Dietary Guidelines for Americans 2000
SUMMARY OF PCRM'S LAWSUIT VERSUS
THE U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE AND
THE U.S. DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

On December 15, 1999, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, along with several other individual and group plaintiffs, filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary Dan Glickman, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) Secretary Donna Shalala, and Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee for 2000 Chair Cutberto Garza. This case was brought under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

The Federal Advisory Committee Act

The Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) requires that an advisory committee be balanced in terms of points of view represented and the function to be performed, and prohibits the inclusion of members with inappropriate special interests to assure that the advice and recommendations of the advisory committee will not be inappropriately influenced by any special interest, but will instead be the result of the committee's independent judgment. The FACA also requires that the advisory committee disclose all committee documents to the public in a timely manner and that all committee meetings be open to the public.

Background

The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee was established by the USDA and the DHHS to present a report of recommended revisions to the current Dietary Guidelines, last updated in 1995. The Committee's report is given to the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human Services, who will review and rely on it to revise and issue the Dietary Guidelines in the summer of 2000.

The Dietary Guidelines are the principal federal policy document on making dietary choices, with the outlying purpose of educating consumers about food choices most likely to promote physical well-being and to avoid or postpone the onset of diet-related chronic diseases. However, it appears that the underlying purpose is to promote certain agricultural interests. The Guidelines also form the basis for all federal food assistance and nutrition programs, including the School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, the Food Stamp Program, and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).

Advisory Committee members were to have been appointed based on their scientific knowledge of nutrition. Out of the 11 members appointed, 6 currently have or recently have had financial ties to the meat, dairy, or egg industry. Even the Deputy Undersecretary of Agriculture, who participated in the Committee meetings, has a business relationship with the Dannon Institute, a dairy-product manufacturer. (Follow this link to learn more about the conflicts of interest.)

The primary goals of the lawsuit brought by PCRM and others were:

1. to encourage the Committee to make recommendations which recognize the role the American diet—rich in meats, dairy products, and fried foods—plays in contributing to the high toll heart disease, cancer, diabetes, stroke, hypertension, obesity, and lactose intolerance exact among Americans in general and disproportionately so among people of color;
2. to encourage the Committee to promote the healthiest possible diet to help reduce this toll;
3. to encourage the Committee to make recommendations to the federal government for revising the Dietary Guidelines that will force a change in the "nutritional" standards of federal food assistance programs;
4. to encourage the Committee to make dairy products optional in the Dietary Guidelines, as well as encourage the use of plant-based diets for those who may choose them;
5. to ensure that, in the future, the USDA and the DHHS choose members for all dietary guidelines advisory committees who do not have inappropriate relationships to any food industries; and
6. to ensure that, in the future, the USDA and the DHHS operate dietary guidelines advisory committees in accordance with the public disclosure requirements of the FACA.

Current Status

On Friday, January 28, 2000, the U.S. District Court judge denied our request for a temporary injunction to halt the release of the Committee's report, stating that he did not believe that preventing its release would resolve any harm to the plaintiffs.

Shortly thereafter, the Committee's report was released, which made unexpected recommendations favorable to the plaintiffs' position concerning the role of dairy products and plant foods in the American diet. The Committee declared that:

• soy-based beverages (soymilk) are on par with cow's milk as a source of calcium
• the foundation of a healthy diet is plant foods

In light of the Committee's recommendation to raise soymilk's nutritional status to equal the long-standing prominence given to cow's milk and the recognition of the benefits of vegetarian foods in the diet, PCRM filed a motion to voluntarily dismiss the portion of our lawsuit concerning the composition of the Committee. PCRM's claims concerning the Committee's failure to comply with the public disclosure requirements of the FACA remain pending.

PCRM's lawsuit was clearly instrumental in getting the Committee to do the right thing, despite the members' problematic ties to the meat, dairy, and egg industries. For the first time, a dietary guidelines advisory committee has acknowledged what PCRM has been saying for years: that fortified soymilk is a healthy source of calcium and other nutrients, that dairy consumption is not necessary, and that meat should never be the center of the diet.

The USDA and the DHHS are currently in the process of making final revisions to the Dietary Guidelines, based on the recommendations made by the Committee.

The 2000 edition of the Dietary Guidelines is expected to be released in May 2000.

To learn more about PCRM's lawsuit against the USDA and the DHHS, please click here.