USDA AIMS TO ADD TRANSPARENCY TO THE DIETARY GUIDELINES

Mito

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2016
Messages
2,554
The announcement is good news, because it signals that the USDA and HHS are committed to increasing transparency in the Guidelines’ process, which in 2015 became a political battle field, riddled by activist agendas and corporate interests. It’s also good news because on the USDA’s list of topics for review are saturated fats and “low-carbohydrate diets,” both of which The Nutrition Coalition has identified as areas where DGA recommendations are not in line with current scientific thinking.

Since the DGA were first issued in 1980, the food pyramid–and now the MyPlate icon–have been used to direct the federal government’s nutrition programs, such as the School Lunch Program, feeding programs for the elderly, and military rations, as well as nutrition information provided to patients, school children, and consumers. However, the guidelines have often issued nutrition advice based on weak or flawed evidence, resulting in significant mistakes, such as a 35-year cap on cholesterol, which was dropped in 2015, and several decades of advice to eat a “low-fat” diet, language that has slowly disappeared from the DGA over the last decade.

Here are the topics that rise to the top for The Nutrition Coalition:
  • Saturated fats: the science has clearly evolved. See our primer on the latest science here. (Summary of the data: The rigorous trial data do not support the allegation that saturated fats cause cardiovascular mortality or total mortality. While saturated fats can be shown to raise the “bad” LDL-cholesterol, this elevated risk factor does not result in higher mortality rates, very likely reflecting a more complicated pathway for cardiovascular disease than simply LDL-C (i.e., saturated fats also consistently raise the “good” HDL-cholesterol, which may be a compensating effect).
  • The DGA should offer a true range of diets, including one for people with metabolic conditions, such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. We suggest an additional, low-carbohydrate “Dietary Pattern” for these populations. Carbohydrate restriction is supported by a sizeable body of rigorous clinical trial evidence, showing it to be both safe and effective for combatting these diseases. The diet is clearly “evidence-based,” as demonstrated in a recent letter signed by nearly 34,000 people. The text of this letter provides a summary of the evidence.
  • There is scant scientific evidence on diets for infants 0-2, post weaning, or children generally. Past recommendations have extrapolated from data on adults, based on the assumption that the same diet would be appropriate for children, but the advice given to middle-aged men and women, for the avoidance of heart disease, obesity, etc., may very well not appropriate for growing children, who have different nutritional needs. Based on the principle of “first, do no harm,” The Nutrition Coalition recommends that the DGA not issue recommendations for these populations, other than for nutritional sufficiency.
  • There is a lack of rigorous clinical trial data showing health benefits of a vegan/vegetarian diet. A review prepared by the USDA Nutrition Evidence Library (NEL) for the 2015 Dietary Guidelines report concluded that the evidence for this diet’s disease fighting powers is only “limited,” which is the lowest rank for available data. Moreover, although the NEL conducted eight reviews on fruits and vegetables, none found strong (grade 1) evidence to support the assertion that these foods can provide health benefits.
https://www.nutritioncoalition.us/2...o-add-transparency-to-the-dietary-guidelines/
 

Wagner83

Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2016
Messages
3,295
  • Moreover, although the NEL conducted eight reviews on fruits and vegetables, none found strong (grade 1) evidence to support the assertion that these foods can provide health benefits.
    • The DGA should offer a true range of diets, including one for people with metabolic conditions, such as obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. We suggest an additional, low-carbohydrate “Dietary Pattern” for these populations. Carbohydrate restriction is supported by a sizeable body of rigorous clinical trial evidence, showing it to be both safe and effective for combatting these diseases. The diet is clearly “evidence-based,” as demonstrated in a recent letter signed by nearly 34,000 people. The text of this letter provides a summary of the evidence.
https://www.nutritioncoalition.us/2...o-add-transparency-to-the-dietary-guidelines/
So ketogenic diets high in SFA for the disease and fruits and vegetables are worthless?
 
Z

Zsazsa

Guest
Conflicts of interest for members of the U.S. 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee
2022 Mar 21

Results: Our analysis found that 95% of the committee members had COI with the food, and/or pharmaceutical industries and that particular actors, including Kellogg, Abbott, Kraft, Mead Johnson, General Mills, Dannon, and the International Life Sciences had connections with multiple members. Research funding and membership of an advisory/executive board jointly accounted for more than 60% of the total number of COI documented.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom