Nina Teicholz, PhD Profile picture
Dec 29, 2020 10 tweets 4 min read Read on X
Thread Re: #DietaryGuidelines (DGA), just out:

USDA-HHS Secys said they're for “all Americans,” yet the DGA is scoped ONLY for disease prevention, not treatment. This ignores the 60% of US with a diet-related disease. DGA is thus for minority of Americans who are healthy. Image
Congress' statute says the DGA must be for the "general public"--yet clearly majority of Americans now have diet-related diseases. THIS is the general public, yet Guidelines excludes them. DGA process didn't even look at studies on weight loss, when >42% of adults now w/ obesity.
Tagline of this DGA is "make every bite count," yet did not reduce 10% of calories as sugar, as recommended by the expert committee. Sugar is not just 'empty calories'--it raises blood sugar and over time high blood sugars lead to diabetes (+ increase vulnerability to Covid) Image
Guidelines are also, by law, supposed reflect "scientific and medical knowledge that is current at the time" Yet its core recommendations, the "Dietary Patterns" are based on systematic reviews from 2013. Already 7 years out of date. Image
Encourages people to eat "nutrient dense" foods which sounds good but seems to be the new way to condemn fat (see graphic). Fat is not nutrient dense, per se, but it is part of many foods that are naturally v. nutrient dense (milk, meats, some fruits) Image
In fact, this #DietaryGuidelines don't meet nutrient goals: “Nutrients that do not meet Recommended Dietary Allowance or Adequate Intake goals include the following:" Iron, Vitamin D, Vitamin E, Choline, and Folate.
2020 Expert Report, Part D, Ch. 14, p. 10
That is probably bc the #DietaryGuidelines are keeping their 10% cap on saturated fats, which limits the natural, whole foods where these nutrients are found. And now, sat-fat cap goes down to all children >2 even tho only 2 small trials cited (one on teens w/ genetic aberration)
And here's the kicker. Actually only 5% of saturated fats should come from food, says the new DGA. The rest should be the "saturated fats from oils," aka, highly industrialized (and inflammatory) soybean oil. Ew. Image
Last decade of science on saturated fats was ignored, even though former Dietary Guidelines committee members, including the Chair of the 2005 DGA, tried multiple times to reach USDA-HHS to let them know science on sat fat has changed. They were ignored. bmj.com/content/371/bm…
In all, a sad day for science and the public health. We live in one of the sickest countries on earth, and here is the record of the #DietaryGuidelines in combatting obesity (+ diabetes, etc). Process is captive to the food & drug industries. @JoeBiden please do better. Image

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Nina Teicholz, PhD

Nina Teicholz, PhD Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @bigfatsurprise

Nov 23
I've applied to lead the next USDA-HHS Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 🧵

How does this process work? Let me explain (what I know): First, the USDA Secy must be nominated. After that, some combo of this person and the USDA transition team decide on appointments. Mine would not require a Presidential nomination or Senate review. I don't aim to be high-level. I just want to bring evidence to a process devoid of it for the past 45 years.

How am I qualified? I have a PhD in nutrition, focusing on evidence-based nutrition policy (which is what we need!)

I spent the last 10y running a small non-profit dedicated to elevating awareness about the problems with the guidelines. These include the need for a recognized, rigorous methodology for the scientific reviews, far better transparency, and more.

I spoke to Congress about the need for a review of the guidelines, which had never been done. Ultimately, Congress mandated 2 reviews by the Nat'l Academies of Sciences, with a $2M allocation. Findings of these reports are stunning. They say that without reform, our guidelines are not "trustworthy."
nutritioncoalition.us/the-process-of…

The Academies made 11 recommendations to USDA to upgrade the guidelines and USDA did not fully implement even one of them.
nutritioncoalition.us/news/usda-fail…

I also worked with top academics, including 5 members of former Dietary Guidelines expert committees, to document the problems with the guidelines in papers, including one published in a journal of the Nat'l Academies (PNAS Nexus). USDA staff wrote a paper labeling our findings "Misinformation."

Another paper I co-authored reported that 95% of the expert committee for the currrent guidelines had at least one tie with food/pharma. This number has been widely cited! Additional unpublished data is here:
nutritioncoalition.us/conflicts-of-i…

An overview of all this work is here:
nutritioncoalition.us/impact
The basic story here is that nearly all the large, NIH-funded clinical trials on diet and disease for the past 80 years--many $$billions spent--have been suppressed and ignored. It's not that clinical trials can't be done, as many claim, but rather that the science has been canceled.

For my book, The Big Fat Surprise, I extensively documented the systematic corruption of nutrition science by food/pharma and the cancellation of this, fundamentally important evidence.

That book was a NYTimes and international bestseller, was named a Best Book of the year by the Economist, WSJ, Mother Jones and others. And, it was given strong reviews by 3 top medical journals: the BMJ, the Lancet, and the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

The Lancet: "Gripping narrative…this is a disquieting book about scientific incompetence, evangelical ambition, and ruthless silencing of dissent that has shaped our lives for decades…researchers, clinicians, and health policy advisors should read this provocative book."
In trying to shed light on these problems, I was myself subject to cancellation campaigns

I became the subject of the single largest retraction effort in recent history aimed at a scientific journal. That campaign tried to get my detailed critique of the 2015 US Dietary Guidelines withdrawn from the BMJ (a cover story). Yet it ultimately failed. The BMJ did not retract, and the EIC wrote a strong editorial in my defense.

Mainstream journalists have repeatedly made ad-hominem attacks, accusing me of working for/with the meat industry, which has never been true (and no evidence ever cited).

In 2004, when I investigated seed oils and industry's efforts to bully scientists critical of these oils for Gourmet magazine, its advertiser, Procter & Gamble (maker of Crisco oil) threatened the magazine with pulling all of its advertising if the story ran. Ruth Reichl, then EIC, stood up to P&G and published it. In her memoirs, she calls this one of the proudest moments of her career. (P&G has been a major player in pushing the American Heart Association to recommend seed oils--going back to 1948, when the company gave American Heart the equivalent of $20M in today's dollars)

Defenders of the status quo, who dominate our media, our public health groups in DC and most university nutrition departments, including Harvard, Stanford and NYU, have successfully suppressed challenges to the guidelines.

And so, this faulty policy remains enshrined still today.
Read 5 tweets
Nov 6
Whatever your views on the election, now is the time to reverse chronic disease in America. We have a chance. @RobertKennedyJr @NicoleShanahan
The single most important thing we can do is to fix the US Dietary Guidelines for Americans--by far the most powerful lever affecting what Americans think is healthy (and what is fed in schools, on military bases, and all federal programs)
The Guidelines have failed us:Image
The Dietary Guidelines have clearly not protected our health. We don't need to assess why.
The National Academies of Sciences has already studied the problem (mandated by Congress, with a $2M allocation). They found that the guidelines "lacked scientific rigor," do not use a "verified methodology," and are not "trustworthy."
nutritioncoalition.us/the-process-of…Image
The Guidelines recommend:
--6 servings of grains a day, including 3 servings of refined grains
--Up to 10% of calories as sugar (sugar is unlimited in school lunches)
--seed oils over whole, natural fats
--seed oils over whole, natural fats Image
Read 5 tweets
Aug 21
Want to know a lie bigger than Biden being “sharp as a tack”?
The one that red meat causes diabetes
A new study is the latest to make this claim. (NYTimes reports)
Like 2+2=5, this claim is unhinged from fundamental facts 🧵 Image
Fact #1: This inconvenient truth Image
Fact #2:
The formal way to diagnose diabetes is elevated blood sugar (A1c). What causes high blood sugar? Eating sugars + starches
Red meat contains no sugar or starch
Thus, red meat cannot cause diabetes

(yes, v. high protein consumption will elevate blood glucose but nowhere near as much as carbs)
Read 5 tweets
Mar 5
One year ago, dozens of headlines splashed news about a "keto-like" diet causing heart disease
This came from a press release by the Amer. College of Cardiology, on data that had been presented at their conference but not published--not even a pre-print; study not registered 1/
@ACCinTouchImage
I wrote about this at the time:
All links, statement from ACC, attempts to interview the researchers here.
(need to scroll half-way down the article) 2/shorturl.at/myzGT
A year later, there's still nothing published, not even a pre-print🤔
Press releasing unpublished data is poor practice. Rules out the possibility of critique by other researchers--bc data not available.
Could be seen as a PR stunt 3/
Read 5 tweets
Feb 29
Gemini AI doesn't just have a "woke" problem. It's also engaged in making harmful, (libelous/defamatory) statements about people like myself, who challenge a status quo narrative. Should this not be of concern to @GoogleAI?

In my case, Gemini falsely asserts that I have ties to the meat and dairy industries. It tries to substantiate these claims with innuendos and fallacious arguments

When corrected, Gemini says, 'I'm learning,' yet if you ask again, it just repeats the same false information 1/Image
The whole conversation on me is here:
2/
Image
Gemini also repeatedly makes the same false claims about the group I founded, The Nutrition Coalition: Image
Read 11 tweets
Oct 18, 2023
I'm having trouble believing that the @nytime cares about the health of its readers.
Here's a featured recipe from this week. A stack of pancakes with syrup that will send your blood sugar sky high and is one of the worst possible ways to start the day. Image
And ICYMI, here's what the Times recommended in the middle of the pandemic, when we knew that obesity, diabetes etc vastly increased the risk of worsened outcomes and death from Covid Image
Also during the pandemic, here was its Ode to Binge Eating.
"Let’s stress-eat some chips together Image
Read 8 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(