We are in the home stretch for the 2010 Dietary Guidelines, with the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee report now available to be viewed in its entirety at http://www.dietaryguidelines.gov. The 2010 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee members, listed in Table 1, deserve thanks not only from the nutrition community but also from the people of the United States for volunteering for this difficult task and then working without pay for months and months to produce this comprehensive report. There is plenty to read, to think about, discuss, praise, and dispute. The old adage was that for a bridal shower, the gifts should include something old, something new, something borrowed, and something blue (the cover is blue!), and the gift we have received from the committee has followed this advice.
Some Things Old
Like its 21st century parents, the year 2000 and 2005 Dietary Guidelines, the 2010 Guidelines stress both a balanced nutrient dense diet and plenty of physical activity. The other general messages summarized in Table 2 Americans have heard, if not heeded, before.
Just as the guidelines committee was forming, we applauded the use of more systematic, evidence-based processes for generating the 2010 Guidelines.1 This committee has made greater strides than any prior committee was able to in this regard. When existing systematic reviews were not available, the evidence collected from the literature was systematically reviewed, graded by trained individuals, and synthesized to answer questions the committee posed. The resulting report incorporates them and the quality of the evidence presented, generally in a succinct and understandable manner. Food pattern modeling was also put to good use to answer questions concerning the impact of proposed changes in guidance on intakes.
Both nutrients and food patterns were also discussed at length by the 2010 committee. Many of the issues are familiar to readers of Nutrition Today because they were discussed in our Dietary Guidelines series over the past few years.2-8
Some Things New
The scientific committee's attention to individual differences and needs did not extend to nutrigenomic prescriptions because the science simply is not there yet to make such recommendations. However, the committee did emphasize how the guidelines could be tailored to be in line with many different healthful food patterns. These include the US Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) MyPyramid, the Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension-style dietary pattern, and certain Mediterranean style dietary patterns.
Some other additions to the 2010 Guidelines that are welcome are a much expanded excellent chapter on food safety and extensive appendices with the results of modeling various dietary patterns. A special bonus that should not be overlooked is the set of short papers at the very end of the document called "Resources." They include useful material on food allergens, conventional and organic foods, child overweight, and other issues.
Some Things Borrowed
Physical activity needs a more prominent place in the thinking of all nutritionists and consumers.9 Therefore, it is good to see that the Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans were borrowed from extensively in the 2010 document. Those Physical Activity Guidelines cover energy output with as much rigor as the Dietary Guidelines do for food and eating and also deserve reading in their entirety.
Many Things True
The Dietary Guidelines committee members deserve great credit for all their hard work and for the well-crafted document they have produced. The remarkably thorough and advice-filled and practical information-loaded text runs several hundred pages.
Some Things Missing?
The public comment period on the report closed in early July, and now the 2 cabinet level departments that sponsor the guidelines will further review and refine the recommendations and package them for consumers and policy makers.
The 1980 Dietary Guidelines were much shorter and sweeter (no pun intended) than the 2010 set, but they were consumer directed rather than heavily referenced scientific reviews. In fact, the 1980 Guidelines fit on the cover of a small USDA pamphlet with accompanying text of about 8 pages and an accompanying supplement to the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition that examined the evidence for each guideline. In the 2010 scientific document, it is difficult to discern what the 2010 Dietary Guidelines really are because the many actionable messages are embedded in the text. Americans may have gotten fatter over past 30 years, but their attention spans have certainly not increased. What are missing are some positive, actionable guidelines that people can easily remember and put to work in their daily lives. The committee clearly communication as a priority, as did the authors of several recent articles in Nutrition Today.9,10 We hope that now that the science has been reviewed, that actionable messages in everyday language will be crafted by communications experts as the document and its progeny are further refined in the next few months by USDA and US Department of Health and Human Services.
REFERENCES