16 ms·
New U.S. Dietary Guidelines Reject Recommendation to Cut Sugar, Alcohol Intake
- godelzilla 6y agoIt's not just the guidelines either. The state heavily subsidizes unhealthy, unsustainable, and environmentally suicidal food production.
- bilekas 6y agoAnd whos at the head of U.S. Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services ? Sonny Perdue... A charming, forward thinker and believer in science. /s
- bilekas 6y agoAnd for Reference on his great ideas : > In December 2018, he changed the nutrition standards for school lunches to allow more refined grains, allow milk with added sugar, and increased sodium. Exactly who you want in charge of health.
- blakesterz 6y agoI would assume this is something of a biased take, but MotherJones has a write up on him and all the things he's done wrong: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/12/monsters-of-2020-sonny-perdue/ https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2020/12/monsters-of-202...
- bilekas 6y agoHis positions are available to the public, and they don't prioritize the health of the American public. His bias would lean towards less regulations, which is a position, fine, but when you're responsible on a federal level, that should benefit all Americans, not just Companies. But thats my 2 cents.
- blakesterz 6y agoThe guidelines are up at https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/ https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/ Guidelines: https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/Dietary_Guidelines_for_Americans_2020-2025.pdf https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-1... The entire thing is a 164 page PDF, there's also a much shorter executive summary: https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/DGA_2020-2025_ExecutiveSummary_English.pdf https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-1...
- jtsiskin 6y agoHere’s the bullet points: Eat these: • Vegetables of all types—dark green; red and orange; beans, peas, and lentils; starchy; and other vegetables • Fruits, especially whole fruit • Grains, at least half of which are whole grain • Dairy, including fat-free or low-fat milk, yogurt, and cheese, and/or lactose-free versions and fortified soy beverages and yogurt as alternatives • Protein foods, including lean meats, poultry, and eggs; seafood; beans, peas, and lentils; and nuts, seeds, and soy products • Oils, including vegetable oils and oils in food, such as seafood and nuts Don’t eat these: • Added sugars—Less than 10 percent of calories per day starting at age 2. Avoid foods and beverages with added sugars for those younger than age 2. • Saturated fat—Less than 10 percent of calories per day starting at age 2. • Sodium—Less than 2,300 milligrams per day—and even less for children younger than age 14. • Alcoholic beverages—Adults of legal drinking age can choose not to drink, or to drink in moderation by limiting intake to 2 drinks or less in a day for men and 1 drink or less in a day for women, when alcohol is consumed. Drinking less is better for health than drinking more. There are some adults who should not drink alcohol, such as women who are pregnant.
- hirundo 6y agoI think it's healthiest to regard these guidelines as an advertisement from the most effective lobbyists of the food industry, cloaked as a scientific analysis from an agency that wasn't so much captured by that industry, as conceived and built by it from the start. That doesn't mean it's all wrong, just that the right parts are those that accidentally coincide with dominant industry interests.
- bohemian99 6y agoAdvice to cut sugar and alcohol consumption would go against the lobbyists for the most powerful industries, right? I think the parts that are right are not those that coincide with industry interests but those that go against industry interests. Those parts are probably directionally correct but have softened language due to lobbying.
- hirundo 6y agoYes, the food industry doesn't exist in a vacuum and they are painfully aware of that. They routinely compromise and tailor their advertising message for the zeitgeist. I think this mild improvement is an example.
- MeinBlutIstBlau 6y agoWhere I live in the US, being a teetotaler is weirder than be a black Jewish, Chinese person. The latter can be understood and interesting to many. The former means "you're not with it and you must be an asshole."
- Aerroon 6y agoThe problem is that we don't really know what dietary guidelines should be. Whether industry lobbying is involved or not doesn't really change that nutrition isn't something we've figured out. Going by "gut feel" will probably provide similar or better results.
- jklinger410 6y agoAs long as this persists it's a wide open attack vector for conspiracy theorists. Science has a credibility issue.
- jmpman 6y agoThey’re suggesting that one drink a day for men is better than two? In my experience, it’s the people drinking 12+ in one sitting or 30+ units in a week who are having the health issues. Feels like suggesting lowering the speed limit to 55mph because it causes fewer deaths than 65mph. Just makes people skeptical of government overreach.
- zzzeek 6y agodo you work in the field of dietary research?
- manmal 6y agoAlcohol is damaging in small amounts already, there’s plenty of research around that.
- bitcharmer 6y agoResearch suggests that drinking an occasional glass of red wine is good for you. It provides antioxidants, may promote longevity, and can help protect against heart disease and harmful inflammation, among other benefits. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6099584/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6099584/ https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/265635#can-wine-improve-health https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/265635#can-wine-im... https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191021-is-wine-good-for-you https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20191021-is-wine-good-for... So I guess it also depends on what type of alcohol you consume.
- boringg 6y agoI believe that recommendation is outdated and was rescinded.
- Dirlewanger 6y agoNope. All fabricated. No amount of alcohol is beneficial. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipak_K._Das https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dipak_K._Das
- nradov 6y agoThere is no scientific evidence that publishing US federal government dietary guidelines has ever done anything to improve public health. This is a total boondoggle and waste of taxpayer money. The FDA and Congress should cancel the entire program.
- jinpa_zangpo 6y agoSchool meals are designed around the US dietary guidelines, so they are important.
- draw_down 6y agoThe meals are what is important, not the guidelines. Territory, not map.
- anonuser123456 6y agoDear god... have people read the packages on food they feed kids at school? I counted 120 grams of added sugar a day in the school lunch of my son. Non-fat chocolate milk and sugar laden starches. Juice counts as a serving of fruit (and our pediatrician didn’t see a problem with that) But hey... they’ve got a bag of 4 carrots so that will balance it out right?
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y agoHave you tried intervening, together with some other similarly thinking parents?
- arcticbull 6y agoThe tomato paste on a pizza was recently ruled a vegetable too, depending on its volume. [1] [1] https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2011/11/15/142360146/pizza-as-a-vegetable-it-depends-on-the-sauce https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2011/11/15/142360146/pi...
- treeman79 6y ago
- ashtonkem 6y agoToo profitable, obviously. We can argue about carbohydrates endlessly, and I have to no avail in the past, but there is no dietary need for sugar at all. We tolerate some of it, but the less of it you eat the better off your body will be. On a related note, the alcohol industry is actually really shady. They like to put on a clean image of providing responsible adults entertainment, but in reality the industry is deeply dependent on alcoholics. It’s estimated (2007 numbers) that just over 10% of alcohol drinkers consume half of the alcohol in the United States. Without that small cohort of alcoholics, a large percentage of the industry would go broke. Ever since learning this fact, I’ve taken an extra skeptical eye towards anything that even vaguely looks like alcohol industry influence.
- ChrisMarshallNY 6y agoLots of industries like that. Look up gun ownership numbers. Another strange food is dairy. In fact, I think that most Europeans were lactose-intolerant, until they started getting people from Asia mixing in genes. There was a study, to that effect, recently; where they looked at old DNA samples. I remember the Masai tribe, in Africa. These are some of the most robust, healthy people you have ever seen, and their traditional food is cow's milk, mixed with cow's blood. YUM. But I loves my sugar and milk in my tea (don't drink booze, though).
- ashtonkem 6y agoThe difference is between companies depending on collectors or aficionados, and companies depending on addicts. Assuming that one doesn’t have issues with firearm ownership in general, then there doesn’t seem to be anything fundamentally wrong with someone collecting a large number of firearms. You might find it odd, but there doesn’t seem to be a social level difference between someone owning a handgun and someone collecting them. (Correct me if someone can show a link between number of guns owned and violence). There is a major difference between someone averaging a drink every other day or so, and someone having 10 drinks a day. The latter group is unquestionably addicted, with extremely negative personal and social consequences for that addiction.
- slowhand09 6y ago
- kavalec 6y agoSo, how do we follow the money?
- ralusek 6y agoThis smells like Big Bacon to me.
- asdffdsa 6y agoGood: alcohol and white sugar/refined carbs are 2 things the body doesn't really need. Skip the desserts and booze isles every time I go to the grocery store and my body thanks me for it
- throwaway29303 6y agoI believe in the future people will look at sugar and alcohol the same way we look at hard drugs today.
- kyriakos 6y ago..or medicine will be able to fix any issues caused by them making them ok to abuse maybe i'm just an optimist
- watwut 6y agoLike, incarcerating people for long years, making them unemployable after release and destroying families of people involved in it? I really hope not. I mean, i am fine with heroin being illegal. But I don't think the way it is done should be done more and more.
- webmaven 6y agoThis whole subthread reminded me of a science fiction story I read several decades ago (late 80s or early 90s, I think) about an agent in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Chocolate. The story centered on an undercover ATFC agent who grew up in Hershey, PA (which gave him some sort of underworld cred) and had infiltrated the Swiss Cartels. As I recall there were some flashbacks about a chocoholic family member or lover that had died which was what set him on a path of self-righteous vengeance, and a raid featuring a showdown with a literally sticky-fingered bad guy. There may have also been a Bond-style femmes-fatale who managed to escape that was a scion of some chocolatier family (Mars, perhaps?). It's possible I'm confabulating some of these details. I've tried to track down this story a few times without success, but it pops back into mind every time I see some mention of the idea of criminalizing sugar vs. decriminalizing other substances, so I thought I'd mention it on the off chance someone here recognizes it.
- chrisjarvis 6y agolol from my experience reading comments here most of HN thinks all drugs should be legal!
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- partiallypro 6y agoNo one listens to government "guidelines" in private life. They could easily add alcohol and sugar to the list and it wouldn't effect behavior at all.
- Nbox9 6y agoGovernment dietary guidelines effects health education, and my public school health education had an impact on the decisions I made during some of my more formative years.
- treeman79 6y agoSame. As a kid the Food pyramid meant lots of bread was great! Nut jobs went against the government. Took a long time to realize just how bad the food pyramid was.
- Nbox9 6y agoMy favorite logical inconsistency in the food pyramid is that dairy is given it’s own category of required daily intake for a healthy diet, but 65% of the global population has some level of lactose intolerance. The government was claiming that people with lactose intolerance cannot have a complete diet.
- webmaven 6y ago> My favorite logical inconsistency in the food pyramid is that dairy is given it’s own category of required daily intake for a healthy diet, but 65% of the global population has some level of lactose intolerance. The government was claiming that people with lactose intolerance cannot have a complete diet. Keep in mind that lactose intolerance isn't evenly distributed across the globe. People of Northern European extraction have the lowest rates, so the Standard American Diet overlooking or ignoring other extant USAian groups' dietary needs and constraints from consideration (however numerous they may be among the US' population) shouldn't be too startling.
- chlodwig 6y agoMany years ago I would have viewed an official government nutrition document as a credible source, and random blogs on the internet as a trash source of information. And I still believe one must be very sceptical of random blogs on the internet. Yet, most randos on the internet will at least cite their sources and explain their reasoning for all their decisions. But in the 150 pages long form document, I do not see sources cited or reasoning explained -- https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/Dietary_Guidelines_for_Americans_2020-2025.pdf https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-1... Is there some other source that explains their decision making process? In particular, I would be really curious to know what the basis is for the guideline that saturated fats should be replaced by "vegetable" oils, and that "saturated fat should be less than 10% of calories." I've looked at a lot of studies myself over the years, and find the evidence against seed oils to be much stronger than the evidence against saturated fat.
- sharadov 6y agoHave a heart for the Pharmaceutical Industry, how will it survive without sugar-laden foods forced down the pipeline? Who will take all the drugs for so-called "lifestyle diseases"?
- Scoundreller 6y agoThe great thing about longevity is that lots of stuff creeps up on you anyway.
- sharadov 6y agoBut you have pharmaceuticals to help with that, the trick is to keep you just enough alive pumping those drugs in your body. Death is a serious monetary loss.
- rconti 6y agoCounterpoint: The food pyramid. (or, as I heard on a podcast the other day, "a nutritious kid's breakfast was a bowl of sugary cereal, a glass of orange juice, and a piece of toast")
- jelliclesfarm 6y agomost of the 'bad sugar' in the us is from HFCS. there is only so much cane sugar one can consume. (plus, the bush family has supported the florida sugar cartels..the fanjul brothers from cuba. google it if curious. that's a whole another topic and would distract.) sugary drinks are the worst culprit and sugar is too expensive for it. high fructose corn syrup, otoh. but here is a dirty secret: corn is subsidised by the govt. and HCFS is the by product of our mid western corn. and instead of dumping it, it gets back into local consumption. in a way, we are funding our own HCFS based diseases. i think i have come to a point..in the past 8 years i have been farming..where i can pretty much connect every societal and financial and environmental ill to farm subsidies. cancel farm subsidies forever and the pandora's box will disappear. poof!
- froh 6y ago> I think i have come to a point..in the past 8 years i have been farming..where i can pretty much connect every societal and financial and environmental ill to farm subsidies. Interesting. Could you detail a bit on how farm subsidies create ill? Or link to some articles which do?
- jelliclesfarm 6y agoit is a very involved topic. but here is something from 2016 that speaks of it and is relevant to the HCFS/bad diet issue: https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/07/18/486051480/we-subsidize-crops-we-should-eat-less-of-does-this-fatten-us-up https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/07/18/486051480/we... [..]Americans are told to fill 50 percent of our plates with fruits and vegetables. But here's the contradiction, as the researchers see it: U.S. agriculture policies "focus on financing the production of corn, soybeans, wheat, rice, sorghum, dairy and livestock," the researchers write. About $170 billion was spent between 1995 and 2010 on these seven commodities and programs, according to the researchers.[..] [..]"Higher consumption of calories from subsidized food commodities was associated with a greater probability of some cardiometabolic risks," the authors conclude. For instance, they found a higher probability of both obesity and unhealthy blood glucose levels (which raises the risk of Type 2 diabetes) among people who consumed the most calories from subsidized foods.[..] having pasted the above, the article also takes the other side(because. NPR)..and i have points of disagreement with this bit: [..]Consider this: Sugar hooked us on yogurt. Americans eschewed yogurt until Dannon began adding sugary jam to the bottom. Same story with cereal. Adding sugar to tasteless flakes drove up sales. And then there's the idea that crop subsidies don't necessarily make food cheaper. Here are two reasons why. First, only a tiny slice — an estimated 15 percent — of the price we pay for processed foods, say, a box of cornflakes or cookies made with wheat and corn syrup, actually goes to the farmer.[..] why? because all the excess production has to go somewhere. because school lunches and food bank supplies have certain guidelines. why is smuckers jam approved for school cafeterias? and the other grape jelly guy. i forget the name. because smuckers agrees to buy the excess HFCS. HFCS also in peanut butter. the healthy vegetables and fruit isnt subsidised. only commodity crops. and only a small portion of it is for human food consumption. and it's only for commodities that is listed on the stock exchange. its the same with ketchup. ever wondered why we have HFCS in our tomato ketchup? and school cafeterias menu includes french fries and ketchup..both of which were considered to be part of the 'daily 5' vegetables/fruits for a balanced diet. it is also the reason for our high meat consumption and why its cheap. subsidies doesnt pay farmers. it pays them to continue farming for feed, ethanol and HFCS. the good and healthy food we eat comes from canada or south america. because it's cheaper to pay subsidies than hand over something as important as feeding 330 million people. we cant forget fibre(cotton) and dairy. both of these are dying or loss making sectors in the united states. its in absolute shambles. the guy making the money is the one who sells alfafa or hay. you can make more profits growing hay for feed than growing food for humans. and the guy who makes food for humans barely breaks even. and they are almost always collecting farm subsidies. fertiliser and input companies(looking at you, bayer nee monsanto!) have their hooks on all commodity crops. because you have to see this from the vantage point of wall street. after we have introduced derivatives, futures and options etc..its a feverish speculative game. with algos running everything now, its certainly not about food anymore. it's a ponzi scheme. farms exist to make profits for inputs, tractor/machinery and seed companies. they are all publicly listed companies. connect the dots. and farms are propped up by tax payer dollars. pension companies and insurance companies buy farmland and play in the stock market. it goes back to paying pensions and medicare and benefits etc. this house of cards may or may not come toppling down. but its still a house of cards. most of the feed and fodder grown..esp soy..was going to china. and as exports. we produce so much and we dont need as much. it helps balance our budget. or at least work with it. meanwhile..our waterways and aquifers are poisoned. farmers get caught in debt traps and imprisoned by unending credit. land rich but cash poor. so much poison in our waters and soil. the number of cancers have sky rocketed amongst farmers. i am not a luddite. but we cant ignore ground reality. 330 million is a lot. its not as much as the 1400 million of china or india..but it's still one of the more populous nations in the world. food security for this country is no joke. but we are holding on to depression era policy when it comes to farm subsidies. a generic wiki entry on ag subsidies here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy
- misiti3780 6y agoI find it interesting that the FDA is recommending 1 drink per day for adult males, meanwhile Europeans live longer than us and drink a lot, on average [1] "World Health Organization figures show the French are far from being the heaviest drinkers in Europe. They have an average annual consumption per person of 12.6 litres of pure alcohol among the over-15s, behind Lithuania’s 15 litres, Germany’s 13.4 litres, Ireland and Luxembourg’s 13 litres each and Latvia’s 12.9 litres. In the UK 11.5 litres are drunk per person annually. Wine represents 58% of all the alcohol consumed in France. " The moral of the story IMO is take anything these institutions recommend with a grain of salt. This is the same FDA that pushed the carb-heavy food pyramid for years, ignoring all of the sugar and corn syrup added to everything[2] [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/27/the-french-must-drink-less-wine-say-health-officials https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/27/the-french-mus... [2]https://www.salon.com/2015/04/12/the_fdas_phony_nutrition_science_how_big_food_and_agriculture_trumps_real_science_and_why_the_government_allows_it/ https://www.salon.com/2015/04/12/the_fdas_phony_nutrition_sc...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- gruez 6y ago> I find it interesting that the FDA is recommending 1 drink per day for adult males, meanwhile Europeans live longer than us and drink a lot, on average [1] I don't see the contradiction in this. You can also make the conclusion that europeans are living longer than us despite their alcohol intake, but they can live even longer if they weren't drinking as much.
- mint2 6y agoYeah based on my anecdotal European experience, they tend to have healthier lifestyles along many facets from food portions to attitude towards walking places. They probably are more keen to taking walks rather than grabbing an Uber for 3 blocks because the walkability of places in America is straight up garbage but that’s another issue, a digression. But all those factors mean that it’s likely in spite of the drinking that they’re healthier.
- coding123 6y agoIf you truly want to get healthy visit any naturopathic doc. They will readily give you recommendations to cut sugar out of your diet. They will also closely monitor your blood levels for a ton of different alarms. It's odd because it's stuff that regular doctors "should" do but instead a regular doctor just prescribes stuff when you get frequent headaches or prescribes different stuff if you have moods. They don't even test your blood for various things unless you ask these days. A naturopath will typically find the hormonal imbalances that is causing all this shit and provide supplements that actually work. Sure they may also recommend a statin, but you will get there far faster than a 9-5 kaiser MD.
- phkahler 6y ago>> And the result will always be to put you on a statin. Red yeast rice did wonders for my cholesterol. It is where statins came from in the first place.
- gruez 6y ago>If you truly want to get healthy visit any naturopathic doc The wikipedia article for "Naturopathy" doesn't inspire confidence. >Naturopathy or naturopathic medicine is a form of alternative medicine that employs an array of pseudoscientific practices branded as "natural", "non-invasive", or promoting "self-healing". The ideology and methods of naturopathy are based on vitalism and folk medicine, rather than evidence-based medicine (EBM).[2] Naturopathic practitioners generally recommend against following modern medical practices, including but not limited to medical testing, drugs, vaccinations, and surgery.[3][4][5][6] Instead, naturopathic practice relies on unscientific notions, often leading naturopaths to diagnoses and treatments that have no factual merit.[7][8] >Naturopathy is considered by the medical profession to be ineffective and harmful, raising ethical issues about its practice.[7][9][10] In addition to condemnations and criticism from the medical community, such as the American Cancer Society,[11] naturopaths have repeatedly been denounced as and accused of being charlatans and practicing quackery.[7][12][13][14][15][16] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturopathy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturopathy
- coding123 6y ago
- andrewclunn 6y agoBrawndo Hard, now with alcohol AND electrolytes!
- fmakunbound 6y ago> rejecting recommendations by its scientific advisory committee to make significant cuts Why even bother having a scientific advisory committee then?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- Scoundreller 6y agoSo uhhh, does anyone else think Coke and Pepsi will face tobacco-style lawsuits? Once tobacco advertising was suppressed/banned, the media didn’t defend them anymore...
- tracker1 6y agoThey'll just start using other means of sweetened products to advertise, or do what Smirnoff did and use their brand to advertise a product that isn't restricted.
- 29athrowaway 6y agoNot unexpected from the administration that claims that climate change is not real, in the country where close to half of the population believe in imaginary friends and that vaccines are bad and contain microchips.
- erikerikson 6y agoThe guidelines, as linked by chlodwig[0] to the report[1], clearly state that if you don't drink you should avoid it and that if you do drink that you likely over consume and should limit yourself. This is right before citing increased risk of death associated with consumption. The implication that we should avoid alcohol seems rather clear, contrary to the headline. Even in the article, the subtext undermines the headline. It is accurate in that it doesn't explicitly tell us to stop but fairly meaninglessly so. I wonder if anyone actually thinks everyone would stop if these guidelines told us to, especially given our ongoing lack of compliance. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25572471 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25572471 [1] https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/Dietary_Guidelines_for_Americans_2020-2025.pdf https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-1...
- syndacks 6y agoSugar and alcohol are the two most (ab)used substances in America. Source: rampant obesity and alcohol abuse everywhere you look, with relentless advertising of both (see Superbowl). There's way too much fucking money being made to cut these industries off by even a percent.