As a registered and licensed dietitian nutritionist for over 15 years in Louisiana, I have worked alongside many providers with the common goal of providing the best possible care and supporting patients with guidance on balanced diets.
With high rates of childhood obesity in Louisiana, I recognize that the state legislature is looking to apply some new frameworks in the public health space. While these measures are well-intentioned, it is apparent to me that they rely upon some misconceptions that warrant further consideration so that we don’t do more harm than good in navigating health outcomes.
The United States no doubt has the safest food supply system in the world thanks to the oversight of the FDA. The nutrition profession is guided not by outside influencers but by scientific, regulatory and reliable U.S. public health agencies.
My argument is this; why would we restrict ingredients in foods that “may” cause harm, as the proposed warning label indicates, in a vulnerable population already subject to malnutrition, when we already have the federal oversight to dictate what foods and how much of it we serve our children?
I worry about the credibility and validity of the field of nutritional sciences in an already fragile culture where everyone claims to be a nutritionist. Undoubtedly, transparency is critical. Placing warning labels on food products is good in theory; however, it’s unclear on the potential harmful effects of these ingredients we are warning consumers against. Also, consider the drastic uncertainty if some ingredients are deemed safe by the FDA, yet there’s a warning label contradicting the FDA’s claim.
Louisiana lawmakers are right to think critically about public health policies, but my extensive experience as a practitioner leads me to believe that new proposals should be reconsidered to instead embrace evidence-based research to guide our practices.
