DIET GUIDELINES: LESS MEAT

                  Remember the first U.S. Dietary Guidelines from 1979?  The infamous Food Pyramid?  Twinkies and Nabisco crackers on the foundational bottom?  Obesity and diabetes to follow? 

                  Well, not much has changed.  The guidelines get updated every 5 years, so the proposal coming up for the latest perversion puts beans, peas, and lentils over meat.  The Stanford University professor overseeing the committee writing the new guidelines says the emphasis is "plant forward."

                  When I was in Uruguay last fall, I learned that the per capita consumption of red meat is a bit more than 200 pounds per year.  In the U.S., it's slightly more than 50 pounds.  And guess what?  Their cardiovascular, colon cancer and other chronic diseases are miniscule compared to the U.S.  Most red meat there is grass finished, not grain finished. And you can spend days trying to find a fat person.  

                  These new guidelines demonize red meat especially.  In the protein category, the new guidelines move meat, poultry, and eggs to the bottom tier, below seafood, nuts, seeds, and soy products.  As a matter of environmental conscience, I only eat seafood if I'm fewer than 100 miles from the ocean.  The world's fisheries are being decimated by overharvesting, especially by China.  If we're part of a universal community, eating beef in Denver and fish in Boston makes a lot of sense. 

                  What's fascinating, of course, is that these scientists writing the guidelines blame animal proteins for cardiovascular disease, cholesterol and other health problems.  All these alleged maladies have been steadily increasing since the 1979 Food Pyramid while red meat consumption in that same time period has fallen by about 20 pounds per capita per year. 

                  Of course, the meat industry is already putting out press releases and interviews impugning these proposed guideline tweaks.  The guidelines impact school lunch programs and the public's general perception of dietary options.  The report does differentiate between processed meats and unprocessed.

                  But no additional differentiation exists, like the difference between grass finished and grain finished beef, or pastured poultry versus factory farmed.  The fact that these supposedly smart people can't even imagine that a burger from a beef animal raised solely on forages would not be different than a burger from a beef animal fattening on corn in a feedlot is tantamount to dereliction of duty. 

                  It could be dereliction, negligence, laziness, prejudice, or ignorance, but to refuse to examine the difference in nutrition between protein sources casts doubts on any studies or recommendations coming from this esteemed committee.  After Fauci and Francis Collins' anti-science (don't you love it?) pablum over the last couple of years, who's going to believe their fraternity regarding much of anything?

                  You can eat your beans and peas if you want, but I'm going to enjoy herbivores that build soil, don't require monocrops, tillage, or petroleum.  Risking TMI, beans don't agree with me, know what I mean?  Steak does.  Last night's pigaerator pig pork chops Teresa fixed for dinner were outstanding.  The bummer?  No leftovers.  Drat. 

                  Do you believe the meat-cancer, diabetes, heart attack link?