Are those cheery ads, featuring celebrities with a milk mustache, actually beckoning you towards a shorter life and telomeres? Or is this just another "nutritional nowhere" situation? A recent study reports definitively, perhaps.
A controversial article on red meat had an unintended consequence: it unmasked the ties between science and industry. Not the meat industry, but the "anti-meat" health-advocacy industry, which reaches into academia and commercial interests. JAMA takes a stance. Good for them, which is good for us.
Acai breakfast bowls are available in nearly every trendy smoothie and juice bar. But if you haven’t indulged in this particular "superfood" fad yet, you haven’t missed out. Turns out acai bowls don’t actually provide a healthy start to the day after all. That's because they're nutritionally equivalent to three bowls of Froot Loops.
A new study looks at how the American diet has changed after 17 years of cajoling. It's time to begin thinking outside the box -- pizza or otherwise.
Given the ridiculous headline "Broccoli Is Dying. Corn Is Toxic. Long Live Microbiomes!," the article, written by a retired English teacher, makes one outrageous, unscientific claim after another. Let's dissect them one by one.
Certain foods, due to their effect on blood sugar levels, precipitate the release of molecules which are associated with inflammation. Excessive consumption of refined carbohydrates, french fries or soda isn't going to trigger that response. While those who eat this way may have significant negative health issues, it won't be due to so-called “inflammatory” foods. To suggest so is junk-science and a lack of common sense.
We know health's basics including making good choices about nutritious foods. That said, are subsidies and large scale federal programs the best way to support healthful choices?
Bloomberg's recent hit piece on milk touches upon almost every sensitive issue that worries parents: food, school and their children. Toss in a conspiracy theory about "Big Dairy," and that's how Bloomberg came up with a fear-mongering headline, complete with a disgusting photo that is supposed to make readers feel queasy.
Dr. Edward Archer believes that nutrition science is not just misguided but actually harmful. That's an extraordinary statement that requires extraordinary evidence. Does he provide it in his latest paper?
Substitute the word "Halloween" for any celebratory event and pervasive worry-lists abound. Fun also matters.
Food labels serve one purpose, and one purpose only: To provide nutritional information to consumers. The process by which a food is produced is not relevant to its nutritional content or safety profile. Therefore, products made using animal cell culture techniques absolutely should not require special labeling.
Some studies are so incredibly stupid, one wonders how they get published in any scientific journal, let alone a prestigious one. And yet, it's happened once again. A new study in JAMA Internal Medicine claims that eating organic food will reduce a person's risk of developing cancer. You got it right: Magic prevents cancer.