As discussed in Making Sense of Nutrition News, Part I, nutrition research and knowledge over the past few decades grew at a staggering rate.
I’ve been adjunct (part-time) faculty over 20 years and have a unique perspective of hearing what my students know and understand about nutrition as they learn key concepts. Early on in my teaching career (pre-internet), I assigned students a project requiring them to summarize a nutrition-related current event from a newspaper or magazine. They presented their summary in class and we deciphered reliability, learning what’s credible and what’s questionable.
As the internet evolved and became the go-to place for information, our learning advanced to a virtual platform including discussion boards. A favorite discussion board topic was (and is) answering this question: Why is nutrition so confusing?
My nutrition students’ confusion over nutrition claims in media
Over the years, my students’ responses include comments like this:
- “Nutrition is confusing because it’s applicable to everyone. Everyone has their own experience and opinion and can say anything on the internet. People try to educate themselves but it’s an endless cycle of misinformation and opinion pieces.”
- “My sister won’t eat some vegetables anymore. She read somewhere they cause cancer. I’m not sure what she’s reading. I know that’s not true and told her it’s the opposite—how veggies may prevent cancer.”
- “News articles or reports get out there and maybe facts aren’t verified. The reports turn out to be untrue, yet the information is already out there. People don’t find out the truth and stick with the first info they learned.”
- “Articles written are exaggerated to get our attention. Some of the headlines are true, but researchers are testing on rats, not humans.”
- “Many studies make a bold claim and then make note about needing further research to substantiate it. One must always notice these disclaimers.”
- “One thing surprising me is that too many studies try to account for many things. From the day I started taking science classes and learning about the scientific method, my teachers made it clear that variables need to be controlled during experiments. So, why do many scientists, etc., forget the basics when performing their own experiments?”
- “One question I ask myself is why do people continue to believe these claims even after people claim they are not real?”
Good insight—score one for my students!
A closer look at nutrition news
But the abundance of information online makes it hard to sort through all the articles on any given nutrition topic and find the truth.
When looking at nutrition news, I don’t take the words in the article for face value. I take a closer look. For instance, when I reviewed references from a website touting coconut oil, many studies were either completed on rats or used an oil that is not coconut oil.
It’s important to look at exactly what is being studied and who the results apply to. While animal models are important in research, and studies might yield promising results, the research is preliminary and not definitive without human clinical trials.
In human trials, I also look at how many people were involved in the study. Studies performed on small sample sizes may hold less weight than studies involving hundreds, if not thousands, of people. To rule out a finding being “chance,” sample size ought to be large enough. If you’re averaging out the odds of something, 1 in 10 would be very different than 1 in 10,000.
Correlation is not causation
Although large sample-size studies called observational studies, like the Nurses’ Health Study, are important and add to our body of knowledge, they may provide weaker associations as opposed to the validity of a clinical study involving treatments and control groups. Correlating evidence does not prove a cause and effect. (Many things correlate as highlighted on this website. For example, as consumption of cheese rises so do the number who die getting tangled in bedsheets…hmmm.)
You might be surprised to know some headlines in the news come from information compiled in a press release. It’s important to look at news stories and find the source(s) for the nutrition news article. For example, various food associations send press releases to editors and reporters; while their press releases may cite studies, it’s not going to provide a comprehensive review of the food or product—only supporting studies.
Many study results are preliminary, like those of a phase I clinical trial, which involve under 100 people and is highly experimental. In contrast, the results of a study involving a phase IV clinical trial is not preliminary and the treatment is already being used by the public.
Other studies have yet to be peer-reviewed. The study may be online, and written by an established researcher or doctor, and posted with other research articles, but it may not have the vetting of other medical peers, as it would, say, if published in a peer-reviewed medical journal.
So, as I tell my nutrition students each semester, take a closer look. With a little research, you’ll be able to decipher what is reliable, or not. With some effort, you’ll understand what is nutrition noise and what is factual nutrition news.
Let’s chat. What confuses you?
Image credits: pixabay.com and neilyonnutrition.com
Jennifer Neily, MS, RDN, LD, FAND
Registered Dietitian Nutritionist | Wellcoach® Certified Health Coach