In North Carolina is it apparently not legal to give dietary advise unless you are a registered dietician. Paleo blogger, Steve Cooksey of Diabetes-Warrior.net has been targeted by the North Carolina Board of Dietetics/Nutrition (registered dietitians) under the guise of a North Carolina state law because he was counseling people in nutrition. As a citizen it really gets my back up when a political organization such as the Board of Dietetics (who we know gets tons of money from soft drink and junk food companies) starts dictating their own brand of nutrition.
More people need to take responsibility for their own health
Cooksey was overweight with insulin dependent diabetes. Then he took responsibility for his own health instead of relying on doctors and medications. He adopted the Paleo diet, lost weight, lost the diabetic diagnosis and requires no medications. He did it all through changing his lifestyle and diet. See his cool video here.
As a nutritionist/chiropractor I think someone should have training in order to counsel people for money. Unfortunately, dietetics in this country is controlled by the processed food and beverage industries. (Click here to find out what the American Dietetic Association is trying to do in every state in this country.) The appropriate training can be acquired through several other institutions that teach correct nutrition — not the conventional processed food supporting misinformation they call dietetics.
Treatment for diabetics in 7 countries ineffective
In March of 2011, Science Daily published an article about a study that was published in the Bulletin of the World Health Organization‘s March edition. Entitled, “Management of diabetes and associated cardiovascular risk factors in seven countries: a comparison of data from national health examination surveys,” the study compared the outcomes of diabetic management in 7 countries.
According to Dr. Stephen Lim, one of the study’s co-authors and an Associate Professor of Global Health at IHME,
Too many people are not being properly diagnosed with diabetes and related cardiovascular risk factors. Those who are diagnosed aren’t being effectively treated. This is a huge missed opportunity to lower the burden of disease in both rich and poor countries.
IHME researchers gathered data and performed their analysis in collaboration with researchers at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine; the Harvard Global Equity Initiative; the National Institute of Public Health in Mexico; and Ramathibodi Hospital in Thailand.
In an attempt to determine the cause of the low rates of diagnosis and effective treatment, researchers examined a range of factors and found that there were no inequalities in diagnosis and treatment of diabetes related to socioeconomic status.
However, in the US, people who had insurance were twice as likely to be diagnosed and effectively treated for diabetes as those who did not have insurance. Economic status does have an effect on whether or not one has insurance or not.
In the United States alone, nearly 90% of adult diabetics — more than 16 million adults aged 35 and older — have blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol that are not treated effectively — that is, they do not meet standards for healthy levels of blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol. In Mexico, 99% of adult diabetics are not meeting those standards.
Is taking medication acceptable when it can be managed by diet?
What does effective treatment mean? From a researcher’s point of view it means that medications are used to control blood sugar (and the other conditions). While medications may be necessary to control things initially, it is certainly better for someone to take control of their own health and learn how to improve their health through lifestyle changes.
Steve Cooksey did just that and is sharing what he learned through his own experience. Aren’t we all, as bloggers doing that?
Cooksey is represented by libertarian group Institute for Justice, which on its website defends Cooksey’s position:
…the First Amendment does not allow the government to ban people from sharing ordinary advice about diet, or scrub the Internet — from blogs to Facebook to Twitter — of speech the government does not like. North Carolina can no more force Steve to become a licensed dietitian than it could require Dear Abby to become a licensed psychologist.
I like their reference to Dear Abbey. I would miss reading her column wouldn’t you? What do you think about this case? Leave a comment and let me know!