<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blind men and an elephant</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/blind-men-and-an-elephant/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/blind-men-and-an-elephant/</link>
	<description>Food and nutrition blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2014 04:05:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Janice Bremer</title>
		<link>http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/blind-men-and-an-elephant/comment-page-1/#comment-1413</link>
		<dc:creator>Janice Bremer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Mar 2012 01:54:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.foodinfo.org.nz/?p=411#comment-1413</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We do know what we need to eat. The comprehensive inclusion of evidence-based, health-protective or therapeutic components within dietary patterns leaves only a small margin for inclusion of foods and ingredients we do not need to eat. Nevertheless, any debate produces evidence:  of 45 social networking responses to the reported list of foods ‘we don’t need’ found on the TV One web-site, 11 appeared to agree with the advice, 6 suggested the research was already known and not needed, 12 raised further discussion around ‘moderation’ but without disagreement, 3 introduced other topics, and 13 appeared to disapprove of the advice.    

I suggest that messages will be clear when confined only to the evidence that applies to the population studied, the research question asked and the strength of the evidence. Such messages require repeating as many times as is necessary to counter any ‘popular wisdom’ that might evolve from unqualified and repetitive, personal viewpoints commentated via social, advertising or media networking.  Evidence-based dietary advice is not elusive, but since all humans eat, I defy anyone to always eat without a ‘white hat’.  

1. Mann JI. Evidence-based nutrition: Does it differ from evidence-based medicine? Ann Med. 2010;42:475-86. 
2. Finlay A McAlister, Sean van Diepen, Rajdeep S Padwal, Jeffrey A Johnson, Sumit R Majumdar. How Evidence-Based Are the Recommendations in Evidence-Based Guidelines?  PLoS Med. 2007; 4(8): e250. 
3. Truswell AS. Some problems with Cochrane reviews of diet and chronic disease. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005;59 Suppl 1:S150-4; discussion S195-6.
4. Rosenfeld  RM, Shiffman R.  Clinical practice guideline development manual: A quality-driven approach for translating evidence into action. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009; 140(6 Suppl 1): S1–43.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>We do know what we need to eat. The comprehensive inclusion of evidence-based, health-protective or therapeutic components within dietary patterns leaves only a small margin for inclusion of foods and ingredients we do not need to eat. Nevertheless, any debate produces evidence:  of 45 social networking responses to the reported list of foods ‘we don’t need’ found on the TV One web-site, 11 appeared to agree with the advice, 6 suggested the research was already known and not needed, 12 raised further discussion around ‘moderation’ but without disagreement, 3 introduced other topics, and 13 appeared to disapprove of the advice.    </p>
<p>I suggest that messages will be clear when confined only to the evidence that applies to the population studied, the research question asked and the strength of the evidence. Such messages require repeating as many times as is necessary to counter any ‘popular wisdom’ that might evolve from unqualified and repetitive, personal viewpoints commentated via social, advertising or media networking.  Evidence-based dietary advice is not elusive, but since all humans eat, I defy anyone to always eat without a ‘white hat’.  </p>
<p>1. Mann JI. Evidence-based nutrition: Does it differ from evidence-based medicine? Ann Med. 2010;42:475-86.<br />
2. Finlay A McAlister, Sean van Diepen, Rajdeep S Padwal, Jeffrey A Johnson, Sumit R Majumdar. How Evidence-Based Are the Recommendations in Evidence-Based Guidelines?  PLoS Med. 2007; 4(8): e250.<br />
3. Truswell AS. Some problems with Cochrane reviews of diet and chronic disease. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2005;59 Suppl 1:S150-4; discussion S195-6.<br />
4. Rosenfeld  RM, Shiffman R.  Clinical practice guideline development manual: A quality-driven approach for translating evidence into action. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009; 140(6 Suppl 1): S1–43.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
