Ummmm classic use of a Red Herring here... Science cannot be manipulated. Science tells us what it tells us. True, the ignorance of the average person is easily manipulated but this doesn't mean that science itself is being manipulated. There are things we know and things we don't.

Don't misunderstand what I'm saying.

There is a vast body of research that is practically useless because it tells us very little and yes this usually involves corporate sponsorship. A study can show what you want it to based on purposely manipulating the variables or by poor design but this doesn't mean that science is being manipulated. Perhaps this is semantics for you but I think it is a redulous assertion that somehow the laws of physics are being manipulated somehow.

Still, I agree with what you're saying regarding the manipulation of people in research. You even see "reputable" media sources reporting the results of these studies.

My favorite recent example of this is when consumer reports ranked the best commerica diet programs work best ... here is their list.

No. 1: Jenny Craig Diet
No. 2: Slim-Fast Plan Diet
No. 3: Weight Watchers Diet
No. 4: Zone Diet
No. 5: Ornish Diet
No. 6: Atkins Diet
No. 7: NutriSystem Diet

How did they come to this conclusion? THe number one ranking of Jenny was based on a study where participants were given free Jenny food for two years and 92% of the study participants "adhered" to the program.

Really? You give someone free food and they want to keep getting it? No kidding? I'm shocked.

I say "adhered" because clearly they were not sticking to the program as the average participant lost only 16 lbs over two years. (The study was also funded by Jenny)

Here is a write up if you want to read about this rediculousness.

So is consumer reports really that dumb or are they are the take. I have no idea.

Just don't know how these people can get away with posting that kind of misinformation. I think IP is making a TON of $$ and I really don't think that they care. I would venture to guess that their attitude would be "don't like it? go to another program"

This is my biggest "concern" with IP. I like their approach. There is a lot of scientific base there, much of it relates to science done just now that has not yet reached public knowledge or runs against what doctors and nutritionists still learn. But on the other hand they use the same products as other companies, just with a huge markup. I also do not like the many complaints about pushy coaches I read on this board. Too me at least, it smells too much like wanting to make the big bucks. It is a pyramid scheme after all. The product works, but it could be improved using organic, high quality ingredients. And they could actually still make more money in the long run by decreasing prices and working with true health professionals that properly educate themselves and with better coaches.

I also have to agree with John about science. It is very hard to do good science nowadays because the funding is not there and funding agencies have switched to very short-term thinking. Proper studies with numbers of participants big enough that you can actually get meaningful statistics are extremely expensive. And scientists will not make it long in this business if they do not publish quickly. Therefore, society gets the science they ask for. As for science sponsored by corporations, you will never hear the negative data. But it is hard to publish negative data just in principle.