首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>American Journal of Public Hygiene >McGoverns Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs Versus the: Meat Industry on the Diet-Heart Question (1976–1977)
【2h】

McGoverns Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs Versus the: Meat Industry on the Diet-Heart Question (1976–1977)

机译:麦戈文参议院营养与人类需求选择委员会与之:饮食业在饮食心脏问题上的关系(1976–1977年)

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

For decades, public health advocates have confronted industry over dietary policy, their debates focusing on how to address evidentiary uncertainty. In 1977, enough consensus existed among epidemiologists that the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Need used the diet–heart association to perform an extraordinary act: advocate dietary goals for a healthier diet. During its hearings, the meat industry tested that consensus. In one year, the committee produced two editions of its Dietary Goals for the United States, the second containing a conciliatory statement about coronary heart disease and meat consumption. Critics have characterized the revision as a surrender to special interests. But the senators faced issues for which they were professionally unprepared: conflicts within science over the interpretation of data and notions of proof. Ultimately, it was lack of scientific consensus on these factors, not simply political acquiescence, that allowed special interests to secure changes in the guidelines.
机译:几十年来,公共卫生倡导者一直在饮食政策方面与业界对抗,他们的辩论集中在如何解决证据不确定性上。 1977年,流行病学家之间达成了足够的共识,即参议院营养与人类需求特选委员会利用饮食与心脏的联系来执行一项非凡的举动:倡导饮食目标以实现更健康的饮食。在听证会上,肉类行业检验了这一共识。该委员会在一年内为美国制定了两版《饮食目标》,第二版包含了关于冠心病和肉类消费的和解声明。批评家把这次修订定为对特殊利益的屈服。但是,参议员面临着他们没有专业准备的问题:科学内部在数据解释和证据概念上的冲突。归根结底,正是由于缺乏对这些因素的科学共识,而不仅仅是政治上的默许,才使特殊利益集团得以确保准则的改变。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号