Practice Paper of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics:
Communicating Accurate Food and
Nutrition Information
ABSTRACT
Consumers are increasingly interested in food and nutrition
information and the channels for receiving information
are expanding at a fast pace. This scenario provides new
opportunities for registered dietitians (RDs) to reach diverse
audiences with credible nutrition messages. However, it
is also more challenging to be heard in an increasingly
competitive communications environment where information
is sometimes inaccurate but believed by the public. RDs
must actively take steps to position themselves as reliable
sources of science-based food and nutrition information and
communicate through a variety of new media and traditional
channels. RDs are uniquely qualified to evaluate and interpret
nutrition research within the context of the body of science,
and appropriately translate the findings into positive and
practical food and diet advice for the public. Resources are
provided to help RDs evaluate nutrition research, stay abreast
of the latest food and nutrition information, and effectively
communicate science-based information in a variety of
formats.
Today’s rapidly-changing food and nutrition information
environment offers benefits and drawbacks for those in
the dietetics profession and consumers alike. Registered
dietitians (RDs) can communicate messages to a broader
audience and through multiple media channels. Consumers
can readily access these channels for information on the
relationship between the foods they eat and health. Yet
the volume of available nutrition information in print,
broadcast, and electronic media presents challenges to RDs,
who find it increasingly more difficult to be heard above the
noise. For consumers, the lines between misinformation and
accurate, science-based food and nutrition information are
difficult to discern (1).
so. Education and credentials are not required to dispense
nutrition information and advice. Misinformation can be
propagated by an inexperienced reporter, misinterpretation
of study results, and/or an unqualified company
spokesperson (4), or can be biased to sell products or
services, to discredit other sources or products, or to
promote a particular agenda. Consumers who seek nutrition
information through an Internet search engine may get
millions of results, without any type of filter or rating system
to distinguish the quality of the source.
Consumers are highly interested in food and nutrition
information. The percentage of consumers who actively seek
information about nutrition and healthful eating has more
than doubled from 19% in 2000 to 46% in 2011 (2). Media
sources of information are vast, including classic formats such
as television, radio, newspapers, and magazines; new media
such as Web sites, blogs, video sites, social networking services,
phone applications (apps), and consumer-generated content;
advertising; and food packages themselves. Individuals
dispensing food and nutrition information are also diverse,
with RDs joined by other health professionals, the food
industry, personal trainers, health food store employees, and
credentialed or non-credentialed “experts.”
A striking feature of this changing landscape is the
“democratization of health information” (3), with those
conveying information not always the best qualified to do
The disparity between information and misinformation
results in part from the conflicting goals, perspectives, biases,
and agendas of the involved parties (5,6). The media strive
to present information in a simple, absolute way while
informing and entertaining the reader (6). Scares, scandals,
conflicts, and sensational headlines can be more exciting,
compelling, and profitable to report than substantiated
science. Industry-sponsored information may be
scientifically accurate but present only one perspective. RDs,
as members of the science community, have a responsibility
to fairly present food and nutrition research with their
underlying uncertainties, and to acknowledge the ongoing
evolution of the science while also offering actionable tips to
the consumer.
How can RDs help consumers differentiate between accurate
food and nutrition information—a product of significant
scientific agreement from studies that have withstood peer
review and can be replicated—and food and nutrition
misinformation that consists of erroneous, incomplete, or
Figure 1. Sources of nutrition information 2011. Reprinted from Nutrition and You: Trends 2011 (2).
misleading statements that sound credible and may or may
not be based in science? The goal of this practice paper is to
equip RDs with strategies and resources to:
•
position themselves as reliable sources of science-based
food and nutrition information in multiple media
formats;
•
provide accurate, science-based, practical food and
nutrition information through a variety of channels,
including new social and electronic media and within
their limitations of space and time;
•
effectively communicate with a variety of audiences
such as consumers, media, other health professionals
and colleagues, and provide them with reliable nutrition
information sources;
•
use strategies to evaluate and communicate nutrition
research within the context of the body of science on the
topic; and
•
guide other communicators such as reporters, bloggers,
and health professionals to reliable food and nutrition
information sources.
TODAY’S INFORMATION LANDSCAPE—A WHOLE
NEW WORLD
The availability of food and nutrition information has
exploded, with millions to billions of hits when consumers use
Internet search engines to find information on food, nutrition,
diet, and weight loss. As consumers make hundreds of
food-related decisions each day (7), they also turn to various
resources, traditional and new, including social media (8) and
thousands of phone apps pertaining to food (9).
Despite the growing popularity of the electronic media,
television and magazines continue to be widely used sources
of food and nutrition information (Figure 1). The survey,
Nutrition and You: Trends 2011, found that 67% of those
interviewed said they got their information from television (up
from 63% in the 2008 survey) and 41% named magazines
as a top source (down from 45% in 2008) (2). The Internet
was virtually tied for second place, mentioned by 40% of
respondents (up from 24% in 2008 and 13% in 2002). The
Internet and other forms of electronic media are likely to
continue growing. Traditional newspapers dropped from 33%
in 2002 to 20% in 2011, as readers switched to online access
to news and information. As summarized in the April 2011
issue of the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, the
publishing industry—newspapers, books, magazines, trade
publications—is rapidly moving toward electronic delivery of
information (10).
The discrepancy between popularity and credibility of
information sources is striking. Only 11% of respondents
considered television—the most popular information
source—as very credible, 17% mentioned the Internet,
and 14% mentioned magazines in the 2011 survey. Health
clubs/gyms and personal trainers were cited by 26% and
31% of respondents, respectively. RDs and nutritionists
topped the credibility list at 71% each but were not named
as primary sources of information (2). Results were similar
in the International Food Information Council 2011 Food
& Health Survey (11). The media—Internet, cooking
shows, television, and magazines—were commonly named
as information sources for guiding food and nutrition
practices, while RDs were mentioned by only 9% of
respondents. Consumer recognition of RDs as a source of
2
Nutrition research, policy, and positions
•
•
Evidence Analysis Library (www.andevidencelibrary.com; free to
Academy members, subscriptions available to nonmembers)
Evidence-based answers to numerous dietetic practice questions
provided by an objective and transparent methodology to assess
food and nutrition-related research. Includes a tutorial to learn more
about the evidence-based practice process.
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics
(www.andjrnl.org; free to Academy members, subscriptions
available to nonmembers)
Original, peer-reviewed articles advance professional knowledge of
nutrition research and practice.
•
US Department of Agriculture’s Nutrition Evidence Library
(www.nutritionevidencelibrary.com)
Systematic reviews on food and nutrition research to inform federal
nutrition policy and programs.
•
National Institutes of Health National Center for
Complementary and Alternative Medicine Resources for Health
Care Providers (nccam.nih.gov/health/providers)
Access to evidence-based information on complementary and
alternative medicine including dietary supplements, herbs, and
probiotics.
•
US National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health
(www.nlm.nih.gov)
Resources include: PubMed.gov, a free searchable database of more
than 20 million citations and abstracts in the fields of medicine and
health; and MedlinePlus (www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus), a source
for consumer-friendly information about diseases, conditions, and
wellness issues.
•
The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality
(www.ahrq.gov)
A knowledge base for effective practices in health and health care.
•
Cochrane Reviews (www.cochrane.org/cochrane-reviews)
Systematic reviews of primary research in human health care and
health policy.
•
•
Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2010 (www.cnpp.usda.gov/
DGAs2010-PolicyDocument.htm)
The US government’s evidence-based nutritional guidance to
promote health, reduce the risk of chronic diseases, and reduce the
prevalence of overweight and obesity through improved nutrition
and physical activity.
Academy Position and Practice Papers
(www.eatright.org/positions)
Position papers reflect the Academy’s stance on food, nutrition, and
health issues. Practice papers are evaluative summaries of scientific
information and/or practical application that address memberidentified practice topics.
•
IFIC Review. How to Understand and Interpret Food and HealthRelated Scientific Studies (http://bit.ly/GB9hU5)
A guide to help media, health professionals, and educators critically
review scientific research.
Nutrition information, news, and issues
•
Academy Knowledge Center (www.eatright.org/knowledgecenter)
Staff responds to Academy member requests for information by
e-mail at [email protected] or by phone at 800/877-1600, ext.
4853 or 4784.
•
Daily News (www.eatright.org/dailynews)
A daily newsletter informing Academy members of selected news
affecting food, nutrition, and health.
•
Food & Nutrition magazine. (foodandnutritionmag.org)
Nutrition news and resources from the Academy.
•
Hot Topics (www.eatright.org/About/Content.aspx?id=10614)
Short, concise practice and science-based information about
emerging areas of food, nutrition, and health to help answer
questions from patients/clients and the media.
•
Academy Nutrition & Healthy Eating Web site (science.eatright.org)
Reliable, credible scientific content from the Evidence Analysis Library
rewritten for the general public.
•
Consumer Diet and Lifestyle Book Reviews
(www.eatright.org/dietreviews)
Diet book reviews by current and former Academy spokespeople.
Communication skills
•
Improving Public Understanding. Guidelines for Communicating
Emerging Science on Nutrition, Food Safety, and Health for
Journalists, Scientists, and Other Communicators. Harvard
School of Public Health and International Food Information Council
Foundation (http://bit.ly/GBlgyK )
Guidelines to help communicators foster sound science and
improved public understanding.
•
Working with the Media: A Handbook for Members of the
American Dietetic Association (http://www.eatright.org/
Members/content.aspx?id=11126)
A guide to developing productive working relationships with the
media and as well as interviewing skills.
•
Develop an Online Presence (www.eatright.org/Members/content.
aspx?id=7272)
Resources for Academy members to communicate online by
creating a Web site, podcasting, blogging, and utilizing social
networking and streaming videos.
Figure 2. Resources for communicating science-based food and nutrition information.
food information is far below that of doctors and other
medical professionals (28%) and grocery stores (28%). Only
2% mentioned learning about food safety from an RD, but
RDs were named as a more trusted source of food safety
information than any media outlet.
resources for communicating science-based food and nutrition
information are listed in Figure 2.
The evolving communications environment offers RDs
a growing number of opportunities to provide accurate
information on food and nutrition and help others to
identify reliable sources of information. This practice paper
spotlights four contemporary arenas in which RDs can offer
expertise—traditional media, electronic media, industry, and
evaluating and communicating nutrition research. Additional
Over the past several years, traditional media have been
shaken by economic and workforce pressures, with lasting
effects on the way they operate. The change in print
newspapers is particularly noticeable. A combination of
factors, including the recession and a trend toward local and
electronic media, contributed to a 20% drop in the number
of daily newspapers between 1970 and 2009, with net paid
TRADITIONAL MEDIA: STRATEGIES FOR WORKING
WITH BROADCAST AND PRINT
3
circulation dropping 25% over the same time period (12).
It is estimated that newsrooms have lost 1,000 to 1,500
newsroom jobs since 2000 (13). The Pew Research Center
notes that as newsrooms become smaller and traditional
journalists carry a greater workload, an increasing amount of
content is contributed by bloggers, local unpaid columnists,
semi-professional reporters, and freelance writers who may
not have a mastery of science reporting. Lay journalists may
feel comfortable reporting on nutrition by interviewing and
quoting other health professionals or non-accredited sources
rather than RDs.
The print magazine industry also is changing as magazines
incorporate digital platforms. Hard hit by the recession,
a large number of magazines folded in 2008 and 2009;
however, 2010 saw a net gain in the number of magazines,
led by the introduction of 28 new food magazines (13).
Competition from cable and Internet programming is
shrinking the network television news audience. To cut costs,
networks have downsized newsroom staff and turned to field
reporters who write, shoot, and edit their own stories. Across
traditional media, strained time and resources mean that the
quality of reporting and fact checking may be inconsistent.
This puts the onus on RDs to uphold high standards in
order to ensure that their communications are science-based
and accurate.
•
Help the reporter overcome time limitations. Today’s
rapid pace of communication may make it difficult
for reporters to investigate stories adequately to
ensure accuracy (6). To be a valued source, follow hot
topics and know where to go to get reliable, accurate
information quickly. Explain complex topics succinctly
and summarize key points clearly and simply. Space
limitations and time constraints may result in quotes
being shortened or taken out of context, so keeping
messages brief and balanced is critical.
•
Stay current with scientific literature and its
interpretation. Utilize Academy resources such as the
Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Food &
Nutrition magazine, Daily News e-mail updates, “New in
Review” abstracts and citations, Academy position and
practice papers, and the Evidence Analysis Library for
updates and interpretations (Figure 2). Recognize that
science-based conclusions may differ among food and
nutrition practitioners, as well as among professionals and
organizations in other health disciplines.
•
Balance the story. Tactfully inquire about the source
of the story idea. The reporter may be responding to
information received from industry, a public relations
firm, or a university publicity office presenting its
perspective on study or survey results (14). A 2008 study
found that at least one-third of health news stories in
the United States were based on a press release (15).
By their nature, press releases may present only select
study findings and may not discuss study limitations or
alternate conclusions (16).
•
Explain science in clear, easy-to-understand terms.
Discuss whether findings are consistent with a large
body of research and explain how they are relevant to a
particular audience, utilizing information in Academy
position papers, practice papers, and the Evidence
Analysis Library, as well as the positions of other credible
medical and health professional associations. Give sciencebased, actionable suggestions to help consumers interpret
and personalize the information (4).
•
Present the reporter with valid conclusions and sound
messages. General reporters, freelance writers, and
unpaid writers may not have the background or time to
understand or explain research findings, limitations, and
implications (4). RDs can help position messages within
the context of current science and dietary guidance.
Citing the conclusions of Academy position papers helps
establish credibility and summarize scientific consensus
on specific areas of research.
•
Adhere to ethical standards. The Academy Code of
Ethics guides RDs in their professional practice and
conduct, including communicating food and nutrition
information while avoiding or disclosing any conflicts of
interest. The following Code of Ethics principles apply to
the provision of information (17):
The following guidelines can help RDs effectively and
accurately communicate food and nutrition information
through traditional media channels:
• Understand the media’s mission. While print and
broadcast reporters want to be accurate, their primary
goal is to sell papers or magazines or attract viewers or
listeners, and they often do this with enticing headlines
and story leads (4). RDs can help ensure that the
information beyond the headline or lead is balanced
and solid, and that messages are tempered with
scientific perspective.
• Be a proactive source for the media. Cultivate and
reach out to media contacts with information and
interpretation on food and nutrition science and
news. Add value by providing the media with contact
information for additional credentialed professionals
who can help the reporter understand food and
nutrition news, put scientific findings into context,
and provide a different perspective. Recommend the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics spokesperson
program, which offers qualified, trained food and
nutrition practitioners who are easily accessible to
the media on a wide range of issues. Facilitating
such access can help ensure the accuracy of food and
nutrition information. RDs need to position and
actively market their blogs and social media platforms,
contributing comments to and crosslinking with other
blogs and Web sites to become more visible in the
electronic media world.
4
•
Who owns and operates the Web site?
•
What is the purpose of the Web site?
•
What are the background, affiliation, and credentials of the researchers and sources involved with and cited on the Web site?
•
Does the site say who wrote the copy or how it was approved?
•
Does the site indicate when the information was posted?
•
Does information reference peer-reviewed journals and evidence-based analyses?
•
Are references provided?
•
Does the Web site differentiate fact from opinion?
•
Does the information cover more than one perspective on an issue?
•
Is the information balanced and does it state any caveats?
Figure 3. Questions to ask and communicate regarding the credibility of Web sites. Adapted from references 1 and 23.
Principle 6: The dietetics practitioner does not
engage in false or misleading practices or
communications.
b. The dietetics practitioner promotes or
endorses specific goods or products
only in a manner that is not false and
misleading.
c. The dietetics practitioner provides
accurate and truthful information in
communicating with the public.
Principle 13:The dietetics practitioner presents
reliable and substantiated information
and interprets controversial information
without personal bias, recognizing that
legitimate differences of opinion exist.
Principle 15:The dietetics practitioner is alert to the
occurrence of a real or potential conflict
of interest and takes appropriate action
whenever a conflict arises.
a. The dietetics practitioner makes full
disclosure of any real or perceived
conflict of interest.
ELECTRONIC MEDIA: ENSURING THE QUALITY OF
INFORMATION
The explosion of electronic media has changed the ways that
consumers access information. In 2010, consumers spent
28.4% more time on mobile devices than they did in 2009,
a higher rate of increase than for any other medium; Internet
use grew by a steady 6% while magazines and newspapers
declined by 9% over the same time period (18). It is estimated
that multi-tasking adolescents and teens are exposed to media
close to 11 hours daily, much of it via television, mobile
devices such as smartphones, and video games (19). The
industry is changing so rapidly that it is virtually impossible to
predict the specific changes in media channels in the coming
years. What is known is that credible, science-based food and
nutrition communications must continually evolve in order to
secure a place in electronic media (20).
The ways in which RDs can provide food and nutrition
information have expanded beyond the printed word. With
the Internet as a gateway, RDs connect with consumers
through not only traditional materials in an e-print format
but also podcasts, videos, blogs, discussion forums (10), text
messages, social media, and Web sites that incorporate several
of these features.
Electronic media is fraught with misinformation. Online
content is not overseen by any regulatory agency and is not
checked for accuracy. As a result, Web sites that feature sound,
science-based content coexist with Web sites containing
questionable, inaccurate, or alarming nutrition information.
Furthermore, Web site designers often utilize search engine
optimization and search engine marketing tools to improve
the visibility of their Web sites. Since search engines do not
differentiate between accurate and inaccurate content in their
rankings, top-ranked food and nutrition sites are as likely to
contain misinformation as scientifically-backed information.
Web sites that rank high using a search engine often are less
accurate than those listed on a government Web portal (21).
Because of the prevalence of misinformation and “urban
health myths” in electronic media, it is crucial for RDs to
provide accurate, evidence-based advice about food and
nutrition when communicating using electronic media. The
following guidelines can help RDs direct consumers toward
quality electronic information and sources:
•
Communicate accurate, science-based food and
nutrition information. Consumers lack the education
and experience to differentiate between sound science and
misinformation. A role of RDs is to distill evidence-based
science into easy-to-understand, actionable advice for
consumers.
•
Become familiar with guidelines for medical and
health information Web sites. For example, Health On
the Net Foundation (www.hon.ch), a United Nationssponsored non-profit, non-governmental organization
dedicated to protecting citizens from misleading health
5
information, sets ethical standards for Web site developers
and promotes and guides the deployment of useful and
reliable online health information. Health On the Net
also certifies trustworthy Web sites and offers a search
engine for accurate medical information.
• Help consumers access trusted information. Refer
them to Academy resources such as the public portal of
the Academy Web site at www.eatright.org/public, and
the Kids Eat Right Web site at www.eatright.org/kids.
Web sites that utilize health professionals as authors
and editors or are sponsored by government or private
health organizations such as the National Institutes of
Health and the Mayo Clinic were among those most
likely to provide advice consistent with sound nutrition
guidance (22).
•
•
•
View Web sites with a critical eye. Because search
engines do not differentiate based on quality or credibility,
it is incumbent upon RDs to critically evaluate Web
sites before contributing to or recommending them.
Reputable health agencies and associations, including the
National Cancer Institute (23) and the Academy (1), have
formulated questions to ask to ascertain the credibility
of Web sites (Figure 3). However, credibility may not
correlate with accuracy (24,25).
Educate consumers to differentiate between
commercial and non-commercial messaging for
children. Commercial Web sites, particularly those that
feature familiar characters or celebrities, can be highly
appealing to children. Over 80% of commercial Web sites
with designated children’s areas were found to utilize kidfriendly “advergames” as a strategy to promote products
by delivering advertising in a game format (26,27). It
is recommended that commercial messages targeted to
children both encourage them to choose foods that make
meaningful contributions to a healthful diet (nutrientrich choices from all five food groups) and limit their
exposure to foods that are sources of saturated fat, trans
fat, added sugars, and sodium (28). The Academy’s Kids
Eat Right Web site provides parents and caretakers with
scientifically-based nutrition and health information.
Help consumers recognize qualified authors. Nutrition
communications are unique in that everyone eats and
therefore may consider himself or herself to be a food
and nutrition “expert” (6). Electronic media has made
it easy for unqualified authors to present their views
alongside those of food and nutrition practitioners.
RDs are encouraged to identify Web sites, blogs, and
social media sponsored by professional associations
such as the Academy, government health agencies, and
health organizations that utilize credentialed authors
to provide content and that peer-review their articles
prior to acceptance for publication. Blogs written by
RDs may be a source of scientifically-based information
and interpretation. The Nutrition Blog Network (www.
nutritionblognetwork.com) was among the first sites
to aggregate blogs written by RDs who are approved
through the site’s application process. Among the criteria
for approval are that the blog must be written by an
RD, primarily educational, and evidence-based. To
aid the consumer in recognizing credible sources, RDs
always should include their credentials when identifying
themselves in the media and to the public.
•
Distinguish between opinion and fact when blogging.
Health and medical blogs typically serve as a platform for
providing commentary rather than presenting scientific
findings (29), a distinction that may not be apparent to
consumers. RD bloggers can be more effective promoters
of accurate food and nutrition information by writing
in a way that identifies content as science-based fact or
judgment based on research findings and professional
expertise. Opinion should be guided by accuracy
and balance. Include links to article abstracts, health
organizations, and other sources of reliable information.
•
Contribute to the online conversation. Be an e-presence
who provides accurate information and actively corrects
food and nutrition misinformation. Add comments and
clarifications to blogs and posts to correct or explain
information and enter into an online dialogue with
readers. Direct them to trusted food and nutrition
sources for additional information. When providing
information on professional listservs, include scientific
references or authoritative sources, or make it clear that
the information is professional opinion. In addition,
RDs must serve as the gatekeeper for contributions and
comments to their Web site, blog, Facebook page, and
other electronic sites. This helps ensure that consumers
receive accurate information and are not “hijacked” to
sites that promote products, present unsubstantiated
points of view, or have malicious intent.
INDUSTRY COMMUNICATIONS: NEW STRATEGIES
FOR WORKING WITH INDUSTRY
RDs have moved beyond more traditional industry
positions in business, marketing, and communications
into opportunities to serve as consultants; writers; speakers;
and media (including social media) spokespersons for food
companies, commodity groups, and trade associations.
Inherent in these positions is the communication of
information regarding specific foods and food products. The
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) guidelines on endorsements
and testimonials can help guide RDs in their work with food
and nutrition businesses (30).
•
Disclose sponsor relationships. FTC guidelines call for
disclosing any sponsor relationships that are related to
a product endorsement or review and might influence
a consumer’s decisions (30). These guidelines apply to
media appearances and Web site content, as well as blogs,
social media, and traditional media. The FTC suggests
including a short statement at the end of an article or
post, or adding a hashtag such as #paidad, #paid, or #ad
to the end of a Twitter posting to notify the consumer of
commercial sponsorship.
6
•
Ensure that all endorsements are truthful and not
misleading. RDs are viewed as having specialized training
and knowledge not possessed by ordinary individuals.
As such, consumers are likely to believe that written and
verbal statements are the honest opinion or experience
of that food and nutrition practitioner rather than of
the sponsor. Any endorsements should reflect the actual
examination or testing of the product (30).
•
Determine whether the study results are applicable to the
audience. For example, the results of a study on healthy
young men may not apply to postmenopausal women
with type 2 diabetes.
•
Consider all the facts to assess a study’s objectivity.
Many professional journals, including the Journal of the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, publish information
about authors’ potential conflicts of interest and sources
of funding and support. However, a study’s objectivity
should not be judged on these factors alone. For instance,
many industry-funded studies are well-designed and
contribute significantly to advancing nutrition research.
All scientific studies should be judged on the same
standards, such as the strength of the methodology, the
appropriateness of the conclusions, and whether the
studies underwent the peer-review process (31).
RESEARCH: EVALUATION AND COMMUNICATION
In today’s media environment, nutrition research studies
frequently make news through multiple channels. The ability
to accurately evaluate and communicate the findings to
diverse audiences, such as consumers, reporters, and other
health professionals, is a necessary skill for RDs.
One challenge is that nutrition research covers a broad
spectrum of health conditions and topics. Even the most wellread RD may be hard-pressed to quickly comment about the
study of the day, especially within the context of the existing
body of evidence on that issue.
Following are brief steps for evaluating and communicating
nutrition research. Figure 2 lists resources for in-depth
guidance on evaluating and communicating nutrition
research, as well as resources for accessing evidence-based
research summaries on nutrition topics.
Steps to Evaluate Nutrition Research
• Read the entire study rather than relying on the abstract
or a news report, which does not provide enough
information to assess or accurately comment on the
merits of a study (31). Determine whether the study has
been peer-reviewed by independent scientists or published
in a peer-reviewed journal versus being reported at a
meeting or convention (32).
•
Evaluate the study design and what type of conclusions
may be drawn from the study. For example, the results
of epidemiological studies do not show cause and effect
among factors, but rather associations that may or
may not be related. On the other hand, the results of
randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical
trials can show cause and effect between study variables
(31).
• Assess how the results fit within the existing body
of research on the topic. For instance, do the results
confirm previous research and accepted dietary
guidelines, or directly oppose them? Steps to determine
this may include checking for conclusions from the
Academy’s Evidence Analysis Library; reading responses
about the study from relevant third-party authorities
such as the Academy, the American Diabetes
Association, or the American Heart Association; or
consulting third-party professionals in the area of
research.
Steps to Communicate Nutrition Research
• Provide pertinent facts about the study, including the
study design and any limitations. Give a balanced
perspective of the study’s overall conclusions rather than
highlighting particular findings that might mislead the
audience (32).
•
Communicate the study findings in simple language. Avoid
obscure acronyms, technical terms and scientific jargon.
•
Put the study results into context regarding how they
fit within the previous body of research, to whom the
findings apply and whether they warrant a change in
eating habits.
•
Be specific. If the study warrants a change in eating
habits, explain what to eat or not to eat, how much and
how often, and to whom the advice applies (4).
•
Stay within your area of expertise. If the study topic
is unfamiliar to you, referring a reporter to a more
knowledgeable practitioner is a viable option as
is interviewing other practitioners yourself before
commenting through social media.
•
When communicating about nutrition research—or any
type of food and nutrition information—consider factors
such as the audience’s cultural beliefs, literacy level, and
socio-economic status and tailor messages accordingly.
RDS: UNIQUELY QUALIFIED COMMUNICATORS
RDs are uniquely qualified to be at the forefront of
communicating science-based food and nutrition information
and correcting misinformation, and to position themselves as
reliable sources of this information.
To effectively reach the public with accurate, positive, and
practical food and nutrition information, RDs must actively
participate in new modes of communication and continue
honing traditional communications skills. To help increase
7
recognition of RDs as qualified sources of information, the
RD credential (and licensure credentials, if applicable) must
consistently be used in all communications and opportunities
must be taken to explain the training and role of the RD.
RDs in all practice areas and at all experience levels can
proactively enhance communication skills through continuing
education. For example, the Professional Development
Portfolio offers Learning Needs codes in the areas of media,
verbal communication and written communication skills, as
well as for evaluating research and, for those involved with
scientific research, communicating research outcomes.
Whether the RD reaches millions in a national media
interview, thousands in a blog posting, or one person during a
counseling session, each occasion adds to the body of accurate
information. The opportunities are almost unlimited to reach
diverse audiences through new and traditional channels. Using
the practice information and resources in this paper can help
heighten recognition of RDs as reliable information sources
among the public, the media, and other health professionals,
and positively impact the eating habits of those reached.
Acknowledgements
The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics authorizes
republication of the practice paper, in its entirety, provided
full and proper credit is given. Commercial distribution is
not permitted without the permission of the Academy and
any distribution should not be used to indicate endorsement
of product or service. Requests to use portions of the paper
must be directed to the Academy headquarters at 800/8771600, ext 4835, or [email protected]. This paper will be
up for review in December 31, 2015.
Authors: Diane Quagliani, MBA, RD, LDN (Quagliani
Communications, Inc., Western Springs, IL); Mindy
Hermann, MBA, RD (Hermann Communications, Mount
Kisco, NY).
Reviewers: Melinda Anderson, PhD, RD, LDN (Tennessee
Technological University, Cookeville, TN); Nutrition
Education of the Public dietetic practice group (Mary
Anne Burkman, MPH, RD, Dairy Council of California,
Oakland, CA); Sharon Denny, MS, RD (Academy
Knowledge Center, Chicago, IL); Dietitians in Integrative
and Functional Medicine dietetic practice group (Robin
Foroutan, MS, RD, Dietitian in Private Practice, New
York, NY); Barbara Ivens, MS, RD/FADA (ConAgra
Foods, Omaha, NE); Weight Management dietetic practice
group (Susan Burke March, MS, RD, LD/N, CDE);
Brigid K. McVaugh, MS,RD, LD (Aramark at St. Luke’s
Episcopal Hospital, Houston, TX); Marisa Moore MBA
RD LD (Aquila, LTD., Atlanta, GA); Esther Myers, PhD,
RD, FADA (Academy Research & Strategic Business
Development, Chicago, IL); Mary Pat Raimondi, MS, RD
(Academy Policy Initiative & Advocacy, Washington, DC);
Quality Management Committee (Marsha R. Stieber, MSA,
RD, CNSC, Mesa, AZ); Brian Wansink, PhD, (Cornell
University, Ithaca, NY).
APC Workgroup: Connie B. Diekman, MEd, RD, LD,
FADA (chair); Terri Verason, MS, RD; Lona Sandon, MEd,
RD (content advisor).
We thank the reviewers for their many constructive
comments and suggestions. The reviewers were not asked to
endorse this paper.
References
1. American Dietetic Association. Position of the American
Dietetic Association: Food and nutrition misinformation. J Am
Diet Assoc. 2006;106(4):601-607.
2. American Dietetic Association. Nutrition and You: Trends
2011. http://www.eatright.org/nutritiontrends. Accessed
February 6, 2012.
3. Helm JS. FNCE reinforces power of nutrition
communications. Food Insight Blog. http://www.foodinsight.
org/Blog/tabid/60/EntryId/389/FNCE-Reinforces-Power-ofNutrition-Communications.aspx. Accessed February 6, 2012.
4. Miller GD, Cohen NL, Fulgoni VL, Heymsfield SB, Wellman
NS. From nutrition scientist to nutrition communicator: why
you should take the leap. Am J Clin Nutr. 2006;83(6):1272–
1275.
5. Fernández-Celemin L, Jung A. What should be the role of the
media in nutrition communication? Br J Nutr. 2006;96(Suppl
1):S86-88.
6. Goldberg JP, Sliwa SA. Communicating actionable nutrition
messages: challenges and opportunities. Proc Nutr Soc.
2011;70(1):26-37.
7. Wansink B, Sobal J. Mindless eating. The 200 daily
food decisions we overlook. Environment and Behavior.
2007;39(1):106-123.
8. Mintel Oxygen Reports. Mintel predicts global consumer
trends for 2010 [press release]. http://www.mintel.com/presscentre/press-releases/446/mintel-predicts-global-consumertrends-for-2010. Accessed February 6, 2012.
9. FoodMinds. Localize, mobilize, scrutinize. Five social media
trends in food & nutrition for 2010. http://www.foodminds.
com/index.php/food-thoughts/localize-mobilize-scrutinizefive-social-media-trends-in-food-nutrition-for-2010/. Accessed
February 6, 2012.
10. Aase S. Print vs online: can there be a cohabitation of
competing media and how readers can benefit. J Am Diet Assoc.
2011;111(4):500-504.
11. International Food Information Council Foundation. 2011
Food & Health Survey. Food Insight Web site. http://www.
foodinsight.org/Newsletter/Detail.aspx?topic=International_
Food_Information_Council_Foundation_Releases_Its_2011_
Food_Health_Survey. Accessed February 6, 2012.
12. Editor and Publisher. Daily and Sunday Newspapers—Number
and Circulation: 1970 to 2009. US Census Bureau Web site.
http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1135.
xls. Accessed February 6, 2012.
13. Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. The
state of the news media 2012: an annual report on American
journalism: overview. http://stateofthemedia.org/. Accessed
February 6, 2012.
14. Rowe S. Communicating science-based food and nutrition
information. J Am Diet Assoc. 2001;101(10):1145-1146.
8
15. Schwitzer G. How do US journalists cover treatments, tests,
products, and procedures? An evaluation of 500 stories. PLoS
Med. 2008;5(5):700-704.
16. Woloshin S, Schwartz LM, Casella SL, Kennedy AT, Larson
RJ. Press releases by academic medical centers: not so academic?
Ann Intern Med. 2009;150(9):613-618.
17. American Dietetic Association. American Dietetic Association/
Commission on Dietetic Registration code of ethics for the
profession of dietetics and process for consideration of ethics
issues. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(8):1461-1467.
18. Phillips LE. Trends in consumers’ time spent with media.
eMarketer Web site. http://www.emarketer.com/Article.
aspx?R=1008138. Accessed February 6, 2012.
19. Rideout VJ, Foehr UG, Roberts DF. Generation M2: Media
in the lives of 8- to 18-year-olds. Menlo, CA: Henry J. Kaiser
Family Foundation; 2010. http://www.kff.org/entmedia/
upload/8010.pdf. Accessed February 6, 2012.
20. Buttriss JL. Translating complex science into life-course health
promoting strategies. Proc Nutr Soc. 2011;70(1):38-46.
21. Sutherland LA, Wildemuth B, Campbell MK, Haines PS.
Unraveling the web: an evaluation of the content quality,
usability, and readability of nutrition web sites. J Nutr Educ
Behav. 2005;37(6):300-305.
22. Ostry A, Young ML, Hughes M. The quality of nutritional
information available on popular websites: a content analysis.
Health Educ Res. 2008;23(4):648-655.
23. National Cancer Institute. Evaluating health information on
the internet. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/
Information/internet. Accessed February 6, 2012.
24. Bernstam EV, Walji MF, Sagaram S, Sagaram D, Johnson CW,
Meric-Bernstam F. Commonly cited website quality criteria are
not effective at identifying inaccurate online information about
breast cancer. Cancer. 2008;112(6):1206–1213.
25. Walji M, Sagaram S, Sagaram D, et al. Efficacy of quality
criteria to identify potentially harmful information: a crosssectional survey of complementary and alternative medicine
web sites. J Med Internet Res. 2004;6(2):e21.
26. Culp J, Bell RA, Cassady D. Characteristics of food industry
web sites and “advergames” targeting children. J Nutr Educ
Behav. 2010;42(3):197-201.
27. Henry AE, Story M. Food and beverage brands that market to
children and adolescents on the internet: a content analysis of
branded web sites. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2009;41(5):353-359.
28. Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children.
Preliminary proposed nutrition principles to guide industry
self-regulatory efforts. Federal Trade Commission Web site.
http://www.ftc.gov/os/2011/04/110428foodmarketproposedgui
de.pdf. Accessed February 6, 2012.
29. Buis LR, Carpenter S. Health and medical blog content and
its relationships with blogger credentials and blog host. Health
Commun. 2009;24(8):703-710.
30. Federal Trade Commission. 16 CFR Part 255. Guides
concerning the use of endorsements and testimonials in
advertising. http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/10/endortest.shtm.
Accessed February 6, 2012.
31. IFIC Review. How to understand and interpret food and
health-related scientific studies. Food Insight Web site. http://
www.foodinsight.org/linkclick.aspx?fileticket=d8IZK7B4MGY
%3d&tabid=93. Accessed February 6, 2012.
32. Harvard School of Public Health, International Food
Information Council Foundation. Improving public
understanding. Guidelines for communicating emerging science
on nutrition, food safety, and health. http://www.foodinsight.
org/Content/6/Improving-Public-Understanding-GuidelinesFor-Communicating-Emerging-Science-on-Nutrition-FoodSafety-and-Health.pdf. Accessed February 6, 2012.
9