- cross-posted to:
- worldnews
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews
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 Nestlé, 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.
You must log in or # to comment.
I would like more details on what “ties” means, since US Right To Know is a well known pseudoscience and fearmongering group, pushing anti-vaccine nonsense among other things. It doesn’t help that “big agriculture, ultra-processed food companies, pharmaceutical companies and other corporate organizations” is ridiculously broad.
Yes, people on a food and nutrition panel are going to have some tie to…food and nutrition as a field. That’s not a surprising statement.
And how they are connected to the specific companies listed needs explaining, since the US Right To Know group has in the past claimed that any form of email conversation or a company donating to a university someone works at counts as ties.
Thanks for this context.
They’re one of the groups with a long history going back decades of fearmongering about biotechnology. Since I’m a molecular biologist (and active in the skeptic and scientific communication areas), I’ve known about them for a while.
They’re closely tied with the Organic Consumer’s Association, which is even more insane on the pseudoscience, pushing things like chemtrails.
They make ya gay dontchano.
A rational view is much appreciated. Though I’m usually calm, sometimes the urge to go *Pitchfork!" gets to us all. This was my moment until I saw your top comment.
Regardless of that, we all know that snack food companies don’t have the public’s health in their best interest.
What about Big Egg though
They’re in cahoots with Big Bacon, Big Cereal and Big Dairy in order to inform you about “a balanced nutritional breakfast”!
I put a link to their report in my comment - here’s another reference, go to page 8. I see nothing in the report indicating that the people listed are still working for the companies accused in the article.
I wish I could be shocked and horrified but this just seems like par for the course at this point
I’m honestly astonished that it was less than half.
9 had strong ties, but 4 had moderate or loose ties, so it’s more like 65%.
Your cynicism is useless and even irritating. The purpose of commenting is contributing to the subject.
Your pedantism is useless and even irritating. The purpose of commenting is contributing to the subject.
Pointing out the one purpose of commenting is pedantism? Ok contrarian. And why are you regurgitating my comment? If you had made the effort to read it, your comment wouldn’t have been made, ironically.
You need to get the stick out of your ass buddy. Not every comment needs to “add something to the conversation”. People make comments as jokes, like me copying your comment, but you clearly don’t understand jokes.
You’re the one who needs to get the stick out of his ass, imagine if 380 upvoters were self centered enough to comment their “funny” jokes, comment section would be unusable. Original comment wasn’t even a joke, just cynicism. Stop being a self centered twat and follow basic etiquette, you’re not that funny
Damn, I see it’s lodged way up there, you may want to see a doctor about that!
Apparently you’ve never been on Reddit either.
Nice retort, no arguments, no wonder you defend shitty comments you aren’t capable of anything better. Also reddit being bad is an excuse for you to do the same here? Can you like type 1 smart thing for once?
Holy shit after going through your comment history I can see you’re busy fighting the good fight. Good luck fighting cynicism and technology/windows hate, I couldn’t take it anymore and just blocked like all the tech forums here, the people are insufferable to anything against their echos.
deleted by creator
Bro I use both windows and Linux I’m just not a fanboi of either so I’m sorry I don’t fit within your world of extremes.
I run windows with straight defender built in and I’ve never gotten a virus. Hell, last time I got a virus on windows I was like 17 and downloading pirated games. Ever since I got a job and could afford to buy my games on steam I’ve been fine.
You guys blow this shit way out of proportion for just some Linux love. Which while a beautifully efficient OS, sometimes you just want to use a more polished ecosystem.
No viruses unless u install random exes and what do updates break? And how are weekly updates a negative? Do you like out of date software? Is that what linux is like? Youre scraping the bottom of the barrel for arguments. Sounds like youre the one vulnerable to viruses without weekly updates lmao
Wym windows is one time payment, stable, easy to use and no devs target linux, hannah montana OS maintained by Derek is free and open source.
deleted by creator
I’m not a server nor an appliance so idk what’s your point here
But I am. brb, distro-hopping to hannah montana linux now
Differences aside this was actually hilarious
No way… people who are experts in the food/health industry are involved with giving dietary advice? The horror.
Of course there isn’t a link to the reports, so I have to go looking for it. Anyway here’s the report. PDF - page 8 for the results. I spot-checked a few of them - the conflicts of interest I saw was in the form of companies sponsoring research done. …which is pretty much how the majority of research gets done I believe…
Also I see coca-cola referenced ONCE as a “possible” COI
Position in industry-sponsored conferences: Dr. Booth was selected to speak at a conference sponsored by Bayer, Coca-Cola, and Abbott, among other industry actors
yet this article seems to deem it alright to put it as the posterboy image and list it prominently among other unpopular company names. Also they have to link to their boogeyman reporting about aspartame. You can see where HN tore it apart here.
This is why I hate news nowadays. I could’ve made some good food in the past 20 minutes on a nice Saturday, but instead I wasted time finding out a guardian article was bullshit.
Well see, your problem is you’re fact checking things and reading the article.
This used to be all “conspiracies” and some folks got picked on for pointing this shit out. It turned out that there is no such thing as “conspiracies”, literally everything you hear is real. It’s all a giant mob. They look out for each other. Who gives a fuck about people, as long as their pockets are lined up.
deleted by creator
You think they became corrupt after they got the position or did they get the position because they were corrupt?
deleted by creator
Mix of both. Some probably got paid to go there and lobby for said company or product. Others are probably thinking of potential jobs for after. We all know private sectors always pay more than government jobs.
Regulatory capture is out of control.
