Today's Topic 👉 Nutrition

“The most significant reset of federal nutrition policy in our nation’s history.”

^{—Brooke Rollins, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture}

Last month the U.S. federal government released the new Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

• Protein targets jumped 50%.

• Full-fat dairy is now permitted.

• And for the first time, "avoid highly processed foods" is official guidance.

Some of this is well-supported. Some is genuinely contested.

Here's how to tell the difference.

What has the strongest evidence?

The ultra-processed food guidance. It’s not close.

A 2019 NIH study found people ate 508 more calories per day on ultra-processed food, even when diets were matched for macros.

A 2024 BMJ review of 10 million participants confirmed links to heart disease, diabetes, and depression.

Bottom line: Avoid ultra-processed foods. The science is clear.

What else is well-supported?

Dietary patterns matter more than single nutrients.

The PREDIMED trial followed 7,447 adults for five years. A Mediterranean diet reduced major cardiovascular events by 30%. No single food or supplement has replicated this effect.

Bottom line: Focus on overall patterns such as whole foods, plants, and quality protein. Not individual "superfoods."

What is genuinely contested?

Saturated fats.

The saturated fat reversal has made headlines, but the science is messier than the coverage suggests due to industry funding, conflicting meta-analyses, and public disagreements among top researchers.

Want to know how to evaluate contested nutrition claims yourself? We break down both sides, the funding issues, and the red flags to watch for.

FEATURED RESOURCE

Next week 👉 Strength Training

ABOUT THE CONTRIBUTOR

Brian S. Dye, Ed.D., is the founder of Applied Wellness, an evidence-based wellness education platform which helps people access, understand, and apply evidence-based wellness information.