Question #3 October 2014
In three of the studies in this meta-analysis, clinical
psychologists or “Professional interventionists” delivered the diet portion of
the weight-loss interventions. How do you feel about other individuals besides
RDs providing nutrition recommendations? How can RDs promote to the public that
they are the most reliable source for nutrition information and that other sources
(TV shows, supplement advertisements, fad diet books, etc.) may be unreliable?
posted by Caroline Moss @ 4:08 PM
11 comments
11 Comments:
I'm not against others being part of the conversation but I don't think they should be the only ones talking. I think that we truly are the experts in our field, and we would be the best providers of these recommendations.
I think this is just going to take people time to realize. The more they see their primary care physicians or go to the hospital and a dietitian is a member of a team, or their family members see a dietitian regularly the more the expertise of our profession will spread. Until then, we have to have tough skin and loud voices. We have to promote ourselves above and beyond.
Clinical psychologists have very valuable insight when it comes to the emotions and feelings towards food but I don't think they are qualified to give nutrition and diet advice. That's like a pharmacist trying to take x-rays for a radiologist. However, working together as a team to address mental factors of overeating I think is great!
RDs need to have evidence based facts to show people that supplements and fad diets can be harmful/unsuccessful. Accommodating to the needs of the individual is important as well. Explaining nutrient needs and the benefits to eating healthy in a way that interests them will be beneficial to their understanding. Being relatable and finding certain things that they will actually do is key to patients making positive changes.
Haley,
I like your ideas of accommodating the needs of people and being relatable. I think many people might just believe a supplement advertisement or an unreliable TV show(Dr. Oz...), because they are readily available and easy to understand. However, visiting a dietitian could be intimidating for someone or trying to read a research article can be confusing. So trying to break down nutrition in easy terms that interest people is a great tip for RDs.
On one hand, I would say that how I feel about it depends on the advice being given. If it's good, solid nutrition advice, that's okay. On the other hand, having other non-dietetic professionals deliver nutritional advice kind of dilutes our impact as professionals.
Honestly, I don't know the answer to your question about how we can promote ourselves as the most reliable source of info. I think we have a lot of work to do. For one, I think we need charismatic, vocal, and passionate spokespeople to get out there and shut down the garbage we see on shows like Dr. Oz. Get on local TV stations to address trendy nutritional topics. Or we need to get ourselves out there into publications that people read for nutrition/fitness info, like Men's Health, Women's Health, etc. and get our well-researched opinions into the public eye. I think it always helps for people to see us doing more than promoting myplate because I get the feeling a lot of people think that's all we do!
This is a tough question. Sometimes dietitians get a bad rap because we're kind of like the food police. I agree with Brady about having charismatic spokespeople to represent our ideas, and the one thing that I would add to that is CONSISTENCY. I think there's so much information out there that consumers are just confused more than anything else. If we could just have someone that is giving consistent information so that consumers will be wary of quick fixes like we see on television shows such as Dr. Oz. This reminds me of another point, which is that consumers are really quick to trust a diet plan given to them by a doctor. So many diet books are written by M.D.s but who knows what kind of nutrition education or training they've had? People just trust the title of a doctor.
Regarding nutrition recommendations from people other than RDs, I think it depends on the situation, but it goes back to a multidisciplinary approach to weight loss. I agree with Haley that clinical psychologists can be a valuable member of the team, but they should leave the nutrition part up to the experts, which should be the RDs.
First off, this is a great question Caroline! Props!
I'm not sure that I like the fact that non-RDs give nutrition recommendations (cough personal trainers...cough...chiropractors), but I think the fact that other professionals are doing as much should give us all even more incentive to push our brand and our role in the health-care process.
We shouldn't just be complacent with other professionals doing our job, and I think up and coming dietitians hearing about other professions giving advice that we are trained and licensed to give provides us with even more of a reason to work hard and gain the respect of our peers in the health care field.
It has become clear that even though we have a credential, not everyone is convinced that we are the experts in the field...so what we have to do is convince them otherwise. Brady brings up a great point about pushing our brand using charismatic, vocal, and passionate spokespeople. Additionally, I think we can make just as much of an impact on a larger scale if we all just work together to let people know that we are able to translate current nutrition research & evidence based principles into practice. We need to earn the respect of our peers in medicine so that they want to come to us for advice and hear what we have to say on situations (like the VLCD).
We also need to earn the trust of the public, and one way to do that is to just do a good job, develop rapport and provide patients with information that actually WORKS. Word of mouth goes a long way. Advertising our services (possibly with testimonials) wouldn't hurt either.
I think the best way to get these messages across is through the use of a multidisciplinary team. All aspects (nutrition, exercise, psychology, medical supervision, etc.) are important in making long-term changes, so all of these professionals should be involved. However, I think each individual should stick to their area of expertise and avoid taking the words out of someone else's mouth. As we mentioned in the first post, we would recommend clients to exercise, but would not give them specific advise about exercise routines. In this same aspect, I don't think other health professionals should be talking about nutrition and giving dietetics advice. But then again, it's all about getting across the information that will lead to healthier lifestyles, so as long as they don't directly contradict what we try to tel clients, it may not be harmful.
In order to promote that we are the most reliable source, I think that we need to continue to practice only evidence-based information, be consistent in the messages that we get across, and get out into the public eye with a louder presence. The TV shows, advertisements, and diet books are popular mostly because they make noise and are in your face. Our biggest challenge in being seen as a reliable source is learning how to compete with these other sources in the media.
Brady brought up a great point about how RDs need spokespeople to tell the public the truth about nutrition topics. Sammy also brought up a good point that a lot of nutrition books are written by doctors. I think most people just aren't as familiar with RDs as they are with doctors, so they are likely to believe anything they say. I think many people also don't know about all the coursework and training RDs have to go through. So having spokespeople and also every day RDs provide reliable and truthful nutrition information will hopefully build our rapport with the public.
I think that it takes a team to make things work. I believe that everyone in their team has their professional opinions on different topics. However, I would not overstep my boundary with a physician, nurse, trainer, or psychologist so I would hope they wouldn't over step their boundaries with nutrition. Now a days everything can be googled and I'd imagine that most of these professionals are getting their nutrition knowledge from the internet. I could also find diagnosis on the internet but that does not qualify me to diagnose a patient. I think as RDs we have to find our own voice, be the educated professional that can back up our opinions. We have to demand to be respected by our peers and the public. Dietetics is still a growing field and I believe we need to be able to advocate for our profession and get things done our way. Discussion is always welcome with other peers and coworkers but everyone should know their role and be willing to learn from others.
If someone who is not an RD is giving nutrition recommendations, I would question whether their knowledge came from a creditable source. I think we go through an extensive learning process that few non-RD's could match. In addition to that, we base our recommendations on our own careful review of the research or the Academy's evidence analysis library as opposed to that of media reports whose purpose is to draw in more readers, written by authors who have little or no nutrition education. We need to make the public aware of the differences. Unfortunately, the creditability of RD's has been questioned in some media reports due to some of the food industry sponsors backing the AND. When these issues are discussed in the media, it makes it more difficult for us to convince client/patients that we know what we are talking about.
I agree with Sammy that consistency is really important. And maybe we need to explain our perspective on research studies and point out deficiencies when popular media interprets research incorrectly. I know someone who reads research studies, and sometimes makes erroneous conclusions based on what he read because he doesn't have the nutrition background to put the information in the proper perspective. Somehow, we need to make it clear what the outcome of research really means. Maybe research articles should have a section summarizing the information learned from the research aimed people with limited knowledge about the subject. That might make it harder for media to twist the research outcome to be more sensational than it really is, and help us highlight our value.
Post a Comment
<< Home