Nutrition Policy Influence by External Forces

Sep 30, 2024

Lecture by Nina Teicholz at Low Carb Down Under Conference

Introduction

  • Speaker: Nina Teicholz, science journalist and founder of The Nutrition Coalition
  • Focus: Ensuring dietary policy is evidence-based
  • Theme: Examining why nutrition advice is often incorrect and influenced by external forces

Dietary Guidelines and Their Impact

  • US Dietary Guidelines:
    • MyPlate and the Food Pyramid emphasize grains over animal fats
    • High carbohydrate intake recommended, low fat by default
  • Correlation with Obesity:
    • Increase in carbohydrate intake associated with rise in obesity rates
    • 1980: Obesity rate was 12.3%; projected to be around 50% now
    • Similar guidelines in Australia

Conflicts of Interest in Nutrition Science

  • Study on US Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee:
    • 95% of members had conflicts with food or pharmaceutical companies
    • Predominant ties to multinational processed food companies like Nestle, General Mills
  • USDA partnerships with ultra-processed food companies
    • Monthly meetings that may indicate regulatory capture

Current Work and Investigations

  • Column on Substack: "Unsettled Science"
    • Focus on uncovering conflicts of interest behind nutrition science

Key Figures and Bias in Nutrition Science

  • Walter Willet at Harvard:
    • Long-standing influence on nutrition guidelines promoting plant-based diets
    • Connections to Seventh Day Adventist Church and financial ties influencing research outcomes
    • History of bullying scientists who challenge his views
  • Christopher Gardner at Stanford:
    • Vegan and influential in the Dietary Guidelines Committee
    • Trials allegedly designed to favor vegan diets
    • Center funded by Beyond Meat, indicating conflict of interest

Media Bias and Misrepresentations

  • Bias against carnivore diet portrayed unfairly in media
    • Largely portrayed as a male-only trend; however, many women participate for health reasons

Flawed Research and Policy Influence

  • Global Burdens of Disease Study:
    • Influential study declared no amount of red meat is safe
    • Errors acknowledged, but paper not retracted
    • Lack of transparency and accountability in scientific publishing

Broader Themes and Conclusion

  • Bias in favor of plant-based diets at high institutional levels
    • Influence of food and pharmaceutical industries
    • Need for awareness and change to promote health-focused dietary policies
  • Call for more investigative journalism and serious consideration by policymakers

Closing Remarks

  • Nina Teicholz emphasizes the importance of documenting these influences
  • Encourages audience to read her work for further insight
  • Wishes the conference success

Gemini

Analysis of Nina Teicholz's Talk on Nutrition Science

Nina Teicholz, a science journalist, author, and founder of The Nutrition Coalition, discusses the concerning disconnect between nutritional advice and scientific evidence.

Teicholz's main arguments:

  • Dietary guidelines are heavily influenced by industry: She highlights that the US dietary guidelines, characterized by a low-fat, high-carbohydrate approach, are out of sync with scientific evidence.
  • Conflicts of interest are rampant: A study by The Nutrition Coalition revealed that 95% of the US Dietary Guideline Advisory Committee members had conflicts of interest with food or pharmaceutical companies, primarily Nestle, Dannon, General Mills, and Kellogg's. The International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), a food industry lobbying group founded by an ex-Coca-Cola VP, also holds significant influence.
  • The USDA, responsible for overseeing the guidelines, has numerous partnerships with ultra-processed food companies, suggesting potential regulatory capture.
  • Harvard's nutrition department, a powerful voice in the field, has a long-standing bias towards plant-based diets, potentially influenced by figures like Walter Willett. Willett, a proponent of vegetarianism, had connections with Ancel Keys (of the diet-heart hypothesis) and the Seventh Day Adventist Church, known for promoting vegetarianism.
  • Harvard receives substantial funding from various food industries, including nut producers, raising questions about potential bias in their research.
  • Willett has a history of bullying scientists who challenge his views, mirroring the behavior of Ancel Keys towards those who questioned the diet-heart hypothesis (e.g., John Yudkin who suggested sugar as a primary culprit in heart disease).
  • Christopher Gardner, a vegan and influential nutrition scientist at Stanford and member of the US Dietary Guideline Expert Committee, receives funding from Beyond Meat, a significant conflict of interest often ignored by the media.
  • The media often portrays the carnivore diet and its proponents unfairly, focusing on negative stereotypes and overlooking the potential benefits reported by many, particularly women with chronic diseases.
  • The Global Burden of Disease study, heavily funded by the Bill Gates Foundation and highly influential in European policy, demonstrates a bias against red meat. Its 2019 claim that no amount of red meat is safe was later acknowledged as flawed by the study authors, including Christopher Murray, but the paper was not retracted.

Teicholz's Conclusion:

  • A strong bias towards plant-based diets and against meat exists within influential institutions.
  • This bias is fueled by the food and pharmaceutical industries, whose financial interests are often at odds with public health.
  • She urges for greater transparency and scrutiny of these influences to ensure that nutrition science and policy are truly evidence-based.

Teicholz's Call to Action:

  • She calls for increased awareness and action from the public and other stakeholders to address these issues, hoping for a shift towards more objective and evidence-based nutrition recommendations.