That's indeed an issue. I believe science is not immune to information overload (just like mainstream with internet). This creates spots / schools of thoughts, and only people working or studying the field can have an opinion whether a book or paper is worth its weight.

I guess it's a bit like music, unless you have genius talent out of the box, you will only be able to parse things clearly after 5-10 years of swimming in the pool. Unless we have something to connect the dots for us, for instance something that can cross correlated data from biological pathways, chemistry, physics, maths, so you know what is solid or not.

Also nutrition is too tied to economics and politics, that doesn't help.