'You Guys Turn a Blind Eye': Black Woman Takes Democrat Ro Khanna APART...
James Clapper Analyzing the Trump Whistleblower Complaint in 2019 Now Makes People Wonder...
ABC's Good Morning America Didn't Think This Aspect of the Eric Swalwell Story...
*SNORT* Just Found the MOTHER of All Foreshadowing Pic-Posts from Eric Swalwell and...
YO Cali? They BOTH Suck: Katie Porter Trips SPECTACULARLY During Bizarre Victory Lap...
Catherine Herridge Shares Declassified Doc Drop (Adam Schiff Told HUGE Lies About Trump...
Oh, Honey... WAT? Hack Journo Drops the MOST Pathetic Excuse YET for Not...
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton Just Made the Left's Definition of 'Democracy' VERY...
Monday Morning Meme Madness
Slant Rant: 'Journalist' Jim Acosta Laments Not Being More Opinionated About Trump on...
Desperate Dems May Call on Kamala Harris in Hopes of Avoiding All-Republican California...
Eric Swalwell Suspends Calif. Gubernatorial Campaign and Now EVERYBODY Has the Same Questi...
Dem Robert Garcia Wants Eric Swalwell to Leave CA Governor’s Race, Silent on...
Report: Artemis II Pilot Makes a Point of Thanking God
Sen. Rick Scott Trumpets Busting the Filibuster

Government's dietary advisors using research 'so off base as to be scientifically useless'

Seriously? What’s this about a federal committee sending out text messages to “scold” obese citizens? Baylen J. Linnekin, executive director of the Keep Food Legal Foundation, noted in a column last year that the federal government’s Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, a rotating group of academics who meet every five years, was considering not only privacy invading text messages but also new food taxes and municipal food bans.

Advertisement

Linnekin has a new column today in which he interviews University of Alabama-Birmingham researcher Edward Archer, whose new article published in “Mayo Clinic Proceedings” argues that the DGAC’s research “is so off base as to be scientifically useless.”

Archer explains why the DGAC continues to rely on so-called “memory-based dietary assessment methods,” which rely on anecdotal data, or “whatever the participant thinks (or would like the researcher to think) he or she ate over the past day, week, and in some cases the past decade.”

The federal government has massively increased spending on nutrition and obesity research over the past few decades, and now spends over $2 billion of taxpayer’s money per year. Unfortunately, the people that control that funding are the same researchers that use these anecdotal methods, train the next generation of researchers, and control the publication of scientific papers. As such, new methods and innovative research is stifled. The same researchers are getting funded to do the same research year after year after year.

Advertisement

In other words, the federal government’s dietary research methods are even less sound than anecdotal climate change data.

https://twitter.com/MoonbatCatnip/status/609857303907577857

https://twitter.com/MoonbatCatnip/status/609858312859951104

Advertisement

https://twitter.com/UberMinch/status/609849506205569024

Thanks goodness the first lady and her mother and daughters leave for Europe this week to lead a delegation through the United States’ pavilion at the Milan Expo 2015, entitled “American Food 2.0: United to Feed the Planet.” We’re anxious ourselves to learn just what “American Food 2.0” is and how the federal government intends to force it on the public.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement