From The Wall Street Journal:
After decades of failure, maybe government should get out of the business of giving dietary advice.
By David A. McCarron | November 27, 2015 3:39 p.m. ET
With the release of the eighth edition of the U.S. government’s Dietary Guidelines expected by year’s end, it seems reasonable to consider—with the “obesity plague” upon us and Americans arguably less healthy than ever before—whether the guidelines are to be trusted and even whether they have done more harm than good.
Many Americans have lost trust in the science behind the guidelines since they seem to change dramatically every five years. In February, for example, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee declared that certain fats and eggs are no longer the enemy and that cholesterol is “not considered a nutrient of concern for overconsumption.” This, after decades of advising Americans to “watch their cholesterol.”
Such controversy is nothing new. U.S. Dietary Guidelines were first released by the Agriculture Department and the Department of Health and Human Services in 1980. One nutrition expert at the time, Edward “Pete” Ahrens, a groundbreaking researcher on fat and cholesterol metabolism, called the guidelines “a nutritional experiment with the American public as subjects . . . treating them like a homogeneous group of Sprague-Dawley rats.”
The original goals were to: 1) increase Americans’ carbohydrate consumption to 55%-60% of caloric intake; 2) reduce fat consumption to less than 30% from 40% of caloric intake; 3) reduce saturated fat to 10% of calories and increase poly- and monounsaturated fats each to 10% of calories; 4) reduce cholesterol intake to less than 300 milligrams a day; 5) reduce sugar intake by 40%; and 6) reduce salt consumption by 50%-80%.
These six goals, viewed in the context of what we know today, could hardly be more misdirected. That assessment starts with the guideline’s emphasis on increasing carbohydrates and reducing fat consumption, a strategy that research has documented is more likely to add excess weight than to improve health. Most recently, a study published in April in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that “lowering the fat content of dairy or other foods may simply lead to increased carbohydrates consumption and explain . . . associations with weight gain.”
There’s more at the link, but perhaps, just perhaps, it shouldn’t be any of the government’s fornicating business what people eat!
And now, on to the blogroll!
- Donald Douglas on American Power: Climate Skeptic Judith Curry Says She Was ‘Tossed Out of the Tribe…’ Something like 140 national leaders will meet at the Paris Climate Change Conference to decide to raise energy costs on the Little People for no good purpose. We thank God that the republicans control the Congress, so that President Obama’s cockamamie decisions and commitments cannot be translated into higher taxes.
- William Jacobson on Le*gal In*sur*rec*tion: lib*er*al and Wesleyan protesters demand tracking system for faculty migroaggressions (seriously) However will these Special Snowflakes™ survive when they are finally graduated from college and have to do something really radical like go out into the real world and start a career?
- Patterico on Patterico’s Pontifications: Third Strike “Reform” Costs Another Life California released a violent felon serving a life sentence under the “three strikes” law, due to the requirements of Proposition 36 . . . and the released felon is now accused of murder in Oklahoma.
- William Teach on The Pirate’s Cove: People Who Live Big Carbon Lives Call For Reduction In Other People’s Lives
- Darleen Click on Protein Wisdom: Meanwhile, Aussie police rush to scene of killing …
- Hube at the Colossus of Rhodey: Quote of the Day
- Karen on The Lonely Conservative: Why I Prefer Online Shopping
- Smitty on The Other McCain: Political Correctness Is A Medieval Shield Trying To Stop A Hellfire Missile
- Kim Quade on The Victory Girls: Shooter Robert Lewis Dear Made Comment About Baby Parts and Liberals Erupt