Nutrition and Health Coaching course

danlen

Sapsorrow wrote: »

I got a job in a really hectic cafe in town today, one of the other girls working there is a food scientist, it doesn't say much for the Irish career opportunities in food and nutrition these days I say you're better off in your current job for now Portia! On this topic does anyone know where to go to find out about going into second level teaching? I'd love to do it, apparantly there's a shortage of science teachers in England and Ireland and there's talk about bringing nutrition into the school curriculum.

First you should check here does your undergraduate degree comlpy with the list of acceptable courses set out by the teaching council:
http://www.teachingcouncil.ie/_fileupload/TC_Publications/Autoquals_updated_6th_December_2010_94833770.pdf

If it does then you will have to apply for a Hdip in education in one of the universities in either Ireland or the UK. If you are accepted onto a Hdip, it will take about 12-18 months to complete.


I am currently in my final year of a science education degree. This is a concurrent degree so I will not need to do a Hdip and so will be finished in May. I found this thread interesting as I was actually looking into doing a masters in nutrition (possibly in Coleraine) when I'm qualified, for two main reasons. One, this is my real passion as opposed to teaching in a school. Two, I'm not too optimistic about getting a teaching post straight away so perhaps a masters would be no harm no matter what I decide to do in future.

I know job opportunities are bleak in all sectors though. Any opinions you have from your viewpoint would be welcome...

Sapsorrow

Well I can only really talk from experience, but anyone I am still in contact with from college (since graduating) is either doing a masters, unemployed or working in shops and cafes. That said, if it's your passion and it's feasible for you to do it then hell ya, go for it. If you're into it enough and good enough you can make it work some how, at least in the long run of your life. And there's worse things to do in a recession than go back to college. Personally though, I've been job hunting for months to no avail, the degree in nutrition (and dietetics as far as I can tell) by itself isn't enough for the jobs that are out there, so I'm looking into going back to do a food science and technology Msc next year. It would be excruciatingly boring and those elements of my degree were my most loathed, but it's where the jobs and careers opportunities are at. Teagasc etc are continuing to grow and expand as are many food companies in Ireland, that's clear just by scouting the job sites and my degree hasn't provided me with the experience and skills most of these places want. Money is the key, ya I want to be a nutritionist and I find it fascinating but I can't do anything till I get some bucks in my pocket, so my plan is do a msc, get a well paid job in science or industry (the only well paid and plentiful options for the foreseeable future), get some hands on experience, make some contacts, get a good reference, save like crazy and then in a few years I'll have enough money to start a business or go into consulting comfortably. Otherwise pharmas a good bet too, loads of jobs there these days. That's my plan, don't know if it is in anyway useful to you though Sorry, not sure was that a bit ranty? I feel a bit ranty :pac:

Sapsorrow

Oh forgot to mention, I researched the PGDE, I would only have been eligably to teach biology (WTF! I did so much god dammed chemistry :mad:) so I didn't bother applying, I've no hope of getting work with only one subject.

Fister

Just wondering what is so wrong with the 3 year PT nutrition course given by CNM ? They have an association with the Charles Sturt University in Auz where you can upgrade your Diploma qualification to a Degree through distance learning. I have a Bsc in Science from UCC & am v interested in working as a self employed Nutritionist. Iwork PT & have a child so a FT degree course if not possible for me. I am v. interested in nutrition but do not want to throw good money down the drain Has anybody any experience good or bad of the CNM or do people know of any Distance Learning course that would train you to the same level ?

ciagr297

I went to the CNM course open day last year in Dublin cause I was interested.

Mostly, what put me off the course was actually the content of the course and end qualification.

Anyone can call themselves a Nutritionist at the moment (soon to change) whereas the title Dietitian is a protected title. So after 3 years of study, the girl selling vitamins in Holland and Barrett could call herself the same thing as me - when I had invested time and money into studying.

On the content of the course - I come from a scientific background and whilst some of the study material looked like it was from scientific sources, when they started babbling about tinctures and organic food/only eating sprouts/no red meat at all, it quickly threw everything into doubt for me.
I remain strongly suspicious about this course.

Naturally, its up to yourself. Do some investigation though, as when the title Nutritionist becomes protected, your qualifications may not meet the criteria.

Lantus

Sapsorrow wrote: »

This disturbs me now end, to think that the 'experts' people put their health in the hands of may have no proper training and learn 'the hard way'. The hard way is usually by trial and error isn't it? Nice to think of people charging forty or fifty quid an hour just to use you as a guinea pig in their own quest to nutritional expertise. It's so incredibly imoral and arrogant to presume that you can go around meddling with peoples health and well being withtout being properly trained and assessed to a high standard. You wouldn't take a prescription off a GP who had done a part time diploma for a year, food is just a bundle of biologically active chemicals too it's not all that different to popping a pill.

Well there are plenty of people who have limited qualifications like Tom Venuto (self appointed nutritional consultant!) who is an icon of what good nutritional advice and exercise can achieve. Then you have armchair professors like atkins that have a protected title of Dr but honestly not someone you would want to look like or aspire to be like. I believe that actions speak louder than words. If someone lives by the mantra they are selling and it visibly works then great. Quals have there place and as a highly qualified person myself in other areas I would always advocate higher education. For research and food science analysis stuff certainly yes.

To help others towards a better lifestyle communication and empathy are just as important as the raw knowledge of telling them what to eat.

Sapsorrow

Fister wrote: »

Just wondering what is so wrong with the 3 year PT nutrition course given by CNM ? They have an association with the Charles Sturt University in Auz where you can upgrade your Diploma qualification to a Degree through distance learning. I have a Bsc in Science from UCC & am v interested in working as a self employed Nutritionist. Iwork PT & have a child so a FT degree course if not possible for me. I am v. interested in nutrition but do not want to throw good money down the drain Has anybody any experience good or bad of the CNM or do people know of any Distance Learning course that would train you to the same level ?

Honestly, you won't be eligible to register with any credible organisations with a qualification from CNM, this thing of being accredited by an Australian college just reflects how suspect it is. If you want proof, email the British Dietetic Association and see what they think of that qualification, you wouldn't have a hope of getting a job in a professional healthcare setting.

Edit: I should mention, a few years ago I looked into doing to CNM course myself, I met with the course director and had a good look at the curriculum as at the time I was very interested in traditional Chinese medicine. I spoke to a couple of lecturers in UCC about it and discovered the 'college' has a serious reputation and the 'credentials' are completely meaningless. I also spoke to my acupuncturist about it and he enlightened me to some fairly dubious and sinister goings on with the running of the college, that he had good reason to know about.

When the legislation eventually changes to protect the title of health care professionals like nutritionists you won't have a leg to stand on legally without a proper qualification. Anyone in the nutrition industry would consider that course quackery.

There are better options out there I'm sure, but I seriously doubt you're going to find anything credible in distance learning, it's too hands on a curriculum and you wouldn't get any clinical practice from distance learning.

Sapsorrow

Lantus wrote: »

Well there are plenty of people who have limited qualifications like Tom Venuto (self appointed nutritional consultant!) who is an icon of what good nutritional advice and exercise can achieve. Then you have armchair professors like atkins that have a protected title of Dr but honestly not someone you would want to look like or aspire to be like. I believe that actions speak louder than words. If someone lives by the mantra they are selling and it visibly works then great. Quals have there place and as a highly qualified person myself in other areas I would always advocate higher education. For research and food science analysis stuff certainly yes.

To help others towards a better lifestyle communication and empathy are just as important as the raw knowledge of telling them what to eat.

Geez this again? *sigh* I give up.

Red Cortina

Lantus wrote: »

Well there are plenty of people who have limited qualifications like Tom Venuto (self appointed nutritional consultant!) who is an icon of what good nutritional advice and exercise can achieve. Then you have armchair professors like atkins that have a protected title of Dr but honestly not someone you would want to look like or aspire to be like. I believe that actions speak louder than words. If someone lives by the mantra they are selling and it visibly works then great. Quals have there place and as a highly qualified person myself in other areas I would always advocate higher education. For research and food science analysis stuff certainly yes.

To help others towards a better lifestyle communication and empathy are just as important as the raw knowledge of telling them what to eat.

Just after logging onto Tom Venuto’s website there for a look.

I know that I would make a distinction between the dietary advice given by the likes of Tom Venuto, John Berardi etc vs the likes of the WAPF, Mark Sisson, Kurt Harris etc.

Tom Venuto and John Berardi come at nutrition from very much a bodybuilding/get a low body fat % pov. I (rightly or wrongly) associate them with advice such as eat small meals every 3 hrs, eat egg whites and take loads of fish oils washed down with a protein shake. While I would consider their dietary advice to be better than what some folks normally eat such as donuts, chips, chicken nuggets etc, there is no way that I would consider their nutritional recommendations to be optimal.

brainyneuron

I'm currently doing the IINH Nutrition and Health Coaching course (in Bray) so if anyone has any questions feel free to ask

Stayed away from this thread up till now as I didn't feel like defending myself against certain posters who were extremely negative about any course other than their own. Now that I've done more than half the course I feel better able to talk about/defend the course and fight my corner. :rolleyes:

Lantus

Red Cortina wrote: »

Just after logging onto Tom Venuto’s website there for a look.

I know that I would make a distinction between the dietary advice given by the likes of Tom Venuto, John Berardi etc vs the likes of the WAPF, Mark Sisson, Kurt Harris etc.

Tom Venuto and John Berardi come at nutrition from very much a bodybuilding/get a low body fat % pov. I (rightly or wrongly) associate them with advice such as eat small meals every 3 hrs, eat egg whites and take loads of fish oils washed down with a protein shake. While I would consider their dietary advice to be better than what some folks normally eat such as donuts, chips, chicken nuggets etc, there is no way that I would consider their nutritional recommendations to be optimal.

Wouldn't say it was, just an example. Naturally sapsparrow wants to protect their expensive and lengthy education. Totally understandably and rightly so.

Just saying that you dont always need an expert who has been officially indoctrinated to get results. While it's a recommended course of action there are charletons who have quals an even fake quals.

Consider this.....Jillian McKeith and Nigella Lawson are both the same age. Which one would you rather look like?

Red Cortina

Lantus wrote: »

Wouldn't say it was, just an example. Naturally sapsparrow wants to protect their expensive and lengthy education. Totally understandably and rightly so.

Just saying that you dont always need an expert who has been officially indoctrinated to get results. While it's a recommended course of action there are charletons who have quals an even fake quals.

Consider this.....Jillian McKeith and Nigella Lawson are both the same age. Which one would you rather look like?

Hey I am the most sceptical of folks when it comes to the medical profession, for example, so I understand what you are saying there.

I bloody hate both of those women! I get really annoyed everytime I watch Nigella, she is the laziest bloody cook ever and sets a terrible example to all the folks who watch her!! Saw one program where she took a wok full of spagetti (!!) off to bed with her:eek:

Sapsorrow

Lantus wrote: »

Wouldn't say it was, just an example. Naturally sapsparrow wants to protect their expensive and lengthy education. Totally understandably and rightly so.

No really it's not like that at all (plus I got my fees paid for by the government ) It's just that after doing my course I've come to realise how much there is to learn that is completely fundamental to understanding nutrition and the human body that these privately run courses just don't cover. They're just not very good for someone looking to go into nutrition professionally, simple as, and there are much better options out there.

Sapsorrow

brainyneuron wrote: »

Stayed away from this thread up till now as I didn't feel like defending myself against certain posters who were extremely negative about any course other than their own. Now that I've done more than half the course I feel better able to talk about/defend the course and fight my corner. :rolleyes:

Wow subtle, especially with the sarcastic rollie eyes.

Lantus

Sapsorrow wrote: »

No really it's not like that at all (plus I got my fees paid for by the government ) It's just that after doing my course I've come to realise how much there is to learn that is completely fundamental to understanding nutrition and the human body that these privately run courses just don't cover. They're just not very good for someone looking to go into nutrition professionally, simple as, and there are much better options out there.

Regardless of how much you paid for your education it WAS expensive.

As with any subject nutrition is a massive area that can be scrutinised and detailed in every area. It can really get down to the chemistry and components of foods, what they are comprised of and how they are grown.

BUT, in the real world we all go the similar shops and buy similar food. Bit of veg, some meat, fruit and so on. Knowing what is good and bad in a shop is the real key to success. 99% of us dont need or want to know about the science behind why a carot is orange. Is it any good? can I eat it raw etc...

Teaching people what is good and bad food, how to read nutritional labels and more importantly the ingredients list is key. Bring back home economics in school and teach kids how to cook. Back to basics with simple foods.

I agree a lot of the courses are way to hippy and herbs to be considered relevant. Appealing to bored housewives and of no real substance.

The technical courses can be very detached from the reality of most weight issues. If people have studied the science of food then trying to get a scared and food motivated person to change their life requires more than just a knowledge of molecules.

Lantus

Red Cortina wrote: »

Just after logging onto Tom Venuto’s website there for a look.

I know that I would make a distinction between the dietary advice given by the likes of Tom Venuto, John Berardi etc vs the likes of the WAPF, Mark Sisson, Kurt Harris etc.

Tom Venuto and John Berardi come at nutrition from very much a bodybuilding/get a low body fat % pov. I (rightly or wrongly) associate them with advice such as eat small meals every 3 hrs, eat egg whites and take loads of fish oils washed down with a protein shake. While I would consider their dietary advice to be better than what some folks normally eat such as donuts, chips, chicken nuggets etc, there is no way that I would consider their nutritional recommendations to be optimal.

What you can take from reading the likes of Tom is a real basic understanding of the basics of nutrition. While most diet books just direct you to eat A B & C without question at least authors like Tom aim to educate the reader about what A B & C (and D & E) are and why you may want to consider eating them. The stripped back bare bones approach these authors take gives the reader a solid base that they can always fall back on if they come across a new food or wonder substance. You can ask your self. Is this an A grade food? Is it refined? What is the ingredients list?

This has nothing to do wth bodybuilding. Fact is most people will never get to look like bodybuilders. But the healthy lifestyle they lead is an optimum that 90% of the population is just no where near.

I dont look like a body builder and I dot really aspire to but I do know that a consistent combination of healthy protein, carbs and fats in every meal or snack every 3 hours or so is a good way to eat.

I can scrutinise any product in a shop and know whether it's good, allright or hiding crappy ingredients in the list.

I know about the rights types of exercise and how to apply them in my life and how important things like goal setting are for long term success.

You call that bodybuilding dieting.

I call it optimal nutrition. If everyone had that kind of knowledge then forums like this would be very very quiet.....

metamorphosis

Id agree with Lantus's forst post in the fact that the more you make nutrition complicated for most people, the more they will run away from it all together.

Me, I thrive on complication but when someone comes up to me after a class when i tutor people on courses, I don't complicate it. Simplicity is key. People (most) simply want to know what's okay to eat and what's not, beyond that, they really don't care.

Fister

I am really interested in the CNM course as it is the only PT option in Cork, i am very happy & would be very grateful to receive peoples opinion/advice on this either good or bad as it is a big commitment & price to pay but if people are critising the credentials of the College it would in my opinion only be right to do so if that person has concrete evidence. The nutritional course has been accredited by the IANT. Could they do this if the course was not seen to teach its students to an acceptable level to advice clients. I would like to know if u have taken the time to look at the Charles Sturt University website - Distance study is only a part of what they do or are you questioning their credibility also. They appear to me to be a v. well regarded institution.

Sapsorrow

Lantus wrote: »

Regardless of how much you paid for your education it WAS expensive.

As with any subject nutrition is a massive area that can be scrutinised and detailed in every area. It can really get down to the chemistry and components of foods, what they are comprised of and how they are grown.

BUT, in the real world we all go the similar shops and buy similar food. Bit of veg, some meat, fruit and so on. Knowing what is good and bad in a shop is the real key to success. 99% of us dont need or want to know about the science behind why a carot is orange. Is it any good? can I eat it raw etc...

Teaching people what is good and bad food, how to read nutritional labels and more importantly the ingredients list is key. Bring back home economics in school and teach kids how to cook. Back to basics with simple foods.

I agree a lot of the courses are way to hippy and herbs to be considered relevant. Appealing to bored housewives and of no real substance.

The technical courses can be very detached from the reality of most weight issues. If people have studied the science of food then trying to get a scared and food motivated person to change their life requires more than just a knowledge of molecules.

I agreee completely with your post, but (there had to be one ) but it's not like the third level degrees only teach the science of food and not the more hands on therapeutic stuff too. In my course at least, we did a good balance of nutrition and dietetics modules relative to the sciencey ones, especially for the last two years.

My point is it's not good to go advising people with health issues (that you could make a hell of a lot worse if you give them shoddy advice) on how they should change their diets without a really good grasp of the fundamental science. If you don't have the science then you are always relying on someone else's interpretation of the latest research to form your opinions on, rather than your own. That is clearly potentially very dodgey seeing as there is so much misinformation and corruption out there, and you'd never been in much of a position to determine who is preaching nonsense or logic.

I know from experience, years ago before I started my course and had zero knowledge of science I would believe anything in a nutrition book if it was written convincingly enough, because I had no awareness of scientific logic. So much of what I used to believe, and sounded very reasonable at the time has since proven to be complete nonsense. If it wasn't for my education in the sciencey side of nutrition, I probably would never have been able to see this.

For example, if I were working as a practitioner now, I sure as hell wouldn't be comfortable devising a supplementation regime as part of a patients treatment without a sound understanding of the metabolism of those nutrients, you could seriously mess someone up with some very simple mistakes if there were any holes in your knowledge. A part-time, weekend diploma (maybe 80 days study over the course of the year) is hardly going to be able to cover even the tip of the ice-berg as far as this necessary knowledge is concerned, so these under-qualified practitioners are in a position to do some serious harm to their patients.

If you have the science behind you, you can always interpret the latest research yourself (hopefully without bias) and change your recommendations when need be. Nutrition isn't a static science, it's changing all the time and a lot of what was thought to be gospel is now proving to be bad advice, so a practitioner needs to be able to stay on top of all the emerging evidence if they are really going to be in a position to continually give sound advice over the course of their career, much in the same way as a doctor must stay on top of the latest medications, surgeries etc.

Sapsorrow

Fister wrote: »

The nutritional course has been accredited by the IANT.

This really doesn't mean anything, the IANT isn't a respectable organization. The qualification of nutritional therapist is different to being a nutritionist, you sure as hell wouldn't be eligible to become a member of any recognizable associations like the BDA. There are lots of these organizations going around 'accrediting' courses, it doesn't mean they offer anything worthwhile or credible in the industry.

If something goes wrong with a patient you wouldn't have a leg to stand on, and could end up in some serious sh*t. The legislation is going to change eventually and with a diploma from a private college you won't have a hope of getting a licence and will have wasted all that money.

Also, because it's not a credible qualification (in the real world), your only hope of employment will be to go freelance as no one is going to consider your qualification meaningful with lots of people with degrees, masters and Phds in nutrition and/or dietetics around. Whether you feel that it is morally responsible for you to work with ill people after spending a few weekends a year learning about bee pollen and the rainbow diet is up to you, but it's risky. I still don't feel ready myself to start working as a consultant, so I can't imagine how people from these courses can unless they are completely unaware of how complex the field of therapeutic nutrition really is.

People keep talking about this as if you are going to be working with healthy enough people who's health will improve with any bit of half decent advice or like you're only going to be getting people to lose weight. It's not like that, you will have people with any myriad of illnesses and complications that will be tricky to work around and that you could potentially make very serious if you give bad advice that doesn't take their underlying issues into consideration. Just teaching people how to read labels in the supermarket isn't going to help people much if they have heart disease, osteoperosis or cancer.

Lantus

Sapsorrow wrote: »

My point is it's not good to go advising people with health issues

Nutrition isn't a static science, it's changing all the time and a lot of what was thought to be gospel is now proving to be bad advice, so a practitioner needs to be able to stay on top of all the emerging evidence if they are really going to be in a position to continually give sound advice over the course of their career, much in the same way as a doctor must stay on top of the latest medications, surgeries etc

Totally agree that underlying health issues should be dealt with at least at first or in part by someone with recognised qual. At the very least you have someone to sue if they malpractice.

Agree that SOME elements of nutrition is always changing, the bits that are changing most will be the supplements and packaged food where a knowledge of the interesting ingredients (the stuff you wont find wondering about in the wild) is required to ensure food costs are driven low and a minimum level of food safety and taste is retained.

The basics of what to eat and when to eat and what constitutes good food was established 50+ years ago. I dont think that any revolution in terms of fruit and veg will be discovered in the next few years. In fact I have a sneaky suspicion that my great great grandchildren will be eating fruit, veg, meat, fish and grain products on a daily basis. And maybe even a spalsh of milk in their tea!

There will always be soundbites and martketing speil about chocolate and wine and is it good or bad?!? Usually from an aspiring dietician trying to make a name for themselves in a competative market. It's mostly for show like the rows between x factor judges. Raises profiles but addds nothing to knowledge.

Sapsorrow

Lantus wrote: »

The basics of what to eat and when to eat and what constitutes good food was established 50+ years ago. I dont think that any revolution in terms of fruit and veg will be discovered in the next few years.

Maybe this can work for healthy people or people who only need to lose some weight, but this approach doesn't apply to sick people who need very carefully tailored diets to manage or treat their conditions. Foods that are considered healthy for the majority people can be very dangerous for others so you can't just apply one basic 'healthy' diet to every client you get.

Lantus

Sapsorrow wrote: »

Maybe this can work for healthy people or people who only need to lose some weight, but this approach doesn't apply to sick people who need very carefully tailored diets to manage or treat their conditions. Foods that are considered healthy for the majority people can be very dangerous for others so you can't just apply one basic 'healthy' diet to every client you get.

Again there is no agruement from here. The very few % of sick people should seek help from a dietician. The other 98% can come to me!

Sapsorrow

Lantus wrote: »

Again there is no agruement from here. The very few % of sick people should seek help from a dietician. The other 98% can come to me!

Ah are you a nutritional therapist then? *dawning realisation*

98% illness free!! :eek: where on earth do you live then?

Lantus

Sapsorrow wrote: »

Ah are you a nutritional therapist then? *dawning realisation*

98% illness free!! :eek: where on earth do you live then?

I prefer the term Lifestyle Consultant.....



Cheers

Sapsorrow

Lantus wrote: »

I prefer the term Lifestyle Consultant.....



Cheers

Cool

ciagr297

brainyneuron wrote: »

I'm currently doing the IINH Nutrition and Health Coaching course (in Bray) so if anyone has any questions feel free to ask

Stayed away from this thread up till now as I didn't feel like defending myself against certain posters who were extremely negative about any course other than their own. Now that I've done more than half the course I feel better able to talk about/defend the course and fight my corner. :rolleyes:

can i ask what your motivation is for doing this? are you intending to work as a nutritionist later on? how will the new criteria for nutritionist affect you?

never heard of the course in Bray

Lantus

ciagr297 wrote: »

can i ask what your motivation is for doing this? are you intending to work as a nutritionist later on? how will the new criteria for nutritionist affect you?

never heard of the course in Bray

Perhaps you could clarify the new criteria and how and when it will be implemented?

Also, does anybody have any good recomendations for personal indemnity insurance for offering nutritional and healthy lifestyle advice?

ciagr297

i know it was due to be enacted shortly, but i have no exact dates

i checked here http://www.indi.ie/index.php?page=30 which is the Institute for Clinical Nutrition and Dietitians

the site states

Please note there are currently no part time courses that will give individuals a qualification that will be recognised by the Statutory Registration Boards in either Ireland or the United Kingdom.

does anyone have links for the proposed legislation to make the title nutritionist protected?

ciagr297

found this http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2004/4304/b4304s.pdf