US Nutrition Panel's Ties To Top Food Giants Revealed In New Report 41
Tom Perkins writes via The Guardian: Almost half of a federal government panel that helps develop US nutritional guidelines has significant ties to big agriculture, ultra-processed food companies, pharmaceutical companies and other corporate organizations with a significant stake in the process's outcome. The revelation is part of a new report from US Right to Know, a government transparency group that looked for ties to corporate interests among the 20-member panel of food and nutrition experts that makes recommendations for updating the US government's official dietary guidelines.
It found nine members had ties to Nestle, Pfizer, Coca-Cola, the National Egg Board and other prominent food lobby groups, among others. The findings raise questions about whether the panel is looking out for Americans' health or corporate profits, and "erodes confidence in dietary guidelines," said Gary Ruskin of US Right to Know. "Millions of Americans' lives are affected by this report and it's crucial that the report tell the truth to American people and it's not degraded into another sales pitch for big food and big pharma," he said. [...]
"The guidelines affect the entire US food system quite strongly," Ruskin said. US Right to Know scoured public records dating back five years for conflicts of interest among the 20 panel members. In addition to the nine it found with "high-risk conflicts of interest" and connections to the food and drug industry, it found four more members who have possible conflicts of interest. It applauded the agencies for appointing seven members who did not appear to have any conflicts. At least four panelists have connections to at least two companies each among Abbott, Novo Nordisk, the National Dairy Council, Eli Lilly and Weight Watchers International. One panel member has received about $240,000 in grant funding from Eli Lilly.
It found nine members had ties to Nestle, Pfizer, Coca-Cola, the National Egg Board and other prominent food lobby groups, among others. The findings raise questions about whether the panel is looking out for Americans' health or corporate profits, and "erodes confidence in dietary guidelines," said Gary Ruskin of US Right to Know. "Millions of Americans' lives are affected by this report and it's crucial that the report tell the truth to American people and it's not degraded into another sales pitch for big food and big pharma," he said. [...]
"The guidelines affect the entire US food system quite strongly," Ruskin said. US Right to Know scoured public records dating back five years for conflicts of interest among the 20 panel members. In addition to the nine it found with "high-risk conflicts of interest" and connections to the food and drug industry, it found four more members who have possible conflicts of interest. It applauded the agencies for appointing seven members who did not appear to have any conflicts. At least four panelists have connections to at least two companies each among Abbott, Novo Nordisk, the National Dairy Council, Eli Lilly and Weight Watchers International. One panel member has received about $240,000 in grant funding from Eli Lilly.
Re:More tin foil hat BS (Score:4, Interesting)
Ah, yes. Gary Ruskin, the anti-GMO evangelist for the Organic Consumers Association. It's not surprising that he is spreading FUD about the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee by claiming members of the committee have "ties" to food lobby groups. The Right To Know has such a stellar reputation with impartial investigations.
Gary Ruskin conspiracy claims [acsh.org]
Gary Ruskin linked to anti-science Russian fake news site [geneticlit...roject.org]
Yeah, I'm sure there are other articles, both pro and con, about Gary Ruskin, but those were the first two in the search results. Your searches should fill in enough background to make your own opinions.
Re: (Score:3)
So other than the ad hominem, got anything to show that the claims being made about industry ties on the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee are wrong?
I KNEW IT (Score:5, Funny)
Something always seemed off about the Chocolate-Zoloft-Soda-Eggs food pyramid.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Except for the saturated fats in the yolk.
Re: (Score:2)
Even f you're overeating, your body can process around 20g of saturated fats per day with no ill effects.
https://www.health.harvard.edu... [harvard.edu]
Eggs are also the best source of choline by a mile.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I will categorically state that eggs from CAFOs, which means the vast majority of them in countries that allow this, are harmful. All the products of CAFOs are harmful. For multiple independent reasons.
It is possible (but not known for certain) that relatively humanely raised chickens might produce eggs that are semi-good for you. As a vegan I would still not eat them even if I could (very allergic, which is part of why I adopted a vegan diet long before the name "vegan" even existed). But given the cho
Re: (Score:2)
doing better job than in past (Score:5, Insightful)
The government's recommendations are certainly better and healthier now than 50 years ago when I was in school.
That said the best food would be made from ingredients not in a labelled can or package.
Re: (Score:2)
You can, but it's definitely healthier made from fresh tomatoes. Less sodium.
Re: (Score:2)
"contains less than 2 percent salt, citric acid, calcium chloride"
too much salts are bad for you and the canners usually throw in a ton. at my age it causes problems
Re: (Score:2)
Most Italians make ragout from canned tomatoes. They're not quite as good for you as fresh but are better in some regards.
https://www.futurefit.co.uk/bl... [futurefit.co.uk]
I guess tomatoes are one of the exceptions. Also, canning technology has gotten a lot better, from no lining to BPA lining to BPA-free lining.
Demonstrating ties to these companies is pointless (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I'm gonna assume you'd have a hard time putting together a panel of mostly unemployed experts. Even pure academics get grants that come from companies.
If you want to demonstrate an actual problem, show us specific positions taken by specific individuals on the panel, where it appears the position goes against the public interest.
I mean, come on - would it make sense to complain that somebody on Cisco's or Google's payroll is serving on the IETF?
Re: Demonstrating ties to these companies is point (Score:3)
Perhaps public research should be founded by taxes, and not be disguised private research…
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps public research should be founded by taxes, and not be disguised private research
Would that be more or less socialistic than general health insurance?
Re: (Score:1)
I mean, come on - would it make sense to complain that somebody on Cisco's or Google's payroll is serving on the IETF?
... or that the chairmain of the FCC was previously the Associate General Counsel for Verizon Communications. I mean, there couldn't possibly be any conflict of interest situations there.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, regulatory capture is rampant in our government.
I always suspected that ... (Score:4, Funny)
Blame Ancel Keys (Score:5, Informative)
Ancel Keys convinced government that fat made you fat, when in fact high carb and sugar make you fat.
The food pyramid was born and is almost completely upside down, to the benefit of the sugar, corn, seed oil industries..
You want to stay healthy:-
- Intermittently Fast
- Each meat, dairy, eggs, vegetables, nuts.
- Stay away from seed oils, sugar, processed grains, fruit juice as much as possible.
https://www.defeatdiabetes.com... [defeatdiabetes.com.au]
https://www.npr.org/sections/t... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Food advice is like religion, everyone is convinced they know exactly what is best for you.
Re: (Score:2)
as well as beliefs in circumcision being 'clean' when really they just believe sex should be painfully punished.
I am circumcised and sex is not painful at all, quite enjoyable actually...
Re: (Score:2)
They also said sugar made you fat at the same time. CICO is likely closer to the truth of why there is an obesity epidemic, even if low carb diet is healthier. Most people were have been too poor to exist on a low carb diet historically, there was no massive switch to high carb. There was however a massive switch to adding liquid calories, no food pyramid had to include soda to make it happen.
You want to stay looking healthy for as long as possible, go for early embalment. Nature is not kind, regardless of
There's no obesity epidemic in France (Score:2)
Fame awaits anyone who wants to come to the sunny land of cheese, meat and wine and figure out why almost everyone is skinny. You'll only have to spend 5 years learning the insane language.
It could be the lack of sugary desserts. The insulin spike of simple carbs seems to make me put on weight, but not if eaten outside of meal times.
Re: (Score:1)
Regulatory capture (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, it's another example of regulatory capture. For some reason that seems to be positively encouraged by both congress and the executive branch. (Party seems irrelevant, though the emphasis changes.)
I don't need nutrition panels... (Score:3)
I can figure out on my own that eating chocolate bars and Doritos is probably not the best diet.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, many people can't figure this out.
Re: (Score:2)
Agriculture covers all food.
Unfortunately, the special interests have taken over recommendations so lots of unhealthy food gets promoted.
No shit, Sherlock (Score:3)
These things are ALWAYS overpopulated by industry insiders.