See All-Creatures.org Health Position and Disclaimer
The two individuals who oversee the DGAs are not nutrition researchers or physicians. They are politically appointed cabinet members—in this case, Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue and Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar.
Just before 2020 closed out, the 164-page 2020–2025 Dietary Guidelines for
Americans (DGAs) were released by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)
and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).[1] The purpose of these
guidelines, released every five years, is to provide, “advice on what to eat
and drink to meet nutrient needs, promote health, and prevent disease”.[2]
And while most Americans rarely give a thought to the the DGAs when shopping
for food or cooking dinner, these guidelines play a critical role in
determining which foods are prioritized in all national food programs,
including school breakfast and lunch programs and food assistance programs,
which provide food for over 70 million Americans a year.[3-5] Understanding
how those guidelines are created is therefore critical to understanding how
American nutrition policy works (or, as the case may be, fails).
Who Creates the DGAs?
Before the USDA and HHS finalize the DGAs, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory
Committee—made up of twenty nutrition and medicine experts—meet to review
the latest studies on nutrition and health. This past July, they released
The Committee’s Scientific Report summarizing their findings.[6] The USDA
and HHS, guided by that report, then create the final DGAs for the public;
simply put, top health scientists make evidence-based recommendations to
inform how our government gives nutrition advice to Americans.[7] Sounds
simple enough, right?
Unfortunately, not so much. By the time the final DGAs are released, there
are often large discrepancies between the Advisory report and the guidelines
that determine national food programs, and these discrepancies have
seriously negative impacts on our health. Here are the big three from the
2020–2025 DGAs:
1. Added Sugar
The Committee’s Scientific Report echoed what nutrition science has been
screaming for decades: higher intake of added sugars, particularly from
sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) are associated with type 2 diabetes,
cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality.[8-11] For that reason, the
Committee recommended reducing added sugars to ≤6% of total calories. This
recommendation is in line with a broader recommendation that Americans
consume at least 85% of total calories from nutrient-dense foods, leaving no
more than 15% for added sugars and saturated fat.
And yet the DGAs recommended limited added sugars to ≤10% of total daily
calories.
Both the Advisory Committee’s and DGA’s recommendations rested on two major
assumptions: (1) that Americans are consuming only the most nutrient-dense
versions of foods to meet recommendations (i.e., Steel-cut oatmeal vs.
sweetened breakfast cereal to meet grains recommendations), and (2) that
Americans are not consuming alcohol, another low-nutrient calorie-dense
beverage. Unfortunately, neither of these assumptions are true. In fact, 56%
of adults over 21 years-old reported consuming alcohol in the past month,
and nearly half of those currently drinking reported binge drinking.[12]
Thus, to keep within recommended calorie intake while still meeting
nutrient-dense food recommendations, one would have to balance and reduce
added sugar intake to accommodate for saturated fat and alcohol.
2. Alcohol
The Advisory Committee outlined a large body of evidence showing that
alcohol does not improve human health and that both higher consumption
levels and binge drinking are associated with increased risk of all-cause
mortality. Ethanol, the chemical compound itself, has no nutritional value,
and alcoholic beverages provide few recommended food groups or nutrients.
While the DGAs do advise that those not currently drinking do not start,
they still allow for up to 2 drinks a day for men and 1 drink a day for
women. The differences in recommendations between genders stem from general
differences in body mass and alcohol’s impacts on different body masses.
However, the Advisory Committee argued that substantial evidence shows that
men who drank 2 drinks a day had “modest but meaningful increase in
[mortality] risk” compared to men who drank 1 drink a day.
3. Saturated Fat
The Advisory Committee outlines strong evidence that diets lower in
saturated fat are associated with lower LDL and total cholesterol in
children, and that substituting saturated with unsaturated fat was
associated with lower risk of heart disease and cardiovascular disease
mortality in adults.[6] But while the Committee Report defined “fatty meats
and full-fat cheese” as major sources of saturated fat[6], the final DGAs
state that the largest sources of saturated fat are “sandwiches, including
burgers, tacos, and burritos; desserts and sweet snacks; and rice, pasta,
and other grain-based mixed dishes.”[2] This statement bypasses the true
culprits of saturated fat in our diet: meat, eggs, high-fat dairy products
and refined plant oils.
The Advisory Committee is explicit that not all substitutions are equal.
Replacing saturated fat with refined carbohydrates does not improve, and can
even worsen, CVD risk; on the other hand, substituting saturated fat with
unsaturated fat, found mainly in whole plant foods, can lower CVD risk.[13]
However, the DGAs recommendation for lowering saturated fat intake is that
Americans choose low-fat dairy or leaner cuts of meat.[2] But does this
recommendation go far enough to encourage optimal health? Given that the
average adult is not meeting recommended vegetable intakes, particularly
dark-green vegetables and legumes,[2] why not recommend foods like soy milk,
collard greens, and beans over dairy and lean meat?
Why Do We See These Differences?
While we’d like to think the United States government hands off our national
nutrition guidelines to the best and most informed scientists, the Advisory
Committee’s job is severely limited: they can only advise the DGAs. They may
not always go far enough in their recommendations, but even if they do,
there is no guarantee that those recommendations will be heeded. Those
responsible for final DGAs can veto, revise, and ignore any recommendations
from the Committee’s report. And unlike the Committee, the two individuals
who oversee the DGAs are not nutrition researchers or physicians. They are
politically appointed cabinet members—in this case, Secretary of Agriculture
Sonny Perdue and Secretary of Health and Human Services Alex Azar.[14,15]
Perdue, the former governor of Georgia, violated the law by advocating for
President Trump’s reelection in 2020.[16] Alex Azar is a former executive of
Eli Lily, a pharmaceutical company based in Indianapolis.[17] In addition to
lacking any authority or expertise in nutrition, can we really trust that
these two appointees have the American peoples’ best interests in mind?
Or are they merely puppets of our administration’s agenda and of corporate
dominance over the American food system?
References
Return to Food Hazards in Animal Flesh and By-products
We began this archive as a means of assisting our visitors in answering many of their health and diet questions, and in encouraging them to take a pro-active part in their own health. We believe the articles and information contained herein are true, but are not presenting them as advice. We, personally, have found that a whole food vegan diet has helped our own health, and simply wish to share with others the things we have found. Each of us must make our own decisions, for it's our own body. If you have a health problem, see your own physician.