Typically qualitative descriptors can be converted to quantitative measures using sensory analysis and focus group formats such as Quantitative Descriptive Analysis (a trademarked sensory analysis methodology from Tragon). Within the focus group format, there must be facilitation and training to help facilitate a consensus of what descriptors mean to the consumer panelists. From there, once consensus is built, and panelists are trained on the descriptors, panelists can capture quantitative data using line scales.

The nutrition world brings a wealth of science to the table, but can say very little. We’re held captive to the designs and endpoints of drug company monopolies, who control the FDA. Objective truth is often downplayed or overlooked. Still regarded as quackery–Nutrition is actually way ahead of orthodox medicine. Probiotics were just germs to doctors a decade ago. Vitamin D was a hoax in medicine 5 years ago. Fish oil was snake oil, until recently. I could go on and on about dozens of nutrients that are finally getting some recognition. Still, we have a long way to go. The science is there; literally thousands of papers each year on these topics. Yet, we’re ignored by the media, and policed by the Feds. Medicine is business, and things move slowly.

If nutritionists were allowed to make reasonable, scientific health claims, our messages would be more understandable and less subjective. Science is more than just clinical trials: it runs the gamut from observational studies to clinical trials; from case studies to animal data. It should all be considered. However, those in power keep nutrition companies from saying objective things about their products based on real science. The Feds would do a much greater service to our country by upholding the quality and safety of products, rather than limiting what claims are made. Let science and the public decide the latter.