1992, the U.S. Department of Agriculture Proposed

¶ … 1992, the U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed the food pyramid as a tool of assessing the healthiness of a diet and as a proposal towards healthy living. While many of the issues that were relevant in the 1992 USDA food pyramid, such as "eating a variety of foods," balancing foods with physical activity" or moderate consumption of alcohol -- general indications for a healthy lifestyle -- the actual reference to food and to what can actually be called a healthy diet has been a point of controversy ever since. We will be proposing three modifications to key points in the food pyramid, according to the reasoning presented here below.

The first issue is the failure of the USDA pyramid to "recognize important health differences between red meat"

and other foods in the group. The risk of consuming red meat is clearly related with increased risk of developing coronary disease, colon cancer or diabetes. However, the red meat category, including pork and beef, are predominant in saturated fat, which raises cholesterol and rises the risk of coronary disease. The generic category "meat products" is much too general, because chicken and fish, the so-called white meat category, produce more unsaturated fat, which lower consistently the risk of having the diseases I have previously mentioned here above. As such, it is obvious that "not all fats are bad for you"

and that a distinction needs to be made in this sense.

We propose, as such, that the new food pyramid separate the two different categories of meat, red meat and white meat, and treat each differently. The old pyramid recommended that 2 to 3 servings for meat in general. In the new pyramid, we suggest that fish and poultry be used in 1 to 3 or even 4 servings, while the red meat category be used sparingly, due to increased risks of disease.

The second issue that needs debating refers to the role carbohydrates play in the old pyramid and the position we want to attribute them in the new one. In the old pyramid, carbohydrates, including bread, cereal, rice and pasta, were recommended in 6 to 11 servings. They were thus used as surrogate replacements of fats and as providers of necessary calories.

However, the food pyramid never considered some of the negative effects of carbohydrates and of consuming them in 6 to 11 servings. One of these would be the fact that a massive switch in one's diet from fats to carbohydrates increases the blood level of triglyceride, with increased chances of heart disease

. It would seem, in this case, that the old pyramid substitutes one source of heart diseases with another. Additionally, levels of low -- density lipoprotein, commonly known as "bad cholesterol" increase as well when switching to carbohydrates. An increase in glucose and sugar levels, as well as the risk of obesity should be mentioned as well.

The solution we propose is somewhat similar to the one referring to meat and implements, first of all, a differentiated view on the carbohydrates category. We suggest that additional categories of food, including nuts and beans, should be used to provide part of the proteins needed (1 to 3 servings) and that entire components of the carbohydrate category, including white rice, white bread, pasta and sweets, should be used sparingly. Whole grain foods, notorious for their numerous qualities in disease prevention, should be consumed at most meals.

The third issue that comes up when referring to the old pyramid and a serious concern in this case is the promotion of an "overconsumption of dairy products," up to 2 or 3 servings per day. If we look at the calcium content, this proposal should prove useful, however, experimental studies have shown that high dairy consumption is also associated with increased risks of prostate cancer or ovarian cancer. At this point, even if conclusions cannot be drawn, the risk is there and there is no point in recommending something we know may be risky.