Our Impact
The goal of the Nutrition Coalition has been to establish a solid scientific foundation for the US Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Before our work, not a single report by an established nutrition expert existed to examine the methodological issues of this highly influential policy. Now, we have 4 reports by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine as well as multiple papers in top journals by leading scientists, all reporting that the Guidelines do not reflect the best and most current science, are not the product of a rigorous methodological process, lack transparency, and have no advice for people with diet-related conditions. Regarding this last point, the implication is that the Dietary Guidelines are not appropriate for the 93% of American adults with cardio-metabolic conditions. Further, recommendations to cap saturated fat and effectively limit fat and cholesterol are not supported by the preponderance of the evidence, according to the USDA's own scientific reviews.
Our Work with Congress
Congress holds an unprecedented hearing on the US Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Secretaries of both the Departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services (USDA-HHS) testify for two hours. Key quotes:
- CONAWAY (R-TX): Serious questions have been raised about the overall oversight of the overall DGAC process… Hopefully, the next time the question will be asked: Are the guidelines themselves contributing to the problem? The emphasis on carbohydrates over the last 20 years and the impact it’s had on — on these issues that we’re talking about with obesity or diabetes, other things.
- D. SCOTT (D-GA): I’m very concerned that you’re not using the most relevant, basic, and the best science-related information in formulating these guidelines. You certainly did not use some of the most recent peer-reviewed and published nutrition and diet-related science. It was not even considered by the advisory committee and not even included in the evidence-based library to be considered by the advisory committee when they were finalized in the report. That’s a fact.
The Nutrition Coalition was responsible for developing an interest in Congress to mandate—and allocate more than $1M—for the first-ever outside peer-review of the Dietary Guidelines, by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM)
The National Academies release two reports (here & here) with numerous recommendations.
- Top-line conclusion: the Guidelines' process lacked scientific rigor and does not use any recognized or verified methodology for reviewing the science.
- “To develop a trustworthy DGA [Dietary Guidelines], the process needs to be redesigned”
- “The current DGA process for reviewing the science falls short of meeting the best practices for conducting systematic reviews.”
- The process lacks transparency and needs to disclose conflicts of interest.
The Nutrition Coalition worked with members of Congress to hold the USDA accountable, requiring the agency to report on its progress in responding to the National Academies recommendations:
- USDA required to report to Congress in 2018 (USDA-HHS Response to the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine)
- Congress mandates a follow-up report by the NASEM, with another $1M allocation, to ascertain independently the degree of USDA compliance.
The National Academies issues two reports (here & here) concluding that the USDA had not fully implemented even one of the 11 recommendations from 2017.
- “...the proposed analytic and methodologic improvements to the DGA process had largely not yet been achieved.”
In sum, Congress has spent 7 years and $2 million dollars
trying to improve the rigor and transparency of the
US Dietary Guidelines for Americans
However, the USDA has not yet complied with the NASEM recommendations.
The Coalition will continue to work with Congress to ensure the Guidelines comply to the National Academies reports. It is crucial that the Guidelines are a trustworthy document based on a transparent, rigorous scientific process.
Our Work with the Scientific Community
The Nutrition Coalition has worked with leading academics who have authored a number of papers documenting methodological issues in the Dietary Guidelines. Until our work, not a single paper critically analyzing the guidelines had been published by a mainstream nutrition expert. These academics now includes 6 former members of previous Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committees (the experts who wrote the guidelines) and the former head of the World Heart Federation. These respected leaders have written:
Conflicts of Interest: First-ever systematic review of the extensive financial conflicts of interest on the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. Findings:
- 95% of the 2020 committee had at least one tie to a food or pharmaceutical company;
- Over half had 30 such ties or more;
- USDA does not disclose conflicts of interest, despite a National Academies recommendation to do so.
Paper on how the Guidelines does not comply with its authorizing legislation or relevant regulation (Easy-to-read summary of paper here). Findings:
- Science was 7-8 years out of date for key recommendations at the time of publication of the 2020 Guidelines;
- All studies on weight loss were excluded from the 2020 Guidelines;
- The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee was not independent. The USDA agency staff controls the entire process, with the committee little more than window dressing;
- Recommendations on saturated fat, dietary cholesterol & total fat do not reflect the USDA’s own scientific reviews;
- Note: this paper was published in PNAS Nexus, a journal of the National Academies of Sciences.
Papers on how the science does not support continued caps on saturated fats
- A “State of the Art Review” in the Journal of the American College of Cardiology:
- Named one of the top 100 papers of the year by the journal's Editor-in-Chief;
- Five authors are members of previous Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committees;
- Review of the science on saturated fats: “Dietary Saturated Fats and Health: Are the U.S. Guidelines Evidence-Based?”
- Findings: the 2020 USDA's own review on saturated fats found that 87% of studies did not support its recommendation, yet the USDA review still concluded that the evidence against these fats was “strong.”
The Low-carbohydrate diet should be one option in the US Dietary Guidelines: extensive review of the science.
- This diet has the most evidence for the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes;
- The diet has also proven effective for combatting obesity and cardiovascular disease;
- Concerns about effects on mortality are not justified by the data.
- The quantity and quality of the evidence on low-carbohydrate and ketogenic diets merits the inclusion of this nutritional approach as one option in the Dietary Guidelines.
Our work continues!
Stay in touch by signing up for our newsletter
Support our work by making a donation
The Nutrition Coalition has no backing by industry and depends on supporters like you to do this important work.