Or the opposite of what you say is true, and most studies require funding and said funding is not provided to scientists for peer reviewed studies that are not expected to provide the results that said funding source is looking for. So no good science on these subjects ever comes out because the studies are done intermittently by independent scientists without major funding from the food and drug special interest lobby.
Not everything in the world is funded by corporations. When you lie about one thing in this world, it is easy to tell, as it will have implications beyond your immediate field. If you start lying about something big like metabolic pathways, it becomes clear really quick, as people will want to cite your paper, and most of the people citing your paper will find that you are wrong, as it affects their results. When that happens (very rare--because it is always found out and the person who did it is utterly ruined), it is damn near always found out.
If you have funding from a different industry, or are working with funding from a national organization such as the NIH (who does not review content prior to publication), then you find a situation where your thesis is that of a crazy person. Sadly, this seems to be par for the course for you, Danno. Hundreds of thousands of scientists are not out to get you. They do not report false data en masse, and they do not cover up for each other. In this world, you get ahead by proving other people wrong. The only exception to this rule that I can think of offhand is climatology, where the whole field was basically founded on the assumption of global warming, and the only source of funding is "liberal" institutions ruled by political appointees who aren't scientists. I'm sure there are other fields like this, but brother let me tell you, human physiology ain't one of the. There are about five hundred times too many people in this field to be manipulated in any manner other than with verifiable fact.
You should go to your local university and sit in on a thesis defense in a hard science field (like cell biology, biochemistry, or genetics to be relevant to this conversation). Watch the professors tear them apart if there is ANYTHING that even LOOKS wrong. Also know that most of the people defending their thesis have already been subjected to two or more years of this type of attack. Science is trial by fire, and scientists as a group are fire hardened. If there was a group of people that is likely to admit that they are wrong in the face of real evidence, scientists are it (though that doesn't always happen--the larger the field, the more likely that the truth will make it through).
Would you really have people take the word of some guy over that kind of accumulated and tested wisdom?
