There is general consensus among policy advocates and food writers that these Guidelines are definitely better than the last round, as they name the obesity epidemic in America and speak about the contributing environment. The Guidelines also name that lots of folks (15% of Americans) don't have access to what they need to fulfill the recommended daily requirements.
Not surprisingly, a good portion of their key recommendations focus on "increasing" certain foods instead of "decreasing" others. Sure, they talk about lowering sodium and cholesterol intake, but they shy away from the specifics. If the goal of the USDA is to offer more plain, easy-to-understand language for Americans, why not just say LAY OFF THE WHOPPERS. DRINK FEWER BIG GULPS. DON'T HEAD FOR THE BORDER WITH TACO BELL- THAT SHIT WILL KILL YOU!
There is also no meaningful discussion of the politics of consuming certain foods, though I wouldn't expect the USDA would ever say, "The oceans are DYING! Stop eating canned tuna!" or, "The jury is still out on regular soy consumption, and most of it is GM soy anyway, so keep that in check as well!" or, "Those strawberries on your 'healthy' McDonald's salad come on the backs of migrant workers that we won't recognize as contributing members of our nation with all the rights and protections therein!"
Sadly, we have all this build up every five years for the new Guidelines. We should know by now that they're never going to blow our minds, as the USDA is bought and paid for by lobbyists backed by hundreds of millions of dollars. Incremental improvements are nice, but who are we serving by tiptoeing around the issues and hoping for better five years from now when the next round of Guidelines emerge?
