Controversy Surrounds Selection of Panelists to Evaluate Evidence on Drinking and Health for Dietary Guidelines Update

The selection of new panelists for a committee tasked with assessing the evidence about drinking and health has sparked controversy, as one of the chosen experts also has financial ties to the alcohol industry. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine recently dropped two Harvard scientists with similar conflicts of interest, only to nominate another Harvard professor with industry connections.

The committee’s work will be crucial in updating the federal government’s dietary guidelines, which inform Americans about nutrition and diet, including recommendations on alcohol consumption. Critics have raised concerns about the influence of researchers with ties to the alcohol industry on the committee, especially given the conflicting evidence on the health effects of moderate drinking.

While some studies suggest cardiovascular benefits in moderate drinking, others have highlighted the risks associated with even small amounts of alcohol. The debate around the health benefits of alcohol consumption has become increasingly polarized, with different experts advocating for varied viewpoints.

The committee’s new nominations include Dr. Luc Djousse, an associate professor at Harvard, who has received funding from the alcohol industry for his research on moderate alcohol consumption and cardiovascular disease. Dr. Djousse’s ties to the industry have raised questions about potential conflicts of interest and the impartiality of the committee’s findings.

The National Academies has faced criticism for lack of transparency in the selection process of panelists and their ties to industry funding. As the committee prepares to convene for its first meeting, the public has until Thursday to comment on the nominations, underscoring the significance of public scrutiny in ensuring unbiased and evidence-based guidelines.

The debate around the health effects of alcohol consumption is far from settled, and the committee’s work will play a crucial role in shaping future dietary recommendations for Americans. With conflicting evidence and industry influence at play, the need for thorough and impartial review of the evidence is more important than ever.