Government “Recommendations”

The government, particularly the U.S. Federal Government, is fond of providing Americans with its recommendations for our health and well-being.

The question we should be asking ourselves is this:  Is the government qualified to make recommendations about our health - or anything else, for that matter?

In light of the fact that scientific and nutritional research is continually revealing new information, and subsequently re-evaluating what’s good or bad for us on a very frequent basis, how can a bunch of politicians possible know what to tell the American public?

An example of this is an article that came out just this week in The Telegraph, a British publication, about a study concluding that red wine, previously thought to be healthful in moderation, is now bad for you in any amount. Why? Because it contains alcohol, which is toxic to the liver. This fact has been known for pretty much ever. But the health implications are being re-examined, probably not for the last time.

The biggest question that plagues most of us is, why does health information keep changing?

The problem with studies in human nutrition is that the human body is intricately complex, and separating out the effects of even one food, not to mention one element of a food, is difficult if not impossible to do. Such a study would have to be done in a completely controlled, institutional environment where “cheating” would be impossible. Like a prison. No one ever “cheats” in there, right?

Nevertheless, on Thursday of this past week, the USDA came out with its new updated Dietary Guidelines, as reported by NBC News (which, by the way, are solid until 2020). These guidelines were finally released “after a year of arguments, lobbying and directives from Congress,” the article stated. It reported that the guidelines were an admitted compromise – no surprise there. The government has to keep everybody happy, you know - especially the ones who line their pockets.

“HHS and USDA walked a fine line in issuing the guidelines. They considered advice from nutrition and public health experts, food industry experts, farmers and politicians.”

And we all know how important the opinions of food industry “experts” and politicians are.

Once again, with the release of this new and improved Guideline, the government has shown that it still does not understand nutrition, in spite of the very intellectual and prestigious persons on their Advisory Board. The guidelines reflect more of an effort to not rock the boat than to give the American public trustworthy advice.

Here are a few things that jumped out at me.

Cholesterol – They finally agree that dietary cholesterol has no impact on blood cholesterol (yay!), and yet they still recommend "eating as little dietary cholesterol as possible." Why? Because dietary cholesterol is linked to foods high in saturated fat, which everybody “knows” is bad for you.

Saturated Fat – No study has EVER been done to analyze the effect of organic saturated fat consumption (fats naturally present in meat, eggs, and dairy) in the human body, using the scientific method  – that is, a double-blind, random-selection study that isolates organic saturated fats from toxic trans-fats found in manufactured foods. Every nutritional study on fats lumps all solid fats into one bucket, which shows a glaring lack of understanding of fats in general. Instead, study results rely heavily on what the subjects report in questionnaires, based on what they logged or remember having eaten over a given period. If you've ever tried to keep a diet log, I rest my case.

In fact, the most current research suggests that the big culprit in chronic illness is not saturated fats, but polyunsaturated fats, which are the most unstable (inflammatory) fatty acids of all. You can read more about this in publications such as THE BIG FAT SURPRISE, by Nina Teicholz, and KNOW YOUR FATS, by Mary J. Enig PhD (a well-respected lipid expert). Despite this new revelation, the government Guidelines still recommend that we replace as much of our fat intake as possible with polyunsaturated fats, the oils manufactured from corn, soy, and seeds.

Sugar Consumption – Everybody knows that sugar is bad for us. It makes us fat and it makes us sick (diabetes). If these Dietary Guidelines were honest, they would tell us to cut out added sugar completely. But then there’s the sugar industry to worry about, and the big soft drink manufacturers, and the corn industry that pumps out vats and vats of high-fructose corn syrup from their surplus corn supply (for which they get subsidies from the government). Besides that, just about every single processed food on the market contains added sugar, usually in the form of high-fructose corn syrup. So, the wise government has extended a compromise by recommending that we keep our consumption to 10%. For a 2,000 calorie diet, that’s 200 calories a day we can spend on the processed food of our choice, over and above the sugar naturally present in the two cups of fruit we should eat.

Grain – The 2016 guidelines continue the old assumption that grains are critical to a balanced diet. They tell us we should eat six ounces of whole grains a day, which is equivalent to six slices of bread. Who decided that human beings cannot live healthy lives without grain? There is abundant evidence of cultures around the world that have thrived for hundreds, probably thousands, of years eating a grain-free diet (like the Inuit populations). Current research is finding that humans may actually be healthier if they DON’T eat grains - of any kind. Autoimmune diseases, as well as neurological ailments like Alzheimer’s, are being connected with “leaky-gut syndrome,” a condition caused by the gluten in our modern wheat. You can read more about this in the well-researched books, GRAIN BRAIN, by David Perlmutter MD, and WHEAT BELLY, by William Davis MD (or by searching online).

In a spirit of fairness, the 2016 guidelines are certainly an improvement over those of the past. Still, for the federal government to behave as though it is the prevailing authority on - well, anything for that matter, would be laughable, if it weren’t oft times downright dangerous to our well-being.

Politicians are not experts – they’re just politicians. They should stay out of the business of giving advice.

What should we eat, then?

Do you think Americans can figure it out without the government’s help? I do. We have access to the same information the government uses to makes its recommendations. We just need to access it. The government thinks you are too stupid to know what’s best for you.

THAT should make you down-right annoyed.


Image Credit:  www.uab.edu