Ah! Whereas, I've argued we can kick these stats within current resources by simply "doing different".
No, of course not. But I don't think that's how they're presented...at least in Australia. I think we talked about this way up in this thread lol
-
-
They are Gid. They are the benchmark for how dietitians are trained, they continue to be used in diabetes research as the benchmark, they underpin institutional food policy, food legislation, education, they are now even the benchmark for PTs on our insistence.
-
That’s why it is so frustrating for dietitians to throw out statements such as “it’s a GUIDELINE” where most of us recognize if I didn’t have 3 serves of dairy (or alts) in my food plan for a patient in an exam, or didn’t pop in “breakfast” I’d be failed.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
It is how the ADG--and every other dietary guideline that links diet to the prevention of chronic disease--is "presented." That's what they actually say: use these guidelines to reduce the risk of chronic disease. And if you don't use these guidelines, then what?
-
A follow-on question (AFAIC): what if individuals have followed the guidelines, and still get food-related disease, despite no family history, regular exercise, low alcohol intake and never a smoker?
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
. But I am responding there to your observation “no person in public health is focused on individual responsibility”
I’d suggest too, ADG are the antithesis of individual responsibility.
Do ADG=health. Don’t, and you will never achieve “health”?