How Did I Get Involved?
Good you ask. Last year, an email was sent my way from Harvard University to coax me into enrolling in one of their courses, offered to both professionals, such as nutritionists or doctors, as well as to the public. The course is titled Evidence-based Optimal Nutrition: The Quest for Proof. I looked up the course, and while all my better judgments told me to drop it, curiosity killed the cat… it didn’t kill the cat but it sure killed Harvard!
I enrolled–it was cheap, only $49 for either version of the course. As a PhD I qualified for the professional and I really wanted to see what they teach about nutrition to professionals! Wow!
Clueless Doctors & Scientists 
NIH Commentary for Nutrition Research
What Research Should Be Funded?
In November 2018 through December 15, 2018, the NIH invited public comments to guide the kind of research they will support for the next decade. This comment period was short but critical. Historically, the NIH has been influenced tremendously by business interests that provide huge chucks of financial support to the government and thereby to the NIH. Thus there has ever been any unbiased research funding for nutrition research. This may also be true of other research areas–I am no familiar with them.
I found it very important to submit my commentary, which I did on the 11th of December, so a few days before the deadline. Here I copy-paste my commentary so you can see what I see as weakness in the NIH funding process through my recommendations. There is no way to know if the NIH considers anyone’s recommendations at all. However, it cannot hurt to try. Right? Right. So here is my comment, which starts with the greeting letter. I copy-paste the whole thing. I also attach it in a PDF in case you want to download it–it is a public document now: NIH–comment–AAStanton–12-11-2018 Continue reading →
Share this: