Sugar shocked. That describes the reaction of many Americans this week follo

游客2024-01-21  28

问题     Sugar shocked. That describes the reaction of many Americans this week following revelations that, 50 years ago, the sugar industry paid Harvard scientists for research that shifted the focus away from sugar’s role in heart disease—and put the spotlight (注意的中心) squarely on dietary fat.
    What might surprise consumers is just how many present-day nutrition studies are still funded by the food industry. Nutrition scholar Marion Nestle of New York University spent a year informally tracking industry-funded studies on food. "Roughly 90% of nearly 170 studies favored the sponsor’s interest," Nestle tells us. Other systematic reviews support her conclusions.
    For instance, studies funded by Welch Foods—the brand behind Welch’s 100% Grape Juice—found that drinking Concord grape juice daily may boost brain function.Another, funded by Quaker Oats, concluded, as a Daily Mail story put it, that "hot oatmeal (燕麦粥) breakfast keeps you full for longer. "
    Last year, The New York Times revealed how Coca-Cola was funding well-known scientists and organizations promoting a message that, in the battle against weight gain, people should pay more attention to exercise and less to what they eat and drink. Coca-Cola also released data detailing its funding of several medical institutions and associations between 2010 and 2015.
    "It’s certainly a problem that so much research in nutrition and health is funded by industry," says Bonnie Liebman, director of nutrition at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. "When the food industry pays for research, it often gets what it pays for. " And what it pays for is often a pro-industry finding.
    Given this environment, consumers should be skeptical (怀疑的) when reading the latest finding in nutrition science and ignore the latest study that pops up on your news feed. "Rely on health experts who’ve reviewed all the evidence," Liebman says, pointing to the official government Dietary Guidelines, which are based on reviews of hundreds of studies.
    "And that expert advice remains pretty simple," says Nestle. "We know what healthy diets are— lots of vegetables, not too much junk food, balanced calories. Everything else is really difficult to do experimentally. " [br] What is the author’s advice to consumers?

选项 A、Follow their intuition in deciding what to eat.
B、Be doubtful of diet experts’ recommendations.
C、Ignore irrelevant information on their news feed.
D、Think twice about new nutrition research findings.

答案 D

解析 推理判断题。定位句指出,鉴于这种环境,消费者在阅读营养科学的最新发现时应持怀疑态度,并且忽略新闻推送上弹出的最新研究。由此可见,作者的建议是对新的营养研究成果三思而后行,D)中的Think twice对应原文中的skeptical,故答案为D)。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3382611.html
最新回复(0)