Kevin Klatt, PhD, RD

The ASN released it's official scientific statement on processed food. The text of this can be found  here . Statements regarding why some found the report controversial can be found here . The statement seems to have garnered controversy, because of its inclusion criteria for the word 'processed', and for its final conclusion. The researchers identify that the term 'processed' is quite subjective and ''value-laden''. In an attempt to develop definitions for processed foods, they categorize foods based upon data from focus groups conducted by the International Food Information Council ( a non-profit independent group that doesn't lobby - see here -  but has garnered distrust by those concerned about funding - see here ). You can find the IFIC's definitions of processed here . Source: foodinsight.org They identify processed foods as being a continuum. Many have taken issue with the idea that simply processing techniques have been inc...

I've seen this Huffington Post article trending lately across all social media sites. It's titled 'I'm Gluten Intolerant..Intolerant'. The post was written by Marc Vetri, a chef in Philadelphia (where I've lived for most of my life - his restaurants are great). You can read the full article  here . One can sympathize with Mr. Vetri's sentiments: the gluten free movement has blown up over the years. Depending on who you ask, the gluten-free industry is a several hundred million to billion dollar market -see here . The growth in market size surely hasn't reflected some astronomical increase in Celiac's Disease - in the U.S., rates are about 1% (1). The issue of non-celiacs gluten sensitivity (NCGS) is quite a controversial topic - some have accepted it as being a true condition (2), others have questioned whether it exists without an understanding of the pathophysiology (3), and some have stated that NCGS prevalence can be up to 6% of the population ...

The idea that grains are pro-inflammatory seems to be a ubiquitous belief nowadays. From medical professional friends to lay people to Crossfitter's at the bar (...drinking beer/vodka), I get the question a lot: are grains inflammatory? Source: wellnessmama.com Epidemiological evidence overwhelmingly suggest that whole grains, and dietary patterns that include whole grains, like the Mediterranean diet, are either associated with lower circulating markers of inflammation (CRP, IL-6, etc), or have a null effect (1-9). The most recent Nutrition Reviews on the topic concluded that while epidemiological evidence supports a positive effect of whole grains on inflammatory markers, intervention studies don't indicate a clear effect on markers of inflammation, and calls for additional research (10). If you're further interested in epidemiological associations with diet and inflammation, see the most recent Nutrition review (11). Since the Nutrition Reviews publication, a ran...

Disclaimer: I don't regularly drink fruit juice. I thoroughly enjoy mimosas. Update: a recent review found here comes to similar conclusions that there is sparse evidence suggesting 100 percent FJ is detrimental to nutrition/health/weight status. Everybody seems to be talking about fruit juice today, so I thought I'd jump on the bandwagon. The role of fruit juice in the diet has garnered a lot of controversy. Some have gone as far as saying it's metabolic poison , and as bad as soda . Others, including the USDA , state that fruit juice can count as a serving of fruit. Where does fruit juice fit, if anywhere? First let's take a look at what the Dietary Guidelines from 2010 (1) say: Screenshot, DGA 2010, health.gov Sounds like a pretty solid/realistic recommendation to me? Let's look at the nutrient differences. I grabbed the nutrient profiles of a typical orange (i picked the smaller of the two USDA options), 1 cup of orange juice, and Coca-Cola f...

I was on Facebook the other day, and someone in a group I'm in made a statement about not being sure whether to eat dairy, because "one week its bad, and the next its good". This is something I hear all too often from people: nutrition is complex, confusing, and constantly changing. One week 'X' is bad, the next 'X' is good. From an outsider's perspective, nutrition seems like a battlefield - low fat vs low carb vs Mediterranean vs Paleo vs Veg*n. Google any of these diets and you'll find plenty of websites saying that the government advice is wrong and they've got the perfect diet, the solution to all of your chronic woes, guarantee'ing weight loss, muscle growth, longevity, etc. Basically, if you've got an ailment, 'X' diet is the cure. I can certainly see this as being overwhelming from a non-scientist/dietitian perspective. Nutrition is confusing...right? Screenshot, DGA: 1980, health.gov From an insider's pe...

A new publication (1) in the British Journal of Nutrition has caused some controversy in the nutrition field, with many on the pro-organic side hailing it as proof that organic food really is better for you. The study is garnering headlines, such as the one on Nature's blog , that organic is more nutritious. Part of the reason this has caused some controversy is because very few studies have ever supported a nutritional benefit to consuming organic food. In 2008, a study in the Netherlands found a beneficial effect of organic milk consumption on the incidence of eczema (2). A study in the U.S. found that organic milk contained more omega 3's, though this is due more to animal feed than whether something is organic or not (the differences were also arguably irrelevant if you compare milk to other foods rich in n-3's, like flax and fish) (3). Organic tomatoes were also shown to accumulate more vitamin C and phenolic compounds (antioxidants) than conventional tomatoes, whi...