Home of the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
All ODPHP sites
Get email updates from ODPHP
Instructions: You can browse comments by topic, or search by comment text, organization, affiliation, or comment ID. The search phrase must match in its entirety for a result to be returned. Searches are not case-sensitive.
The modern studies explain our obesity epidemic, and it's not lazy lifestyle nor all added sugar, the new scapegoat. By steering people away from fats and pushing upon them unhealthy carbs you have created this epidemic. You now have a chance to reverse this health crisis by denouncing the fad from the 1980s and encouraging people to avoid carbs and increase fats. Why this healthy diet was only revealed to me by the hospital's dieticians after I contracted Diabetes is a crime. Looking over your website I'm appalled to see you still talking about calories and exercise, you are still suggesting fruits, milk and grains, and placing limits on quantities. This is all misdirected and in error. Please research what is known as "LCHF" or Low Carb High Fat. It's not a fad - it's getting rid of fads, if anything. I could say a lot more, and give my personal story, but this should be enough for you to see that yet another person is calling on you to reverse this obesity epidemic of the last 30 years by reversing the ridiculous fad of the last 30 years.
I think an emphasize should be on eating clean. Which means eating foods that have no additives and preservatives. As a culture so much of the food that is commercialized is food that has been processed and has a million ingredients that are hard to pronounce and where many of us are clueless about their origin. The 2010 guidelines promote eating vegetable's and fruits and nuts beans, healthy oils and lean meats which is great! However the guidelines do not present a lot of information on the importance of eating natural food. Yes alot of food from the guidelines are natural but preservatives and additives can easily be added to any of these products and the knowledge of the harm that they can cause should be emphasized in the 2015 guidelines.
I would recommend discusses the importance of healthy dietary needs for infants and children so the parents are fully aware of what to give their children and what not to give their children. If Children start off eating fast food and processed food, they aren't being taught healthy food choices at a young age and it is going to be a lot harder to have them acclimated at an older age to eat healthy and live a healthy lifestyle.
I have completed extensive research and wrote a book based on that research, describing the appropriate volume of food that should be consumed on a daily basis. Based on this information, I recommend that the FDA consider the following changes:1. Create a universal serving size based on volume. A cup (8 ounces) seems to be the simplest as it is easily recognized, can be used for food and liquid, and is often used as a serving size already. This would solve the current problem of inconsistent serving sizes which makes it impossible to compare food items. 2. Change current recommendations regarding serving sizes and nutrition to reflect a simple volume based approach to nutrition. My research shows that only 1 cup of food (assuming a balanced diet) is required for every 20 pounds of body weight. This simple approach can allow individuals to lose weight or maintain a healthy weight by understanding appropriate food volume intake. Replacing or complimenting current educational efforts with this knowledge would be very helpful. 3. Educate school systems regarding food volumes to assist with appropriate food volumes being provided to students through school lunches, addressing obesity in the youth and seeing them up for a healthy adulthood. I look forward to working with you to educate America! Further information available at proportionfit.com. I would be happy to provide sample books for review. Thanks.
Affordability needs to be considered when designing the dietary guidelines. The American household can then apply the guidelines effectively. Having realistic goals that allows low income families achieve a healthy diet seems to be one of the critical points to take onto account. The guidelines are designed to help Americans eat healthy diets, promote health and prevent disease, therefore to ensure Americans with all kinds of incone are able to follow them, we must ensure that diets are not only based on scientific research but also affordability. Also very important, We need to address the need to lower the consumption of processed foods that contains added fats, sugars, Preservatives and other chemicals. In order to address the increasing obesity epidemic, there needs to be a clear message that announces the adverse effects of these products.
As an aspiring registered dietitian, I believe it is highly important to include the issue of sustainability in the Dietary Guidelines 2015. Also, the language should be clear and applicable to suggest a positive outcome rather than confuse the reader as to what the recommendations are. For example, more detail should go into stating the foods we are to decrease, like fat, and the difference between the different fats. In addition, the Gluten-free diet should be mentioned in the DG2015 as an answer to individuals with Celiac Disease and Gluten intolerance, not just to those who choose it by preference. In the chapter describing fruits to increase. It is not enough to say "increase in vegetables and fruits". Although it is understood that we can consume a wide variety and amount of vegetables and reap the benefits, assuming we are of good health, however, it Should mention that the amount of fruits to intake should be limited due to the high content of fructose in fruits and if our body doesn't really know the difference between added sugar and fructose, natural sugar, it is important to limit our sugar intake, even from fruit.
When the guidlines for grains are being listed, It needs to be specified so that consumers will understand the difference between whole grains and refined grains. Why? because refined grains such as white bread and rice transfer into regular sugar. Refined grains add empty calories, cause metabolic effects, increase risk of heart disease and diabetes. Bad examples of grains to refrain from are french fries, specific breakfast cereals, potato and pasta salads, muffins, doughnuts ect.
One recommendation that I have is to discuss the importance of eating "whole" foods and limiting the amount of processed food in the diet. Not only is processed food higher in sodium it contains chemicals, preservatives and coloring that have negative effects on our bodies. When you eat whole foods, you are getting more of the vitamins and nutrients than you would when eating processed foods.
Based on the discussion from Day 1, I have three comments/questions for your consideration.1. Why are red meats continually lumped with processed meats?This is an unfair, biased analysis of red meat protein as processed meats will clearly have negative health effects based on the preservation process. Red meat has various positive health outcomes when separated from its processed counterpart.2. When analyzing calcium intake, how can the topic of acid/base balance and calcium resorption not be discussed?With an acidic dietary pattern, calcium is typically leached from our bone structure and from muscular stores. The answer to the calcium conundrum is not to increase calcium intake, but rather to decrease calcium resorption through reducing our renal acid load. Specifically, this includes the reduction of processed foods, dairy, and grain content in the diet. Meats/Protein foods do have a net acid yield, but these proteins and amino acids are essential to bodily structure, cellular repair, production of enzymes-hormones, etc.3. When analyzing dietary patterns relating to neural tube defects, etc., the conclusion made recommended a diet high in fruits, vegetables, grains, and low in red/processed meat (grouped together again) and sweets. Aside from the continual oversight of red meat vs. processed meat, was it taken into consideration that the flour supply in the US has been fortified with folic acid? Without this fortification, would grains be recommended to prevent birth defects? Shouldn't the Dietary Guidelines recommend a healthy diet without the need for fortified foods? Orange juice is a perfect example of a fortified food that should not be recommended. It contains just as much sugar as a soda, but is considered a healthy alternative because it is pumped full of calcium and other vitamins and minerals.This system needs to take a serious step back and evaluate where they are taking these recommendations. All that is being done now is picking up the same shovel and digging the hole deeper, which only drives the health of this nation down.
I am writing to you as a registered dietitian with a background in public health in response to request 5-2, food systems sustainability, specifically to provide recommendations for the inclusion of eating minimally processed whole foods as an important component of food system sustainability. Currently, we recommend that people eat whole foods for health reasons, but further framing it in terms of sustainability provides American families with additional motivation. In other words, if they are unwilling to eat minimally processed whole foods for the benefit of their own bodies and minds, perhaps they will do it if they know it affects future generations. [See attachment for more]
This site is coordinated by the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion,
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, Office of the Secretary,
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion
Last updated: 9/22/2014