{"id":765329,"date":"2026-07-16T01:12:15","date_gmt":"2026-07-16T01:12:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/765329\/"},"modified":"2026-07-16T01:12:15","modified_gmt":"2026-07-16T01:12:15","slug":"setting-the-record-straight-calley-means","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/765329\/","title":{"rendered":"Setting the record straight: Calley Means"},"content":{"rendered":"

Washington Post reporter, Tim Carman, contacted me for comment about a speech he heard made by RFK Jr\u2019s top food advisor, Calley Means, in which Means made patently false charges about my work.\u00a0 From Carman\u2019s report, MAHA Mondays at the Great American State Fair miss one obvious problem<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Means suggested her research had been bankrolled by sugar and tobacco industries, the latter of which\u00a0once owned major food companies<\/a>. The industries \u201cfunded her to say that basically the base of our diet should be carbs,\u201d Means said. He added that the report made Americans afraid of foods other than grains.<\/p>\n

These charges surprised me for two reasons: (1) Anyone even remotely familiar with my work would know these statements could not possibly be true, and (2) I am not MAHA\u2019s enemy. I support parts of its agenda, and am on record as calling for coalition-building around common objectives<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Means began making the false claims on June 30, when we were on a panel at the Aspen Ideas Festival, moderated by Corby Kummer.\u00a0 You can watch the session here<\/a>\u00a0and make your own decision about how it went.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

I would have let the whole thing go, except that Calley Means followed it up with his speech at the Great American State Fair on July 6.\u00a0 Tim Carman sent me a transcript of Means\u2019 remarks:<\/p>\n

In\u00a0the 1980s, a group called the Sugar Research Council paid her to do a lot of research. And they really funded her to say that basically the base of our diet should be carbs, and the base our diet to be grains, and we should fear fat. And really, we should fear a lot of natural foods in favor of grains. And her research, she claims credit for being the architect of the 1992 food pyramid. And I told her, when we talked last week, I think it\u2019s actually demonstrable that the dietary guidance from the 1990s has been the most destructive public health document in modern history, because they put grains and carbs at the base of the pyramid. And they didn\u2019t differentiate whole grains or refined grains. Why did they do that? That was directly prompted by the food industry, which at the time was the cigarette industry.<\/p>\n

Carman asked: \u201cAny of this true?\u201d<\/p>\n

Good grief no. Not only are these statements false; they are spectacularly false.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s take them line by line.<\/p>\n

Means: In\u00a0the 1980s, a group called the Sugar Research Council paid her to do a lot of research.<\/p>\n

False. In the 1980s, I was teaching nutrition to medical students at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) school of medicine and running a nutrition education program funded by NIH and, later, by the John Tung Foundation.\u00a0 To avoid conflicts of interest, I have a long-standing policy of not taking payments from food companies.\u00a0 The policy is posted on this site here.<\/a><\/p>\n

Means: And they really funded her to say that basically the base of our diet should be carbs, and the base our diet to be grains, and we should fear fat.<\/p>\n

False.\u00a0 Here, I think he must be referring to the Sugar Research Foundation (SRF) which funded researchers at Harvard who wrote a skewed review of diet and heart disease in the New England Journal of Medicine in 1967; the review downplayed sugar, and emphasized fat. The SRF\u2019s role in this research was exposed in 2016 in JAMA Internal Medicine by Cristin Kearns, Laura Schmidt and Stanton Glantz: Sugar Industry and Coronary Heart Disease Research: A Historical Analysis of Internal Industry Documents<\/a>.\u00a0 I wrote the commentary on this study: \u201cFood industry funding of nutrition research: The relevance of history for current debates<\/a>.\u201d\u00a0 I also wrote about both pieces on this site.<\/a><\/p>\n

Means: And really, we should fear a lot of natural foods in favor of grains.<\/p>\n

False.\u00a0 Here, I think, he must be talking about my role as managing editor of the 1988 Surgeon General\u2019s Report on Nutrition and Health<\/a>. The report summarized the research consensus of that time.<\/p>\n

\u201cFats and cholesterol. Reduce consumption of fat (especially saturated fat) and cholesterol.\u00a0 Choose foods relatively low in these substances, such as vegetables, fruits, whole grain foods, fish, poultry, lean meats, and low-fat dairy products.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cComplex carbohydrates and fiber: Increase consumption of whole grain foods and cereal products, vegetables (including dried beans and peas), and fruits.\u201d<\/p>\n

The National Academies\u2019 even more comprehensive report, Diet and Health: Implications for Reducing Chronic Disease Risk<\/a>, made similar recommendations in 1989.<\/p>\n

Means: And her research, she claims credit for being the architect of the 1992 food pyramid.<\/p>\n

False. I have never claimed such responsibility; I had none. My only role in the 1992 pyramid was to work closely with a reporter for the New York Times, Marian Burros, to expose how the meat industry induced the USDA to suppress the pyramid when it was about to be released in 1991.\u00a0 I devoted an entire chapter of my book, Food Politics, to providing the evidence for this.<\/p>\n

Means: And I told her, when we talked last week, I think it\u2019s actually demonstrable that the dietary guidance from the 1990s has been the most destructive public health document in modern history,<\/p>\n

True.\u00a0 This is what he said and, I assume, is what he thinks.<\/p>\n

Means:\u00a0 because they put grains and carbs at the base of the pyramid. And they didn\u2019t differentiate whole grains or refined grains.<\/p>\n

False. The USDA\u2019s pyramid brochure<\/a> said: \u201cChoose a diet with plenty of grain products, vegetables, and fruits which provide needed vitamins, minerals, fiber, and complex carbohydrates, and can help you lower your intake of fat.\u201d<\/p>\n

It also says, \u201cHere are some selection tips: \u261b To get the fiber you need, choose several servings a day of foods made from whole grains, such as whole-wheat bread and whole-grain cereals. \u261b Choose most often foods that are made with little fat or sugars. These include bread, english muffins, rice, and pasta\u2026 \u261b Baked goods made from flour, such as cakes, cookies, croissants, and pastries, count as part of this food group, but they are high in fat and sugars.\u201d<\/p>\n

Means: Why did they do that? That was directly prompted by the food industry, which at the time was the cigarette industry.<\/p>\n

Misleading.\u00a0Yes, the cigarette industry owned Kraft Foods and other food companies at that time, and taught those companies how to use the tobacco playbook to promote unhealthy products (as we only recently learned<\/a>).\u00a0 But the major food industry influences on dietary guidelines and food guides in the 1980s and 1990s were the meat and dairy industries, as I describe in Food Politics. As far as I can tell, they still are, as witnessed by the 2025-2030 guidelines<\/a> and inverted pyramid<\/a>.<\/p>\n

But that\u2019s not all.\u00a0 Calley Means said on Instagram<\/a>: \u201cAt @aspenideas<\/a>, I spoke with @marionnestle<\/a> \u2013 an architect of the 1990s U.S. Dietary Guidelines that led to an explosion of refined carbohydrates and ultraprocessed food in the American diet.\u201d<\/p>\n

Misleading again.\u00a0 I was indeed a member (although hardly the architect) of the 1995 Dietary Guidelines Scientific Advisory Committee.\u00a0 Here is what the 1995 guidelines said about grains.<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cMost of the calories in your diet should come from grain products, vegetables, and fruits These include grain products high in complex carbohydrates\u2014breads, cereals, pasta, rice\u2014found at the base of the Food Guide Pyramid, as well as vegetables such as potatoes and corn. Dry beans (like pinto, navy, kidney, and black beans) are included in the meat and beans group of the Pyramid, but they can count as servings of vegetables instead of meat alternatives.\u201d<\/p>\n

Doesn\u2019t this look a lot like what the 2025-2030 guidelines say about grains?\u00a0 I think it does.<\/p>\n

Yes, the 1995 guidelines did not say anything about reducing intake of ultra-processed foods.\u00a0 How could they? The term was not coined until 2009.<\/a><\/p>\n

So: Why on earth is Calley Means attacking my work?<\/p>\n

I can only speculate.\u00a0 I see the underlying issue in our current food problems as the food industry having profits to stockholders as its primary fiduciary responsibility, as I have described for decades in my daily newsletter foodpolitics.com, and in my books<\/a>, most notably,<\/p>\n

In making false charges, could Calley Means possibly be attempting to deflect attention from the difficulties MAHA is confronting in implementing its agenda? (I will say more about that tomorrow).\u00a0 Means seems to view me as an appropriate target for deflection.\u00a0 Obviously, I disagree.<\/p>\n

MAHA\u2019s agenda appears to be running up against the pushback that inevitably happens when you do something that might threaten food industry profits. See, for example:<\/p>\n

A final comment<\/p>\n

Reasonable people can disagree about elements of nutrition policy. But reasonable people cannot invent a history that did not exist.<\/p>\n

If Calley Means or anyone else believes that I have misrepresented the science or the historical record in my lengthy body of work, show me the evidence. I will be happy to consider it.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s how Gold Standard Science works.\u00a0 Otherwise, it\u2019s just name-calling.<\/p>\n

Addition<\/p>\n

I was just sent this link<\/a> to Vanity Fair\u2019s article about Calley Means.<\/p>\n

_____________________<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Pub date is September 8. Pre-orders through UC Press<\/a> get a 30% discount. Use promo code UCPSAVE30.<\/p>\n

\t\t\t\t\t