I’ve just turned in the copy-edited manuscript of Why Calories Count: From Science to Politics (pub date March 2012) and now have time to catch up on some questions:
Q. I was recently given to read a book titled “The China Study” which is based on research conducted in 1970’s in China by Dr. Colin Campbell. His main conclusion is that eating dairy and meat causes cancer. His resolution is that a plant-based diet (i.e. vegan) is the (only?) healthy diet for humans. This book has made strong enough of a point to convince several of my friends to “convert” to a vegan diet in order to save their health. Could you share some comments on the validity of the research and conclusions this book presents with regards to detrimental effects of dairy and meat on human health?
A. Campbell makes a forceful argument based on his interpretation of the research and on case studies of people whose diseases resolved when they became vegans. And yes I’ve seen Dr. Campbell’s new movie, Forks over Knives. The first half is a terrific introduction to how the current food environment promotes unhealthy eating. The second half promotes Dr. Campbell’s ideas about the hazards of meat and dairy foods.
Whether you agree with these ideas or not, the film is well done and worth a look.
Some scientists, however, interpret the research as demonstrating that people are healthier when they eat dairy foods. For example, the enormous consensus report on diet and cancer risk from the American Institute for Cancer Research and the World Cancer Research Fund concluded in 2007 that eating lots of red meat and processed meat is convincingly associated with an increased risk of colorectal cancer (but no others).
On the other hand, they found dairy foods to be associated with a decrease in the risk of colorectal cancer. They found limited and less convincing evidence that dairy foods might decrease the risk of bladder cancer but increase the risk of prostate cancer.
How to make sense of this? These are two food groups in the diets of people who consume many kinds of foods and who do many things that might increase or decrease cancer risk. Given this complexity, one food or food group seems unlikely to have that much influence on cancer when considered in the context of everything else people eat and do.
Nutrition research, as I am fond of saying, is difficult to do and requires interpretation. Intelligent people can interpret the studies differently depending on their point of view.
The new Dietary Guidelines say to cut down on saturated fats. Those are most plentiful in meat and dairy foods (plant foods have them, but in smaller amounts). Pretty much everyone agrees that plant-based diets promote health/ But whether they have to be 100% plant-based is highly debatable.
The new USDA MyPlate food guide suggests piling plant foods—fruit, vegetables, and grains—on 75% of your plate so the argument is really about what goes on the remaining 25%, what USDA calls the “Protein” section. You can put beans in that quarter if you don’t want to eat red meat, poultry, or fish.
Q. I’d love to hear your take on the recent walnut flap [accusations that the FDA now considers walnuts to be drugs]. I suspect walnuts got caught with such offenders as Pom, Froot Loops, and Juicy-Juice, but I’d love to find out what the FDA actually said about this. For some odd reason I don’t believe the article is presenting the whole truth.
A. This is a health claims issue. The FDA is not saying walnuts are drugs. It is saying that Diamond Walnut is claiming walnuts as drugs on package labels. How so?
The labels say the omega-3 fatty acids in walnuts may help lower cholesterol; protect against heart disease, stroke and some cancers (e.g. breast cancer); inhibit tumor growth; ease arthritis and other inflammatory diseases; and even fight depression and other mental illnesses. These are disease claims for which the FDA requires scientific substantiation.
The company’s petition did not provide that substantiation so the FDA issued a warning letter. In general, you should be skeptical any time you see a nutritional factor advertised for its ability to prevent or treat such a broad range of problems.
Q. A question about sugar and how it is counted: My books say: 4 g = 1 teaspoon = 15 calories. My Illy Caffe says 10 g of sugar, but 50 calories. Ingredients: coffee, sugar, potassium bicarbonate, potassium citrate. If the drink is 50 calories, shouldn’t it say 12 g or more for the sugar listing?
A. Sugar should be the only ingredient that has calories in this coffee but I’ve seen calorie lists that say 5 calories per gram for sugars. Food companies have some leeway in the way they compute calories. Illy may be using a method that gives 5 rather than 4. But the difference between 40 and 50 is hardly measurable and I wouldn’t worry about amounts this small, annoying as imprecise figures may seem.
The Seattle group calculates the cost of food per calorie. By this measure, the price of fruits and vegetables is exceedingly high compared to the cost of junk food. Fruits and vegetables do not have many calories for their weight.
The Commerce department tracks the indexed price of foods. Its data show that the indexed price of fresh produce increased by 40% ince 1980 whereas the price of sodas and processed foods has declined by 10-30%. (The easiest place to see their charts is in New York Times articles from a couple of years ago. Click here and also here).
Other USDA economists, however, argue that price trends for fruits, vegetables, and junk foods are really no different, and that the data shown in the figure overstate the apparent difference.
Nevertheless, the Seattle paper got a lot of attention, and rightly so. One of my calls was from David Freeman of CBS News who said he was hearing lots of complaints that the study promoted a “nanny state” because it blamed bad eating habits on the government. My quotes:
“It’s a common misconception that food choices are solely a matter of personal responsibility,” Dr. Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition, food studies, and public health at New York University and an outspoken critic of the fast food industry, told CBS News. “People are hugely influenced by the price of food. If you don’t have any money and go into the store to buy some fresh fruits, you might decide that it’s cheaper to have a couple of fast food hamburgers.”
And those who can afford healthy food may lack the time or the necessary food-preparation skills, Dr. Nestle said.
Government-sponsored cooking classes and kitchen equipment may not be in the offing. But Dr. Monsivais and Dr. Nestle agreed that federal agriculture policies could do more to encourage healthy eating. For example, some of the federal farm subsidies now directed to producers of corn, soybeans, and other crops used to make fast and processed foods could be redirected to growers of fruits and vegetables.
“What’s the matter with that?” Dr. Nestle said. “I can’t think of a thing.”
Q: What’s the big deal over the government’s new food icon? A plate? That seems really boring.
A: The Department of Agriculture’s plate may look banal, but it is a key part of first lady Michelle Obama’s healthy eating campaign and I see it as a big step forward. Unlike the 2005 MyPyramid, this one is mostly about food, is easy to understand, and does not require use of a computer.
The plate does a better job of reflecting current thinking about healthy diets than previous guides. Its four sectors are unequal. Vegetables get the most space, and dairy – a discretionary choice – is off to the side.
You are to pile half your plate with fruit and vegetables, and a quarter with grains (half of them whole grains). All these come from plants.
I’m less happy about the sector marked “protein.” Protein is not a food. It is a nutrient.
USDA must think everyone knows that “protein” means beans, poultry and fish, as well as meat. But grains and dairy, each with its own sector, are also important protein sources. The meat industry wants you to equate protein with meat. It should be happy with this guide.
What I like best are the messages that come with the plate. My favorite? “Enjoy your food, but eat less.”
At last! Enjoyment is part of dietary advice. High marks to USDA for this one.
Other messages are designed to help you eat less while eating better. Smaller portions keep calories under control. Making half your plate fruits and vegetables is a profound switch from the six to 11 calorie-rich grain servings you were supposed to eat daily under the old MyPyramid.
For people who drink milk (really, you don’t have to), switching to low-fat is an effective way to save on calories, and whole grains are better for health than refined, rapidly absorbable starches that behave like sugars in the body.
So far, so good. But next come the politically charged “foods to reduce.” Here, the USDA is leaning in the right direction, but still pulling punches. USDA tells you to reduce sodium from soup, bread and frozen meals, but says nothing about salty snacks or other sodium-laden processed foods. This is a glaring omission.
And the final principle – “drink water instead of sugary drinks” – puts naturally sweet fruit juices (fine in small amounts) in the same category as sugar-added juice drinks, sports drinks and sodas, which ought to be reserved for occasional treats.
Let’s give USDA credit for going as far as it could without directly confronting the processed-food and soft-drink industries.
Optimist that I am, I think the icon has plenty for everyone to work with. It emphasizes the positives – fruits, vegetables, whole grains – and leaves lots of room for enjoyment. You can pile whatever foods you like on that plate as long as they fit within their assigned sectors.
Best of all, you do not have to count numbers of servings. If you want to control the size of your servings, just use a smaller plate.
Consider the alternatives. From 1958 until 1979, the USDA’s uncontroversial Four Food Groups advised eating two or three servings a day from dairy, meat, fruits and vegetables, and breads and cereals – half the plate from animal-source foods.
In 1979, in an effort to help reduce dietary risks for chronic diseases, USDA stacked the groups with plant foods above animal foods, eliciting a furor that led USDA nutritionists to begin a 12-year project to research a new food guide.
USDA released a food guide Pyramid in 1991, withdrew it under protest from meat producers, and re-released it a year later. Meat and dairy producers did not like being at the “eat less” top of the Pyramid. Nutritionists thought it promoted too many servings of high-calorie grains.
In 2005, the USDA replaced that Pyramid with the unobjectionable, food-free MyPyramid. This was impossible to teach (you had to know what each color stood for), eliminated any sense that it is better to eat some foods than others, and required a computer to personalize your own diet.
USDA officials say they spent about $2 million to research and test the new plate logo, create its website, and publicize it. This is a lot or a little depending on your perspective, but a plate is not exactly a new concept. The American Diabetes Association, American Institute for Cancer Research and Canadian government have all used similar plant-focused plates for years. The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine has one with a similar design but 100 percent vegetarian.
We can argue over nutritional details, but I think USDA’s plate-plus-messages works better than anything it has done before. The plate works for health and for disease prevention. It took courage to make half of it fruit and vegetables. That’s real progress.
Now the challenge is to Congress: How about fixing agricultural policies so they support these recommendations?
I attended the launch of the new food icon this morning, and the press conference following it (which featured Red Rooster chef Marcus Samuelson).
As USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack explained, we have an obesity crisis in America that imperils our nation’s national security, economic vitality, and health care system. It’s time for action.
I got a preview of the design on a conference call last week (while I was in Spain) and took a screen shot:
This may not look much like action, but it is a sharp departure from previous USDA icons (which USDA has delightfully put online). These mostly emphasize the importance of meat and dairy foods (the 1992 Pyramid was an exception, which was why the Bush II USDA got rid of it).
Before yawning, consider its strengths:
It is easy to understand (as Mrs. Obama explained, even a child can use it).
Vegetables comprise the largest sector.
Together, vegetables and fruits are half the plate.
You can put whatever foods you like on that plate.
You don’t have to count servings or worry about portion size (if the plate isn’t too big).
Dairy foods–a discretionary group–are off to the side.
My one quibble? Protein. I’m a nutritionist. Protein is a nutrient, not a food. Protein is not exactly lacking in American diets. The average American consumes twice the protein needed. Grains and dairy, each with its own sector, are important sources of protein in American diets.
Why protein? USDA used to call the group “meat” even though it contained beans, poultry, and fish. The meat industry ought to be happy about “protein.” Meat producers have spent years trying to convince Americans to equate meat with protein.
And USDA says its consumer testing (as yet unpublished) indicated that the public understood “protein” to cover diverse food sources.
According to William Neuman’s report in the New York Times, USDA official Robert C. Post said that:
U.S.D.A. had spent about $2 million to develop and promote the logo, including conducting research and focus groups and creating a Web site. Some of that money will also be used for the first year of a campaign to publicize the image.
I would like to see that research. Post told me that the research would be published on the website within the next few days. I look forward to seeing it.
One other point: consider the alternative. Just for fun, here’s the plate the USDA was considering in its last efforts to try to get rid of the Pyramid in 1991. We have Marian Burros, then at the New York Times, to thank for rescuing the Pyramid that came out in 1992.
The next step, of course, is to bring agricultural policy in line with the plate, meaning doing a much better job of supporting producers of vegetables and fruits. This is part of Secretary Vilsack’s plan for repopulating and revitalizing rural America—a goal that I strongly support.
Given the pushback against public health that is happening in Congress this week—Cut school lunches! Cut WIC! Get rid of nutrition recommendations! Go easy on tobacco and antibiotics!—the more I think it took courage for USDA to do this.
On May 26, the USDA announced that it will be releasing a new “food icon” to replace the foodless and useless 2005 MyPyramid:
The USDA’s press announcement explained:
The 2010 White House Child Obesity Task Force called for simple, actionable advice to equip consumers with information to help them make healthy food choices. As a result, USDA will be introducing the new food icon to replace the MyPyramid image as the government’s primary food group symbol. It will be an easy-to-understand visual cue to help consumers adopt healthy eating habits consistent with the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
What will the new icon look like? The USDA isn’t saying, but William Neuman of the New York Times did some sleuthing. According to his account:
The circular plate, which will be unveiled Thursday, is meant to give consumers a fast, easily grasped reminder of the basics of a healthy diet. It consists of four colored sections, for fruits, vegetables, grains and protein, according to several people who have been briefed on the change. Beside the plate is a smaller circle for dairy, suggesting a glass of low-fat milk or perhaps a yogurt cup.
And WebMD scored an interview with Robert C. Post, PhD, deputy director of the USDA Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, who gave additional hints:
“There will be a ‘how-to’ that will resonate with individuals. That is the behavioral part that is needed. We need to transcend information — ‘here’s what the science says’ — and give people the tools and the opportunities to take action.”
• Compare sodium in foods like soup, bread, and frozen meals—and choose the foods with lower numbers.
• Drink water instead of sugary drinks.
A bit of history:
From 1958 until 1979, the USDA’s food guide was sort of a rectangle illustrating four food groups: Dairy, meat, fruits and vegetables, breads and cereals. In 1979, USDA introduced a highly controversial design with food groups stacked on top of each other, with the plant-food groups at the top and the animal-food groups underneath (the producers of these foods did not like that).
Beginning in 1980, the USDA conducted an extensive research project to develop a new design—the pyramid—which it released in 1991 and withdrew immediately under pressure from meat producers.
In 1992, after a year of extraordinary controversy (recounted in my book Food Politics), the USDA released its highly controversial Food Guide Pyramid.
Why was it controversial? The food industry objected that the Pyramid make it look as if you were supposed to eat more foods from the bottom of the pyramid than the top (which, of course, was its point).
Nutritionists objected that it encouraged eating too many servings of grains and, therefore, encouraged obesity.
In 2005, the USDA replaced it with the unobjectionable MyPyramid. The food industry liked this one because it did not indicate hierarchies in food choices. Most nutritionists that I know hardly knew what to do with it. It required going online and playing with a website, and was unteachable in clinic settings.
I thought the 1992 pyramid had a lot going for it, particularly the idea that it’s better to eat some foods than others. But MyPyramid was a travesty–hopelessly complicated, impossible to teach, and requiring the use of a computer.
Given this situation, the new image is highly likely to be an improvement. If the new icon keeps the hierarchy, conveys concepts easily, and does not require online access, I will consider it a great step forward.
Fingers crossed.
Details about the release:
The announcement will be Thursday, June 2, 10:30 a.m. EDT. It will be live-streamed at www.usda.gov/live. All information will be posted at www.cnpp.usda.gov.
I’ll be there. Stay tuned.
Balancing Calories• Enjoy your food, but eat less.
• Avoid oversized portions.
Foods to Increase
• Make half your plate fruits and vegetables.
• Switch to fat-free or low-fat (1%) milk.
Foods to Reduce
• Compare sodium in foods like soup, bread, and frozen meals—and choose the foods with lower numbers.
This page is somewhat disorganized in that I now put occasional print, audio, and video interviews, which used to be separated, together by year. The section at the very end is called Controversies; it is where I post letters from critics. Scroll down to find whatever you are looking for. Media interviews and reviews for specific books are on the pages for that book. For old podcasts and videos of presentations, look under Appearances and scroll down for Past Appearances; in recent years, I’ve been putting them in the chronological list here.
Interviews, media appearances, and lectures (the ones for which I have links)
Jan 17 Podcast interview with Kathlyn Carney, Connecting the Dots. Lisen on Spotify or Apple Podcast
Jan 16 LA Times guide to Japanese subscription snack boxes (Video Part I). Part II is Jan 23 (same clip?)
Jan 14 The Franklin Institute’s Ben Franklin Birthday celebration. My talk comes first. Others are from Eric Oberhalter and honoree Wendell Berry. Use passcode $H81iALu
Jan 15 Two short answers to questions at FAO’s Regional Office in Santiago, Chile. Video 1: on what governments can do about childhood obesity. Video 2: on food choices in an unhealthy food environment.
July 5 Goldberg R. Food Citizenship: Food System Advocates in an Era of Distrust. Oxford University Press. Chapter 1. Health and Nutrition: Interview with Marion Nestle:1-13. Video online
July Carter J. Interview with Marion Nestle. In: Food for Thought: Feeding the People, Protecting the Planet. Aspenia [Aspen Institute Italia] 2015;67:101-105.
July Carter J. Intervista a Marion Nestle. Come cambiano le politiche alimentary. In: Fame Zero: Rinascimento agricolo. Aspenia [Revista di Aspen Institute Italia] 2015;69:198-202.
January 10 Video interview on Star Talk, co-hosts Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Eugene Mirman, with Anthony Bourdain, about the science of cooking (sort of).
May 21 Print interview with Revital Federbush for an Israeli women’s magazine, mostly about dairy foods I’m told (it’s in Hebrew, which I cannot read, alas).
November 19 Interview with Al Jazeera for a Fault Line program on “Fast food, fat profits: obesity in America (my 10 seconds starts at about minute 15).
September 16 Speech at Columbia University conference on Global Food Systems: Their Impact on Nutrition and Health for All on panel on Advanced Technologies, Food Safety and the Role of Local and Organic Food Production (video)
November 12 Panel discussion on the farm bill, Wagner School of Public Service, Puck Building (Lafayette at Houston), 2nd floor. Here is Wild Green Yonder’s take on it.
February 6, 2008 Biologique Foods radio, two podcast interviews with TJ Harrington in Bloomington, MN, one on food politics and the other on what’s in your food.
Interview with Laura Flinders (and Arun Gupta and Peter Hoffman), Grit TV. It’s on how to eat well without going broke, and starts with a Monty Python clip on Spam 11/26/08
September 5, 2007 Scientific American Podcast with Steve Mirsky. Because I am a Paulette Goddard professor at NYU, he sends along an article he wrote about Einstein’s experience with the gorgeous movie star.
NPR Science Friday, panel on the farm bill with Michael Pollan and Sandor Ellix Katz 8/10/07
Are you responsible for your own weight? Balko R. Pro: Absolutely. Government has no business interfering with what you eat. Brownell K, Nestle M. Con: Not if Blaming the Victim Is Just an Excuse to Let Industry off the Hook. Time June 7, 2004:113.
2022: Nestle M. SLOW COOKED: AN UNEXPECTED LIFE IN FOOD POLITICS. University of California Press.
2020: Nestle M, Trueman K. LET’S ASK MARION: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW ABOUT THE POLITICS OF FOOD, NUTRITION, AND HEALTH, University of California Press.
2018: Nestle M. UNSAVORY TRUTH: HOW FOOD COMPANIES SKEW THE SCIENCE OF WHAT WE EAT, Basic Books. Portuguese (Brazil) edition, 2019.
2015: Nestle M. SODA POLITICS: TAKING ON BIG SODA (AND WINNING), Oxford University Press. Paperback, 2017.
2013: Nestle M. EAT, DRINK, VOTE: AN ILLUSTRATED GUIDE TO FOOD POLITICS, Rodale Books.
2012: Nestle M, Nesheim M. WHY CALORIES COUNT: FROM SCIENCE TO POLITICS, University of California Press. Paperback, 2013.
2010: Nestle M, Nesheim MC. FEED YOUR PET RIGHT, Free Press/Simon & Schuster.
2008: Nestle M. PET FOOD POLITICS: THE CHIHUAHUA IN THE COAL MINE, University of California Press. Paperback, 2010.
2006: Nestle M. WHAT TO EAT, North Point Press/Farrar, Straus and Giroux. Paperback, 2007. Hebrew (Israel) edition, 2007.
2003: Nestle M. SAFE FOOD:BACTERIA, BIOTECHNOLOGY, AND BIOTERRORISM, University of California Press. Paperback 2004; Chinese edition2004, Japanese edition2009. Revised and expanded editionretitled SAFE FOOD:THE POLITICS OF FOOD SAFETY, 2010.
2002: Nestle M.FOOD POLITICS: HOW THE FOOD INDUSTRY INFLUENCES NUTRITION AND HEALTH, University of California Press. Paperback 2003; Revised and expanded edition 2007; Chinese edition, 2004; Japanese edition, 2005; 10th Anniversary Edition with a Foreword by Michael Pollan, 2013.
1985: Nestle M. NUTRITION IN CLINICAL PRACTICE. Greenbrae CA: Jones Medical Publications. Asian edition, 1986. Greek edition, 1987.
2004: Nestle M, Dixon LB, eds. TAKING SIDES: CLASHING VIEWS ON CONTROVERSIAL ISSUES IN NUTRITION AND FOOD, McGraw Hill/Dushkin.
1988: Nestle M, managing ed. THE SURGEON GENERAL’S REPORT ON NUTRITION AND HEALTH. Department of Health and Human Services.
ARTICLES (SELECTED): For the most part, these are columns, professional articles, book chapters, letters, and book reviews for which links or pdf’s are available (or will be when I get time to find or create them). Additional publications are listed in the c.v. link in the About page.
Eric Crosbie, Laura Schmidt, Jim Krieger, Marion Nestle. Chapter 14. Sugar Sweetened Beverages. In Maani N, Petticrew M, Galea S, eds. The Commercial Determinants of Health. Oxford University Press, 2022:131-140.
Carlos Augusto Monteiro,Mark Lawrence, Christopher Millett, Marion Nestle, Barry M Popkin, Gyorgy Scrinis, Boyd Swinburn. The need to reshape global food processing: a call to the United Nations Food Systems Summit. BMJ Global Health 2021;6:e006885. doi:10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006885
Nestle M. Public health nutrition deserves more attention. Review of Jones-Smith J, ed. Public Health Nutrition: Essentials for Practitioners (Johns Hopkins Press, 2020). American Journal of Public Heath. 2021;111(4):533-535.
Woolhandler S, Himmelstein DU, Ahmed S, Bailey Z, Bassett MT, Bird M, Bor J, Bor D, Carrasquillo O, Chowkwanyun M, Dickman SL, Fisher S, Gaffney A, Galea S, Gottfried RN, Grumbach K, Guyatt G, Hansen H, Landrigan PH, Lighty M, McKee M, McCormick D, McGretor A, Mirza R, Morris JE, Mukherjee JS, Nestle M, Prine L, Saadi A, Schiff D, Shapiro M, Tesema L, Venkataramani A. Public policy and health in the Trump era: A Lancet Commission Report. The Lancet, February 10, 2021.
Nestle M. Review of Jessica Harris, Vintage Postcards from the African World: In the Dignity of Their Work and the Joy of Their Play. Food, Culture, and Society, 2021;743-744.
2020
Nestle M. Book review: Jessica Harris, Vintage Postcards from the African World: In the Dignity of Their Work and the Joy of Their Play. Food, Culture, and Society [published online July 23, 2020, Scheduled for print November 2021].
Nestle M. Comment: Ultraprocessed Food Consumption and Risk of Type 2 Diabetes Among Participants of the NutriNet-Santé Prospective Cohort. PracticeUpdate.com, December 31, 2019.
Nestle M. A food lover’s love of nutrition science, policy, and politics. European Journal of Clinical Nutrition. 2019;73:1551–1555. Published online April 24, 2019.
Nestle M. How neoliberalism ruins traditional diets and health [book reviews]. Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology [book review]. Published online, April 18, 2019.
Nestle M. Comment: Long-Term Consumption of Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages and Risk of Mortality in US Adults. PracticeUpdate.com, March 28, 2019.
Nestle M. Comment on: Effects of replacing diet beverages with water on weight loss and weight maintenance: 18-month follow-up, randomized clinical trial. Practice Update website, June 26, 2018.
Nestle M. Perspective: Challenges and Controversial Issues in the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 1980 to 2015. Advances in Nutrition, 2018;9:148-150.
Nestle M. Invited expert comment: Nonnutritive Sweeteners and Cardiometabolic Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Prospective Cohort Studies. PracticeUpdate website, Jan 18.
Nestle M. Foreword to Eric Holt-Giménez, A Foodie’s Guide to Capitalism: Understanding the Political Economy of What We Eat. Monthly Review Press, 2017.
Nestle M. Dear Colleagues. Letter on President Trump’s nominee for CDC director and her connection to Coca-Cola. Dean’s Weekly Update, NYU College of Global Public Health. 2017;48(3): July 28.
Nestle M. Foreword. Clapp S. Fixing the Food System. Praeger/ABC-CLIO, 2017:vii-x.
2016
Nestle M. Food Politics, the Food Movement, and Public Health. In: Shiva V., ed. Seed Sovereignty, Food Security: Women in the Vanguard of the Fight Against GMOs and Corporate Agriculture. North Atlantic Books, 2016:65-75.
Nestle M. Foreword to Joy Santlofer’s Food City:Four Centuries of Food Making in New York City. WW Norton, 2016:ix-x.
Delisle H, Nestle M, Besançon S. Rethinking nutritional policies in developing countries taking into account the double burden of malnutrition. Ideas for Development, October 18, 2016.
Delisle H, Nestle M, Besançon S. Il faut repenser les politiques de nutrition dans les pays en développement en prenant en compte le double fardeau nutritionnel. Huffington Post (France), October 14, 2016.
Nestle M. Food industry funding of nutrition Research: the relevance of history for current debates. JAMA Internal Medicine 2016;176(11):1685-1686.
Nestle M. The politics of food choice. In: Anne Barnhill, Mark Budolfson, Tyler Doggett, eds. Food, Ethics, and Society: An Introductory Text with Readings, eds. Oxford, 2016:596-601.
Nestle M. Utopian dream: a new farm bill (reprint of article in Dissent, 2012). In Goldthwaite MA, ed. Norton Reader: an Anthology of Nonfiction, 14th edition. WW Norton & Co, 2016:274-280.
Nestle M, Rosenberg T. The whole world is watching. Soda wars. Sugar tax. US, Mexico [Big Food Watch] World Nutrition November-December 2015, 6, 11-12, 811-832.
Barnoya J, Nestle M. The food industry and conflicts of interest in nutrition research: A Latin American perspective. Journal of Public Health Policy advance online publication, 29 October 2015:1-6; doi:10.1057/jphp.2015.37. [Retracted]
Nestle M. Eating made simple: How do you cope with a mountain of conflicting diet advice? Scientific American, Special Collector’s Edition, The Science of Food. Summer 2015:38-45.
Nestle M. Regulation does change eating behavior. In: Brain Food: Hastings College’s Introduction to the Liberal Arts, 2014-2015. Hastings College Press, 2014:155-158.
Nestle M. Next, Cut the Soda and Junk Food. New York Times, Room for debate: What other unhealthy products should CVS stop selling? February 7, 2014
2013
Blumenthal SJ, Hoffnagle EE, Leung CW, Lofink H, Jensen HH, Foerster SB, Cheung LWY, Nestle M, Willett WC. Strategies to improve the dietary quality of supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP) beneficiaries: An assessment of stakeholder opinions. Public Health Nutrition 2013. doi:10.1017/S1368980013002942.
Nestle M. A push for policies for sustainable foods systems. Perspectives, FAO, October 9, 2010.
Gussow J, Kirschenmann F, Uauy R, Schell O, Nestle M, Popkin B, Cannon G, Monteiro C.
The American genius. [Appraisals]. World Nutrition 2013;4:150-170.
Leung C, Blumenthal S, Hoffnagle E, Jensen H, Foerster S, Nestle M, Cheung L, Mozaffarian D, Willett W. Associations of Food Stamp Participation with Obesity and Dietary Quality among Low-income Children. Pediatrics 2013;131:463–472.
Nestle M. Food safety and food security: a matter of public health. In: Estes CL, et al, eds. Health Policy: Crisis and Reform, 6th ed. Jones and Bartlett Learning, 2013:125-130.
Nestle M. Politics. In: Smith AF, ed. The Oxford Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America. Vol 3, Pike-Zomb. Oxford University Press, 2013:28-37.
2012
Nestle M. Foreword to Fairfax SK et al. California Cuisine and Just Food. MIT Press, 2012:xii-xiv.
Nestle M. Cookbooks and food studies canons. Foreword to Taylor MJ, Wolf C, eds. 100 Classic Cookbooks, 501 Classic Recipes. Rizzoli, 2012:8-9.
Nesheim M, Nestle M. Is a calorie a calorie? Nova ScienceNow, September 20, 2012.
Nestle M. Online debate: What role should government play in combating obesity? Wall Street Journal, September 18, 2012.
Nestle M. Online debate: Buying organics is a personal choice. New York Times, September 10, 2012.
Temple N, Nestle M. Population Nutrition and Health Promotion. In: Temple NJ, Wilson T, Jacobs DR, eds. Nutritional Health: Strategies for Disease Prevention, 3rd ed. Humana Press, 212:373-450.
Isoldi KK, Dalton S, Rodriguez DP, Nestle M. Classroom “cupcake” celebrations: observations of foods offered and consumed. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior 2012;44:71-75.
Nestle M. Food stamps for fast food? No: what the poor need is healthy food. Milwaukee Wisconsin Journal Sentinal, September 24, 2011.
Nestle M. School food, public policy, and strategies for change. In: Robert SA, Weaver-Hightower MB, eds. School Food Politics: The Complex Ecology of Hunger and Feeding in Schools Around the World. New York: Peter Lang, 2011:143-46.
Robbins A, Nestle M. Obesity as collateral damage: a call for papers on the obesity epidemic [editorial]. Journal of Public Health Policy 2011;32:143-45.
Csete J, Nestle M. Global nutrition: complex aetiology demands social as well as nutrient-based solutions. In: Parker R, Sommer M, eds. Routledge Handbook in Global Public Health, Routledge, 2011:303-13.
Nestle M, Wansink B, Heber D, Skelton JA, Sothern MS, Cohen DA, Kibler C. Industry Watch: Will private sector companies “step up to the plate” to protect children’s health? Childhood Obesity 2010;6:247.
Warren C, Nestle M. Big food, big agra, and the research university. Academe 2010;Nov-Dec:47-49. Also available at Academe Online.
Falbe JL, Nestle M. The politics of government dietary advice. In: Germov J, Williams L, eds. A Sociology of Food & Nutrition: The Social Appetite, 3rd ed. Oxford, 2008:127-146.
Nesheim MC, Nestle M. Pet Food. In: Allen G, Albala K, eds. The Business of Food: Encyclopedia of the Food and Drink Industries. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2007:297-301.
2006
Nestle M. Food marketing and childhood obesity—a matter of policy [Perspective]. New England Journal of Medicine 2006;354:2527-2528.
Nestle M. Trans fat nation. New York Times [op-ed], October 1, 2006:WK-11.
Nestle M. One thing to do about food: a forum. The Nation September 11, 2006:14.
Nestle M. Food industry and health: mostly promises, little action. Lancet 2006; 368:564-565.
Nestle M. The spinach fallout: restoring trust in California produce. San Jose Mercury News (Perspectives), October 22, 2006.
Lewin A, Lindstrom L, Nestle M. Food industry promises to address childhood obesity: preliminary evaluation. Journal of Public Health Policy 2006;27:327-348.
Berg J, Nestle M, Bentley A. Food studies. In: Katz SH, Weaver WW, eds. The Scribner Encyclopedia of Food and Culture, Vol 2. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 2003:16-18.
Nestle M. Not good enough to eat (commentary). New Scientist2003;177 (February 22):25.
Nestle M. Hearty Fare? Review of Faergeman, O. Coronary Heart Disease: Genes, Drugs, and the Agricultural Connection. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2003. Nature 2003;425:902.
Nestle M. Thinking about food (letter). Wilson Quarterly Autumn 2003 [27(4)]:4.
Young LR, Nestle M. The contribution of expanding Portion Sizes to the U.S. obesity epidemic. American Journal of Public Health 2002;92:246-249.
Mahabir S, Coit D, Liebes L, Brady MS, Lewis JJ, Roush G, Nestle M, Fay D, Berwick M. Randomized, placebo-controlled trial of dietary supplementation of a-tocopherol on mutagen sensitivity levels in melanoma patients: a pilot trial. Melanoma Research 2002;12:83-90.
Byers T, Nestle M, McTeirnan A, Doyle C, Currie-Williams A, Gansler T, Thun M, and the American Cancer Society 2001 Nutrition and Physical Activity Guidelines Advisory Committee. American Cancer Society Guidelines on Nutrition and Physical Activity for Cancer Prevention: Reducing the Risk of Cancer with Healthy Food Choices and Physical Activity. CA Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2002;52:92-119.
Nestle M. Genetically engineered “golden” rice unlike to overcome vitamin A deficiency (letter). Journal of the American Dietetic Association 2001;101:289-290.
Nestle M. Nutrition and women’s health: the politics of dietary advice [editorial]. Journal of the American Medical Women’s Association 2001;56:42-43.
Nestle M. Food company sponsorship of nutrition research and professional activities: A conflict of interest? Public Health Nutrition 2001;4:1015-1022.
Nestle M. Review of: Bendich A, Deckelbaum RJ, eds. Primary and Secondary Preventive Nutrition (Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2001). American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2001;74:704.
Nestle M. Hunger in America: A Matter of Policy. Social Research 1999;66(1): 257-282.
Nestle M. Commentary [dietary guidelines]. Food Policy 1999;24(2-3):307-310.
Nestle M. Meat or wheat for the next millennium? Plenary lecture: animal v. plant foods in human diets and health: is the historical record unequivocal? Proceedings of the Nutrition Society 1999;58:211-218 (online here).
Singer AJ, Werther K, Nestle M. Improvements are needed in hospital diets to meet dietary guidelines for health promotion and disease prevention. Journal of the American Dietetic Association 1998;98:639-641.
Nestle M. Toward more healthful dietary patterns—a matter of policy. Public Health Reports 1998;113:420-423.
Nestle M. In defense of the USDA Food Guide Pyramid. Nutrition Today 1998;33(5):189-197.
Nestle M.Broccoli sprouts as inducers of carcinogen-detoxifying enzyme systems: clinical, dietary, and policy implications [Commentary].Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA 1997;94:11149-11151.
Nestle M.The role of chocolate in the American diet: nutritional perspectives.In: Szogyi A, ed.Chocolate, Food of the Gods.Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, 1997:111-124.
Nestle M. Dietary advice for the 1990s: the political history of the food guide pyramid.Caduceus: A Humanities Journal for Medicine and the Health Sciences 1993:9:136-153.
Nestle M.Epidemiologists’ Paradise.Junshi C, Campbell TC, Junyao L, Peto R.Diet, Life-style, and Mortality in China: A Study of the Characteristics of 65 Chinese Counties.NY: Oxford University Press, 1990 [book review].BioScience 1991;41:725-726.
Nestle M, Porter DV. Evolution of federal dietary guidance policy: from food adequacy to chronic disease prevention.Caduceus: A Museum Journal for the Health Sciences 1990;6(2):43-67.
McGinnis JM, Nestle M. The Surgeon General’s report on nutrition and health: policy implications and implementation strategies. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition1989;49:23-28.
Nestle M, Roberts WK. Separation of ribonucleosides and ribonucleotides by a one-dimensional paper chromatographic system. Analytical Biochemistry 1968;22:349-351.