Kevin Klatt, PhD, RD

The discussion surrounding non-nutritive sweeteners (NNS) is one that often involves more sentiment than science. Claims regarding cancer and a litany of other conditions have been claimed and noted in the literature. These claims often fail to take into regard the concept of 'dosage'. If you are interested in understanding how the safe intake dosages were established, and address claims regarding safety of artificial/natural NNS, read these 2  recent reviews (for those who don't trust science, I'd like to note that Shankar's is quite conservative) (1,2). I'd also encourage you to read Colby Vorland's posts on this topic: here . The current study (3), published in Obesity , that's been making headlines discusses a 12 week randomized trial that looked at the effects of consuming water vs NNS beverages during a weight loss program. The participants met with either an RD or clinical psychologist weekly to discuss behavioral strategies to promote weight lo...

Amongst the movement of health-minded individuals trying to derive the perfect algorithm for optimal health, there has been a resurgence of consuming raw, or unpasteurized, unhomogenized milk. For more on their perspective, you can peruse http://www.realmilk.com/ - in summary, they push that it's 'natural' dairy and that is therefore better, making a number of claims that I'll address below. Besides the obvious naturalistic fallacy and lack of scientific backing, I always find it interesting how humans in modern society love to reinstate previously removed selective pressures. This whole camp of raw milkers also seems, to me, to be of the same mindset as the anti-vacciners. I guess everyone's a bit concerned their immune systems were getting off easy? #YODO. Anyway, do any of these claims stand up to the science? Claim 1 : Pasteurization denatures proteins - sure, pasteurization denatures proteins, so that they are no longer biologically active. This begs t...

I've mentioned before that I'm currently in the process of obtaining both my PhD and the Registered Dietitian (RD) credential. In my opinion, both are very complementary degrees that can inform/influence each other in a positive way, to make one both a better scientist and a clinician. However, at times, they clash - scientific idealism doesn't always align with clinical realism, and vice versa. My current internal monologue/debate really heated up these past couple weeks, with the release of these two seemingly contradictory articles: 1 . For the first report, see here . Dr Yoni Freedhoff, whose blog is a really great read, pointed out a number of somewhat troubling tweets from RD's at the F3K conference. The RD's took to the usual mantra of needing to work with the food industry, and tried to absolve the sins of processed foods. To quote one RD's twitter, "Healthy eating requires - balance of foods, right portions, & proper prep. Don't worry a...

There are a lot of different thought processes in nutrition. When it comes to employing nutrition research at a population level, there seems to be 2 lines of thought: good enough and perfection. I title this Chocolate Milk and Juice because these are two areas where the debate gets quite heated and you can see these polarized perspectives: Chocolate Milk - Milk is a great source of nutrients, like protein, riboflavin, calcium and (fortified) Vitamins A&D. In America, we have food policy that's made milk production super cheap (when compared to other nations, like India) and milk widely available - it's our society's chosen source of readily available calcium. We all know calcium is extremely important for bone health, and its particularly critical to absorb enough calcium throughout growth and development, to achieve peak bone mass and delay the onset of osteoporosis later in life. However, alongside all of the nutrients in milk, chocolate milk contains a significa...