DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: BENGOETXEA,JUAN BAUTISTA
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: TODT,OLIVER
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Manuscrito (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452021005004202
Resumo: Abstract In this paper we present an analysis of the role of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the regulation of health claims (claims about additional health benefits provided by foods). Currently there is a line of thought in the nutrition sciences and in regulation that data from RCTs may be able to minimize, or even make superfluous, the role played by expert knowledge in decision making. We analyze the limitations of, as well as the possible intervention of expert judgment in RCTs in pharmacology and nutrition. As a result of our analysis, we argue that both RCTs and expert knowledge are necessary for data generation in health claim regulation. We argue that as far as data generation is concerned, nutrition is more complex than pharmacology, implying that RCTs are more difficult to effectively design and execute. What the latter means is that in nutrition and health claim regulation, expert knowledge is even more important than in pharmacology.
id UNICAMP-17_76122228b814b95da510e8032d54799b
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0100-60452021005004202
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-17
network_name_str Manuscrito (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMSHealth-ClaimEvidenceNutritionDecision-MakingRCTExpertiseAbstract In this paper we present an analysis of the role of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the regulation of health claims (claims about additional health benefits provided by foods). Currently there is a line of thought in the nutrition sciences and in regulation that data from RCTs may be able to minimize, or even make superfluous, the role played by expert knowledge in decision making. We analyze the limitations of, as well as the possible intervention of expert judgment in RCTs in pharmacology and nutrition. As a result of our analysis, we argue that both RCTs and expert knowledge are necessary for data generation in health claim regulation. We argue that as far as data generation is concerned, nutrition is more complex than pharmacology, implying that RCTs are more difficult to effectively design and execute. What the latter means is that in nutrition and health claim regulation, expert knowledge is even more important than in pharmacology.UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência2021-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452021005004202Manuscrito n.ahead 2021reponame:Manuscrito (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMP10.1590/0100-6045.2021.v44n3.jbinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBENGOETXEA,JUAN BAUTISTATODT,OLIVEReng2021-09-22T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0100-60452021005004202Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0100-6045&lng=pt&nrm=isoPUBhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpmwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br2317-630X0100-6045opendoar:2021-09-22T00:00Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
title DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
spellingShingle DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
BENGOETXEA,JUAN BAUTISTA
Health-Claim
Evidence
Nutrition
Decision-Making
RCT
Expertise
title_short DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
title_full DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
title_fullStr DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
title_full_unstemmed DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
title_sort DECISION-MAKING IN THE NUTRITION SCIENCES: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE FOR ASSESSING HEALTH CLAIMS
author BENGOETXEA,JUAN BAUTISTA
author_facet BENGOETXEA,JUAN BAUTISTA
TODT,OLIVER
author_role author
author2 TODT,OLIVER
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv BENGOETXEA,JUAN BAUTISTA
TODT,OLIVER
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Health-Claim
Evidence
Nutrition
Decision-Making
RCT
Expertise
topic Health-Claim
Evidence
Nutrition
Decision-Making
RCT
Expertise
description Abstract In this paper we present an analysis of the role of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the regulation of health claims (claims about additional health benefits provided by foods). Currently there is a line of thought in the nutrition sciences and in regulation that data from RCTs may be able to minimize, or even make superfluous, the role played by expert knowledge in decision making. We analyze the limitations of, as well as the possible intervention of expert judgment in RCTs in pharmacology and nutrition. As a result of our analysis, we argue that both RCTs and expert knowledge are necessary for data generation in health claim regulation. We argue that as far as data generation is concerned, nutrition is more complex than pharmacology, implying that RCTs are more difficult to effectively design and execute. What the latter means is that in nutrition and health claim regulation, expert knowledge is even more important than in pharmacology.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452021005004202
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0100-60452021005004202
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/0100-6045.2021.v44n3.jb
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência
publisher.none.fl_str_mv UNICAMP - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Centro de Lógica, Epistemologia e História da Ciência
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Manuscrito n.ahead 2021
reponame:Manuscrito (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Manuscrito (Online)
collection Manuscrito (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br
_version_ 1748950066227314688