Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Miscellaneous General
1

http://www.lewrockwell.com/lewrockwell-show/2011/09/13/223-government-hates-good-health/

the new lewrockwell podcast has led me to this question:

The reccomended dietary guidelines that grew out of the 1977 McGovern Report, itself grew out of the Ancel Keys 7 country study. The study concluded the lipid hypothesis which basically said high cholesterol and saturated fats cause heart diease.

But we now know that Ancel Keys left out several countries that would have proved his hypothesis completely incorrect. Did the federal government know that back then?

If so, why did they create the flawed dietary guidelines that promote the flawed idea of eating little to no cholesterol and saturated fats?

Also, now that we know the study was “fixed” why doesn’t the federal government get rid of the flawed dietary recommended guidelines, or at least correct them?

This seems to be highly unusual and we really should demand an answer.

2

Because, at the time, it looked like those things contributed to heart disease. And they’ve stuck around forever because nutrition is a breeding ground for religious dogma.

In theory the government could have used these scare tactics to their advantage, but by in large I see that americans ignore the USDA guidelines. And no matter how bad you think the USDA guidelines are, they’re still better than what normal americans are eating. So maybe fat isn’t “bad” but if you can get people to stop eating cheeseburgers they’ll reduce their overall calories and lose weight/improve health markers.

3

anyone who knows anything about good health realizes it has nothing to do with fat or sweets…its about real food vs fake (hormone laden, antobiotic unpure food or stuff that isn’t even food at all)…

eat lots of real food and you heal. simple. eat fake foods and you get sick.

but the fact that the USDA guidleines are based off a study that was “fixed” is concerning…why would they do this? and not correct it now that they know its been fixed?

4

Because science doesn’t really have a good answer for what the “best” diet is. Actually they’ve just found out that within reason, basically nothing matters other than calories. You can complain all you want about vitamin deficiencies but for the average american, the vast majority of marginal benefits are procured during weight loss no matter which diet you’re on.

This isn’t the answer anyone wants to hear. They’re all looking science to find some evil gremlin like HFCS or saturated fats that are causing problems. But the simplest explanation is always calories. And calories have been shown in controlled studies to cause problems. HFCS and saturated fat (within reason; actually a pretty wide margin) have not.

So there’s really nothing to change their guidelines “to”. The real debate is over which dietary recommendations can best cause people to lower their calorie intake. Personally I just count, but for some reason everyone has a phobia of counting. So they attach superstitious labels to food as “good” and “bad”, and wind up eating less because they don’t compenstate 100% of the evil foods they used to eat with the good foods they’re supposed to eat.

For example, if someone stops eating fast food and prepares their own meals, then they’re probably not going to replace the fast food with an equal number of calories. Its just a psychological trick. So when the FDA says “eat low fat”, they’re trying to get you to eat lower calories, and that’s not a bad recommendation.

I mean, I know on the mises forums we just assume that everything the government does is wrong, but if NASA can correctly record that gravity is 9.81m/ss, then the USDA can probably figure out that people need to eat less calories.

The only possible convolution is if you think the dept of health is somehow influenced by special interests to promote particular dietary paradigms, but A) No one even listens to the dept of health and B) You’d figure that fast food would be the strongest interest group and they’d just lobby for high fat type diets.

Though there does seem to be a little bit of cognitive dissonance over the whole 80’s saturated fat scare. They basically looked at statistical regressions and said “fat causes weight gain and heart disease”. They’ve never really gotten over this neurosis. So rather than admit they are wrong and explain to everyone that eating low fat is still a good idea cus it controls calories, they just tell people to eat less fat.

5

Current USDA dietary guidelines are based on the flawed notion that cholesterol and saturated fat are unhealthy. They are unrealistic, unworkable, unscientific and impractical; they have resulted in widespread nutrient deficiencies and contributed to a proliferation of obesity and degenerative disease, including problems with growth, behavior and learning in children. The US government is promoting a lowfat, plant-based diet that ignores the vital role animal protein and fats have played in human nutrition throughout the ages.

The pyramid with its strictures against fat consumption does not recognize variations in human metabolism. Recommendations for fat restriction are predicated on the assumption that fat causes weight gain and heart disease; several recent studies have shown that that restriction of natural fats actually leads to more obesity in both children and adults, while the refined carbohydrates, polyunsaturated and trans fats that frequently replace natural saturated fats contribute to weight gain and chronic disease. Restriction of animal fats in children leads increased markers for heart disease and to deficiencies of vitamins A, D and K2, needed for growth, strong bones, immunity, neurological function, and protection from tooth decay.

Unfortunately this is what happens when families delegate their responsiblity for nutrition to the State. It sells its advice to the highest bidder and naturally, in an economy dominated by corporate monopolies funded by the inflation from fractional reserve banking, the guidelines are designed to promote the products of commodity agriculture. The products of mixed family farms which built the nation, from where the Founding Fathers were born and raised do not get a look in because they are the natural competition to commodity agriculture.

Read more here: http://www.westonaprice.org/basics/comments-on-the-usda-dietary-guidelines

Here in Britain, we had no dietary guidelines prior to the World War’s. That was the perogative of the family unit. After the malnutrition experienced then we created new guidelines which encouraged more meat, dairy and egg consumption and restriction of carbohydrates to loose weight, and children were given a pint of full fat milk each day at school, paid for via taxes.

That guidance continued until about 1983 before which one could not purchase skimmed milk. We then adopted the US Govt’s guidelines being propagated by the World Health Organization which are now formulated into European Treaties on obesity.

“The previous nutritional advice in the UK to limit the intake of all carbohydrates as a means of weight control now runs counter to current thinking and contrary to the present proposals for a nutrition education policy for the population as a whole… The problem then becomes one of achieving both a reduction in fat intake to 30% of total energy and a fall in saturated fatty acid intake to 10%.” (Proposals for nutritional guirelines for Health Education in Britain 1983)

And so started the obesity epidemic

6

To ask the question of why they did this, ask who benefits.

The guidelines push us towards grain consumption. The grain industry is so productive now that it produces more than we need, at lower quality than the consumer would normally demand. Absent market intervention via foreign aid, bio-fuel mandates, national grain reserves (grain mountains), and encouragement of domestic consumption via dietary guidelines. Absent that, the price of intensely farmed grains would fall below the cost of production triggering market mechanisms which would cause the bankruptcy of some of the grain cartel players, leaving only higher quality grain producers in business.

Grain is important to corporations and government because it is an internationally tradable commodity which lasts long periods. Growing grain is like growing money. It is a quasi form of money. For example the Romans battled the British to plough fields and plant grain rather than produce dairy and meat because the latter could not be traded easily around the Empire. The situation is identical today.

The power to grow unlimited grain is similar to theFederal Reserve printing unlimited number of dollars. Just as the government requires legal tender laws and more to force demand for dollars, so too must they force individuals to consume more and more grains to give high volumes of poor quality grains a high price. Indeed, being into grains is a hedge against dollar devaluation because, regardless of the quantity of grain being produced by Monsanto, et al. it will still not keep pace with dollar devaluation so, grain values will rise in an inflationary period, hedging the government’s exposure to a devaluing dollar.

Think of grains as a currency and you understand why they are being forced upon us. Look at the history of empires using grain as currency and you will see that this goes back millenia, particularly when an Empire runs out of gold.

7

Polyunsaturated oils and margarines favored are produced from GRAINS

The starch and carbs promoted by the food pyramid are produced from GRAINS

GRAIN fed animals tend to be leaner and lower in fat than grass fed heritage breeds.

Also, with low fat dairy, the industry can cream off the cream, selling skim milk for the price of whole milk, ensuring double profit when they get malnourished women craving butterfat in icecream and chocolates.

And then, there are the processed alternatives to salt, like MSG, encouraged by the low salt brigade.

So you always see corporations in the background trying to replaces traditional foods with their newfangled products. Just as how Du-Pont got hemp made illegal so that they could flog artificial plastic thread to a public which was previously self sufficient in fibre for clothes and other fabric. Its just crony capitalism, aka fascism, all over again. But this time, with food, the public get very, very sick. Which big pharma loves, so maybe they are part of it also?

8

Biggest issue is that our schools and other government facilities are forced, via Federal Grants to comply with the USDA’s dietary guidelines. No wonder children then crave the crap in vending machines, because they are malnourished. The Federal Govt has used the Federal School Lunches program to force their corporatist dietary guidelines upon the childen of America, with horrific consequences.

9

Sieben wrote the following post at Wed, Sep 14 2011 10:14 PM: Because science doesn’t really have a good answer for what the “best” diet is. Actually they’ve just found out that within reason, basically nothing matters other than calories.

Well, this logic ignores that calories, in the form of protein, are used for many bodily processes other than energy, and that excess protein is excreted in the form of urea. Excess carbs are stored as body fat. Similarly, saturated fat is a major component of most of the body’s organs. For example, cook marrowbone and you will discover that the marrow is almost entirely saturated fat. It is the same thing with the brain and many other organs and, saturated fat tends to concentrate around the organs, particularly the heart and kidneys, just go ask your local butcher for kidneys with the fat still attached and you will see what I mean. Saturated fat is also the the major component in the cell wall along with cholesterol. Therefore, not all calories of saturated fat are used for energy, and fatty acids in animal fats tend to stimulate metabolism. This forms a homeostatic system whereby the more saturated fats we consume, the more energy we burn, meaning that the consumption of saturated fats tends to normalise body mass.

In contrast, carbohydrates are only used for energy, in the form of glucose, and take many minerals and vitamins to be metabolized properly, many more than for protein and animal fats, which tends to be sluggish on metabolism, leading to slow burn and a tendancy to store energy from carbs in body fat. And of course you get the roller coaster insulin response if you have too many refined carbs.

This is why those on a low carb, high fat/protein diet tend to loose weight. It is why lots of saturated fat from coconut oil tends to cause weight loss, because fats stimulate metabolism whilst carbs tend to do the opposite. Of course, the body, with sufficient nutrients, can healthily consume a portion of its calories in carbs, but modern diets are high in refined carbs which lack the minerals and vitamins the body requires to metabolise them, which is why they are particularly sluggish on metabolism and tend to particularly cause weight gain.

This is why the calorie theory of weight gain misinterprets the laws of thermodynamics, namely ignoring that the body is a dynamic system that metabolises different calories in different ways.

So Sieben is wrong in saying that simple calorie restriction works, because, counter to intuition, one finds that obese individuals tend to have mineral and vitamin deficiencies, because a person must be well nourished in order that they burn off the food they consume, because metabolism requires nutrients. The solution therefore is a nutrient dense diet without refined carbohydrates and, with restricted access to carbs if weight loss is required. It is only possible to reduce carbs and maintain nutrient density if protein and fats are consumed in liberal quantities, otherwise you will see the typical yo-yo-ing between diet and uncontrolled indulgence, and between weight loss and wieght gain.

This video of Zoe Harcombe goes into the science of it: http://vimeo.com/26994290

10

Sieben. Please provide some studies to prove your assertion that calories are the only thing that matter, regardless of the calorie type. I seek an equal playing field here. Before you ask for studies from me, the video above from Zoe Harcombe is full of them, as is her book “The Obesity Epidemic”, also check out theobesityepidemic.org and, the USDA Press Release by Sally Fallon is fully referenced if you follow the link on that post.

11

Oh, and another thing. It is well known that THE BRAIN consumes half the calories that a human consumes, and it primarily requires and is primarily comprised of saturated fats, discounting water of course. The myelin sheath around the brain cell is primarily comprised of cholesterol also. This is another example of why exercise alone is not the answer because half of our metabolism is for the benefit of our brain, and metabolism rates are not only based on activity, but on cells having the correct nutrients to carry out the process. If a calorie restricted diet lacks the required nutrients, metabolism will reduce faster than calorific intake, even if physical activity increases, because half of the metabolism is being carried out by cells which have nothing to do with physical activity. This is one of the reasons why it is difficult to sustain enhanced physical activity on a calorie restricted diet that causes nutrient deficiencies.

12

“Yet even the amount of cholesterol found in three to four eggs per day produces no change in blood cholesterol levels in 70 percent of the population, as shown in randomized, placebo-controlled trials”

Correct. Aubrey de Grey’s book Theory of Aging has nice chapter about this!

Cholesterol induced clots have to do with rate of intake given genetics of the person. Some people cannot process much at all, and molecule that is supposed to do processing causes clumping and then lesions, but many people are not significantly affected by even large quantities of continuous cholesterol intake.

(De Grey however believes that this has to do with mitochondrial DNA mutation whereas I agree with more modern telomeres and chromomeres theory, which seems to have more a priori and experimental evidence. Even Robert Rosen’s purely mathematical theorem is better. But that is beside the point.)

13

First, to hell with you. You are so totally abusive with your sources, you shouldn’t be asking for any. Again, you used studies about a tree that has “soy” in its name to argue against the soy-bean. You are dishonest and literally nothing is good enough for you. You have never read any of my studies, so you know, maybe you could go die.

Here’s a comparison of 4 different diets varying along nutrient type and quality produce similar average weight loss results.

Here’s a study showing that overfeeding induces insulin resistance (diabetes) and leptin resistence (appetite dysregulation).

Here’s a study showing that high fat diets (which are high in calories) lead to weight gain.

But you don’t care about any of those because they invalidate your religion. Good job.

14

Phil Ridley,

You can’t post copyrighted articles in their completeness. You can quote three paragraphs MAXIMUM.

15

Sieben,

Can you calm down a little bit. It doesn’t matter how someone else is posting in regards what your standards should be.

16

Current USDA dietary guidelines are based on the flawed notion that cholesterol and saturated fat are unhealthy. They are unrealistic, unworkable, unscientific and impractical; they have resulted in widespread nutrient deficiencies and contributed to a proliferation of obesity and degenerative disease, including problems with growth, behavior and learning in children. The US government is promoting a lowfat, plant-based diet that ignores the vital role animal protein and fats have played in human nutrition throughout the ages.

The pyramid with its strictures against fat consumption does not recognize variations in human metabolism. Recommendations for fat restriction are predicated on the assumption that fat causes weight gain and heart disease; several recent studies have shown that that restriction of natural fats actually leads to more obesity in both children and adults, while the refined carbohydrates, polyunsaturated and trans fats that frequently replace natural saturated fats contribute to weight gain and chronic disease. Restriction of animal fats in children leads increased markers for heart disease and to deficiencies of vitamins A, D and K2, needed for growth, strong bones, immunity, neurological function, and protection from tooth decay.

Unfortunately this is what happens when families delegate their responsiblity for nutrition to the State. It sells its advice to the highest bidder and naturally, in an economy dominated by corporate monopolies funded by the inflation from fractional reserve banking, the guidelines are designed to promote the products of commodity agriculture. The products of mixed family farms which built the nation, from where the Founding Fathers were born and raised do not get a look in because they are the natural competition to commodity agriculture.

Read more here: http://www.westonaprice.org/basics/comments-on-the-usda-dietary-guidelines

17

Why? I don’t owe him courtesy. The only people who seem to have a problem with my conduct are mods who ideologically believe that argumentation should be clean and impersonal. I don’t think my conduct has backfired on me. In fact, observers have agreed that Phil is a religious fanatic.

18

Sieben,

Whether or not you owe him courtesy is your private business. Whether you owe this community courtesy is my business.

19

Sorry I thought I was calling phil a retard. Not the whole community. But If I have a legitimate reason for namecalling, will it matter? Didn’t think so.

20

Maybe you should think how it comes off to other visitors when they see people resorting to such low grade interaction.

If this forum software weren’t broken, I would temp-ban you, but alas I cannot.