My first impression is that the new guidelines are somewhat convoluted. The 1980 version of the guideline had 3,159 words. The 2015 version has 51,998 words. It really dances around what they are really trying to say.
It reminds me of when I was helping to write the school pamphlet on responsibility and expectations. They can't say "do not" or "no" or anything that can be taken in a negative way. So instead they find a very wordy way of saying "do not" or "no" without actually saying it but in the process the point becomes so unclear that it's just ends up being a waste of paper.
I think it's still woefully inadequate in so many ways.
You might find this blog piece interesting:
Low Fat, High Maintenance: How money buys lean and healthy–plus, an alternative path to both eathropology.com/2016/01/07/l ow-fat-high-maintenance-how-mon ey-buys-lean-and-healthy-plus-a n-alternative-path-to-both/
Essentially, it suggests that the new guidelines set anyone who eats a culturally based diet, or is not of at least middle class means, for failure... I think I'd have to agree. It goes on to also suggest that if we all just went back to eating the way people did in the 1950's we'd all be fine... I'd have to agree with this, too.
The thing is, I sincerely wonder if anyone even really pays attention to the guidelines?
I certainly don't.
...and I realize the guideline weighs in heavily when it comes to public food policies, but the thing is we're still asking the wrong questions when it comes to obesity and health.
It's going to take Joe & Jane Average to step back into their own lives, listen to the movers and shakers, and just do what needs to be done, regardless of the guidelines.
I think programs like the Vintage Project (article above) have a much better chance of making a difference for everyone than the food guidelines ever will.
P.S. I think this can be our year! Let's do it together! (you remain one of the strongest people I know!)
At least cholesterol is out of there and they say to drink more water!
I was surprised that they say (or someone interpreted it to say) to limit red meat to about a pound and a half a week. 26 ounces, as I recall. I need about that much just to meet my protein requirements for a day and a half! And I think it's unreasonable to expect the other 80% or so of my protein requirements to come from eggs, dairy and beans. 1675 days ago
I think it's time they did away with the whole thing. Let's take one simple line on the graph there - dairy. How could anyone even put that on a recommended list, when fully 65% of humans are partly or fully lactose intolerant?!?!? Madness. 1675 days ago
Wow! That's a lot of info! There are so many different diets out there, like the ketogenic diet for example (I know a few ppl trying that). EVERY DAY, "experts" say what was good for us for us one day is bad the next and vice versa. Sure eating more fruits and veggies is wonderful.... (I totally agree with that), so much of our food is coming in from other countries and the stories about imported food is scary!
In my opinion, I agree with you, JUST EAT REAL FOOD! (And try to buy locally).
The news has ppl so confused! Maybe if tax breaks were given to whole food grocery stores, resteraunts and fast food places that actually are very mindful of healthy cooking, (there are several, and people line up for them....people WANT to eat at places like this) so like I said, help these places that really do care what they serve.
People are so confused about what's good or bad and there are so many people who don't or who don't want to know how to even read a nutrition label. Who can really blame these folks with all the confusion?
Maybe kids should be learning this in school, never too early to teach good nutrition....and for goodness sakes, don't drop physical education from schools due to "budget cuts" , instead, maybe ADD funding and make nutrition part of physical ed and make it a required course just like English or math. Educating our future generations is the key I believe. 1675 days ago