| Home
|
Magazines give good nutrition advice Posted 4-13-98 Crash dieting is out and sound nutritional advice is in. At least that’s what the American Council on Science and Health tells us. Based on the council’s 1998 "Nutrition Accuracy in Popular Magazines" survey, which tracked 21 top-circulating publications from January 1995 to December 1996, magazines have improved the accuracy of their nutrition coverage. According to the council, which has surveyed magazines since 1982, 77 percent of the magazines were "excellent" or "good" sources of nutritional information, while 23 percent were "fair" or "poor" sources. Among the magazines surveyed—including household names such as Glamour, Shape, Reader’s Digest, and Cosmopolitan—Consumer Reports scored the highest, New Woman the lowest. Four judges, all food science and nutrition experts, selected eight articles from each magazine and independently evaluated them for accuracy, presentation style, and validity of recommendations. The survey found that consumer and homemaking publications are generally more accurate in their nutrition coverage than health and women’s magazines. Other than Men’s Health, men’s magazines were not included in the survey since there was a lack of nutrition articles in that market. "Overall, it’s looking up. I think the magazines are somewhat more careful about identifying which reports are preliminary and which results have been replicated," said registered dietitian Ruth Kava, PhD, the council’s director of nutrition. In the past, nutritional reporting tended to cover miracle cures and dieting fads, she said. Accuracy has improved because in the last 10 to 15 years magazine editors have hired more nutritional experts on staff, according to Kava, who coordinated the survey and was one of the judges. Delia Hammock, a registered dietitian who is director of nutrition at Good Housekeeping, reviews articles before they are published in the magazine. "When I look at the articles, I look at them from a different perspective than most journalists do since I’m looking at them as a nutritionist," Hammock said. Good Housekeeping was rated an "excellent" source of accurate nutritional information. Journalists have a responsibility to their readers to provide reliable information, said registered dietitian David Feder, senior associate food editor at Better Homes & Gardens, which also ranked as an "excellent" source. "It’s so easy to yell fire in a crowded theater. People don’t need that. It just scares them away. Then, they won’t listen to any message and their health goes to hell," Feder said. "At Better Homes & Gardens, we shoot for making a valid statement of current science without the use of scare tactics." Feder said he makes it an editorial policy to talk to experts on both sides of an issue, allowing readers to make informed health choices best suited to their needs. Though the survey found that on the whole there was an improvement in nutrition coverage, the council stressed that consumers should be wary of what they read. Hammock cautioned that people should never change their behavior based on one study or one article. And, she said, people should read articles in their entirety, not just the headline or a few sentences. "Often, headlines are there to grab a reader; it’s not really a good summary of what the article is about. They have to read the whole thing, and find out what caveats there are, and pay attention to those." Related Site |
|