International Life Sciences Institute

From WikiCorporates
(Redirected from ILSI)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

ILSI is a non-profit, worldwide federation of entities comprised of the § ILSI Research Foundation, the § Health and Environmental Sciences Institute and 16 country or regional branches. Its headquarters are in Washington, DC, USA. ref

ILSI has been accused multiple times of being a front group.
Tobacco: A report found that ILSI had, for decades, furthered the commercial interests of the Tobacco Industry and undermined the World Health Organisation's tobacco control efforts by presenting seemingly unbiased research.[1]
Sugar: A systemic review published in the Annals of Internal Medicine attacked dietary advice to eat less sugar on the grounds that such advice is not scientifically justified. Two of the 4 authors consult for ILSI, and one is on the scientific advisory board of Tate & Lyle. The accompanying editorial destroyed every one of the flawed premises.[2] ILSI's founder, Alex Malaspina, asked for and received regular input and guidance from Dr Barbara Bowman, a top official at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, on how to address actions by the World Health Organization that were hurting the food and beverage industry. Dr Bowman helped Malaspina find inroads to influence WHO officials to back off anti-sugar talk.[3]
Glyphosate: A UN joint FAO/WHO panel ruled that Monsanto's herbicide glyphosate was unlikely to pose a cancer risk through diet. Alan Boobis, who chaired the panel, is also ILSI Europe's vice-president. The co-chair, Angelo Moretto, is a board member of ILSI's Health and Environmental Services Institute, and of its Risk21 steering group. ILSI has received at least $500,000 in donations from Monsanto, in addition to significant contributions from other chemical industry sources.[4] [3]
GMO? check.


ILSI is affiliated with the World Health Organisation as a non-governmental organisation, and has specialised consultative status with the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organisation. Additionally, ILSI works closely with two WHO groups: the International Agency for Research on Cancer and the International Programme on Chemical Safety. It is also connected with the European Food Safety Authority and the United States Environmental Protection AgencyWikipedia-W.svg. It has been active in designing risk assessment procedures for GM foods and chemicals for govt regulators in the US and the EU.

The EU's European Food Safety Authority dictates to the Food Standards Agency. To quote from the book "Europe on 387m Euros a Day": "On 21 May 2008, a Swedish newspaper reported that the European Commission had paid €13.2m to a lobby group to review the EU's official guidelines on food and nutrition. The group was § EURRECA, an ILSI project. The article noted that "the ILSI is a controversial organisation... in 2002 it questioned the recommendation to limit the consumption of sugar to less than 10%. The group argued that it wasn't proven that the measure, which was a threat to the soft-drink industry, would help fight obesity."
Private Eye's "Brussels Sprouts" column was also wary: "Many of these companies manage to participate twice in the project through another front organisation, the European Food Information Council, the membership of which largely reproduces ILSI's. Why deep-pocketed food multinationals should be paid from the public purse to develop nutrition recommendations is unclear, but one thing is for sure: ILSI has form. The BBC's Panorama investigated it in 2004 for secretly funding a UN study on the role of sugar and carbohydrates in nutrition. We await Eurreca's no-doubt scientifically rigorous and entirely unbiased conclusions in due course."'[5] [6]

In 2004 the ILSI was were charged with paying off the World Health Organisation’s Expert Consultation on Carbohydrates in Human Nutrition, effectively botching the WHO’s research on sugar and its health effects.[7]

Funding

ILSI is membership-funded.

Members

ILSI members are companies from the food and beverage, agricultural, chemical, pharmaceutical, and biotechnology and supporting industries. A list of supporters is available online in ILSI Corporate Members and Company Supporters Worldwide (2015).[8]

ILSI Research Foundation

The Foundaton is tireless in its support of the Genetically Modified Organisms industry, now that the sugar debate is over.

Reports: The Research Foundation does publish annual reports. They are available here.
Funding: Foundation is financially supported through grants from public and private sector organizations.ref A pie chart showing a high-level breakdown by sector is available in the Annual Reports. That's your lot.

Health and Environmental Sciences Institute

HESI brings scientists from academia, govt, and industry around the world together to ensure the health and safety of people and our environment.ref HESI was established in 1989 as a global branch of ILSI, to provide an international forum to advance the understanding of scientific issues related to human health, toxicology, risk assessment, and the environment. In 2002, HESI became an independent, nonprofit organization; in 2018, it became a fully independent entity.ref

Funding: HESI does not disclose its funding. The most they say is "HESI’s scientific initiatives are primarily supported by the in-kind contributions (from public and private sector participants) of time, expertise, and experimental effort. These contributions are supplemented by grants from governments and foundations as well as direct funding (that primarily supports program infrastructure and management) provided primarily by HESI’s corporate sponsors." ref
Annual Reports: HESI does not publish its annual reports.

Members

A list of HESI members is to be found in ILSI's Annual Report 2015 (the latest available), on page 14.[8]

Projects

EURRECA

EURRECA (EURopean micronutrient RECommendations Aligned) consisted of 35 partners based in 18 countries. The Network (2007-2012) addressed the problem of variations in micronutrient recommendations between different European countries. Its main objective was to develop methodologies to standardise the process of setting micronutrient recommendations. ref
The overall objective of the project was to overcome fragmentation and create a sustainable collaborative network to develop quality assured aligned nutrient recommendations across Europe. Based on this, critical micronutrients and vulnerable population groups will be identified, which will guide the development of country-specific Food Based Dietary Guidelines.ref website

People

Articles

  • Jan.10.2019: ILSI Wields Stealthy Influence for Food, Agrichemical Industries. ILSI claims on its website to bring together scientists from industry, government and academia to “provide science that improves public health.” However, evidence suggests that ILSI Global and its branches operate as fronts to influence science and policies in ways that benefit corporate interests over public health. ILSI is funded by the food and agrichemical industries, according to internal documents obtained by U.S. Right to Know. Two papers published in January 2019 document how Coca-Cola and other corporations used ILSI to influence decades of Chinese science and public policy on obesity and diet-related illnesses such as Type 2 diabetes and hypertension. In May 2016, ILSI came under scrutiny after revelations that the chair of ILSI’s board of trustees, Alan Boobis, was at the same time the chairman of a UN panel that found Monsanto’s herbicide glyphosate unlikely to pose a cancer risk through diet. ILSI has received at least $500,000 in donations from Monsanto, in addition to significant contributions from other chemical industry sources. more... Stacy Malkan, US Right To Know.
  • Apr.25.2017: Drinking Four Cups of Coffee a Day has no Health Risks, say experts. Scientists from the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) found that drinking up to four cups of coffee every day carries no risk to your health whatsoever. No actual research was carried out; ILSI merely reviewed other studies. On what basis did they choose which ones to review? Sarah Young, The Independent.
  • Oct.09.2004: Sugar industry's cash sweetener to UN food report. The sugar industry undermined the independence of a UN review of the nutritional value of carbohydrates by funding it and nominating industry scientists to sit on it. Sarah Boseley, The Guardian.
  • Oct.08.2004: UN probes sugar industry claims. BBCs Panorama has uncovered documents which reveal the World Sugar Research Organisation and International Life Sciences Institute, both funded by the sugar industry, helped pay for the Expert Consultation on Carbohydrates in Human Nutrition. ISLI was given the opportunity to suggest members of the committee and select the chairman, as well as review the agenda of the consultation. The expert consultation was a joint venture between the World Health Organisation and the FAO and was due to look impartially at key questions, including whether sugar is detrimental to human health. BBC News.

References

  1. ^ The Tobacco Industry and Scientific Groups ILSI: A Case Study. Alternative url: UCSF Center for Tobacco Control Research and Education Tobacco Free Initiative, World Health Organisation, World Health Organisation, Jul.2000.
  2. ^ The Scientific Basis of Guideline Recommendations on Sugar Intake: A Systematic Review. See also Industry-funded study says advice to eat less sugar is based on bad science, and More on the industry-funded sugar guideline paper Jennifer Erickson, Behnam Sadeghirad, Lyubov Lytvyn, Joanne Slavin, Bradley C Johnston, Annals of Internal Medicine, Feb21.2017.
  3. ^ a b ILSI Wields Stealthy Influence for Food, Agrichemical Industries. Stacy Malkan, US Right To Know, Jun.28.2016.
  4. ^ UN/WHO panel in conflict of interest row over glyphosate cancer risk. Chairman of UN’s joint meeting on pesticide residues co-runs scientific institute which received donation from Monsanto, which uses glyphosate. Arthur Neslen, The Guardian, May.17.2016.
  5. ^ Eatwell Guide – conflicts of interest. Europe on 387 million Euros a Day, St Edward's Press Comments @ 8:55, Zoe Harcombe PhD, May.21.2008.
  6. ^ The Trouble with Sugar. The World Sugar Research Organisation is funded by the Sugar Industry. ILSI's research is paid for by food companies including Tate & Lyle. BBC Panorama, Oct.04.2004.
  7. ^ Sugar Industry Propaganda Study. A new study funded by food companies challenges recommendations by public health officials for people to cut sugar consumption, saying there is no clear link between consumption of added sugar and health effects. "Guidelines on dietary sugar do not meet criteria for trustworthy recommendations and are based on low-quality evidence," said Bradley Johnston of The Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, one of the co-authors. Two of the authors, Jennifer Erickson and Dr Joanne Slavin, have previously promoted sugar. A report by Dr Cristin Kearns at UCSF, found that the sugar industry sponsored research that blamed fat for heart disease rather than sugar. The US Sugar Association lobbied Congress to withdraw $406m of WHO funding because of its promotion of low-sugar intake to counter obesity. Jon Woodhouse, Maui Hawaii The World, Dec.20.2016.
  8. ^ a b ILSI Member List ILSI, Jan.2016.