That’s the lingering fallout from the Dec. 15, 2014, meeting of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) – a group of health and dietary officials assembled as part of the five-year effort to update USDA’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans. In the Dec. 15 meeting, the DGAC made preliminary recommendations that included reduced consumption of red meat, citing not only the impact of livestock proteins, but also the impact their production has on the environment.
The DGAC meetings – held over six different dates between June 2013 and December 2014 – each had lengthy discussions on dietary studies and research into foods produced and consumed by Americans. Public comments also were made to the DGAC up until Dec. 30, 2014, and remain on the committee’s database.
Comments will reopen to the public once the DGAC makes its final report and it is posted to the federal register. That is expected to be released in the first months of 2015.
The dietary guidelines have been collectively published by the departments of Health and Human Service (HHS) and Agriculture every five years since 1980 as a recommended resource for government agencies and military that employ and feed workers, and to the general American population based on dietary trends and needs.
Here’s a breakdown of the issues:
Who’s on the DGAC?
It’s an assorted group of doctors, dieticians and nutritionists from academia and some private sector experience. Along with the roster of members, there are subcommittees and additional consultants. See the entire list at the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion website.
Each member goes through a public nomination process. Much of the expertise is related to disease research, nutrition education and the medical fields.
What does the committee assess?
Basically, the committee wants to find ways to suggest healthy eating and activity, and how to reduce the risk of diseases. But the environmental concerns are creeping into the debate more this time.
Several subcommittees are tasked to study several points that should be addressed in the guidelines. A number of committees look into food consumption and activity patterns. One committee looks into food sustainability and how safe our food is.
As we know, we’re a nation that’s a bit heavier than the past, and we’re not exercising as much. Those trends all go into recommendations for what we should eat.
How are these guidelines used?
For government agencies, they’ll be influential in several ways. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention implements them for programs used in weight control in the prevention of certain diseases. The Food and Drug Administration bases some if its nutrition labeling policies on the guidelines. Consumer initiatives from the National Institutes of Health follow the guidelines closely.
For the USDA, the guidelines have a huge influence on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamp programs, as well as National School Lunch Program strategies.
Who leads this process? HHS or Agriculture?
It switches between the agencies every five years. The 2015 guidelines are being led by HHS, but the government says “each step of the development of the Dietary Guidelines is a joint effort between HHS and USDA.”
What’s the issue with beef?
Two main concerns, really. Committee meetings have spent a considerable amount of time on how animal agriculture affects the environment. Some drafted recommendations reported in the press have said the committee will suggest sustainable diets that ensure food production methods and livable conditions for future generations.
Many voices are also recommending more plant-based foods and less consumption of animal protein for health reasons. The current guidelines now recommend eating lean meats, but in the Dec. 15 meeting, the recommendation was for fewer“red and processed meats.”
As expected, environmental groups cheered the initial recommendations. Those groups, and the media and some on the committee, still cite a controversial report from the United Nations that blamed animal agriculture more for greenhouse gas than transportation.
How has the industry responded?
Both the NCBA and the American Meat Institute have issued comments on the ruling. Kristina Butts, NCBA’s executive director of legislative affairs, had comments listed in the public comment section, saying, “The egregious conclusion to remove lean meats from the common characteristics of dietary patterns associated with positive health outcomes is historic and unsubstantiated. It is inconsistent with more than three decades of scientific evidence on the benefits of lean meat in healthy diets and is also in direct conflict with all previous editions of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.”
See more comments at the Office of Disease Prevention and Health Promotion website.
How will the debate continue?
As mentioned, public comment and the comment period will be announced once the recommended guidelines draft is published.
The NCBA is telling its membership, in its Beltway Beef blog, that once the report is released, the secretaries of HHS and Agriculture “will have the opportunity to review the recommendations and request input and comments.” And after it is published, the organization will closely follow the comment period and encourage its membership base and nutrition experts to be advocates for beef. 
