https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_c28wiWIsQk

Here's what's in new dietary guidelines from the Trump administration

Americans should eat more whole foods and protein, fewer highly processed foods and less added sugar, according to the latest edition of federal nutrition advice released Wednesday by the Trump administration.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins issued the 2025-2030 U.S. Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which offer updated recommendations for a healthy diet and provide the foundation for federal nutrition programs and policies. They come as Kennedy has for months stressed overhauling the U.S. food supply as part of his Make America Healthy Again agenda.

"Our message is clear: Eat real food," Kennedy told reporters at a White House briefing.

The guidelines emphasize consumption of fresh vegetables, whole grains and dairy products, long advised as part of a healthy eating plan.

But they also take a new stance on "highly processed" foods, and refined carbohydrates, urging consumers to avoid "packaged, prepared, ready-to-eat or other foods that are salty or sweet, such as chips, cookies and candy." That's a different term for ultraprocessed foods, the super-tasty, energy-dense products that make up more than half of the calories in the U.S. diet and have been linked to chronic diseases such as diabetes and obesity.

The new guidance backs away from revoking long-standing advice to limit saturated fats, despite signals from Kennedy and Food and Drug Commissioner Marty Makary that the administration would push for more consumption of animal fats to end the "war" on saturated fats.

Instead, the document suggests that Americans should choose whole-food sources of saturated fat — such as meat, whole-fat dairy or avocados — while continuing to limit saturated fat consumption to no more than 10% of daily calories. The guidance says "other options can include butter or beef tallow," despite previous recommendations to avoid those fats.

Guidelines were due for an update

The dietary guidelines, required by law to be updated every five years, provide a template for a healthy diet. But in a country where more than half of adults have a diet-related chronic disease, few Americans actually follow the guidance, research shows.

The new recommendations drew praise from some prominent nutrition experts.

"There should be broad agreement that eating more whole foods and reducing highly processed carbohydrates is a major advance in how we approach diet and health," said Dr. David Kessler, a former FDA commissioner who has written books about diet and nutrition and has sent a petition to the FDA to remove key ingredients in ultraprocessed foods.

Others expressed relief after worrying that the guidelines would go against decades of nutrition evidence linking saturated fat to higher LDL or "bad" cholesterol and heart disease.

"I guess whoever is writing these had to admit that the science hasn't changed," said Marion Nestle, a nutritionist and food policy expert who advised previous editions of the guidelines. "They haven't changed in any fundamental way except for the emphasis on eating whole foods."

The new document is just 10 pages, upholding Kennedy's pledge to create a simple, understandable guideline. Previous editions of the dietary guidelines have grown over the years, from a 19-page pamphlet in 1980 to the 164-page document issued in 2020, which included a four-page executive summary.

The guidance will have the most profound effect on the federally funded National School Lunch Program, which is required to follow the guidelines to feed nearly 30 million U.S. children on a typical school day.

The Agriculture Department will have to translate the recommendations into specific requirements for school meals, a process that can take years, said Diane Pratt-Heavner, spokesperson for the School Nutrition Association. The latest school nutrition standards were proposed in 2023 but won't be fully implemented until 2027, she noted.

>>24087830

Science advisers didn't make ultraprocessed food recommendations

The new guidelines skip the advice of a 20-member panel of nutrition experts, who met for nearly two years to review the latest scientific evidence on diet and health.

That panel didn't make recommendations about ultraprocessed food. Although a host of studies have showed links between ultraprocessed foods and poor health outcomes, the nutrition experts had concerns with the quality of the research reviewed and the certainty that those foods, and not other factors, were the cause of the problems.

The recommendations on highly processed foods drew cautiously positive reactions. The FDA and the Agriculture Department are already working on a definition of ultraprocessed foods, but it's expected to take time.

Not all highly processed foods are unhealthy, said Dr. David Ludwig, an endocrinologist and researcher at Boston Children's Hospital.

"I think the focus should be on highly processed carbohydrates," he said, noting that processing of protein or fats can be benign or even helpful.

More protein recommended

The guidelines made a few other notable changes, including a call to potentially double protein consumption.

The previous recommended dietary allowance called for 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight — about 54 grams daily for a 150-pound person. The new recommendation is 1.2 to 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight. An average American man consumes about 100 grams of protein per day, or about twice the previously recommended limit.

It's not clear what evidence supported the change, but Ludwig said the earlier recommendation was the minimum amount needed to prevent protein deficiency and higher amounts of protein might be beneficial.

"I think a moderate increase in protein to help displace the processed carbohydrates makes sense," he said.

The guidelines advise avoiding or sharply limiting added sugars or non-nutritive sweeteners, saying "no amount" is considered part of a healthy diet.

No one meal should contain more than 10 grams of added sugars, or about 2 teaspoons, the new guidelines say.

Previous federal guidelines recommended limiting added sugars to less than 10% of daily calories or people older than 2, but to aim for less. That's about 12 teaspoons a day in a 2,000-calorie daily diet. Children younger than 2 should have no added sugars at all, the older guidance said.

In general, most Americansconsume about 17 teaspoons of added sugars per day, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Alcohol limits removed

The new guidelines roll back previous recommendations to limit alcohol to 1 drink or less per day for women and 2 drinks or less per day for men.

Instead, the guidance advises Americans to"consume less alcohol for better health."They also say that alcohol should be avoided by pregnant women, people recovering from alcohol use disorder and those who are unable to control the amount they drink.

END

>>24087844

>it should be lawful that you can beat up everyone who says: "when life gives you lemons, you should make lemonade"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyLUU3O4zW8

>>24088122

>>24088122

>Even AI is calling them the standing army.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_Demolition_Team

The Underwater Demolition Team (UDT), or frogmen, were amphibious units created by the United States Navy during World War II with specialized missions. They were predecessors of the Navy's current SEAL teams.

>>24088201

>>24088300

>No tendies

your graph is incomplete

>>24088424

>>24088491

https://www.newsmax.com/us/un-trump/2026/01/07/id/1241220/

Trump Orders US Exit From 66 International Organizations

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed a presidential memorandum directing the U.S. to withdraw from 66 international organizations that the White House said no longer serve American interests.

The White House said the directive orders all executive departments and agencies to stop participating in and funding 35 non-United Nations organizations and 31 U.N. entities that the administration concluded operate contrary to U.S. national interests, security, economic prosperity, or sovereignty.

The White House said the action follows a review of every international intergovernmental organization, convention, and treaty that the U.S. belongs to, funds, or otherwise supports.

The White House said the withdrawals will end American taxpayer funding and involvement in entities it argues advance globalist agendas over U.S. priorities, or address important issues so inefficiently that federal dollars are better spent elsewhere.

In a fact sheet released Wednesday, the White House said many of the targeted bodies promote radical climate policies, global governance, and ideological programs that conflict with U.S. sovereignty and economic strength.

The White House said American taxpayers have spent billions of dollars on such organizations with little return, while some of those groups criticize U.S. policies, advance agendas contrary to American values, or fail to achieve meaningful results despite large budgets.

Congressional Research Service reporting on U.S. contributions to the U.N. system has noted that American support is delivered through assessed dues for the U.N. regular budget and peacekeeping, along with voluntary contributions to agencies, funds, and programs, meaning funding withdrawals can have broad operational impacts even beyond the specific entities targeted.

The memorandum represents the administration's most expansive pullback to date from multilateral engagement, extending Trump's long-running argument that international commitments must produce measurable benefits for Americans and must not constrain U.S. decision-making.

The White House said Trump initiated the withdrawal of the U.S. from the World Health Organization and the Paris Climate Agreement immediately upon returning to office, framing both steps as necessary to restore national sovereignty over public health and energy policy.

The White House also said Trump notified the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development on day 1 that its global tax deal has no force or effect in the U.S. while directing an investigation into whether foreign tax rules are extraterritorial or disproportionately target American companies.

The administration's broader posture has included steps to leave or defund politically charged U.N. bodies, including a February 2025 executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the U.N. Human Rights Council and prohibiting any future U.S. funding for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for the Near East.

The White House said Wednesday's memorandum is designed to save taxpayer money and refocus resources toward America First priorities such as infrastructure, military readiness, and border security, while ending what it views as subsidized hostility toward U.S. interests.

>>24088507

The White House did not immediately provide a detailed public roster of all 66 organizations covered by the withdrawal order, but said agencies have been instructed to wind down participation and funding consistent with the memorandum's directives.

The administration's push has drawn objections in prior, similar actions from outside experts and advocacy groups who argue that withdrawing from global institutions can reduce U.S. influence and weaken international coordination on cross-border challenges.

For instance, public health experts warned the administration's earlier move to pull out of the World Health Organization could weaken U.S. readiness for future outbreaks, with Georgetown University health-law professor Lawrence Gostin telling Kaiser Health News, "It'll isolate us diplomatically, and it'll isolate us in pandemic response."

Amnesty International USA criticized Trump's decision to withdraw from the U.N. Human Rights Council, with Amnesty's Amanda Klasing calling it "performative disregard for human rights" in a statement released by the group after the February 2025 order.

Financial analysts have also warned that a sweeping U.S. retreat from multilateral institutions could have consequences beyond diplomacy, with Reuters reporting that S&P Global multilateral-lender analyst Alexander Ekbom said a U.S. withdrawal from the World Bank would be "unprecedented" and could threaten the institution's top-tier credit ratings.

Supporters of the administration's approach argue the president is correcting decades of U.S. overcommitment to bureaucratic international bodies that do not serve American workers, taxpayers, or national security.

They argue that in an era of great-power competition, Washington should deploy resources toward bilateral leverage, hard-power deterrence, and direct investment at home rather than underwriting institutions that often turn against U.S. interests.

Critics counter that U.S. exits can reduce America's ability to shape global standards and norms, while leaving strategic space for rivals to dominate rulemaking in arenas ranging from public health to development policy.

The White House said the withdrawals align with Trump's longstanding America First doctrine and reflect an effort to ensure every international relationship is judged by outcomes that advance U.S. security, sovereignty, and economic strength.

Implementation now shifts to the federal agencies directed to halt participation and funding, setting up a new phase of scrutiny over which programs are affected, what statutory obligations remain, and how quickly the U.S. can unwind decades of multilateral commitments.

>>24088531

>creates a unique ID from your fonts, screen size, and plugins

Disable JS for everything except trusted sites

https://amiunique.org/fingerprint