Can I Believe Scientific Studies? Sifting Facts from Fallacies Eliminates Fear-Based Decisions

Science is a funny “thing.” For one who thought science was relatively straight forward — more “black and white” than “grey” — in those early days of college chemistry, I’ve learned over the years that it’s quite the opposite, especially when food and nutrition issues are involved.

Today, with the bombardment of 24/7 messaging on what to eat or not, what will “make America healthier” (or not), and what will prevent or cause a disease, it comes as no surprise that as consumers, we generally don’t trust what we read or hear about food or nutrition ¹ — especially if it doesn’t align with our beliefs.²

How do we sift facts from fallacies? We all want to trust the latest findings or headlines, especially if they match our beliefs. But we need to stop and evaluate if what we read is credible. Being informed eliminates fear-based decisions.

Waving the Red Flag

So where do we go from here? There are some guardrails or red flags that can help us sift facts from fallacies. The International Food Information Council (IFIC) identified 10 warning signs or red flags of junk science:³

• Recommendations that promise a quick fix.
• Dire warnings of danger from a single product or regimen.
• Claims that sound too good to be true.
• Simplistic conclusions drawn from a complex study.
• Recommendations based on a single study.
• Dramatic statements that are refuted by reputable scientific organizations.
• Lists of “good” and “bad” foods.
• Recommendations made to help sell a product.
• Recommendations based on studies published without peer review.
• Recommendations from studies that ignore differences among individuals or groups.

The Current Reality

While I could write volumes and cite examples for any of these 10 warning signs, let’s dig a little deeper on two that highlight our current environment:

Dire Warnings About a Single Product – First, let’s look at “dire warnings of danger about a single product or regimen.” These seem to be populating headlines, books and, most recently, U.S. policy. Food dyes and seed oils are a few of the current “hot topics.” The overall health and safety of what we eat is extremely important, but one ingredient is not going to change our health status. For example, the current push to replace synthetic food dyes with natural ones frankly will not “make American healthy,” especially when the item is a sugar-laden beverage or calorie dense food.

In addition, years of studies have shown no related adverse human risk for use of these items (a rat study is not the same). While naturally sourced dyes may be the best option, they are the least studied for potential risks. In this case, some toxicologists have expressed concerns.

Likewise, seed oils (soybean, canola and corn) are in the crossfires lately. Seed oils are polyunsaturated fats containing omega-3 and omega-6. While the ratio of omega-6 to omega-3 can be higher in some seed oils, raising questions about potential inflammation in the body, science studies do not validate the point.⁴ Consumption of saturated fats (beef tallow, butter, coconut), by contrast, still show greater health risks. In both examples, it’s still the “dose or portion” that makes the risk.

Dramatic Statements Refuted by Reputable Scientific Organizations – Second, warnings about genetically modified foods (GMOs) and use of glyphosate in crop protection are perfect examples of dramatic statements that have been refuted by reputable scientific organizations. Decades of scientific studies from the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine show no significant harm from these products to human or environmental health. And yet, the “fear factor” flag still being waved … today more than ever.

Trustworthy Messenger

Who do you trust for nutrition and food information? According to consumer research, food and nutrition scientists, medical professionals and registered dietitians are mentioned as highly trusted sources¹ for approximately half of the population. But the actual source of information for many? It’s still family (except if they’re also a RD), friends, and of course, social media.

While the scientific community, including many of my peers, populate the social media channels with credible information, influencers that lead with fear often “win.”

Science Is a Journey

Science is journey, not a destination. While this may not be reassuring for some, it’s good news. Continuous scientific research has led us to treat and manage peanut allergies differently, improved diet strategies for diabetes management, and led us to discover how beneficial micronutrients in our fruits and veggies can reduce chronic disease, if we eat them.

Nutrition is relatively a new science and what we know is the result of research and learnings over the years by trained experts and scientists, not social media influencers.

Dig beyond the headlines and look at the facts and potential fallacies. Whether we want to believe it or not, is a personal decision. But knowing the facts eliminates fear-based decisions.

_____________________________________________

Reliable Sources for Consideration:

• Rosanne Rust, MS, RDN https://rustnutrition.com/about-me/
• Melissa Joy Dobbins, MS, RDN https://soundbitesrd.com/ (podcasts)
• Substack, Unbiased Science, Jess Steier, DRPH, Dustin Moore, PhD, RDN and other credential professionals.

References:

1. “IFIC Spotlight Survey: Americans’ Trust In Food & Nutrition Science,” By Food Insight, October 1, 2024.

2. “Down the Rabbit Hole: How Digital Media Shapes Public Perceptions of Food Science and Technology Research (And How We Can Safeguard Science Integrity and Credibility),” Annual Review of Food Science and Technology, Vol. 16:459-479, April 2025.

3. “Understanding & Interpreting Food & Health Scientific Studies,” Guidance For Food & Nutrition Communicators, International Food Information Council (IFIC), March 2024.

4. “Are Seed Oils Bad?” By Rosanne Rust, Rust Nutrition Services, November 4, 2024.