US "Food Pyramid" Invalid As It Was Made By Experts With Conflicts Of Interest
Click
Here to Add Comment Subject:
US "Food Pyramid" Invalid As It Was Made By Experts With Conflicts Of
Interest
Date:
Tue, 13 Aug 2002 10:39:06 -400
From:
Stephen Tvedten <steve@getipm.com>
Organization: Get Set Inc. (www.getipm.com)
To: Paul Helliker <phelliker@cdpr.ca.gov>
Director, State of California, Department of Pesticide
Regulation
cc: Christine Whitman whitman.christine@epa.gov
US "Food Pyramid" Invalid as It was Made by Experts with Conflicts of Interest
A U.S. District Court judge ruled last week that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) violated federal laws when they selected individuals with known financial ties to various food industries to serve as members to the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. This group was in charge of drawing up the latest nutritional guidelines that comprise the USDA's "Food Pyramid".
In addition to its educational purpose, the pyramid also serves as a basis for all federally funded food programs in the United States.
The research and advocacy group Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) had filed the lawsuit last December. PCRM asserts that the current food pyramid is unhealthy because it promotes the consumption of meat, eggs and dairy as part of the daily diet.
They also maintain that it is racially biased since nonwhite races are more likely to be lactose intolerant and some are more susceptible to diet-related chronic illnesses including heart disease, stroke, hypertension, obesity, diabetes and certain types of cancer.
As a matter of fact, several groups and people within the African-American community openly supported PCRM's lawsuit, including the NAACP, former Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, Martin Luther King, III, and Muhammad Ali.
In its lawsuit, PCRM claimed that there were serious conflicts of interest affecting six out of 11 members on the Advisory Committee, and that these conflicts influenced their decisions. Some of the conflicts were as follows:
- Cutberto Garza (chairman of the committee) - direct ties with the National Dairy Council
- Richard Deckelbaum - received grant funding from the National Dairy Promotion and Research Program and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association
- Scott Grundy - served on the American Egg Board
- Johanna Dwyer - on the American Meat Institute Committee and the National Dairy Promotion and Research Program Board and was also sponsored by the National Dairy Council for a visiting professorship
- Roland Weinsier - received a $500,000 grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb/Mead Johnson, a company that sells and promotes dairy-based products
- Eileen Kennedy - serves as an advisor to the Board of Directors of the Dannon Research Institute, Inc., another dairy company.
DR. MERCOLA'S COMMENT: ALWAYS, ALWAYS look at the details and try to find out where the money is flowing as it will usually provide a clue as to where the real truth lies. The Dairy Council is one clever group in infiltrating so many members on the Food Pyramid committee. This is one of the major reasons why milk is so strongly pushed.
However, I don't think they hold a candle to the grain industry. I don't have the financial resources to conduct independent investigations like PCRM, but I suspect that the committee was also composed of members with links to this industry, which is why so many servings of breads and grains are recommended. However, it is always possible that the only explanation for the ludicrous recommendations for including so many grains in our diet is related to the members' ignorance of the scientific literature.
PCRM again, as they have often in the past, did a really great job here in taking a federal agency to task for acting improperly. My one and only problem with them, as many of you have already heard me say, is that I strongly disagree with their pro-vegan and anti-meat and eggs agenda.
When reading about this conflict of interest at the USDA, it reminds me of the great expose that the USA Today did recently on the rampant conflicts of interest in the FDA's drug approval process. They found that very often members of the FDA scientific advisory boards had financial interests in the companies whose drugs they were reviewing. Certainly, if the courts have ruled against the USDA in the above case, it would most likely do so in this case against of the FDA concerning the drug approvals. In my mind, it is actually a much stronger case.
If you would like to be included in our mailing list for continuing information on pesticides, please email us at list@safe2use.com.