Back to the “most pub hlth policy begins with no evidence” well, it’s bc we know that, we should be mandated to critically review these policies in their historical context??
...I've read a number of the studies, but clearly I'm not as expert as the people who wrote the review, recommendations etc. That's why the NHMRC did the review, surely - because not every person involved in policy has time to read ~1,000 papers
-
-
Well, maybe the NHMRC just pumps this shit out at a very cheap price of ~2.1M so it looks like it is "doing something"? Oh, and it keeps the profession of dietetics alive. Bonus.
#wecandobetterpic.twitter.com/I0AZeVqhS2
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The thing is - which ~1000 papers? We all know that there are literally hundreds of thousands of nutrition papers, with different grades of reliability through the literature. Pick 1000 and you get one answer, another 1000 and you get another. No one can read them all, and
-
depending on the set up of the committee and the individuals chosen to oversee the process, there will be blind spots. Yet this is people's health we are talking about, on a national scale. I think these biases are highly worth interrogating.
- 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.
