2010 means ... (drumroll) ... new dietary guidelines!
This article was originally on a blog post platform and may be missing photos, graphics or links. See About archive blog posts.
It’s 2010 -- and we all know what that means. Yes! Time for a brand-new iteration of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Those simple-sounding pieces of government eating advice are spawn of a surprisingly arduous process. A team of 13 appointed nutrition scientists reviews reams of scientific studies and convenes at half a dozen lengthy meetings at which the scientists discuss nutrients, one by one, and listen to testimony.
I went to a couple during the run-up to the 2005 guidelines. Practically every sector of the food industry had reps there listening to each twist and turn in the proceedings, ducking out during breaks to the lobby, where they could be seen reporting in to folks unknown on their cellphones. (What were they saying? ‘They’re coming down hard on added sugar!’ ‘Fish is hot — ramp up production of the Healthy Catch dinner line!’ The panel can easily spend hours debating how much vitamin D, say, we should be allotted each week. The idea is that all of the nutrients we need should come from food itself, not supplements, which makes for a complicated number-crunch.
The process is both kind of fascinating and kind of deadly boring: When I went, one USDA staffer, expecting a long night, was happily settled in with her needlepoint.
Plenty of folks want to offer the panel advice, which they can do via the public comments process. All the comments are up on the Web for us to read.
The Salt Institute has weighed in, arguing that the limits set on salt the last time around were not science-based and were based on an intermediate measure— blood pressure — instead of death.
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, an animal rights group, wrote to suggest that vegetarian and vegan diets should be considered for lessening the burden of disease.
The National Fisheries Institute sent a letter saying they hoped the 2010 guidelines would more clearly state to Americans that they really should be eating more fish.
And the Soyfoods Assn. of North America wrote a five-page letter extolling the virtues of ... no, you have to guess.
Read all the comments here — which include many from nutrition students and dietitians and scientists as well as ones from the food industry and advocacy groups. Last I checked, there were more than 600.
And check out the proceedings so far at the dietary guidelines home page, here, where you can view transcripts and/or video of the four meetings held so far. (Might want to get out your needlepoint, though.)
— Rosie Mestel