Today’s post carries on from “The Nutrition That Never Arrived,” which discusses the work of Dr. Dhruv Khullar, as well as his referencing of Dr. Kevin Hall’s highly-regarded study of ultra-processed foods.
The alarming aspect of this topic is that, almost exactly one year ago, CBS News published a piece titled “RFK Jr. aides accused of censoring NIH’s top ultra-processed food scientist.” That scientist of course was Dr. Hall, described therein as “The National Institutes of Health’s top researcher on ultra-processed foods.”
Hall had announced that, after 21 years at his dream job, he was retiring early because, apparently, the NIH is no longer a place where unbiased science can be conducted. The details are rather shocking, according to journalist Alexander Tin:
Hall told CBS News that he was blocked by the department from being directly interviewed by a reporter from The New York Times, asking about recent research on how ultra-processed foods can be addictive.
Apparently, the NIH leadership did not want any comparison made between being hooked on ultra-processed foods and, for instance, your average meth habit — unless the disease manifests in exactly the same way and causes exactly the same effects as hard-drug addiction.
Hall was allowed to reply to The Times with written answers which “were then edited and sent to the reporter without his consent.” This behavior, needless to say, is normally considered highly unacceptable among professionals in the fields of both medicine and journalism.
Then the situation deteriorated even further when the government denied tampering with Hall’s words, and accused him of untruthfulness about the interference, and acted like the material wasn’t very good or worth being concerned about. Hall, however, maintained that his work on the effects of ultra-processed food on carefully observed subjects…
[…] was the largest study of its kind and no previous study had the same level of dietary control, much less admitted them to a hospital to ensure diet adherence…
Meanwhile, the NIH officials maintained that no censorship was in effect, and that any attempt to portray the government’s position as false would be deliberate distortion. In order to avoid being contradicted, the government agency also prevented Hall from participating in a conference on the subject.
At the same time, Susan Mayne, who had formerly been in charge of the food safety and nutrition center run by the Food and Drug Administration, spoke up for Hall’s research.
This whole controversy surprised many observers because just a few months earlier, reporters were writing passages like this one, published in January of 2025 in The New Yorker:
The dirty little secret is that no one really knows what caused the obesity epidemic. It’s the biggest change to human biology in modern history. But we still don’t have a good handle on why.
That was Dhruv Khullar, quoting what had been said to him by Dariush Mozaffarian, a dean at the Tufts School of Nutrition Science and Policy. The implication is that ultra-processed foods have “probably contributed to rising obesity rates,” although other factors also are involved — like changes in the human microbiome and general metabolism, as well as (probably) epigenetics.
Of course, as always, the possibility exists that the situation is influenced by factors that have not even been suspected yet.
(To be continued… )
Your responses and feedback are welcome!
Source: “RFK Jr. aides accused of censoring NIH’s top ultra-processed food scientist,” CBS News, 04/17/25
Source: “Why Is the American Diet So Deadly?,” The New Yorker, 01/06/25
Image by geralt/Pixabay
FAQs and Media Requests: 
