Comments on: Yet another scoring system http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/yet-another-scoring-system/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 02:17:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Mark http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/yet-another-scoring-system/comment-page-1/#comment-10505 Mark Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:19:38 +0000 http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/13/yet-another-scoring-system/#comment-10505 Previous comment scrambled: I meant to say that it is not a new ranking system, but is a review of existing ranking systems. Previous comment scrambled: I meant to say that it is not a new ranking system, but is a review of existing ranking systems.

]]> By: Mark http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/yet-another-scoring-system/comment-page-1/#comment-10504 Mark Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:18:39 +0000 http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/13/yet-another-scoring-system/#comment-10504 This journal article is just a meta-review of existing ranking systems, not a new ranking system, right? Drewnowski did a previous review in 2005. This just introduces ideas for ranking the rankings: Things are really getting out of hand! This journal article is just a meta-review of existing ranking systems, not a new ranking system, right?

Drewnowski did a previous review in 2005. This just introduces ideas for ranking the rankings: Things are really getting out of hand!

]]> By: Fentry http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/yet-another-scoring-system/comment-page-1/#comment-10503 Fentry Wed, 13 Feb 2008 19:05:24 +0000 http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/13/yet-another-scoring-system/#comment-10503 To play Devil's advocate, it is not clear to me why having multiple rating systems poses a problem for consumers (except uncritical ones). Divergent ratings regimens provides evidence to consumers that there are different ways of thinking about or evaluating nutrition and that they have to think about the assumptions behind each of the rating systems. It seems little different to me than ratings of institutions of higher education or consumer reports: one can't just look at a number, one has to see if the selection criteria are relevant to oneself. To play Devil’s advocate, it is not clear to me why having multiple rating systems poses a problem for consumers (except uncritical ones).

Divergent ratings regimens provides evidence to consumers that there are different ways of thinking about or evaluating nutrition and that they have to think about the assumptions behind each of the rating systems.

It seems little different to me than ratings of institutions of higher education or consumer reports: one can’t just look at a number, one has to see if the selection criteria are relevant to oneself.

]]> By: Migraineur http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/yet-another-scoring-system/comment-page-1/#comment-10502 Migraineur Wed, 13 Feb 2008 18:20:28 +0000 http://www.foodpolitics.com/2008/02/13/yet-another-scoring-system/#comment-10502 I like your first idea - no rating system, for all the reasons that commenters on your previous posts have stated. What we really need to invest in is teaching better critical thinking skills, so people can see through the oversimplified media reporting on science and the exaggerated claims of marketers. I like your first idea – no rating system, for all the reasons that commenters on your previous posts have stated.

What we really need to invest in is teaching better critical thinking skills, so people can see through the oversimplified media reporting on science and the exaggerated claims of marketers.

]]>