What the Canuck? Confused Public Has Questions About Canadian Olympic Team’s Bizarre Fashi...
Home Alone: Harry Sisson’s Response to Personally Housing Illegal Aliens Is ‘Mi Casa...
Texas Congressman Looney Tune Gene Wu, Shows His Racist Side Too
No to Voter ID: Hakeem Jeffries Tries to Justify Dems Being on Unpopular...
'How Do You Do, Fellow Bad Bunny Fans?', John Kasich Drops Cringeworthy...
Delete Your Account: John Harwood Gets DRAGGED By X for His Nasty-Looking Super...
Senate Republican Leader John Thune Provides a Sneak Peek of the Pregame Flyover
Halftime S***show: Even NFL Players Have NO IDEA Who Bad Bunny Is (Just...
HHS Hands Off Some Gameday Menu Suggestions
Legal Action Launched to Stop Puberty Blocker Experiment ON CHILDREN
Whoa, His Eyes Get BIGGER? Adam Schiff's Reaction to ABC's Jon Karl Pushing...
Narrative OBLITERATED --> Watch Dana Bash Call Hakeem Jeffries Out TO HIS FACE...
'Fire MORE Writers': WAPO's Woke Super Bowl Piece Gets the DRAGGING It Deserves...
This Is QUITE the List of Fake Stories the Washington Post Has Fallen...
OH, She MAD! Ted Cruz Triggers Virginia Democrat Senator Louise Lucas Into Showing...

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