Wed, Oct-10-18, 06:48
|
 |
Senior Member
Posts: 4,044
|
|
Plan: Very LC, Higher Protein
Stats: 227/186/185
BF:
Progress: 98%
Location: Herndon, VA
|
|
Quote:
|
Wansink’s downfall reveals the corrosive powers perpetually undermining good science in nutrition. Observational studies are supposed to be exploratory work, hardly ready for prime time. Yet the pressure to publish, the reality that media coverage drives grant making, and that these both drive the professional trajectory of researchers, push scientists like Wansink and others to oversell their results.
|
This has been the dynamic of nutrition science since 1978 when McGovern pushed for dietary changes on weak observational studies that showed zero causation and very weak correlation at the most. The product at the time was the Food Pyramid. Nice to know that a good "gut feel" has formed food policies, nutrition claims, and medical/ pharmaceutical/food manufacturing decisions since then. Why pursue the facts when you can tell a good story? I'm hoping these blunt statements lead to something more valid than the current guidelines. |