Talk:Nutritionism

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Food and drink, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of food and drink related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Food and drinkWikipedia:WikiProject Food and drinkTemplate:WikiProject Food and drinkFood and drink

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Food and Drink task list:

To edit this page, select here

Here are some tasks you can do for WikiProject Food and drink:

Help bring these Top Importance articles currently B Status or below up to GA status: Agaricus bisporus (i.e. mushroom), Beef, Bread, Curry, Drink, Food, Ham and eggs, Soy sauce, Sushi, Yogurt
Bring these Top Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Beer, French cuisine, Sugar
Bring these High Importance articles currently at GA status up to FA status: Apple, Burger King, Fish
Participate in project-related deletion discussions.
Delete unrelated trivia sections found in articles. Please review WP:Trivia and WP:Handling trivia to learn how to do this.
Add the {{WikiProject Food and drink}} project banner to food and drink related articles and content to help bring them to the attention of members. For a complete list of banners for WikiProject Food and drink and its child projects, select here.
Provide photographs and images for Category:Wikipedia requested images of food
Consider joining this project's Assessment task force. List any project ideas in this section

Note: These lists are transcluded from the project's tasks pages.

Health and fitness Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Health and fitness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of health and physical fitness related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Health and fitnessWikipedia:WikiProject Health and fitnessTemplate:WikiProject Health and fitnessHealth and fitness
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

Disagree with the idea suggested merger into the Nutrition article. Nutritionism as an ideological stance (though perhaps one not affirmatively committed to by its adherents) deserves a page of its own. As an ever increasing phenomenon due to increasing global and local consciousness with regard to issues surrounding food, interest in (and contributions to) an article on nutritionism can only grow. Boldymumbles (talk) 11:54, 14 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Yahnahwoodby.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Merge

I think that nutritionism should remain separate from nutrition since it's an ideology rather than a science. However, I think it would be good to have a reference to or section about nutritionism on the nutrition page (129.123.156.57 (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2008 (UTC)).[reply]

NPOV

This seems to be a term that is applied to others but never oneself, much like extremism. How do we go about presenting a neutral view of a thing that is only named in criticism? MagnesianPhoenix (talk) 06:00, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Faulty Citation

the following is part of "defense of nutritionism": One criticism is that while many scientific studies of nutrition, or the conclusions extrapolated from them by both scientists and journalists have been bad, we should not reject a scientific approach to food altogether.[4]

If you read the article linked to in [4] (actually titled "Science and the fiction of nutrition") there is no defense of nutritionism, and in fact the author uses the term nutritionism critically (of the nutrition industry) several times. The author argues that there is little that science can currently tell us about nutrition beyond basic dietary advice like eat more vegetables. Rather than being antithetical to the critique of nutritionism, this article raises many of the same points as Pollan does in "In Defense of Food". It should be noted that no one is discouraging the use of good science in guiding nutrition, merely that almost all advice pandered as 'scientific' when it comes to nutrition is anything but, and that there is little evidence to support a dietary focus on individual nutrients as opposed to whole foods. The author of the article agrees that nutritionism is bad, and says so, thus it doesn't make much sense to include it as a citation under the section "Defense of Nutritionism". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.161.210 (talk) 18:04, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will attempt to fix the article based on this talk

I hope to be finished in a few days. Daniel Kellis (talk) 18:45, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]