Trump Teases: A Former President Told Me 'I Wish I Did It' on...
The Harsh Reality of Daycare: High Turnover, Low Bonding, Long Days – Protect...
Trump Reveals GOP Rep. Dunn Faced 'Terminal' Heart Ailment, Would've Died by June...
GOP Senator's Support for Unpaid TSA Workers Turns into Fiery Clash with 'Defund'...
Dem Sen. Van Hollen, Not Content With Just DHS Going Unpaid, Threatens to...
You Gonna Cry? The Look on Adam Kinzinger's Face as Fellow CNN Panelist...
Coincidence? Three Attacks on Conservatives Tied to Furry Subculture – An Insider's Alarmi...
While Hollywood Congratulates Itself, Here's a Song That SHOULD Win an Oscar
Gavin Newsom Crosses His Legs This Way to Distract From the Lies He's...
Dem Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz Came 'SO Close to a Full Confession' While...
Why the Early American Schools Were Christian
To Explain How Trump's Messing Up Militarily 60 Minutes Turns to Advisor During...
NGO Director Tries Picking a Fight About the SAVE Act With Sen. Mike...
Adam Schiff Sweats As Democrat War on DHS Starts Backfiring
Candace Owens BRAVELY Demands X 'Ride With Her at Dawn' to Save Tucker...

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