{"id":472347,"date":"2026-02-11T07:20:09","date_gmt":"2026-02-11T07:20:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/472347\/"},"modified":"2026-02-11T07:20:09","modified_gmt":"2026-02-11T07:20:09","slug":"new-food-pyramid-website-has-a-chatbot-skeptical-of-its-own-content","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/472347\/","title":{"rendered":"New food pyramid website has a chatbot skeptical of its own content"},"content":{"rendered":"

How trustworthy is the new U.S. food pyramid? It\u2019s a mixed bag, according to the government website devoted to that pyramid.<\/p>\n

Kyle Diamantas, head of the Human Foods Program at the Food and Drug Administration, alerted the public this week to a generative artificial intelligence tool added to the government\u2019s \u201ctransformational\u201d realfood.gov<\/a> site. The tool, with a headline \u201cUse AI to get real answers about real food,\u201d features \u201cAI integration to provide parents and consumers with clear and concise answers at the click of a button,\u201d Diamantas wrote on X<\/a>.<\/p>\n

It turns out that the click of a button leads users to Grok \u2014 the generative chatbot that\u2019s part of the X social media platform owned by former Trump administration adviser Elon Musk. Asked if the new food pyramid<\/a> is backed by high-quality research, Grok responds: \u201cMany nutrition scientists and organizations have raised concerns about the evidence quality and process for the final version.\u201d While the guidelines\u2019 recommendations on limiting added sugars and ultra-processed foods are backed by research, Grok says, \u201cthe emphasis on saturated fats and animal proteins contradicts longstanding evidence.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

That\u2019s a pretty accurate summary of the nutrition community\u2019s response<\/a> to the new guidelines and pyramid<\/a>, which features a prominent rib-eye steak and stick of butter along with less controversial items like broccoli, salmon, and olive oil. But in general, researchers are wary of the risks of turning to AI for nutrition advice.<\/p>\n

\u201cI think the use of AI holds promise for providing tailored nutrition advice in a way that is convenient and low-cost,\u201d said Alyssa Moran, a nutrition policy researcher and epidemiologist at the University of Pennsylvania. But she notes that generative AI, just like human health care providers, tends to perpetuate stereotypes about eating and weight, such as stigmatizing obesity<\/a>. Overall, she said, the models need a lot more testing on how they answer nutrition questions before they\u2019re ready for widespread public use \u2014 \u201c[a]nd certainly before these tools are promoted by the government, which is supposed to be looking out for the public\u2019s health.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\/<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\"\"\/<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\tSign up for Morning Rounds<\/p>\n

Understand how science, health policy, and medicine shape the world every day<\/p>\n

The National Design Studio, which worked on the dietary guidelines website, has not yet responded to a request for comment.<\/p>\n

The Grok tool on the government\u2019s dietary guidelines website also includes some sample questions, most of which use language involving \u201cREAL FOOD.\u201d One concerns feeding a vegetarian, Indian-food-loving family \u201cREAL FOOD\u201d on a budget of $200 a week. Grok recommends lentils, rice, and buying in bulk.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Another sample question asks about \u201cREAL FOOD\u201d during pregnancy. Among Grok\u2019s recommendations are \u201cFolic acid\/folate (400\u2013800 mcg\/day, often via prenatal vitamin),\u201d listing food sources like fortified cereals and leafy greens as well. Medical organizations specifically recommend that pregnant women take folic acid supplements<\/a> to prevent birth defects rather than relying solely on food sources. Grok does not make that distinction, which could inadvertently play into unfounded fears about folic acid supplements<\/a> perpetuated by some wellness influencers.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Regardless of concerns about the reliability of large language models, Americans are increasingly turning<\/a> to them with health questions. Another study published this week in Nature Medicine<\/a> highlights that differences in how people phrase their questions and what information they emphasize or exclude impacts the accuracy of chatbots\u2019 answers. \u201cEvaluation mistakes are often made when systems are assessed in artificial environments,\u201d co-author Adam Mahdi, an associate professor at Oxford Internet Institute, told STAT via email, explaining why chatbots may outperform doctors<\/a> under ideal conditions and then falter in the real world<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\"\"\t\t<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\"\"\/
\n\t\t\t\tSTAT Plus: Behind new dietary guidelines: Industry-funded studies, opaque science, crushing deadline pressure<\/a><\/p>\n

All this means users may find their own experiences with Grok diverge when it comes to the tool\u2019s utility. But the STAT newsroom had fun testing it out. One reporter asked, given butter\u2019s prominence on the food pyramid, how many sticks of butter<\/a> they should be eating each day.<\/p>\n

Zero, Grok said: The pyramid\u2019s visual hierarchy shouldn\u2019t be interpreted literally.<\/p>\n

\u201cAh, thank you,\u201d the reporter replied. \u201cThat was very confusing. Can you suggest a better way to lay out food guidelines visually to avoid this kind of mistake?\u201d<\/p>\n

Sure, Grok said. A better, more intuitive approach would be getting rid of the government\u2019s new inverted food pyramid, and going back to MyPlate<\/a>.<\/p>\n

STAT\u2019s coverage of chronic health issues is supported by a grant from\u00a0Bloomberg Philanthropies<\/a>. Our\u00a0financial supporters<\/a>\u00a0are not involved in any decisions about our journalism.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"How trustworthy is the new U.S. food pyramid? It\u2019s a mixed bag, according to the government website devoted…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":472348,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[36],"tags":[254,64,63,1834,5898,137,532,4390,1836],"class_list":{"0":"post-472347","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-nutrition","8":"tag-artificial-intelligence","9":"tag-au","10":"tag-australia","11":"tag-chronic-disease","12":"tag-chronic-diseases","13":"tag-health","14":"tag-nutrition","15":"tag-obesity","16":"tag-public-health"},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/472347","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=472347"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/472347\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/472348"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=472347"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=472347"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/au\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=472347"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}