Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee Recommendations

2010 Guidelines

My comments are in this style. This is a short summary of key ideas.

Despite the new science I write about in this site, the DGAC continues to make STRONG recommendations largely confirming the original dietary goals. In many places, there is acknowledgement that the new science exists, but the committee stands firm. For instance; "Healthy diets are high in carbohydrates" (Not always true.).

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) jointly publish the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. I suspect, that the reluctance to change guidelines when the evidence that they cause obesity is so strong, is political. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)has a primary responsibility to support American farmers.

The fact that the American public continues to get fatter and fatter is acknowledged, even large numbers of children. But constantly the DGAC says that the failure of the public to follow the guidelines is the problem. They blame the public. (Which is unfair. Over 30 years the American diet has moved quite a lot, always towards the guidelines. Diets have much fewer saturated fats. People eat more chicken and less red meat. The consumption of whole grains and carbohydrates have increased tenfold. Remember the DGAC said. "Healthy diets are high in carbohydrates".).

The DGAC often affirm that losing weight is a simple matter; eat fewer calories than you burn in your daily life. Calories in v calories out, it's simple mathematics. For instance: "There is strong and consistent evidence that when calorie intake is controlled, the macro-nutriment proportion of the diet is not related to losing weight." (Not true. It's commonly been understood, that changing the macro-nutrients in the diet, will make no difference to body weight. That the only thing that matters is the calories eaten and the calories expended. In a simplistic mathematical way that should always be true. But the body is driven by hormones and doesn't behave in a simple way in response to one's diet. Many cases studies show that CICO is NOT VALID.)

They recommend a "shift of food intake patterns to a more plant-based diet that emphasizes vegetables, cooked dry beans and peas, fruits, whole grains, nuts and seeds." (That's an option not necessarily a healthy option. For instance The Women's Health Initiative, found there were NO health advantages in the low-fat high-carbohydrate diet for older women.)

The DGAC speaks strongly against low-carbohydrate high-fat diets, while admitting that they are effective in reducing weight. So the committee would see nutritional ketosis as "less safe," and "can't be maintained in the long term," and "will cause a dramatic increase in triglycerides," and "the increase in dietary saturated fat will increase the risk of heart disease".

The key factor in ketogenic diets is to reduce carbohydrate intake. The new science claims that Nutritional Ketosis is the preferred treatment for type 2 diabetes, is highly protective against cardio-vascular disease, and significantly reduces dental caries. In contrast the DGAC strongly state: "There are no detrimental effects of carbohydrates as a source of calories on these or other health outcomes."

2015 DGAC Report

The full report is 500 pages long. These two statements, on sugary drinks and cholesterol are new:

"Added sugars should be reduced in the diet and not replaced with low-calorie sweeteners, but rather with healthy options, such as water in place of sugar-sweetened beverages."

"Individuals have many potential options for reducing the intake of added sugars. Strategies include choosing beverages with no added sugars, such as water, in place of sugar-sweetened beverages, reducing portions of sugar-sweetened beverages, drinking these beverages less often, and selecting beverages low in added sugars."

"Previously, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans recommended that cholesterol intake be limited to no more than 300 mg/day. The 2015 DGAC will not bring forward this recommendation because available evidence shows no appreciable relationship between consumption of dietary cholesterol and serum cholesterol … [because] Cholesterol is not a nutrient of concern for over-consumption."

Here are the key personal health problems identified in the 2015 report.

Preparing to Learn New Health Facts

Some people read the confusing recommendations about how to be healthy, realise that they make no sense, and give up in disgust. One week the reports say red meat is unhealthy, and next week the report says that red meat is an essential part of a healthy diet.

STOP: Make space for NOT KNOWING: Most of the confusion comes for big studies of thousands of people who have been "told" to behave in a certain way. Measurement of what they actually did is based on self-reports. From a scientific point of view, there's no control.

With diet, many of the best scientific studies are very small. Studies usually last only seven days, often with fewer than ten people. Every meal needs to be controlled, and that's hugely expensive.

To study high-fat diets the study needs to last at least a month, That's a high burden on the test subjects and a very high cost for the researchers. However, the results have been remarkable.

No amount of evidence will change what you are thinking, if you can't first make space for not being sure. Then you can read some of the new science and experiment with it in your own life.