unstructuredio/SCORE-Bench · Datasets at Hugging Face

text stringlengths 0 2.18k
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin
Results
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End
Records dating back to the 1930s demonstrate the sugar industry, sometimes in cooperation with dental interests, exaggerated fluoride’s effectiveness and downplayed safety concerns. The sugar industry’s science manipulation campaign preceded the better-known tobacco industry campaign defending cigarettes. Key leaders of the sugar industry’s campaign transferred to the tobacco industry, which then adopted many of the sugar industry’s tactics and financed research from some of the same sugar-conflicted scientists. Currently, a prominent safety issue with fluoride is developmental neurotoxicity. Evidence indicates that researchers with undisclosed conflicts of interest with sugar and allied industries produced biased reviews downplaying this risk.
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin
Conclusion
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End
Recently available records reveal a long history of the sugar industry distorting fluoride science. Many of the sugar industry’s tactics were later adopted by the tobacco industry and mirrored by industries involved in asbestos, lead, pesticides, climate change denial, and others. Researchers and policymakers should be aware of the distorted scientific record regarding fluoride effectiveness and toxicity.
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin
Keywords
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End
Sugar industry, Fluoride, Fluoridation, History, Science manipulation, Tobacco industry, Caries, Adverse health effects, Smoking


*Correspondence:
Christopher Neurath
cneurath@AmericanHealthStudies.org
¹ American Environmental Health Studies Project (AEHSP), North Sutton, NH, United States


--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin
Background
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End
Recent scholarly research has uncovered the sugar industry’s efforts to deny or minimize sugar’s contribution to obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and tooth decay by manipulating the scientific record [1–5]. Along with


--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Footer Begin
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin
BMC
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End
© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Footer End
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Plain Text Format 1.0.4
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Header Begin
Neurath Environmental Health (2025) 24:62
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Number Block Begin
Page 9 of 35
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Number Block End
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Header End


--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin
(A)
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin
Z 991 no. 5 1960 Sugar Research 1943-1959 SUGAR RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin
(B)
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End


--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Caption Begin
Fig. 6 Key people connecting the sugar industry to the dental establishment and tobacco industry. A Robert Hockett, Scientific Director of the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) from 1943 to 1953. In 1954 he switched to become Associate Scientific Director of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee when it first formed and continued there for the next three decades until 1987 [141]. Image is in the public domain. B Fice Mork was public relations counsel for ADA in the 1930s-1940s then switched to the SRF soon after it was established in 1944. This image was drawn by the author and is a composite sketch based on several photographs of Fice Mork from the 1930s
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Caption End


A few years later, Hockett arranged to have Stare pass tobacco industry money through the Harvard Nutrition Department to an anthropologist, Carl Seltzer, who was nominally employed by the department [161–164].¹² Seltzer actually worked full-time promoting a tobacco industry message claiming smoking did not cause heart disease. He argued that there was just a statistical correlation because of a genetic predisposition for certain people to both smoke and develop heart disease.¹³ The tobacco industry and the sugar industry manipulations of science became intertwined, with Hockett, Stare, and Keys playing central roles in this cooperation.


--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title Begin
Sugar is essential ingredient in cigarettes making them more harmful and addictive
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title End


There was another link between the sugar and the tobacco industries, a link that played a key role in the rapid increase


¹² According to The Center For Media and Democracy’s SourceWatch, Stare essentially laundered money for Seltzer from the tobacco industry: “Over a number of decades, more than $2 million in tobacco money passed through secret accounts and were channeled to Seltzer via Stare. The companies paid on a pro-rata basis according to their sales. The money then went into a secret ‘Special Account #4’ held by the Kansas City law firm Shook, Hardy & Bacon. Payments were then made as grants to the Department of Nutrition, where Stare took his cut, and passed the rest to Seltzer.” [162].


¹³ The arrangement in which Stare surreptitiously passed tobacco money to Seltzer (while taking a cut) lent the name “Harvard” as cover for Seltzer’s cigarette defense efforts. It lasted from 1963–1977, and netted Seltzer over $2 million. Archived financial statements of Stare’s Harvard Nutrition Department from its inception in 1942 until 1971 have recently been made available from the Harvard University archives [42]. The records for 1967, for example, show the Council for Tobacco Research “donating” $30,000 to the department, with $25,000 earmarked for Seltzer and $5,000 for the department [165] (p. 19). Stare used semantic tricks to deny he accepted any money from tobacco interests [162].


in cigarette sales starting early in the twentieth century. Sugar was found to reduce the alkalinity of tobacco smoke to make it mild enough to inhale into the lungs, something not typically done with the previous common methods of smoking tobacco in pipes and cigars. “Sugar and tobacco have a long and incestuous history”, says Robert Proctor in his landmark study on the tobacco industry [166] (pp. 30–35).


In one of Hockett’s SRF science bulletins from 1949 an article describes the crucial role of added sugar in making cigarette smoke less irritating [167]. It describes the chemistry of added sugars that produce a less alkaline smoke. Unmentioned is that smoke from cigarettes produces a faster and stronger nicotine response and may lead to greater addictiveness than cigar or pipe smoking [168, 169]. Inhaling the smoke of cigarettes also greatly increases their carcinogenicity [170]. Thus, sugar was an essential component in making cigarettes more addictive and more deadly. The sugar industry apparently knew this by 1949 and the tobacco industry presumably did too [166] (pp. 30–35).¹⁴ The SRF bulletin’s article on sugar and tobacco notes that “In 1948, 26,000,000 pounds of refined cane and beet sugars found their way into tobacco products.” [167].


In 1950, the SRF commissioned a report by a biochemist/statistician to estimate the market for sugar in the burgeoning cigarette industry. The report, titled “Tobacco and Sugar” confirmed for the sugar industry leaders what


¹⁴ Proctor describes the link between sugar and tobacco: “This business of sugar in tobacco leaf is a fascinating one — and insufficiently appreciated outside the tobacco man’s labs. Sugar and tobacco have a long and incestuous history, and as one leading insider put it in the 1940s, ‘Were it not for sugar, the American blended cigarette and with it the tobacco industry of the United States would not have achieved such tremendous development as it did in the first half of this century.’ The American-blend cigarette … was in fact a candied-up contraption.” [166] (p. 33).
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Plain Text Format 1.0.4
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title Begin
Exhibit E: Form of Invoice
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title End
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE INVOICE
GRANT AND CONTRACT ACCOUNTING
--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End
TEL. (206) 543-8454 FAX. (206) 543-0764

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Form Begin
BILL DATE: ___
INVOICE #: ___

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin

Results

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End

Records dating back to the 1930s demonstrate the sugar industry, sometimes in cooperation with dental interests, exaggerated fluoride’s effectiveness and downplayed safety concerns. The sugar industry’s science manipulation campaign preceded the better-known tobacco industry campaign defending cigarettes. Key leaders of the sugar industry’s campaign transferred to the tobacco industry, which then adopted many of the sugar industry’s tactics and financed research from some of the same sugar-conflicted scientists. Currently, a prominent safety issue with fluoride is developmental neurotoxicity. Evidence indicates that researchers with undisclosed conflicts of interest with sugar and allied industries produced biased reviews downplaying this risk.

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin

Conclusion

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End

Recently available records reveal a long history of the sugar industry distorting fluoride science. Many of the sugar industry’s tactics were later adopted by the tobacco industry and mirrored by industries involved in asbestos, lead, pesticides, climate change denial, and others. Researchers and policymakers should be aware of the distorted scientific record regarding fluoride effectiveness and toxicity.

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin

Keywords

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End

Sugar industry, Fluoride, Fluoridation, History, Science manipulation, Tobacco industry, Caries, Adverse health effects, Smoking

*Correspondence:

Christopher Neurath

cneurath@AmericanHealthStudies.org

¹ American Environmental Health Studies Project (AEHSP), North Sutton, NH, United States

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin

Background

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End

Recent scholarly research has uncovered the sugar industry’s efforts to deny or minimize sugar’s contribution to obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and tooth decay by manipulating the scientific record [1–5]. Along with

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Footer Begin

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin

BMC

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End

© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Footer End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Plain Text Format 1.0.4

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Header Begin

Neurath Environmental Health (2025) 24:62

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Number Block Begin

Page 9 of 35

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Number Block End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Page Header End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin

(A)

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin

Z 991 no. 5 1960 Sugar Research 1943-1959 SUGAR RESEARCH FOUNDATION, INC.

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image Begin

(B)

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Image End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Caption Begin

Fig. 6 Key people connecting the sugar industry to the dental establishment and tobacco industry. A Robert Hockett, Scientific Director of the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) from 1943 to 1953. In 1954 he switched to become Associate Scientific Director of the Tobacco Industry Research Committee when it first formed and continued there for the next three decades until 1987 [141]. Image is in the public domain. B Fice Mork was public relations counsel for ADA in the 1930s-1940s then switched to the SRF soon after it was established in 1944. This image was drawn by the author and is a composite sketch based on several photographs of Fice Mork from the 1930s

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Caption End

A few years later, Hockett arranged to have Stare pass tobacco industry money through the Harvard Nutrition Department to an anthropologist, Carl Seltzer, who was nominally employed by the department [161–164].¹² Seltzer actually worked full-time promoting a tobacco industry message claiming smoking did not cause heart disease. He argued that there was just a statistical correlation because of a genetic predisposition for certain people to both smoke and develop heart disease.¹³ The tobacco industry and the sugar industry manipulations of science became intertwined, with Hockett, Stare, and Keys playing central roles in this cooperation.

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title Begin

Sugar is essential ingredient in cigarettes making them more harmful and addictive

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title End

There was another link between the sugar and the tobacco industries, a link that played a key role in the rapid increase

¹² According to The Center For Media and Democracy’s SourceWatch, Stare essentially laundered money for Seltzer from the tobacco industry: “Over a number of decades, more than $2 million in tobacco money passed through secret accounts and were channeled to Seltzer via Stare. The companies paid on a pro-rata basis according to their sales. The money then went into a secret ‘Special Account #4’ held by the Kansas City law firm Shook, Hardy & Bacon. Payments were then made as grants to the Department of Nutrition, where Stare took his cut, and passed the rest to Seltzer.” [162].

¹³ The arrangement in which Stare surreptitiously passed tobacco money to Seltzer (while taking a cut) lent the name “Harvard” as cover for Seltzer’s cigarette defense efforts. It lasted from 1963–1977, and netted Seltzer over $2 million. Archived financial statements of Stare’s Harvard Nutrition Department from its inception in 1942 until 1971 have recently been made available from the Harvard University archives [42]. The records for 1967, for example, show the Council for Tobacco Research “donating” $30,000 to the department, with $25,000 earmarked for Seltzer and $5,000 for the department [165] (p. 19). Stare used semantic tricks to deny he accepted any money from tobacco interests [162].

in cigarette sales starting early in the twentieth century. Sugar was found to reduce the alkalinity of tobacco smoke to make it mild enough to inhale into the lungs, something not typically done with the previous common methods of smoking tobacco in pipes and cigars. “Sugar and tobacco have a long and incestuous history”, says Robert Proctor in his landmark study on the tobacco industry [166] (pp. 30–35).

In one of Hockett’s SRF science bulletins from 1949 an article describes the crucial role of added sugar in making cigarette smoke less irritating [167]. It describes the chemistry of added sugars that produce a less alkaline smoke. Unmentioned is that smoke from cigarettes produces a faster and stronger nicotine response and may lead to greater addictiveness than cigar or pipe smoking [168, 169]. Inhaling the smoke of cigarettes also greatly increases their carcinogenicity [170]. Thus, sugar was an essential component in making cigarettes more addictive and more deadly. The sugar industry apparently knew this by 1949 and the tobacco industry presumably did too [166] (pp. 30–35).¹⁴ The SRF bulletin’s article on sugar and tobacco notes that “In 1948, 26,000,000 pounds of refined cane and beet sugars found their way into tobacco products.” [167].

In 1950, the SRF commissioned a report by a biochemist/statistician to estimate the market for sugar in the burgeoning cigarette industry. The report, titled “Tobacco and Sugar” confirmed for the sugar industry leaders what

¹⁴ Proctor describes the link between sugar and tobacco: “This business of sugar in tobacco leaf is a fascinating one — and insufficiently appreciated outside the tobacco man’s labs. Sugar and tobacco have a long and incestuous history, and as one leading insider put it in the 1940s, ‘Were it not for sugar, the American blended cigarette and with it the tobacco industry of the United States would not have achieved such tremendous development as it did in the first half of this century.’ The American-blend cigarette … was in fact a candied-up contraption.” [166] (p. 33).

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Plain Text Format 1.0.4

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title Begin

Exhibit E: Form of Invoice

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Title End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title Begin

ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE INVOICE

GRANT AND CONTRACT ACCOUNTING

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Sub-Title End

TEL. (206) 543-8454 FAX. (206) 543-0764

--------------------------------------------------- Unstructured Form Begin

BILL DATE: ___

INVOICE #: ___