A new push to expand the power of Registered Dietitian Nutritionists could limit consumer access to alternative nutrition professionals. State-based action alerts!
Listen to the audio version of this article:
THE TOPLINE
- The Dietitian Interstate Compact has passed in multiple states and is under consideration in many others, making it easier for Registered Dietitian Nutritionists (RDNs) to practice across state lines.
- The Compact excludes other qualified nutrition professionals, such as Certified Nutrition Specialists (CNS), limiting consumer choice and potentially impacting insurance coverage.
- The Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND) has extensive ties to Big Food and Big Pharma, raising concerns about conflicts of interest and the broader impact of this Compact on public health.
What we eat shapes our long- and short-term health, as well as our energy levels, our quality of life and overall well-being. Yet, navigating the world of nutrition can be overwhelming especially given so much apparently conflicting information. So many Americans turn to professionals for guidance—whether to manage a chronic condition, address food sensitivities, boost energy levels, reduce their risk of heart disease, cancer, or diabetes, or simply adopt healthier habits. But what if the only professionals available to provide this support were those with financial ties to Big Food, Big Ag, and Big Pharma? And what if the information you got was far from the best or most relevant available and would do little to help you or, worse still, may even be counter-productive to your health?
A monopoly over the practice of nutrition has long been the goal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND). The AND is the trade group for Registered Dietitian Nutritionists (RDNs), and for years it has pushed for laws in as many states as possible stipulating that only RDNs could offer nutrition services.
Now, the AND is employing a new strategy. Much like the Interstate Compact pursued by the Federation of State Medical Boards to extend their power over medical practice, the AND is now working to get its own Dietitian Interstate Compact passed in as many states as possible.
The goal of the Dietitian Interstate Compact is to allow RDNs to practice in multiple states without needing to obtain a license in each individual state. Instead, state legislatures can pass model legislation to enter the Compact, after which RDNs can practice in any participating state without obtaining additional licenses. As the Compact has been passed in seven states, it officially has come into effect: it has been enacted in North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Ohio, Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi.
Right now, model legislation to enter the Compact is being considered in many states, including:
- Missouri (HB 397, SB 412)
- Arkansas (HB 1185)
- Wisconsin (AB 45, SB 71)
- West Virginia (SB 2389)
- Idaho (H 132)
- Montana (SB 279)
- Iowa (HSB 119, HF 532)
- Vermont (H 296)
- Rhode Island (HB 5067/SB 345)
- Texas (HB 4465)
- Georgia (HB 185)
- New Hampshire (HB 145)
While this Compact may seem beneficial at first glance, it unfairly excludes other qualified practitioners, such as Certified Nutrition Specialists (CNS), who often have more advanced training than RDNs and employ a different, arguably more effective, approach to nutrition. By licensing one group while excluding others, this Compact threatens the livelihoods of non-RDN nutrition professionals and limits consumer choice. Additionally, it has insurance implications, as many laws only recognize “licensed” health care professionals, potentially cutting non-RDNs out of insurance reimbursement. All told, enacting the Compact would make it harder for non-RDNs to practice.
Health coaches may also be affected by the Compact, as their ability to provide nutrition advice could be severely restricted. Many individuals seeking better health do not require prescriptions or specialized diets but need practical guidance on managing their income to afford a healthy lifestyle, finding suitable exercise routines, and making sustainable dietary changes. If health coaches are barred from offering nutrition advice, their ability to support patients in these critical areas of well-being is at risk.
The bottom line: If this Compact gains traction, consumers will have fewer choices when seeking nutrition guidance.
There has been some encouraging news from the FTC on this issue: FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson is forming a task force to investigate “deceptive, unfair, and anticompetitive labor practices.” Among the priorities for the task force are looking at “harmful occupational licensing requirements, where employers or professional associations advance or promote needless occupational licensing restrictions that can serve as an unwarranted barrier to entry and reduce labor mobility.” In other words, precisely what the AND has been doing for years.
We have previously reported on the AND’s troubling conflicts of interest. For instance, Kraft Singles—the processed cheese product commonly found in school lunches—was the first to receive the AND’s “Kids Eat Right” label. Similarly, Coca-Cola-sponsored dietitians publicly recommended small cans of soda as a snack.
More recent investigations into the corporate ties of the AND reveal that it continues to accept millions of dollars from Big Food and Big Pharma. The organization has even invested in ultra-processed food and drug companies, while its leadership has been employed by or consulted with multinational food and pharmaceutical corporations. Past corporate contributors to the AND include Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, General Mills, Hershey, Kellogg’s, and the National Confectioners Association—the trade group representing candy manufacturers.
A 2022 study concluded that the AND has a “symbiotic relationship” with these corporate giants, positioning itself as a “pro-industry voice” in policy discussions, often taking public stances that contradict its stated mission of improving global health.
Given these deep-rooted conflicts of interest, do we really want the AND to wield even more power over the practice of nutrition in the United States?
If you live in one of the following states, please click the link to oppose the extension of nutrition monopolies.
