The dangerous quackery of nutritionists

[getreal]

Latest post of the previous page:

Indeed I have, Oh! indeed I have, Alan.

It will include the use of crocodiles, large Irish Draght stallions and lots and lots of water (before the firing squad, of course. It would be meaningless afterwards.). I plan to have the "treatment" administered by well trained little fluffy kittens. I'm not a complete sadist, you know!

[david house]

I worked in the food industry most of my life and have employed nutritionists. These were qualified professionals whose task was to calculate the nutritional value of the foodstuffs being produced, and to help with product development to ensure new products delivered what was claimed for them, and were correctly balanced.

They were far removed from those rogues trying to make a fast buck out of peoples fears over the effects of modern diets, and selling snake oil cures to make you lose weight. It started for me with "E for additives" by Maurice Hanssen, one of the most irresponsible books ever written. I don't for one moment defend such people but do speak up for proper nutritionists. They are not all like that!

[getreal]

I'm really interested to hear that, David. Where did these "nutritionists" train and what qualifications did they have? Why did you not employ either food technologists or dietitcians? Was this in the UK?

Thanks

ETA: looked up some Uni courses and I still can't fathom why anyone with a serious interest in diet and nutrition would plump for a course in nutrition alone (some of the courses were combined nutrition and dietetics) when it only restricts the variety of places you can be employed. There is no standardisation on the qualification and no governing body. I'm also curious why bona-fide nutritionists (though I doubt they even exist) haven't come out against the quacks. That only leads me to conclude thay are all quacks.

[Alan H]

There is a rough divide between nutritionists and nutritionists. David is referring to nutritionists when he talks about those working for food manufacturers. Nutritional therapists tend to be the ones up to their whatever in pseudo scientific diagnostic tests such as iridology, hair mineral analysis and sell - frequently at high cost - food supplements. These ones are the problem: people who have real deficiencies in their diet need to see their GP; those tho don't - and that is the vast majority of us - certainly don't need to be told they have 'deficiencies' or 'imbalances' and don't need to take supplements.

BTW, anotehr blog post, this time looking at OfQuack's definition of nutrirional therapy: OfQuack: protecting the public from quack nutritional therapists?

[getreal]

I still don't get it Alan. Can you explain what would make a nutritionist bona fide? How does one know? I'm not convinced.

[Alan H]

Prof David Colquhoun has highlighted the nonsense taught on some nutritional therapy courses: http://www.dcscience.net/?p=4900

However, there are some courses that do teach human nutrition and I've no reason to believe they are not proper science and evidence based. These are the ones that end up with the respectable nutritionists. Of course, if you are able to aim higher, you could become a Dietitian.

In terms of knowing which end of the spectrum a particular nutritionist/nutritional therapist is at, I don't think there is any easy way other than finding out what trade body they belong to. Ones like BANT and ION seem to be at one end and ones like the Association for Nutrition at the other.

[david house]

I'm really interested to hear that, David. Where did these "nutritionists" train and what qualifications did they have? Why did you not employ either food technologists or dietitcians? Was this in the UK?

Yes this was in the UK, and was over 15 years ago. I am now retired. The people we employed were described in the Company literature and publicity as "nutritionists", but in fact their qualifications were either in food science of home economics. So sorry if that was misleading. I am beginning to wonder how they would now be feeling if the word has now been hijacked by fraudstersfor it tends to discredit what was a perfectly responsible job.

[getreal]

Prof David Colquhoun has highlighted the nonsense taught on some nutritional therapy courses: http://www.dcscience.net/?p=4900

However, there are some courses that do teach human nutrition and I've no reason to believe they are not proper science and evidence based. These are the ones that end up with the respectable nutritionists. Of course, if you are able to aim higher, you could become a Dietitian.

In terms of knowing which end of the spectrum a particular nutritionist/nutritional therapist is at, I don't think there is any easy way other than finding out what trade body they belong to. Ones like BANT and ION seem to be at one end and ones like the Association for Nutrition at the other.

OK. But why would we need another "nutrition" qualification when we already have dietitians and food technologists? To me this is like saying there are other courses in "medicine", some are even as good as the current medical degrees, but most are not.

What on earth is the advantage of having well respected and understood degees in nutrition (dietetics and food technology) and then introducing an inferior course, which doesn't actually qualify them to do anything worthwhile. It seems completely illogical to me.

David. That's cleared that up then! Thanks.

I would still stick my neck on the line and say there is no such thing as a nutritionist. It's a self conferred, meaningless title.

[Alan H]

OK. But why would we need another "nutrition" qualification when we already have dietitians and food technologists? To me this is like saying there are other courses in "medicine", some are even as good as the current medical degrees, but most are not.

What on earth is the advantage of having well respected and understood degees in nutrition (dietetics and food technology) and then introducing an inferior course, which doesn't actually qualify them to do anything worthwhile. It seems completely illogical to me.

I think the answer lies in what the entry qualifications are for a Dietetics course and what Dietitians do. They are experts in the dietary requirements of people with medical conditions (diabetes, liver failure, etc, etc) and generally work alongside doctors in hospitals. They have an excellent knowledge of human diet and requirements in a wide variety of situations and will have a university degree.

However, to be able to advise on the nutritional status of, say, corn flakes, or what constitutes a healthy yoghurt, or what's required to make a low salt ready meal still taste good doesn't require that detailed medical knowledge, but it does require a very good level of knowledge and skill and they do provide an essential service. These are the nutritionists and they will also have a university degree.

Then there are the nutritional therapists. As far as I can see, there are perfectly good nutritional therapists who can advise on diet, whether for weight loss or just general health and, if properly trained, they will give science and evidence-based advice. I really have no idea, but maybe organisations like weight-watchers use them to advise their clients?

Then there are the nutritional therapists who use pseudo-scientific tests to find 'intolerances' and 'imbalances' and try to advise on diet based on these bogus tests and may well offer their own very special brand of dietary supplement. Unfortunately, some of them will also have university degrees.

I would still stick my neck on the line and say there is no such thing as a nutritionist. It's a self conferred, meaningless title.

I hope I've been able to persuade you otherwise!

[getreal]

However, to be able to advise on the nutritional status of, say, corn flakes, or what constitutes a healthy yoghurt, or what's required to make a low salt ready meal still taste good doesn't require that detailed medical knowledge, but it does require a very good level of knowledge and skill and they do provide an essential service. These are the nutritionists and they will also have a university degree.

But that's what a food technologist does! They have been doing that for decades.

Then there are the nutritional therapists. As far as I can see, there are perfectly good nutritional therapists who can advise on diet, whether for weight loss or just general health and, if properly trained, they will give science and evidence-based advice

.

But that is exactly what dieticians do!

I really have no idea, but maybe organisations like weight-watchers use them to advise their clients?

No, they use dieticians. http://www.weightwatchers.co.uk/util/ar ... 71&sc=3045

No, Alan. You have not convinced me.

[Dave B]

This is becoming another problem where we are getting hung up on the use of a word rather than what actually happens. When I perfectly good word gets hijacked the "value" of the word suffers. Nothing wrong with "nutritionist"

nu·tri·tion·ist/n(y)o͞oˈtriSH(ə)nist/
Noun: A person who studies or is an expert in nutrition.

and

nu·tri·tion/n(y)o͞oˈtriSHən/
Noun: The process of providing or obtaining the food necessary for health and growth

di·e·ti·tian/ˌdī-iˈtiSHən/
Noun: An expert on diet and nutrition.

and

di·et/ˈdī-it/
Noun: The kinds of food that a person, animal, or community habitually eats

There may be a subtle difference between the two that I can't grip but, essentially, they look to be synonymous. So if the prejudice against "nutritionist" an effect of that hijacking? Like we lost "gay"? as a synonym for joyfulness.

This is a subject for another thread!

[getreal]

It's not really the word I object to, Dave, it's the fact that they are unneccessary. Everything they do is already covered better by food technologists and dieticians. We don't need them. They are unregulated (unnofficial bodies don't count) and their title is not protected.

[Dave B]

It's not really the word I object to, Dave, it's the fact that they are unneccessary. Everything they do is already covered better by food technologists and dieticians. We don't need them. They are unregulated (unnofficial bodies don't count) and their title is not protected.

In David's case the "nutritionists" were, apparently, qualified in some way - and work experience may qualify as a qualification.

Unfortunately, in some ways, we are not a country that pins specific definitions to titles, I was called an "engineer" in one comapny when I had no academic engineering qualifications at all. In Germany that would have been as frowned upon, maybe even illegal. In this country you can call yourself "Doctor" quite legally, providing you do not start treating people for disease or using it to perpetrate fraud (how does Malik get away with it?)

Oxford Brookes offers a nutrition degree, but do not say what title you may use afterwards.

Nutritionists can be employed in a range of roles within the NHS, including within primary care trusts (PCT's) and NHS trusts (eg in Public Health Directorates)

This is a non-degree position in the NHS.

Seems like a perfectly acceptable word to some authorities, just spoiled for some by association.

[getreal]

Dave stated that the nutritionists he worked with were qualified in the field of food science or home economics (I forgot about that one!).

I believ it's standard in the rest of europe not to be either employed, or regarded as an engineer unless one has a degree in the relevany branch of engineering. The loose use of the word in the UK pisses me off, we have a variety of trades describing themselves as engineers, from motor mechanics to carpet cleaners.

[Alan H]

I believ it's standard in the rest of europe not to be either employed, or regarded as an engineer unless one has a degree in the relevany branch of engineering. The loose use of the word in the UK pisses me off, we have a variety of trades describing themselves as engineers, from motor mechanics to carpet cleaners.

It pisses you off? How do you think I feel?!

[Dave B]

I agree with you, getreal, but, for some reason, professional titles, short of Doctor in medicine, have not been respected in this country. And we are supposed to be the snobby nation of Europe (though perhaps the French could give us lessons ! )

If professional titles were legally restricted to those with qualifications it would make it a lot safer when seeking treatment.

[getreal]

There are quite a few professions which have protected titles in the UK.

Registered Nurse.
Dietician
Chiropidist and Podiatrist...

here. There are tons (though these are all health related. I think that's the only ones protected in the UK


http://www.hpc-uk.org/aboutregistration ... tedtitles/

Alan. My husband is an engineer (wif a degree 'an all). Amusing anecdote: I was doing a beginers French class and we were asked to say a little about ourselves (in French) and our families. One woman said her husband was an engineer and the teacher asked, what kind of engineer? The woman said he was a heating engineer. "Oh no!" said the teacher "in France you must have an engineering degree to call yourself one. Your husband is a plombier". I am ashamed to say I felt just a tiny bit smug.

[Alan H]

Alan. My husband is an engineer (wif a degree 'an all). Amusing anecdote: I was doing a beginers French class and we were asked to say a little about ourselves (in French) and our families. One woman said her husband was an engineer and the teacher asked, what kind of engineer? The woman said he was a heating engineer. "Oh no!" said the teacher "in France you must have an engineering degree to call yourself one. Your husband is a plombier". I am ashamed to say I felt just a tiny bit smug.

Hee hee hee!

Sir Monty Finniston tried to do something about this in the 1980s, but the Government failed to act on his recommendations other than changing a BSc into a BEng for engineers. The status of engineers has not increased.

[getreal]

I don't see that changing here untill the term "engineer" stops being used in place of more accurate terms, eg. technician or mechanic.

I was introduced to someone who said they were an aeronautical engineer. I assumed he designed and built aircraft. Turns out he's an auronautical technician (he maintains airoplanes). The US seem to be much stricter about the use of the term in that case (as a quick wikki search found).

It severely pisses me off when the media (usually tabloids) refer to someone as a nurse, when in fact they are a nursing assistant.

[getreal]

Well done, BBC!!

This morning on the BBCTV Breakfast show they had an item about food "allergy" and food "intolerance". There was a piece by a dietician at a london hospital (forgot which one) explaining that these are relatively rare and cationing against self diagnosis and treatment by excluding foods from the diet (usually wheat and dairy products). A short piece of film with some mad old bat (from some consumer organisation) who claimed that goats milk is not a dairy product (WTF!!! I must tell my friend who makes award winning goats milk cheese that she doesn't actually have a dairy at the farm)- this wasn't given much credence as she was just showing the range of foods available that were free from....whatever. She was not even introduced or named. Cut to studio with the friendly doctor (a GP) who made it very clear that this was more of a fad and a trend and to beware of nutritionists (she did say some were OK, but that it's an unregulated field and some are appalling) and to visit your GP or State Registered Dietician (though you'd need a refferral from your GP to see one around here).

Good job!

[Alan H]

There was a piece by a dietician at a london hospital (forgot which one)

Possibly Registered Dietitian Catherine Collins from St Georges?

I'll need to find the prog in iPlayer...