Released last week, the government’s five-year update to dietary guidelines is a bit of a disappointment. Early clues as to what it would contain gave industry groups time to circle the wagons, removing key provisions that might save lives and avoid deadly diseases.
The American Cancer Society has taken the report to task for ignoring significant scientific evidence of a link between diet and cancer. When this group takes a stand, we probably should listen, or at least we might expect our representatives to pay attention.
Specifically, the link shows that eating large amounts of processed meat increases one’s risk for colon cancer. A government advisory panel suggested red meats were also implicated, and a healthy diet should rely on more fruit and vegetables.
The meat industry cried foul and its clout with Congress shows in the minimizing or outright exclusion of those recommendations.
The final report lists lean meat as “a valuable source of protein.” What about beans, nuts, seeds and leafy greens? Eggs, which contain high amounts of cholesterol in the yolks, are now apparently OK. Five years ago, the guidelines recommended limiting intake to two small eggs per day (or 300 mg). Medical research seems to conclude that dietary intake of cholesterol doesn’t necessarily translate into serum cholesterol (found circulating in the bloodstream and a prime cause of heart disease).
The advisory panel also called for “environmentally friendly” dietary suggestions, which are nowhere to be found in the final report. It seems Republicans in Congress opposed any recommendations based on environmental impact.
The good part is that sugar and salt are named for what they are: additives to processed foods that simply don’t belong in a healthy diet. The new report suggests sugar should account for no more than 10 percent of daily calories. That’s about 200 calories, or the amount found in one 16-ounce, sugar-sweetened soda.
About 90 percent of Americans consume too much salt, according to the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. On average, that’s 3,400 milligrams per day. The guidelines say everyone should lower that to 2,300, or about one teaspoon.Â
But most people ingest way more than that in processed foods such as canned soup, peanut butter, pretzels or crackers. People with high blood pressure or prehypertension could benefit from even deeper reductions. Those who are willing to clog supermarket aisles while reading ingredient labels will discover that, under the headings for sodium and sugar, they include only amounts added to the product. Naturally sweet (such as fruit) or salty ingredients are not listed.
And while eggs seem to be off the radar for now, deeper in the report, the guidelines include this recommendation: “Individuals should eat as little dietary cholesterol as possible while consuming a healthy eating pattern.” Is this a mixed message? One might assume so.
Anyway, the differences between the advisory panel’s recommendations and the final report are stark and reflect the unreasonable clout the food industry wields. We’ve seen it before in USDA reports on antibiotic use in healthy animals primarily to promote rapid growth. Citing the increase in antibiotic-resistant strains of diseases, the USDA’s acknowledgment of the problem and how to mitigate it was changed to a completely voluntary program. Instead of regulations that meat producers use antibiotics only on the advice of a veterinarian (to cure illness), factory farms may or may not choose to limit their use to animals that are sick.
It’s understandable that industry groups and lobbyists put their own interests first, but there’s something really wrong with a system that pressures government agencies to cave on scientific issues. The dietary guidelines are meant to help people understand what a healthy diet is and what foods should be avoided. They’re also used on package labels, to influence subsidized school lunch programs and physicians’ advice to their patients.
To minimize the link between diet and disease is to lessen the impact of scientific knowledge on health. To quote a once-popular song: “When will we ever learn?”