Researchers have reviewed the diets of the top 9 health bloggers in the UK, so determine whether their diets and advice are healthy. Only 1 met the criteria, which is interesting:
news.sky.com/story/dieters-...
I'll obviously qualify this, that we don't know whose sites were reviewed, and we also don't know what the criteria for rating the blogs. The only person to pass was a qualified nutritional therapist, so that helps narrow it down a little!
This is really interesting, and perhaps not surprising. A number of news organizations have reported this study, but I've not yet been able to find the original paper, probably because it's not yet been presented at a conference.
Personally it really annoys me when academics try to get exposure for themselves by sending out press releases like this without making the paper itself available.
This seems to be the press release.
eurekalert.org/pub_releases...
Yes, it doesn't surprise me! I'm really quite curious to know whose advice is believed to be the most sound. But perhaps they're not publishing the paper yet, until they've sorted out the legalities? I imagine they'd have to name (and shame) the blogs, which might be risky ground.
"transparency, evidence-based references, trustworthiness and adherence to nutritional guidance, and bias"
If your doctor gives you advice - do you demand or expect a full bibliography for everything they tell you?
We expect bias from universities - where does their funding come from?
Does the nutritional guidance still advocate low-fat high carbohydrate?
I am glad to see that they used Public Health England's info.
I'm not demanding a full bibliography, just the paper being referred to.
It's only through reading it will we find out the specifics of the nutritional guidance they use.
As for bias, all research and all writing on health is potentially biased or subject to conflicts of interest. It's only through a critical reading of them can we find out how reliable their claims actually are.
This is interesting and I'm glad that the nutritional therapist was giving sound advice.
So thanks for sharing it as its food for thought thats for sure. 😊
What's worrying is that it seems one blog was run by a GP, and her blog apparently failed...
This prompts a few thoughts:
Never believe anything you read in the news.
Perhaps it is the UK nutritional guidelines that are wrong.
Bear in mind that much of the WHO & NHS guidelines and standard advice are 50 to 100 years behind current research, which is on the internet for anyone to read.
What benefit are qualifications if what they teach is out of date or biased?
...but the NHS has benefited me - and I have benefited from hundreds of thousands of pounds worth of treatment.
Yes, I know what you mean - I'd like to see their qualifying factors. But I suppose that even if we updated our definition of a healthy diet, 8 of the 9 bloggers would probably still be wrong! Our definition of "healthy diet" appears to be completely open to interpretation...
Best not to trust any of them...encourage people to come on to the healthy eating forum where you get good advice and no biased nonsense.
Hi Cooper27
I'll try to keep my eyes open to find the study - it would be interesting to see the comparisons.
Zest 
Today is the start of Mental Health week for children, 
Health Anxiety
High fat health guru has heart attack, aged 51
