Nutritionists and Environmentalists Should Work Together: So Why doesn’t Congress Want Them To?

The group of appointed nutritionist (appointed by the government) to draft new guidelines for the nation’s diet had decided to utilize data collected on the environmental implication of different food choices. Sounds great, right? And, if you think about it, makes a lot of sense. The guidelines would help individuals to move towards healthier and environmentally friendly diets.

Well, Congress has told them to stop. According to NPR, “lawmarkers attached a list of ‘congressional directives’ to a massive spending bull that was passed by both the House and the Senate in recent days.” The directive “expresses ‘concern’ that the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee ‘is showing an interest in incorporating agriculture production practices and environmental factors’ into their recommendations.” The directive encourages the Obama administration to ignore these factors.

It’s important for farmers, environmental scientist, and nutritionists to work together in order to discover which foods are the best for people and for the environment. Without farmers on board, no one will actually produce the crop. The idea that this has only been suggested in the past and not actually put into action is quite shocking.

It could be discouraged because of actions like Miriam Nelson (a panel member of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee) who stated a few months ago that “in general, a dietary pattern that is higher in plant-based foods and lower in animal-based foods is more health-promoting and is associated with less environmental impact.”

Naturally, the American Meat Institute didn’t like this statement. I wonder what their connection to government officials is like. The original statement from the American Meat Institute to this statement is that nutritionist don’t have the expertise to “take on” environmental questions, but, why can’t we get environmentalists, as well as farmers, in on the Committee? Wouldn’t this collaboration a. increase the overall health of Americans, b. produce positive environmental impacts for land in the U.S. and worldwide? Additionally, if the U.S. starts eating less meat, what do we think the chances are of other countries following the trend?