World governmental agencies still clueless about dietary recommendations

deoxy4
deoxy4 Posts: 197 Member
edited November 2024 in Social Groups
Over the past few years there has been great acceptance and support for the LCHF diet in Sweden and other Scandinavian countries. I wanted to research governmental agencies dietary recommendations around the world. Below is a link list a summary of current recommendations. They remain clueless as most recommendations including the Swedish Food Agency which continues to recommend 40% of calories from grains and starches. Sad but not surprising. Food politics continues to rule the day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nutrition_guides

Replies

  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Remember no politician wants the voters to be hungry on election day. Grains and starches is the easiest and cheapest way to fill stomachs hence the 'science' behind government dietary recommendations.

    The Low Carb High Fat diet does not have well paid lobbyists to promote it like the Carb promoting food industry.

    Then there are the masses (I was one of them a year ago) that demands their right to all of the carbs they want 24/7.

    Eating for good health will never carry the day by any national government that is controlled by lobbyist of the special interest. There will alway be a remnant concerned with eating for life vs. death but it will never be the masses. The path of least resistance will rule the day for the masses always because governments will always take the path of least resistance.

    Diet related early deaths will continue. Aging voters is the nightmare for politicians. The System sees aging voters as liabilities because of past commitments made years ago that can no longer be honored in full without rioting by the younger voters.

    We may have some positive impact on a few family members then only by being a living example. Yes it is hard to know a better way of eating and not understand why others do not see it. It was not until I realized that living on carbs was going to be the death of me when I was already 63 years old that I was willing to change. I had the education and knowledge many years ago but not the will to act in my best health interest.
  • deoxy4
    deoxy4 Posts: 197 Member
    Useful resources related to the politics of food.

    http://michaelpollan.com/resources/politics-policy/
  • fishgutzy
    fishgutzy Posts: 2,807 Member
    Grains are subsidized. Meat is not.
    The US invented the food pyramid at the same time it began grain subsidies. Go figure. And that is also when obesity and heart disease also began to rise.
  • GSD_Mama
    GSD_Mama Posts: 629 Member
    Boy, you've got to love French guidelines. I laughed way too hard!
  • minties82
    minties82 Posts: 907 Member
    I was interested in what the reccomendedations were here in New Zealand, especially for children as I have two under 5. I'm a bit disturbed that the reccomendations for 2-18 year olds mentions "low fat" constantly. Low fat dairy, low fat meat etc etc. Is fat not vital for brain growth and development? And for hormonal health?! Why on earth would (especially) a 2 year old need to have skim milm and fatless meat.

    I never listened to the public health burse when it came to feeding my kids and am glad I didn't.
  • KnitOrMiss
    KnitOrMiss Posts: 10,103 Member
    Exactly, @Minties82! If you don't eat cholesterol, your body will make it because that's how it delivers fuel to the brain. I'm all for making sure my kiddo's brain keeps on. I just have to make sure to help with healthy balance.... Goodness...SMH
  • deoxy4
    deoxy4 Posts: 197 Member
    fishgutzy wrote: »
    Grains are subsidized. Meat is not.
    The US invented the food pyramid at the same time it began grain subsidies. Go figure. And that is also when obesity and heart disease also began to rise.

    Sugar is also subsidized! Your tax dollar at work!
  • deoxy4
    deoxy4 Posts: 197 Member
    GSD_Mama wrote: »
    Boy, you've got to love French guidelines. I laughed way too hard!

    Just like the French! The traditional "laissez-faire" approach to nutritional recommendations. You can do this...or wait...this...or maybe this...oh, I know this...or you could do this...

  • minties82
    minties82 Posts: 907 Member
    edited July 2015
    I always shake my head in bewilderment when you guys put pictures of nutrition labels from the USA on here; everything has a recommended percentage of daily intake apart from sugar. Are you meant to just eat as much as possible? It's so messed up.

    @KnitOrMiss our nurse here was trying to get me to give my 19 week old (fully breastfed) baby skim cows milk as she was "too fat", er...? WTH? I stopped listening to her after that.

    After a rough search it seems the recommended amount of sugar for the average adult is 90g here, and fat at 70g. 90g of sugar! Wow. And only 50g of protein apparently.
  • deoxy4
    deoxy4 Posts: 197 Member
    It does appear that consuming as much sugar as possible is the game plan. It is added to all processed foods.

    I have seen estimates that the average American consumes 150-170 pounds of sugar per year. That is around 200 gm of sugar daily. Considering the consumption in the 1770's the annual consumption was around a pound per year and in the 1860's the annual consumption was around 10 pounds per year, we have come a long way.


    http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/02/by-2606-us-diet-will-be-100-percent.html

  • KnitOrMiss
    KnitOrMiss Posts: 10,103 Member
    minties82 wrote: »
    I always shake my head in bewilderment when you guys put pictures of nutrition labels from the USA on here; everything has a recommended percentage of daily intake apart from sugar. Are you meant to just eat as much as possible? It's so messed up.

    @KnitOrMiss our nurse here was trying to get me to give my 19 week old (fully breastfed) baby skim cows milk as she was "too fat", er...? WTH? I stopped listening to her after that.

    After a rough search it seems the recommended amount of sugar for the average adult is 90g here, and fat at 70g. 90g of sugar! Wow. And only 50g of protein apparently.

    My daughter tripled her birth weight by 6 months old - and never once did my doc tell me to restrict her eating. Now she's a rail thing mostly healthy almost 15 year old. There is a theory that babies who are well nourished in the first 6-12 months, fed when hungry, all that, not overfed, but picked up and held, too, develop better emotional systems and those born with a decent body weight who gain decently (read born fat, are fat babies) end up thinner later in life to start their metabolisms out right. Dunno that I buy in, but everyone I know who had fat babies has thinner children, and everyone I know who had super tiny babies have heavier children, so maybe?

    My doctor told me that there is no recommended sugar here in the US on labels because there is no need for it. EVER. In anyone's diet. I don't know why that conversation stuck in my head, but yeah, sugar is in practically EVERYTHING in the US. And they're about to start importing a bunch of American foods into the UK, and they UK's health core is in an uproar. I can only wonder how things will go as US junk food hits worldwide!! UGH. Poor world.
  • GaleHawkins
    GaleHawkins Posts: 8,159 Member
    Even with my USA health care related education it was only last year when looking to manage my pain without starting on Enbrel injections did I learn that sugar or any other form of carbs were not required by humans ever. I thought there was like a daily requirement of carbs or you would die.
This discussion has been closed.