People who know a thing or two about nutrition continue to puzzle over the strange dish of commerce and politics served up in the new Dietary Guidelines for Americans. In a new editorial for the BMJ, Marion Nestle, one of the most influential authorities in the world on food policy, is blunt. Political and commercial interests are up front in these guidelines, she says. Concerns about science and conflicting interests are hard to find.

Evangelism for Meat and Dairy

“Prioritize protein foods at every meal” is one of the biggest, boldest recommendations you will find in this brief document. That imperative was clearly driven by politics of this administration more than science. Red meat plays well with MAHA. But for those who actually read the document, it was hard to square that edict for more protein with the details of the guidelines.

Karen Harouse-Bell is an assistant professor and director of the dietetics program at Seton Hill University. She tells Roberta Burkhart at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that it is tough to square the recommendations for red meat and full-fat dairy with guidance to consume less than ten percent of calories from saturated fat:

“I don’t want to say it’s laughable The messages are confusing, and they contradict each other in a lot of ways [e.g. citing beef tallow as a healthy choice]. That was a surprising one.”

Nestle is more direct:

“The messages about meat and full fat dairy are explicitly evangelical. Health and human services secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr posted on X, ‘Beef is BACK.’”

She laments the issuance of hastily assembled guidance based upon the work of meat and dairy industry insiders.

Real Food: Yes

The other bold recommendation in these guidelines is to “eat real food.” The guidance is clear in its call to “Limit highly processed foods, added sugars, and refined carbohydrates” and for this, they are getting wide support from diverse stakeholders in dietary health.

Equity: Forget It

However, the politics that fuel these guidelines are explicit in rejecting any consideration of what will work for real working families and persons with meager financial resources. Equity? This administration will cancel anyone who utters that word. Fairness is not their concern.

In her BMJ editorial, Nestle is crystal clear about this problem with the guidance:

“Also omitted is any discussion of the resources needed to follow such advice. Real food is more expensive than ultra-processed foods and requires cooking skills, kitchens, equipment, and time. Not everyone has such things, but the agencies explicitly reject equity as a consideration.”

Perversely, these guidelines come from politicians who claim support from common folk. But they show little regard for hard realities most people face. Prices for red meat are daunting. Privileged folk telling the people to “let them eat” like themselves does not work any better today than it did in the day of Marie Antoinette.

For quite a few of us, the affordability of real food is a real concern. Not a hoax.

Click here for Nestle’s editorial in the BMJ, here and here for further perspective.

The Cook, painting by Giuseppe Arcimboldo / Wikimedia Commons