Misinformation and Disinformation in Food Science and Nutrition: Impact on Practice.

Food and nutrition are popular topics in the media and on social media. The ubiquity of social media has created new opportunities for qualified or credentialed experts in the scientific community to connect with clients and the public. It has also created challenges. Health and wellness gurus, or self-proclaimed experts, utilize social media platforms to garner attention through compelling narratives, build audience followings, and influence public opinion by sharing (often) misleading information about food and nutrition. The consequence of this can be the perpetuation of misinformation, which not only undermines a well-functioning democracy but also diminishes support for policies that are science or evidence based. Nutrition practitioners, clinician scientists, researchers, communicators, educators, and food experts need to encourage and model critical thinking (CT) to participate in our world of mass information and mitigate misinformation. These experts can play a vital role in the evaluation of information about food and nutrition against the body of evidence. This article explores the role of CT and ethics of practice in the context of misinformation and disinformation by providing a framework for engaging with clients and offering a checklist for ethical practice.

Fats in Foods: Current Evidence for Dietary Advice.

Current discussion of the importance of food fats in the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) often suffers from preconceptions, misunderstandings, insufficient knowledge, and selective reasoning. As a result, the sustained controversy about dietary fat recommendations can be contradictory and confusing. To clarify some of these issues, the International Expert Movement to Improve Dietary Fat Quality in cooperation with the International Union of Nutritional Sciences (IUNS) organized a symposium at the 21st meeting of the IUNS, October 17, 2017, Buenos Aires, Argentina, to summarize the key scientific evidence underlying the controversy on the relationship between the saturated and unsaturated fat consumption and CHD risk. Presenters also discussed, using examples, the rationale for and implications of the partial replacement of foods rich in saturated fats by those rich in unsaturated fats. Presentations included strategies to fit healthier fats into meals. This report summarizes the symposium presentations.

Consumer perception and insights on fats and fatty acids: knowledge on the quality of diet fat.

BACKGROUND: Research indicates that consumers do not understand dietary fat, either the importance of the quality or the quantity of fats needed for health. Previous consumer surveys suggest the priority placed on fat in various nutrition communications (i.e., low fat or reduction in fats) has contributed to this confusion. METHODS: This consumer study was carried out in 16 countries in two waves, investigating in total 6,426 subjects. The survey was conducted by phone, internet and face-to-face interviews, depending on the acceptable method for the population. Participants, aged 18-70 years, were the main family shopper. RESULTS: Knowledge about fat is conflicted, including which fats have health benefits; 59% of respondents think fat should be avoided, 65% think a low-fat diet is a healthy diet and 38% claim to avoid foods containing fat. Respondents were aware of different types of fats but did not know which ones were healthier. Omegas have the greatest level of recognition but at the same time many people do not realize they are fats. CONCLUSIONS: Around half of consumers do not know whether fats are good or bad, meaning they do not know what to eat.