or passing judgment…because, quite frankly, where else is sponsorship money supposed to come from?
It’s more just something I want you to consider.
BP
This entry was posted by Brad Pilon on Friday, May 7th, 2010 at 4:22 pm and is filed under
Weight Loss Science
Alright, I lied…I am going to comment.
At first glance, you might think “ugh..stupid supplement companies, now we can’t trust research either”.
But the other way of looking at it is, they ARE reinvesting in science, which is a good thing.
They are promoting a conference which means the sharing of scientific thought, which is also a good thing.
Are they influencing? Hard to say. But it almost seems like they are in a lose lose situation.
Dont fund research…they suck. Fund research…they still suck.
My thought is, funding = sharing the wealth in the name of science.
B
I have no problem with them funding research. The problem comes in that most people don’t know enough to read the studies that come out and judge whether they are valid or not. You can have the same problem tackled by two different groups of researchers, and they may come to opposite conclusions. Whether or not that is because of who funded them is something to be considered on a case-by-case basis. That’s why the peer-review process is so vital.
I’d hate to see them stop, though.
-Drew
I guess it’s not so much the funding but whether there is pressure on what the results say or not. Funding can be a valuable investment in the future OR it can be a promo tool.
If the company behaves in an ethical way it’s all cool. We just have to work out which one is which.
I can’t say I care for it. All sports nutrition ever did for me was empty my wallet and made me fat while taking the credit for the muscle that I built.
Think of just how many people forgo eating some sweets or shunning any particular food they like because the “science” says to eat this and not that. Besides don’t these science conferences just end up being more ammunition for the next fad diets and supplements?
note I’m not disagreeing that funding science is bad I think its very good. I just have a bone to pick with whoever came up with the idea of eating every 2-3 hours with protein at every meal at least 1 gram per pound of bodyweight while not mixing carbs with fats.
Brad,
My take is that it still comes down to looking at the quality of the methods employed and reading full studies instead of merely writing off a result because of a funding source or blindly accepting it because everything seems kosher with the source of funding.
As you noted, it’s lose lose for those companies. But hopefully we can move toward a time when companies genuinely embrace quality research and consumers start to have respect for those companies and confidence in them because of displayed integrity instead of looking at any and all companies as suspicious.
Oh yeah, let me be clear, I”m not for sports nutrition at all…to me a large, large portion is quackery.
I meant the funding of research in general.
B
Brad,
I lost a lot of weight [70 lbs.] using a combination of ESE and Turbulence Training. These to two programs combined completely changed the shape of my body! I didn’t think it was possible considering I am over 40! I am currently incorporating ESE in maintaining this weight loss and in 2 weeks I will be celebrating the first year of maintenance!!!! {very exciting for me!]ESE was the perfect fit for me ! Thanks!
BP – My comment was going to be – “Brilliant post! You said soooo much, without saying hardly anything at all!!”
But then I read the first comment and thought – “Damn, he blew it!”
So now I’ll just say this – “Brilliant post! You said soooo much, with saying slightly more.” LOL!
I agree, the obvious thought is that the vampires are now in charge of the blood bank! But the reality is, you see this in virtually every industry. Government can’t fund every research project. At some point funding HAS to come from the private sector. Obviously, RBC, Budweiser and State Farm (Random, major corporate sponsors that I literally read off the boards as I’m watching the Stanley Cup Playoffs), aren’t going to fund a sports nutrition conference. Obviously, the private funding has to come from the businesses that survive in their niche area (sporting events being one of the obvious exceptions – which is why you will see companies as diverse as my above examples, sponsor these events). In the example of a sports nutrition conference, you just hope that the researchers doing the science have integrity, and are in it “for the science”, and not to exploit the consumer. That’s where people like myself rely on guys like you and Barban to help filter out the good from the bad. For that, I thank you.
Am I correct that the money that is used by companies to advertise comes from profits, and that is money provided by the public, not investors, or shareholders. Basically, for every penny spent by their customers, a % is taken off for advertising. The problem being that the customers have no control over where the money they spend on products is then placed. The research programs that pharmaceutical companies conduct, is funded by the customer, the exorbitant price charged for medicine is the engine that drives further research, but part of that money goes in sponorship/advertising. To my way of thinking, this is part of the problem with the economy, we are spending an awful lot of money in an industry that is parasitical, the money that is sloshing around in the advertising industry is ridiculous. To laughingly describe advertising as an industry is a complete nonsense.