Cargando…
An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report
The US Dietary Guidelines for Americans is an enormously influential policy that has guided US nutrition programs since 1980. During these last 40 years, some researchers have expressed concern that the guidelines are based on an insufficiently rigorous assessment of the scientific evidence, a view...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9896931/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36741454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac107 |
_version_ | 1784882147944824832 |
---|---|
author | Achterberg, Cheryl Astrup, Arne Bier, Dennis M King, Janet C Krauss, Ronald M Teicholz, Nina Volek, Jeff S |
author_facet | Achterberg, Cheryl Astrup, Arne Bier, Dennis M King, Janet C Krauss, Ronald M Teicholz, Nina Volek, Jeff S |
author_sort | Achterberg, Cheryl |
collection | PubMed |
description | The US Dietary Guidelines for Americans is an enormously influential policy that has guided US nutrition programs since 1980. During these last 40 years, some researchers have expressed concern that the guidelines are based on an insufficiently rigorous assessment of the scientific evidence, a view that was largely substantiated by a Congressionally mandated 2017 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, which identified a need for enhanced transparency, greater scientific rigor, and updates to the scientific methodology for the DGA process. This paper traces the history of these ideas and contextualizes the DGA within the law and regulations that govern its process. The paper also discusses how recent iterations of the Dietary Guidelines have not fully adhered to these guiding documents, which has resulted in diminished independence of the expert committee in charge of evaluating the science for the DGA and a continued lack of a fully rigorous scientific process for producing consistent and trustworthy guidelines for the public. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9896931 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-98969312023-02-04 An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report Achterberg, Cheryl Astrup, Arne Bier, Dennis M King, Janet C Krauss, Ronald M Teicholz, Nina Volek, Jeff S PNAS Nexus Perspectives The US Dietary Guidelines for Americans is an enormously influential policy that has guided US nutrition programs since 1980. During these last 40 years, some researchers have expressed concern that the guidelines are based on an insufficiently rigorous assessment of the scientific evidence, a view that was largely substantiated by a Congressionally mandated 2017 report by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, which identified a need for enhanced transparency, greater scientific rigor, and updates to the scientific methodology for the DGA process. This paper traces the history of these ideas and contextualizes the DGA within the law and regulations that govern its process. The paper also discusses how recent iterations of the Dietary Guidelines have not fully adhered to these guiding documents, which has resulted in diminished independence of the expert committee in charge of evaluating the science for the DGA and a continued lack of a fully rigorous scientific process for producing consistent and trustworthy guidelines for the public. Oxford University Press 2022-07-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9896931/ /pubmed/36741454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac107 Text en © The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the National Academy of Sciences. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Perspectives Achterberg, Cheryl Astrup, Arne Bier, Dennis M King, Janet C Krauss, Ronald M Teicholz, Nina Volek, Jeff S An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report |
title | An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report |
title_full | An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report |
title_fullStr | An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report |
title_full_unstemmed | An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report |
title_short | An analysis of the recent US dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a National Academies report |
title_sort | analysis of the recent us dietary guidelines process in light of its federal mandate and a national academies report |
topic | Perspectives |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9896931/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36741454 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgac107 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT achterbergcheryl ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT astruparne ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT bierdennism ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT kingjanetc ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT kraussronaldm ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT teicholznina ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT volekjeffs ananalysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT achterbergcheryl analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT astruparne analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT bierdennism analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT kingjanetc analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT kraussronaldm analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT teicholznina analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport AT volekjeffs analysisoftherecentusdietaryguidelinesprocessinlightofitsfederalmandateandanationalacademiesreport |