ArticlePublic health nutrition2022
Conflicts of interest for members of the US 2020 dietary guidelines advisory committee.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Why is there no regulation despite evidence that ultra-processed foods are hazardous to long-term health?Future healthcare journal · 2026Review
- Using Instagram for health promotion: professional and ethical challenges for Australian nutritionists and dietitians.Health promotion international · 2025Article
- Conflicts of interest in submissions and testimonies to an Australian parliamentary inquiry on menopause.Health promotion international · 2024Article
- An unbiased, sustainable, evidence-informed Universal Food Guide: a timely template for national food guides.Nutrition journal · 2024Review
- Conflicts of Interest in Nutrition: Categorical Thinking and the Stigma of Commercial Collaboration.Current developments in nutrition · 2024Article
- Article
- Adherence to the Planetary Health Diet Index and correlation with nutrients of public health concern: an analysis of NHANES 2003-2018.The American journal of clinical nutrition · 2024Article
- Nutritional Criminology: Why the Emerging Research on Ultra-Processed Food Matters to Health and Justice.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024Article
- Conflicts of Interest for Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee Members: Neither a New Nor Unexplored Issue.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- Reply to M Mialon et al.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- Beyond Plants: The Ultra-Processing of Global Diets Is Harming the Health of People, Places, and Planet.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Perspective: Examining Conflicts of Interest for Professional Service within the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2023Article
- The Founder: Dispositional Greed, Showbiz, and the Commercial Determinants of Health.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Applying a Commercial Determinants of Health Lens to Understand, Expose and Counter Industry Co-option, Appeasement and Partnership Comment on "'Part of the Solution': Food Corporation Strategies for Regulatory Capture and Legitimacy".International journal of health policy and management · 2022Article
- An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report.PNAS nexus · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo measure incidence of conflicts of interest (COI) with food and pharmaceutical industry actors on the advisory committee for the 2020-2025 US Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) and assess the adequacy of current mechanisms to disclose and manage COI among the committee's members.
designWe compiled longitudinal data from archival sources on connections between members of the DGA's advisory committee and actors. We hypothesised that these committee members, who oversee the science for the most influential dietary policy in the USA, might have significant COI that would be relevant to their decision making. Disclosure of COI on this committee was recommended in 2017 by the National Academies of Sciences in order to increase transparency and manage bias, but public disclosure of the committee's COI does not appear to have taken place.
settingThe committee was composed of twenty experts.
participantsNone.
resultsOur analysis found that 95 % of the committee members had COI with the food and/or pharmaceutical industries and that particular actors, including Kellogg, Abbott, Kraft, Mead Johnson, General Mills, Dannon and the International Life Sciences, had connections with multiple members. Research funding and membership of an advisory/executive board jointly accounted for more than 60 % of the total number of COI documented.
conclusionsTrustworthy dietary guidelines result from a transparent, objective and science-based, process. Our analysis has shown that the significant and widespread COI on the committee prevent the DGA from achieving the recommended standard for transparency without mechanisms in place to make this information publicly available.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.