Carbonfiberboy 

To some extent this is true. The problem is not so much industry funding, which I doubt is really an issue, as it is general researcher bias. One assumes you've read many nutrition threads here and noticed that posters have nutritional biases. One shouldn't need to mention that these biases are present in researchers, also. They're trying to prove a point which agrees with their beliefs. In fact, JAMA had a meta-study recently which concluded that, as far as those researchers could tell, all nutritional studies are contaminated by researcher bias. IOW, don't trust anything that hasn't passed the scientific method test, meaning duplication and further testing by means of varying the inputs. Even then . . .

The problem of course is that doing research with one's own body is that the results won't be known until you're dead. You pays your money and takes your choice. But that's the way life works in general. One tries to make choices in a way which results in positive outcomes 20 years down the road. Sometimes you're right, sometimes you're wrong.

At 74 (and 70 for my wife and partner for 46 years), I gotta say that this data point's results have been excellent. 8 oz. of orange juice every morning. Stopped drinking fruit juice with lunch maybe 10 years ago. Tea or BCAA water with lunch now. Ovo-lacto-pisco vegetarians, sort of Med diet, almost all food organic. Lots of exercise. Little alcohol. YMMV.