There had to come a moment when I would say I agreed with something the Donald Trump administration said in the USA, and, to my surprise, it has arrived. The Guardian reported last week that:
The Trump administration has released updated dietary guidelines for Americans on Wednesday that emphasize eating whole and minimally processed foods, scaling back refined carbohydrates, and “declaring war” on added sugars.
The recommendations encourage “prioritizing high-quality protein, healthy fats, fruits, vegetables and whole grains” while steering clear of highly processed foods. Robert F Kennedy Jr, the health and human services (HHS) secretary, and Brooke Rollins, the agriculture secretary, are presenting the new guidance at a White House briefing.
They added this:
“Today, our government declares war on added sugar,” Kennedy said. “Highly processed foods loaded with additives, added sugar and excess salt damage health and should be avoided. As secretary of health and human services, my message is clear: eat real food.”
You can put aside for a moment the fact that this comes from the Trump administration. Forget, too, that it comes from Robert Kennedy Jr, whose opinions on many subjects I find fall within the range from appalling to straightforwardly offensive. For example, on issues around neurodivergence and many of his claims on vaccination, he is just plainly wrong. But on this issue of diet, he is right, and I think it is appropriate to say so. If one is to criticise, it is also appropriate to admit that your opponent has, just occasionally, got something right.
To contextualise this, one of the big problems of the last 45 years has been the global expansion of what might be called the SAD, which stands for the Standard American Diet. This is, of course, based upon excess consumption of almost all foods, and most especially those that are ultra-processed. That led to an obesity crisis in the US long before it spread to Europe, as ultra-processed food production and marketing were expanded worldwide by profit-driven corporations that care nothing for their customers' well-being or the quality of the food they produce. Many of the problems inside the American health system, and to some extent within society, can be attributed to that diet, just as the growth of chronic illness in the UK is similarly attributable, in large part, to much of the UK population being poisoned on a persistent and deliberate basis by the foodstuffs that are made available to them at affordable prices by our so-called food manufacturers and supermarkets.
Now, Robert Kennedy Jr has said that reducing sugars, which will never be achieved without avoiding ultra-processed foods, and eating what might be described as proper foods, is essential to restoring the health of people in the USA. I agree, but what, of course, was absent from what he said was:
- any indication as to how this will actually happen,
- whether penalties will be imposed upon manufacturers for causing this problem, or
- how those who want to make this transition will be assisted in both time and monetary terms.
The result is that, whilst what he says is correct, the likelihood that anything will happen to correct the crisis in US healthcare is very limited, most especially given the changes in the Trump administration's support for healthcare costs.
So, whilst I welcome the rhetoric from Robert Kennedy Jr., the reality is that the US remains exactly where it was. The Trump administration is actually doing nothing to stand up to the toxic food industry, and countries like the UK will have to eventually do this themselves. I look forward to a government with the courage to do so. The Greens really need to take this issue on.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
For me, food labelling is most important. For example, instead of listing any of the 50 different names for 50 different types of sugar, they should be listed under the main heading “Sugars: glucose, maltodextrin, honey, etc”.
Starmer and Trump want the UK to import more US beef, much of which is not raised in the US, but packaged there. Labelling must reflect this.
US beef also makes use of growth hormones; label it.
Chlorinated chicken? As long as it is labelled.
I’d also like to see food assays: how much heavy metals are in foods? how about glyphosate (toxic weedkiller).
We don’t know because the information is not available. It should be.
Enough monkeys and enough typewriters and you will get Shakespeare.
The Green Party (GPEW) does already take the issues associated with food consumption and production seriously. In the Green Party Manifesto 2024 it is covered at considerable length and with specific progressive proposals in the section headed “A GREENER AND FAIRER FOOD AND FARMING SYSTEM”.
I know little about the history of food and it is tempting to state the obvious that before large scale manufacturing of agri-chemicals and food for retail all food must have been much healthier and obesity in the general population low. I suspect, however, that basic supplies were graded and the lower grades consigned for general consumption and higher ones for the gentry. While this concerns quality I am equally sure that constraining supply through price and availability was another factor so that any health benefits of chemical- and processing-free food would have been reduced or more likely wiped out by the insufficiency of variety and quantity.
Our modern problem is the poor quality of food available (in ‘developed’ countries at least) in much greater quantities than are needed and whether by design or not neatly sets up pharmaceuticals and private health care to take advantage of a manufactured problem. This, I might add, is a dynamic I see in in almost all technical and pharmaceutical areas.
Thanks.
Noted.
The main suggestion I’ve seen is to block food stamp recipients from using them to buy unhealthy foods.
Since it’s not also trying to ensure sufficient food stamps are provided to buy healthier foods, or efforts provided to reduce the cost of healthcare foods, the concern is that it will not improve the health of people, it will just starve the poor.
I agree that is one of the few areas where I think RFK Jr is at least partially correct, but the plan appears to be all penalty for the consumer and not businesses and no reward.
I’ve watched the first instalment of “What Not to Eat”, and the recommended diet sticks to all the (currently fashionable) guidelines. From the programme, it also implies that a healthy diet will in general be more expensive (though not in this particular case), and also needs much more time spent on shopping, cooking, washing-up. In real life this will mostly fall upon the woman, on top of the already demonstrated extra time she already spends in family support. This doesn’t mean that moving away from UPF isn’t necessary — it so obviously is — but that it has costs and implications in many other areas. We should be honest about this.
I agree entirely
In faiurness, Jamie Oliver was doing quite well with some of his ideas last night on Feast for a Fiver. We will use couple – especially the brazed cabbage, which was quick and looked very good and is cheap.
He could start with the diet of King Donald…
I regularly meet young (<30) people who simply do not know how to cook a meal from scratch, which I find astonishing. Or perhaps I don't given the dearth of what used to be called "Home Economics" – aka how to cook – in schools and disinterested parents. I note, too, that life expectancy and morbidity statistics for the so-called 'boomers' seem to be deteriorating, especially compared to those few left who lived and ate a restricted, but broadly nutritious, diet in the 1930-1955 period.
Children are now arrivng in schools having never used cutlery according to recent reports I said. What does this say about our relationship with food, let alone preparing it? Does it call come pre-prepared to be eaten out of a bag, box or packet?
Some like to have their cake and eat it too!
They dont get well padded sinecures without integrity or initiative.
That’s how the cookie crumbles. Right?
Many I know have got the message and have drastically cut back on the McDonald’s and KFC’s and have lost several stone already.
Some are having difficulty giving up the fizzy sweetness of coke light or zero – which is just poison by another name but same mother.
Many have also stopped other ‘recommendations’ as they see many ending up in hospitals in autumn and now.
Orthodoxy’s and their purveyors are the real mind poisons – bodies follow.
The partial attempt at creating a healthy populace, especially the kids is an attempt to build them into the canon fodder boots on the ground, imperial invaders.
The business plans though have long been to turn ‘citizens’ into perma sick profit centers, from cradle to grave.
Victim to big Pharma and the Medical Insurance Complex’s scam of privatised health, which has advanced as planned under Herr Starmer fascist state; a government that means us the people who are implicitly guilty of aiding and abetting the daily slaughter of Gaza.
As we are equally guilty of attacking many nations with evil, illegal sanctions. Which starve them of nutrition and basic medicines.
Many such places where children would actually be better off having the bad fast foods, ironically.