Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eat Real Food

realfood.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

511–520 of 1001 posts

Re: Eat Real Food

#511

Post by dqv »

nihakue wrote: post #55

How is it possible that beef, dairy, and chicken are front and center while Lentils, Tofu (or even just soy), Chickpeas, Nutritional Yeast, Broccoli, etc are all left off? Why do they arbitrarily split "protein" and "fruit/veg" given that most/all of the most protein dense foods are vegetables/legumes? Steak is a terrible source of protein (in terms of nutrient density). Immediately pretty suspicious.

There are nuts and legumes there in the bottom left.

So funny to see people reflexively defend those things being left off because it confirms their own beliefs. A deeper inspection of the actual guidelines has them being very fair to plant proteins:

> Consume a variety of protein foods from animal sources, including eggs, poultry, seafood, and red meat, as well as a variety of plant-sourced protein foods, including beans, peas, lentils, legumes, nuts, seeds, and soy.

The thing is... the pyramid is just a graphic, the actual words give more context.

https://cdn.realfood.gov/DGA.pdf

Re: Eat Real Food

#512

Post by 303uru »

torben-friis wrote: post #240
criddell wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the zeitgeist is starting to turn on the high-protein diet recommendations: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/11/looking-to-bu... There was a story about this in the NYT recently (can't find it) and IIRC, it basically said protein is out and fiber is in. It wasn't that simple, but that was my takeaway.

Fiber is stupidly easy to supplement, something that’s not talked about enough. A glass of water with psylium husk a day and you solve a lot of modern diet problems.its also super cheap,a $20 bag can last you a year.

Supplemental fiber is mostly worthless.

Re: Eat Real Food

#513

Post by 303uru »

bsder wrote: post #449
dyauspitr wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of red meat is probably one angle I can’t get behind. They are very high in cholesterol and triglycerides which are deadly for the heart over the long haul.

The problem is that when people say "red meat" they're almost always referring to the modern "hamburger-like substance" which almost certainly high on the ultra-processed scale. An actual steak or hamburger ground at a butcher would be a pretty gigantic step up for most people.

Your colon doesn't care how expensive the beef was.

Re: Eat Real Food

#514

Post by susiecambria »

There are so many things wrong with this website and the underlying arguments, assertions, etc., as others have pointed out, I will simply say that according to https://www.accessibilitychecker.org, the site is not compliant. Which doesn't surprise me in the least, but it is a good reminder that this is not a serious administration.

Re: Eat Real Food

#515

Post by bigiain »

kranke155 wrote: post #505
parl_match wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a weightlifter and as part of my training, I eat pretty close to about a pound of meat a day during bulk, usually about 12-14oz. This is because I need to eat about 200g of protein a day. I supplement it with protein shakes. I find that to be a challenging amount of meat. It's a lot! And to find out that's average ??? Americans eat way too much meat. Cheese, too.

Cheese is probably there due to lobbying. I don’t understand why it would be that high.

Cheese _is_ delicious.

(But I doubt the cheese I find so delicious is that same as the cheese that's so prevalent in American diets...)

Re: Eat Real Food

#516

Post by fasterik »

hansvm wrote: post #493
fasterik wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nutrition science has come up with acceptable macronutrient distribution ranges (AMDR). The recommendation for adults is 45-65% of total calories from carbohydrates, 20-35% from fat, and 10-35% from protein. That is definitely not low carb. The sources of those macronutrients also matter. The ideal range for saturated fat is 5-10% of total calories. Meat consumption, especially red meat, is associated with higher ris…

To be fair, those macronutrient guidelines were established not because of any special properties of those macros (give or take the nitrogen load from protein) but because when applied as a population-level intervention they encourage sufficient fiber, magnesium, potassium, etc. You can have 50% of your calories be from fats and still live a long, healthy life, and you can do so as a population (see, e.g. Crete and s…

Well, there are two factors that go into the recommendations. As you mentioned, one is adequate micronutrients. The other is chronic disease risk reduction. The 5-10% of total calories from saturated fat recommendation falls into the latter category. The risk of meat and dairy is not just cancer, but saturated fat.

I would agree that with proper knowledge and planning, it's possible to reduce carbs and increase protein/unsaturated fats while maintaining adequate fiber and micronutrients. But in practice, I think it's much more common to see people taking low-carb diet recommendations as a license to eat a pound or more of meat per day, drink gallons of milk per week, and completely ignore fiber intake, which is objectively not healthy.

Re: Eat Real Food

#517

Post by ShakataGaNai »

Its unfortunate the way modern politics has gone. I see this site and am immediately suspicious. What bullshit is there? What ulterior motive should I be concerned about?

Rather than reading it, assuming it was fact based science. Maybe not the best because governments never get things 100%.... but at least able to trust it. Now specifically because this is RFK's MAHA world, I assume everything on this site is a lie.

After reading through it I don't see anything terrible or stupidly over the top. Yes, more proteins and vegetables good, less heavily processed foods.

Re: Eat Real Food

#518

Post by [deleted] »

diegocg wrote: post #320
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #191

For all the lunacy of RFK this somehow is actually a really good set of guidelines? Certainly better than the previous version. I didn't expect that to be honest.

I'm surprised that governments didn't take this problem more seriously. Obesity is a huge problem, people have been ignoring it only because improvements in medicine have been offsetting the general health decline. Without the medical improvements that save the life of obese people, life expectancy would have decreased. I don't expect the Trump administration to make the best decisions but at least they are taking it…

[deleted]

Re: Eat Real Food

#519

Post by mertd »

sallveburrpi wrote: post #338
overgard wrote: post #25

I'm pleasantly surprised, this is actually really good. The reason I'm surprised is because of how corrupt the creation of the previous food pyramid was (the sugar industry likely paid to downplay the danger of sugar[1]) I find when it comes to health advice, generally government sources can't be trusted because there's too much special interests and money involved. You really have to do your own research. [1] https:…

The biggest issue with sugar is that it makes stuff taste better which leads to overeating. Incidentally it’s also the only downside of glutamate, it just makes stuff taste so good you’ll eat much more than your appetite would guide you to

My personal anecdotal experience is that once you make a conscious effort to avoid added sugars, your taste buds eventually recalibrate over the course of a few months and you end up perceiving stuff with added sugar as way too sweet.

Re: Eat Real Food

#520

Post by stainablesteel »

Waterluvian wrote: post #433
zeroonetwothree wrote: post #191

For all the lunacy of RFK this somehow is actually a really good set of guidelines? Certainly better than the previous version. I didn't expect that to be honest.

I’m pinning the blame for the frustrating animate-while-you-scroll design squarely on RFK.

it's a terrible design and i can't believe they've done this to the american people
Post reply on HN