Comments on: Things that annoy me about nutrition.

By: food dood

food dood — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:43:22 +0000

Dieticians are not research scientists. They are actually educators with a fairly basic understanding of food science and biochemistry. Their primary role is to educate their patients according to the current nutritional dogma.

As someone with over 20 years experience as food scientist I am constantly amazed at how little basic science is studied by dieticians.

By: Mary

Mary — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 12:21:31 +0000

hi folks…
we had a child with some wacky health problems…migraines at 5 days, lack of sleeping patterns, tiny, pale, generally sickly…went to plenty of nutritionists, harvard top in their field highly credentially hard to get appointments with docs, rds, you name it…with little results, actually no results, and thousands of dollars–really–wasted–if your goal is results–as was ours.

we did get results with the wap diet…amazing results actually–not an impressive credential to find..

our take away was if you want credentials…that’s one path
if you want results..well, that is another

By: Charlie

Charlie — Sun, 13 Apr 2008 05:11:15 +0000

Mraaagghh… her post points out the possible exceptions… but I wanted to be the one to point out the exceptions. That’s my job… mrraagghh.

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 19:30:36 +0000

Nutrition n00b here again… On the subject of scientists not studying some “revolutionary” new diet or whatever, it could be fear of losing funding or being seen as a quack when agreeing with the alternate medicine folks. Doesn’t prove anything, mind you, just a similar vein of thought that Mr. Smith brought up concerning scientists awhile back.

Also, I just read more on the recent findings on pharmaceuticals not delivering the intended benefits because of the assumptions of the testers involved. For example, a cholesterol drug lowers bad cholesterol, but doesn’t stop heart blockages, thus heart attack risks stay the same. But they advertised it with the express purpose of lowering the risk of heart attack. Similarly with diet, the same thing can be said. Targeting this one thing or that doesn’t always get you the intended consequence even though research shows the two are linked.

Granted, both of my points are on the negative side of this whole topic and there is plenty of positive, provable nutrition info out there, it’s just that most Americans don’t do the basics very well and only when our health gets bad do we seem to reach for the “fastest” method available, not necessarily the best and most proven.

By: Infinity

Infinity — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 23:44:49 +0000

I agree, there have been meaningful contributions by people untrained in the field they contribute to. But I do think that their contributions deserve more scrutiny than otherwise would be applied. If I were to attempt some research in knot theory, I hope I would not be taken as seriously as someone who was trained in it.

The other thing to consider is – if this research were so revolutionary and accurate, why has it not been further studied and advocated by others? So much of the philosophy behind science is the concept of reproducing results to demonstrate their accuracy and generalizability. If it can’t be reproduced by anyone else, it’s probably not accurate data.

By: Kerr

Kerr — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:45:08 +0000

BTW, it’s been scientifically proven that Fritos make you happy. Try it, it’s true. And I don’t even like them.

By: Kerr

Kerr — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:44:33 +0000

Math is highly different than…well almost every other field. ab + ac = a(b+c) can be proven, and can’t be politicized. And it’s hard to sell math.
Ye Ben’s point is still completely valid, for the same reason. Other fields are swayed by the social influences at the time, and that affects who has, or does not have, a degree and/or influence.

By: Audrey

Audrey — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:04:06 +0000

Hey Annette, John said you commented on the info I sent you, I was wondering if you even got it! I’m so glad I encouraged some research into non-standard nutritional teachings. I do agree that they are off in many areas (unclean food etc.) but my main point was that if God created something to be eaten, even the most highly educated humans are not going to come up with something better. We just have to try to get things as close to the way they were created as possible. BTW, our family has been enjoying raw milk, disease free, for over 3 years and John has lost weight incorporating coconut oil into his diet. We got into this whole crazy thing by reading The Makers Diet- still not 100% on (& self-promoting), but food for thought.

By: BanjoBen

BanjoBen — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 13:44:21 +0000

“Posers” are one thing, but not having an advanced degree in nutrition doesn’t make one a poser. If a lack of an advanced degree is enough to discredit someone, there are many mathematicians, scientists, etc down through history that we should just forget about. I can’t remember all the specifics, but as I recall, Pierre de Fermat was actually a lawyer. Yet it’s his contributions to mathematics that have immortalized his name.

I’m not saying this Price fella is a nutrition expert or anything (don’t know a thing about him). It’s just that I feel your post precludes the possibility that someone without such a degree could ever make meaningful contributions, and that’s simply not true.

By: Ducky

Ducky — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 19:16:41 +0000

Well said, Annette!