Now, everyone knows about the USDA food pyramid which was updated in 2005. But there are many who debunk the voracity of this pyramid because the belief is that the USDA version is influenced by political pressure from the big food producers which come on, is no big shocker as it is no secret that money from big business influences our government's choices.
However, let's be open-minded and see if what the USDA created really makes sense. Along with the USDA food pyramid version, I will also compare two other popular food pyramids, the "Healthy Eating Pyramid" created by Harvard Medical which is based on the best available scientific evidence about the links between diet and health, and the second pyramid is the University of Michigan Integrative Medicine, "Healing Foods Pyramid" which is based on a more Dr. Weil type of holistic view of foods which grades foods more on their healing characteristics. I think these 3 pyramids are great to compare as each has a good representation of governmental, scientific, and holistic views.
Now, I am no certified professional related to health or nutrition, but I am a consumer and can have an opinion based on my own health experience and beliefs, so I'll share what I think. This is merely personal opinion, and as always, get guidance from your health care professional. In comments, I'd like to know what you all think.
What makes sense to me:
- I like how they emphasize "Variety." Variety to me means balance and choice. I do agree that issues like weight gain can be caused by a lack of variety in food choices. For example, I know many people who can go days without eating a single vegetable or fruit as most of what they eat are grain-based foods like bread & pasta, meat, or dairy.
- I like how they emphasize "Personalization." Everyone is different and each of us has different health issues, so no one food solution can be an umbrella and help everyone. As well, not everyone eats the same, there are lifestyle choices and cultural influences to take into consideration.
- I like the visual representation of the food groups standing side by side as opposed to the top-to-bottom approach. To me it looks more like "pillars" of health versus a power structure of food.
What does not make sense to me:
- Of the "food pillars", why is the grains section the biggest and it's first as most of us read left to right? As well, why is Dairy wider than Vegetables or Fruits? This to me looks like a definite influence from the big food producers namely the dairy and corn people. Do you know just how many things are made out of corn, and it's not just food products. Read the Omnivore's Dilema, and you will get a good picture of just how much corn is in our daily lives. It's way more than you could imagine. And dairy, those Got Milk ads are everywhere.
- I don't understand why exercise is included in the food pyramid. I'm not saying that exercise is not a vital part of a healthy life but it is not a part of food. Exercise should be it's own thing and should be used as a compliment to the food pyramid. Or, rename this pyramid the "Health Pyramid" and then include emotional/mental well being because along with exercise it too is an important part of healthy living.
- There is no mention of processed versus fresh or organic foods. There's no mention of food additives, preservatives, or the quality of the food itself. Yes, some will say that there is not enough data yet that says eating organics is better for you, but there sure are plenty of studies and reports on the ill effects of processed foods on people. If we look at a tomato for example, eating an organic tomato fresh from the farm is going to have higher nutritional benefits than a tomato that has been processed, canned, and had a bunch of preservatives and additives thrown in. Another example, white processed flour is not as healthy for people as whole grain wheat flour. The production of the food should be included as well.
The Harvard "Healthy Eating Pyramid"
What makes sense to me:
- I like how they gave nuts and legumes their own section. This
takes into consideration a significant protein source that is
non-animal based which is good news for the growing numbers of
vegetarians, vegans, or any cultural or religious influence that does
not include meats in their daily intake like the Indian culture.
- I like that they mention Vitamin and mineral supplements. Ideally, if we ate what we should every day, then we wouldn't need vitamin supplementation, but let's be realistic. Most of us don't get all the daily nutrients and vitamins and minerals we need to maintain optimal health. I have had health issues arise because I was lacking a certain vitamin or amino acid, and my naturopathic doctor gave me supplementation and it helped relieve my problem.
- They mention booze. Woo-hoo! Alcohol is not all bad for you and there are studies that have shown the health benefits of alcoholic drinks like red wine.
What does not make sense to me:
- Like the USDA food pyramid, why is exercise included in an eating pyramid. Like I said before, if you are going to include exercise then you should also include emotionla/mental well being, and then call the whole thing an "Overall Health" pyramid. And why specifically mention weight control? This is where I think Harvard's own biases shine through.
- I don't understand why oils and whole grains are down at the base, the area that is supposed to be the "foundation of health" as they call it. It does not make sense to me that the importance of oils and grains comes before vegetables and fruit. Yes, we all need to get some healthy oils in our diet and eat whole grains, but it doesn't make sense to have those outrank veggies and fruits. I think the bars should be reversed.
- I don't get why butter is grouped with red meat, and is not with dairy. How is butter worse for you than cheese? I also don't get why white rice is in the use sparingly category. There are a large numbers of cultures like Asians that eat white rice and they don't have major health problems as a result of eating white rice every single day at almost every meal. I would argue too that you can't just lump all white rices together because comparing something like Uncle Ben's white rice with white Jasmine Rice made in Thailand cooked in a rice cooker like my mom makes it is like comparing apples and mangos.
The University of Michigan Integrative Medicine "Healing Foods Pyramid"
What makes sense to me:
- I LOVE how they have water as the foundation for good health. That makes absolute sense to me, and it is something that both the USDA and Harvard versions are lacking. Harvard mentions alcohol so why not water? A lack of water would have a significant influence on our health and it is more related to food and eating as opposed to exercise.
- I like that they gave seasonings its own category. In other modalities of healing, like Aryuvedic and Traditional Chinese Medicine, herbs and seasonings are greatly used for healing purposes, so if you can get them in your foods during cooking, then there is added bonus. The inclusion of the seasonings was a sign to me that UMIM looked at food lifestyles outside of the U.S. as well as eastern modalities of medical treatment because let's be real, America is a melting pot of cultures, and the western way of doing things is not the only way nor the absolute way. We can learn a great deal from other cultures and viewpoints.
- I like how they broke up the sections by "daily, weekly, and optional" and color coded it. It makes it really easy to find visually what and how often I should be eating certain foods.
What does not make sense to me:
- Like the other two pyramids, there is no mention of processed versus fresh or organic foods.
- In the grains section, I think they need to include more specifics about whole grains versus processed grains as well as balance. For example, you have a bag of brown rice and some corn, and then there's pretzels and tortilla chips all shown together. I would think they mean for us to eat more whole grains like brown rice or whole grain breads versus pretzels and chips.
- I think they need to either be more specific about what "Accompaniments" means or use another word like Optionals, Treats, or Extras. Accompaniments sounds so academic and who talks about their "Accompaniments?" I don't think I've even heard that word used on the Food Network or in Martha Stewart's shows.
So, there's my two cents on each of the pyramids. Overall, I think the University of Michigan's Healing Foods Pyramid is the strongest in it's philosophy and what makes common sense. I also think it is the most well rounded out of the three. Now, it's time for you all to weigh in. Thoughts?
