Buzz
Governments and businesses often fund research to evaluate the potential hazards of new or existing products, as well as to guide policy decisions. This becomes problematic when the study's results do not align with the expectations of the government or business involved.
In such cases, the results may be hidden or ignored. In rare instances, third-party study results are manipulated to make a product appear more damaging than it actually is. While the exact reasons behind this are unclear, it usually harms the business in question. Despite the suppression, some studies have eventually been revealed to the public.
10. The European Union Suppressed a Study Showing Piracy Does Not Impact Sales
In 2013, the European Union sought to implement a new anti-piracy law that would have required internet service providers to monitor and cross-check movies and books uploaded to their platforms. To support this law, they funded a study that aimed to demonstrate that piracy negatively affects the sales of music, books, games, and films.
The research concluded that piracy had no impact on the sales of games, books, and music. In fact, it boosted the sales of video games, as some players ultimately chose to purchase the official version. This outcome surprised the EU, who had not anticipated it, prompting them to withhold the study's findings.
Nevertheless, the EU shared the portion of the study indicating that piracy of popular movies led to a decrease in cinema attendance. The remaining results were only disclosed after a request was made by parliamentarian Julia Reda.
9. The Sugar Industry Concealed Research Connecting Sugar to Cancer
Decades ago, the International Sugar Research Foundation (ISRF) was intent on proving that sugar was beneficial to humans. To support this stance, it financed research that would bolster its claims. In 1967, the foundation commissioned a study to disprove any link between sugar and heart disease.
While we now understand that sugar can contribute to heart disease, the flawed study suggested that rats on a sugar-rich diet developed high cholesterol due to gut microbes, not the sugar itself. It also claimed that the effects of sugar on rats were different from those on humans.
In 1968, the ISRF launched another study, aiming to prove that sugar was not harmful to humans. Codenamed Project 259, the study instead found a connection between sugar and both heart disease and bladder cancer in humans. This posed a threat to the industry, so the ISRF abruptly canceled the study and suppressed its findings.
8. GlaxoSmithKline Concealed a Study Revealing That One of Its Drugs Causes Heart Attacks
In 1999, GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), a leading pharmaceutical company, introduced a new diabetes medication named Avandia. By 2006, Avandia had become one of GSK's top earners, generating $3 billion annually. This success was shattered when the FDA disclosed that the drug had caused heart attacks in 83,000 patients since its launch.
The disclosure stunned everyone, except GSK, which had been aware of the drug's dangers since 2000. A study funded by the company had already pointed out the harmful side effects, but GSK chose to suppress the results because Avandia was a lucrative product. Instead, they began working on a new drug to counteract the heart attack risk caused by Avandia.
In 2007, the FDA issued a black box warning for Avandia, its most severe warning, indicating the potential for heart attacks. The agency also recommended that doctors only prescribe Avandia as a last resort.
7. Bayer Concealed a Study Showing Trasylol's Severe Health Risks
Trasylol, a drug produced by Bayer to prevent bleeding in heart surgeries, had a 2007 study that revealed it could cause serious side effects, such as strokes, heart attacks, and kidney failure. Instead of recalling the medication, Bayer chose to suppress the study.
Bayer later claimed it was not attempting to hide Trasylol’s harmful effects. The company argued that it withheld the study due to flaws in the research methods and that the results were premature. However, the study had already involved 67,000 patients.
6. Public Health England Withheld Vaccine Study Findings Without Clear Justification
In 2018, it was uncovered that Public Health England (PHE) had kept three vaccine studies under wraps. As PHE is a governmental body rather than a profit-driven organization, the exact reasons for withholding the study results remain uncertain.
The study involved 640 children under the age of 16. With their parents' consent, Public Health England (PHE) tested new vaccines for meningococcal disease and whooping cough on the children. The research posed significant risks, potentially leaving the children vulnerable to these diseases if the vaccines were ineffective.
The study was completed in 2016, but PHE refused to release the findings. EU regulations mandate that the results of drug and vaccine trials be made public within a year of their conclusion. The reasons behind PHE's decision to withhold the results remain unknown.
5. The EPA Concealed a Study Showing Dioxins Can Accumulate in Meat
Dioxins refer to a group of toxic, man-made chemicals that pose significant risks to both human health and the environment. These substances are linked to a range of serious health issues, including cancer, birth defects, liver disease, and they can also severely damage the immune system.
Dioxins are toxic by-products created during the manufacturing of herbicides, pesticides, plastics, bleach, and a variety of other chemicals. As a result, they typically contaminate the soil and water sources, remaining in the environment for many years before eventually breaking down.
Numerous studies conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have shown that dioxins can accumulate in meat and eggs. However, the EPA has withheld the publication of these findings, allegedly due to pressure from large corporations such as Monsanto and the Dow Chemical Company.
One particularly controversial report, titled 'Exposure and Human Health Reassessment of TCDD (Dioxin),' was so contentious that it is believed President Bush ordered its suppression just before leaving office. This action has been widely interpreted as a gesture of gratitude to the chemical industry.
4. Big Pharma Concealed Data Indicating Tranquilizers Are More Addictive Than Heroin
Tranquilizers are a class of anti-anxiety medications produced by most major pharmaceutical companies. Some of the most well-known brands in this category include Xanax, Valium, Rohypnol, and Benzotran, among many others.
Pharmaceutical companies make a significant profit from tranquilizers, and it's no surprise that during the 1980s and 1990s, the industry is accused of suppressing evidence showing that these drugs were even more addictive than heroin. As a result, thousands of people became hooked on tranquilizers after being prescribed them by their doctors.
Sue Bibby, a long-time user of Valium, was first prescribed the drug at the age of 14. She struggled with addiction for 23 years and eventually decided to quit, despite her physician advising against it. The withdrawal process was agonizing, with symptoms similar to those of quitting hard drugs.
Tranquilizers have also been linked to fatalities. In the UK, between 1990 and 1996, 1,810 users of tranquilizers died. During the same timeframe, drugs like cocaine, heroin, and methadone claimed 1,623 lives. Yet, doctors continue to prescribe these dangerous medications.
3. GSK Suppressed Study Results Showing That Paxil Can Cause Suicidal Thoughts in Children
Paxil, an antidepressant manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), was primarily intended for adult use. However, it was sometimes prescribed to children, prompting GSK to conduct four studies to examine the drug's effects on younger patients.
The studies found that Paxil was ineffective at treating depression in children. In fact, it had the opposite effect, pushing some children towards suicidal thoughts. This was information GSK clearly didn’t want the public to know, so they chose to suppress the study findings.
It was uncovered that GSK had issued a memo in 1999 in an effort to control the narrative surrounding the studies and protect its sales. However, in 2004, a spokeswoman denied that the memo was intended to hide the adverse effects of Paxil on children, claiming that GSK had made the study results public after the New York attorney general filed a lawsuit against the company.
2. Daiken Suppressed a Study Demonstrating the Dangers of PFAS
Although most of us may not be familiar with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), they are used in many products we encounter daily. PFAS are chemicals composed of carbon and fluorine, used in products like liquid repellents, food packaging, clothing, and firefighting foam. Commonly, PFAS are found in food wrappers for bread, burgers, sandwiches, and popcorn.
However, PFAS are hazardous to human health. Two specific types, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), are linked to serious health issues such as high cholesterol, thyroid disorders, and various cancers.
PFAS can leach from food packaging into the food it holds. Since these chemicals don't break down easily, they can continue to pollute the environment—both soil and water—long after the packaging has been disposed of. Luckily, both PFOA and PFOS have been phased out.
Regrettably, these substances have been replaced by a less harmful form of PFAS, which still poses significant health risks like liver and kidney damage and cancer. Yet, food packaging companies are concealing this fact from the public, with one of the major companies being Daikin from Japan.
Investigations have revealed that Daikin withheld the results of a study concerning the effects of the less dangerous PFAS in reports submitted to the FDA. The study showed that PFAS caused harm to the liver and kidneys of mice, and its elevated fluoride levels also led to mineral loss in the mice's incisors.
1. Scientists Concealed Portions of a Study That Suggested Roundup Does Not Cause Cancer
Roundup, a popular herbicide, has been facing increased scrutiny. The controversy began when a former school groundskeeper filed a lawsuit claiming that Roundup caused terminal cancer. The court ruled in favor of the groundskeeper, and Monsanto was ordered to pay $289 million in damages.
Around 9,000 individuals filed lawsuits against Monsanto, alleging that the herbicide caused a range of health problems. The claims linking Roundup to cancer stem from an International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) report, which suggested the herbicide could be 'probably carcinogenic to humans.' The IARC operates as part of the World Health Organization (WHO).
The controversy surrounding the study arises from Roundup's extremely low toxicity levels. When it comes to short-term exposure, it is even less toxic than table salt, and the risk of it causing health issues like cancer is minimal.
In 2017, an investigation by Reuters uncovered that IARC researchers had removed part of a study that showed glyphosate, the primary component in Roundup, does not cause cancer. The study also omitted a reference to research by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which had concluded that glyphosate did not cause cancer in mice.
Other sections of the study were also altered. For example, a segment that had stated Roundup does not cause cancer was revised to suggest that it may cause or contribute to cancer. Additionally, some researchers inserted negative findings while the study was under review by the IARC.
Reuters was unable to determine who made the changes or the reason behind them. The news agency reached out to 16 researchers involved in the study, but they either did not respond or refused to comment. The IARC also instructed the researchers not to speak to the media.
