Eric Roberts 
“Report Reveals Extensive Industry Ties Among U.S. Nutrition Panel Members”
A recent report, released this week, has shed light on the concerning connections between nearly half of the members of the U.S. government panel responsible for shaping dietary guidelines for Americans and various sectors of the food, pharmaceutical, and weight loss industries.
The report, authored by researchers from the advocacy organization U.S. Right to Know, highlights the historical efforts of food and pharmaceutical industry stakeholders to influence the U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA). These guidelines play a crucial role in shaping national dietary recommendations based on the latest scientific findings related to diet, nutrition, and health outcomes.
According to the report, 13 out of 20 members of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC), responsible for reviewing scientific research and making recommendations for the DGA, were found to have conflicts of interest with industry actors. These conflicts ranged from high-risk to medium-risk and possible conflicts.
The report identified nine members of the DGAC with high- or medium-risk conflicts of interest associated with companies and industry groups, including prominent names such as Coca-Cola, the Nestlé Nutrition Institute, National Dairy Council, Weight Watchers International, Beyond Meat, the California Walnut Commission, and the National Egg Board. In addition to these, pharmaceutical giants like Pfizer, Abbott, Novo Nordisk, and Eli Lilly were also mentioned in the report.
Gary Ruskin, the executive director of U.S. Right to Know, expressed concerns about the impact of such revelations on public trust in government dietary guidelines. He emphasized that millions of Americans rely on these guidelines for their well-being and that it is essential for the information to be free from undue influence by Big Food and Big Pharma.
While the report did highlight some positive findings, such as seven DGAC members having no conflicts of interest within the past five years and four members having only one instance of possible conflicts, it stressed the need for significant improvement. The report argues that as long as high-risk conflicts of interest persist within the DGAC, the public cannot have confidence in the independence and objectivity of official dietary advice provided by the U.S. government.
To address these issues, the report’s authors have put forth several recommendations for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. These recommendations include not appointing DGAC members with high-risk conflicts of interest, disclosing individual members’ conflicts from the past five years, improving disclosure forms, publishing provisional appointees’ lists for public comment, and enhancing transparency regarding leadership or paid roles at conflicted nutrition organizations.
Furthermore, the report advocates for the expansion of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act to cover the nutrition field and ensure greater transparency in industry relationships within the nutrition and health sectors.
Disclaimer: The views, suggestions, and opinions expressed here are the sole responsibility of the experts. No Dive Digest journalist was involved in the writing and production of this article.