The American Dietetic Association (ADA) originated humbly in 1917, after working to healthfully feed soldiers during World War I. Since then, the group has gone on to become the world’s largest organization of food and nutrition professionals. In an effort to step up its commitment to “the nutritional well-being of the American public,” the ADA announced it would change its name to the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, effective January 2012. 

Sylvia Escott-Stump, registered dietitian and ADA president, explained why now is the right time to change the group’s name. “While ADA’s name reflected what registered dietitians did in the early part of the 20th century when ADA was founded (“applying nutritional principles to the planning and preparation of foods and regulation of the diet”), it no longer applies to the work of RDs in the 21st century, whose work is much more related to overall health and wellness with a focus on nutrition,” she said. “The name Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics promotes the strong science background and academic expertise of our members, primarily registered dietitians. Nutrition science underpins wellness, prevention and treatment.
 
“By adding nutrition to our name, we communicate our capacity for translating nutrition science into healthier lifestyles for everyone,” she continued. “Keeping dietetics supports our history as a food and science-based profession. Thus, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics quickly and accurately communicates our identity—who we are and what we do.”
 
Ms. Escott-Stump went on to say the group’s website, www.eatright.org, would remain as-is. “We still have the same mission, the same powerful Eat Right message, and are still bringing the same quality nutrition advice to the table as we have for nearly 100 years,” she said. “The field of nutrition has changed over this century, and we’re evolving to meet these needs”
 
What hasn’t changed, however, is the group’s stance on dietary supplements. Ms. Escott-Stump told Nutraceuticals World that its name change  “does not in any way affect any of our official positions. Our position on the use of dietary supplements remains the same.”
 
She then referenced ADA’s 2009 position statement, which promotes food as the primary source for supporting optimal health and reducing the risk of chronic disease.
 
While ADA acknowledged “Additional nutrients from supplements can help some people meet their nutrition needs as specified by science-based nutrition standards such as the Dietary Reference Intakes,” it contended “Consumers may not be well informed about the safety and efficacy of supplements and some may have difficulty interpreting product labels.”
 
Though the group didn’t pan the use of supplements outright, it stated that “the expertise of dietetics practitioners is needed to help educate consumers on the safe and appropriate selection and use of nutrient supplements to optimize health,” and encouraged dietetics practitioners to “keep up to date on the efficacy and safety of nutrient supplements and the regulatory issues that affect the use of these products.”
 
Tracking Consumer Attitudes
 
In tandem with the name change proclamation, ADA also released the findings of its recent nationwide consumer opinion survey, “Nutrition and You: Trends 2011.”
 
The top line results indicated that half of American adults believed they are doing “all they can” to achieve balanced nutrition and healthy diets—an interesting finding considering it stands starkly against the sobering statistic that two-thirds of American adults are either overweight or obese.
 
“Despite what people may say, virtually all indicators show half the American public is not in fact doing all it can to achieve a healthy diet,” said Jeannie Gazzaniga-Moloo, registered dietitian and ADA spokesperson. “The survey’s findings show a significant proportion of people don’t think they need to do more, despite increasing rates of obesity, diabetes and other nutrition-related health conditions.”
 
The convenience of TV, magazines and the Internet continues to render those sources as the primary mediums for dietary influence, which caused Ms. Gazzaniga-Moloo to express concern about editorial oversight. “There is less editorial oversight when it comes to the content found on websites and blogs, which leaves room on the Internet for the spread of misinformation about nutrition and health,” she said. “As we move from regularly fact-checked forums of media…it’s becoming increasingly important that consumers learn to distinguish between a nutritionally sound website and a fraudulent one.”
 
The influence of questionable media aside, ADA found Americans to be receptive to “positive food messages,” underscoring the general preference of hearing what to eat in the form of “sound bite advice” that is easy to process and follow. “Dietary guidelines are not taking hold with the public, with just slightly more than half of the consumers saying they understand the guidelines,: commented Ms. Gazzaniga-Moloo. “Easy-to-follow, lifestyle-friendly tips that help people make good choices are the most effective.”
 
When it came to learning about the kinds of foods people were eating, ADA found an uptick in the consumption of vegetables, fish, chicken and whole grain foods. “We are seeing single foods, such as berries and fish, growing in consumption,” said. Ms. Gazzaniga-Moloo. “For many people, they are an easy fix for better health—consumers feel better if they are doing something without really having to engage in major behavior changes or delving into emotional reasons for eating.”