Noakes team rests its case

A DEBATE around the South African dietary guidelines versus a low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet (LCHF) took centre stage at Professor Tim Noakes’s misconduct hearing yesterday.

The defence rested its case yesterday afternoon and Noakes is expected to know his fate on April 21, 2017, when judgment is delivered.

Noakes is charged with unprofessional conduct after he responded to Pippa Leenstra’s tweet by stating babies should be weaned on to a LCHF diet.

Leenstra had tweeted him and nutritional therapist Sally-Ann Creed, asking if it was safe for breast-feeding mothers to be on the Banting diet.

Noakes tweeted back: “Baby doesn’t eat the dairy and cauliflower. Just very healthy high fat breast milk. Key is to wean baby on to LCHF.”

Claire Julsing-Strydom, former president of the Association of Dietitians of SA, approached the Health Professionals Council of SA and they laid the charge against Noakes.

South African-born and educated doctor of nutrition Caryn Zinn was Noakes’s last witness. Zinn, who has a practice in New Zealand, has been espousing LCHF diets for the past five years.

She had been trying to prove LCHF diets wrong, and then she realised the science added up.

Under cross-examination by advocate Ajay Bhoopchand, Zinn said the SA dietary guidelines were too vague to determine portion sizes, but what was clear in the guidelines is that starchy foods should be the basis of most meals, and people had to eat as little fat as possible.

Zinn said an LCHF diet was highly beneficial and most nutrients could be found in the diet, in which cereals were currently fortified with nutrients.

Bhoopchand put it to her that it was cereal, notably pap, that was the foundation of most people’s diets.

Noakes’s defence team attempted to put into evidence a letter written to the Association of Dietitians of SA (Adsa). Bhoopchand opposed it, saying they were being ambushed.

After deliberation, committee chairperson advocate Joan Adams allowed Noakes’s advocate, Michael van der Nest, to read out the letter addressed to Adsa.

Van der Nest had sent Adsa a letter asking for clarification on a number of issues, including if Julsing-Strydom had lodged her complaint in her private capacity or on behalf of Adsa, and if it was a complaint or a query.

Van der Nest also queried why Adsa and Julsing-Strydom had not been at most of the hearing, specifically when Noakes had been on the stand. lynette.johns@inl.co.za

@LynnetteJohns