Proposed Dietary Guidelines for Americans Sharply Debated
Peer-reviewed article appearing in the journal Nutrition disputes the Report of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee
New York, 1 October, 2010 – A special article published today in the journal Nutrition sharply criticizes the recent Report of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC). Authors Hite et al. argue the Report fails to conform to the standards of evidence-based medicine, despite its claimed reliance on a newly created USDA Nutrition Evidence Library. The authors call the DGAC to task for failing to consider recent scientific results while at the same time further confusing the American public.
The Dietary Guidelines are the basis for the USDA Food Pyramid, and serve as the foundation for nutritional information for Americans. The Guidelines also strongly influence nutrition education, research funding, governmental meal programs including school lunches, as well as providing direction for the food industry, regulatory agencies, consumer advocates, and the media. They have been largely immune from criticism, perhaps a result of their wide application.
The DGAC Report places the blame for many of America's chronic health problems on the inability of people to follow previous Dietary Guidelines, which have changed very little since the first recommendations were made in 1977. Hite et al. explain that, in fact, nutrient consumption in the past thirty years has consistently moved in the direction of the Guidelines’ recommendations for carbohydrate and fat, while calorie consumption has stayed within suggested ranges. At the same time, the rates of obesity and Type 2 Diabetes have skyrocketed.
In suggesting the need for an entirely new process, Richard David Feinman, Professor of Cell Biology at SUNY Downstate Medical Center said, “The previous Guidelines have not worked well. It is simply unreasonable to ask the DGAC to audit its own work. An external panel of scientists with no direct ties to nutritional policy would be able to do a more impartial evaluation of the data. This would be far better for everyone.”
The article is titled “In The Face Of Contradictory Evidence: Report Of The Dietary Guidelines For Americans Committee” by Adele H Hite, MAT; Richard D Feinman, PhD; Gabriel E Guzman, PhD; Morton Satin, MSc; Pamela Schoenfeld, RD; Richard J Wood, PhD. It appears in Nutrition, Volume 26, Issue 10 (October 2010) published by Elsevier. DOI: 10.1016/j.nut.2010.08.012.
# # #
The journal Nutrition presents advances in nutrition research and science, informs its readers on new and advancing technologies and new data in clinical nutrition practice, encourages the application of the techniques of outcomes research and meta-analyses to problems in patient-related nutrition; and seeks to help clarify and set the research, policy and practice agenda for nutrition science to enhance human well-being in the years ahead.
Elsevier is a global information analytics business that helps scientists and clinicians to find new answers, reshape human knowledge, and tackle the most urgent human crises. For 140 years, we have partnered with the research world to curate and verify scientific knowledge. Today, we’re committed to bringing that rigor to a new generation of platforms. Elsevier provides digital solutions and tools in the areas of strategic research management, R&D performance, clinical decision support, and professional education; including ScienceDirect, Scopus, SciVal, ClinicalKey and Sherpath. Elsevier publishes over 2,500 digitized journals, including The Lancet and Cell, 39,000 e-book titles and many iconic reference works, including Gray's Anatomy. Elsevier is part of RELX, a global provider of information-based analytics and decision tools for professional and business customers. www.elsevier.com