Problems with the US Government Dietary Guidelines
Popular Lecture Series
Volume 4
By
Mark Leo Collins, PhD Biochemistry,
Smashwords Edition 2011
Based on his book Maximum Irony,
Appendices 7, 8, 9
Copyright 2006
Mark Leo Collins
***
Table of Hyperlinked Contents
Initial set of common-sense dietary rules
The most nutritious food groups
Putting this theory into practice
Author Bio
Developed strong interest in nutrition in grade school
In the late 1960’s my restless experimentation convinced me that the official US government dietary recommendations were wrong-headed, as I gained weight the more heavily I consumed grain-based foods
Finally, I went against government advice and easily lost 80 pounds
Maintained a trim and proper weight ever since (for over 40 years) on my whole foods nutritional program in which foods are consumed in direct proportion to their “quantitative nutritional scores.”
Received degrees in Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, and Biochemistry
Enjoyed a 16 year career as a research scientist doing DNA-based quantitative diagnostics (18 US Patents)
Enjoying an ongoing career as a writer (7 books)
***
Problems with Government Dietary Guidelines
Before we get to that, we need to lay a solid biochemical foundation for nutritional theory
***
The Principle of Equilibrium
Example: A 185 lb person consumes 3000 calories a day
Goes on a diet, consumes 1500 calories a day
After months of starving, weighs 145 lbs
Goes off diet, consumes 3000 calories a day
After months at the original activity level, 180-190 lbs
Yo-yo dieting: Senseless waste of time, money, & bad for health
***
Permanent weight loss
Requires permanent reduction in calorie consumption
And a Sensible, lifelong eating program
Based on sound nutritional theory and very tasty food
Weight loss should never be the goal
-Leads to imbalanced or dangerous diets
Optimal health via proper nutrition is the goal
Weight optimization: One of the end results
Unfortunately, most of us have unrealistically low target weights
***
Can we be too thin?
Yes, the long-lived people (from actuarial data) are not thin, but average to above average
A malnourished body will not find its proper weight
A well-nourished body will
-Unless a serious genetic flaw prevents it
What’s your proper weight and % body fat?
Nourish yourself properly and you’ll find out
***
Initial set of common-sense dietary rules
The French rules:
-Eat delicious, nutritious meals
-Eat slowly to savor the flavors and allow the brain time to gauge satiation
-The brain is a pleasure-seeking organ: Never frustrate it at mealtime
In addition, either: eat when hungry or eat multiple mini-meals
Never eat on schedule, for emotional comfort, or defensively
Exercise: Don’t overdo it. Just stop avoiding it
***
Proper Nutrition has Five Dimensions
1. Satisfying the brain’s pleasure-seeking impulses through great-tasting food
2. Getting sufficient calories
3. Getting sufficient essential nutrients
4. Getting sufficient water and oxygen
5. Keeping toxins as low as possible
Americans are failing on all five points:
-Our food has too many toxins and calories
-Our nutrition is deficient in nutrients, water, oxygen, and flavor
-Though we eat too many calories, we are perpetually seeking food
***
Some simple shopping rules
Shop only along the periphery of grocery stores
Avoid all food in the middle isles: Fake, processed junk
Avoid empty calorie white foods:
-White sugar (use fruits and nuts to sweeten foods)
-White flour products (add mixed whole grains; dilute with white flour to taste)
-White rice (subst. whole grains like quinoa, wild or brown rice)
Exceptions to “white food is junk food” rule: Cauliflower and milk products
***
First order quantitative theory
Simplified, approximate
No weighting factors, no penalties
Though over-simplified, may indicate trends
***
More complete theory
Health score = (S-N)/N, S=signal, N=noise
S = nutrients
N = toxins
Health score1,2 =
{(∑nutrients (x) -∑ toxins (x))/∑toxins (x)}
1. X= per calorie normalization probably better than parts per million
2. Ideally, toxins would be weighted by their relative toxicity
***
Definition: Food has Signal >> Noise
Fish caught in Minimata Bay during the 1950s Minimata disaster were poisonous due to lethal levels of organo-mercury
Mushrooms delivering at least 0.1 mg/kg of α-amanitin are poisons
Toxicological models: Inadequate at predicting the effects of chronic consumption of low levels of a variety of toxins
-Nutritional programs need to minimize toxic overloads
***
Simple Example
With two nutrients and three toxins in three foods
Reference: Bunzl, K. et al., 2001. J. Environ. Quality 30(3): 934-9
Beans have a S/N much higher than lettuce.
On a ppm basis, lettuce has more S and more N
Is this generally true? See several other examples of this below
***
Additional Thoughts
The authors observed that S/N decreased markedly when plants were grown on contaminated soil
Consider that organic foods are often fertilized with manure
-Relative to foods, manure is enriched in toxins, depleted in nutrients
-Do manure-fertilized organic foods have decreased S/N?
***
Reduction of food toxicity by “filtration”
Notice that meat and dairy have much lower levels of the toxin Aluminum than plant foods. Is this generally true? Do plant foods have higher nutrients per calorie, but also higher toxicity?
***
Filtration of toxins in human diet
-Interesting: The human body seems to be treating the “normal” level of fluoride in the human diet just like known toxic substances.
Wisdom of adding fluoride to the water supply?
***
In the absence of complete information on nutrients and toxins:
Assume ∑nutrients(x) >> ∑toxins(x) in most whole foods, so that the nutritive value of any food can be approximated by:
- ∑ nutrients per calorie
In this simplified model, we invest calories to buy nutrients
If we invest wisely, our health improves and our weight normalizes
***
Simplified nutritional model
The higher the nutrient content per calorie
-The more nutritious the food and
-The greater the ROIC, return on invested calories
Because all essential nutrients are equally essential, they are equally weighted
Because of incomplete information, no correction is made for differential absorbability
***
Putting all nutrients on the same scale
For each nutrient, compute amount per calorie for each food in USDA database
Sort high to low
Assign food with highest value of that nutrient = 300 points
Assign all other foods = (Ai/Amax)*300
Sum over all nutrients in database to compute a total quantitative nutrient score
***
The most nutritious food groups
***
Food group notes
The average scores are of the top 25 foods in the food group
Vegetables (1361) have the highest nutritional score
-Fruits (321) are not in the same nutritional league
Meats (466-554) are more nutritious than fruits (321)
Whole grains the lowest nutrition per calorie (255)
-Odd choice for the base of the USDA food pyramid
Vegetables should be the base of the pyramid
Whole cereal grains should be the top of the pyramid
-Eaten sparingly
Nuts and seeds (406) more nutritious than cereals
-Even with a 4.5-fold higher energy density
***
***
The top 25 foods
***
The top 25 foods (cont.)
***
18 of the top 25 most nutritious foods are vegetables
Watercress and spinach are the top two
5 are livers
1 yeast extract (such as Vegemite)
1 shellfish (oysters)
Liver and oysters are probably higher in toxins than muscle meats
***
Cooked vs raw foods
***
Raw and Cooked Foods
Nearly the same in total “essential” nutrients
USDA database does not include heat-unstable accessory nutrients like enzymes
Some nutrients may become more bio-available by cooking
-Carotenoids, including beta-cryptoxanthin and lycopene
Cooking is also expected to reduce bio toxins, while increasing chemical toxins. Net positive.
***
Consequently
Some people find eating 4-8 ounces of leafy vegetables daunting
Take advantage of roughly equal “essential” nutrition of cooked and raw foods and cook the leafy vegetables to greatly reduce their volume and make them easier to eat and digest
***
The most nutritious high protein sources
***
Most nutritious high protein foods
No surprises – egg white, non-fat cottage cheese, lean meats and fish top the list
Vegetarian sources: Spirulina protein closely matches human nutritional needs
***
Most nutritious dairy foods
***
Most nutritious dairy foods
Score much lower than vegetables, but higher than grains
Whey fraction of milk is most nutritious
Whole eggs about a hundred points behind egg white, but are more balanced
Some cheeses scored higher than whole milk
-Odd since cheese ~ whole milk - whey
***
Most nutritious nuts and seeds
***
Nuts and Seeds
Seeds more nutritious than nuts
Peanuts not on the list. Classified as a legume. Score =285
Brazil nuts top the list based largely on a perfect 300 Selenium score
One Brazil nut supplies RDA
Five would supply the current safe Upper Limit
Overdosing on the most nutritious food in a group probably not a good idea
***
Nut medley
Cocktails are probably a better idea
-Dilute unbalanced toxic effects
-Provides more nutritional balance
-Example:
Brazil nuts for Se
Almonds for natural vitamin E
Walnuts for omega 3s
Other nuts to fill out the nutritional profile
& balance the toxicological profile
***
Nuts and seeds
Chia and flax seeds very high (essential omega 3 fats)
Flax would be #2 on this list (higher than chia) if all of its protein data were included
Almonds did not score well, but are one of the best sources of natural vitamin E, which even a rich diet has trouble meeting
Coconuts (97) and macadamias (102) do not make the list
-Missing data, or over-rated?
Nuts and seeds score higher than grains:
This suggests a diet with more calories from nuts and seeds than grains, which are lower energy density
***
Whole grain brans and germs
Not whole foods, but they are included in the database because their scores are not inflated by additions
Contrast salted nuts:
-Iso-calorically adding sodium, an essential nutrient, increases the score of nuts
-Completely artificial and may be harmful
-Not counted in the database
***
Whole grain bran and germs
***
Whole grain brans and germs
Wheat bran more nutritious than wheat germ
Oat bran is about the same, raw or cooked
Rice bran is about the same as wheat bran and may be easier on most people’s digestive tract
Corn bran score is artificially low due to missing protein data
***
Whole grains
Score lower than the corresponding brans due to high caloric content and low nutrient content of the endosperm
***
The most nutritious whole grains
***
Whole grains
Dark rye (data available only as flour) scored the highest
Amaranth, oats, and wheat practically identical in nutritional value, but not in composition
Mixed grains more nutritionally balanced
Probably true of most food groups
Sprouted wheat did not outscore wheat, but may be more digestible
***
Most nutritious finfish and shellfish
***
Finfish and shellfish
Shellfish are more nutritious, but probably also more toxin-laden
The same mechanism that allows better uptake of nutrients may allow superior uptake of toxins
Are we really better off eating “more nutritious” foods?
As in engineering, is not “S/N” more relevant than “S”?
***
The most nutritious fruits
***
Fruits
Lemon with the peel (604) greatly outscored lemon without the peel (287)
-Are we throwing away nutrients?
Blueberries (138) did not make the list
Based on total antioxidants per gram, blueberries outscore almost all other fruits
Total antioxidants per calorie is more relevant
Should non-absorbable antioxidants count?
-Perhaps, as they may reduce the oxidative stress of the GI tract
***
Total antioxidants per calorie (TAC)
***
Total antioxidants per calorie
Spices have the highest value
-Also believed to be very toxin rich
Much lauded turmeric is lower than cinnamon
Cranberries higher than blueberries
Blueberries score higher than spinach, which has a much higher overall nutritional score
Sugar-free baking chocolate scores high
-Irrelevant, as who eats chocolate without added sweetener?
***
Current government recommendations: Based on a false assumption: Average dietary intakes of “apparently” healthy individuals are adequate
How can we call people “healthy,” 2/3rds of whom will suffer from ill-health for many years before dying from complications of one or more degenerative disease?
The American diet is full of processed foods
Would not the nutrient content of whole foods be a better guide?
***
Can we estimate RDAs using whole foods?
It takes about 10,000 years for a major change to occur in the human genome
10,000 years ago people were probably eating mostly randomly chosen whole foods
Reasonable assumption: Human digestive system is “tuned” to the level of nutrients in whole foods (as animals, we co-evolved with our food supply)
Thus, we should be able to estimate true RDAs by analyzing randomly chosen whole foods
***
Alternative estimate of RDAs
Use random samplings of whole foods to estimate the real dietary requirements
Two computer simulations were done, each with 100 randomly chosen whole foods
Amount of each food equals 20 calories.
Thus, total calories = 2,000 to compare with RDAs
***
Random whole foods nutrients vs RDA
Sim 1 or 2 = simulation # 1 or 2
***
More random whole foods nutrients vs RDA
***
More random whole foods nutrients vs RDA
***
Randomly chosen whole foods
NB: Just consuming whole foods randomly, one would meet the RDAs in all but 5 nutrients.
One would exceed the RDAs in 25 different nutrients
Clearly, even random whole foods dieting is richer in nutrients than government recommendations
Yet even whole food diets can be “deficient” in USDA nutrients
Notable deficiencies included
Calcium and Vitamins A, D, and K
Is this real or an RDA problem?
The nutrient contents in the whole foods do not agree with the RDAs
***
Whole foods vs RDAs
Data can be explained by assuming:
Calcium RDA is set too high relative to Mg and P
Vitamin E set too high relative to Se and Omega 3
Omega 3 set too low relative to omega 6
Vitamin D set higher than what would be needed in “a state of nature” due to our modern sun avoidance
-And may not be high enough in some cases of extreme sun avoidance
***
Vitamins
A diet of vitamin and mineral pills and fiber supplements has virtually no calories and 100% of the RDAs or greater
Extremely high nutritional score
Why not eat junk calories and just consume enough fiber, minerals and vitamins?
Several reasons:
-Weight gain from over-consumption of junk food
-Higher toxicity
-Likely missing some accessory nutrients
-Very likely unbalanced (as are the RDAs, on which vitamin and fiber formulations are based?)
***
Putting this theory into practice
It’s simple –
No calories to count
In a properly nourished and hydrated body, hunger is a reliable guide
-(not so in a poorly nourished body)
Use the food pyramid as a guide
***
Example: Whole foods dieting
Modify great-tasting, easy-prep recipes to improve nutrition:
Remove/reduce white “foods”: Sugar, flour, rice
Add lots more tasty vegetables (nutritious, filling)
Use whole grains sparingly
Make sure each meal contains at least 20 grams of protein (US RDA) – 40 for whole foods diet
-E.g., 3 ounces of fish, meat, or cheese supplies ~ 20g protein
***
Example: Soy-glazed Salmon with Watercress
Reference: “Everyday Foods” Recipe
Soy-Glazed Salmon with Watercress Salad
Prep: 10 minutes Total: 20 minutes
Brushing fish with a citrusy glaze while it's cooking infuses it with flavor. Add a simple salad to round out the meal.
***
Ingredients (Serves 4).
2 tablespoons soy sauce
4 teaspoons honey
2 oranges, peeled, flesh cut into segments, and juice squeezed from membranes (~ 3 tbl.)
Coarse salt and ground pepper
1 teaspoon rice vinegar
1 tablespoon vegetable oil
4 salmon fillets (about 6 ounces each)
1 bunch watercress (about 3/4 pound), thick ends trimmed
1/2 small red onion, thinly sliced
***
Directions
In a small bowl, whisk together soy sauce, 3 teaspoons honey, and orange juice; season glaze with salt and pepper.
In a large bowl, whisk together 1 tablespoon glaze, 1 teaspoon honey, vinegar, and oil; set dressing aside.
Heat broiler, with rack 4 inches from heat. Line a rimmed baking sheet with foil. Season salmon with salt and pepper and broil 5 minutes. Remove fish from oven, brush with glaze, then broil until opaque throughout, about 2 minutes, brushing with glaze once more.
Add orange segments, watercress, and onion to dressing and toss to combine. Season with salt and pepper. Divide salad among four plates and top with salmon. Serve immediately.
Copyright 2010 Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia, Inc. All rights reserved.
***
Great Tasting Food, Just 20 min prep time
However, 380 calories: too low for a three meal plan
42 grams of protein: 2xRDA for a single meal, close to whole foods RDA
2.1 grams of fiber: Way too low – need 10 grams
Recommendation: Just add more tasty vegetables!
Tomatoes plus lightly steamed broccoli and carrots
Additional colors also improve the “presentation”
Option: Also add some chopped nuts or crumbled cheese for additional flavor
***
This quantitative nutritional analysis of foods still needs:
More data on toxins and a good model of chronic toxicity
A sounder nutritional theory – in particular, RDAs based on dietary surveys of really healthy people
Thus, we must find the healthiest people and use their nutrition to set standards
And either prove they are healthier or start the search over with new criteria
***
Summary
Quantitative health assay to find the healthiest people:
We could screen people with a “Quantitative Health Questionnaire,” where a group of doctors “force ranks” the seriousness of all known “medical conditions”
Follow up with those who score the highest:
-Thorough medical exams to weed out false positives
-Thorough analysis of their nutrition
-Prospective studies to see if these people did indeed prove healthier than average
-If not, start over again with a new quantitative health theory
Although this would be an expensive undertaking, would it not be worth it to have more sensible nutritional recommendations?
***
Summary
For now, amounts of nutrients per calorie in randomly chosen whole foods makes more sense than current RDAs
All non-redundant whole foods could be used to take out some of the sample bias
Or average many random simulations (Std. Dev.)
Do a better job of eliminating redundancies
-There are so many similar meats and cuts of meats in USDA database
***
References
Maximum Irony, which contains all of the nutritional and quantitative health references
***
Supplementary information
***
What would our nutritional profile look like if we consumed the same amount of the top 100 or so non-redundant whole foods?
What would be our ROIC (return on invested calories)?
This is a CRON-type experiment (see Roy Walford’s books)
***
ROIC
ROIC = % of RDA/% of recommended calories
Example: A meal plan provides 1000 calories, while 2000 are recommended. Calcium = 2x RDA.
ROIC (Calcium) = 2/(1000/2000) = 400%
ROIC = 100% means adequate nutrition: on average, RDAs and calories at the recommended levels of the US government
***
Nutritional Profile
25 grams of each of the 91 most nutritious foods contained 1114 calories and an average ROIC of 1020%
Only USDA “deficient” nutrient was omega-6 fat (39%)
-Is that nutrient set too high?
On average, there was 10-times the needed nutrition per calorie
What would happen to our health if we ate like this?
We would be a lot lighter (per CRON) – or too thin?
Is too much nutrition harmful?
***
Are the RDAs sound?
Let’s compare the ratios of the nutrients in the most nutritious whole foods to the ratios of their RDAs
***
Observed Ratios of Nutrients
***
Ratios of Essential Nutrients
These four are close to RDA ratios
Ratios of RDAs are probably close to correct, although the absolute values may still be sub-optimal
USDA may have set Calcium too high
In 1989, USDA recommended 2000 mg of potassium and 500 mg of sodium
Since then, they have relaxed the sodium, as American diets become ever more perverse, with added salt and many subtracted nutrients
***
Other Essential Nutrient Ratios
***
Possible Problems with RDAs?
These five nutrient ratios are way off
What might be wrong with RDAs?
With more Se in the diet, the need for vitamin E might decrease
The omega-6 RDA is probably set too high, based on over-consumption of processed foods by Americans who are merely “apparently healthy.”
Vitamin D is set much higher than what would be needed in a “state of nature” due to sun avoidance
Vitamin K is set way too low, due to avoidance of green leafy vegetables by Americans
***
But
Could the problem be over-nutrition?
After all, in a state of nature, one would not know what the most nutritious foods are
And taste is an unreliable guide to nutrition
***
Health and Disease
Diseases arise because our defense systems become “overmatched”
Example: CVD is not due simply to high saturated fat and/or cholesterol in the diet
The modern French and the traditional Polynesian (coconut-rich) diets are if anything higher in saturated fat than American diets
Polynesians have higher blood cholesterol than Americans (total typically over 200) yet have much lower rates of CVD.
French and Polynesian foods are more nutritious than American foods – they have better weapons to bolster their defenses
The French paradox is not explained by any one ingredient (like red wine) in their diet
***
Milk: Cow’s vs human’s
One surprising result of these studies is that cow’s milk is 3.1 times more nutritious
Cow’s milk exceeds human’s in 18 nutrients
Human milk exceeds cow’s milk in just 7 nutrients
***
How can this be?
We feed cows better than we feed ourselves
We eat many products based on white flour (score 86)
We feed cows the more nutritious wheat germ (615) and wheat bran (1124)
The K1 content of cow’s milk is 2-10 times higher than human
Again, probably due to under-consumption of green leafy vegetables by mothers
***
Is cow’s milk really more nutritious?
There are many complications
For example, human milk has 2.6-fold lower total mineral content, but the minerals may be more absorbable
Database does not score accessory nutrients such as antibodies, taurine and Bifidogenic oligosaccharides
While the protein content of human milk is lower than cow’s, this slows infant growth to an appropriate rate and may improve colonic health by reducing the available food supply of the putrefactive competitors of acidophilus microbes.
###
For other free e-books by Mark Collins, go to