I think that all you need to do in order to be a consultant is to have some business cards printed up but maybe it would be good to have some training in the area to which you're consulting. Would this program be adequate? I don't know. It might depend on where you live but you can peek at this and see if it looks any good. https://www.zentrum-der-gesundheit.de/nutrition-consultant-feedbacks.html
Location is likely to play a role. There seems to be so many nutrition qualifications out there, but I imagine most of them are junk. I took a look at the American Nutrition Association (not sure what level of standing/respect this association has in the field) site that details a few: http://americannutritionassociation.org/toolsandresources/descriptiondegreescredentials ^ Only Bridgeport and Bastyr programs are mentioned specifically for qualifying a person to sit for the CCN (Certified Clinical Nutritionist) exam, but I know that Huntington University of Health Sciences has programs that qualify as well. If I'm not mistaken, of all of the certifications listed there, it appears that the top-level credential in the dietary field remains the RD (Registered Dietitian). I've also seen programs for a DCN (Doctor of Clinical Nutrition) like the one at Maryland University of Integrative Health, but I'm unsure of the kind of reach the degree has in that field. I'd really love for Jennifer to chime in on this. I'd like to learn about the hierarchy of certifications and associations. I've been reading some things, but I'm still unsure of what the order should be.
And I may be mistaken. Re-reading that link, it says: "It is the most widely recognized nutrition certification by federal and state governments. It is the only non-dietetics credential and examination widely named in state nutrition licensure laws."
"I'd really love for Jennifer to chime in on this. I'd like to learn about the hierarchy of certifications and associations. I've been reading some things, but I'm still unsure of what the order should be." Well, keep in mind my MS serves my role as a culinary educator - so I train chefs in healthy cooking. The operative distinction is that they are not practicing medicine, they are practicing culinary arts. The nutrition industry is a mess. (1) the RD is required in most states to work in legitimate healthcare (ex. hospitals, doctor's offices, diabetes education, etc.) so there's that. They have all the money- and aren't giving up that power anytime soon. Pursuing a non-RD credential means you will be excluded from most legitimate employment paths and even the lower-paying ones (grocery store nutritionist, fitness center nutrition coach, etc.). (2) non-RD routes will lump you into the "alternative health" category. This category includes alternative medicine, chiropractic, and various practitioners. The state you're living in will dictate if / which non-RD credential you can use in order to be called anything with "nutrition" in the title. licensed, certified, ist, etc. no matter where you live, there are rules. (eagerly enforced by RDs scanning for people practicing outside the law and will absolutely report you to your state licensing board.) This is a hard path to pursue- it's very much like that of a midwife trying to practice legally, there are many of the same parallels. Edit to add, it occurs to me that the lay-midwife certified nurse-midwife controversy might not be well known here- so instead it's a bit like the RA/NA degree debate. Consider an RD to be like the "RA" degree, while the non-RD paths to be like the "NA" degrees. They can work, but you should be well informed that they won't work in a lot of instances. (3) most of what you read is nutrition fiction, making most of what you'll learn from a consultant to be fad-based, agenda-based, or product sales-based crap. The bottom line is that fad-based, agenda-based, and product sales/supplement based bad advice doesn't really hurt healthy people. So, you can do your keto diet or grapefruit diet or protein powders and you'll be fine. Of course you'll FEEL really proactive, an activist even (can you say placebo effect?) and it will amount to nothing. You're fine, and assuming you eventually return to your old eating habits, you'll probably never suffer nutritional consequences. The issue, and the bigger problem, is when sick people fall prey to nutrition fiction. Whether it's a "cancer diet" or a liquid diet, a vitamin regimen, etc. if it replaces sound nutrition advice (which IS medical advice when used to treat a disease- which is why it is regulated and licensed by people who have actually studied science, organic chemistry, biochemistry, etc.) that can cause a sick person to decline quickly. For healthy people wanting to improve their health: eat less, eat fresh, move more. For sick people, see an RD and MD simultaneously. If you want to study nutrition, enroll in General Biology 101 and start there.
Here's a kid who could use some nutrition help https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/03/health/poor-diet-blindness-scli-intl/index.html
poor kid ;( So this is a CNN summary of the journal - I'm curious if they were accurate in the reporting of events? I think a case that is a big enough deal to make a medical journal probably so exceptional that... that it made a medical journal. B12 is more of a deal in a vegetarian diet - they *literally* don't consume B12 unless as a supplement, and you don't see loads of blind vegetarians. I think there had to be many factors, but junk-food-shaming makes headlines for sure, so if I were guessing, I would guess that his diet was a contributing factor of a condition that may have happened anyway. Sometimes you just draw the short straw.
