A “Basic” Examination of the Alkaline Diet

The web is once again abuzz with suspicious claims about the alkaline diet. A staple of some alternative medicine circles for years now, this eating plan isn’t new to the pantheon of internet health-woo.  Practitioners of this food fad claim that it can help prevent many ailments, including cancer, by regulating your internal pH. Sound suspicious yet? You don’t need a PhD in chemistry for this diet to raise some major red flags. A quick examination of the science, and a few simple facts about the human body, show that this diet is… pretty basic. What is an alkaline diet? Some compounds produced through digestion are acidic while other compounds are basic (alkaline). As a quick chemistry primer: Acids and bases are measured on the pH scale. On the pH scale, 0-7 represents an acidic compound, while 7-14 represents a basic compound. Alkaline diet proponents claim that alkaline compounds (7-14 on the pH scale) are good for the body, and that a build-up of acidic compounds (0-7 on the pH scale) could lead to negative health effects. The main goal of the alkaline diet is to increase the amount of “alkaline foods” you eat and decrease the rest. Which foods are included (and excluded)? Many foods that are staples of a healthy eating pattern are actually included in the alkaline diet. Fruits, vegetables and nuts are all included as “alkaline foods.” Plant-based proteins from beans and soy products are also heavily encouraged on an alkaline diet. Unfortunately, that is where the good recommendations stop. The alkaline diet encourages adherents to (unnecessarily) restrict dairy, eggs, meats and cheeses. Besides the fact that these foods definitely don’t affect the pH of your blood (more on that later), the 2015 Dietary Guidelines for Americans show that they are important parts of a healthy eating […]

article

What Are You Looking For from Food?

Think for a minute: What exactly are you hoping to get from the food you choose? Is food simply a foil to hunger, or are you more deliberate about the enjoyment, taste or nutrition of your meals? It can be a tricky question to answer—and your answer might change depending on the time of day, how hungry you are, your health goals and of course, your budget. But no matter what your circumstance, on some basic level we all tend to want the same thing: a delicious, (at least somewhat) nutritious meal or snack for a reasonable price. And if it’s convenient, then that’s even better. At least, that’s what our years of consumer research have shown. Taste and price are, and likely always will be, the top drivers of our food decisions. But for today, let’s put those two aside and focus on another major priority: health. When you think of how food relates to health, the first thing that may come to mind is body weight. It makes sense—food has calories, and the number of calories we eat impacts our body weight. Currently, about 70 percent of U.S. adults are reportedly overweight or obese, and 40 percent of people in our 2018 survey said they are interested in weight loss or weight maintenance benefits from the foods they eat. This is second only to cardiovascular health when it comes to benefits that people are seeking from their food choices. Our research also shows that, despite seeking health benefits from foods, many people tend to have difficulty making direct connections between specific foods and a health benefit. When it comes to foods and nutrients that might help with body weight and cardiovascular health, we see some similarities. For example, vegetables and protein lead the way for perceived benefits in […]

article

Inspiring Trust & Action: Registered Dietitian Nutritionists As Food & Health Ambassadors

The evidence is undeniable: Americans continue to fall short of Dietary Guidelines recommendations. Yet the reasons this gap endures—and how to turn motivation into better diet quality—are far less clear. Insights from the 2025 IFIC Food & Health Survey and IFIC Spotlight Survey: Americans’ Trust in Food & Nutrition Science highlight a path forward: build trust, reduce confusion, and make healthy eating feel more doable. The Power Of Trust “Trust takes years to build, seconds to break, and forever to repair.” Trust may be one of the most important yet missing ingredients in improving diet quality. Fewer than four in 10 Americans strongly trust the science of food, nutrition, and diet. Among those with lower trust, more than half say they would be more willing to change their diets if they had more trust in science. Consumers most often turn to medical doctors, nurses, as well as food and nutrition scientists for nutrition information—with friends and family close behind. Although a smaller percentage say they get most of their information from registered dietitian nutritionists (RDNs), approximately two-thirds of Americans feel that RDNs are the most qualified experts to provide recommendations on making healthy food choices. That trust comes with opportunity. The Cost Of Confusion Nutrition strikes a chord as most Americans say they are interested in the topic. Just over half (52%) report participating in a private social media group focused on food, nutrition, and diet. And, about four in 10 consumers who notice food, nutrition, and diet headlines in the media say they search for additional information online. However, an abundance of mixed messages can work against them. Eight in 10 Americans say that it is hard to know what to believe because it seems like recommendations about what to eat and drink are always changing. This sentiment has […]

insights

IFIC Spotlight Survey: COVID-19’s Impact On Food Purchasing, Eating Behaviors & Perceptions Of Food Safety

It’s been just over one month since the World Health Organization declared COVID-19, also known as the novel coronavirus, a global pandemic. And we continue to feel its impact in nearly every aspect of our lives. For many of us, our normal shopping routines – and certainly eating out – have been entirely upended. To capture what we know to be widespread changes in how we buy food, how we feel about food safety and ultimately what we eat, the International Food Information Council conducted a consumer research survey. The International Food Information Council (IFIC) commissioned an online research survey with consumers based in the US to measure knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs about food and health in a pandemic. One thousand adults aged 18+ years completed the survey from April 6-7, 2020, and responses were weighted to ensure proportional results.  Key findings include:

research

Parents Uncertain About Times of Children’s Dietary Transitions; Gap Exists Between Expectations and Reality

Download the PDF FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 20, 2018 (Washington, D.C.)—Parents of children under 24 months old are quite confident that they are feeding them an age-appropriate and nutritious diet—admitting, in fact, that their children’s diets are more nutritious than their own. But a new survey by the International Food Information Council (IFIC) Foundation also reveals parents’ underlying concerns around issues like what foods to introduce into their kids’ diets and when. The survey of 1,001 parents with children from birth to 24 months (“B to 24”) found that 53 percent are very confident that they are feeding their child an age-appropriate, nutritious diet, while another 44 percent are at least somewhat confident. Despite that confidence, however, some parents expressed concerns and confusion about what they feed B-to-24 children. For instance, as parents introduce children to solid foods, 55 percent of them say that choking hazards are a major concern, with 38 percent concerned about the potential for allergic reactions. In addition, 21 percent said a major concern was what foods to introduce, and 24 percent said when to introduce them. For those with children less than six months old, the number was even higher (33 percent). Parents also are less than fully satisfied with the amount of information and guidance available about healthy eating and nutrition for children under 24 months. Only 42 percent are very satisfied. Pediatricians overwhelmingly are the primary source of information, cited by 77 percent of parents as a top source, followed by advice from their mother or mother-in-law (32 percent) and other family members (30 percent).  Also striking is the number of children whose child care provider has at least some impact on a child’s diet (79 percent). “What we feed our children as infants and babies can make a big difference in their […]

Media

Sweet Nothings or Nothing Sweet? Consumers Seek Clarity On Low- And No- Calorie Sweeteners

(Washington, D.C.) — The International Food Information Council (IFIC) recently provided a forum for health professionals and food safety experts to discuss the latest science and consumer insights around low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS).   “In today’s media landscape, headlines often sensationalize conflicting opinions on the role sweeteners should play in a healthy diet,” Wendy Reinhardt Kapsak, MS, RDN, IFIC President & CEO, said. “This leaves consumers with contradictory messages about the benefits and risks of consuming these ingredients. Because of this, we see a pressing need for clear, evidence-based communication to dispel misconceptions and empower individuals to navigate the nuances of sweetener consumption, especially timely during February, a month in which sweetness is often celebrated and enjoyed by many.”   3 In 4 Americans Look To Reduce Sugar In Their Diet  Food trends come and go, but one has stood the test of time: the search to satisfy our sweet tooths. While sweet treats will likely always be popular, reducing sugar intake is also a top health priority. According to the 2023 IFIC Food & Health Survey, 72% of Americans say they are looking to limit or avoid sugar in their diet. While sugar replacements, such as LNCS and sugar alcohols, are becoming more prevalent in products with reduced added sugar, their expanding usage often leads to questions about safety.   Safety In Question  During IFIC’s recent educational webinar, Breaking Down the Basics and Biological Fate of Low- and No-Calorie Sweeteners, the safety of LNCS took center stage. IFIC Senior Director of Nutrition Communications, Kris Sollid, RD, presented IFIC data in tandem with Bernadene Magnuson, PhD, a food toxicologist with expertise in safety and government regulations of food ingredients, including LNCS.   “Believe it or not, LNCS are some of the most studied ingredients in our food supply,” Kris Sollid, RD, […]

Media

BPA: What’s Getting Missed?

Bisphenol-A, or BPA, has long been an incredible example of just how far chatter can run away from science. We even profiled the BPA “debate” as part of our War on (Food) Science series last year. This week is no different, with specious claims about BPA increasing the risk for cancer to obesity, diabetes, and ADD, plus a half-dozen other scary sounding things. It won’t surprise you to hear that those unsubstantiated claims aren’t science-based or helpful for our food safety. Bizarrely, this week also brought critiques of substitutes for BPA, which the same critics had long been pushing for, due to the unscientific rumors about BPA itself. Let’s dive into both.   Should I be worried about BPA, or about BPA substitutes? (Hint: Neither, really) Dr. Henry Chin, PhD, an independent expert in food safety and food chemistry, demystifies it: “Since BPA doesn’t pose a risk, there is no scientifically valid reason for families to avoid BPA.  All food packaging materials are safe and some food products are available in alternative packaging. There are no packaging materials that are ‘safer’ than BPA.” BPA? Safe and approved. Substitutes for BPA? Also safe and approved. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approves all food packaging materials as “food contact substances,” so all of these substitutes are in the same boat as BPA: The FDA confirms there is “sufficient scientific information to demonstrate that the use of these materials is safe.”   BPA (and Substitutes): What’s the point? Let’s back up for a minute and talk about why BPA exists. BPA (or substitutes) are used in can liners. Without a liner, metal cans get corroded or punctured.  That means that the food would get contaminated by the metal can and/or outside bacteria that can cause dangerous foodborne illness. It made a big difference […]

article

Food for Thought This Healthy Aging Month

Healthy Aging Month is a great time to consider how beliefs and behaviors around food change as we age. Aside from what is often a distinct set of beliefs about nutrition, and an evolving set of eating behaviors, older adults also have different nutritional needs than their younger counterparts. As the body ages, it processes food more slowly and requires different levels of nutrients in order to fuel the body, maintain muscle mass and promote optimal cognitive health. The 2017 Food and Health Survey findings include a detailed report focused exclusively on older adults ages 50 to 80. This report was conducted in collaboration with the AARP Foundation. The findings shed new light on older adults’ eating attitudes and perceptions. Let’s see how they stack up against their younger counterparts. Health Risks Fluid and Fiber As you can see, older adults are a pretty nutrition-savvy group. The 2017 Food and Health Survey shows how older adults may be changing their eating habits to match their unique nutrition needs and to lower their risk for chronic disease. This could be, at least partially, a result of who they trust for their information. The survey shows how older adults are more likely to trust conversations with healthcare professionals and registered dietitians as sources of information on what to eat and avoid. They are also less likely than younger consumers to get nutrition information from family and friends. This trust in – and reliance on – credentialed sources, like health professionals and registered dietitians, could be putting older adults on the path to good nutrition. For more information on how nutrition needs change over time, and how to get the nutrients you need for healthy aging, check out this resource. Adam Sachs, University of Maryland dietetic intern, contributed to this post.

article