Ms. Bartolotto is a Registered Dietitian and was appointed to a panel to look at GMO labeling, but claims she was dismissed after blowing the whistle on other panel members with strong ties to Monsanto and other GMO companies and have a conflict of interest. Photo courtesy of healthyeatingrocks.com
NOTE: The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics has responded to this article. Read it here.
Health Impact News Editor Comments:
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics is in the news again. This nutrtion group seems to thrive on controversy, as we have now reported in several articles that the group wants to restrict freedom of speech in nutritional counseling all across the country by seeking to silence anyone carrying the title of “Nutritionist” or “Dietitian” and not certified by their organization. They want to be the only group allowed to give out nutritional advice in hospitals receiving funding through Medicare and Medicaid (story here), and they have actively attacked bloggers on the Internet offering nutritional services that conflict with their support of the USDA dietary guidelines (story here). Those USDA dietary guidelines, of course, are not designed to make you healthy, but to support the industries heavily subsidized by the U.S. government (wheat, corn, soy), which includes GMO crops. We have also reported how large junk food companies are financially supporting the Academy (report here).
So this story should come as no surprise that a new committee by the Academy setup to look at the GMO issue and discuss labeling requirements, contains members with strong ties to the GMO companies, and that the lone member of the panel supporting labeling of GMOs was dismissed. Look for GMO-approved food with no labeling requirements to be fully endorsed by the Academy and accepted wholeheartedly in hospitals all across the country.
Food Politics Creates Rift in Panel on Labeling
Excerpts:
The politics of genetically modified food has created a rift in a policy-setting committee of the influential Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that demonstrates the difficulty in finding anyone — anywhere — who doesn’t already have an opinion on the issue. A dietitian working on a panel charged with setting policy on genetically modified foods for the academy contends she was removed for pointing out that two of its members had ties to Monsanto, one of the biggest makers of genetically modified seeds.
In December, the academy selected seven members, including Ms. Bartolotto, who is employed by Kaiser Permanente but emphasized she was not speaking on its behalf, to serve on the Advanced Technologies in Food Production work group.
In February, Ms. Bartolotto sent an e-mail to Kari Kren, a manager of research and business development at the academy, asking about the academy’s conflict of interest policy and raising questions about two other members of the group, Marianne Smith Edge and Jennie Schmidt.
Ms. Schmidt, a dietitian who operates a farm in Maryland, won a $5,000 prize from Monsanto and is a test farmer for the company.
Ms. Smith Edge, chairwoman of the committee, is a senior vice president at the International Food Information Council, which is largely financed by food, beverage and agriculture businesses, including companies like DuPont, Bayer CropScience and Cargill, companies that were among the biggest financial opponents of the California labeling initiative.
Later, she questioned the academy’s decision to hire Christine M. Bruhn, a professor at the University of California, Davis, to write its position paper on genetically engineered foods.
Professor Bruhn, who works for the university’s agriculture extension service, was an opponent of the California labeling measure. Additionally, the university has scholarships and other programs financed by Monsanto.
But what really concerned Ms. Bartolotto was the academy’s decision that Professor Bruhn would write the paper before the work group finished its review of the scientific materials. “Why have a work group if its conclusions are not going to be the basis for the position paper?” she said in an interview.
Read the Full Article here: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/11/business/a-dismissal-raises-questions-about-objectivity-on-food-policy.html
See also:
Another advertisement/marketing tool at the McDonald’s booth at the last Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ expo.
As is par for the course for Big Food, they focus on calorie contents to distract from worrisome ingredients and poor nutrition.
A “McDouble” and chicken nuggets make the list of foods that McDonald’s considers fitting to stress to Registered Dietitians as healthier choices.
Most disturbingly, AND doesn’t seem to think there is anything problematic with this sort of messaging at their conference.
Source: Dietitians for Professional Integrity’s Facebook Page
Are America’s Nutrition Professionals in the Pocket of Big Food?