Generally speaking...experts in the area, ideally based on evidence. I think the way the NHMRC comes to most of their conclusions (including clinical research) is a pretty workable way to go about it
I think anyone who has an enormous public platform has some responsibility to fact-check their assertions. His anti-vax stance, for example, is truly horrific
-
-
You know, I almost used "pete is anti-vax" in my "statements dietitians throw around" he is in fact NOT anti-vax, never has been, but that we just assume someone is bc they hold alternate views in other spheres is, well, its just not cricket.

-
Um, I think he's pretty on the record as vaccine questioning, at least. He's definitely against water fluoridation and sunscreen (weirdly), so there's those ones as wellpic.twitter.com/307FGh6ghR
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
LOL. " Anyone who has an enormous public platform has some responsibility to fact-check their assertions." That's what the critics of the 1977 Dietary Goals and 1980 DGA said too. But we created them anyway & then sent them overseas.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.
Or, if we must have guidelines:
1) Everybody gets adequate essential nutrition, including high-quality protein foods as desired/required.
2) Nobody gets pestered about "healthy" foods, "healthy" weight, etc.