I'm specifically referring to this food pyramid, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/media/File%3AUSDA_Food_Pyramid.gif https://en.m.wikip

I'm specifically referring to this food pyramid, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/media/File%3AUSDA_Food_Pyramid.gif https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/me..., which was well-known by the US populace at large (as well as taught in schools) in the early 90s. There were subsequent US food pyramids and then a new "MyPlate" program in the US after that, but none that were as widely known/discussed as the original one. The basic problem of the original food pyramid is that the base is essentially "tons of processed carbohydrates" (flours, bread, pasta), while it says to minimize oils and fats. But I think the biggest crime of the original food pyramid, and honestly much nutrition "science", is that it was not scientifically based. There were never any studies that said, for example, that mono-unsaturated fats were bad for you (the opposite is true), but the food pyramid made broad assumptions without any actual studies to back it up. The flip-flop on dietary cholesterol is another good example. There is evidence high LDL in the blood is associated with higher rates of cardiovascular disease, but never evidence that eating cholesterol leads to higher LDL levels, except in certain genetic circumstances. For decades nutritionists told us "eggs are bad for you" based on this theory without any evidence to back it up.