Aug 17, 2026 · 28 min · 11 segments
In this special edition of SciDish, recorded live at the Hot Topics Studio stage at IFT FIRST, we’re exploring **Artificial Intelligence in Food Science and Nutrition: Applications in Academia and…
Chang ChenGuest
James KennedyGuestSo let me build on the, uh, editorial side of things.
So everybody that's in scholarly publishing is worried about AI taking over everything, even down to peer reviews.
And, uh, so what's, what's your take on that?
Um, I, I definitely see more, um, more people have this kind of concern with, um, both sides, right? Using AI to write papers.
Just a couple weeks ago I, I, I reviewed a paper which I believe is generated by AI.
If you look at their credentials, they don't really have food science training, but talking about something seems reasonable.
But if you look at the figures, wow, something's weird, right? But also there's the other side, right? From the reviewing process, uh, using the AI to generate a lot of things.
Uh, I've seen some LinkedIn posts says, "Okay, I only write a 15-page, uh, manuscript, but I receive a 20-page review comments." And, [laughs] we have seen tho- all of those, right? But I think, um, AI is a great tool, but, uh, I think it is important for us to, to emphasize that the tool should not be, uh, misused or, um, abused, right? It's, um...
And, and most important thing for publishing and reviewing is a training process for our students, for our colleagues to, uh, think things through and know how and know why.
The publishing is not the sole purpose, right? So I think this is definitely an increasing concern.
I don't know.
Uh, in, in fact, that kind of brings up another interesting question, going a little bit off script here, which is: how do we know AI has really been used, right? So you had to say that you thought it was, but there are no AI detection tools, and even, uh, in writing papers and writing reviews, it's really hard to prove that AI was used.
So that's a, a major concern these days, is that, uh, there are no good detection tools.
Do you have a comment on detection tools?
Um, maybe, uh, something a, a bit tangential to that is just one thing that we look at is by providing AI tools, are we actually making some jobs harder? Um, because you're providing so much information to, uh, humans that it's difficult to, to digest all that information and to really make sense of it.
So let me build on the, uh, editorial side of things.
So everybody that's in scholarly publishing is worried about AI taking over everything, even down to peer reviews.
And, uh, so what's, what's your take on that?
Um, I, I definitely see more, um, more people have this kind of concern with, um, both sides, right? Using AI to write papers.
Just a couple weeks ago I, I, I reviewed a paper which I believe is generated by AI.
If you look at their credentials, they don't really have food science training, but talking about something seems reasonable.
But if you look at the figures, wow, something's weird, right? But also there's the other side, right? From the reviewing process, uh, using the AI to generate a lot of things.
Uh, I've seen some LinkedIn posts says, "Okay, I only write a 15-page, uh, manuscript, but I receive a 20-page review comments." And, [laughs] we have seen tho- all of those, right? But I think, um, AI is a great tool, but, uh, I think it is important for us to, to emphasize that the tool should not be, uh, misused or, um, abused, right? It's, um...
And, and most important thing for publishing and reviewing is a training process for our students, for our colleagues to, uh, think things through and know how and know why.
The publishing is not the sole purpose, right? So I think this is definitely an increasing concern.
I don't know.
Uh, in, in fact, that kind of brings up another interesting question, going a little bit off script here, which is: how do we know AI has really been used, right? So you had to say that you thought it was, but there are no AI detection tools, and even, uh, in writing papers and writing reviews, it's really hard to prove that AI was used.
So that's a, a major concern these days, is that, uh, there are no good detection tools.
Do you have a comment on detection tools?
Um, maybe, uh, something a, a bit tangential to that is just one thing that we look at is by providing AI tools, are we actually making some jobs harder? Um, because you're providing so much information to, uh, humans that it's difficult to, to digest all that information and to really make sense of it.
The rest of this transcript — segmented and speaker-labeled, so you land on the exact moment something was said
Search every transcript — by keyword, by phrase, or by meaning, across every show Radar indexes
Trends — what is surging across podcasts, measured against its own baseline
Alerts — when a name you follow appears in a newly indexed episode
No account is needed to search Radar.