Gavin Newsom Can’t Read? He Has a Funny Way of Showing It
Weepy Dem: Crockett Vs. Talarico Primary Is a Choice Between the Black Candidate...
HuffPo Turned Off By Patriotic Displays From One Country In The Olympics. You'll...
‘Crazy Talk!’ Tim Burchett Schools Bernie Sanders on How Simple It Is to...
Lawyer Hopes Dead Man's Family Opens an Investigation Into His 'Lynching'
Dyslexia Diss: Newsom’s Comms Director Launches F-BOMB at Journalist Seeking Learning Disa...
David Hogg Brought Up to Speed About Fast and Furious Scandal
Congresswoman Says Advice to Drink Whole Milk Is ‘White Supremacy Dog Whistling’
NBC Affiliate Shares Harrowing Story of an ICE Agent Pushing a Megaphone Out...
Rep. Jason Crow Says ICE Agents Are Parading Around in Commando Cosplay
NYC Mayor Mamdani's Excuse for 'Photo ID to Shovel Snow' Hypocrisy Is OFF...
Rep. Ilhan Omar's SOTU Guest Is Activist Who Went Viral for Being Dragged...
Officer Who Arrested Laken Riley's Killer Speaks at White House Event Honoring Angel...
Member of Parliament Especially Concerned for 2SLGBTQIA+ Canadians in Puerto Vallarta
From Booing Anthems to Cuddly Consolation Prizes: Canada's Stuffed Animal Walk of Shame...

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