No, you're not. What Adams is leaving out is the simple fact that it wasn't the scientists alone who were responsible, they were just "doing science." What happened after science was :
1) marketing
2) media
here is the process:
scientist A does some research, first person to try something in terms of health, fitness and/or nutrition. He gets results, publishes, looks like decent science, but its the first time anyone has done it and in the science world the publishing is all about "look at this, check it out"
Company A (who may or may not be his employer) sees his results about something that might relate to their business and send it to marketing for a spin job. A marketing guru gets hold of it and makes some commercials with guys in lab coats and people getting desired result (whatever it is). The commercial is brilliant, catching the desires and wants of the public and both encouraging the D&W and providing the "scientific" solution.
Media company A: recognizes the excitement generated by the commercial, traces it back to the scientist, invites him on for an interview. Asks him 40 minutes of questions from which they extract 3 minutes of support for Company A's marketing plan which means that the corporation will pump more money into media advertising. The media and production corporations win, we lose, seriously lose because we not only die early but have to pick up the cost for the diseases which disproportionately effect people who cannot afford the health care cost and society will not allow them to rot in the gutter (which is a good thing, I mean really).
Cutting to the chase, the public has been sold a pile of crap, the scientist has had his integrity sold down the river and the company and the media have sold what they are supposed to sell: product and mindshare. The system has worked beautifully!
The player that has not played a part in this story, the one that should be standing between the consumers and the corporations is the government. While I refuse to Libertarian bash because it is too easy a target, I do want to make clear that this IS the role of government. That without the government providing this service to the public, the public will be raped by the corporations, as they have been. ( "Oh, it is only the stupid ones, the ones that believe the media and the corporations, you should be more thoughtful in your beliefs." And so we are here blaming the poor scientist who was mistreated in all possible ways all through the process while he just did what was right in the world of science.)
Punchline: We need the government to police the corporations. To do that they need money, tax money. We need to pay this because if we don't we end up paying the cost for people in hospital for all these lifestyle diseases that ARE OUR FAULT FOR ALLOWING THE CORPORATE SHILLS THAT WE CALL POLITICIANS TO GUT OUR GOVERNMENT. It is time to return to the understanding that government is an important part of human interaction, that it is good in its role and in its very nature, and that it is only perverse when it is perverted by power mongers who use the power for self-aggrandizement: which is what has happened with corporations since the Reagan came into office. We need to get the corporations out of government, get the corporate money out of government and start to reclaim it by getting real citizens in. This begins with election reform, tax reform and (although I am not a rabid supporter of it, it would at least flush the Congress bowl quickly) term limits.