3

votes

Have you seen the new USDA Dietary Guidelines? (Spoiler: same old crap)

Answered on August 19, 2014
Created June 18, 2010 at 7:24 PM

Actually, they are the "proposed" guidelines. But I wouldn't hold my breath expecting anything different from what's offered here, at the official website: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/dietaryguidelines.htm

Jimmy Moore's take-down:

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-867-LowCarb-Lifestyle-Examiner~y2010m6d15-The-2010-Dietary-Guidelines-are-here-Still-loving-the-carbs-dissing-saturated-fat

An excerpt:

"Not that I expected anything less, but the panel???s proposed cure for the ever-expanding obesity and disease epidemics is to eat less calories, exercise more upwards of 2 1/2 hours of moderate physical activity weekly, lower sugar, dropping fat consumption (opting for fat-free and low-fat dairy and lean meats on rare occasions), cutting the salt, and eating a more plant-based diet that includes taking in more beans, peas, fruits, whole grains, nuts and seeds. Does anybody else see what???s wrong with these ???new??? recommendations? That???s right, there???s nothing really NEW about them at all. Isn???t this the exact same basic advice we saw in the 2005 Dietary Guidelines and hasn???t obesity and preventable chronic disease only gotten worse? This isn???t the time for keeping the status quo, we need to shake things up people!"

Ironically, the public meeting for comments is on July 8 -- the day of the nation-wide Meet-Ups!

"A public meeting to solicit oral comments on the Report will be held on July 8, 2010, starting at 9:00 am EDT in the Jefferson Auditorium of the US Department of Agriculture's South Building, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250."

Here's a real question. Does anyone think it's worth going to that meeting, or submitting comments by email? The Report is already written, so I can't imagine that there's much opportunity to change the actual guidelines at this point.

03aeff8d87a3b53a449b5b8e9158da98

(3268)

on June 19, 2010
at 02:53 PM

Good answer! The point about not attacking the foods that have powerful backers is very percipient.

  • 03aeff8d87a3b53a449b5b8e9158da98

    asked by

    (3268)
  • Views
    952
  • Last Activity
    1286D AGO
Frontpage book

Get FREE instant access to our Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!

1 Answers

1
4b97e3bb2ee4a9588783f5d56d687da1

on June 19, 2010
at 11:18 AM

The more doubts we can throw out there , the more likely we are to see changes. We need baby steps, I highlydoubt we would see a vivid transformation from SAD to Paleo because of information... If we crack the egg, a bit at a time we could see the yolk drop out in time.

I'd recommend devillanizing saturated fat first

attacking vegetable oil and wheat would mean competing with too much big business, but if we can get people eating good fat and cholesterol and trusting it's health again, we would see the trust falter

if we attack grains and oil, we would be lobbied against, businesses stand to lose billions when those staples fall out of our diets

if we simply promote saturated fat, without attacking anyone, we might be able to sneak a foot in the door

once there, then we can nudge some more and in a decade or three? Who knows

right now I worry about converting loved ones, the rest ofthe world will come with time.

Paleo is a real old school grass roots campaign.

03aeff8d87a3b53a449b5b8e9158da98

(3268)

on June 19, 2010
at 02:53 PM

Good answer! The point about not attacking the foods that have powerful backers is very percipient.

Answer Question


Get FREE instant access to our
Paleo For Beginners Guide & 15 FREE Recipes!