Page 68 - Winter2014

public has already been subject to the unintended sential nutrition from wholesome, nourishing foods would not only provide
effects of policy established by the USDA and the foundation for good health, they would finally provide what has been
DHHS without the support of sufficient evidence. missing from the past thirty-five years of federal nutrition policy: dietary
The world simply cannot withstand the conse- guidance that works―for all Americans.
quences if the DGA’s impact on the environment
is similar to its impact on obesity and chronic Adele Hite is director and co-founder of Healthy Nation Coalition, a non-
disease. profit health advocacy organization dedicated to health for all through
equitable access to food and knowledge. She is also a registered dietitian
WHAT CAN BE DONE INSTEAD? and PhD candidate in communication, rhetoric, and digital media at North
In 1977, the Dietary Goals presented a single Carolina State University. She has master's degrees in English education
perspective on food and health to the public as and public health nutrition and has pursued graduate studies in nutrition
if it were a commonsense approach to nutrition epidemiology. Her current research involves a critical examination of the
grounded firmly in science and applicable to all U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Americans. This was not the case. However,
there is such an approach available to the lead- REFERENCES
ership at USDA and DHHS. Dietary recom- 1. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion. 2010 Dietary
Guidelines for Americans Backgrounder: History and Process [Internet]. 2011 [cited 2011 Jan
mendations that focus on a food-based guidance 31]. Available from: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/DietaryGuidelines/2010/PolicyDoc/
that assists Americans in acquiring adequate 2. Backgrounder.pdf
Kennedy E. United States Department of Agriculture Public Meeting [Internet]. Mar 10, 2000.
essential nutrition is based in solid, non-contro- Available from: http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dgac/pdf/pubmtng.pdf
versial science and is equally applicable to all 3. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary
Guidelines for Americans, 2010 [Internet]. 7th ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Americans. Although scientific understanding of Office; 2011 [cited 2010 Jan 31]. Available from: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAs2010-Policy-
essential nutrition is not complete by any means, 4. Document.htm
Taubes G. Good calories, bad calories: challenging the conventional wisdom on diet, weight
it is nevertheless supported by evidence that has control, and disease. New York: Knopf; 2007.
stood the test of time with little controversy. All 5. Teicholz N. The big fat surprise: why meat, butter, and cheese belong in a healthy diet. New York:
Simon & Schuster; 2014.
Americans require essential nutrition; without 6. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Morbidity and Mortality: 2007 Chart Book on Car-
exception, inadequate intake results in diseases diovascular, Lung, and Blood Diseases [Internet]. Bethesda, MD: U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services, National Institutes of Health; 2007 [cited 2011 Sep 24]. Available from: http://
of deficiency. It is not necessary to eliminate, www.nhlbi.nih.gov/resources/docs/07-chtbk.pdf
restrict or modify culturally traditional foods 7. Ogden CL, Carroll MD. Prevalence of overweight, obesity, and extreme obesity among adults:
United States, trends 1976-1980 through 2007-2008. [Internet]. Hyattsville, MD: National Center
under the essential nutrition paradigm. for Health Statistics; 2010 Jun [cited 2011 Sep 1]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/
Focusing on essential nutrition is an ap- 8. hestat/obesity_adult_07_08/obesity_adult_07_08.pdf
Levenstein H. Fear of food: a history of why we worry about what we eat. Chicago: Univ Of
proach that includes and celebrates a wide variety 9. Chicago Press; 2013.
Lappé FM. Diet for a small planet. 10th anniversary ed., completely rev. & updated. New York:
of food traditions. Such guidance would shift the Ballantine Books; 1982. 496 p.
focus of public health nutrition towards general 10. Butz EL. An Emerging, Market-Oriented Food and Agricultural Policy. Public Adm Rev. 1976
Mar;36(2):137.
health and wellness, and away from weight and 11. Pyle G. Raising less corn, more hell: the case for the independent farm and against industrial
food.1st ed. New York: Public Affairs; 2005. 229 p.
other surrogate markers like cholesterol lev- 12. Oppenheimer GM, Benrubi ID. McGovern’s Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human
els and blood pressure, leaving those areas of Needs Versus the: Meat Industry on the Diet-Heart Question (1976–1977). Am J Public Health.
2013 Nov 14;104(1):59–69.
concern for the healthcare setting. Importantly, 13. Austin JE, Hitt C. Nutrition intervention in the United States: cases and concepts. Cambridge,
guidance that emphasizes adequate essential Mass: Ballinger Pub. Co; 1979. 387 p.
nutrition would be clear, concise, and useful 14. Hegsted M. Washington - Dietary Guidelines [Internet]. 1990 [cited 2011 Jan 24]. Available from:
http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/Hegsted.pdf
to the general public. Contradictory messages 15. Peretti J, Sahota M. The Men Who Made Us Fat. BBC Two; 2012.
about nutrition―unavoidable when most dietary 16. Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs of the United States Senate. Dietary goals for
the United States [Internet]. 2nd ed. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1977 [cited
2013 Aug 1]. Available from: http://catalog.hathitrust.org/Record/000325810
guidance lacks a strong scientific basis because it 17. Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, United States Senate. Dietary Goals for the
simply echoes the DGA―have led to widespread United States: Supplemental Views. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office; 1977.
general confusion and a lack of confidence in the 18. American Medical Association. Dietary goals for the United States: statement of The American
Medical Association to the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, United States Sen-
science of nutrition. The proliferation of “food ate. R I Med J. 1977 Dec;60(12):576–81.
59
rules” that stem from DGA guidance have left 19. Harper AE. Dietary goals-a skeptical view. Am J Clin Nutr. 1978 Feb;31(2):310–21.
20. Weil WB Jr. National dietary goals. Are they justified at this time? Am J Dis Child 1960. 1979
many consumers frustrated by the feeling that the Apr;133(4):368–70.
standards for “healthy eating” are unreachable, 21. Broad W. Jump in funding feeds research on nutrition. Science. 1979 Jun 8;204(4397):1060–1.
22. Jacobson NL. The Controversy over the Relationship of Animal Fats to Heart Disease. BioScience.
even as they strive to meet those standards. 1974 Mar;24(3):141–8.
60
DGA recommendations based on adequate es- 23. Smil V. Coronary Heart Disease, Diet, and Western Mortality. Popul Dev Rev. 1989 Sep;15(3):399.
24. Truswell AS. Some problems with Cochrane reviews of diet and chronic disease. Eur J Clin Nutr.
64 Wise Traditions WINTER 2014 Wise Traditions

145881_text.indd 64 12/23/14 12:16 AM