SCIENCE-THE DARK SIDE 255
A BIG SURPRISE
At the time that this new Public Nutrition Information Committee was
being formed, a maelstrom was developing across town at the presti-
gious National Academy of Sciences (NAS). A public dispute was taking
place between the NAS president, Phil Handler, and the internal NAS
Food and Nutrition Board. Handler wanted to bring in a group of distin-
gUished scientists from outside of the NAS organization to deliberate on
the subject of diet, nutrition and cancer and to write a report. This did
not please his internal Food and Nutrition Board, which wanted con-
trol over this project. Handler's NAS was being offered funding, from
Congress, to produce a report on a subject that had not been previously
considered in this way.
Within the scientific community it was widely known that the NAS
Food and Nutrition Board was strongly influenced by the meat, dairy
and egg industries. Two of its leaders, Bob Olson and Alf Harper, had
strong connections to these industries. Olson was a well-paid consul-
tant to the egg industry, and Harper acknowledged that lO% of his
income came from offering his services to food companies, including
large dairy corporations.^3
Ultimately Handler, as president of the NAS, went around his Food
and Nutrition Board and arranged for a panel of expert scientists from
outside of his organization to write the 1982 report Diet, Nutrition, and
Cancer.^4 As it turned out, I was one of thirteen scientists chosen to be on
the panel to write the report.
As could be expected, Alf Harper, Bob Olson and their Food and
Nutrition Board colleagues were not happy about losing control of this
landmark report. They knew that the report could greatly influence na-
tional opinion about diet and disease. Mostly, they feared that the great
American diet was going to be challenged, perhaps even called a pos-
sible cause of cancer.
James S. Turner, chairman of a related Consumer Liaison Panel with-
in the NAS, was critical of the Food and Nutrition Board and wrote, "We
can only conclude that the [Food and Nutrition) Board is dominated by
a group of change-resistant scientists who share a rather isolated view
about diet and disease."3
After being denied control of this promising new report on diet,
nutrition and cancer, the pro-industry Board needed to do some dam-
age control. An alternate group was quickly established elsewhere: the