Nutrition science has enriched our understanding of how to stay healthy by producing valuable knowledge about the interaction of nutrients, food, and the human body. Nutrition science also has raised societal awareness about the links between food consumption and well-being, and provided the basis for food regulations and dietary guidelines. Its collaborative and interdisciplinary research has accomplished much, scientifically and socially. Despite this, nutrition science appears to be in crisis and is currently confronted with a public reluctance to trust nutritional insights. Though deflating trust is a general phenomenon surrounding the scientific community, its impact on nutrition science is particularly strong because of the crucial role of nutrition in everyone’s daily life. We, a Dutch collective of nutritionists, medical doctors, philosophers and sociologists of science (http://www.nutritionintransition.nl), have diagnosed that nutrition science is meeting inherent boundaries. This hampers conceptual and methodological progress and the translation of novel insights into societal benefit and trust. In other words, nutrition science is facing limitations to its capability and credibility, impeding its societal value. We take up the challenge to halt the threatening erosion of nutrition science’s capability and credibility, and explore a way forward. We analyse limitations to capability and credibility, then argue that nutrition science is caught in a vicious circle, and end by offering some suggestions to transcend the limitations and escape the current deadlock. We invite nutritional experts as well as scholars from adjacent disciplines to engage in the discussion.

While health innovations such as nicotine vaccination need broad reflection to guide decisions on their further development and possible future implementations, only a small part of the ethical and social issues of this innovative technology has been discussed. For a debate to come into existence, a 'neurobio-psycho-socio-cultural' frame of smoking and quitting appears fruitful. Important topics for reflection are the human activities and social processes in a vaccine-supported quit attempt, next to respect for individuals, possible harms and questions of (global) justice and research ethics.

No abstract

Introduction This study investigated the mental health burden of patients with chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyneuropathy (CIDP) or multifocal motor neuropathy (MMN) during the COVID-19 pandemic in comparison to matched healthy controls. Methods The cross-sectional study included 59 patients with a diagnosis of either CIDP or MMN and 59 propensity score matched healthy controls. All participants completed a survey including demographics, distress (distress thermometer), depressive symptoms (PHQ-2), generalized anxiety (GAD-7), COVID-19-related fear, and risk perception. Additionally, patients with CIDP or MMN were asked about the frequency and type of infections since treatment initiation. Results Patients with either CIDP or MMN reported experiencing reduced frequency or no differences in infection frequency since immune medication was initiated. Regarding COVID-19, patients with CIDP or MMN rated their risk of infection similar to healthy controls, while they expected a higher probability of the occurrence of symptoms, severe course, and dying of COVID-19. They reported increased depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety, and COVID-19-related fear in comparison to healthy controls. Conclusion Despite their personal experience of reduced frequency of infection since immune medication was initiated, patients with CIDP or MMN reported increased risk perception and prevalence of depressive symptoms, generalized anxiety, and COVID-19-related fear in comparison to healthy controls. This highlights the need for evidence-driven strategies to protect the mental health of this vulnerable group. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40120-022-00359-3.

No abstract