BETHESDA, Md. -- Inside a packed ballroom at a Holiday Inn, 13 government-appointed scientists sat regally around a table, debating servings of fish. "What do we want to recommend for children• Fish twice a week?" asked chairwoman Janet King. "Small fish," said another panel member. "Children are advised to eat smaller portions of fish than adults?" "Can we defer a vote on that?" pleaded another. The panel of nutrition researchers had been talking this way for 45 minutes. The audience already witnessed exhaustive discussions on protein, sugar, fat, grains, breakfast, exercise and a record-breaking 2 1/2-hour standoff on vitamin D. "Mind-numbing isn't the half of it," said a woman in line for the restroom. "I want to strangle them." After a year's work, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee is in the final stages of overhauling the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which are to be formally adopted next year. Since 1980, the guidelines -- consisting of seven to 10 short statements and an accompanying booklet -- have been issued every five years by the departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services. School menus must comply with the guidelines; so must the Women, Infants and Children program, which provides food to low-income mothers. The food pyramid is based on the guidelines. To reach their conclusions, committee members -- unpaid volunteers -- have waded through thousands of pages of studies on fat, heart disease, television watching, obesity and the effect of fiber on stool weight. They have been aided by testimony and letters from hundreds of groups and individuals, including the Sugar Association, the Grocery Manufacturers of America, the American Heart Association, the Bible-based Hallelujah Diet and disciples of Dr. Joseph Mercola, author of "The No-Grain Diet." The job is "enormous -- probably one of the most difficult jobs I ever had," said Dr. Cutberto Garza, director of the division of nutritional sciences at Cornell University and chairman of the 2000 committee. And he didn't get paid. Writing the dietary guidelines is honor, toil, aggravation and tedium -- in unequal measure. The results are bland and seemingly obvious bits of advice most Americans have never read. "It is interesting to see how they put it all together," whispers one audience member. "It is a little bit boring, of course." The committee has held four public meetings to discuss the ideal American diet. The panel will hold its fifth -- and supposedly last -- public meeting on the issue today.The third meeting, which took place in March, attracted a veritable Who's Who of the food world. The National Dairy Council's representative sat up front. Farther back was an employee from the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a consumer advocacy group. There were cheerleaders for seemingly every foodstuff: walnuts, soybeans, sugar, alcohol, crackers, jellies and vegetables. They listened intently and dashed off during breaks to inform headquarters of critical twists in deliberations. Complaints surfaced from the moment the committee was appointed last year. The Center for Science in the Public Interest pointed fingers at seven of the 13 selected committee members for having financial relationships with industry groups, including the Sugar Association, the Campbell Soup Co. and the American Cocoa Research Institute. How, asked the consumer group, could Americans be sure these scientists were unbiased? The Sugar Association and the Grocery Manufacturers of America wrote to say the guidelines don't focus enough on physical activity -- just on what people eat. The grocery manufacturers have suggested the name of the guidelines be changed to the "Dietary and Physical Activity Guidelines." The fourth meeting was in May. It was supposed to be the last, but a rollicking debate about vitamin D threw everything off schedule. No one was certain when the meeting would end. Fresh science, it seemed, had emerged since 2000, revealing many people are deficient in the vitamin. But some committee members were nervous about recommending a big jump in intake. For the first time, the committee planned to recommend Americans slash their intake of trans fats, those hardened, partially hydrogenated vegetable oils found in stick margarines and many baked goods. But sugar was a sticky mess. As the committee took up the issue again, an excited rustle went through the audience. Dr. Carlos Camargo, assistant professor of medicine and epidemiology at Harvard University, cited three studies reporting children drinking the greatest number of sugary soft drinks ended up plumper later on. Nutrition researchers Teresa Nicklas, professor of pediatrics at Baylor College of Medicine, and Joanne Lupton, professor of nutrition at Texas A&M University, lobbed back other studies that didn't find that link. The mood began to lighten when sugar was put off again and matters drifted to a discussion of alcohol, in which nothing, as usual, was left unquestioned. The panel debated a recommendation that alcohol be avoided by children and those operating heavy machinery. One member asked for the pertinent data.

---

Copyright ©2025— Trib Total Media, LLC (TribLIVE.com)

---