The Nutritional Accuracy of Popular Magazines

If you want to judge information in a magazine, scan through it to see who is paying them to advertise products.

Some of the men's muscle magazines are just nuts. They show pictures of obviously steroid-enhanced bodies, and have an article touting how this body was possible because of some specific supplement...then you turn the page and there's an ad for that supplement.

Hmmm...coincidence, I'm sure.

Brian

Men's Fitness:

"Guys who eat bran cereal frequently are happier, are more alert, and have greater energy levels than guys who don't", "Alcohol plus a steak dinner works like lighter fluid on your metabolism"

Well, constipation can make one feel less alert, I guess... and we all know that non-drinking vegetarians have non-ignited metabolisms.

It would have been interesting if they had evaluated Eating Well and Vegetarian Times. I like them both, but sometimes they write things that are hard to believe.

I'm shattered that I can no longer completely trust the advice in Reader's Digest ;)

If they were to read "Unleashing the Wild Physique" by Vince Gironda, they'd probably put it in the "Poor" category, because of the high saturated fat approach. However, I'd challenge them to find something that works better at creating a symmetric physique without resorting to steroids. However, muscle mags do indeed have really poor information.

My favorite FITNESS magazine is Muscle & Fitness (even though I am a girl). Great articles, how to and more than just isolated exercises, they have sets and write articles referencing scientific studies. Favorite place to get any kind of DIET information - American Jourcal of Clinical Nutrition. LEAST favorite place - on the INTERNET.

I like some of the recipes and nutritional info I find in Fitness and Shape magazines. Cosmo is just stupid half the time...most of their "nutritional" info is some sort of fad or celebrity diet. One magazine I read even had an article in it about how to combine Relacore with Zantrex 3 to make a "super weight loss cocktail". !!

I'm amazed that more magazines aren't listed as poor based on the ridiculous diet claims they make.

All I know is that certain bodybuilding forums refer to "Muscle and Fitness" magazine as "Muscle and Fatness".

I like your disclaimer, Jim. No experts. No subscription fee. I like your stuff anyway.

The health and fitness industry is fueled by all these magazines...I guess it's up to the readers not to accept everything blindly. It's up to us to read what is useful and reliable.

I'd suspected they ranked the muscle mags as "poor" based on high dietary fat recommendations. If that were the case, I'd say this study would be flawed. But after reading the .pdf, I noted they actually had been marked down for a lack of supporting scientific studies for the dietary recommendations of certain foods.

That's still a bit weak, scientists worshipping science and downplaying anecdotal evidence or logical conclusions. But at least the org that wrote this isn't still living in the "science" of 1980's nutritionists. "Fat makes you fat". Haha!

I believe it's more along the lines of water consumption. Drinking plentiful water causes the body to not retain (for safety against future "droughts"). Eating plentiful fats may cause the body not to retain, for the same reason - Fats are as essential as water. And the body will gladly synthesize fat out of junk calories, if need be.

At least most nutritionists today are down with Zone diet-like partitioning. Things are looking up.

Kallash wrote:

That's still a bit weak, scientists worshipping science and downplaying anecdotal evidence or logical conclusions.

I empathise with your sentiments (I follow an ayurvedic diet - nothing like 5,000 years of anecdotal evidence and logical conclusions!), but they had pretty low standards.

Ultimately, you make your decision based on how you feel, and you live with the consequences of your decisions.

Well, the only two I would pay any attention to - Prevention and Cooking Light - are both good. Though even Cooking Light is a little heavy on the sugar. ;-p

Eh. We all sort of know that most of the stuff is either fluff, or paid advertisement.

After we beat up all the magazines for failing to provide serious reviews of fad diets, or fake supplements, shall we look at how the nutritional review was done?

What is considered "healthy"? The current carb-loading pyramid? What is nutritionally sound? We make the presumption that the basis and metrics within the review were, by default, proper.

No. The review was done by "[f]our experts in nutrition and food science". Who are these "experts"? One of them is Dr. Irene Berman-Levine.

Is the doctor an independent researcher with no affiliation with publications?

Ooops. Nope. She runs healthandage.com/.org and publishes "Nutrition Tidbits".

I am a sceptic, and a sarcastic cynic (the worse kind). I will give it to ACSH that we should be aware of our source of nutritional information.

I also believe the panel are indeed expert in the nutritional field.

After reading the 23 page report, there were several subjective statements (missed an opportunity
to inform, impressive long article, mistaken
impression that all fatty acids of both types
are nutritionally essential).

Additionally, they were looking at 2004-2005 articles. This is when we still thought Atkins will kill you, and trans fats were just a glimmer in the eye of the nutritionist.

But now I am just ranting. Overall fair attempt, but make sure the panel discloses all connections, and do not try to deduce objective and quantifiable results on four subjective reviews.

Great points Libertate. I would be skeptical about jumping all over the mags as more untrustworthy than we already know them to be.

And what Neel, above, said is totally true and we, as consumers, should be able to parse through the BS and takeaway the things that are actually sound advice.

Unfortunately, most people who subscribe to these take what they read at face value.

I am serioualy unsurprised by the report. Back when I was a serious fitness magazine head I eventually gave up buying men's fitness magazines altogether. I enjoyed the looks that clerks would give me as I sauntered up to the counter an plopped down Triathelete, Runner's World, Fitness and Self. To give you perspective I am coming from 396 pounds, am a martial arts instructor and used to do Olympic Power lifting. When occasionally asked why those magazines by clerks or other people in line, my tag line was, "Good fitness is where you find it."

Go to bodybuilding forums and look around the nutrition and training posts. On the one website I go on www.discussbodybuilding.com people actually put programs together for you. They are anti-steroid use too!