A new research found fault with the new U.S. Dietary Guidelines that the government will release later this year.
The dietary guidelines are to provide guidance for national policies and programs regarding nutrition and to help men, women and children make the healthiest choices. The guidelines are currently reviewed by the US government's health and agricultural agencies.
The author of "The Big Fat Surprise," Nina Teicholz penned that the dietary guidelines was disinclined to "consider any evidence that contradicts the last 35 years of nutritional advice."
The committees in the past used the Nutrition Evidence Library (NEL) to systemize the process of collecting and considering studies as the basis of the guidelines, said Nina.
However, the team for the 2015 guidelines did not use NEL reviews for the 70% of the nutrition topics it covered.
"Use of external reviews by professional associations is problematic because these groups conduct literature reviews according to different standards and are supported by food and drug companies," the researchers wrote in the report.
According to the report, the committee placed sugar and saturated fat together under a classification called "empty calories."
Nutrition science does not upkeep that category since saturated fats are largely in foods like meat, dairy and eggs.
"Saturated fat is not empty calories. Sugar is not empty calories," said Dr Robert Lustig, co-founder and president of the Institute for Responsible Nutrition and a professor of pediatrics at the University of California, San Francisco.
"Sugar is not dangerous because it's calories; sugar is dangerous because it is toxic calories," said Lustig.
British Medical Journal
editor-in-chief Dr Fiona Godlee released harsh criticisms the "an unscientific report" from a biased expert committee, Diet Doctor informed.
"These guidelines are hugely influential, affecting diets and health around the world. The least we would expect is that they be based on the best available science. Instead the committee has abandoned standard methodology, leaving us with the same dietary advice as before - low fat, high carb," said Dr Fiona.
"Growing evidence suggests that this advice is driving rather than solving the current epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes. The committee's conflicts of interest are also a concern. We urgently need an independent review of the evidence and new thinking about diet and its role in public health," added Fiona.