Statement on the outcome of the HPCSA inquiry into the conduct of Professor Tim Noakes

The Association for Dietetics in South Africa’s (ADSA) former president Ms Claire Julsing-Strydom submitted a complaint about Professor Tim Noakes to the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) in 2014 on behalf of ADSA regarding, what it considered, unconventional infant nutrition advice.

The complaint

The complaint was lodged after Professor Noakes advised a mom via Twitter to “ween” (sic) her baby on to a low carbohydrate, high fat diet. ADSA believed, at the time, that the advice:

  1. was not based on current scientific evidence;
  2. contradicted international and local guidelines for complementary feeding adopted by organisations like the World Health Organisation;
  3. could negatively affect a baby’s health, growth and development; and
  4. was provided via Twitter without an examination or consideration of the baby’s health or age and therefore nutritional needs. ADSA also considered it risky if other moms on Twitter took the same advice.

Professor Noakes did not advise the mom to continue with breastfeeding, which undermined its importance. For these reasons, ADSA considered the advice unconventional and requested the HPCSA to investigate further.

The HPCSA charge and inquiry

The HPCSA is a statutory body established to regulate registered healthcare practitioners and protect the public. The HPCSA considered the complaint and decided to hold an inquiry into what it considered “unprofessional conduct” that was “not in accordance with the norms and standards of your profession” and that Noakes “provided unconventional advice on breastfeeding on social networks (tweet/s).”

ADSA has lodged other complaints to the HPCSA to adjudicate in the past. Most cases are resolved mutually without the need for a detailed inquiry. It was never ADSA’s intention for this matter to span over 3 years and to progress to a hearing. The HPCSA follows a specific disciplinary process for all complaints. This case has gone through all the necessary steps and couldn’t be resolved or concluded in the preliminary inquiry phase. The HPCSA has autonomy on the type of inquiry it wished to institute and ADSA has co-operated fully with their decision.

The formal hearings began in June 2015 and continued in November that year. The inquiry continued in February and October 2016. The hearings have now been concluded and the HPCSA has issued its verdict.

ADSA’s concern

ADSA was concerned, when lodging the complaint in 2014, that a strict low carbohydrate, high fat diet for babies would not meet all the nutritional needs of a growing child. Current scientific evidence does not support an extreme low carbohydrate, high fat diet for babies. When foods rich in carbohydrates such as whole grains and legumes are avoided and other carbohydrate food sources such as dairy, fruits and vegetables are restricted, the diet can become deficient in certain essential nutrients, such as vitamin C, B1, B3, B6, folate, magnesium and fibre. Because infants and young children are considered a vulnerable group, the potential for nutrient deficiencies is a serious concern. Deficiencies can compromise growth, and cognitive and physical development. Restrictive diets for babies with medical conditions should only be followed under strict medical supervision with monitoring by suitably trained and registered healthcare professionals.

Dietary guidelines for feeding babies are developed by organisations such as the World Health Organisation and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), based on a strong body of evidence. In South Africa, the Department of Health has adopted these recommendations. We also have Paediatric Food Based Dietary Guidelines backed by technical support papers published in 2013. This is a widely accepted scientific approach to child nutrition. The risks of experimenting with a baby’s development are immense and the long-term effect of low carbohydrate, high fat diets for babies is currently unknown. ADSA believed that the advice provided by Professor Noakes was against accepted common practice. The concern for the health of babies was ADSA’s primary interest when ADSA lodged this complaint.

The use of social media for professional purposes does pose interesting questions, especially for dietitians and other health care practitioners. While social media may be appropriate for generic public health messages such as how to reduce salt or sugar consumption in diets, social media may not be advisable for providing specific individualised, clinical nutritional advice to vulnerable groups such as babies, where little is known about their health and medical history. ADSA does recognise that social media provides significant opportunities for public health information and for use by health care professionals. However, clear guidelines are required to guide and regulate patient interaction outlining the use and limits of social media by health practitioners.

“ADSA accepts the verdict and we are relieved that the hearing has finally been concluded. We welcome the precedent this case provides on what we considered unconventional advice. The case also sets a precedent about the use and limits of social media by health professionals. For ADSA this hearing was never about winning or losing, or standing for or against Professor Noakes. It was about protecting the health of babies and future adults,” said Maryke Gallagher, President of ADSA.

“We will study the verdict in detail and decide what implications this case has for ADSA and dietitians. We also call on the HPCSA to provide guidelines for health professionals’ use of social media in their practice,” said Gallagher.

ADSA and its members will continue to provide dietary advice that is evidence-based and in line with guidelines provided by the national Department of Health and international bodies such as the World Health Organisation. A scientific and rigorous process is used to develop international and local dietary guidelines, and the outcome of the inquiry does not mean that these guidelines will now change. ADSA will consider new approaches and practices based on scientific evidence that has been adopted by credible health organisations.

About sponsorship and big foods

“Many dietitians and members of ADSA have been worried about the allegations made during the course of this inquiry that dietitians are unfairly favouring big food companies because they sponsor the organisation. ADSA wants to assure those concerned that we will never compromise ADSA’s independence as a result of corporate sponsorship. ADSA is a registered not-for-profit organisation (NPO) and relies in part on fundraising to sustain its work. In 2016, we received 63% of income from members. Our sponsorship policy is clear on non-influence by sponsors. We do not endorse any brand, product or retail chain. There is no conspiracy between big foods and dietitians to sell unhealthy food to South Africans. A healthy population through well balanced diets is what we strive for,” said Gallagher.

It is very unfortunate that the professionalism and integrity of a number of nutrition scientists in South Africa has been unfairly questioned during this inquiry. It is ADSA’s hope that the reputation of nutrition professionals and dietitians as nutrition experts will be restored. Despite the negative sentiment, ADSA believed it had a responsibility to enquire about an issue that had such significant consequences for dietitians and other health professionals.

On Tim Noakes

“We respect Professor Tim Noakes for his work as a sports scientist. He is a well respected A-rated scientist and is respected in academic circles. His work is pioneering and he has always tested conventional thinking. But, we have differed with Professor Noakes on this issue. We have no personal gripe with Professor Noakes. Our concern has always been about the health of babies,” said Gallagher.

This hearing has been rather divisive with strong views expressed on both sides. The debate has raised significant awareness about the importance of nutrition, which is positive. Health, wellness and nutrition should concern everybody. But, South Africans have also been confused by the ebb and flow of this divisive nutrition debate and the inconsistent nutritional advice provided over many years. That is unfortunate.

“I’m pleased this is over and we can now focus on other urgent nutrition challenges we have in South Africa,” concluded Gallagher.

Useful links:

ADSA’s position on infant nutrition:

Infant Nutrition Statement

Comprehensive Q&A:

Q&A

ADSA’s sponsorship policy:

ADSA Sponsorship Policy

Tim Noakes tweet: 

ADSA_Noakes Tweet

  1. The HPCSA charge:

“guilty of unprofessional conduct or conduct which, when regard is had to your profession is unprofessional, in that during the period between January 2014 and February 2014 you acted in a manner that is not in accordance with the norms and standards of your profession in that you provided unconventional advice on breastfeeding on social networks (tweet/s).”

50 thoughts on “Statement on the outcome of the HPCSA inquiry into the conduct of Professor Tim Noakes

  1. Will you now be acknowledging that ‘banting’ (not a fad, its been around for well over 100 years) should be offered as a choice to SA people who present with metabolic illnesses including Type 2 diabetes? And indeed should be offered as a choice to everyone, from 0 to 100 years plus.

    Liked by 9 people

    • easylocarb

      Certainly to T2DMs it should be offered … anything less, with the evidence we have, would indicate that dietitians have chosen to no longer be health care professionals.

      Liked by 7 people

  2. Tanya

    Even your statement is embarrassing to you. Shame on you for not putting first the health and welfare of South African people. Shame on you for using all the fancy words to cover over your error. Shame on your former President for lodging the claim and for such unprofessional actions. Shame on the organisations who supported her claim. Shame on you for the future actions you will take on continuing to try to take the egg and mud off your face. Shame Shame Shame. If there are any decent honest integrity keepers in your organisation left, may they rise to the top quickly and make the changes necessary. This is not over. The people will continue to speak and Prof Noakes will be held up for the ultimate humanist altruistic scientist that he is.

    Liked by 7 people

  3. Shame on you ADSA. Drain your own swamp first before scratching in someone else’s pond. Your statement denies that Noakes promoted breastfeeding and yet you post his tweet which says that high fat breast milk is essential. Get your house in order. And quit trying to justify to your members that your Big Food sponsors don’t play a key role in your ridiculous guidelines. It is dietitians not LCHF practitioners who are endangering the lives of patients. Your dogged insistence that low carb diets are dangerous, is feeding (pun intended) the obesity, type 2 diabetes, dementia and heart disease epidemic.

    Liked by 4 people

  4. GregW

    If you want there to be no suspicion about your integrity with regards to sponsorship then stop accepting the money from companies who profit most from obesity. It’d sort of obvious. Duh…

    Liked by 6 people

  5. Timber

    Your internal communication that was handed into evidence refutes your statement. Crisis Management coming before integrity. Your refutation of corporate sponsorship doesn’t answer for the arguments that were raised against your members or the research, not the association. Perhaps the misrepresentation wasn’t as low as the phoney meta-analysis you dietitians conspired to draw up by Naude et al that was clearly aimed at Prof. Anyone wanna cringe and laugh, check out Zoe Harcombe’s deposition on what level of “science” ADSA accepts.

    After following the angel’s deposition, I decided to go full Keto in a n=1 experiment. The dietary recommendations of two RD’s was turned upside down and my inflammatory issues (big guy limping since years) went away within 3 weeks.

    Liked by 6 people

  6. Maureen Berry

    What a totally embarrassing statement! Have you learned nothing? All of the freely available video of Prof Tim’s evidence should be essential core teaching for all students of dietetics. What an amazing presentation he gave. If you disagree with it, you should be challenging the findings based on scientific analysis, not papering over the cracks. Instead of employing a crisis manager you should be employing some top class scientists, and maybe statisticians, to fully analyse what your current advice is based on, good or bad science.

    You do not deserve to be called a professional organisation. You should be expressing some humility and apologising to Prof Noakes for turning his life upside down for 3 years!

    Liked by 8 people

  7. Martin Wermuth

    Unfortunately you keenly prove Max Planck’s statement right with a vengeance: “Science advances one funeral at a time”. I see no humility, no admission of guilt, no apology, no willingness to learn, no decency in your statement. Shame on you and your entire profession, if your members stand by you and this joke of a statement.

    Liked by 4 people

  8. Richard Davies

    Your organisation should appologise to Tim Noakes and his family. Your quick and unquestioned action to persue him, is misguided and highlights your bias and subservience to pharma and food industry, to all those who are able to question your loyalty. “GOD Save Common Sence”. The Human race deserves to be better informed by its’ peers. Professor Noakes, you deserve the most senior recognition from your Country. Well done Sir!

    Liked by 4 people

  9. benfury22

    ABOUT ADSA

    The Association for Dietetics in South Africa (ADSA) is A COMPLETELY UNprofessional organisation for Registered Dietitians as well as a non-profit organization that TAKES MONEY FROM BIG FOOD AND BIG PHARMA that promotes SUBoptimal nutrition for all South Africans by sharing BOGUS NON-SCIENTIFIC nutrition related articles when we’re not busy trying to CRUCIFY TIM NOAKES for TRYING TO HELP PEOPLE BECAUSE IT PISSES OFF OUR CORPORATE SPONSORS!!!

    Liked by 4 people

  10. Pa

    What have you learned from this process? Nothing. The attack on Tim Noakes WAS personal , don’t pretend otherwise. Unless you embrace the science yourself and change you will end up the laughing stock of history. The countless who have died prematurely due to poor dietary advice is unforgivable.

    Liked by 4 people

  11. Scoop

    As a medical based organisation – you and your members owe a duty of care to your patients. Your focus should be on advocating and researching healthy and EFFECTIVE regimes to benefit your patients health outcomes. where has the outdated information you constantly provide got society and your patients to – obesity and chronic illness and dis-ease is where it got us! But i guess healthy people dont need medical personnel so we know the answer as to why you don’t wish to help heal the masses back to optimal non-medicated health don’t we?

    Liked by 3 people

  12. R. Coleman

    It’s time you as an organisation looked at what current research is proving, as opposed to following the low fat high carb dogma which has no scientific basis. Observation would show that the current dietary guidelines you support and the obesity epidemic have a strong correlation. Admit you may be in the wrong and help people become well or all of your little remaining credibility will be gone.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Any credibility they might have had was wiped out in one swoop with their statement. My opinion of dietitian association’s world wide was low before. Now … well I’d rather listen to my grandma than my dietitian. At least my grandma seems to know what she’s talking about

      Like

  13. Tania

    When will you address the 12 days of evidence from Professor Noakes, showing the positive health outcomes for a low carb high fat diet? Im concerned that the advice I’ve received from a dietitian under current guidelines is not best practice! There may be many more court cases to follow if these guidelines remain scientifically untested!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. Hayley

    It doesn’t hurt to admit how wrong you were. Professor Noakes knows the way of the future while you all still flounder. By following a Banting/keto/LCHF lifestyle (or whatever you want to call it), I now have blood glucose levels of a non-diabetic. The proof is in the pudding!

    Liked by 3 people

  15. Kim Miller

    If you care about restoring your reputations you have to publicly apologise to Prof Noakes and stop giving people dietary advise that is making them sick and shortening their lives.

    Liked by 5 people

  16. Mathew

    “When foods rich in carbohydrates such as whole grains and legumes are avoided and other carbohydrate food sources such as dairy, fruits and vegetables are restricted, the diet can become deficient in certain essential nutrients, such as vitamin C, B1, B3, B6, folate, magnesium and fibre. ”

    Nonsense. Looking at good sources of these, Vitamin C is in kale, broccoli and cauliflower, Vitamin B1 is in pork, Vitamin B3 and B6 are in tuna, Folate is in Asparagus, Avocado and Spinach, Magnesium is in Spinach, Mackerel and Avocados and fibre, don’t get me started on fibre.

    The fact is that a LCHF diet generally gives you MORE nutrition, not less, as you are eating nutrient dense foods.

    Liked by 8 people

  17. Marc Blythe

    Stop shilling for big food. If you can’t get up to date with the science your organization and its members will become irrelevant. LCHF is a great option for many people.

    Liked by 3 people

  18. Karen Thorpe

    Your behaviour and the relationships with Big Food business, has seriously damaged and undermined the reputation of any dietician in South Africa. I hope that compensation and an apology is provided to Tim Noakes for the last 3 years of hell and expense you have put him through.

    Liked by 3 people

  19. benfury22

    SEVENTEEN LIES IN A SINGLE STATEMENT
    ADSA MAKES NEW RECORD FOR BEING CORPORATE STOOGES

    Let’s sum up the lies in your statement, ADSA. Shall we?

    LIE ONE
    “Ms Claire Julsing-Strydom submitted a complaint about Professor Tim Noakes to the Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) in 2014 on behalf of ADSA”

    ADSA LIES!
    She submitted the complaint on her own personal account.
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE TWO
    “Professor Noakes did not advise the mom to continue with breastfeeding, which undermined its importance.”

    ADSA LIES!
    Noakes clearly stated, “Baby doesn’t eat the dairy and cauliflower. Just very healthy high fat breast milk. Key is to ween baby onto LCHF”

    What part of, “very healthy high fat breast milk.” do you think does not encourage breastfeeding?
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE THREE
    “When foods rich in carbohydrates such as whole grains and legumes are avoided and other carbohydrate food sources such as dairy, fruits and vegetables are restricted, the diet can become deficient in certain essential nutrients, such as vitamin C, B1, B3, B6, folate, magnesium and fibre.”

    ADSA LIES!
    False dichotomy. You equate restricting carbohydrates with restricting nutrients. A whole food low carbohydrate plan is RICH in nutrients. That is EXACTLY what Dr. Noakes recommends, a low carbohydrate, high nutrient approach.
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE FOUR
    “Dietary guidelines for feeding babies are developed by organisations such as the World Health Organisation and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), based on a strong body of evidence.”

    ADSA LIES!
    The testimony of Dr. Noakes, Ms. Harcombe, Ms. Teicholz, and Ms. Zinn clearly laid out that there is NOT a strong body of evidence for such guidelines.
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE FIVE
    “The risks of experimenting with a baby’s development are immense and the long-term effect of low carbohydrate, high fat diets for babies is currently unknown.”

    ADSA LIES!
    We have population data for people like the Inuit and Masai that clearly show that the effect of low carbohydrate, high fat diets for babies is healthy growth and thriving.
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE SIX
    “The concern for the health of babies was ADSA’s primary interest when ADSA lodged this complaint.”

    ADSA LIES!
    ADSA accepts large sums of money from sugary junk food manufacturers that peddle that poison to children. Your primary interest is your power, money, and prestige. Who’s kidding who, here?
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE SEVEN
    “For ADSA this hearing was never about winning or losing, or standing for or against Professor Noakes. It was about protecting the health of babies and future adults,” said Maryke Gallagher, President of ADSA.

    ADSA LIES!
    ADSA twisted the truth into knots, outright lied, and scrabbled for the least straw to attack Dr. Noakes. This was a vindictive, Big FOOD industry agenda driven attempt to pillory a person who disagreed with the processed food status quo. All to protect ADSA’s position, power, prestige and money.

    <<<<>>>>

    LIE EIGHT, NINE AND TEN!
    “ADSA and its members will continue to provide dietary advice that is evidence-based and in line with guidelines provided by the national Department of Health and international bodies such as the World Health Organisation. A scientific and rigorous process is used to develop international and local dietary guidelines, and the outcome of the inquiry does not mean that these guidelines will now change. ADSA will consider new approaches and practices based on scientific evidence that has been adopted by credible health organisations.”

    ADSA LIES!
    8. Your dietary advice is NOT evidence-based.
    9. Your evidence procedure is NOT scientific and rigorous.
    10. YOU LIE! You have no intention to consider new approaches and this statement proves it.

    You’re just covering your ass. Please. Stop lying already. Have you no dignity?
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE ELEVEN
    “We will never compromise ADSA’s independence as a result of corporate sponsorship.”

    ADSA LIES!
    Really? You accept a third of your operating income from big junk food and sugary food peddlers and pretend independence? Do you really think we’re stupid enough to believe that? Or should I say, are YOU really stupid enough to believe that?
    <<<<>>>>

    LIE TWELVE
    “Our sponsorship policy is clear on non-influence by sponsors. We do not endorse any brand, product or retail chain. There is no conspiracy between big foods and dietitians to sell unhealthy food to South Africans. A healthy population through well balanced diets is what we strive for,” said Gallagher.

    ADSA LIES!
    See above. I’m not wasting any more time on this. You do the bidding of your corporate masters and help them POISON the people you are sworn to protect. How you sleep at night is beyond me.

    <<<<>>>>

    LIE THIRTEEN
    “It is very unfortunate that the professionalism and integrity of a number of nutrition scientists in South Africa has been unfairly questioned during this inquiry. It is ADSA’s hope that the reputation of nutrition professionals and dietitians as nutrition experts will be restored. Despite the negative sentiment, ADSA believed it had a responsibility to enquire about an issue that had such significant consequences for dietitians and other health professionals.”

    ADSA LIES!
    Your nutrition scientists published the absurd “Naude Study” which was completely ripped to shreds by Noakes and Harcombe. It was an OBVIOUS “hit piece” designed to attack Noakes.

    Your “experts” showed up and attacked Noakes with gusto. Twisting the facts with wild abandon.

    The reputation of those nutrition professionals and dietitians as nutrition experts will NEVER be restored. They are QUISLINGS! Collaborators with the enemies of health.

    <<<<>>>>

    LIE FOURTEEN
    “There is no conspiracy between big foods and dietitians to sell unhealthy food to South Africans.”

    ADSA LIES!
    You take big money from Coke and other big unhealthy food companies. You repeat their lies over and over and over and…

    Oh, actually that doesn’t qualify as a conspiracy. You’re just hurting people right out in the open. You take big money from Big FOOD and Big SUGAR, then you do their bidding.

    I take it back. Not a conspiracy. Out in the open. Being evil.

    Not a conspiracy. Just black soul evil. OK. I mean, not OK. But not a conspiracy. Out in the open and all…

    <<<<>>>>

    LIE FIFTEEN
    “We have no personal gripe with Professor Noakes. Our concern has always been about the health of babies,” said Gallagher.”

    ADSA LIES!
    You tried to DESTROY the man. One does NOT do that to one they respect and have no personal gripe with.

    As for the health of babies. Nonsense. I covered that above.

    He tweaked you, and you decided to squash him. STOP LYING!

    <<<<>>>>

    LIE SIXTEEN
    “South Africans have also been confused by the ebb and flow of this divisive nutrition debate and the inconsistent nutritional advice provided over many years. That is unfortunate.”

    ADSA LIES!
    No, ADSA. That is by DESIGN. Your corporate masters make billions by selling processed sugary garbage foods. Keeping people confused is their bread and butter. And ADSA helps make that possible.

    <<<<>>>>

    LIE SEVENTEEN
    “I’m pleased this is over and we can now focus on other urgent nutrition challenges we have in South Africa,” concluded Gallagher.

    ADSA LIES!
    Your response to this affair proves you’ve learned NOTHING. Diabetes and obesity are wrecking the health of South Africa, and you are still warbling on with platitudes that don’t help the outcome.

    You are worse than useless ADSA. You ARE the problem. Get right or get gone. We’ve public health problems to be solved here. And YOU, ADSA’s Ms. Gallagher, are NOT helping.

    Liked by 7 people

  20. Patricia Eccles

    Maybe you could be spending your time better
    Looking at what a large proportion of South African babies are actually weaned onto,
    Cerelac baby food that is mainly carbohydrates
    that convert to sugar quickly and is highly processed
    For babies wants wrong with real food such as mashed avocado,pumpkin with butter,scrambled eggs cooked in butter,puréed lamb and vegetable stew, stewed berries and full cream yoghurt ….banting … my babies ate that and thrived !

    Liked by 3 people

  21. Nettles

    The dietary guidelines of the Western world have cost lives and caused untold suffering. You owe Tim Noakes an apology, and for the sake of the population you purport to want to help you need to open your eyes to the evidence he presented rather than blindly following the old dogma. To quote a wise man called Pet Hein:

    In view of your manner
    of spending your days
    I hope you may learn,
    before ending them,
    that the effort you spend
    on defending your ways
    could be better spent
    on amending them.

    Liked by 3 people

      • benfury22

        Hein has more sage advice for ADSA, if they’ll simply open their eyes to accept it:

        The Road to Wisdom?

        “The road to wisdom? — Well, it’s plain
        and simple to express:
        Err
        and err
        and err again
        but less
        and less
        and less.”

        Piet Hein

        Liked by 3 people

  22. Matt

    Not even a hint of apology to Noakes and no mention of the evidence presented which contradicts your big food driven approach to dietary advice. Please don’t call yourselves scientists or claim to have ordinary people’s health at heart.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. You couldn’t apply evidence based nutrition to the tweet. You couldn’t give evidence based nutrition in the the Naude review ‘sttich up’. In the trial when evidence wanted it was a fail. How can you give SA evidence based nutrition?

    Liked by 1 person

    • benfury22

      Answer: They can’t. They’re dietitians, not scientists.

      And as dietitians, they’re not trained to make hypotheses, test hypotheses, and confirm or refute them via the scientific method.

      Oh! That would be Professor Noakes’ job, wouldn’t it?

      Like

  24. Allen Jepson

    There are 12 days of evidence that contradict your recommended way of eating. You need to answer those comprehensively. It is obvious from the evidence you are making us fat and sick.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. Carel

    I followed your food pyramid and became fat and sick. Then I followed Tim and lost weight and got healthy. In my mind you were killing me. Tim rescued me. Search your conscience .

    Liked by 2 people

  26. I wrote a sensible reasoned letter over 24 hours ago. It’s still not been approved for publication. I wonder is mine is the only one, or are there many letters that have not been “approved.”

    Like

    • sks23cu

      My comment also has not been published. But I posted a copy on ketogenicforums dot com in the topic tim-noakes-found-not-guilty. (Someone should archive this page, esp. comments, in case it disappears.)

      Liked by 1 person

      • johnsveitch

        It may be that just like the ADSA is totally clueless about the use of Twitter, they are also clueless about the use of links to other material (evidence) on the Internet. Both your post and mine have links to material on the Internet. Nothing either of us have linked to should cause the ADSA any concern at all. In both cases mostly to material we have written ourselves, in my case over a year ago. I make the point that the ADSA did NOT make the decision to change Dr Noakes, that decision was made by the HPCSA, and they did it in the belief that the Naude Review, justified a strong stand against LCHF diets.

        Sadly for them, Zoe Harcombe ripped the paper to pieces because of it’s bias and deliberate misrepresentation. This paper posed as “scientific evidence” but they manipulated the English language to get the result they wanted. The used a special definition of “low fat” that suited their purpose, to discredit Dr Noakes and the Banting diet. They tried to cheat, and it was very obvious.

        Compared with that, the slight indiscretion of Ms Claire Julsing-Strydom, is just a trivial slight. And the support she got from the ADSA, a small case of bad judgment. There are much bigger fish that were determined to discredit Dr Noakes.

        Liked by 2 people

  27. sks23cu

    The Noakes Trial brings to mind a similar set of events in Sweden starting in 2005 as chronicled in youtu dot be /l55OjWS9pEc?t=5m6s.

    The principal players:
    Dr Annika Dahlqvist
    ~ Prof Tim Noakes,
    Swedish Nat’l Board of Health & Welfare
    ~ Health Professions Council of South Africa and Association for Dietetics in South Africa.

    The Swedish board reviewed the science for 2 years, then in January 2008 ruled that low carb diets were safe and appropriate for treating obesity.

    Prof Noake’s defense very carefully and thoroughly described the science in support of low carb diets. Based on that science you should rule similarly to the Swedes (or better as you’ve had the benefit of world class expert testimony).

    If you don’t you will eventually be marginalized by the citizens of South Africa who, by trying the low carb diet and finding that it works, will stop listening to you. No customers, no money.

    My own n=1 experiment:
    dietdoctor dot com/healing-brain-well-pancreas2, shows A1C decline from diabetic to normal; and
    ketogenicforums dot com/t/lipid-panel/6279/8?u=sks23cu, shows excellent lipid panel trends (e.g., Trig/HDL=36/71=0.507 and all the “bad” scores are trending downward).

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s