To me, this comment & some that follow indicate that there are some misconceptions about how we got where we are now (& thus, I think, some mistaken ideas about how to change the situation). Thread.
1st, lower fat, higher carb national dietary guidelines *began* as a clinical intervention for high risk patients. Then (as now) docs who were trying to the right thing for patients in their care, read research & advised their (high risk) patients accordingly. 2/
Food manufacturers picked up on this. They thought, "Hey, fear & uncertainty MOVES PRODUCT. Let's use this to advertise products that say to housewives 'Hey, your son or husband *might* be high-risk. Protect them by buying our product." 3/
Educated, health-conscious, middle-class professionals picked up on this too - from newspapers & magazines & food labels. They thought "Hey, I *might* be high-risk too, right? I can afford to purchase health & longevity as if they are commodities. I should do this diet." 4/
More & more (white, educated, middle-class professional) people began eating this way - *decades* before national dietary guidelines to prevent chronic disease came along. When the opportunity to create these guidelines came along (for reasons too numerous to tweet) 5/
the people in charge of the guideline-making were who? White, educated, health-conscious, middle-class professionals. Who then decided to *force* their chosen diet on the rest of the nation (much to the delight of food manufacturers whose products supported this diet). 6/
They - the policymakers & the food manufacturers - were encouraged by a (white, educated, health-conscious, middle-class) public who *demanded* dietary guidelines that would tell them how to prevent chronic disease, along with the foods that would support this diet. 7/
Oh, yeah, & they also decided to *force* poorly educated, low-income & minority populations (who were seen as unwilling or unable to "care" about their health) to follow this diet as well, y'know, "for their own good." 8/
So when I see calls to "enforce national change" & to make the *government* change its policies on nutrition & lifestyle (to, I assume, ones that we *now* like better than the ones we *demanded* 50 years ago), it kinds makes me cringe. How about we fix the real problem? 9/
The real problem is that top-down, public health nutrition policy shoves off public responsibility for things that can dramatically impact health outcomes - a living wage, safe work environments & neighborhoods, clear air & water, access to health care - onto the individual.10/
The problem is that one-size-fits-all approach ignores the fact that we are a diverse world & different people may need & want different ways of thinking & acting when it comes to food & health. 11/
The problem is that national dietary guidelines serve food manufacturers & the nutritional science-industrial complex (I'm looking at you nutritional epidemiology of chronic disease) & not individuals. 12/
We "influenced the masses" 50 years ago & look how that turned out. Oh, but THIS TIME we've got it right? 🙄
Not a chance that anything could wrong? No possible unintended negative consequences?
LOL. That's what they said LAST time. 13/
Not a chance that anything could wrong? No possible unintended negative consequences?
LOL. That's what they said LAST time. 13/
Calls to *change* - rather than *eliminate* - dietary guidelines & "force" others to follow them ignores the reality that "change" only perpetuates the original Big Mistake, which was creating them in the first place. 14/14
#DumpTheDGA
#DumpTheDGA
