The new Dietary Guidelines for Americans were just released. Should you follow them whole-heartedly or take them with a grain of salt?

Last month, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines, which provide recommendations to Americans on what they should put on their plates. 

The Dietary Guidelines have a broad-reaching impact on more than just our plates. Many health practitioners view them as the gold standard for health advice. Schools and the military also follow the guidance in the Dietary Guidelines. And when it comes to government food assistance programs like school lunches and WIC, the Dietary Guidelines are a guiding light.

In 2015-2020, the Dietary Guidelines were the subject of heated debate about the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee’s (DGAC) recommendations regarding meat. DGAC’s preliminary report suggested that a healthy diet was “lower in red and processed meats” and that diets “lower in animal-based foods” were also “associated with less environmental impact than the current US diet.”

This was the first instance where the DGAC incorporated discussions of sustainability in its recommendations. The instant backlash from a number of stakeholders pointed out that comparing the environmental impact of producing different foods failed to consider the ultimate nutrition that they provide. All calories are not created equal when it comes to the nutrients they provide.

The final version of the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines backtracked on the anti-meat recommendations and instead focused on sugar consumption. With the average American consuming up to 22 teaspoons of sugar a day, the guidelines suggested that Americans reduce sugar consumption to no more than 10% of daily calories, which equates to 12 teaspoons in a 2,000-calorie daily diet.

So where do the new guidelines fall on the subject of red meat consumption?

Regarding protein, the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines did encourage Americans to “shift towards other protein foods” instead of red meat like nuts, seeds, and 8 ounces of seafood per week.

The guidelines suggest that studies show a diet lower in meat and processed meat consumption has a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease in adults. The document does, however, note that most of the research the DGAC examined lumps different types of meat together regardless of its fat content. Ultimately, the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines suggest that Americans on a 2,000-calorie daily diet consume about 26 ounces of meat, poultry, and eggs per week.

The new guidelines also recommend Americans drop their sugar intake to 6% of total daily calories.

It can be confusing or overwhelming to know whether this nutrition advice makes sense for you. Before you decide to follow the federal nutrition recommendations, however, here are a few reasons the Dietary Guidelines are misguided:

1. One (Serving) Size Does Not Always Fit All
   
   Making nutrition recommendations that are fitting for all 328 million Americans is a tall order. The Nutrition Coalition (TNC) issued a statement in response to the new guidelines suggesting that the DGAC failed to account for the fact that the general public suffers from chronic disease and that federal nutrition policy fails to address it.
   
   “Nutrition recommendations that are taught to all Americans should necessarily reflect all Americans, and these Dietary Guidelines clearly fail to do that,” said Nina Teicholz, executive director of TNC. “The policy is scoped for disease-prevention only—thereby ignoring the 60% of the population now diagnosed with one or more diet-related disease, including heart disease, obesity, diabetes, etc.”
   
   TNC advocates for the inclusion of research that demonstrates how nutrition and diet can treat a number of diseases. Although the guidelines were intended for “average” healthy Americans, the average American is far from healthy. Over 70% of Americans are either overweight or obese - a direct result of food intake. This must be considered when issuing broad brush eating recommendations. 
   

2. The Guidelines Fail to Distinguish Between Processed and Whole Foods
   
   The Dietary Guidelines focus on nutrients and fail to pay attention to where those nutrients are coming from. There is no mention of processed and refined foods and how they compare to whole foods. Processed foods are often designed to be hyperpalatable and contain a number of added ingredients like salt and sugar. Food developers often focus on the bliss point, which is the exact combination of salt, sugar, and fat that optimizes deliciousness. The goal is to get you hooked on their food so that you keep buying it -- not to make sure you get the nutrients you need.
   
   This year, the scope of questions that the DGAC was asked to consider was narrower than what it was asked to consider in previous years. This unfortunately meant that the DGAC was unable to address the role of processed foods versus whole foods in achieving optimal nutrition.
   

3. Most Americans Need To Eat More Protein -- From Meat
   
   The CDC estimates that nearly one-third of Americans have metabolic syndrome, which is marked by abdominal obesity, dyslipidemia, hypertension, type 2 diabetes. In other words, it means that someone’s metabolism is essentially broken. Researchers have identified metabolic benefits between increased protein intake and remedying this condition, yet much of our nutritional advice urges us to eat less protein in favor of plant-based foods.
   
   Animal protein is a critical source of protein and nutrients. To get the same amount of protein in a 4oz steak (181 calories) you’d need to eat 12 oz of kidney beans (almost one pound!) plus a cup of rice, which equals 638 calories, and 122g of carbs. Imagine trying to get 100g of protein from this sort of diet! What about nuts? To get the 30g of protein from almonds, you would need to consume a little over 1 cup of chopped almonds, which is over 850 calories and 75g of fat. Yikes!
   
   With protein being the most satiating macronutrient, and animal-sourced foods as the lowest calorie, most bioavailable, and nutrient-dense source of protein, telling a population of sick, overweight, and obese (yet mostly malnourished) people to REDUCE their meat intake is the wrong message. 
   

4. Lobbying Interests Play a Major Role in Shaping the Dietary Guidelines
   
   The DGAC has faced criticism in recent years for not requiring its committee members to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Although TNC advised the USDA and HHS to require members to make basic disclosures, it has ignored this advice. Four out of the six members that comprise DGAC’s infant nutrition subcommittee, called Birth-to-24, have ties to the infant formula and baby food industries, for example.
   
   The meat lobby is not without its role in developing these guidelines. It was one of the most vocal critics of the 2015-2020 Dietary Guidelines’ potential suggestion to reduce red meat and processed meat consumption. Letting lobbyists and big business decide what goes on your plate is almost never a good way to achieve your optimal health.

So, where should I get nutrition advice?

The truth is that we don’t know that much about nutrition and certainly should never be setting global dietary policy based on epidemiology (the studies that can only show associations and not prove cause). Why not take into account food traditions that communities have thrived on for centuries, climate-appropriateness of a region being able to produce and store that food?

Given how little we understand about human nutrition, and that processed foods are generally nutrient-poor and not what humans evolved to eat, how about just starting there, by encouraging folks to cook at home and generally eat less ultra-processed foods?

How about adopting a general guideline similar to Brazil’s Guidelines:

1. Make natural or minimally processed foods the basis of your diet

2. Use oils, fats, salt, and sugar in small amounts when seasoning and cooking

3. Limit consumption of processed foods (meaning bread or canned fruits vs. fresh fruits)

4. Avoid consumption of ultra-processed foods (meaning sugar-sweetened beverages, candy, chips, etc.)

5. Eat regularly and carefully in appropriate environments and, whenever possible, in the company of others

6. Shop in places that offer a variety of natural or minimally processed foods

7. Develop, exercise, and share cooking skills

8. Plan your time to make food and eating important in your life

9. Out of home, prefer places that serve freshly made meals

10. Be wary of food advertising and marketing

Many different diets that are practically opposite to the Standard American Diet (SAD) are reversing diseases like type 2 diabetes. Clinical trials have shown remission from diabetes on a high fat, moderate protein, low carb (ketogenic) diet that includes much more animal products than the diet the USDA recommends. While I don’t feel the ketogenic diet needs to be THE ONLY dietary solution, the Virta trial certainly shows that there shouldn’t be only one diet for all people and that we should be thinking outside of the box and nutritional epidemiology if we’re going to solve our type 2 diabetes crisis. Traditionally, humans have lived a very healthy life on a wide variety of macronutrient ratios and it seems clear that once modern, ultra-processed foods enter the picture, the wheels fall off. 

For anyone looking to change their diet for the better, I offer custom dietary consults and coaching! Click here to learn more.

Meg Chatham is a brand strategist, community developer, and digital content marketer. She creates, designs, and manages all social media, web, and newsletter content for Sacred Cow and Sustainable Dish. She is currently based in Texas, where she enjoys running and hiking in between sips of espresso. Learn more here.