Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Censorship Government Medicine The Media

North Carolina Threatens To Shut Down Nutrition Blogger 515

Posted by timothy
from the we-haff-veys-to-maek-you-schutt-down dept.
vvaduva writes "The North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition is threatening to send a blogger to jail for recounting publicly his battle against diabetes and encouraging others to follow his lifestyle... the state diatetics and nutrition board decided [Steve] Cooksey's blog — Diabetes-Warrior.netviolated state law. The nutritional advice Cooksey provides on the site amounts to 'practicing nutrition,' the board's director says, and in North Carolina that's something you need a license to do." If applied consistently, I think this would also clear out considerable space from the average bookstore's health section. (And it could be worse; he could have been offering manicures.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

North Carolina Threatens To Shut Down Nutrition Blogger

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @10:55AM (#39781885)

    I guess this means I should stop reading the ingredients in my food and trying to eat healthy and balanced. Don't want to be jailed for "practicing nutrition"

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @10:58AM (#39781935)
      Citizen, don't you know that you're incapable of doing anything without government oversight?
      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @12:00PM (#39782895)

        Reading the comments here decrying the fact that an unlicensed person would write about nutrition is maddening.

        These license requirements are written by the same government that brought us the DMCA, the Patriot Act, and narrowly missed on SOPA. Also Vioxx, and school sponsored sugar bomb school lunches, with some whole grain. And apprently USDA inspections of student's brought lunches. It's the same. It's the same people, same motivations, same corruption, same everything.

        We know the MPAA and RIAA are self serving corps who will destroy anything and anyone to perserve their power and make another dollar. Everyone here knows that. But apparently we don't know enough about organizations like the AMA to realize that they are the same.

        They are out to protect the consumer or patient in the same way the MPAA is out to protect movie viewers. It's the same.

        • by BronsCon (927697)

          They are out to protect the consumer or patient in the same way the MPAA is out to protect movie viewers. It's the same.

          One's trying to protect you from bad medical and nutritional advice, the other's trying to protect you from bad movies.

          </sarcasm>

          Both are failing. Hard.

          • by LocalH (28506)

            No, the MPAA is trying to protect you from good movies so that you don't know that the majority of their dreck is made up of bad movies.

            Yeah, not really working well either, except within the unwashed masses.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          if someone dies from taking this unlicensed person's advice, who pays the health bills? That's right, the taxpayer!
    • I guess this means I should stop reading the ingredients in my food and trying to eat healthy and balanced. Don't want to be jailed for "practicing nutrition"

      He makes money on ad revenue for this advice. And also from the article:

      McCullagh said the board may be on more solid ground in its complaint about the telephone support packages Cooksey offers. “But if customers are paying $97 or $149 or $197 a month to have someone listen, that sounds a lot like life coaching, which doesn't require a license.”

      So I think the board is trying to do Crooksey a favor because here's what's going to happen. Someone is going to die after telling their family members that they've stopped seeing a regular doctor and went holistic with Crooksey when they should have had their ankle amputated. The family is going to sue Crooksey probably with a number of things like practicing nutrition without a license, etc etc. And since Crooksey is making money off this operation it's going to be hard to tell the court that was just friendly advice over tea. Crooksey isn't going to have malpractice insurance and his first amendment rights aren't going to protect him from the lawsuits that follow regarding the repercussions of his preachings.

      Crooksey should be able to say whatever he wants and put it on his blog. That doesn't mean he shouldn't be held accountable for what he says. It's wrong for the board to try and shut him down now but if I were them I would just kindly let Crooksey know that the things he is saying might leaving him with serious liabilities in due time.

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

        He makes money on ad revenue for this advice.

        *sigh*

        I don't give a shit. I really don't. I'm tired of this mentality that says that making money on ads is somehow more evil than usual because of the content on your website. Such bullshit. Either way, you're making money off of ads. It's your website.

        They might have been right to shut down the website, but not for this reason.

        • by Sarten-X (1102295) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:24AM (#39782317) Homepage

          How about "he makes money, period." The important part is that it's a significant source of economic gain, which makes it a business. Being a business means more liability, under consumer-protection laws.

        • by Sir_Sri (199544) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:27AM (#39782365)

          That doesn't make it evil, that makes it a commercial enterprise. You telling your buddy the key to diabetes is drinking 3 cans of coke a day is different than you charging for advice that says the same, or generating revenue from ad sales on your website than promotes the same.

          In one case, your friend is being an idiot for listening to you. In the other you are fraudulently presenting the information commercially. Advice of various sorts (legal, medical, apparently nutritional in north caronlina) requires you be licenced so that people are protected from businesses selling snake oil to cure diabetes.

          IANAL, so consider this in the advice to a buddy category. But if you have a business where you practice medicine, law, or nutrition in north carolina expect them to come after you eventually.

      • by Sarten-X (1102295)

        The laws are protecting people from their own stupidity? Amazing...

      • Someone is going to die after telling their family members that they've stopped seeing a regular doctor and went holistic with Crooksey when they should have had their ankle amputated.

        Wait, what?

        I can understand someone doing something stupid like deciding to forego certain medications (in this case Metformin, Insulin, whatever) in favor of some holistic thing, but skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says? C'mon, you're flirting with argumentum ad absurdum there.

        Don't get me wrong - I agree with your main point: if he's charging money giving actual medical advice sans license, he's opened himself up to a shitload of liability, and if something goes wrong, he's liabl

        • by ttyRazor (20815)

          His disclaimer says he isn't an expert but then goes on to imply that experts can't be any better since they're not doing what he is.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by vlm (69642)

          giving actual medical advice

          The problem is he's merely providing diet advice, which is not medical advice.

          Here is an example of a violation of the NC law (thank god I don't live there):

          "I advise you not to eat at McDonalds because a homemade salad is more nutritious than a cheeseburger".

          thats all it takes to be a criminal in NC.

          Its basically a blasphemy law, but applied to diet instead of gods.

          • by SirWhoopass (108232) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:54AM (#39782787)

            "I advise you not to eat at McDonalds because a homemade salad is more nutritious than a cheeseburger". Thats all it takes to be a criminal in NC.

            That is not correct. Providing nutritional information is perfectly legal in NC. Telling people about your diet is fine. Creating a diet plan for someone would be illegal. Which is what this guy was doing. Diagnosing symptoms and providing specific nutritional remedies for people with diabetes (charging $100 - $150 for this service).

            The state board provides a PDF [ncbdn.org] of what type of advice is legal, and what crosses the line. The short version would be that it is fine to provide nutritional information. It is illegal to provide nutrition care services.

            • by nbauman (624611)

              That PDF is worth reading carefully. You cross the line when you provide individualized services to treat diabetes:

              Persons who are not licensed to practice dietetics/nutrition in North Carolina can provide general non-medical nutrition information. Nutrition Information is defined in 21 NCAC 17.0402 as nonfraudulent nutrition information related to food, food materials, or dietary supplements which is designed for one or more healthy population groups and is based on valid scientific evidence, reports

        • On this blog there is advice to ignore dietary recommendations from the American Diabetics Association and use his diet instead. From what I have seen of his recommendations they could easily cause hypoglycemia, a potentially fatal condition.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I can understand someone doing something stupid like deciding to forego certain medications (in this case Metformin, Insulin, whatever) in favor of some holistic thing, but skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says? C'mon, you're flirting with argumentum ad absurdum there.

          I wish you were right, but you're wrong. People believe and follow all manner of stupid advice from the internet, strangers on buses, that guy at the health food store, everywhere. Maybe it's false hope, maybe it's a desire to be more natural, whatever it is, people take bad advice from strangers all the time. It's not just on the internet.

        • by SuricouRaven (1897204) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:52AM (#39782737)
          "skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says?"

          I believe you underestimate the strength of human stupidity. A common mistake.
        • by Sarten-X (1102295) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:58AM (#39782871) Homepage

          skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says?

          Yes, people do this. There are people who are terrified of surgery. They'll only go if it's the last option (besides losing that foot entirely). That random dude on a blog becomes their last hope, who will save them when the doctors (those evil minions of the pharmaceutical industry) won't. They know that the surgery might not work, has its risks, and will cost thousands of dollars. The doctors even admit that. This diet, though, is cheap, the person stays in control, and it'll improve their life... their savior even says so, right there! Besides, if it doesn't work, they can get the surgery in a few months, unless they find another last chance.

        • by tlhIngan (30335) <slashdot@wor f . n et> on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @12:23PM (#39783203)

          I can understand someone doing something stupid like deciding to forego certain medications (in this case Metformin, Insulin, whatever) in favor of some holistic thing, but skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says? C'mon, you're flirting with argumentum ad absurdum there.

          Um, I'm sure the late Steve Jobs has admitted to trying to practice holistic medicine in an attempt to cure his cancer, which delayed actual surgery so by the time he had it, it was too late.

          Now, it may not be a random blog that advocated that, but I'd say that if Jobs wasn't willing to get cancer surgery for years, then it's not an absurd thought at all.

          Hell, people believe in creationism/intelligent design/"scientific controversy", Obama wasn't born in the US (still), Obama is a Muslim, etc. Even idiotic blog posts from a no-name, as long as they confirm our beliefs, will have a higher "pull" than respected articles that contradict our beliefs.

        • by Peristaltic (650487) * on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @12:46PM (#39783627)

          ...but skipping surgery based on what some random dude on a blog says? C'mon, you're flirting with argumentum ad absurdum there.

          I would tend to agree with you, but on the other hand I've heard of people doing just that kind of thing. For instance, a neurologist friend of mine had recently been seeing an unusual number (5, over 3 weeks) of people being admitted for symptoms and signs resembling Myasthenia Gravis and MS in his rural hospital.

          After spending a fair amount of time investigating, turns out that these people sought out a "practitioner" in the community that injected them with fluid pulled from some ungodly mixture of ground up pig brains... never heard what it was they were trying to treat. The patients ended up with neurological autoimmune disorders and are not in very good shape. I'm not making this up, either- It took forever for doctors and authorities to figure out what happened, as the patients were concerned that the practitioner would be prosecuted, so were reluctant to talk.

          Then there's the recent case of an individual in Houston jailed for injecting some mixture (including caulk) into her customers' butt cheeks to plump up their rear ends.

          Take Steve Jobs- from what I read, had he undergone a pancreatic Whipple procedure immediately after his cancer diagnosis instead of waiting 10 months while first trying "naturopathic" remedies, he likely would have had more time in a better state of health before succumbing to his disease- not a sure thing, but it was the opinion of several doctors that worked on him that he would have been much better off avoiding the naturopathic approach as a first option. I can't fault someone trying -anything- as a last resort, after other, more proven options have failed, but to seek out naturopathy or homeopothy as a primary treatment?

          Never underestimate human stupidity.

        • by ajlisows (768780)

          To be fair, there are plenty of people who have their children skip vaccines on the word of Jenny Mccarthy. People will listen to whatever advice sounds good to them.

      • Someone is going to die after telling their family members that they've stopped seeing a regular doctor and went holistic with Crooksey when they should have had their ankle amputated

        Let me quote something displayed in bold faced lettering on each and every page of this fellers web site:

        âoeI am not a doctor, dietitian, nor nutritionist ⦠in fact I have no medical training of any kind.â

        Wake me up when he misrepresents himself.

        Assume the guy is a crackpot and assume everything he says is wrong. I would rather live in a society man enough to tolerate crackpots than deal with the consequences of a government that (effectivly) outlaws speech or seeks to fault everyone e

        • The second he bills someone for his advice he become subject to consumer protection laws. Up until that point he violated no law, but by charging for his services, he is in fact making claims contrary to his disclaimer, which is a form of misrepresentation. He is being charged for violating consumer protection law, not for as you put it "being a crackpot".

          I frequently rail against the nanny-state, but in this particular case the power of the government is being used appropriately in my opinion. Maybe it
    • Can't he just move the hosting of his site to another provider ( one that is outside of the US ) and then tell them to go fuck themselves ? Oh wait, I am talking about the US, how silly of me! But seriously, wouldn't that solve it ?
      • Can't he just move the hosting of his site to another provider ( one that is outside of the US ) and then tell them to go fuck themselves ? Oh wait, I am talking about the US, how silly of me! But seriously, wouldn't that solve it ?

        Not if he's charging for his services and receiving the money in NC. If he's operating his business in NC then he's going to be subject to NC laws.

  • by iamhassi (659463) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @10:56AM (#39781903) Journal
    FTFA: [carolinajournal.com]
    "After the meeting he handed out a couple of business cards pointing people to his website.

    Three days later, he got a call from the director of the nutrition board."


    once you go into the real world and hand out business cards you are operating a business, it's no longer free speech. Title is misleading.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:00AM (#39781959)

      So handing out business cards is the definition of a business transaction? Is there some sort of a law that says you can't use business cards for personal use?

      What happened to a business transaction being the exchange of money for a service or item?

      What's next, needing a license to hand out free pamphlets?

      • by gnick (1211984) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:12AM (#39782145) Homepage

        So handing out business cards is the definition of a business transaction?

        No, but handing out cards advertising services that you offer in return for compensation sure makes it look like one.

        • by El Torico (732160)

          So handing out business cards is the definition of a business transaction?

          No, but handing out cards advertising services that you offer in return for compensation sure makes it look like one.

          Is he actually getting compensation? I read the article and I didn't see anything stating that. I didn't see anything on his web site about compensation, but now it's down, so I can't take another look right now.

    • once you go into the real world and hand out business cards you are operating a business, it's no longer free speech.

      Uh... not a Constitutional scholar, I take it?

      • by geekoid (135745)

        So false advertising is protected speech now?

        • Didn't read the article. But doesn't depend on what he was advertising ? If at no point he said or insinuated that he is an expert, there shouldn't be any problem, right ?
          • by vlm (69642)

            If at no point he said or insinuated that he is an expert, there shouldn't be any problem, right ?

            That is the problem, you should not require a license or permission to provide dietary advice. They are selectively enforcing it only on him as an individual. Almost all "health oriented" marketing advertisements of all kinds are in violation unless the person who wrote the ad copy purchased a license from NC to be permitted to exercise free speech in NC. Also most restaurant reviewers, cooking TV shows, are illegal in NC. The only reason he is being selectively punished is merely because he's one dude

        • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:12AM (#39782139)

          No but giving nutrition advice is protected speech. Otherwise you'd not be able to make a video to tell viewers, "You really should stop eating sugar," without getting drug to court by the Carolina government for talking w/o a license. The professor who posted the youtube video "Sugar: The Bitter Truth" would now be a criminal.

    • by honkycat (249849)

      Yes, that. And providing one-on-one advice for a small fee... and quite a few other pretty clear violations.

      I'm strongly inclined to agree with NC on this one.

    • So every time I give out business cards to friends so they have my contact info, it's a business transaction?

    • by iamhassi (659463) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:04AM (#39782011) Journal
      "The board also directed Cooksey to remove a link offering one-on-one support, a personal-training type of service he offered for a small fee. "

      He was selling his services. Yes, he was practicing without a license. That's not blogging, that's not free speech. I can't offer one-on-one personal legal advice for a small fee because... wait for it.... i'm not an attorney.

      “But if customers are paying $97 or $149 or $197 a month to have someone listen, that sounds a lot like life coaching, which doesn't require a license.”

      Then start a life coaching website and charge for that. Just like I can't start a legal blog and charge $197 a month "to listen" and then claim "it's life coaching!"

      I'm all for free speech, but this guy with clearly trying to practice without a license and when he got busted he cried "free speech! I have a disclaimer!" Come on, this guy gives free speech a bad name.

      Advice is free. Charging for advice, now you're running a business and you should have a license.
      • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:19AM (#39782235)

        >>>He was selling his services. Yes, he was practicing without a license. That's not blogging, that's not free speech.

        So if I help someone fix their computer over the phone, or via video chat, and then charge 1-2 hours for my time, I've commited a crime of practicing engineering without a license?!?!?

        God damn. You can't even open your mouth w/o tripping over some damn law & having the full weight of some government full upon you. Witness the poor UK citizen who is being drug out of his homeland into the Soviet Union of the USSA because he posted a link to piratebay and isohunt.

      • I asked a similar question elsewhere, but why should he need a license?

          If anything the license makes him more dangerous if he is a quack. He just needs to pass some test that is most likely BS and pay the government money, now he seems like a legit expert to people.

      • by El Torico (732160)
        If he's doing this for money, then yes, NC has a case if they require licensing for nutritionists, but IANAL, so I could be wrong.
    • once you go into the real world and hand out business cards you are operating a business, it's no longer free speech. Title is misleading.

      Really? The word for "business card" in my native tongue could be translated back into English as "visiting card". Does that make the act of giving it to someone a form a social call or something? Or does it create a legal obligation to pay a visit? Just following your linguistic "logic" there...

    • by El Torico (732160)
      Let me preface my remarks with "IANAL", since I'm not.
      What does the business card say? Is his web site for profit?
      A card that fits in your wallet doesn't mean you're providing professional services. It's not a business card if it isn't promoting a business. If he's doing this for profit, then I see where North Carolina has a valid issue. If he's doing it to solely express his opinion, without compensation, then I don't see where they have a case.
    • by erroneus (253617)

      I'd say this is more of a grey area. I'm guessing that the card-bearing person did not assert he is a professional anything and is certainly not asking for any money in any form at all.

      Having skimmed the article myself, I can see why the blogger was pretty upset. Carbs are horribly bad for the organs associated with diabetic disordered. This is especially true in the case of processed starches and grains. Evolutionarily speaking, the ability to eat grains at all is an extremely recent development [beyondveg.com] where

    • by OFnow (1098151)
      You do know that the stores sell blank cards and you can print anything on them (even how to contact you!) and pretty much whatever you print it's still called a business card? So yes, no matter what you print on a card it's pretty much still free speech.
  • Geez, if you started this process where would it end. You would have to shut down all the biology departments in schools for practicing Religion without the tax exempt status. You would have to jail all the "Job Creator" appologists for operating without a "Snake Oil" license. It would be total anachry. Free speach no more ,without paying someone for the right to say it (unless your already a member of the club and paid your dues).

  • good (Score:5, Interesting)

    by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @10:59AM (#39781941) Homepage Journal

    Lets bring this sort of thing to all the people that are effectively practicing medicine without a license.

    • Why?

      • Re:good (Score:4, Interesting)

        by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:10AM (#39782113) Homepage Journal

        Because they bilk, harm and kill people. Often with free reign.

        Children are dead because some unqualified person was lying about vaccine harm,
        People with diabetes are going to be a lot worse off because this guy is pretending to be an expert.

        • Re:good (Score:5, Insightful)

          by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @12:35PM (#39783427) Homepage Journal

          Children are dead because some unqualified person was lying about vaccine harm,

          No, children are dead because their parents are idiots.

          People with diabetes are going to be a lot worse off because this guy is pretending to be an expert.

          From Diabetes-Warrior.net:

          I am not a doctor, dietitian nor nutritionist in fact I have no medical training of any kind.

          If you think a guy is an expert, even though he expressly states that he is not an expert, that's on your dumb ass, not him. Maybe, instead of blaming everyone else for your bad decisions, you should stop bitching and take responsibility for your own actions.

  • by CanHasDIY (1672858) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:02AM (#39781993) Homepage Journal
    First in flight, 48th in education...

    Am I the only one not surprised by this?
  • by smitty_one_each (243267) * on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:04AM (#39782017) Homepage Journal
    A nutrition blog
    Is a horrible slog.
    Go straight razor smooth,
    Get some barbecued hog!
    Burma Shave
  • I particularly like all of the "Become and Nutritionist" and "Become a Health Coach" ads that I see with this story. By the way, what the hell is a "Health Coach"? How many players are there on a "Heath Team"? Is there a professional league? What do they call the finals?
  • My psych prof in college had to be careful not to use "Dr." as a title on anything in NYS, even though he had a valid doctorate in psychology. I believe it had something to do with the doctorate not being in clinical psychology or somesuch.

    Although I can see these rules being for consumer protection, many of them are poorly implemented.

  • all for a FAQ (Score:4, Interesting)

    by mounthood (993037) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:11AM (#39782121)

    They call a FAQ a 'assessing and counseling readers' because it answers questions. From the article:

    Where it crosses the line, Burill said, is when a blogger “advertises himself as an expert” and “takes information from someone such that he’s performing some sort of assessment and then giving it back with some sort of plan or diet.”

    Cooksey posted a link (6.3 MB PDF download) to the board’s review of his website. The document shows several Web pages the board took issue with, including a question-and-answer page, which the director had marked in red ink noting the places he was “assessing and counseling” readers of his blog.

    “If people are writing you with diabetic specific questions and you are responding, you are no longer just providing information — you are counseling,” she wrote. “You need a license to provide this service."

    The board also found fault with a page titled “My Meal Plan,” where Cooksey details what he eats daily.

    In red, Burril writes, “It is acceptable to provide just this information [his meal plan], but when you start recommending it directly to people you speak to or who write you, you are now providing diabetic counseling, which requires a license.”

    The board also directed Cooksey to remove a link offering one-on-one support, a personal-training type of service he offered for a small fee.

    Cooksey posts the following disclaimer at the bottom of every page on his website:

    “I am not a doctor, dietitian, nor nutritionist in fact I have no medical training of any kind.”

    The idea that only licensed people can discuss a subject that everyone is familiar with is like the freak flip-side to 'teach the controversy'; instead of forcing people to disseminate wrong information, they've decided that only government licensed counselors speak the truth.

    • they've decided that only government licensed counselors speak the truth.

      And it gets downright entertaining when you have the licensed elite battling it out between themselves. Some cardiologists recommend diets that are in direct opposition to what some dietitians would tell you, for instance.
    • by rahvin112 (446269)

      Everyone is familiar with driving, does that make you qualified to design and submit plans for roadway construction?

      State licensing boards exist for very good reasons, these often involved severe harm to people decades ago when the laws were passed. The example in the article header is manicures, but did you know if that if you don't know what you are doing with a manicure that you could give someone an infection that could require that their fingers be amputated because you made a very stupid but easily av

  • by smooth wombat (796938) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:14AM (#39782175) Homepage Journal
    this would also clear out considerable space from the average bookstore's health section.

    Trudeau would have to get a real job rather than claiming "The Man" is trying to keep "free" cancer cures secret from the public and harassing him.

    After all, Big Government is in cahoots with Big Pharma so people are bled dry using tested and approved medicines rather than "vitamin" pills to cure cancer.
  • Just because one person did something and got well does not, in any way, imply
    that it works, or is even a good idea for the population as a whole.

    It is exactly this kind of stuff the general public is very susceptible to,
    and needs protection from, so kudos to North Carolina.

  • by thestudio_bob (894258) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:16AM (#39782207)

    All they have to do is place a disclaimer on the site that says "I am not a practicing nutritionist. The following nutrition tips are for entertainment only. Please consult with your North Carolina Practicing Nutritionist before following anything on this site."

    Crisis deverted.

  • Is he qualified to do what he is doing? Does this guy have a degree in nutrition or certification from a third party? Is he running a business? To put it bluntly, how do I know that he isn't a crackpot?

    They want this guy to prove he isn't a crackpot in offering what is effectively medical advice. How is this a free speech issue? I'm not a doctor, so I have no place being in a business offering medical advice. The entire point of having things like certification boards is to keep people like this person from

    • by Shotgun (30919)

      Define "qualified".

      For a generation we have had the federal government propagandizing a food pyramid in our schools that we now know is about the worst diet you could possibly eat (high in grains, low in proteins). How the hell is the government qualified to make a determination of who is qualified?

  • by trout007 (975317) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:25AM (#39782335)

    There is no difference between this and licensed doctors, engineers, lawyers, ect.

    These should all be voluntarily organizations. So if you want to see a real doctor you can find one that has AMA accreditation. But if you want to see a witch doctor, herbal specialist, or chiropractor go ahead. It's your body.

    Now if someone claims to have AMA accreditation when they don't that is committing fraud.

  • by kimvette (919543) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @11:29AM (#39782389) Homepage Journal

    If you want to decrease your risk of diabetes, eat less sugar and exercise more.

    If you want to lower your blood pressure, eat less sugar, maintain proper electrolyte balance (doesn't necessarily mean less salt!), and exercise more. Also consider breathing/meditating exercises as well.

    If you want to lower your risk of cancer, particularly colon cancer, eat more blueberries, green leafy vegetables, garlic, and exercise more.

    If you want to decrease your LDL cholesterol levels, eat more oatmeal and olive oil (not together, that would be gross!), and exercise more.

    Take that, North Carolina! I just posted nutritional advice without a license!

  • Is that his customers should be required to sign something stating they understand he is not a doctor dispensing commonly-accepted medical advice.

    He shouldn't be censored, becuase we should be free to pay any person for any kind of advice we want. Freedom FROM licensing.

    We're allowed to think the world was created 6000 years ago -- and pay money to people who promote this idea. But apparently we're not allowed to follow people's advice. We're not smart enough to make our own decisions. The government should make them for us. That's what I'm getting out of this.

    Another phrase I hate: "the science is settled." That's what they said to Socrates, Galileo, the guy who discovered penicillin (too lazy to Google) etc ad nauseum. It kills me that the people for whom skepticism is (supposed to be) a way of life have such a habit of asking the rest of us to set aside all skepticism.

  • by bkranson (547938) on Tuesday April 24, 2012 @03:06PM (#39785951)
    During 2011 I was able to attend many health related conferences around the country in addition to the NAMA, National Automatic Merchandising Association (aka Vending Machines) conference. While at the NAMA it is no surprise I was surrounded by Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Kraft, Mars and a host of other related companies that make food like products. It was also of no surprise that most of the people were over weight and looked unhealthy.

    Then I got to attend the Ancestral Health Symposium. Major difference, people were talking about eating food our ancestors would have eaten and getting back to the basics. Reducing our sugar intake, lower our consumption of processed foods and getting more information about what we are really putting in our bodies. Some people were overweight, but the majority of people there looked like they cared about their overall health.

    Last I got to attend the ADA conference. This is a huge conference in San Diego where all the Dietitians go to get some of their continuing education credits and current health information. Who was there?!? Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Kraft, Mars and a host of other related companies that make food like products. It was so sad for me to see. So much became clear to me over the course of that weekend.

    I would much rather give my money to Steve Cooksey for his advise, or to support his legal fees, than to most of the Dietitians I met at the ADA.

    NAMA: http://www.vending.org/ [vending.org]
    Ancestral Health Symposium: http://ancestryfoundation.org/ [ancestryfoundation.org]
    American Dietetic Association: http://www.eatright.org/ [eatright.org]

Someone is unenthusiastic about your work.

Working...