Dietary Guidelines for Americans: A Historical Overview

September 2008

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, and their forerunner, Dietary Goals for the 

United States, serve as the basis of Federal nutrition policy and provide guidance 

to consumers about food choices that promote health and reduce the risk of 

chronic disease. This publication is a historical compilation of the professional 

reviews and commentaries on the Dietary Goals for the United States and 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans documents published between 1977 – 2006 by 

governmental and non-governmental agencies, scientists, and educators. 

Abstracts are included when available and are from either AGRICOLA or 

Medline. Opinions expressed in the publications do not necessarily reflect the 

views of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Journals which are part of the National Agricultural Library (NAL) collection have

a call number. Lending and copy service information is provided at the end of this 

document. If you are not eligible for direct borrowing privileges, check with your 

local library on how to borrow materials through interlibrary loan with the NAL.

Materials cannot be purchased from the Library. Please contact the publisher/ 

producer if you wish to purchase any materials on this list.

This resource list is available from the Food and Nutrition Information Center’s 

(FNIC) web site at http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/pubs/bibs/gen/DGA.pdf. A 

complete list of FNIC publications can be found at 

http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/resourcelists.

Each item has been placed in one or more of the following sections. They are 

listed alphabetically by title, except in sections I.A., and I.B., where they appear 

chronologically.

I. Overview and General Information

A. Dietary Goals and Dietary Guidelines, 1977 to 2005

B. Reports of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committees: 1985 –

2005

C. Dietary Guidelines Web Sites

II. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Goals for the United States 

(1977, 1st and 2nd editions)

III. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 

1st edition,1980
 

 

 

 2 

IV. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 

2nd edition, 1985

V. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 

3rd edition, 1990

VI. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 

4th edition, 1995

VII. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 

5th edition, 2000

VIII. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 

6th edition, 2005

IX. Dietary Guidelines from Around the World

I. Overview and General Information

In February of 1977, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and Human 

Needs released the Dietary Goals for the United States. Amid disagreement and 

controversy, the Committee released Supplemental Views to the report in 

November 1977 and a Second edition in December 1977. Prompted by the 

Senate Committee report, the Departments of Agriculture and of Health, 

Education, and Welfare (now Health and Human Services) released the first 

edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans in 1980. In 1990, Title III of the 

National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341) 

was passed. This Act requires that the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and 

Human Services jointly publish a report entitled Dietary Guidelines for Americans

every five years. The Act also makes the report official Federal policy on 

nutrition guidance. Federal nutrition education pieces, such as the MyPyramid, 

are used to translate this nutrition policy into food choices. 

A. Dietary Goals and Dietary Guidelines, 1977 to 2005 (listed 

chronologically)

Dietary Goals for the United States [1st edition]. U.S. Congress. Senate. 

Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. Washington : U.S. Govt. 

Print. Off. 1977.

NAL Call Number: TX360.U6U54 1977a

Description: Acknowledging that many of the leading causes of death in the 

U.S. are linked to diet, this congressional report was compiled to provide 

guidance to the public on dietary choices consistent with prevention of chronic 

diseases. Six major dietary goals are outlined. Also includes recommendations 

for government actions related to food labeling, and nutrition education and 

research.
 

 

 

 3 

Dietary Goals for the United States [1st edition], supplemental views. U.S. 

Congress. Senate. Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. 

Washington : U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1977. 

NAL Call Number: TX360.U6U54

Description: Prompted by food industry requests to express views on the 

Dietary Goals, this is a compilation of comments from trade associations, 

nutrition professionals and others. Also contains a number of related surveys and 

reports. 

Dietary Goals for the United States [2nd edition]. U.S. Congress. Senate. 

Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. 

Print. Off. December 1977. 

NAL Call Number: TX360.U6U54 1977

Description: This report was issued to take into account views expressed since 

the first edition and includes a rewording of the goals as well as a new goal 

stressing the importance of balancing total energy intake with energy 

expenditure.

Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans. U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 1980.

NAL Call Number: TX551.U4

Web site: 

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAsPreviousGuidelines1980Guidelines.htm

Description: Dietary Guidelines based on variety and moderation are 

recommended in this pamphlet presented by the U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(USDA) and Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) which outlines and explains 

seven basic guidelines of healthy eating. 

Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 2d ed., rev. 

Aug. 1985. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. 

Off., Home and Garden Bulletin No. 232. August 1985. 

NAL Call Number: 1-AG84HG-no. 232-1985

Web site: 

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DGAsPreviousGuidelines1985Guidelines.htm

Description: With minor re-wording, this pamphlet promotes the basic tenets 

presented in the previous version of the Dietary Guidelines. 
 

 

 

 4 

Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 3d ed., rev. 

Nov. 1990. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. 

Off., Home and Garden Bulletin No. 232. 1990. 

NAL Call Number: 1-Ag84Hg-no.232-1990

Web site: 

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/DietaryGuidelines/1990/DG1990pub.pdf

(PDF)

Description: With some changes in wording and emphasis, this publication

promotes the principles underlying the previous version of the Dietary Guidelines

Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 4th ed., rev. 

Dec. 1995. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. 

Off., Home and Garden Bulletin No. 232. 1995. 

NAL Call Number: 1-Ag84Hg-no.232-1995

Web site:

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/DietaryGuidelines/1995/1995DGConsum

erBrochure.pdf (PDF)

Description: Whiles continuing to promote variety, moderation and balance, the 

1995 Dietary Guidelines place added emphasis on the role of physical activity in 

weight management. 

Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 5th ed., rev. 

2000. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 

Home and Garden Bulletin No. 232. 2000. 

NAL Call Number: 1-Ag84Hg-no.232

Web site: 

http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2000/document/frontcover.htm

Abstract: Offers three new guidelines (for a total of ten) including a food safetyoriented message, a separate guideline for fruits and vegetables, and a new 

guideline for physical activity. The Guidelines are organized under the 

subheadings of Aim for Fitness, Build a Healthy Base, and Choose Sensibly. 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 6th ed., rev. 2005. Department of Health 

and Human Services, U.S Department of Agriculture.

Web site: http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/

Description: This edition places stronger emphasis on calorie control and 

physical activity to keep weight within healthy limits while consuming a balanced 

eating pattern. Outlines food groups to be encouraged and food components to 

be limited. Also covers key food safety recommendations for avoiding foodborne 

illness. 
 

 

 

 5 

Finding Your Way to a Healthier You: Based on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans (Consumer Brochure). 2005. Department of Health and Human 

Services, U.S Department of Agriculture.

NAL Call Number: 1 Ag84Hg no. 232-cp

Web site: 

http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dga2005/document/pdf/brochure.pdf

(PDF)

Description: This brochure for consumers translates the 2005 Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans into practical tips for making healthy food choices, 

finding balance between food and physical activity, and reducing risk of 

foodborne illness. 

B. Reports of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committees: 1985 – 2005

 (listed chronologically)

Every five years, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee members, 

composed of nutrition experts from within and outside of government, are 

charged with reviewing the existing Dietary Guidelines and recommending

revisions for the next release, if warranted. This section covers these reports. 

Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans, 1985, to the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Human 

Nutrition Information Service. Hyattsville, MD: 1985. 

NAL Call Number: aTX360.U6R46

Description: As the basis for the 1985 edition, proposed revisions to the 1980 

USDA-HHS joint publication, "Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans", are given. The rationale for the recommendations is also given. 

Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans, 1990, to the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Human 

Nutrition Information Service. Washington, DC: 1990. 

NAL Call Number: aRA784.R4

Description: The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee determined that the 

basic messages in the 1985 edition of the Dietary Guidelines remain sound and 

are of priority importance to Americans in choosing healthful diets. Suggested 

modifications for the 1990 edition of the Dietary Guidelines are included along 

with a discussion of these changes. Recommendations for the promotion, use, 

interpretation, and implementation of the Guidelines are also provided. 
 

 

 

 6 

Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans, 1995, to the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Human 

Nutrition Information Service. Springfield, VA: National Technical Information 

Service [distributor], 1995. 

NAL Call Number: aRA784.R4-1995

Web Site: http://www.health.gov/DietaryGuidelines/dga95/DGAC95.HTM

Description: In reviewing the 1990 edition of the Dietary Guidelines, the 

Advisory Committee determined that it contained messages that remain sound 

and of key importance, however, on the basis of new scientific evidence, some 

revisions were warranted for the 1995 edition. The recommended changes and 

their rationale are outlined in this report.

Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans, 2000, to the Secretary of Agriculture and the 

Secretary of Health and Human Services. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 

Agricultural Research Service. Washington, DC: 2000.

NAL Call Number: aRA784.R4-2000

Web Site: http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/dgac/pdf/dgac_ful.pdf (PDF)

Description: Presents the committee’s recommendations for the 2000 Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans along with the rationale for revisions to the previous 

edition. Major changes include a new format for the guidelines - the ABCs for 

good health. 

Report of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee on the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans, 2005, to the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services and the Secretary of Agriculture. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 

Agricultural Research Service. Washington, DC: 2004.

NAL Call Number: aRA784 .R4 2000

Web site: http://www.health.gov/DietaryGuidelines/dga2005/report/

Description: For this report, which serves as the basis for the 2005 Dietary 

Guidelines, the committee conducted an extensive review of the scientific 

evidence related to diet and health and made recommendations for translating 

the science into dietary guidance. The report includes the science base for the

recommendations.
 

 

 

 7 

C. Dietary Guidelines Web Sites (See also Section IX, Dietary Guidelines from 

Around the World)

Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 1980 to 2000

Department of Health and Human Services

Web site: http://www.health.gov/dietaryguidelines/1980_2000_chart.pdf (PDF)

Description: Table comparing 5 editions of the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans. 

DietaryGuidelines.gov: Dietary Guidelines for Americans

Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, USDA

Web site: http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/DietaryGuidelines.htm

Description: Provides links to current and past versions of the Dietary 

Guidelines, press releases, background information and other related topics. 

Dietary Guidelines Web Page

Food and Nutrition Information Center (FNIC), National Agricultural Library, 

USDA

Web site: 

http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?info_center=4&tax_level=2&tax_su

bject=256&topic_id=1332

Description: This web page links to current and previous versions of the Dietary 

Guidelines and provides background information.

Preparation and Use of Food-based Dietary Guidelines

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, Food and 

Nutrition Division

Web Site: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/x0243e/x0243e00.htm

Description: This document serves as guidance in the development and 

implementation of dietary guidelines for improving the dietary practices of 

populations. It recommends a food-based, rather than a nutrient-based 

approach, to guide and improve consumption patterns and provides examples of 

how foods and food groups have been incorporated into the dietary guidelines of 

a number of countries. 
 

 

 

 8 

II. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Goals for the 

United States, 1st and 2nd Editions, 1977

An analysis of dietary goals for the United States. Kristen W. McNutt. 

Journal of Nutrition Education, 10(2): 61-62. 1978.

NAL Call Number: TX341.J6

Abstract: A telegraphic description of changes found in the second edition of the 

Dietary Goals for the United States focuses on additions in the introductory 

section; content of the sections about the Select Committee and Dietary Goals; 

and, addition, changes and revisions in the introduction, summary of Goals and 

bar graphs, and explanation of Goals. The author urges readers to make their 

own critical analysis of the revised Goals and asserts that the significance of the 

changes has not been appreciated nor conveyed to the public.

Dietary Goals for the United States. Calvin W. Woodruff. American Journal of 

Diseases of Children, 133 (4): 371-372. 1979.

NAL Call Number: 448.8-AM38

Abstract: The background of the second edition of the Dietary Goals for the

United States is reviewed and the modified goals are summarized. The

recommendations to Congress to encourage these goals are: 1) fund public 

education programs; 2) require food labeling; 3) fund studies and pilot programs 

to reduce risks in processed foods; 4) fund and coordinate nutrition research; and 

5) form a committee to consider implications of nutrition and agriculture policy. 

The author comments that: 1) the development of nutritional goals is political 

rather than scientific; 2) the process should recognize different viewpoints and 

allow revision; and 3) professionals with an interest in nutrition should take a 

leading role in this process.

Dietary Goals for the United States (second edition). American Dietetic 

Association. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 74(5): 529-533. 

1979. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8-AM34

Abstract: Dietary goals for men, women, and children should probably be 

established separately, with consideration for the food consumption patterns and 

physiologic needs of each group. The Dietary Goals for the United States are not 

adequately specific in their recommendations, and must be continuously 

reevaluated as new scientific knowledge emerges. Following the Goals would 

require alterations in the eating patterns for most of the population; few people’s 

diets are as high in carbohydrate or as low in fat and sugar as recommended. An 

expanded labeling program which consumers can understand and use must also 

be provided. Major shifts in food production and processing would be necessary 

to reduce total fat and cholesterol intakes.
 

 

 

 9 

Dietary Goals for the United States: a commentary. Gaurth R. Hansen. 

Ames: Counsel for Agricultural Science and Technology, Report No. 71. 1977.

NAL Call Number: S22.C6—no. 71

Description: Prepared at the request of Senator George McGovern, this 

commentary on the Dietary Goals for the United States is a consensus statement 

prepared by 14 scientists with expertise in biochemistry, dietetics, economics, 

education, food science and technology. In it, the panel expresses support for 

many of the principles encompassed in the Dietary Goals but also raises 

concerns about the scientific basis for some of the recommendations and 

discusses what it sees as omissions in the report. 

Dietary Goals [for the United States] pose serious threat. Grace T. 

Howaniec. Hoard’s Dairyman, 123(4): 225, 242. 1978. 

NAL Call Number: 44.8-H65

Description: The author outlines her concerns with the 1977 Dietary Goals for 

the United States, specifically about the potential for a decreased intake of meat 

and dairy products. 

Dietary Goals- a progressive view. D.M. Hegsted. American Journal of 

Clinical Nutrition, 31(9): 1504-1509. 1978. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8-J824

Abstract: Some current leaders in the nutrition community find the Dietary Goals 

for the United States either premature or unjustified on the basis of current 

knowledge. Several adverse comments are reported and countered. It is 

concluded that evidence related to the major health problems of Americans 

indicates that a more moderate diet will lessen the impact of certain diseases. 

There are no reasons to believe that such a diet will impose nutritional risks. The 

nutrition community should provide positive leadership.

Food editors explore U.S. Dietary Goals. Institute of Food Technologists. 

Food Technology, 32(4): 20,22,25,28,31. 1978. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8-F7398

Abstract: The Institute of Food Technologists and the Department of Food

Science and Technology of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University 

sponsored a two-day conference on current food issues. The topics are named, 

and an overview of the presentations regarding controversial aspects of the 

Dietary Goals of the United States is provided. One talk described what the 

recommendations of the Goals would look like on the dinner table. A speaker 

claimed that the Goals are premature and based on inconclusive or inadequate 

data.
 

 

 

 10 

McGovern releases revised Dietary Goals. CNI Weekly Report, 8(4): 6-7. 

1978.

NAL Call Number: TX341.C6

Description: An announcement of the release of the revised Dietary Goals and 

a summary of the major changes. 

National Dietary Goals: Are they justified at this time? William Weil. 

American Journal of Diseases of Children, 133 (4): 368-370. 1979.

NAL Call Number: 448.8-AM38

Description: Describes the 1977 Dietary Goals and suggests that they do not 

take into consideration differences in region, sex, age, weight, and lifestyle; that 

they are untested for safety and lack proven efficacy. Other criticisms include 

possible disillusionment of the public with major health programs, reduction of 

individual freedom, and possibility of undiscovered health hazards for some 

segments of the population. The author believes that the Dietary Goals are not 

justified at this time. 

NIH deals gingerly with diet-disease link. William J. Broad. Science, 204 

(4398): 1175-1178. 1979.

NAL Call Number: 470-SCI2

Web site: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/reprint/204/4398/1175.pdf (PDF)

Description: This commentary discusses some of the conflicts and questions 

surrounding the development of the Dietary Goals.

Sen. McGovern on Dietary Goals [for the United States]: Without nutrition 

education, "everything else is lost." E.M. Leeper. Bioscience. 28(3): 161-

164. 1978. 

NAL Call Number: 500-AM322A

Description: In a question and answer format, Senator McGovern describes the 

evolution of the Dietary Goals, counters arguments received against them, and 

describes areas where further government initiatives would be helpful. 

The scientific basis of the "Goals:" what can be done now?

Artemis P. Simopoulos. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 74(5): 

539- 542. 1979.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: The author offers the opinion that specific dietary guidelines aimed 

at particular groups may be more successful than universal dietary goals in the 

promotion of health and the prevention of disease.
 

 

 

 11 

Takin’ away me dyin’. Cortez F. Enrole. Nutrition Today, 12(6): 14-15. 1977.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Description: The author questions the ability of politicians to make sound and 

scientifically accurate dietary guidance and states that politicians are 

“overselling” the ability of nutrition to make a change in health outcomes. 

Twenty commentaries. Nutrition Today, 12(6): 10-13, 20-27. 1977.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Abstract: Twenty correspondents examine the Dietary Goals for the United 

States as recommended by the Senate Select Committee on Nutrition and 

Human Needs. Fourteen responses to the letter sent to certain physicians, 

dentists, and nutritionists are printed. Five responses are included from people 

identified by the Center for Science in the Public Interest as having signed the 

petition to President Carter encouraging him to adopt the goals as national 

policy. A press conference statement concludes the report.

U.S. Dietary Goals. Family Economics Review. ARS-NE-36: 3-6. Winter-Spring 

1978.

NAL Call Number: aS21.A75U45

Description: Speeches made at the 1978 Food and Agricultural Outlook 

Conference are presented in full. Speakers include: D. Mark Hegsted, Gilbert 

Leveille, and Betty Peterkin. 

III. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 1st edition, 1980

ADA reaction to the "Dietary Guidelines." American Dietetic Association.

Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 77(2): 181. 1980.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Abstract: The relationships between food choices and health are the focus of the 

Dietary Guidelines released by DHEW and USDA, emphasizing the importance 

of preventive maintenance through improved nutrition. Another step in the right 

direction would be further clarification of the quantitative guides for fat, starch, 

fiber, sugar, sodium, and alcohol. Further research is recommended on human 

metabolism, particularly for different age and sex groups. Eating a variety of 

foods and maintaining ideal weight are key concepts which could well be 

supported with more material on dietary planning.
 

 

 

 12 

Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines. Alfred E. Harper and Daniel S. 

Greenberg. Nutrition Today, 15(2): 19-22. 1980. 

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Abstract: Two critical commentaries on the USDA-HEW Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans suggest that although the Guidelines demonstrate the public need for 

nutrition knowledge and are an important step toward providing nutrition advice, 

they can be improved. A nutritionist criticizes the Guidelines’ negative statements 

concerning the use of fat, sugar, cholesterol and salt; the implication is that 

Americans are in an unsatisfactory state of health. Recommendations to 

substitute starches for sugars are misleading. A columnist sees nutrition as a 

political issue of special interest groups. The government is criticized for taking 

too long in providing the American public with advice that could have been issued 

a decade ago on nutritional questions that are likely to generate little controversy. 

The Guidelines do not acknowledge public concerns over food additives, 

processed foods and food advertising. Their publication appears to have 

originated from political rather than nutritional motives in which government 

departments sought to gain influence over public policy. 

Dietary Guidelines: Where do we go from here? Mark D. Hegsted. Journal 

of Nutrition Education, 12(2,suppl.1):100-102. 1980.

NAL Call Number: TX341.J6

Abstract: The evidence presented by the Expert Panel of the American Society 

of Clinical Nutrition in relation to the typical American diet indicates that the best 

advice is to moderate consumption of calories, fat, cholesterol, sugar and salt. 

While data collection and analysis techniques limit the applicability of specific 

information to any particular individual, enough evidence has accumulated to 

warrant general dietary instruction to reduce risks of disease. Steps to define 

"moderate" and to give practical dietary recommendations that consider food 

habits, food supply, and food preparation methods are the logical continuation of 

the effort to educate the public, keep abreast of new and changing nutrition 

information and help consumers make informed decisions about dietary intake. 

Dietary recommendations and policy implications: The U.S. experience.

Johanna Dwyer, in Nutrition Update. Jean Weininger and George M. Briggs, 

editors. New York, NY: John Wiley, 1983. 315- 355.

NAL Call Number: RC620.N83-FandN-B-3712

Abstract: There has been progress as well as controversy associated with 

dietary recommendations. Five basic questions concerning dietary

recommendations are: "Are dietary recommendations necessary?" "What should 

they consist of?" "Who should make them?" "How should they be implemented?" 

and "Should the US government play a role in disseminating them?" Aspects of 

policy implications that are considered include rhetoric and programmatic 

realities, the fragmentation of US policy-making power, the effects on dietary
 

 

 

 13 

guidelines, and the larger US nutrition policy issues. The limitations of federal 

policy on influencing what people eat as it affects the controls of food supply and 

demand are included in these issues. Nine shortcomings of food and nutrition 

scientists in dealing with public policy issues are enumerated. 

Eruption reaction. Lewis A. Barness, et al. Nutrition Today. 15(4): 4-5,7-9.

1980.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Abstract: Publication of the USDA-HEW "Dietary Guidelines for Americans" and 

the Food and Nutrition Board response, "Toward Healthful Diets", has sparked a 

controversy among health professionals concerning the relationship between diet 

and heart disease. Seven commentaries provide support for either of 2 sides in 

this issue. Those favoring the diet/heart disease connection recommend lowering 

fat, saturated fat and cholesterol intakes in a prudent diet to reduce risks of 

atherosclerosis. These dietary modifications are advised in the interest of public 

health, despite the fact that a causal linkage cannot be proved. Opponents argue 

that heart disease has a complex, multivariate etiology; evidence supporting the 

diet/disease hypothesis is limited or invalid. They doubt whether dietary 

intervention is efficacious, preventive or safe in reducing risk of heart disease. 

This viewpoint considers blanket dietary recommendations to the general public 

unwise. 

Foods and nutrition 1981. Philip White. Journal of the American Medical 

Association, 245(21): 2239-2241. 1981.

NAL Call Number: 448.9-AM37

Abstract: Increasing numbers of consumers are asking what foods should be 

included in the diet. A lack of consensus between nutritionists and physicians on 

whether dietary recommendations help to prevent degenerative diseases has 

confused the public. Controversy surrounding the relationship between diet and 

health sharpened in 1980, when two nutrition policy reports were published: 

USDA-HEW "Dietary Guidelines" and NAS/NRC "Toward Healthful Diets." In 

contrast to the USDA position, the NRC report stressed variables other than diet, 

and deemphasized the importance of dietary cholesterol and fats as major risk 

factors for healthy individuals. Policy makers should recognize that diet cannot 

compensate for physical inactivity, and that impractical recommendations to eat 

more or less of specific nutrients assume that Americans consume "unsafe" 

levels. Better methods of dietary assessment of the American population are 

needed in order to clarify diet-disease relationships and to justify qualitative or 

quantitative dietary changes. 
 

 

 

 14 

IV. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 2nd edition, 1985

Scientific and public health rationale for the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans. Sanford A. Miller and Marilyn G. Stephenson. American Journal of 

Clinical Nutrition, 42(4): 739-745. 1985.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-J824

Abstract: The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, published by DHHS and USDA 

in 1980, have recently been reviewed by an expert committee that has 

recommended only minimal changes to scientifically update them. Initial efforts to 

develop dietary guidelines for prevention of diseases were fraught with 

controversy, some of which has continued. This controversy exemplifies a larger 

issue concerning the role that contemporary science, and specifically 

government, has in assuring and maintaining public health. Two broad questions 

need to be asked: what is the government's role in facilitating application of 

contemporary nutrition knowledge to public health, and what standard of 

scientific surety should be the basis for its application? Government's role in 

assuring public health and safety indirectly through information is well 

established. In deciding when the data are sufficient to inform the public, public 

health scientists must, at some point, make the leap of faith, even though some 

doubts may remain.

Summary of dietary recommendations for healthy Americans. 

Frances J. Cronin and Anne M. Shaw. Nutrition Today, 23(6): 26-34. 1988.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Abstract: A number of Federal, professional and health organizations have 

published dietary recommendations for healthy Americans that consider the 

relationship of diet to health and the reduction of risk of chronic disease. 

Recommendations for nutrient adequacy, body weight, dietary intakes of fat 

(including saturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids), cholesterol, carbohydrate 

(including complex carbohydrate or starch, dietary fiber and refined sugars), 

sodium and alcohol made by ten organizations are summarized. Additional 

dietary recommendations by these and other groups, including those for

population subgroups such as infants, children and women, are also presented. 

Finally, examples of translations of recommendations into food guidance for

healthy Americans are cited.
 

 

 

 15 

V. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 3rd edition, 1990

Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 1990 revision. Betty B. Peterkin, in 

Proceedings of the Annual Agricultural Outlook Conference, November 27-29, 

1990. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.: The Department.

(67th): 35-45. 1991.

NAL Call Number: 1.90-C2OU8

Description: Provides the text to a speech at 1991 Annual Agricultural Outlook 

Conference. The author discusses the development of the 1990 revision and 

changes made to the 1985 edition. 

Dietary guidelines revised. Nutrition Forum, 8(1): 5-6. 1991.

NAL Call Number: TX341.N877

Description: Summarizes the third (1990) edition of the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans. 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 1990 edition. Betty B. Peterkin.

Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 90(12):1725-1727. 1990.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: Reviews the evolution of the Dietary Guidelines and summarizes 

the most recent edition.

Improving America's diet and health: from recommendations to action.

Paul R. Thomas, editor.

Institute of Medicine (U.S.). Committee on Dietary Guidelines Implementation.

Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1991. xvi, 239 p. 

NAL Call Number: TX341.J6

Description: This book, designed for a wide range of readers, explores how 

Americans can be persuaded to adopt healthier eating habits. It investigates 

current eating patterns in the U.S., consumers' beliefs and attitudes about food 

and nutrition, the theory and practice of promoting healthy behaviors, and the 

need for further research. The author proposes three principal strategies 

necessary to the further implementation of dietary recommendations in the U.S.

The nutrition-health connection: USDA dietary guidance policies. Marion 

Nestle. Agricultural Outlook. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 1992-

1994. (70th): 71-77. 1994. 

NAL Call Number: 1.90-C20U8

Description: Presented at the 1994 Agricultural Outlook Conference, the 

speaker states that the scientific advice for the Dietary Guidelines is widely 

agreed upon and is no longer an issue of contention. She states that the real 

issue is how to put the advice into practice, despite the possible political 
 

 

 

 16 

repercussions. She provides goals for the Department of Agriculture in food 

assistance, food and nutrition monitoring, agricultural support, food and nutrition 

research, and nutrition education. The author provides particular emphasis on 

nutrition education and encourages the USDA to coordinate between the 7 

separate Departmental agencies to maximize the effectiveness of nutrition 

education. 

What's new about the 1990 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.

Betty B. Peterkin. Journal of Nutrition Education, 23(4): 183-186. 1991.

NAL Call Number: TX341.J6

Abstract: The 1990 Dietary Guidelines bulletin reflects recommendations of a 

Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee of nine nationally recognized nutrition 

scientists and physicians. The Committee’s report to the two Departments 

includes its recommendations, a discussion of the changes it proposed to the

1985 edition, summaries of the research on the uses of the guidelines, and 

information on public comments received. Departmental reviewers of the

Committee’s recommendations concluded that the basic messages of the seven 

guidelines, as presented on the cover of the 1985 bulletin, remain sound and of 

priority importance to Americans in choosing food for a healthful diet. However, 

some changes to the wording of the guidelines were made. 

VI. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 4th edition, 1995 

The 1995 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Karil Bialostosky and Sachiko T. 

St. Jeor. Nutrition Today, 31(1): 6-11. 1996.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Description: This paper is based on a presentation made at the Society for 

Nutrition Education's 1995 annual meeting. It describes the development of the 

Dietary Guidelines and their medical and scientific basis as well as their uses in 

Federal food, nutrition, and health programs. 

The 1995 Dietary Guidelines for Americans: an overview. Eileen Kennedy, et 

al. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 96(3): 234-237. 1996. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: Summarizes revisions incorporated into this version of the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans and describes the intended use of the Guidelines. 
 

 

 

 17 

Alcohol guidelines for chronic disease prevention: from prohibition to 

moderation. Marion Nestle. Nutrition Today, 32(2): 86-92. 1997.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Abstract: Text changes in the alcohol recommendation of the 1995 Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans attracted considerable media attention. This article 

provides an overview of the science and politics of the controversial guideline 

addressing the health risks and benefits of alcoholic beverage consumption.

Communicating Dietary Guidelines for Americans: room for improvement. 

Constance J. Geiger. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 101(7): 793-

797. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Abstract: This qualitative study examines consumers’ attitudes about key 

messages, alternative messages, and various formats of the 1995 US Dietary

Guidelines for Americans. Five focus groups were conducted using a discussion 

guide based on previous research and the research concerns of the 1995 Dietary

Guidelines Advisory Committee. The presentation orders of the guidelines, 

guideline alternatives, and formats were varied to prevent bias. Forty consumers 

(age range, 25 to 43 years) participated: three groups of women and two groups 

of men. Participants were not familiar with the Dietary Guidelines but had heard 

some messages. Consumers were confused by several guideline messages. 

First, the messages to "Maintain or improve your weight" and "Balance the food 

you eat with physical activity" did not make sense to them. Second, respondents 

were confused by the term "balance" in several different contexts. The 

participants most preferred a shortened format, followed by a 2-tiered or grouped 

format, with the 1995 list of Dietary Guidelines falling last. Most of the Dietary

Guidelines could be better communicated to the public using shorter, clearer 

messages, especially for the weight and physical activity, and fat guidelines. 

Decreasing the number of guidelines or using a tiered/grouped format could 

make the Dietary Guidelines more useful to consumers. 

Consumers' understanding of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans: 

insights into the future. Debra P. Keenan, et al. Health Education and 

Behavior, 29(1): 124-135. 2002.

NAL Call Number: RA440.A1H5

Abstract: The purpose of this study was to examine consumers' knowledge and 

understanding of the 1995 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the sources 

from where consumers obtain their health information. A telephone survey was 

administered to 400 adults in the Twin Cities area in Minnesota. The number of 

guideline recommendations recalled per person was, on average, less than 2.5 

of a total of 13 recommendations. Participants had difficulties interpreting the 

guidelines. Knowledge of the dietary fat guideline was especially poor. Only 17% 

of survey participants correctly stated the amount of total fat they should have in 
 

 

 

 18 

their diet. The total number of media sources used to obtain health information 

was the variable that best explained the variance in knowledge of the Dietary 

Guidelines recommendations. To effectively change dietary behavior, health 

educators must work effectively with the media to develop behavior-focused 

nutrition messages that are meaningful and clear to consumers. 

“Deconstructing” Dietary Advice. Marion Nestle, in Food Politics. Berkeley, 

CA: University of California Press, 2002. 67-72.

NAL Call Number: TX360.U6N48 2002

Description: Discusses issues raised by critics of the Food Guide Pyramid as 

well as the influence of interest groups on how the messages in the Dietary 

Guidelines are conveyed to the public. 

Dietary guidance and nutrition promotion: USDA's renewed vision of 

nutrition education. Sharyn Sutton, et al. Family Economics and Nutrition 

Review, 9(2): 14-21. 1996.

NAL Call Number: aTX326.A1U5

Description: This paper addresses the relationship between the expert 

consensus on nutrition, diet, and health and the consumer. It distinguishes 

between dietary guidance and nutrition promotion: nutrition promotion uses the 

Consumer-Based Health Communications process to translate the sciencebased dietary guidance into consumer-oriented messages that facilitate behavior 

change. The implications for USDA’s dietary guidance and nutrition education 

efforts are discussed.

Dietary Guidelines and complex carbohydrates. Barbara O. Schneeman. 

Advances in experimental medicine and biology, 427: 51-53. 1997.

NAL Call Number: QP901.A33 

Description: The author discusses the carbohydrate-related Dietary Guidelines 

and raises the question of whether the information on food labels related to 

carbohydrates is adequate for helping consumers make choices consistent with 

the guidelines. 

Dietary Guidelines focus group report. Center for Nutrition Policy and

Promotion, Prospect Associates. 1995. 

NAL Call Number: TX360.U6D54—1995

Description: Presents the key findings from research conducted among 12 

focus groups to test reactions among consumers to the revised Dietary 

Guidelines; a description of the study methodology; a detailed explication of the 

findings from the groups, illustrated with verbatim quotations; and conclusions 

and recommendations from the research.
 

 

 

 19 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans: an historical perspective. C. Wayne 

Callaway. Journal of the American College of Nutrition, 16(6): 510-516. 1997.

NAL Call Number: RC620.A1J6

Abstract: Since 1980, Dietary Guidelines for Americans have been published 

jointly, every 5 years, by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the 

Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS). They benefit from the 

recommendations of a formally appointed Dietary Guidelines Advisory 

Committee. The Guidelines are an example of public health recommendations 

that are based upon published original research and analysis of that data by 

expert panels. The Guidelines are intended for healthy adults, so they might 

reduce their risks for certain diet-related chronic conditions. They are 

suggestions; they do not serve-and should not be used-as regulations. Greater 

individualization of dietary recommendations, for both major subgroups of the 

population and for individual patients, can improve our effectiveness in 

preventing and treating specific diet-related chronic conditions. To accomplish 

this objective, we need to move beyond the use of "indicators" (e.g., body mass 

index or blood cholesterol levels) as if they were "diagnostic," and focus on 

dietary and pharmacologic interventions (or, in some cases, no intervention) 

based on more specific diagnostic criteria (e.g., lipid patterns, fat distribution 

patterns, evidence of insulin resistance, and family history). Better targeting of 

dietary recommendations should improve their effectiveness, while reducing 

costs.

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans – past, present, future. Carole A. 

Davis and Etta A. Saltos. Family Economics and Nutrition Review, 9(2): 4-13.

1996.

NAL Call Number: aTX326.A1U5

Description: The authors review the history of nutrition guidance provided by 

the United States Federal government. 

Dietary Guidelines for the year 2000: epidemiology in action.

Marion Nestle. Nutrition, 15(6): 510-511. 1999.

NAL Call Number: TX341 N8

Description: The author points out that, despite continuing debate over the role 

of specific nutrients in health and disease, the epidemiologic basis of the food 

patterns recommended in the Dietary Guidelines are firmly established. 
 

 

 

 20 

National nutrition objectives and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 

Nancy T. Crane, V.S. Hubbard, C.J. Lewis. Nutrition Today, 33 (2): 49-58. 1998. 

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Description: Reviews progress made on the nutrition objectives outlined in the 

Healthy People 2000 national initiative which relate to the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans. 

Public policy and healthy eating. J. Michael McGinnis and Linda D. Meyers. 

Food Policy, 24 (2/3): 335-347. 1999. 

NAL Call Number: HD9000.1.F66

Abstract: This paper highlights a range of health policy applications, or levers, 

that stem from use of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans as a policy document 

and require strengthening in order to improve health prospects of the American 

people. The discussion draws on broad public policy interventions, many of 

which emerged during the conference.

VII. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 5th edition, 2000

The 2000 Dietary Guidelines for Americans: what are the changes and why 

were they made. Rachel K. Johnson and Eileen Kennedy. Journal of the 

American Dietetic Association, 100 (7): 769-774. 2000.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: Discusses the changes and the rationale for the revisions in the 

2000 Dietary Guidelines. 

Aim for a healthy weight: what is the target? Katherine M. Flegal, et al. 

Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 440S-450S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: The first guideline statement of the Year 2000 edition of Nutrition and 

Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans is "Aim for a healthy weight." The 

purpose of this paper is to describe the evolution of the weight guideline and 

discuss some issues related to it. The current and previous editions of the 

Dietary Guidelines and the corresponding advisory committee reports were 

reviewed. The weight guideline has evolved over the years into one that is 

complex and touches on a wide range of issues. The 2000 edition emphasizes 

weight loss more than previous editions. Unlike the other guidelines in the 

Dietary Guidelines, the weight guideline has a health outcome, a "healthy" 

weight, rather than a behavioral outcome as its goal. Also unlike the other 

guidelines, the weight guideline has become more medically oriented over time. 

The concept of healthy weight in the guidelines includes aspects of body 

composition, fat distribution and weight-related health conditions. It may be 
 

 

 

 21 

difficult for the public and even for health care providers to interpret some of the 

concepts included in the weight guideline. Issues related to the appropriate 

management of weight can be complex and may require a health care provider 

as a resource for interpretation. Rather than try to incorporate further clinical 

decision-making and weight loss guidance within the weight guideline, it may be 

more appropriate to refer the reader to a health care provider for guidance, as 

was done in previous editions. 

Be physically active each day. How can we know? Richard P. Troiano, et al. 

Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 451S-460S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: For the first time in its five versions, Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans contains an apparently nondietary guideline 

recommending physical activity. Although new as a separate guideline, physical 

activity has been included in the weight guideline of previous versions. The 

current version recognizes the importance of physical activity to health beyond its 

effect on weight maintenance. The purpose of this paper is to examine what data 

are available or required to evaluate the level of physical activity in the 

population, particularly in light of current recommendations. The physical activity 

sections of several national surveys that assess individual behavior or activityrelated policies are described. Surveillance of physical activity as a risk factor for 

chronic disease is critical because physical inactivity is highly prevalent, strongly 

associated with increased morbidity and mortality, costly and preventable. 

Determinants of physical activity behavior are also considered. These 

determinants are potentially important factors for surveillance and are critical 

components for planning successful interventions.

Choose a diet that is low in saturated fat and cholesterol and moderate in 

total fat: subtle changes to a familiar message. Lori Beth Dixon and Nancy D. 

Ernst. Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 510S-526S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: "Choose a diet that is low in saturated fat and cholesterol and 

moderate in total fat," issued in Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans in the year 2000, has an interesting and lengthy history. The first 

guideline, for which there was extensive scientific data to show that dietary 

excess increased chronic disease risk, prompted much scientific discussion and 

debate when implemented as dietary guidance. Three major changes in the 

guideline are noted since it was issued in 1980, i.e., numerical goals for dietary 

fats; the applicability of recommended fat intakes for all individuals greater than 

or equal to 2 y old; and rewording to emphasize reducing saturated fat and 

cholesterol intakes. The shift in emphasis includes the terminology moderate fat, 

which replaces the phrasing low fat. National data about the food supply, the 

population’s dietary intake, knowledge, attitudes and behaviors, and nutritional 
 

 

 

 22 

status indicators (e.g., serum cholesterol levels) related to dietary fats help to

monitor nutrition and health in the population. Experts consider that national data, 

although not without limitations, are sufficient to conclude that U.S. intakes of 

fats, as a proportion of energy, have decreased. The lower intakes of saturated

fat and cholesterol are consistent with decreases in blood cholesterol levels and 

lower rates of coronary mortality over the past 30 years. Strategies are needed 

and some are suggested, to further encourage the population to achieve a

dietary pattern that is low in saturated fat and cholesterol and moderate in total

fat. Other suggestions are offered to improve national nutrition monitoring and 

surveillance related to the guideline.

Choose a variety of fruits and vegetables daily: understanding the 

complexities. Susan M. Krebs-Smith and Linda Scott Kantor. Journal of 

Nutrition, 131(2): 487S-501S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: The 2000 edition of Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans is the first to include a recommendation aimed specifically at fruits 

and vegetables, apart from grains. This paper discusses these changes in the 

Dietary Guidelines, summarizes the methods of assessment pertaining to fruit 

and vegetable intakes and their related factors, and reviews the data available on 

current levels and trends over time. Recent methodological advances in the 

measurement of both the aggregate U.S. food supply and foods consumed by 

individuals have allowed for better estimates with which recommendations can 

be compared. The data on individual intakes suggest the following: Americans 

are consuming fruits and vegetables at a level near the minimum 

recommendations; to be in concordance with energy-based recommendations, 

they would have to consume approximately two more servings per day; and dark 

green and deep yellow vegetables are accounting for a disproportionately small 

share of the total. Fruit and vegetable consumption appears to be rising, but only 

slightly, and this increase might be only an artifact of shifts in the population 

demographics. A number of studies suggest that low income households in poor 

central cities and sparsely populated rural areas often have less access to food 

stores and face higher prices for food, including fruits and vegetables, compared 

with other households. At the aggregate level, supplying enough fruits and 

vegetables to meet dietary recommendations for all U.S. consumers would 

require adjustments in U.S. agricultural production, trade, marketing practices 

and prices of these commodities. 

Choose a variety of grains daily, especially whole grains: a challenge for 

consumers. Linda S. Kantor, et al. Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 473S-486S.

2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82
 

 

 

 23 

Abstract: The 2000 edition of Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans is the first to include a specific guideline for grain foods, separate from 

fruits and vegetables, and recognize the unique health benefits of whole grains. 

This paper describes and evaluates major tools for assessing intakes of total 

grains and whole grains, reviews current data on who consumes grain foods and 

where, and describes individual- and market-level factors that may influence 

grain consumption. Aggregate food supply data show that U.S. consumers have 

increased their intake of grain foods from record low levels in the 1970s, but 

consumption of whole-grain foods remains low. Data on individual intakes show 

that consumption of total grains was above the recommended 6 serving minimum 

in 1994-1996, but consumption of whole grains was only one third of the 3 daily 

servings many nutritionists recommend. Increased intake of whole-grain foods 

may be limited by a lack of consumer awareness of the health benefits of whole 

grains, difficulty in identifying whole-grain foods in the marketplace, higher prices 

for some whole-grain foods, consumer perceptions of inferior taste and 

palatability, and lack of familiarity with preparation methods. In July 1999, the 

U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized a health claim that should both 

make it easier for consumers to identify and select whole-grain foods and have a 

positive effect on the availability of these foods in the marketplace.

Choose and prepare foods with less salt: dietary advice for all Americans. 

Catherine M. Loria, et al. Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 536S-551S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: The Nutrition and Your Health: Dietary Guidelines for Americans have 

included dietary guidance on salt and sodium since they were first released in 

1980. This paper briefly reviews the impetus for including sodium guidelines, 

changes in them over time and factors influencing these changes. Although 

guidance appears to have changed little over the five editions, differences in 

wording reflect changes in knowledge of the link between sodium and blood 

pressure, a shift in public health policy toward prevention and increased 

consumption of processed and prepared foods. We examine methods to monitor 

sodium intake and assess whether Americans are following these guidelines. 

Available data indicate that American adolescents and adults are consuming 

more sodium than recommended and are unable to judge whether the amount of 

sodium in their diet is appropriate. Although Americans avoid adding salt to food 

at the table, their efforts may have little effect given that the majority of salt 

consumed is added during commercial processing and preparation. Thus, 

changes to the Dietary Guidelines that emphasize the major sources of sodium in 

U.S. diets and advice to "choose and prepare foods with less salt" may help all 

Americans meet recommended sodium intake levels in the future.
 

 

 

 24 

Choose beverages and foods to moderate your intake of sugars: the 2000 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans- what’s all the fuss about? Rachel K. 

Johnson and Carol Frary. Journal of Nutrition, 131(10): 2766S-2771S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: As part of the 2000 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the public is 

advised to choose beverages and foods to moderate their intake of sugars. The 

term sugars is conventionally used to describe the mono- and disaccharides. 

However, the Dietary Guidelines for Americans distinguish between added 

sugars and other sources of carbohydrates. The concept of added sugars 

provides consumers with useful information, especially if they are trying to limit 

excessive use of caloric sweeteners. Added sugars are defined as sugars that 

are eaten separately at the table or used as ingredients in processed or prepared 

foods. Consumption of added sugars has increased steadily as documented by 

both food supply data and nationwide food consumption survey data. The largest 

source of added sugars in the U.S. diet is nondiet soft drinks, accounting for one 

third of total intake. Diets high in sugars have been associated with various 

health problems, including dental caries, dyslipidemias, obesity, bone loss and 

fractures, and poor diet quality. Research gaps are identified.

Choose beverages and foods to moderate your intake of sugars: 

measurement requires quantification. Susan M. Krebs-Smith. Journal of 

Nutrition, 131(2): 527S-535S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: The Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which form the basis of federal 

nutrition policy, have changed in subtle, but important ways with regard to sugars 

since they were first introduced in 1980; one might say they have become 

"sweeter" over time. Nonetheless, they have continued to maintain that there is a 

concern with overconsumption of sugars in the diets of Americans. Although the 

Dietary Guidelines themselves have never quantified how much constitutes 

overconsumption vs. moderation, the Food Guide Pyramid provides some 

guidance on that subject. The Pyramid's recommendations for added sugars, 

which vary by total energy level, are posed as a benchmark for gauging the 

appropriateness of the population's intakes. Data from the Food Supply series 

and from the Continuing Surveys of Food Intakes by Individuals are used to 

assess recent intakes. The population is consuming added sugars at levels far in 

excess of recommendations; this is generally true for all population subgroups 

examined, but especially for adolescents. Soft drinks are the major source of 

added sugars in the diet. Suggestions are given to facilitate correction of these 

dietary imbalances.
 

 

 

 25 

“Deconstructing” Dietary Advice. Marion Nestle, in Food Politics. Berkeley, 

CA: University of California Press, 2002. 72-92.

NAL Call Number: TX360.U6N48 2002

Description: This book chapter discusses the efforts of various interest groups 

to influence the development and promotion of the messages included in the 

Dietary Guidelines and the Food Guide Pyramid.

Dietary Guidelines 2000 – the opportunity and challenges for reaching the 

consumer. Eileen Kennedy and Carole A. Davis. Journal of the American 

Dietetic Association, 100(12): 1462-1465. 2000.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: Reviews findings from research conducted into consumers’ 

understanding of concepts covered in the Dietary Guidelines and discusses the 

implications for nutrition educators. 

Dietary Guidelines, Food Guidance, and Dietary Quality. Eileen Kennedy, in 

Handbook of Nutrition and Food. Carolyn D. Berdanier, editor. Washington, DC: 

CRC Press, 2002. 339-352. 

NAL Call Number: QP141.H345 2002

Description: Reviews the development of U.S. dietary guidance though the 

2000 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Includes a discussion of the unique 

features of each edition, a comparison the U.S. Dietary Guidelines to those of 

other countries, and a comparison with disease-specific guidelines of 

professional associations, including the American Heart Association and 

American Cancer Society. The author suggests developing and promoting foodbased Dietary Guidelines for children ages 2 and younger as a future direction. 

The Dietary Guidelines for Americans: a basis for US nutrition policy. 

Barbara Schneeman. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 101(7): 742-

743. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: Through examples of the process of guideline development in other 

countries, this article illustrates the role of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans in 

national nutrition policy. 

The fifth edition of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans: lessons learned 

along the way. Debra P. Keenan and Rayne Abusabha. Journal of the 

American Dietetic Association, 101(6): 631-634. 2001. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Description: Examines the complexities of the 2000 edition of the Guidelines 

and identifies the elements that may continue to present challenges to nutrition 

practitioners. 
 

 

 

 26 

If you drink alcoholic beverages do so in moderation: what does this 

mean?

Mary C. Dufour. Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 552S-561S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: The changes in content of the alcohol guideline of the various editions 

of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans from 1980 to 2000 are discussed. This is 

followed by a capsule summary of the history and evolution of the discipline of 

alcohol epidemiology compared with that of nutrition epidemiology. Methods of 

assessment are discussed, and issues surrounding the validity and reliability of 

self-report of alcohol consumption are then outlined. Relevant objectives from 

Healthy People 2010 are discussed. Surveillance of the alcohol guideline 

discloses that, at present, very few American drinkers follow the 

recommendations of the alcohol guideline. Indications for future research needs 

to address this issue conclude the discussion. 

Keep food safe to eat: healthful food must be safe as well as nutritious. 

Catherine E. Wotecki, et al. Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 502S-509S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: The inclusion of food safety in the 2000 edition of the Dietary 

Guidelines for Americans is an important step toward ensuring their continued 

relevance for health promotion and disease prevention. The inclusion of food 

safety is consistent with the original intent of the Guidelines and the increased 

focus on food safety today; it also better reflects current knowledge about diet 

and long-term health. A wide spectrum of surveillance methods can be used to 

monitor progress in reducing the incidence of foodborne illness, from surveys of 

food safety attitudes to epidemiologic data on foodborne illness. Surveillance 

data show that progress is being made, but that much work remains to be done. 

Strategies for reducing foodborne illness require a farm-to-table approach and 

the involvement of all those who have a responsibility for food safety, i.e., 

government, industry and the public. Federal agencies and others are finding it 

useful to use a risk analysis framework, i.e., risk assessment, risk management 

and risk communication, as a means of organizing available information, 

identifying data gaps, quantifying risks for specific pathogens and foods, and 

presenting strategies for improvement. Food safety education is a critical part of 

the overall strategy to reduce the incidence of foodborne illness and 

complements regulatory, research and other activities.

Let the pyramid guide your food choices: capturing the total diet concept. 

Lori Beth Dixon, et al. Journal of Nutrition, 131(2): 461S-472S. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: This paper discusses how the guideline "Eat a variety of foods" 

became "Let the Pyramid guide your food choices," presents background 

information on the food guidance system upon which the Food Guide Pyramid is 
 

 

 

 27 

based and reviews methods that have been used to assess aspects of the total

diet, i.e., the variety, moderation and proportionality, promoted by this guidance. 

The methods include measures of dietary variety, patterns based on Pyramid

food group intakes and scoring methods comprised of multiple dietary 

components. Highlights of results from these methods include the following. 

Although approximately one third of the U.S. population eat at least some food

from all Pyramid food groups, only approximately 1-3% eat the recommended 

number of servings from all food groups on a given day. Fruits are the most 

commonly omitted food group. Vegetables and meat are the groups most 

commonly met by adults, and dairy the most commonly met by youth. Intakes of 

specific types of vegetables (i.e., dark green, deep yellow) and of grains (i.e., 

whole grains) are well below that recommended; intakes of total fat and added 

sugars exceed current recommendations. Scoring methods show those diets of 

the majority of the population require improvement, and that diets improve with 

increases in education and income. This paper also discusses the limitations and 

strengths of these approaches, and concludes with suggestions to improve 

current food guidance and methods to assess the total diet.

Nutrition guidelines and education of the public. Johanna T. Dwyer. Journal 

of Nutrition, 131(11 Suppl): 3074S-3077S. 2001

NAL Call Number: 389.8 J82

Abstract: Guidelines on diet and nutrition serve two important purposes: to 

guide policy makers and to educate consumers, be they healthy or ill, about 

healthful ways to eat. Other lifestyle behaviors such as weight, physical activity 

and smoking status are sometimes also included. The soundness of the resulting 

guidelines depends on the strength of the evidence attesting to the presence of 

diet-health relationships. Precedent and the larger environment also have 

powerful influences. The degree to which guidelines are used will depend on how 

well they are crafted with respect to communication and how the 

recommendations are publicized. Holistic approaches rather than single silver 

bullet approaches that are targeted to reduction in risks of dietary deficiencies, 

food-borne illnesses and multiple chronic degenerative diseases are probably the 

most useful for the nutrition education of the public. The Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans are one example. Such dietary and nutritional recommendations 

based on sound science, reviewed periodically and communicated effectively 

have a positive and helpful role in cancer prevention and risk reduction.
 

 

 

 28 

VIII. Reviews and Commentaries on the Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans, 6th edition, 2005

2005 Dietary Guidelines for physical activity: focus on weight off target.

G.A Gaesser. Health at Every Size, 19(3): 185 – 192. 2005.

NAL Call Number: RC628 .O24

Description: In this commentary, the author discusses the three guidelines for 

physical activity that are part of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines. While strongly 

supporting the Guidelines’ emphasis on physical activity, he outlines the rationale 

for his criticism of the two weight-centered guidelines.

The 2005 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee report: Achieving 

nutritional recommendations through food-based guidance. C. Weaver, T. 

Nicklas and P. Britten. Nutrition Today, 40(3): 102 – 107. 2005. 

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8 

Abstract: The 2005 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee evaluated the 

science base for the relationships of diet and physical activity and health using 

an evidence-based approach. The USDA Food Intake Patterns were used as a 

tool to model food group recommendations that meet 100% of the current Dietary 

Reference Intake standards for most nutrients. Americans need to make 

substantial changes in food choices to meet their nutrient needs without 

exceeding their energy needs. The new guidelines stress the importance of 

making calories count by choosing nutrient-dense foods combined with adequate 

physical activity.

The 2005 Dietary Guidelines: avoiding a fortification "mis-step" as we "step 

up" to whole grains. J.M Jones and F.A Coletta. Nutrition Today, 40(5): 216 –

223. 2005.

NAL Call Number: RA784.N8

Abstract: Recommendations for whole grains feature prominently in MyPyramid,

Healthy People 2010, and the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (6th 

edition). In fact, Healthy People 2010 has the following recommendation: 

Increase the proportion of persons aged 2 years and older who consume at least 

6 daily servings of grain products, with at least 3 being whole grains. The Dietary 

Guidelines materials recommend that Americans substitute servings of whole 

grain foods for processed grain foods because their unique nutrient package 

benefits overall health and lessens chronic degenerative disease risk. The 

substitution of whole grain for refined grains has multiple benefits, but there is 

one drawback-folate. Folate fortification of grain products is required by law only 

for refined flour products, not for whole grain products. Few whole grain products 

are voluntarily fortified with folic acid. Although whole grain products supply more 

naturally occurring folate, it is a small amount and is less bioavailable than folic 

acid. New survey findings reviewed in this article suggest that Americans do 
 

 

 

 29 

receive and are acting on the whole grain message. In particular, they are 

consuming more whole grain bread. While eating more whole grain bread and 

grain products is likely to confer health benefits, could it also have unintended 

health consequences, namely, a reversal of recent gains in folate status?

Dietary Guidelines 2005 – Contributions of Registered Dietitians to the 

evolution and dissemination of the guidelines. P.M. Kris-Etherton and J.A 

Weber. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 105(9): 1362–1364. 2005. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8Am34 

Description: Discusses how dietitians contributed to the development of the 

2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans and describes the key role dietitians can 

play in their implementation.

Dietary Guidelines and Food Guide Pyramid incapacitate consumers and 

contribute to distorted eating attitudes and behaviors. E. Satter. Health at 

Every Size, 19(3): 161–170. 2005. 

NAL Call Number: RC628 .O24

Description: The author gives her opinion that the 2005 Dietary Guidelines 

convey unrealistic standards that may not be attainable for much of the 

population. The author proposes consumers should be taught eating 

competence instead of food restriction.

Federal Communication about Obesity in the Dietary Guidelines and 

Checkoff Programs. Parke E. Wilde. Obesity Research. The North American 

Association for the Study of Obesity, 14(6): 967–973. 2006. 

NAL Call Number: RC628 .O294

Abstract: The new Dietary Guidelines for Americans focus on obesity 

prevention. They recommend increased consumption of whole grains, fruits, 

vegetables, fish, and low-fat dairy products, within a balanced diet whose total 

calories have been moderately reduced. Meanwhile, other well-known and wellfunded federally sponsored consumer communications promote increased total 

consumption of beef, pork, and dairy products, including energy dense foods 

such as bacon cheeseburgers, barbecue pork ribs, pizza, and butter. These latter 

communications are sponsored by the federal government’s commodity 

promotion programs, known as "checkoff" programs. The programs are 

established by Congress, approved by a majority of the commodity’s producers, 

managed jointly by a producer board and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and 

funded through a tax on the producers. The federal government enforces the 

collection of more than $600 million annually in mandatory assessments, 

approves the advertising and marketing programs, and defends checkoff 

communication in court as the federal government’s own message--in legal 

jargon, as its own "government speech." Federal support for promoting fruits and 

vegetables is small by comparison. The checkoff programs recently have 

become more clearly identified as federal programs. After a recent decision by 
 

 

 

 30 

the U.S. Supreme Court upholding the constitutionality of the checkoff programs, 

calls for consistency with the Dietary Guidelines may increase. The current 

inconsistencies in federal communication undermine the effectiveness of the 

Dietary Guidelines as an antidote to the shortcomings of the private sector 

market for information about weight and obesity.

Healthy Eating Index 2005

Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Web site: 

http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/Publications/HEI/healthyeatingindex2005factsheet.pdf

(PDF)

Description: The Healthy Eating Index (HEI) is a measure of diet quality that 

assesses conformance to Federal dietary guidance. The original HEI was 

created by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 1995. Release of new 

Dietary Guidelines for Americans in 2005 motivated a revision of the HEI. The 

food group standards are based on the recommendations found in MyPyramid.

Local wellness policies and the dietary guidelines: What does it mean to 

you? J.D. Black. Journal of the American Dietetic Association,105(6): 891–892. 

2005 

NAL Call Number: 389.8 Am34

Description: This article, written by the manager of the American Dietetic 

Association’s National Nutrition Policy manager, discusses the challenges local 

school districts may face in incorporating the Dietary Guidelines into their local 

wellness policies. It urges dietetics professionals to become active in translating 

the Dietary Guidelines into specific guidelines on the local level. 

New Dietary Guidelines Will Help Americans Make Better Food Choices, 

Live Healthier Lives. Department Health and Human Services, U.S. Department 

of Agriculture.

Web site: http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2005pres/20050112.html

Description: In this news release, the Department of Health and Human 

Services (DHHS) describes key points of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for 

Americans.

Overview of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines. Karin Kratina. Health at Every Size,

19(3): 171–175. 2005.

NAL Call Number: RC628 .O24

Description: The author discusses some of the differences between the 2000 

and 2005 Dietary Guidelines and is critical of what she sees as “increasingly 

stringent behaviors” promoted in the new guidelines. 
 

 

 

 31 

Possible Implications for U.S. Agriculture From Adoption of Select Dietary 

Guidelines. Jean C. Buzby et. al. (ERR-31) Economic Research Service, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 

November 2006. No. 31. 35 pp.

Full Text: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/err31/err31.pdf (PDF)

Abstract: To help Americans meet nutritional requirements while staying within 

caloric recommendations, the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans encourage 

consumption of fruits, vegetables, whole-grain products, and fat-free or low-fat 

milk or milk products. This report provides one view of the potential implications 

for U.S. agriculture if Americans changed their current consumption patterns to 

meet some of those guidelines. For Americans to meet the fruit, vegetable, and 

whole-grain recommendations, domestic crop acreage would need to increase by 

an estimated 7.4 million harvested acres, or 1.7 percent of total U.S. cropland in 

2002. To meet the dairy guidelines, consumption of milk and milk products would 

have to increase by 66 percent; an increase of that magnitude would likely 

require an increase in the number of dairy cows as well as increased feed grains 

and, possibly, increased acreage devoted to dairy production.

Revamped dietary guidelines hit (and miss) the mark: EN’s analysis. E. 

Zied. Environmental Nutrition, 28(2): 1–6. 2005.

NAL Call Number: TX341.E5

Description: Provides and overview and commentary about the dietary 

guidelines.

Revised dietary guidelines promote healthy lifestyle. C. Weaver and B. 

Schneeman. Food technology, 59(3): 28–30, 32–33. 2005. 

NAL Call Number: 389.8 F7398

Description: Provides an overview of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines, how they 

differ from previous editions, and how they will affect government nutrition 

programs and the food industry.

Weighing the Evidence to Formulate Dietary Guidelines. Steven H. Woolf.

Journal of the American College of Nutrition. American College of Nutrition,

25(003): 277S-284S. 2006. 

NAL Call Number: RC620.A1J6

Abstract: Dietary guidelines have broad implications for the health of individuals 

and populations. Increasingly, government agencies and medical organizations

that issue guidelines have pursued evidence-based approaches. These 

approaches emphasize a comprehensive, critical, and explicit examination of the 

scientific evidence that the proposed dietary practice will improve health. 

Evidence-based guidelines typically feature an explicit methodology, include as 

their foundation a systematic review of the evidence, and provide graded 

recommendations that are linked directly to the supporting evidence and state 
 

 

 

 32 

explicitly when recommendations are based on opinion. Guideline development 

usually involves some combination of six steps: (1) specification of the topic and 

the guideline development methodology, (2) systematic review of the evidence, 

(3) consideration of expert opinion, (4) public policy analysis, (5) drafting of the 

document, and (6) peer review. The supporting evidence undergoes critical 

appraisal, including an assessment of the magnitude of the effect on outcomes 

observed in studies, the quality of the studies reporting the effect, or both. Dietary 

guidelines should also consider untoward effects, potential harms, and economic 

implications to society, the food industry, and others. A hallmark of evidencebased guidelines is making explicit the strength of recommendations and the 

quality of the evidence on which they are based. Grading systems are commonly 

used to rate the quality of the supporting evidence.

IX. Dietary Guidelines from Around the World

Dietary Guidelines for Adults in Greece

Supreme Scientific Health Council, Ministry of Health and Welfare

Web site: http://www.mednet.gr/archives/1999-5/pdf/516.pdf (PDF)

Description: Discusses food-based dietary guidelines for healthy adults in 

Greece and the scientific evidence for them.

Dietary Guidelines for All Australians

National Health and Medical Research Council

Web site: http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/dietsyn.htm

Description: Dietary guidelines issued by the Australian government, based on 

the principles of good nutrition, ecological sustainability and equity.

Dietary Guidelines and the Food Guide Pagoda. The Chinese Nutrition 

Society. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 100 (8): 886-887. 2001.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34

Dietary Guidelines in Three Regions of the World. Johanna Dwyer, et al., in 

Handbook of Nutrition and Food. Carolyn D. Berdanier, editor. Washington, DC: 

CRC Press, 2002. 353 -371. 

NAL Call Number: QP141.H345 2002

Description: Examines the strengths and weaknesses of dietary guidelines 

from three regions of the world and provides recommendations for future 

guidelines. 
 

 

 

 33 

Eating Well with Canada’s Food Guide

Health Canada

Web site: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/fn-an/food-guide-aliment/index_e.html

Description: Canadian government guidelines for a healthy diet.

Finnish Nutrition Recommendations

National Nutrition Council

Web site: http://wwwb.mmm.fi/ravitsemusneuvottelukunta/Nutrec98.pdf (PDF)

Description: Nutrition recommendations issued by the Finnish government with 

the goal of defining appropriate nutrient intakes consistent with good health for 

various population groups.

Food Guidelines by Country

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

Web site:

http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/nutrition/education_guidelines_country_en.stm

Description: Dietary guidelines and food guides collected by the Food and 

Agriculture Organization. Includes guides from countries in Africa, Asia and the 

Pacific, Latin America & the Caribbean, North America, the Near East and 

Europe. Some regional guides are also included.

Food Guide Pyramid, Malaysia

Nutrition Society of Malaysia

Web site: http://www.nutriweb.org.my/modules/foodpyramid/index.php

Description: A guide to wise food choices including recommended servings from 

each food group.

The Healthy Diet Pyramid, Singapore

Health Promotion Board, Singapore Government

Web site: http://www.hpb.gov.sg/hpb/default.asp?pg_id=865&aid=316

Description: A pyramid graphic to guide healthy food choices. Includes a 

description of each food group and the recommended number of servings from 

each group.

How the Chinese link dietary advice to their national plan of action for 

nutrition. Keyou Ge and Kristen McNutt. Journal of the American Dietetic 

Association, 100 (8): 885-886. 2000.

NAL Call Number: 389.8-Am34
 

 

 

 34 

Preparation and Use of Food-based Dietary Guidelines

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations, Food and 

Nutrition Division

Web Site: http://www.fao.org/DOCREP/x0243e/x0243e00.htm

Description: This document serves as guidance in the development and 

implementation of dietary guidelines for improving the dietary practices of 

populations. It recommends a food-based, rather than a nutrient-based 

approach, to guide and improve consumption patterns and provides examples of 

how foods and food groups have been incorporated into the dietary guidelines of 

a number of countries.

The original version of this resource list was compiled in 2003 by:

Elizabeth Hill, RD, Nutrition Information Specialist

Acknowledgment is given to the following reviewers:

Johanna Dwyer, DSc, RD, Professor of Medicine and Community Health, 

Schools of Nutrition and Medicine; Senior Scientist, Jean Mayer Human Nutrition 

Research Center on Aging, Tufts University; and Director, Frances Stern 

Nutrition Center, Tufts New England Medical Center, Boston

Lora Wilder, ScD, RD, Nutrition Information Specialist

This resource list was updated in 2008 by: 

Janell Walker, BS, University of Maryland, College Park Dietetic Intern

Lora Wilder, ScD, RD, Nutrition Information Specialist,

With assistance by Susan Stone, Nutrition Information Assistant

Acknowledgment is given to the following reviewers:

Cathy Alessi, RD, Nutrition Information Specialist

Shirley King Evans, MEd, RD, Acting Nutrition and Food Safety Program 

Leader

This publication was developed in part through a Cooperative Agreement with 

the Department of Nutrition and Food Science in the College of Agriculture and 

Natural Resources at the University of Maryland.

Locate additional FNIC publications at http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/resourcelists.
 

 

 

 35 

Food and Nutrition Information Center

Agricultural Research Service, USDA

National Agricultural Library

10301 Baltimore Avenue, Room 105

Beltsville, MD 20705-2351

Phone: 301-504-5414

Fax: 301-504-6409

TTY: 301-504-6856

Contact: http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/contact

Web site: http://fnic.nal.usda.gov/

The National Agricultural Library (NAL) provides lending and photocopying 

services to U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) employees. Non-USDA users 

can obtain materials from NAL through the interlibrary lending services of their 

local, corporate, or university library. For further information on NAL’s document 

delivery services visit their Web site at 

http://www.nal.usda.gov/services/request.shtml.

For questions on document delivery services please call 301-504-5717 or submit 

a question at http://www.nal.usda.gov/services/ask.php. 

The use of trade, firm, or corporation names in this publication (or page) is for the 

information and convenience of the reader. Such use does not constitute an 

official endorsement or approval by the USDA or the Agricultural Research 

Service (ARS) of any product or service to the exclusion of others that may be 

suitable.

USDA prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of 

race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital 

status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic 

information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or a part of an individual's 

income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases 

apply to all programs.) 

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of 

program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's 

TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD). 

To file a complaint of discrimination write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil 

Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410 or call 

800-795-3272 (voice) or 202-401-0216 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity 

provider and employer.
 

 

 

 36