A Taste of Wellness for Savoury and Snacks
Givaudan
However, some aspects of the US Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) new ‘MyPlate’ food icon have raised some eyebrows, notably the decision to mix and match food groups (fruits, grains, vegetables) with nutrients (protein).
Protein is not something most Americans are short of …
Adam Drewnowski, director of the Center for Public Health Nutrition at the University of Washington, told FoodNavigator-USA: “The new icon focuses on food groups (fruit, veg, dairy and grains), and doesn’t talk about fat, carbohydrates and so on. But it still includes protein, which is a nutrient, not a food group.”
Meanwhile, three of the four food groups listed - dairy, grains and vegetables - also contained protein, a shortage of which was “not a problem for most Americans”, he pointed out.
On the other hand, by focusing on food groups and not nutrients, MyPlate “sidestepped” wrangling about ‘good’ vs ‘bad’ fats or carbs that had dogged previous food icons, he said. “This is no bad thing. I think the food groups mean more to consumers anyway.”
While he “would have liked pictures”, the plate was also a big improvement on MyPyramid, which was a “masterpiece of graphic design” but a lousy tool for helping the average consumer eat more healthily, he said.
Oldways director of food and ntrition strategies Cynthia Harriman agreed the new plate was a big step forward, but said adding a few pointers for consumers under the main categories would be helpful on enlarged versions of the icon - on posters on classroom walls - for example.
"Under grains, I'd add 'mostly whole', under vegetables 'all colors', under protein 'plant-based too' and under fruit 'mostly whole'."
Easier to understand than Eatwell plate?
Marion Nestle, professor in the department of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, praised MyPlate, but also found it “odd” that protein was sitting amongst food groups.
“Americans don’t need more protein. Americans don’t need to eat more of anything except fruit and vegetables. But what they have told us is that focus group research showed consumers understand protein to encompass several food groups.”
She added: “Pictures would help but I like it that people get to put their own foods on the plate. I also think it's much easier to understand than the FSA’s pie chart, which is way too confusing [The UK Food Standards Agency’s Eatwell plate, which includes pictures and a section for fatty/sugary foods to eat in moderation].”
Joined up government?
However, it was frustrating that the positive messages embodied by MyPlate were being undermined by efforts by some members of Congress to single out nutrition initiatives for funding cuts, she said.
”Let’s not forget that most Americans still get their nutrition education from food companies and I would argue improving public health is not their primary goal.”
While GOP revisions to the 2012 Agriculture Appropriations bill would save money, blocking proposals to limit the marketing of unhealthy foods to kids could also be seen as “Congress appeasing the food industry”, she argued.
Her comments came as the Republican majority on the House Appropriations Committee this week approved a revised version of the 2012 Agriculture Appropriations bill that would significantly cut federal funding for nutrition programs.
The revised legislation questions the government’s proposal to curb marketing of unhealthy foods to children and urges the Food and Drug Administration to limit rules requiring calorie counts on menus.
It would also put a block on new nutritional standards for school meals and reduce the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program funding.
MyPlate and national security
By emphasising choice, cost savings (via lower healthcare costs) and even national security when ‘selling’ the new food icon to the press, however, agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack had neatly countered claims that the government was going down the ‘nanny state’ route by telling Americans what to do, she noted.
“I was very impressed by his performance in the press conference yesterday.”
Affordable health
Whether the new food icon was an ‘economic plate’ however, remained to be seen, said Drewnowski. “It’s great that dietary guidelines say we should eat fresh , minimally processed fruits and vegetables, fresh fish and lean meat, but these cost money. Are we asking low income people to adopt a high income diet?
“It’s easy for people to say that people on low incomes should boil up a big lentil and vegetable soup and make it last all week, but who wants to do that?”
Click here to read more about MyPlate
10 comments (Comments are now closed)
MyPlate: Not so new guidelines
http://gallery.mailchimp.com/1d07957401d85758bba9d9c3f/files/Not_So_NewGuidelines.pdf
Report abuse
Posted by c wolf
07 June 2011 | 18h58
Same song second (or 3rd, 4th etc.) verse
As you can see from all the other comments, trying to "educate" all Americans by using one picture of a plate is not going to work any better than any of the other "one picture" ideas. The original pyramid had an additional 80 pages of information that was supposed to be given but no one ever looked. At least the second pyramid was designed as a portal to information whether people accessed it or not is another question. The problem is nutrition, and healthy nutrition is so much more complex than a picture of a plate divided into four groups with a circle for dairy at the side. For starters, portion control is probably the biggest problem today and it doesn't tell you how big that plate should be. The American dinner plate has grown in size over the last 40 years and if we just went back to the original size (about the size of our salad plates now) and only ate what ended up fitting on the plate we probably wouldn't be overeating on calories. Then there is the question of where protein fits in, often it is part of either the grain or vegetable or dairy portion (ask any vegetarian), if we are adding to those by needing to see protein on the plate we will probably be eating more protein than we need. Even though it was mentioned that focus groups knew that protein can be found in a number of foods when there is a space to fill people may think they have to fill it and that will most likely be from an animal source because that can be easily identified as a protein. At the same time, fat as a nutrient is actually something we need more of than protein, but it doesn't have a place on the plate anywhere. Is that going to encourage more people to think "all fat is bad," and encourage eating too little fat? There is some interesting research being published suggesting that full fat milk might be associated with lower weights in kids and with better health outcomes in post MI patients. I could go on but I won't, except to say stop trying to fit nutrition education into a picture, it will never have a good outcome!
Report abuse
Posted by Wendy Repovich
07 June 2011 | 00h44
not a problem for most Americans
I see that Adam Drewnowski (and Marion Nestle) operates from the recommended daily allowance viewpoint of the world. Perhaps they could indicate how many calories somebody would consume if they ate the RDA for the major macronutrients? (under 1000kcal for those playing along).
The current acceptable macronutreinet distribution ranges provided by the IOM show protein has a substantial range of intakes that are ok (actually wider, but have to fit the other macronutreints in somewhere...) and if an individual ate the RDA for protein, and ate the current average requirement for energy, they would in fact eat less than the current range of acceptable protein intakes.
At least ADam is correct in his ideas around protein not being a food, but perhaps he should look into the benefits of consuming a diet rich in protein containing foods, and the impact that would have on the micronutrent content of the diet. Especially when the diet is an hypocaloric diet to reduce bodyweight, something that a lot of Americans currently are doing, and should be doing.
lets not get caught within the trap of "eating too much protein" 'wisdoms' and start focussing on the benefits of food, even those that 'oh my gosh' contain higher levels of protein. Because if we are going along that road, we can also bring up we are collectively eating far too much carbohydrates (RDA is only 130g, and on average the population is almost tripling that) therefore recommending foods such as fruits and vegetables is not recommended, or an issue (/sarcasm)
Report abuse
Posted by JC Carter
06 June 2011 | 23h54
We need education
My daughter just finished second grade and had a unit on healthy eating. The class studied the food pyramid, and learned about the different food groups -- which were healthy choices, which to eat in moderation, etc. We are already a very health conscious family, so my daughter knows how to eat very healthfully. However, learning the standards in her classroom setting helped reinforce her education. And, she noted several times that some other children were NOT aware of these guidelines.
Mr. Yonko, we have a terrifying obesity epidemic in this country, not because of lack of freedom of choice, but lack of education. The majority of Americans believe what marketers tell them -- that smoothies sweetened with NutraSweet are a "healthy" choice. That carbs are "bad." That highly processed frozen foods with the words "healthy"and "choice" stamped on them are good for them. That is the true propaganda.
Report abuse
Posted by Anna Andrews
06 June 2011 | 16h49
We need the Gov?
Why do we impress the Whitehouse occupants that we are all stupid and need to look at this my plate? I'd like to know if the Obamas are following this one. I have 2 cups of coffee every morning, and I'm done for the rest of the day. Breakfast starts off with one bowl of oatmeal, my choice, cause I like it. Then a little while later, maybe some bacon, and an egg or two. I'm 56 years old, and I feel good most of the time, that is if I don't overexert from working when I have to. What ever happened to freedom of choice? I don't pay any attention at all to this, I consider it all to be propaganda, besides all of this, "Wheres the Beef?" I wish I lived across the street from McDonalds and Wendys, Id be there several times a week! I don't want to eat like a rabbit, more red meat please!
Report abuse
Posted by Mark A Yonko Sr
05 June 2011 | 13h31
Who wants to boil up a big pot of poor people's food?
I found A Drenowski's question that while it is best for low income people to, "...boil up a huge pot of lentils and vegetable soup and eat it all week, but who wants to do it?" worth a comment.
I just finished eating a week's worth of vegetarian chili beans for breakfast. Yes, it was boring, but no more boring than cereal with fruit in the morning, and it was no doubt no healthier.
Who wants to do it? It wasn't my first choice, but letting good food go to waste wasn't something I could allow myself to do.
I reasoned that I probably got more fibre, more vitamins and phytonutrients than my the customary grain-based breakfast (oatmeal).
Is the population at large willing to do the same thing?
Good question.....
Report abuse
Posted by Isabel Estolano
03 June 2011 | 23h22
Nanny go Home...
With all the corruption taking place in Federal, State and local governments today through lobbying (bribery), non-profits (who FEED off business donations) and PHD's who do dietary research funded by government AND corporations, I think that government needs to stay the hell off my plate, out of my life, and do what it is PAID to do... managing my life and what I put in my mouth is off limits.
Perhaps it's time to gut or eliminate some of these nanny state micromanagers. Why are we bothering to get college educations if we can't manage our own lives properly? That's like a farmer teaching his cows to read. What's the point...something to do while they're being milked? (I can see a magazine rack by the barn door) (-: Never mind.. I just answered my own question.
Report abuse
Posted by Banh
03 June 2011 | 23h19
The MyPlate anatomy of a cheeseburger lunch
As much as some might not like it...and even disagree vehemently, there are a great number of things we simply should not eat if long-term health is our goal. The 1,000 calorie bacon cheeseburger bomb is a perfect example.
Problem is, it fits My Plate: The bun is grain, the meat and cheese are protein, the tomato is a fruit and the lettuce is a vegetable. If I add fries (more vegetable) and a shake (dairy) my plate looks good. The problem is...that's the problem... as contentious and uncomfortable as that might be.
Report abuse
Posted by J Miller
03 June 2011 | 22h31
options
1. The reality is that folks eat foods, not macronutrients. And realize that macro % diets have to be translated into real foods (which becomes a display issue since veggies are high water/low calorie, etc.).
2. Realizing that micronutrients (and ones not officially established) drive health. Look up Beri Beri, Pellagra, Scurvy, IDD, etc.
3. "Good" versus "bad" foods is a useful distinction, but realize it's contentious.
There are lots of plate and pyramid designs. Interesting to look at them all.
Report abuse
Posted by C Wolf
03 June 2011 | 19h34
Eating healthy does NOT have to be expensive!!!
I disagree that eating fresh fruits and vegetables and lean meat is more expensive. I am very frugal and that's all I buy. How much does a box of whole grain pasta cost? A pound of green beans? And, hello, people-- ever heard of Aldi's? I save a ton of money (wherever I shop) and eat super healthy. The notion that people on a low income can't eat healthy is ridiculous.
Report abuse
Posted by Karen
03 June 2011 | 17h50
Read all comments (10)