Wed, Dec-20-17, 05:41
|
 |
|
|
Plan: P:E/DDF
Stats: 225/150/169
BF:45%/28%/25%
Progress: 134%
Location: NC
|
|
A criticism of the DGA process specifically focused on the use of Memory - Based methods of recall used in food diaries that then were used to drive guidelines.
Quote:
Nutrition Has a 'Consensus' to Use Bad Science: An Open Letter to the National Academies
Nutrition' is now a degenerating research paradigm in which scientifically illiterate methods, meaningless data, and consensus-driven censorship dominate the empirical landscape. Since the 1950s, there was a naïve but politically expedient consensus that a person’s usual diet could be measured simply by asking what he or she remembered eating and drinking. Despite the credulous and unfalsifiable nature of this memory-based method, investigators used it to produce hundreds of thousands of publications and acquire billions of taxpayer dollars.
Over time, the sustained funding of demonstrably pseudo-scientific research methods has subverted the self-correcting nature of science and suppressed skeptical scholarship. Consequently, many decades of politics taking precedence over critical inquiry produced contradictory dietary guidelines, failed public policies, and the continued confusion over 'what-to-eat'.
To counter this blatant scientific illiteracy, we published analyses showing that self-reported diets in epidemiologic studies were physiologically implausible and could not support survival. Yet despite our findings and decisive conclusions, the consensus-seekers simply ignored our results and offered mere rhetoric and ad hominems to counter our data.
Recently, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine published a report that exemplifies consensus-based censorship. The authors were well-aware of our work, yet failed to cite or address our refutations of self-reported data. Instead, they stated, "Self-report dietary intake data are central to the development of dietary guidelines" and "current methods being used in the [Dietary Guidelines] process…are indeed appropriate".
Memory-based research methods produce self-reported data that are implausible and should not be used to establish the Dietary Guidelines for Americans or regulate the $5 trillion US food industry. Thus, we sent letters to the Presidents of the National Academies hoping that critical thinking and accountability would prevail over political expediency. We have not received a reply.
|
Letters at:
https://www.realclearscience.com/ar...ad_science.html |