Nutritionists have a degree in nutrition. However, there is no legal definition: anyone can call themselves a nutritionist. Now, there is a range of cosmetics called “nutritionist”.
The marketers of such a company are very clever, since they know that calling the range “nutritionist” currently cannot be challenged, as there is no legal definition of the term. Also, they believe that using this name for the product range is likely to sell the products. Those who buy such products must be convinced by the sales pitch, otherwise they would not buy them. If sales of the products were not sufficient to be profitable, the company would withdraw the range, or at least, re-name it.
The fact that such a product range sells, tells us that the average IQ of the population in which such a range is sold is very low. When the current
Nutrients can only be of benefit to one’s nutritional status if they are eaten. Creams and lotions that one puts on the skin have, to date, no in vivo proven anti-ageing benefits.
Claims made on food labels must not be misleading. If they are, companies can be prosecuted and fined. EU legislation for health and nutrition claims made on food labels is soon to come into force. How are claims made on the labels of non-food products policed? It does not appear that they are. Manufacturers and retailers of all manner of non-food products appear to be able to make many unchallenged claims.
One day, perhaps the term “nutritionist” will become a protected title. If so, only those qualified in nutrition will be able to call themselves a “nutritionist” and such a name for a range of cosmetics will become illegal. In the meantime, perhaps those of us that do have a degree in nutrition should start a class action for defamation of character? After all, such a name for a range of mere cosmetics is an insult to us as professionals. At the least, the Nutrition Society should complain to the Advertising Standards Authority.