The headline, as startling as it may be, that half of the world is on track to be overweight or obese by 2035, is not surprising. This is according to a new report by the World Obesity Federation. The report projects that 51% of the world’s population, more than 4 billion people, will be considered overweight or obese in just 12 years.
I’m going to tell a story on the history of the dietary guidelines that is not as well known so that you can see how we ended up here.
Senator George McGovern’s Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs was founded in 1968 with a mandate to eradicate malnutrition in America. That’s not exactly what happened. From a big picture perspective you ended up with a handful of politicians, uneducated on the matter, altering the course of human nutrition for decades.
In order to justify its existence, as bloated government entities do and since malnutrition was becoming less of a problem in the 70s, general counsel Marshall Matz, and staff director Alan Stone decided that the committee would address "overnutrition," the dietary excesses of Americans.
“It was a "casual endeavor," says Matz. "We really were totally naïve, a bunch of kids, who just thought, 'Hell, we should say something on this subject before we go out of business.' " McGovern and his fellow senators--all middle-aged men worried about their girth and their health--signed on; McGovern and his wife had both gone through diet-guru Nathan Pritikin's very low fat diet and exercise program. McGovern quit the program early, but Pritikin remained a major influence on his thinking.”(1) They were so close that McGovern delivered Pritikin’s eulogy in 1985.
McGovern's committee listened to 2 days of testimony on diet and disease in July 1976. Read that again. The entirety of nutrition science was debated and decided upon in 48 hours!
Nick Mottern, a former labor reporter for The Providence Journal, was assigned the task of researching and writing the first "Dietary Goals for the United States." Mottern, who had no scientific background and no experience writing about science, nutrition, or health, believed his Dietary Goals would launch a "revolution in diet and agriculture in this country." He wasn’t wrong. “He avoided the scientific and medical controversy by relying almost exclusively on Harvard School of Public Health nutritionist Mark Hegsted for input on dietary fat. Hegsted had studied fat and cholesterol metabolism in the early 1960s, and he believed unconditionally in the benefits of restricting fat intake.” Oh and he was also the recipient of sugar industry payoffs…just saying.
Mottern saw dietary fat as the nutritional equivalent of cigarettes. His report suggested that Americans cut their total fat intake to 30% of the calories they consume and saturated fat intake to 10%, in accord with AHA recommendations for men at high risk of heart disease. The report acknowledged the existence of controversy but insisted Americans had nothing to lose by following its advice. I reiterate, this man has no knowledge of the human body, cell structure, composition, essential fatty acids or proteins…nothing. Just a belief. You see things aren’t so different today with the “follow the science” crowd.
"The question to be asked is not why should we change our diet but why not?" wrote Hegsted in the introduction. "There are [no risks] that can be identified and important benefits can be expected."
Here again reveals the unscientific mind at work. Socrates came to the conclusion that he was wise only in so far as he knew that he knew nothing while others only falsely thought they had knowledge. This is the folly of mankind and the political class in general. Lack of humility and hubris to the moon.
There was protest from unlikely places however. Even the American Medical Association protested, suggesting that the diet proposed by the guidelines raised the "potential for harmful effects." National Academy of Sciences president Philip Handler, an expert on metabolism, said that Mottern's Dietary Goals were "nonsense."
Once politicians, the press, and the public had decided dietary fat policy, the science was left to catch up. We still are battling the unscientific ravings of plant based zealotry masked under cover of initials like MD, RD, ETC…
To bring this to a current events tale look no further than my adopted home of NYC. The new mayor, Eric Adams, who is just as low IQ as the last mayor, has declared war on meat. After 3 years of telling people when they could leave their homes and what establishments they could and couldn’t enter based on taking an unproven, experimental gene therapy is now going to track the foods you buy to better establish your carbon footprint.
“Adams, an ardent evangelist of plant-based diets, announced the new tracker and policy at a Brooklyn culinary center run by Health + Hospitals, the city’s public health care system.”
“It is easy to talk about emissions that are coming from vehicles and how it impacts our carbon footprint,“ Adams said. “But we now have to talk about beef.”
“We already know that a plant-powered diet is better for your physical and mental health.” No Mr. Adams…we actually have quite a bit of literature showing the exact opposite in regard to mental health. Would you like to discuss this further or would you rather continue to virtue signal?
City officials said New Yorkers can help the planet by eating more fruits, vegetables, grains, and beans. Imagine the ignorance.
“The new household consumption tracker will be published on the same webpage as the city’s annual inventory of greenhouse gas sources.”
Can you imagine something so absurd and void of evidence? I can! After watching New Yorkers bend to the whims of its political class over the past 3 years, I believe they will allow anything. Some New Yorkers are still wearing masks OUTDOORS!
We began this article showing that the planet is becoming obese and yet we have followed these ridiculous guideline for decades. See chart below:
Not one of these so called leaders has even once considered that their advice for you or the planet is wrong. If you think meat is bad for the planet you can read my in depth article on that subject called Cattle Lives Matter. Sadly you cannot reason with irrational people and winning an argument with data is so 1990s.
Today we are in a battle for food and you must first understand the playing field before you can participate. Consider this a primer for what’s to come!
References
1. Taubes G. The Soft Science of Dietary Fat. http://www.gatsby.ucl.ac.uk/~pel/fat/fat1.html. Accessed May 7, 2023.
2. The Gothamist. NYC Will target food choices in its battle against climate change. https://gothamist.com/news/nyc-will-target-food-choices-in-its-battle-against-climate-change Accessed May 7, 2023.
This topic is SO important, thank you for writing about it! In addition to the importance of decreasing obesity rates (which we are all paying for!) we are now in a fight to protect our food. We recently joined a food co-op, primarily in order to get access to raw milk, and it is amazing to me the lengths to which I must go to obtain the same foods that my grandparents produced and took for granted.
Well done J. I recently moved to rural Arkansas im amazed at the extreme high rate of unfit people. Good folks to be sure just poor diet/genetics?/ and lack of exorcise? Keep up the good work!