Limited Time: Grab your FREE Box of Dark Chocolate Almond Bars Get Yours>>Close
Open
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: USDA "fails to conform to the standards of evidence-based medicine"

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,719

    USDA "fails to conform to the standards of evidence-based medicine"

    A special article published today in the journal Nutrition sharply criticizes the recent Report of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC). Authors Hite et al. argue the Report fails to conform to the standards of evidence-based medicine, despite its claimed reliance on a newly created USDA Nutrition Evidence Library. The authors call the DGAC to task for failing to consider recent scientific results while at the same time further confusing the American public. ...

    Hite et al. explain that, in fact, nutrient consumption in the past thirty years has consistently moved in the direction of the Guidelines' recommendations for carbohydrate and fat, while calorie consumption has stayed within suggested ranges. At the same time, the rates of obesity and Type 2 Diabetes have skyrocketed. ...

    In suggesting the need for an entirely new process, Richard David Feinman, Professor of Cell Biology at SUNY Downstate Medical Center said, "The previous Guidelines have not worked well. It is simply unreasonable to ask the DGAC to audit its own work. An external panel of scientists with no direct ties to nutritional policy would be able to do a more impartial evaluation of the data. ...
    http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releas...-pdg100110.php


    There's a TV news interview with Professor Feinman, in which he says that the "Food Pyramid"

    "ignores the science"

    and that:

    "the committee are actually hiding this information"

    (i.e. they're hiding what we know about nutrition from science)


    http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/mornings/...delines-071410
    Last edited by Lewis; 10-05-2010 at 10:37 AM. Reason: missing link

  2. #2
    lcme's Avatar
    lcme Guest
    The "Nutrition" article was actually posted yesterday
    http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum...ience-and-bias

    The acticle is a free full-text so you should check it out.
    http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article...02893/fulltext

    Thanks for the link to the video.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,719
    Quote Originally Posted by lcme View Post
    The "Nutrition" article was actually posted yesterday
    Whoops! You can tell I browse here a bit rather than reading systematically.

    The acticle is a free full-text so you should check it out.
    http://www.nutritionjrnl.com/article...02893/fulltext
    Oh, I'd never have expected that. Thank you very much.

    Thanks for the link to the video.
    Interesting, isn't it? He's not particularly articulate, but some of those comments of his there are dynamite. I don't know whether he means to imply that there's deliberate deceit there, but that's what his words are literally saying. That's amazing. He seems to be saying that that's because people who've given the wrong advice don't want now to change in face of the evidence, because that would mean loss of face. I think one would have to wonder if the USDA had been "ignoring the science" because it was actually serving producer interests. But maybe Feinman is right there: I could well imagine people giving advice they knew might be dangerous rather than face that they may have got things totally backwards and hence lose face. It doesn't say much for some people's level of honesty (or concern for others), does it? One could get very cynical about human nature, if one hadn't come across people who do take truth, honesty, and duties to others very seriously.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    252
    I was excited to watch this video, but must say that Feinman was pretty disappointing. Not particularly articulate, indeed. I think he really could've said so much more by referencing some actual statistics from his own research. Oh well. And thanks for linking
    Everything in moderation, including moderation.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Victoria, BC CANADA
    Posts
    228
    It is very hard for some people to get up and admit "I was wrong".

    I can only imagine for many researchers/doctors out there this is even more difficult to say when all their educational institutions, degrees, research funding etc lean towards supporting big agro and the pharmaceutical industries.
    The doctor of the future will give no medicine, but will interest his patients in the care of the human frame, in diet, and in the cause and prevention of disease. - Thomas Edison

    Vancouver Island Primal and Paleo Living <<< join our Facebook Group

  6. #6
    lcme's Avatar
    lcme Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Leanne View Post
    It is very hard for some people to get up and admit "I was wrong".

    I can only imagine for many researchers/doctors out there this is even more difficult to say when all their educational institutions, degrees, research funding etc lean towards supporting big agro and the pharmaceutical industries.
    Can you imagine a panel of people admiting they're wrong? If one person starts to resist the ideas *BAM* they're no longer helping to shape the Dietary Guidelines.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Sanford, FL
    Posts
    312
    Not to mention... admitting that they were wrong about the food guidelines means admitting that they are responsible for the deaths of millions of people who followed them through diabetes and heart disease, among others.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    252
    I think I just realized this is precisely why they won't do it -- after admitting that they were wrong, they would be subject to a ridiculous amount of litigation. Yikes!
    Everything in moderation, including moderation.

  9. #9
    Seriously, we need a HUGE class action lawsuit to bring attention to this. Even if you lose (which is probable) it would force the federal government to stop making recommendation that are not based on good science.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northern California
    Posts
    403
    Quote Originally Posted by Lightlystarched View Post
    Seriously, we need a HUGE class action lawsuit to bring attention to this. Even if you lose (which is probable) it would force the federal government to stop making recommendation that are not based on good science.
    Or... we could simply eliminate the USDA. Why is the federal government making recommendations on anything? Why does anyone believe it - ever? Those who want it, can fund it themselves and heed the advice.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •