This episode reconstructs the documented history of the Sugar Research Foundation’s Project 226, a 1960s commissioned review on sugar, fat, and coronary heart disease written by Harvard nutrition researchers and published in the New England Journal of Medicine without disclosure of the sugar industry’s funding and participation. The story follows John L. Hickson’s 1965 correspondence with D. Mark Hegsted, Hegsted’s qualified acceptance, later requests for drafts, the 1967 public review, and the sharp contrast between what the sponsor could see before publication and what readers could see afterward. It also follows Cristin Kearns and colleagues as they later recovered the archival trail, the Sugar Association’s response, and the historians who challenged broader claims about causation. The episode separates the established record from disputed interpretation: the commission, sponsor access, and nondisclosure are documented; the authors’ private motives, the review’s full policy influence, and any quantified public-health consequences remain contested.

This podcast uses artificial intelligence in its research, writing, production, and narration. Episodes are editorially reviewed before publication.

#BannedHistory #BannedHistoryDocumentedSuppressionInstitutionalM #SugarResearchFoundation #Project226 #JohnHickson

YES OR NO: Should the 1967 Harvard review have disclosed the Sugar Research Foundation’s funding and draft access??????