new usda dietary guideline: the good and the bad
In January 2026, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the federal agency responsible for policies governing food, agriculture, and natural resources, released its new guidelines on the optimal American diet. The report is the called the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2025-2030.
The changes were announced jointly by the Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins and the Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F Kennedy Jr. Released at the beginning of the new year, just when many are making new year’s resolutions, the guidelines literally turned the old food pyramid on its head. Their inverted pyramid immediately sparked political controversy. However, experts from across the political spectrum have universal praised the report for finally “calling out” ultra processed foods as the source of the chronic disease epidemic in America.
The 90-page report was written by a panel of researchers and experts from major universities around the country. The lead author was Dr. Christopher Ramasden from the National Institutes of Health. The document clearly disclosed the conflicts of interest of some of the members, some of whom received funding from various agricultural lobbies including The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the American Dairy Science Association, and General Mills. After acknowledging the conflicts, the reports described the process of recommendation development. Their conclusions are based upon randomized control trials with clinical endpoints of disease and mortality. They de-emphasized results from observational studies or studies looking at biomarkers like cholesterol, blood pressure, and blood sugar.
The bottom line of the report is to eat real food and to avoid fake food.
This has been my message to patients for decades. In my book Winning the Battle for Health in a Toxic World, I advocate for a whole food diet, rich in vegetables, fruits, healthy proteins and fats, and whole grains. For decades, I have been advising against the “Terrible Pyramid” of the 1980s and 1990s which recommended a diet full of refined starches, added sugar, and salt, and manipulated ingredients.
The report defines ultra processed food as “a food, beverage, or engineered food-like item that is made primarily from substances extracted from foods (such as refined sugars, refined grains/starches, and refined oils) and/or containing industrially manufactured chemical additives.” These fake foods make up 60% of the typical American diet.
The report discussed why the final recommendations departed from the direction of the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) who, during the Biden administration, “framed its analysis through a health equity lens”. When the new administration took office, they restructured the committee, reframing the recommendations in the following way:
“(The recommendations are based on the) best available nutrition science centered around what humans should eat to prevent and reverse chronic disease and support optimal health…. As a scientific document, the DGAC Report should reflect the best available evidence, independent of current policy preferences or implementation concerns. We recognize and share concerns regarding the affordability and accessibility of healthy food, particularly for disadvantages populations. However, these challenges are best addressed by first establishing clear, unbiased scientific guidance on the optimal diet for Americans. That science can then serve as the foundation for effective downstream policy solutions.”
In other words, the new committee members took cost considerations off the table. In their opinion, we should first define the “perfect diet” and then figure out how to get it to the masses. Reading between the lines, they likely concluded that the prior administration was not pushing for elimination of ultra processed food because these foods as cheap and easily accessible for communities living in food deserts. This perspective change is impactful since USDA recommendations drive the food policy in institutional settings including schools and healthcare facilities as well as SNAP benefits. However, the implementation of the new recommendations will only work if the most disadvantaged communities get the access to whole food that they so desperately need.
The dangers of ultra processed food
The recommendation reviewed scientific literature and documented the harms of ultra processed food (UPF):
· UPF increase mortality rates (higher risk of death)
· UPF increase the risk of heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and obesity
· UPF are often packaged in plastic leading to migration of chemicals (including microplastics) into the food.
· Sugar sweetened drinks increase cavities, diabetes, depression, and heart disease.
· One 12-ounce can of soda per day increase risk of death by 10% and risk of diabetes by 20%.
· Artificial sweeteners increase death by 13%.
· Refined grains, refined potatoes (chips and French fries) and added sugar worsen heart health and metabolism.
They outlined the benefits of real foods, stating that:
· Increasing intake of fruits and vegetables (which are full of polyphenols and fiber) improves blood pressure, circulation, and cholesterol and reduces inflammation.
· Whole grains reduce risk of death by 7%, colon cancer by 13% , diabetes by 33%.
· Minimally processed fermented food improves microbiome improving metabolic and gut health.
Protein Protein Protein
The scientific evidence that UPF are harmful is not up for debate. All health advocates agree with limiting intake of toxic inflammatory food. However, the biggest source of criticism of the new recommendations is its emphasis on meat (red meat specifically) versus plant sources of protein.
A graphic was created to illustrate the new recommendation: an inverted pyramid. The new graphic is a clear and much needed repudiation of the terrible pyramid. At the top of the inverted pyramid are pictures of the most recommended food, which includes broccoli, tomatoes, carrots, peas, chicken, cheese, and beef. The next level has fatty fish, whole milk, olive oil, squash, blueberries, and leafy greens. Graphically, a large steak holds a prominent position in the left upper corner.
As I walk into the grocery store every week, I can see that prices are going up. When I stand in front of the display of meat my first question is “what is the healthiest source of protein for my family?” My next question is “what is the price?” Grass fed beef prices have gone through the roof. How many of us can afford to eat the top shelf grass-fed steak? The first thing I do is to look for sales and stock up when I can.
The prior administration emphasized plant-based sources of protein. These sources, such as beans, lentils, and peas are much less expensive than beef. However, they lack all nine essential fatty acids and are called incomplete proteins. The only plant sources that have all nine are:
soy
quinoa
buckwheat
hemp seeds
chia seeds, and
spirulina.
However, when the incomplete plant proteins are paired with whole grain, then the combination does have the nine essential amino acids. A meal of beans and brown rice is the world’s least expense complete protein. While these plant sources are lacking the inverted pyramid graphic, they are described in a section near the end of the report for vegetarians and vegans. Candidly, the complete plant proteins would be more difficult for the masses to recognize in a graphic. We can assume that this was debated during the committee deliberations. Obviously, the voices of the dairy and cattle lobby came through loud and clear and those foods feature prominently on the inverted pyramid.
The new recommendation not only redefines quality protein but also increases the amount of protein that Americans should consume every day. The prior recommendation was 0.8 grams/kg/day, which is about 50 grams of protein per day for the average person. An example of 50 grams of protein is 6-7 ounces of meat or fish (about the size of an average chicken breast) per day. This amount was determined as the minimal intake to prevent protein deficiency. With the new recommendations, the USDA increased protein intake to optimal levels which are 1.2 to 1.6 grams/kg/day (about 80 to 100 grams for average person) - equivalent to two average chicken breasts per day. This is a big change, encouraging Americans to shift calorie intake from empty pro-inflammatory refined starch and sugar with high quality protein, thereby reducing inflammatory and metabolic diseases in the population.
On the other hand, consuming more animal protein does have downsides. Besides the expense, animal proteins are considered “acidic” foods while plant protein is less acidic. Acidic high protein diets may increase risk of kidney stones and have negative impacts on those with chronic kidney disease due to the added stress of the acid load on the kidneys[1]. Other studies have shown an association between high intake of animal protein and increased risk of heart disease and death[2],[3]. However, other studies show that high protein diet improves metabolism, muscle mass, and bone health, and promotes weight loss[4]. Considering these pros and cons, I recommend those at risk for heart or kidney disease consult their healthcare provider before significantly increasing their dietary protein, especially animal protein. Plant based diets also have downsides due to risk of certain vitamin and mineral deficiencies. I recommend a combination of animal and plant proteins: the best of both worlds.
Fruits and vegetables are alkaline food; therefore, anyone who increases their animal protein intake must balance it by increasing vegetable intake. This is why the inverted pyramid has animal protein and vegetables together at the top. My concern is that some people will just eat meat and will skip the vegetables.
The 777 approach
When it comes to dietary protein, I have coined the phrase “The 777 approach”:
· 7 meals per week to be 100% plant based (focused on nuts, seeds, legumes, and beans)
· 7 meals per week to be vegetarian (focused on eggs and dairy)
· 7 meals per week to have animal protein, with at least 3 being from fatty fish.
This is an easy way to get a combination of plant and animal sources of proteins.
The Fat Debate
The other area of controversy is the report’s classification of foods high in saturated fats as “healthy.” This is controversial because over the last 50 years saturated fat has been deemed unhealthy and to be avoided. However, recent scientific studies have called the association of saturated fat and heart disease into question. The science on this matter is not settled.
Over the last 50 years, saturated fat intake from meat has been replaced by processed oils that are high in trans fats and linoleic acid (a form of omega 6 fatty acid). This shift was the result of recommendations from the American Heart Association in the 1960s that the “modern” processed seed oils were better than the traditional fats like butter. However, recent studies have shown that replacing saturated fat with linoleic acid does not reduce heart disease or death. Instead, highly processed oils may be dangerous.
In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a shift from real butter to artificial margarine (hydrogenated vegetable oil) which is full of trans fat, the type of fat that is most dangerous to the health. The FDA made trans fats illegal in 2015, and they were phased out completely by 2021. However, anything that contains hydrogenated vegetable oil still contains trace amounts of trans fat.
As a result of the ban, most food manufacturer replaced trans fats with other highly processed oils full of chemical additives and linoleic acid, the most common type of omega-6 fatty acid. When linoleic acid is heated (when cooking or frying), inflammatory molecules are produced[5].
In addition to the proliferation of unhealthy oils in the 1980s, the low-fat recommendations of that era lead to mass produced and highly marketed low-fat high sugar foods and snacks. Diets filled with refined starches and sugars and high linoleic oils have resulted in the metabolic crisis we are facing today.
In the view of the committee, shifting back saturated fat will reverse the 40-year trend, reducing omega-6 intake in the population. I agree that too much omega-6 (linoleic acid) can be harmful. However, red meat also contains omega 6 fatty acids.
In my opinion the better approach is to focus on increasing omega-3 and oleic acid while reducing omega-6. Unfortunately, the 2026 recommendation emphasizes butter, tallow, and full fat diary over other sources of heathier fat. This guidance flies in the face of decades of research showing that the Mediterranean diet, which is rich in olive oil (oleic acid) and fish oil (omega 3), produces the largest reduction in heart and metabolic diseases[6]. While this diet does include some dairy, the Mediterranean diet is not high in saturated fat.
Considering the committee members’ conflicts of interest, I cannot help but ask this question: what impact did the dairy and cattle industry lobby have on these recommendations? More research in the coming years will settle these lingering questions.
For now, our focus must be on increasing omega-3 fatty acid intake. The omega-3 from plants is called alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) and is found in flax seed, chia seed, walnuts, soy, spirulina, purslane, and cold pressed canola oil. The omega-3 fatty acids in fatty fish are called EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid), which have been shown to improve cardiovascular and neurologic health. The fish with highest EPA and DHA and lowest mercury levels include salmon, sardines, anchovies, and trout. For those who do not eat fish, algae is a good source of EPA and DHA. Our liver converts ALA into EPA and DHA so those on a plant-based diet need to eat flaxseed or other ALA sources daily to make enough EPA and DHA.
If I was on the expert committee developing the graphic for the inverted pyramid, I would have placed fatty fish and olive oil above beef, emphasizing the importance of omega 3 fatty acids and oleic acid.
Summary
Overall, the new USDA dietary guidelines are a vast improvement from prior food pyramid. After its twenty-year reign over the American diet, the food pyramid was replaced with the plate model in 2011. While the plate model reduced the serving of starches and emphasized portion control and fruits and vegetables, it did not explicitly instruct Americans to avoid ultra processed foods.
Now in 2026, the pyramid has been turned on its head. While the new inverted pyramid is better, it is not perfect. The authors of the guideline emphasize the need for more research to clarify areas of debate. Until the research is settled, focus on real food and don’t get bogged down in the controversy.
In conclusion, I recommend the following:
· Eat whole food.
· Avoid ultra processed “fake” foods with long lists of hard-to-understand ingredients.
· Eat more organic vegetables.
· Eat more high-quality complete proteins based on the “777 approach” incorporating both plant and animal sources of protein into the diet.
· Eat more healthy fat including low mercury fatty fish, olive oil, avocados, chia, and flaxseeds.
References
[1] Ko, Gang-Jee et al. “The Effects of High-Protein Diets on Kidney Health and Longevity.” Journal of the American Society of Nephrology : JASN vol. 31,8 (2020): 1667-1679. doi:10.1681/ASN.2020010028
[2] Meroño, Tomás et al. “Animal Protein Intake Is Inversely Associated With Mortality in Older Adults: The InCHIANTI Study.” The journals of gerontology. Series A, Biological sciences and medical sciences vol. 77,9 (2022): 1866-1872. doi:10.1093/gerona/glab334
[3] Song, Mingyang et al. “Association of Animal and Plant Protein Intake With All-Cause and Cause-Specific Mortality.” JAMA internal medicine vol. 176,10 (2016): 1453-1463. doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2016.4182
[4] Cuenca-Sánchez, Marta et al. “Controversies surrounding high-protein diet intake: satiating effect and kidney and bone health.” Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) vol. 6,3 260-6. 15 May. 2015, doi:10.3945/an.114.007716
[5] Mercola, Joseph, and Christopher R D'Adamo. “Linoleic Acid: A Narrative Review of the Effects of Increased Intake in the Standard American Diet and Associations with Chronic Disease.” Nutrients vol. 15,14 3129. 13 Jul. 2023, doi:10.3390/nu15143129
[6] Kiani, Aysha Karim et al. “Modern vision of the Mediterranean diet.” Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene vol. 63,2 Suppl 3 E36-E43. 17 Oct. 2022, doi:10.15167/2421-4248/jpmh2022.63.2S3.2745