Malnutrition among US women. "This is the stuff that keeps me up at night,” says prof. Bailey. And ability to have healthy children? “Going into reproductive age at nutrition risk can cause intergenerational effects"
Important story by @ANDREAAPETERSEN
This is a problem not just among teens but women of reproductive age. Slide from a recent talk I gave:
The consequences for children of B12 deficiency
(NIH information)
From WSJ: “Adolescent girls gain 40%-60% of their bone mass from 11-14 years of age,” says Dr. Rome--why calcium, Vit D, magnesium are so critical during this time. But 94.3% of 14-18y old girls eat less than the recommended amount of dairy foods--good sources of calcium, Vit D
And 53.6% of girls, age 14-18y, eat less than the recommended amounts of iron-rich meat, poultry. eggs, according to govt data.
Why? Maybe they are responding to idea that red meat is bad. Tho red meat has 2x more iron than white meat. And iron from meat far more easily absorbed
Important to discuss the real health consequences of cutting out meat. Costs + benefits have not been analyzed, and yet we're taking the plunge into eliminating meat from menus, dinner tables, etc. My recent talk on this issue:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In the US, "We live shorter, poorer lives" according to a Nat'l Academies' report. The report was called a "catalogue of horrors." Newspapers were "stunned" and "surprised." That was 2013. “As bad as things were then, they’ve only gotten worse,” says Dr. Woolf from @VCUHealth
By 2019, U.S. was 36th in the world on life expectancy at birth, behind Slovenia, Costa Rica. Recent paper found that even privileged whites fare worse on infant mortality, maternal mortality+deaths from heart attacks than avg. citizens of Norway, Denmark+other developed nations
"The troubling portrait of America’s health did not spur action to paint a better one. Two presidential administrations have ignored it, as has Congress" states this article by @undarkmag, looking back at the 2013 report undark.org/2021/02/01/ame…@XavierBecerra
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.
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)
Today! 11-3PM ET, tweet to #DelaytheDGA until the expert panel includes ALL the science in the Dietary Guidelines expert report. Currently all trials on weight loss, low-carb excluded. Sat fat reviews of last 10y excluded. @HouseAgGOP@HouseAgDems@HouseAppropsGOP@AppropsDems 1/
DGA has no advice for anyone diagnosed w/ chronic illness including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, fatty liver disease, etc. Even tho these are DIET-related diseases. Obesity now at 42.4% in US. #DelaytheDGA@HouseAgGOP@HouseAgDems@HouseAppropsGOP@AppropsDems 3/
Obesity continues to rise in the US. 42.4% among adults now. There was a prediction that we'd hit 50% by 2030, but seems like we'll get there sooner. Not surprising given that nearly all trials on weight loss excluded from our #DietaryGuidelines 1/ cdc.gov/nchs/data/data…
Our nation's nutrition policy, affecting schools, military, feeding programs for elderly etc, is only for "healthy Americans"--USDA-HHS have decided. Even though Congress said the #dietaryguidelines should be for the "general public." 2/
General public is now >60% of America w/ 1 or more chronic disease. Yet Guidelines are not for them. The current committee has also excluded virtually all low-carb science and all science that contradicts continued caps on sat fats. No matter ur views, this is bad science... 3/
For those who missed the #DietaryGuidelines Committee hearing this week. Top news:
--USDA still using its 'own' methodology-- unvalidated, unrecognized. Allows evidence grade to be "strong" based solely on epidemiological studies 😒
1/
Thus, committee gave "strong" evidence grade for existing, status-quo Guidelines (Med/DASH/plant-based) and all-cause mortality, based only on epi data (not enough evidence for other 'dietary patterns,' committee said)
--No other "Dietary Pattern" review is yet complete. 2/
--It appears "low-carb" still defined as 45%
--Saturated-fats review not yet done.
--No 'strong' evidence for anything else. Only "moderate" or less for other questions...thus, if this were a rigorous process, no recommendations would be made based on such weaker evidence... 3/