LIES THE USDA TELLS part 2

That Keep Doctors Busy and Bountiful

Four years after the PCRM verdict, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee reviewed and updated the dietary guidelines again. !is time, they had the task of responding to recent statistics showing skyrocketing rates of obesity across the nation. !e USDA and HHS released the Dietary Guidelines report in January 2005, described by its authors as “the most health-oriented ever.

The report recommended that Americans eat more vegetables and whole-grain products, cut down on certain fats, such as butter, margarine and lard, and consume less sugar. The report strongly recommended that people “engage in regular physical activity and reduce sedentary activities to promote health, psychological well-being and a healthy body weight.” In other words: Get off your butt, America, and start exercising.

Sounds good, doesn’t it? Indeed, the guidelines encouraged people to eat fewer calories, get more physical activity and make sensible food choices, but these changes represent a modest step forward in the slow process of big government and big business addressing the nutrition issue.

One of the most notable improvements was the acknowledgement of the health benefits of vegetables, fruits and whole grains. The guidelines also distinguished between healthy fats and unhealthy fats. The final progression to note is the advice to limit one’s sugar intake. This acknowledgement was a huge step and managed to pass through Congress despite strong objections from the sugar industry.

In addition, the guidelines didn’t speak a language easily understood by the people who most needed the advice. Imagine if the guidelines said, “Stop eating Oreos, Jiffy peanut butter and Hostess cupcakes; Stop eating McDonald’s, Burger King and Taco Bell.” Now that’s something we would understand!

Another shortcoming of the guidelines was the continued recommendation of consuming dairy on a regular basis. Despite evidence linking dairy to breast cancer, asthma and allergies, the USDA’s recommended intake of dairy actually increased in the 2005 guidelines.

 In fact, they encouraged 3 servings of “fat-free” or “low-fat” dairy products per day, sending the message that the only problem with regular dairy products is the high fat content. They gave no mention to any adverse side effects from dairy, such as digestive upset, mucus, osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease, iron, deficiency, breast cancer, asthma, headaches and food allergies.

I’m not saying all people should avoid all dairy, but it’s clearly not an essential part of the human diet. In most areas of the world, it is not consumed at all and a high proportion of people are lactose intolerant or allergic to dairy. Almost anyone who studies nutrition is aware of this fact, so it’s clear health concerns are not driving these recommendations, but rather industry pressures are.

Dr. Walter Willett, chair of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard School of Public Health and author of the book Eat, Drink and Be Healthy, created a score card to rank who benefitted most from the 2005 guidelines.

1. “Big dairy” won with a score of 10 points
2. “Big beef” came second with eight points. 
3. The public’s health came third with six points. 

“Big sugar” ended up with two points.Two of the most powerful groups in the food industry—

dairy and beef—did better than the public, thanks to strong political lobbyists protecting their special interests.

"CHIT CHAT WON'T BURN FAT"

Excerpt from,  Integrative Nutrition