In an embarrassing attempt to verify Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the nomination to lead the Department of Health and Human Services ( HHS), the New York Times falsely identified himself.
The paper accidentally disputed Kennedy’s individual condemnation of a claim made in a famous cereal that was sold to children in an article published Friday about his campaign to regulate the food industry.
The original print of The New York Times ‘ reporting read,” Mr. Kennedy has pointed out Froot Loops as an example of a product with too many artificial ingredients,” the article reads. ” But he was bad. The product list is almost the same, although Canada’s has normal colorings made from blueberries and carrots while the U. S. product contains purple dye 40, bright 5 and blue 1 as well as Butylated hydroxytoluene, or BHT, a lab-made chemical that is used’ for freshness,’ according to the ingredient label”.
After the extract went viral on Sunday, the New York Times readers made an addition post from Kennedy on MSNBC that was posted earlier this month.
” Because of an processing problem, an earlier version of this article incorrectly described Mr. Kennedy’s latest comments on Froot Loops”, a adjustment read. He did n’t compare the total elements in the cereal’s U.S. and Canadian versions, but rather the total amount of synthetic ingredients.
But the modification is not much stronger. How’s the updated words:
Froot Loops is an example of a product that contains too many materials, according to Mr. Kennedy. He questioned the total substance matter in an interview with MSNBC on November 6:” Why do we possess froot rings in this region that have 18 or 19 components and you go to Canada and it has two or three?” Mr. Kennedy asked. He was incorrect about the number of ingredients; they are almost the same. But the French version does include natural dyes made from berries and vegetables while the U. S. product contains red pigment 40, yellow 5 and blue 1 as well as Butylated hydroxytoluene, or BHT, a lab-made substance that is used” for freshness”, according to the product label.
In other words, Kennedy’s Froot Loops claim was discredited by the Times because the paper’s original statement failed to distinguish between artificial and natural ingredients.
The New York Times was made fun of online because it supported the paper’s contentions.
” While trying to own RFK, the]New York Times owned themselves and proved our point”, wrote Jaimee Michell, an online pundit.
Bill Ackman, a billionaire, called the Times “embarrassment,” claiming he had to” check the print paper just to make sure this was a real article.”
Nina Teicholz, a veteran nutritionist, fact-checked a separate article that promoted seed oils as a component of a balanced diet in the Times this week.
” Online forums, blogs and influencers say they’re’ toxic,’ ‘ slowly killing you’ and driving up rates of diabetes, obesity and other chronic diseases”, wrote Alice Callahan, a health and nutrition reporter at the Times, after highlighting comments from Kennedy that” Americans are being’ unknowingly poisoned’ by them”.
Callahan then quoted a number of “nutrition scientists” in a response to Kennedy’s criticism of seed oils, and he published a follow-up article on Friday claiming” Seed oils are much better for health than solid fat alternatives.”
But Teicholz, author of The Big Fat Surprise: Why Butter, Meat and Cheese Belong in a Healthy Diet and the Substack” Unsettled Science“, wrote in a long post on X why Callahan, who relied on anti-meat industry sources, is wrong. While consuming seed oil lowers low-density lipoprotein ( LDL ) cholesterol, Teicholz wrote,” Dietary diet reduction has NEVER been shown to lower cardiovascular or total mortality and only rarely shown to lower cardiovascular events.”
” These’ hard’ health outcomes ( heart attacks, death ) are the ones that matter, and for them, lowering LDL-C through diet has no effect”, Teicholz reported. This has been demonstrated by numerous extensive clinical trials.
