Talk:Dietary Guidelines for Americans

Restriction of dietary fat and cholesterol

This section concludes "A review of reviews also confirmed that egg consumption is associated with adverse effects regarding Heart failure and type 2 diabetes.[36]". While looking at the referenced study, the conclusions section states "Recent evidence-based reviews conclude that increased egg consumption is not associated with CVD risk in the general population. More research is needed on the positive associations between egg consumption and heart failure and T2DM risk, as well as CVD risk in diabetics, before firm conclusions can be made."

I advise that this source be either replaced with one that supports the statement being made or (more ideally) the statement be revised to reflect the evidence.

I have removed that sentence. It was false information. The umbrella review suggests the opposite [1] Psychologist Guy (talk) 20:24, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Article needs updating for 2020–2025 version

The 2020–2025 version of the Guidelines is out: https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2021-03/Dietary_Guidelines_for_Americans-2020-2025.pdf

I am sure this article needs major updating. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.36.27.133 (talk) 16:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I just read the 2020-2025 Guidelines. I was very disappointed to discover that they still encourage people to reduce their consumption of saturated fats in favor of vegetable oils (polyunsaturated fats). This flies in the face of the latest scientific evidence, and represents a huge lost opportunity to educate the public. Lets hope that just as the 2020-2025 Guidelines have ditched trans fats, the 2025-2030 Guidelines will ditch unhealthy polyunsaturated fats (for example, margarine) in favor of healthy saturated fats (for example, butter). Unfortunately, the ghost of long-discredited Ancel Keys continues to cast a long shadow. Piedmont (talk) 13:43, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

I understand that there will be high-quality secondary sources coming out over the next few months that will provide us with material we can use to build the "current" 2020-2025 section. I'll make some cosmetic changes in preparation for that. sbelknap (talk) 19:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

You are claiming that the 2020-2025 Guidelines are wrong so you are arguing from a fringe position, see WP:Fringe. Trans fats are briefly mentioned on page 44 The USDA Dietary Patterns are limited in trans fats and low in dietary cholesterol. Cholesterol and a small amount of trans fat occur naturally in some animal source foods. As of June 2018, partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs), the major source of artificial trans fat in the food supply, are no longer Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS). Therefore, PHOs are no longer added to foods." There are small amounts of trans fat found in meat and dairy products such as butter. In regard to Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids it is not only the DGA advising their consumption. The American Heart Foundation recommends people eat Polyunsaturated Fat (PUFAS) food and cut down on Saturated Fat (SFAS) food [2] and so does the American Diabetes Association [3]. So does practically every other professional health or medical agency.

Can you be more specific on your claim that Polyunsaturated Fats (PUFAS) are "unhealthy". Or do you mean specific PUFAS (not all)? There are Polyunsaturated Fat foods that have proven to lower bad LDL and increase good HDL. There are a lot of PUFA foods out there walnuts, sunflower seeds, flax seeds, salmon, herring, corn oil, soybean oil and safflower oil. I am guessing you are saying Omega 6 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids are "unhealthy" but not Omega 3? Or is your issue just with oxidized PUFA or the Omega-6 to Omega-3 Ratio? As far as I know the DGA are not telling people to load up on highly-processed corn oil and nothing else, they are advising a balanced diet with PUFAS from a wide range of sources including nuts, seafood, oils and seeds. In regard to Omega 6 Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids there was a recent review on this "Despite the concern that omega-6 fatty acids increase inflammation, current evidence from studies in humans does not support this view. In conclusion, these findings support current recommendations to emphasize consumption of ω-6 PUFAs as a replacement of SFAs [4]. The mainstream scientific consensus is to use PUFAS as a replacement for saturated fat foods. There is no conspiracy because you will find that the DGA, American Heart Foundation, American Diabetes Association and practically every other health agency is saying this. This is obviously a complex topic but it is clearly not accurate to describe Polyunsaturated Fats as unhealthy nor is this the place to promote conspiracy theories that the scientific consensus is wrong. Psychologist Guy (talk) 21:33, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

You are both a vegan and a vegan activist and are in so many conflicts of interest you should not even comment here. Let us not forget you are in contact with and are editing an article for a famous vegan quack Michael Greger https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Michael_Greger&diff=991010461&oldid=990995208 And as for your argument that >DGA, American Heart Foundation, American Diabetes Association and practically every other health agency is saying this< that is because they have been found to be unreliable sources of dietary knowledge due to their industry funding and corruption. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/health-news_b_4398304 https://www.diabetes.org/pathway/supporters/corporate-sponsors They are in so many conflicts of interest it is absurd to even quote them as sources of anything medical. And BTW, since from your comments I see you have never studied in any scientific field(s), there is no such thing as a scientific consensus. 78.2.14.40 (talk) 07:45, 4 May 2021 (UTC)