There’s so much attention on the new guidelines, but is it for good reason? You be the judge!
While Fountain Avenue Kitchen isn’t a platform for political discourse, the new dietary guidelines have sparked significant attention—and many thoughtful questions from readers. With that in mind, we felt it was important to shed some light on this week’s announcement of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2025-2030. Because these guidelines directly intersect with the world of food and nutrition, they’re worth a closer look and a moment of reflection from a few different perspectives.
Let’s take a look at the new DGA and the nuances that have caught our attention…
The quick and dirty…
The guidelines are revised every five years, so this announcement is part of regularly scheduled programming. Despite the animated discussion surrounding the revisions, not much has actually changed beyond the presentation and the emphasis on certain information. This, however, is precisely why people are fired up.
Why so fired up?
1. THE IMAGE
When the new DGAs were announced, it was made to seem as if the old pyramid had gotten a makeover. But that’s a misleading message.
In 2011, the MyPlate graphic—a simple circular, colorful, plate design suggesting portions without photos of specific foods—replaced the old pyramid. It’s been gone for quite some time. So truthfully, the pyramid has returned from time away…and now it’s upside down.
At the top we now see animal proteins and vegetables, both frozen and fresh. Whole grains are now at the bottom. Red meat and cheese are being put on a pedestal, while whole grains seem to have been demoted. This is surprising to people because the medical community has been encouraging plant-based eating, pretty broadly for at least 15 years.
And see how there’s a hierarchy within the fruits and vegetables category? For example, frozen peas and broccoli are shown at the top—indicating these are the foods that should be eaten most often. In comparison, grapes and bananas are shown lower down. We can postulate why these fruits are not treated equal here, but this isn’t in line with the long-time research showing how a variety of all fruits and vegetables are beneficial.
2. THE MESSAGING
In bold, the introduction to the DGAs highlights, “the message is simple: eat real food.” This is not a particularly new or novel idea. In fact, the guidelines have historically encouraged people to choose whole foods whenever possible.
What’s different is that now it’s ringing more like an official slogan of sorts for the DGA, and comes with promise that this will Make America Healthy Again (MAHA). And this can be a problematic promise, because even as a dietitian, I strongly believe that it’s too simplistic to suggest eating a certain way will magically make us healthier. It also puts the onus on individuals, which as you can see below is not always an even playing field.
3. IT IMPACTS SOME PEOPLE MORE THAN OTHERS
Those who don’t rely on government subsidies can continue to buy and eat foods in the same way they have been. They will not be impacted. Americans who have limited access or money, and are already struggling to eat more fresh foods, will be impacted the most.
This is because government-funded food programs, geared towards women and children, such as the National School Lunch Program and WIC, need to align with the guidelines. So, we may see more meat and dairy than plant-based or whole grains in schools and WIC portions.
How will more unprocessed meat and dairy be incorporated into meal plans when funding to these programs have taken a cut? These details are foggy and that irks people. Kind of like mandating “wash your hands” but not providing access to soap while those who make the mandates have easy access to washing hands if they so choose.
4. THE SCIENCE IS MISSING
The DGA is normally over 100 pages including citations to various scientific research studies and organizations. This go-around, the document is nine pages and has no links to sources.
This could be intentional, so that it’s more geared towards the general public, who have become increasingly skeptical of the scientific community. Conversely, it could be viewed as a way to take scientific research out of the equation in favor of more opinion-based recommendations.
5. THE NUMBERS DON’T MATCH THE NARRATIVE
One of the only quantitative differences is a recommendation to increase daily protein intake. The reason for this change is unclear. Why should Americans increase their intake of protein? Curiously, eating more protein does align with RFK Jr.’s statement that he intends to “end the war on saturated fats,” most of which are foods from animal sources such as beef and full-fat dairy, which he names specifically.
What people find odd about this is that he’s still recommending diets have less than 10% saturated fat. This feels contradictory because the “quantitative” side of the recommendations remains mostly unchanged; it’s just the narrative that has.
6. WILL HEALTH PRACTITIONERS CHANGE THEIR RECOMMENDATIONS?
Patients will have questions. Physicians will need to tell patients whether or not they should continue to avoid diets high in saturated fat, especially those at risk for or who currently have cardiovascular disease. It’s confusing—what should patients do now?
For example, a family member suffers from a heart attack and goes home to recover. Should we serve them steak for their homecoming? I don’t mean this to sound snarky, but to some folks, this is what the pyramid and messaging seems to be promoting, and we are all unsure how it will play out.
Only time will tell!
My personal opinion on the overall concept of DGAs
Let’s call a spade a spade: the concept behind the guidelines is a bit abstract to begin with. People are different and have unique nutritional needs, so a single pamphlet illustrating very few examples is unlikely to provide all the answers. There is also no acknowledgment of cultural foods. Perhaps most perplexing, the examples on this new pyramid closely resemble the Standard American Diet—an approach that has been widely criticized by administrations on both sides of the aisle in recent history.
This helps explain why the rollout of the new DGAs feels more politically driven than evidence-led, particularly when the messaging is coming from a political figure rather than a health practitioner.
The good news is, FAK has over 1,300 wholesome delish recipes for you to choose from and enjoy—and Ann and I have been saying this all along! Please leave any questions or comments below regarding the DGAs. We loved connecting with readers!
And if you’re interested in personal nutrition counseling, read more about how you can connect with me one on one!
Leave a Reply