Controversy on maple syrup

An American researcher who has published several studies on the benefits of maple syrup is on the hot seat after an article in the New York Times On its close links with an association of Quebec acéricators.

What is reproached in Navindra Seeram, from the University of New England?

This biomedical researcher, which until last year was at the University of Rhode Island, has been working for 15 years on the effects of maple syrup on health. He notably discovered an antioxidant compound, which he named Quebecol, which formed during the transformation of the sap into syrup.

The investigation of New York Timesconducted jointly with the NGO The Examination, says that Mr. Seeram has not always revealed, in his scientific studies, the financing of research and “consultation” received from Acericoles and producers of Quebec (PPAQ), a union affiliated with the Union of Agricultural producers of Quebec (UPA) which represents the 8000 Acérical companies in the province.

He quotes researchers who believe that he has exaggerated the importance of his data on human health.

He is also accused of never revealing that he was a co -detentor of the patent on the Quebecol.

Mr. Seeram did not respond to a request for interview with The pressnor to questions by email on the allegations of New York Times.

Have Quebec Acéricoles producers and producers financed the work of other researchers?

Yes, answers Joël Vaudeville, PPAQ communications director. “Renowned” researchers have been funded by the association for 20 years.

“The PPAQs do not intervene at any time, whether before, during and after research. No right of way is granted to the organization before the unveiling of the results. They are published, whether positive or negative for the Acéricole sector, “he said by email. He adds that scientists are responsible for unveiling their financial links.

The PPAQs “respect the strict ethical standards planned for this kind of research,” he adds.

One of the researchers who conducts research funded by the industry is the biologist André Marette, from Laval University.

In 2023, he published in the journal Endocrinology and Metabolism A study showing that, in mice, replacing sugar with maple syrup is less harmful to “metabolic health”.

Last October, he published in the Journal of Nutrition A study on 42 people showing that replacing two Sugar spoons with maple syrup every day, for eight weeks, “reduced certain cardiovascular risk factors”, especially with regard to blood pressure.

In both cases, PPAQ research funding was unveiled.

Is it normal for food producers to finance scientific research?

Absolutely not, according to Jean-Claude Moubarac, anthropologist specializing in nutrition at the University of Montreal.

“For 20 to 30 years, we demonstrate very well that the industry has been trying to control science. I do not see why we should not protect ourselves against this manipulation, why we continue to accept it. You shouldn’t be stupid. »»

Bryn William-Jones, a bioethist at the University of Montreal, is less draconian. “Reality is that there will never be enough public money for science. The success rate of subsidy requests went below 20 % and in the United States, before this year, it was 5 % to 10 %. »»

Is there a way to supervise potential conflicts of interest?

Yes, in particular with contracts not granting the right to see private partners on the publication of the results and the unveiling of all the researchers’ financial links-including patents, replies Mr. William-Jones. You also have to avoid depending on a single private partner too much.

In the case of Mr. Marette, private financing covers 10 % of its research expenses, and PPAQ funds cover 0.7 % of its research expenses. “The most important thing is transparency, and I have always taken care to mention the sources of private financing or not in my publications,” explains Mr. Marette.

And above all, says Mr. William-Jones, a researcher must, in his communications, always invites the audience to consider the presence of a conflict of interest in his work. “Sometimes, it only takes a long -term relationship with a company to create friendships that affect the interpretation of the results by the researcher. »»

Jonathan Kimmelman, bioethist at McGill University, believes that a “balance of powers” (checks and balances) within establishments and scientific journals makes it possible to detect conflicts of interest and to minimize their impact on research. “The majority of clinical drugs on drugs are funded by pharmaceutical companies. If we prohibit any private funding, it will have a major impact on the quantity of new drugs. »»

A strategy adopted by major medical scientific journals such as JAMA or New England Journal of Medicine is to accept only studies which, from the start, have been entered in a federal register of clinical studies. This makes it possible to detect studies which have given negative results and which have not been submitted for publication.

Read the article New York Times (in English)