New Dietary Guidelines: What Everyone Missed
The nutrition world is in full-blown tailspin mode after the government dropped the new 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. I had a strong reaction. But perhaps not the one you’d expect.
The nutrition world is in a full-blown tailspin after the government dropped the new 2025–2030 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
I had a strong reaction. But perhaps not the one you’d expect.
Let’s start at the beginning.
The very first line of the document declares this update: “These guidelines mark the most significant reset of federal nutrition policy in our nation’s history.”
And the cover graphic? I’m sure you’ve seen it: a literal inversion of the historic food pyramid. Steak, cheese, and eggs are now at the top, while whole grains are compressed down to the bottom.
Bold move!
Or maybe not?
But when I actually went and read the main public-facing brief, I was surprised.
Contrary to public messaging, it actually retains many relics of the old guidelines, with some internal contradictions that left me confused.
For example, it still emphasizes the same restrictions on saturated fat and sodium.
On national television we see RFK Jr. proclaiming, “we are ending the war on saturated fat.” Then, we see a complete inversion of the old food pyramid, with meat and fatty dairy at the top.
But then, the actual new 2025-2030 guidelines state, “saturated fat consumption should not exceed 10% of calories.” That’s the exact same as the old guidelines.
So, what gives?
I’m not here to burn bridges or conflate human nutrition with politics. But like everyone else I want to know “what’s up?” and “what’s next?”
Roadmap
I’m breaking down this letter into three parts:
What I Agree with
What I Disagree with
What Needs to Happen Next
Let’s bite into the chaos and digest it into reason.
What I Agree With
1. Targeting Added Sugars
The guidelines go hard on added sugars—and I’m here for it!
This is one of the rare topics with wide consensus, and the updated language is direct.
The guidelines also concisely teach people how to identify added sugars on labels: look for ingredients that include the word “sugar” or “syrup,” or end in “-ose.”
Examples include: High fructose corn syrup, agave syrup, corn syrup, rice syrup, fructose, glucose, dextrose, sucrose, cane sugar, beet sugar, turbinado sugar, maltose, lactose, fruit juice concentrate, honey, molasses.
That’s solid guidance.
The challenge, of course, is now turning that into effective public education. Without that translation step, it’s just trivia. But the intent is strong, and I’ll try to give credit where it’s due.
Honestly, if nothing came out of this “revolution” other than reducing sugar intake, I would give this administration a “W.”
*That said, the vice president doesn’t seem to be playing for his own team. Or maybe my sense of humor is broken. Do you think this is funny or a mockery?
2. Cutting Back on Artificial Sweeteners
The guidelines also recommend limiting low-calorie, non-nutritive sweeteners like aspartame, sucralose, saccharin, xylitol, and acesulfame K.
I agree with this as well.
The nutrition space broadly has historically been too lax artificial sweeteners.
There are concerning data demonstrating that artificial sweeteners can promote insulin resistance—especially when consumed in mixed-macronutrient meals (i.e., most diets). Plus, they may negatively impact the gut microbiome.
So yes, this is a step in the right direction. Although I’d carve out certain natural non-nutritive sweeteners, like stevia and allulose, as safe.
3. Prioritizing Protein
Another shift: The guidelines now recommend 1.2 to 1.6 grams per kilogram (g/kg) of protein of body weight per day.
That’s an improvement from the sarcopenic 0.8 g/kg (or ~0.36 g/lb), which was barely enough to prevent deficiency, not optimize health.
That old number amounted to about one large chicken breast per day for a grown adult male. Not ideal.
But here’s the funny bit.
There’s a cap. An upper recommended limit. 1.6 g/kg is 0.72 g/lb.
For a 150 lb adult woman that’s 108 grams of protein at the upper bound (81 grams at the lower bound).
That’s “high protein” but not HIGH protein.
And let’s be honest—many pro-protein advocates already exceed 1.6 g/kg. The commonly recommended “high protein” goal of 1 g/lb is 2.2g/kg, which is ~37% higher than the upper bound set by the new guidelines.
Nit picking aside, I personally think it’s a step forward—and it reflects the growing consensus that most people benefit from more protein, not less.
There are nuances and edge cases, but we will leave those for another time.
Or you can read THIS letter today.
4. Full-Fat Dairy Is Back
Another win: the new guidelines green-light full-fat dairy—no added sugar.
This is a long-overdue course correction from the low-fat era, where dairy took a disproportionate hit.
Emerging research shows that full-fat dairy—especially fermented versions like yogurt and kefir—is beneficial for metabolic health. It’s associated with lower BMI, lower diabetes risk, and possibly even lower dementia risk.
Quote: “In 11 of 16 studies, high-fat dairy intake was inversely associated with measures of adiposity.”
Quote: “Higher plasma dairy fatty acid concentrations were associated with lower incidence of diabetes.”
Quote: “Higher intake of high-fat cheese and high-fat cream was associated with a lower risk of all-cause dementia”
Dairy Pro Tips:
Go for probiotic-rich dairy: live-cultured yogurts, kefir.
If you’re sensitive to dairy or have autoimmune concerns, try A2-casein dairy—found in goat, sheep, and buffalo milk. A1 casein (found in most cow’s milk) can break down into beta-casomorphin-7 (BCM7), a compound that may trigger gastrointestinal distress or even autoimmune diseases, like type 1 diabetes, in some people.
Elite-level nutrition stuff, yes—but worth knowing.
5. “Healthy Fats” For The Win
I also applaud the guidelines for emphasizing whole-food-based fats: omega-3-rich seafood, nuts, seeds, olives, and avocados. All excellent.
The guidelines, for the most part, don’t seem to discriminate on plant vs animal-based ‘whole food’ sources of fat.
I realize the public narrative skew is that, now paraphrasing, “RFK Jr and his cronies are pushing beef tallow, butter and saturated fat.” But there’s quite the emphasis on nuts, seeds, and omega-3 rich seafood.
It’s just that beef tallow, dairy fat and red meat are “out of jail,” so to speak.
Omega-3 for Baby Brains!
And, in particular, I give extra credit for page 8 of the summary document, where pregnant women are advised to consume low-mercury, omega-3-rich seafood like sardines and salmon.
This directly counters previous (overblown) FDA warnings against seafood in pregnancy—warnings that, in hindsight, may have harmed infant brain development by discouraging DHA intake.
DHA is the key omega-3 required for fetal brain growth, and depriving developing babies of it can lower IQ and impair cognitive development.
So, this revision matters. A lot.
I’ll be discussing this specifically in an upcoming interview with Omega-3 expert and inventor of the omega-3 index, Professor William Harris in an upcoming interview on my YouTube Channel. So, stay tuned for that!
Essential Fatty Acids: Know Your Terminology
One small but important note: the guidelines state, “Prioritize oils with essential fatty acids, such as olive oil... butter or beef tallow.”
There are odd examples, at best.
Essential fatty acids are those the body can’t make—primarily omega-6 (linoleic acid) and omega-3s (alpha linolenic acid).
Olive oil, butter and beef tallow are poor choices for examples.
Olive oil is still great—but not because it’s high in “essential” fatty acids. Ironically, most “seed oils” would fit the bill better.
If you want the numbers, beef tallow has about 3% “essential fatty acids.” Corn oil, by contrast, may have >50% “essential fatty acids.”
I know I’m nitpicking. But there’s a reason. Here me out.
It’s no secret that the current administration has a beef with corners of the scientific community. I’m not here to pick sides.
But a fact of the matter is there really isn’t any wiggle room for even the perception of scientific illiteracy. Every chink the armor will be exploited.
That’s not a threat. I’m not making the calls or firing the catapults. That’s just the reality of nutrition politics.
Also, while I’m at it… ‘data’ are plural. (Sorry. I had to.)
In the rest of this letter, for StayCurious Premium members, we dig into:
What I Disagree With
The Internal Contradictions
Including an AI-supported proof
What Needs to Happen Next
I’m not here looking for power or a foot in the door. Frankly, I’m an outsider on these matters just like you – sitting with my proverbial popcorn on the edge of my seat interested to see how the story evolves.
