Sugar and Starch Free, No Problem

Anyone who’s followed my writing knows how important food science and nutrition have become in my own life, and how I’m currently pursuing advanced studies so that I can help others feel better through personalized nutrition plans.

So, this morning I was shocked to learn that the USDA’s iconic MyPlate graphic, a staple of nutrition education for nearly two decades as the replacement for the outdated food pyramid, now points to a new web address: realfood.gov. It promises updated guidance, and while the intention to modernize nutrition is commendable, we don’t need a wave of misinformation that confuses consumers seeking trustworthy dietary and nutrition advice.

In fact, that is the exact opposite of what the food science and nutrition world needs.

What’s in a New Name?

If you want to see a demonstrated rebranding exercise, then look no further than the shift from myplate.gov to realfood.gov. The core components remain unchanged: fruits, veggies, grains, protein, and dairy. I would argue that there were some red flags for me in the updated version of the food pyramid, most of which are in the recommended higher protein levels and beef tallow as a “healthy fat” alternative.

It’s like saying cooking your food in bacon grease is “heart healthy,” it’s really not, and should be used sparingly as a flavor enhancer.

Takeaway: A fresh logo does not mean the nutritional recommendations have been rewritten. Readers should look for the official guideline documents, not just the headline announcement. From a future dietitian’s standpoint, my safest interpretation would be: use beef tallow sparingly, keep the majority of your cooking fats unsaturated, and focus on a varied protein mix.

The Misinterpretation of “Real Food”

“Real food” is deliberately left vague for a few reasons: as we are all aware, minimizing highly processed items is pretty sound advice, but overly restrictive recommendations can be unsustainable for low-income families. Dietitians emphasize flexibility, which means encouraging nutrient-dense choices while acknowledging budget constraints and individual health goals. Sometimes, people cannot afford the healthier alternative with fewer ingredients.

Next time you’re at the store, compare nutrition labels for the cheaper items alongside the more expensive ones, and you’ll see that some shoppers cannot justify the cost of a 5-ingredient item versus one with 10+ ingredients if it costs significantly more. And maybe they’re just uninformed about what those additional ingredients are in their food? Shouldn’t our leadership prioritize grocery costs and better nutrition education early on, rather than vilifying overly processed foods?

Will There Be Potential Public‑Health Implications?

The thing about our current access to information is that it’s so readily available that we can find something that aligns with our own ideals, even if it’s not always accurate. A constant stream of misinformation erodes the public’s trust in science and public-health institutions. If the public starts to question the USDA’s guidelines, they will turn to unverified “quick-fix” diets and to health and wellness influencers with absolutely no credibility.

How Can Dietitians Solve This?:

• Provide clear, evidence‑based explanations: The reason we switched to MyPlate is that it was easier for patients and consumers to understand in terms of plate portions. Continue using this MyPlate image if clients seem confused by the newest food pyramid guidelines.
• Highlight practical tips: Swapping refined grains for whole-grain alternatives or incorporating a mix of proteins is already recommended by many dieticians and nutritionists to their clients.
• Encourage skepticism: I enjoy it when people ask questions or show some skepticism, because it lets me teach them about something I’m passionate about. That way, I know they’re questioning the health and wellness influencers they stumble across on the internet. Skepticism is healthy, and any drastic dietary change should involve input from a qualified professional.

Closing Thoughts

Rebranding can be healthy, especially if you’re trying to get the public interested in a topic, but misinterpretation can follow if guidelines aren’t put in place. We have to ground the conversation by teaching readers how to access and evaluate quality nutrition and food science studies so they know what they’re being given is a reliable resource rather than another source of confusion.

We must always work to counter the constant stream of online noise, focusing on balanced eating and evidence-based research.