New Dietary Guidelines Released

Food
1

http://health.gov/images/dga-2015.jpg

The latest revision of the New Dietary Guidelines have been released. The guidelines are revised every 5 years and the process leading to this one was quite contentious.

You can peruse the new guidelines here.

There is really not much changed in this revision. The guidelines still reflects a process that is heavily influenced by industry and lacks supporting evidence. These criticisms that have been ongoing for quite a while. There is an increased focus on restricting sugars which is positive but there is a continued focus on restricting saturated fats and sodium even though these recommendations are not supported by evidence. Other changes include dropping the caution against dietary cholesterol.

I had greater hopes for these guidelines. What do you think?

2 Likes
2

I read through the executive summary. This bit caught my eye in the introductory paragraphs:

At the same time, rates of chronic diseases—many of which are related to poor quality diet and physical inactivity—have increased. About half of all American adults have one or more preventable, diet-related chronic diseases, including cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, and overweight and obesity.

While they carefully used “diet-related chronic diseases,” the addition of the word “preventable” suggests a causal relationship between diet and disease. This reminds me of the cross-fit controversy last summer.

Separately, their stubborn inclusion of whole grains without any recognition of how these carbs exacerbate post-meal blood sugar for people with diabetes disappoints me. They also suggest “limiting” trans-fats. It’s my understanding that trans-fats are not healthy at any level of consumption.

While this document is motivated by good intentions, I fear it is spoiled by the influence of professional egos and the distorting needs of Food, Inc.

3 Likes
3

Terry, the example you cite is not the only place they imply a causal link between diet and diabetes. There are others as well.

This edition includes some baby steps forward, but by and large it is still more about politics than science.

1 Like
4

I think it’s hard to consume zero trans-fats nowadays, so I guess they’re trying to be reasonable / flexible. I like the fact that they said “Follow a healthy eating pattern across the lifespan”, which allows you to have pizza one day, and go back to your healthy eating pattern right away instead of adding pizza to a list of prohibited foods. I think it’s a healthy approach to see eating habits as a a timeline and not as an individual choice / meal / food. I feel like some people give up on eating healthy because they think they will never be allowed to eat pizza - I wish they would start eating healthy and realize that they will actually stop craving pizza! lol

I’m not a fan of trans-fat either, I try not to have it on my diet at all. But I’m thinking that based on what they’re proposing, it’s okay to eat 1 portion of french fries on Sunday for example and keep a healthy eating pattern the rest of the week. And that this option would be healthier than avoiding the trans fat at all, feeling deprived, and giving up on eating healthy…

What do you think?

1 Like
5

@Terry4, I also agree with you that their recommendation of “Consume less than 10 percent of calories per day from saturated fats” is not right. That is a lot of trans fat in my opinion… but I guess that if people are currently consuming way more than that, asking them to limit to 10% of daily calories would be a win. lol

1 Like
6

There obviously is a causal relationship - I am fat(ter) because I have diabetes. The problem is, which came first?

2 Likes
7

@M_K_ - I’m a big fan of moderation in most things. There are some things, like lead in drinking water, that it’s best to avoid completely. I get where you’re coming from. I agree with you, if people feel deprived then good habits become very hard to sustain. My switch to LCHF took very little willpower.

I don’t buy into their stance on saturated fat at all. I eat way more than 10% of my calories as fat because I limit carbohydrates. Fats satiate me and don’t make me fat. I lost 25 pounds eating LCHF almost 4 years ago and I’ve not put it back on.

As far as trans fats go, I seek to avoid them 100% of the time. I rarely eat processed foods. If I do and the label has any hydrogenated fats, I don’t eat it. I suspect that some trans fats are not going to kill you but I’ve already consumed plenty in my lifetime. And I don’t need or miss them. I also avoid all the omega-6 seed oils like corn and canola. I prefer coconut and olive oils.

2 Likes
8

@Terry4
Hi, Terry!!! Happy Friday!!! Btw, I really enjoy talking to you. It relaxes me when I am at work. hahaha Oh, and FYI, after I talked to you about that high carb breakfast of mine, I rearranged my meal plan and increased the fat and protein, and I lowered the daily carbs to 110, without discounting the 30g of fiber. I still have my greek yogurt and raw oatmeal, but I removed the banana. I’ve been way more successful. There are some nights that my bg drops because of intense exercise and then I probably eat 130-150g CHO, but that is once or twice a week. So, thank you for taking the time to write to me! This was my first week trying lowering the carbs this much, I’m curious to see how my body will adapt over the next weeks.

What’s up with the lead in water? Like plastic bottles?

They are suggesting 10% of the total daily calories of trans fat, not fat. They put fat under oils and wrote “The recommendation for oils in the Healthy U.S.-Style Eating Pattern at the 2,000-calorie level is 27 g”. Some days, I get to 50, even 60g of fat (not trans fat). How about you?

Oh yeah, I don’t think fat is the enemy either. Trans fat, however, yes - I agree.

I think the guideline is more directed towards people that don’t eat healthy , or are not interested at all in the subject and that’s why they have to be more flexible with their approach. For example, I work with someone that doesn’t eat healthy… at all. She eats EVERY SINGLE MEAL out. McDonalds in the morning, Taco Bell for lunch, and so on. Isn’t this just sad?

So when I shared with her that she shouldn’t eat that chicken nugget every day, she stopped to think about it. I also met a mom who said “I feel bad, but I don’t have time to cook so me and my kids eat out every night”. Really? So I guess this Guideline is more focused on people that don’t eat healthy so they can start thinking about their nutritional decisions… The problem is that I think those people will never read this! hahahaha

I wish they would have seminars and workshops at work / schools / local communities to teach the basics of nutrition and show people some tools on how to go from eating KFC every night to gradually eating vegetables and lean protein.
One day maybe, Terry… =)

1 Like
9

I can speak to the issue of lead in water since we have intimate contact with it. Our house was built in 1978. At that time, copper pipes were connected with solder containing lead. Present day building codes no longer permit that, but it was standard back then.

When plumbing systems like that reach a certain age, the lead can leach from the solder into the household water. It’s perfectly safe for bathing or washing, but drinking it–if the concentration is high enough–is dangerous. The city tests our tap water twice a year and sends us a copy of the lab results.

1 Like
10

I was just trying to give an example of something that was not acceptable at any level. I thought of it due to the Flint, Michigan catastrophe where a whole town has been drinking lead poisoned water for many months. Lead caused neurological damage is irreversible. This is especially bad for children. But I digress.

Do they really say 10% of calories from trans-fats are OK?

That 27 gram limit for fat @ 9 calories per gram comes to about 12% of calories from fat in a 2000 calorie diet. I eat much more fat than that. I don’t count fat grams; I only limit carbs.

I agree that we need some basic nutritional education in the US. The problem is that people generally won’t pay attention until some serious diagnosis clouds their horizon. I was the same way before my diabetes diagnosis and to a lesser extent following my diabetes complication diagnosis. Human nature denies that bad luck will befall people from eating the way they do. It’s easier to change someone’s religion than it is to change their way of eating. We all are strongly opinionated about how we eat.

The most concise advice I’ve seen on food recommendations is this: Just eat real food. Question anything that has an ingredient list, especially if you can’t pronounce it!

3 Likes
11

I second Terry’s comments about carbs, fat, et cetera. His diet and mine sound the same, near enough.

Sorry to be a broken record, but most of the nutritional “information” we’ve been indoctrinated with for the past half century or so is politics, not science. At least some sense is finally beginning to seep into the conversation, albeit at a rate that is painfully slow. There is good information out there for anyone who cares to seek it out. Gary Taubes’s landmark book is a good starting point, and it’s no longer alone.

3 Likes
12

Back to the original Micheal Pollan advice: “Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.”

2 Likes
13

I am from Brazil, I did not know this was an issue in the past here! Oh wow. Thank you for explaining it to me, David!

1 Like
14

Well, I guess not exactly… I think I mixed up trans fat with saturated fat. They wrote “Consume less than 10 percent of calories per day from saturated fats” and they include trans fat in that.

"Intake of saturated fats should be limited to less than 10 percent of calories per day by replacing them with unsaturated fats and while keeping total dietary fats within the age-appropriate AMDR. "

"Individuals should limit intake of trans fats to as low as possible by limiting foods that contain synthetic sources of trans fats, such as partially hydrogenated oils in margarines, and by limiting other solid fats. A number of studies have observed an association between increased intake of trans fats and increased risk of CVD. This increased risk is due, in part, to its LDL-cholesterol-raising effect.

Trans fats occur naturally in some foods and also are produced in a process called hydrogenation. Hydrogenation is used by food manufacturers to make products containing unsaturated fatty acids solid at room temperature (i.e., more saturated) and therefore more resistant to becoming spoiled or rancid. Partial hydrogenation means that some, but not all, unsaturated fatty acids are converted to saturated fatty acids; some of the unsaturated fatty acids are changed from a cis to trans configuration. Trans fatty acids produced this way are referred to as “artificial” or “industrially produced” trans fatty acids. Artificial trans fatty acids are found in the partially hydrogenated oils[23] used in some margarines, snack foods, and prepared desserts as a replacement for saturated fatty acids. Although food manufacturers and restaurants have reduced the amounts of artificial trans fats in many foods in recent years, these fats can still be found in some processed foods, such as some desserts, microwave popcorn, frozen pizza, margarines, and coffee creamers.

Naturally occurring trans fats, known as “natural” or “ruminant” trans fats, are produced by ruminant animals. Natural trans fats are present in small quantities in dairy products and meats, and consuming fat-free or low-fat dairy products and lean meats and poultry will reduce the intake of natural trans fats from these foods. Because natural trans fats are present in dairy products and meats in only small quantities and these foods can be important sources of nutrients, these foods do not need to be eliminated from the diet."

The sad part is that I think they have to say that because most people probably eat way more than that… My co-worker for sure eats between 50 and 99% of her daily calories in trans fat. lol

1 Like
15

Awesome, I looked him up and I found his blog:

I am adding to my favorites so I can remember to read it weekly. =)

1 Like
16

He has written several excellent books, but the one I referred to above is “Good Calories, Bad Calories”, in which he explains how the generally accepted rules about diet came about, and why they are not valid scientifically.

2 Likes
17

Hi, @David_dns! I’m reading his blog, VERY interesting! I’m sure it’s just a small fraction of his book, but does he promote a low carb diet? Or just a low fructose diet?

I am also curious to know if reducing fructose from processed foods and sugary drinks is enough or if he proposes to reduce the consumption of fruits? What do you do?

1 Like
18

As he would be the first to say (and in fact has said), he is a journalist, not a certified health care professional, so he would not give specific dietary advice. His purpose is to put the facts before you so you can make your own informed choices.

The subject of low carb diets is one that people get extremely passionate about, both pro and con.

As far as the source and type of carbs is concerned, there are differing ideas about that too. I can only relate my own experience.

For me, it doesn’t matter in the least where a gram of carbohydrate comes from; it has exactly the same effect on my blood sugar, regardless. That is not a personal belief; it’s empirical, i.e., that’s what my meter says. But some forms of carbohydrate do digest more slowly than others, and for some people that makes a noticeable difference. For me, it does not.

Each person’s physiology responds in an individual way. That’s why you have to figure out what works for you, which may—or may not—match someone else’s experience.

2 Likes
19

we had a nice interview w Gary Taubes, you can watch it here

3 Likes
20

@David_dns Are you trying to tell me that my physiology reacts in it’s own individual way JUST LIKE EVERYONE ELSE’S DOES? Sounds rather one-size-fits-all to me :wink: :laughing:

2 Likes