as somebody whose first language is not English, it happens rarely that I need to look at up word in the dictionary. I needed to do that to understand your question, though, because I had never heard the word “bunkness”. In the event that there may be somebody else out there, here is the definition per urban dictionary (shortened to avoid profanity): “something veryyyyy stupid, something you hate/dislike, also something grossss”.
I pulled up the nutrition part of the ACSM manual to find out what may be so stupid and offensive to you but failed to see it. The information there seems the consensus of experts on good nutrition.
Nutrition is a very “iffy” area for fitness instructors. The ACSM provides the limit on what we are techniquely able to discuss with clients. A lot of fitness instructors sell supplements and even provide menus/food suggestions that actually are outside of our scope of practice. You may feel that you have the knowledge to do this, but I doubt it. As one in every 100 people taking heart and blood pressure medication are potentially at risk of serious complications from eating something that interacts with their meds. Grapefruit alone has serious known interactions and effects with over 100 popular prescription medications. I guide clients with the information that I am permitted in my scope of practice.
If I feel a client needs more assistance, they go to a Registered Dietician. You may be fine with exceeding your scope, but I find the possibility that something you suggest to a client could be harmful to be an unacceptable risk. If you feel that diet is a part of health you would like to persue, by all means go to college and become a Registered Dietician. You can kid yourself that diet and health safety aren’t that serious, but I certainly would not one of my family members taking advice from a person who read a book or took one CEC course on nutrition. I have taken over a dozen nutrition CEC courses, but only advise as is in keeping with my scope of practice. The courses were for knowledge and personal use. And to help me understand my scope better.
A number of people in here will feel that I am wrong. I only hope that they never suggest a food to a client that seriously harms the client. Even one out of one million is too great a risk for me to take.
It might be helpful if you would state precisely which part of this you think is bunk and why.
I assume you are referring to chapter 6, but it is a fairly long chapter, and covers quite a bit of ground.
Actually I don’t see a lot to disagree with: it covers the basics of why nutrition is important in physical training, questions of scope of practice and the roles of trainer and nutritionist, the importance of fact based evidence over celebrity hype, and some very basic science on energy balance and how food is burned and energy used. Some of the things on glycemic index I have heard at recent conventions.
But I could be missing something, so if you could be specific on what you disagree with it would help in stimulating a discussion in this forum.