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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Achterberg, Cheryl, Astrup, Arne, Bier, Dennis M, King, Janet C, Krauss, Ronald M, Teicholz, Nina, Volek, Jeff S
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