27 Comments
User's avatar
John Wright's avatar

Part of the reason people have followed the "Food Pyramid" has been government subsidies.

For those wanting a redesign, basically you could flip it upside down. A more detailed, nuanced change would be to simply remove the bottom (grains / cereals), push everything down a layer and put the grains / cereals at the top (use very sparingly).

There is still a lot of debate on the details of what makes for the "best" diet. One thing the pyramid completely fails to do is to distinguish how the "food" item was produced. Is that industrial farmed beef and dairy? Or is is natural pasture raised? Are the fruits and veggies natural (organic) or loaded with pesticides and herbicides?

Expand full comment
Ginger Pinson's avatar

And how much of it has been genetically engineered. I still believe in the idea of eating real food, mostly plants and avoiding as many processed foods as possible and look at the people who live in the Blue Zones around the world. We like won’t get our health back entirely until we rebuild our soil and grow most of our food without pesticides.

Expand full comment
Letsrock's avatar

AMEN 👍

Expand full comment
John Wright's avatar

There are a lot of things wrong with our food supply. I think this post is focused on what types of foods should you eat (in which proportions).

Expand full comment
Letsrock's avatar

Same for grains, how are they produced? GMOS, PESTICIDES, ORGANIC, ETC., ETC.

Expand full comment
John Wright's avatar

Sure but even if they are produced in a better way they should remain only a very small part of what we consume.

Expand full comment
Letsrock's avatar

A good general rule of thumb is everything in moderation.

Expand full comment
John Wright's avatar

Except chocolate. 😇

Expand full comment
llaw555's avatar

Of course. The food pyramid was structured in support of “processed food,” which involves corporate interests. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Expand full comment
NP or Bust's avatar

Yes, I agree with the first comment - can you provide a revamped pyramid? Or maybe the pyramid is a bad plan shape in general?

Expand full comment
Nadine Chapman's avatar

I believe John Wright did so in his comment. Interestingly, I took the quiz at my plate.gov and scored in the middle, barely into “pro”, due to my healthier habits towards grains and proteins.

Expand full comment
Bruno's avatar

It's basically upsidedown

Expand full comment
Marie-Louise Murville's avatar

Thanks! How would you re-design the food pyramid? What do you recommend? Thank you.

Expand full comment
llaw555's avatar

As a fitness instructor for the last 14 years, I recommend intuitive eating.” Whole organic foods.”

At every age, our needs change.

Day to day, our needs shift.

When you start to listen to your body, and stick with whole organic unprocessed food, you won’t need anyone to tell you what to eat. You’ll know what feels right in your body. Keep a journal for a year.

Expand full comment
Valerie Grimes, Hypnotist's avatar

An iconic Southpark episode comes to mind: "It's upside." Said Cartman. "Mr President, you can now have butter on your steak."

Expand full comment
PamelaDrew's avatar

The biggest problem is that genetically engineered crops soaked in fatal levels of toxins are no longer part of the discussion. The novel proteins from these biotech mutants and partner chemicals have NEVER been safety tested and MAHA has deleted the topic entirely.

Biotechnology Consultation Memorandum of Conference BNF No. 000001

September 19, 1994

Wholesomeness Studies

Monsanto described the results of wholesomeness studies they carried out in rats, chickens, catfish, dairy cattle, and bobwhite quail. On the basis of their consideration of the totality of these studies, Monsanto has concluded that there is no significant difference in the wholesomeness of glyphosate-tolerant and traditional soybean varieties, as expected from their compositional analysis. These data are summarized on page 49 of Monsanto's September 2 submission.

Conclusions

Monsanto has concluded, in essence, that the glyphosate-tolerant soybean variety they have developed is not significantly altered within the meaning of 21 CFR 170.30(f)(2) when compared to soybean varieties with a history of safe use. At this time, based on Monsanto's description of its data and analysis, the agency considers Monsanto's consultation on this product to be complete.

F. Owen Fields, Ph.D.

http://web.archive.org/web/20101122021318/www.fda.gov/Food/Biotechnology/Submissions/ucm161130.htm

SCORECARD Global Authority for Chemical Safety

Basic Testing to Identify Chemical Hazards

If an industrial chemical is allowed by law to be released into the environment, most people assume that it must have been tested and evaluated for its potential risks. Unfortunately, this is simply not true. Keeping chemical hazards under control requires information about what kinds of hazards each chemical poses. If the basic tests to check on a chemical's toxicity haven't been conducted, or if the results aren't publicly available, current laws tend to treat that chemical as if it were perfectly safe.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120917041002/http://scorecard.goodguide.com/chemical-profiles/chems-profile-descriptions.tcl#safety_assessment

Expand full comment
Jayne Doe's avatar

Food Pyramid was changed to MyPlate.gov.

Expand full comment
Jon Fisher's avatar

Why the continued drumbeat on the pyramid? If MyPlate.gov is now the guideline, why not spend your precious space here talking about it vs. the pyramid?

Expand full comment
Beth C Coddiwompler's avatar

I think because of the cataclysmic deleterious effects the food pyramid had in the U.S. and around the world that are still plaguing us today.

Expand full comment
Jon Fisher's avatar

Sure, but this and other articles seem to be written to lead people to believe this is the current standard. How about educating on the current standard?

Expand full comment
James Lyons-Weiler, PhD's avatar

Excellent. Our kids know how to eat properly, and they are not waiting to be deprogrammed. The effects of maintaining health from the ground up will be massive. Well done, Nina!

Expand full comment
Beth C Coddiwompler's avatar

Ancel Keys, the low-fat low-cholesterol myth, and the disastrous food pyramid and its lasting legacy have done immeasurable harm to humanity. It's high time we overhaul the dietary guidelines and the toxic food supply.

Here's a book worth checking out: Death by Food Pyramid: How Shoddy Science, Sketchy Politics, and Shady Special Interests Have Ruined Our Health, by Denise Minger. Here's an interesting review:

https://www.westonaprice.org/book-reviews/death-by-food-pyramid-by-denise-minger/#gsc.tab=0

Expand full comment
First Amendment's avatar

I've seen people who don't put any dressing on their salad because of the fat and have dry skin and get anxious easily. I also had read that the nutrients in green peppers is more accessible when they are cooked rather than raw. "The Road to Immunity" by Kenneth Bock made me understood that fats are necessary for the metabolic system to work properly.

Expand full comment
VictorDianne Watson's avatar

I will be happy to see the new guidelines presented to us in an understandable manner. I know low carb diets benefit. I lost 10 lbs in 12 weeks after my heart attack because I switched to a low carb instead of low fat diet upon my cardiologists advice. I’m still reluctant to increase fat in dairy. I need more conclusive information.

Expand full comment
Arden's avatar

Too bad you ignore fundamental biochemistry of the Kreb's Cycle which is a carbohydrate driven energy cycle, you ignore the research on the CD36 receptor correlated to cancer metasteses, you ignore the biochemistry research proving that ketones are pro-cancerous, you ignore the endocrinology research of naturally occurring estradiol in animal products that directly negatively affect human endocrinology while plant phytoestrogens, (no such thing as plant estradiol) are protective from xenoestrogen influences, you ignore the TMAO research and heart disease, you ignore the epidemiology statistics that show heart disease as the number one killer 150 years ago after infectious disease and we didn't have refined grains, food preservatives, synthetic dyes and so forth 150 years ago in the food, you ignore the fossil human teeth and feces analyses showing that our ancestors, thousands of years ago were NOT carnivores, rather primarily herbivores. Eat what you want, but stop acting as the mouth piece of the dairy, meat, egg industries and lobbyists as if you are presenting something radically different from the status quo. Trading one branch of industry capture for another is not the solution.

Expand full comment