'False Alarm' Issued: New Report Examines 35 Years Of Food Scares Promoted By The Center For Science In The Public Interest

Washington - A new report examines 35 years of food scares promoted by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Entitled, "False Alarm: A Report on the Center for Science in the Public Interest, 1971-2006," the report evaluates over 90 food scares that CSPI has either launched or helped to promote.

"The 'food police,' as the group has come to be known, have been busted," said study author Steven Milloy, publisher of JunkScience.com. "'False Alarm' is the record on CSPI for the past 35 years -- and the group stands accused of irresponsible alarmism and junk science -- not to mention excessive farce," Milloy added.

CSPI is the activist group that recently sued KFC and threatened to sue Starbucks over their use of politically incorrect cooking oils in fried foods and baked goods.

From its 1973 scare-mongering involving bacon -- "the most dangerous food in the supermarket," according to CSPI -- through its highly-publicized attacks on Chinese food, movie popcorn, fettuccine Alfredo and concluding with a June 2006 scare on "Extreme Ice Cream," the report examines CSPI's scares and the relevant facts and science.

The report also spotlights the various foods that CSPI has labeled as the "worst" ever food and features 35 colorful -- but nonsensical -- quotes from CSPI, including "Hardee's new Monster Thickburger is the fast-food equivalent of a snuff film" and "Fettuccine Alfredo... is heart attack on a plate."

The report also debunks the 91 food scares, leading to the conclusion that CSPI's name is, in effect, a misnomer -- "CSPI's alarmism, by and large, is neither based on credible science nor can it be said to be "in the public interest," says the report.

"False Alarm" is published by the Free Enterprise Education Institute, a nonprofit group dedicated to educating the public about threats to our system of free enterprise.

"CSPI once criticized the FDA for allowing nut processors to advertise the potential health benefits of eating nuts, stating 'It would be unfortunate if the claim turned out later to be untrue. No one's going to get their money back,'" said Milloy. "But 35 years of unfounded scares later, the public ought to be asking CSPI, 'Will we get our money back?,'" he added.

SOURCE: Enterprise Education Institute