The 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, unveiled January 31, 2011, take a major leap forward, highlighting the benefits of vegetarian and vegan diets. The Dietary Guidelines --issued by the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services every five years -- are the blueprint for all federal nutrition programs, including school meals.
The new guidelines sing the praises of plant-based diets: "Vegetarian-style eating patterns have been associated with improved health outcomes -- lower levels of obesity, a reduced risk of cardiovascular disease, and lower total mortality. Several clinical trials have documented that vegetarian eating patterns lower blood pressure."
The guidelines then devote two full pages to vegetarian and vegan nutrition, showing exactly how to pull a healthy diet together. Vegetarian diets may include dairy products and eggs, while vegan diets avoid all animal products and are associated with the lowest risk of overweight and diabetes.
The new guidelines resonate partially with PCRM's own nutrition recommendations, represented graphically in The Power Plate, and presenting whole grains, vegetables, fruits, and legumes as dietary staples.
The guidelines are far from perfect, however. Like previous versions, they speak in "code." That is, they specifically name foods to eat more of (e.g. fruits and vegetables). But when it comes to foods people need to eat less of (e.g. meat and cheese), the guidelines use biochemical terms instead of listing specific foods, apparently out of fear of upsetting food producers. That is, the guidelines call for limiting "cholesterol" and "saturated fat."
Similarly, while dairy products account for more than 30 percent of the saturated ("bad") fat in the American diet, the Dietary Guidelines disguise this fat by splitting dairy products into many categories, including cheese (8.5 percent), butter (2.9 percent), whole milk (3.4 percent), reduced-fat milk (3.9 percent), dairy desserts (5.6 percent), and pizza (5.9 percent), so their contribution to ill health is harder to see.
The new guidelines also continue to give undue emphasis to dairy products, downplaying more healthful sources of calcium, such as green leafy vegetables and beans. This, despite studies clearly showing that children who get calcium from foods other than dairy products have totally normal bone development and other studies showing that older adults who drink milk have no protection from osteoporosis-related fractures.
Despite these signs that food politics continue to work their mischief in the Dietary Guidelines, the current iteration is the best yet, giving plant-based nutrition a place of well-deserved prominence.
MyPyramid.gov - United States Department of Agriculture - Home
Government Unveils New Dietary Guidelines - ABC News
New Dietary Guidelines Drastically Cut Salt Intake - FoxNews.com
New Dietary Guidelines - USDA's new dietary guidelines restrict ...
Your clarion call for moderation is certainly better than the old full bore plunge into animal food, but it is clearly not the best diet. "The China Study" gives an insider's view into the politicalization of government by the food industry. Billions of dollars are at stake, and the health of the American people.
The defenders of the status quo-- conservitives-- reveal themselves in the food arena just as they do in the political arena: as the ostrich with their head in the sand.
Read Gary Taubes's excellent expose on poor dietary science in "Good Calories, Bad Calories."
I have not read Campbell's book, but I am familiar with his research in the actual China study. Campbell fed powdered casein to rats and in response they grew tumors. When fed gluten, they did not. Therefore, Campbell came to the conclusion that casein is dangerous.
This is very poor science. Proper tests are done on whole foods, not powdered food isolates. CLA is also found where casein is. CLA has been found to have anti-cancerous effects in both animal and human studies.
You'll find that the critics of Campbell and the PCRM have cited many studies throughout this discussion, so I am not sure why you feel that someone is sticking their head in the sand.
Yeah, we know what we're going to get, but the photos still get us to buy more than we might.
A little truth in advertising would go a long way.
Government is being fought at every turn to be able to 'make' affordable health care available to all.
It's a mystery to me why Americans are carping about a government take-over at every turn but there it is. A government that serves the greater good of a civilized country appears to have little traction in a nation of people attached to their addictions: oil, junk food and false advertising that makes us feel good about our fantasy-selves.
I mean, really. It's a pretty sad commentary on the culture when you begin to break it down.
How about a simple slogan? The masses can latch onto that....
"If you can't kill it or grow it, don't eat it"
SIMPLE AS THAT.
No shocker here: sacrifice our health for the economic interests of a select few.
Its time everyone learned about the real cost of animal products on tax payers, the environment, our health (through consumption and exposure to production areas), and also our ethics.
These guidelines are a classic example of the old definition of insanity "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
I am not "anti-government" or opposed to government regulation or health recommendations, but ours has really messed up when it comes to nutrition. It is not only bad advice, it is actually dangerous.
The only two things I largely disagree with is saturated fat consumption (it doesn't put one at risk for heart disease and a large body of science shows this), and soy (which should be limited to 1 serving a day).
For starters: Ever read The China Study by T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D.? His conclusions are based on 40-plus years of GOVERNMENT-FUNDED research! Maybe you'd just rather not see the scientific data backing up the contention that plant-based is healthier.
What we need is a prospective epidemiological study that follows a large population of people eating a well-planned vegan diet and omnivores and compare their disease rates over the next 20 years, then you'll have your answer. But, given the weight of the studies already out there, I wouldn't bet against a 100% plant-based diet.
Meat, cheese, and saturated fats are good for you.
Vegetarianism is not healthy. check out weston aprice foundation.
LOL. By all means, eat up!
It is my honor to be your first fan. Keep at it and im sure you'll have thousands.
Dustin Rudolph
www.PursueAHealthyYou.com
It might be slow in coming but coming it is.
Thanks for your comment!