A thread on (some) academics and their interest in media coverage. It's detailed but bare with me. In the middle of November I was emailed by Dr Stephanos Avakian, senior lecturer at the Business school @uniofbrighton. Would I be interested in their research on diet trends? 1/
In particular they were looking at 'long term standing foods that attracted less attention over the years yet they remain more stable in terms of their proven added-value on health. We are particularly interested in snacking foods.' Clear as mud. But still, I had a question. 2/
Had their research been peer-reviewed and published? Too many journalists are willing to publish research which has not been through the proper process. Just because someone has a doctorate doesn't mean their research is pucker. That's why peer review/ publication exist 3/
You'll see where this is going. 'The meta study analysis has not been published by a peer reviewed journal,' he replied. 'It is not an issue if you are not interested in the idea.' Give me strength: it is this sort of thing that gives reporting of academic studies a bad name 4/
It's not just journos at fault. It's academics who rush for glory of media coverage without following standard academic practise. I tell him this and we have a to and fro about why this is important. Then he has another pop at interesting me in his research. 5/
Now it gets interesting. He's looking at 'advantages and disadvantages of popular diet trends' and 'the entrance of alternative snacking foods' onto the Uk market. He is esp interested in vegan products which, despite their 'healthy advertising agenda' might not be so healthy 6/
It's a detailed email. Avakian seems really hooked on the idea that new Vegan products might not be quite as healthy as they look. He's so keen on this that I'm moved to ask a question: is he receiving funding from any entity involved with the 'alternative snacking' industry? 7/
Lo and Behold: 'I am part of a long-standing family business that is based in Greece... with a long history in the manufacturing of dried nuts.' He doesn't run the business but he is, obviously, associated with it. 8/
So this guy is trying to get me interested in (non peer-reviewed) research into a changing sector that his family's business is a part of? And it took an eight email exchange to get to this information? 9/
I am not for a moment suggesting that Dr Avakian stood directly to gain in a financial manner from his research or media coverage of it. I shall assume he has a valid and fully justified academic interest in the alternative snacking market. But... 10/
...the manner of his approach is curious, and this exchange does shine a light on many of the obvious problems in the relationship between academics and journalists. I bring the correspondence to a halt and forward the matter to the academic management @uniofbrighton 11/
I received a reply from Tara Dean, Pro Vice Chancellor, Research and Enterprise. She told me 'This is not an appropriate way for one of our academics to behave'. She told me that researchers need to declare all conflicts of interest. They would look into this further. 12/
I asked to be kept up to date with the outcome of their review. For two months I heard nothing so on Friday I emailed. I was told that for reasons of data protection they could not tell me what the outcome was , however... 13/
'The matter has been dealt with according to university procedures.' And that is it. @Uniofbrighton thinks everything is fine, so again we shall have to take their word for it. 14/
But let me say again: when you read a media report of a new academic study, serious questions need to be asked. Who funded the research? Do they have a vested interest? Has it been peer reviewed and published? This stuff is important. 15/
BTW I'm not really that fussed about the alternative snacking market. But if you are, you might like to contact Dr Stephanos avakian. You'll find him @uniofbrighton ENDS
