A months-long process to decide the federal government’s dietary recommendations for the next five years is now set to stretch well into 2025. That timing means Biden officials will miss an opportunity to lock down the new guidelines before the Trump administration takes office.
Changing terms between updates is unprecedented in recent history, although previous versions have come close: an update In 2005 It was finished a few days before the inauguration. 2020 The revision took place a month before Biden took office.
The directives are fiercely contested in Washington because they affect a Wide range of federal programs, ranging from nutrition label rules to school lunch standards. They are traditionally based on scientific reports from outside experts.
The meeting of this committee has been held. From last yearBoat with an array of Controversial questionsand is not expected to release its recommendations until mid-December. It usually takes several months for authorities to publish their guidelines after their report.
A person familiar with the process told CBS News that the timeline was set long before Election Day.
An HHS spokeswoman did not comment on the timing of the report, other than to confirm that “later in the year” is expected.
“HHS and USDA continue to demonstrate their commitment to transparency, equity, and scientific integrity throughout the process,” the spokesperson said.
Former officials said it would be virtually impossible for the Biden administration to finish the update before leaving office. Much work remains, such as testing results and developing and testing updated messaging through tools such as My Platewhich replaced the food pyramid.
“It’s a very heavy lift, given the complexity and the perspectives of different departments,” said Dr. Brett Geruer, who served as assistant secretary for health at HHS under the Trump administration’s last review. give
Before the Departments of Agriculture and Health can reach an agreement, input from the public and agencies must also work on the guidelines.
“My belief is that when Congress asks two agencies to collaborate on something, that’s a desirable tension, hopefully moving the end product in the right direction. And I think people certainly want that.” Agree that HHS and USDA often come from different quarters, different perspectives,” said Brandon Lipps, who was USDA’s deputy undersecretary for food, nutrition and consumer services under Trump.
One expected fight will be over proposals. Last month was yours. Committee members called for a “shift” to more “nutrient-dense, plant-based foods” as part of a broader recommendation to “emphasize plant sources” of protein.
Trump had it during the campaign. Accused His opponent wants to “stop people from eating red meat”. In one statement Last month, the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association called the recommendations “disjointed” and “impractical.”
Under the drafts, beans, peas and lentils could also be listed as sources of protein, not just vegetables. Red meat will be relegated to the ranking of protein foods, due to health concerns such as heart disease.
To reduce health risks and still meet dietary goals, the committee’s analyzes concluded that red meat often needs to be replaced the most in the American diet.
“Red meat, whether it’s processed or not, is more depleting than poultry or eggs. So I’d put it very last,” said committee member Christopher Gardner. said
How Trump Administration Officials Can Change Guidelines
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. made changes to the committee a central part of his “Make America Healthy Again” plan. The platform.
“We need to change the panel, so they’re making good recommendations and they’re telling people not to eat these foods,” Kennedy said. In September.
They could also offer Kennedy a vehicle to accomplish his goals, such as banning ultra-processed foods from school lunches. If confirmed as secretary, Kennedy and his counterpart at the USDA would have final authority over what is done in the guidelines.
“If Congress wanted a group of scientists to write dietary guidelines, they would put it into law. So the committee makes recommendations, and the secretary takes input from that report,” Lipps said.
It would be unprecedented to ignore the committee’s work entirely, although in the past departments – often run by civil servants – Sometimes disagreements With some recommendations.
“The process isn’t perfect, there’s bureaucracy. But I believe that having transparent scientific committees that everybody knows where it’s coming from is the best way to go,” Geruer said.