Opinion - US dietary guidelines have made us ill — let's change them already
'We have let the industry tell us as a government what's healthy and what's not healthy,' Dr. Makary warned in a recent interview, calling for an overhaul of the pyramid.
They're right to be concerned. Rates of diet-related diseases — including obesity, diabetes, osteoporosis, and iron-deficiency anemia — continue to rise. Anemia alone affects 10 million Americans, causing symptoms like chest pain, headaches, and fatigue. Left untreated, it can lead to serious heart problems, premature births, and stunted growth in infants and children.
Given the stakes, adequate nutrition should become the new cornerstone of national dietary policy. MyPlate, the visual representation of the official Dietary Guidelines for Americans, shapes everything from school lunch programs and hospital meals to broader federal health initiatives.
Yet the government's recommended dietary patterns continue to fall short. According to the 2025 guidelines' own expert report, a person following these recommendations to the letter will still not meet adequacy goals for iron, vitamin D, choline, and folate — nutrients crucial for brain development, bone health, and the prevention of birth defects, among other vital functions.
The responsibility now lies with the Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services to make a final decision on the expert report's findings and develop the official 2025-2030 Dietary Guidelines, which are due out this year. With widespread nutrient inadequacies affecting population health, it is crucial that the new guidelines effectively address nutritional needs.
The nutritional status of adolescent girls illustrates these concerns. Nearly 40 percent of females between the ages of 12 and 21 years are iron deficient. More than 6 percent are so low in iron that they develop anemia — meaning they don't have enough healthy red blood cells to carry oxygen around their bodies. This represents a significant public health challenge during a critical period of growth and development.
The nutritional challenges extend to bone health. By the expert report's measure, among girls aged 14 to 18 years: 68 percent fall below adequacy for calcium, 89 percent for magnesium, more than 97 percent for vitamin D, and 23 percent for protein. These deficits during adolescence — a critical period for bone development — help explain why approximately half of women aged 50 or older will experience a broken bone resulting from osteoporosis.
Pregnancy and lactation amplify these challenges. Nutritional deficiencies during pregnancy can jeopardize the health of mother and baby, in extreme cases leading to complications such as developmental delays and neurological damage. Iron remains a public health concern for pregnant women, critical for oxygen transport and fetal brain development. Similarly, iodine, vital for producing maternal and fetal thyroid hormones, is often overlooked in dietary recommendations.
The expert committees behind the guidelines' scientific reports have previously acknowledged these nutrient gaps and their public health significance. But little action has been taken. The current report continues to reflect similar nutrient gaps in its recommendations.
For instance, the committee recommends that Americans consume three servings of refined grains per day — not because they're healthy, but because they're enriched with added nutrients. Without these enriched foods, the recommended diet would be even less adequate in essential nutrients.
Enriched grains were a reasonable priority when introduced in the 1940s. In the previous three decades, nutrition scientists had successfully identified the vitamins and minerals needed to sustain human growth and good health. Although these experts identified milk, eggs, butter, organ meats, and green leafy vegetables as nutrient-dense 'protective' foods, the government opted instead to deliver vitamins and minerals to people by adding nutrients to refined grains. After all, wartime rationing was in effect, and after the war grains were still cheaper.
This policy got a boost in the mid-20th century when nutritionists started focusing on the threats of heart disease and cancer, and determined that the consumption of animal foods, laden with saturated fat and cholesterol, should be reduced. Meat, poultry, and eggs — some of the more nutrient-rich fare available — were villainized.
The fallout from stigmatizing nourishing foods is that basic nutrition has been imperiled. For example, it takes more than 4,000 calories of unenriched refined grains to get the same amount of essential nutrients that can be obtained by eating less than 300 calories of beef or eggs. You would have to eat twice as many calories of even quinoa as of beef or eggs to provide comparable micronutrient value.
Many nutrients from animal foods are more easily absorbed than those in plants or enriched refined grains. Additionally, grains, legumes, nuts, and seeds can contain high levels of a compound called phytate, which hinders the body's absorption of iron, zinc, and calcium. Yet the guidelines' scientific report stresses the health benefits of beans, peas, and lentils over animal products and overlooks issues of nutrient absorption and adequacy.
Remarkably, the current report moved its own goalposts in a way that downplays current nutrient inadequacies. Before this year, it used a benchmark called the 'Recommended Dietary Allowance,' which represents the daily intake required to meet the nutritional needs of about 98 percent of all healthy individuals. The new report instead adopted the Estimated Average Requirement, a benchmark representing the needs of just half of healthy individuals. In other words, if everyone met the new benchmark, half the population would still face vitamin and mineral inadequacies. This problematic shift in assessment criteria is not explained in the report.
These methodological decisions raise important questions. What is the rationale for changing from the Recommended Dietary Allowance to a lower-nutrient standard? How does the continued emphasis on refined grains align with goals for optimal nutrition?
Moving forward, we need to put nutrition back into our nutrition policy. The upcoming guidelines should prioritize nutrient sufficiency to support pregnant women, growing children, and optimal health for all.
Nina Teicholz, Ph.D., is a science journalist and author. Ty Beal, Ph.D., is head of food systems data and analytics at the Global Alliance for Improved Nutrition.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Business Insider
10 hours ago
- Business Insider
Sarepta says eight-year-old death deemed unrelated to Elevidys
Sarepta (SRPT) said in a statement Friday night: 'Just before 6:00 p.m. ET today, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a press release announcing an investigation into the death of an eight-year-old Duchenne muscular dystrophy patient who had received Elevidys gene therapy. The death of this patient was deemed unrelated to treatment with Elevidys…Sarepta reported this event to FDA on June 18, 2025, via the FDA's postmarketing electronic database, FAERS. At Sarepta, patient safety and well-being are always our top priority. We are committed to upholding the highest safety standards for all of our therapies, and do so in accordance with applicable law and commitment to full regulatory transparency. Elevidys is the only approved gene therapy for families and children devastated by Duchenne, a rare, progressive and ultimately fatal disease. We remain committed to working closely with the FDA to ensure that all decisions are grounded in science and the best interests of patients, considering the compelling need of these families to access disease-modifying therapy.' Elevate Your Investing Strategy:
New York Post
11 hours ago
- New York Post
Breakthrough as two FDA-approved drugs are found to reverse Alzheimer's — including restoring memory
In a stunning scientific discovery, researchers have found that a pair of drugs can not only slow down Alzheimer's disease but actually reverse it and restore memory in mice. And the best part of all? Both are already FDA-approved — albeit for cancer. Researchers first pinpointed how Alzheimer's disease scrambles gene activity in individual brain cells. 3 Researchers have found that a pair of drugs can not only slow down Alzheimer's disease but actually reverse it and restore memory in mice. Pixel-Shot – Using the Connectivity Map database of 1,300 FDA‑approved drugs, the researchers looked for medications that reverse Alzheimer's‑associated gene expression — landing on a shortlist of five, and zeroing in on two cancer drugs. In what one researcher called a 'mock clinical trial,' they then mined 1.4 million patients' medical records, finding that those who had taken letrozole or irinotecan for cancer were significantly less likely to develop Alzheimer's. When given together in an aggressive Alzheimer's mouse model, letrozole — used to treat certain types of breast cancer in postmenopausal women — and irinotecan — an anti-cancer medication used to treat colon cancer and small cell lung cancer — reversed disease‑related gene expression signatures, dissolved toxic tau protein clumps and prevented brain degeneration. Most importantly, they restored memory and learning in mice that had already developed severe symptoms. It's an exciting development for an illness that's notoriously tricky. 3 Letrozole — used to treat certain types of breast cancer in postmenopausal women — and irinotecan — an anti-cancer medication used to treat colon cancer and small cell lung cancer — reversed disease‑related gene expression signatures, dissolved toxic tau protein clumps and prevented brain degeneration. Eric Hood – 'Alzheimer's disease comes with complex changes to the brain, which has made it tough to study and treat, but our computational tools opened up the possibility of tackling the complexity directly,' Marina Sirota, the interim director of the UCSF Bakar Computational Health Sciences Institute, said in a statement. 'We're excited that our computational approach led us to a potential combination therapy for Alzheimer's based on existing FDA-approved medications.' 'Alzheimer's is likely the result of numerous alterations in many genes and proteins that, together, disrupt brain health,' said Yadong Huang, a professor of neurology and pathology at UCSF. 'This makes it very challenging for drug development — which traditionally produces one drug for a single gene or protein that drives disease.' 3 'Alzheimer's is likely the result of numerous alterations in many genes and proteins that, together, disrupt brain health,' said Yadong Huang, a professor of neurology and pathology at UCSF. yurakrasil – The findings were published in the journal Cell. Both drugs are already FDA‑approved for other uses, which could dramatically speed up the path to human trials. However, because they are cancer drugs, repurposing them may be complex and risky. This finding adds to a growing number of potential Alzheimer's treatments. A compound found in rosemary and sage — carnosic acid — has been shown to reverse memory loss and reduce brain inflammation in mice with Alzheimer's, bringing their cognitive function back to near-normal levels. A study from Stanford Medicine found that seniors who received the shingles vaccine were 20% less likely to develop dementia over seven years. And researchers at Penn State and Stanford University discovered that a certain cancer drug could restore memory and brain function in early stage Alzheimer's models.
Wall Street Journal
12 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Vinay Prasad Is a Bernie Sanders Acolyte in MAHA Drag
Meet Vinay Prasad, a young disciple of Bernie Sanders who ranks as one of the most powerful officials in the federal government. He determines whether patients get access to many life-saving medicines. Or not. Think of him as a one-man death panel. Dr. Prasad was named by Marty Makary, the Food and Drug Administration commissioner, as head of the agency's biologics division in May, and last month as its chief medical and scientific officer. More on why he was tapped to these posts later. But it isn't an exaggeration to say that Dr. Prasad wields more power than Anthony Fauci ever did at the National Institutes of Health.
