This last Wednesday, January 7, 2026, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and U.S. Department of Agriculture released the Dietary Guidelines for Americans that will be used through the end of 2030. These guidelines are to not only to be used by citizens to plan their meals but are used by policymakers and federal nutrition programs (like school meals, military rations, WIC, SNAP). So, they have significant impact. https://cdn.realfood.gov/DGA.pdf

According to the press release on the HHS website, the Guidelines emphasize simple, flexible guidance rooted in modern nutrition science:

• Prioritize protein at every meal
• Consume full-fat dairy with no added sugars
• Eat vegetables and fruits throughout the day, focusing on whole forms
• Incorporate healthy fats from whole foods such as meats, seafood, eggs, nuts, seeds, olives, and avocados
• Focus on whole grains, while sharply reducing refined carbohydrates
• Limit highly processed foods, added sugars, and artificial additives
• Eat the right amount for you, based on age, sex, size, and activity level
• Choose water and unsweetened beverages to support hydration
• Limit alcohol consumption for better overall health

Going back to 2018, I’ve written articles about the Dietary Guidelines several times before.

Even back then, almost 8 years ago now, my message was simple:
“…you should not blindly trust what the government tells you when it comes to what to eat. There is a lot at play behind the scenes when any new guidelines or regulation is issued.

My recommendation is simple and is always the same: eat real food. By eating real food, as close to its natural state as possible, you're likely to be much healthier simply because you'll avoid a lot of processed foods. Unaltered foods contain all the nutrients your body needs, and in far more ideal ratios than even the best scientists and estimate.”

Back in June of 2025, I wrote that I hoped the new HHS and Dept of Health leadership would make sweeping changes. 

While not everything I hoped for changed, the new guidelines have more drastic changes than we have ever seen.

WHOLE FOODS

The new guidelines emphasis on whole foods is huge! The guidelines advise people to eat “whole foods” or “real food.” This is almost word for word what I have hoped for and I’m excited that this language is so prominent.  Virtually all nutrition experts agree that eating foods in which the ingredients are limited, recognizable and not highly processed is a good thing. Heavily processed foods have very little to no benefits.

Another interesting thing the guidelines emphasize is the introduction of allergens, like food containing peanuts, wheat, eggs and shellfish, in children’s diets at around 6 months old. The research on this is clear that it lowers the risk of developing food allergies later on.

PROTEIN

The previous recommended dietary allowance for protein was 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight per day. The new guidelines suggest 1.2 to 1.6 grams per kilogram (0.54 and 0.73 grams of protein per pound of body weight daily). While I still think this is low, it’s an improvement.

ADDED SUGAR

Previous guidelines suggested no added sugar in food for children under 2; the new guidelines extend this to age 10. Everyone that knows me knows how I feel about excess sugar in anyone’s diet, but it has bigger impacts on children. Kids that eat too much sugar will likely face a lifetime of health problems. This may be because early sugar exposure can affect children’s long-term taste preferences. American children currently consume a lot of added sugar.

SATURATED FATS

One of my main sticking points with the previous food pyramids and then MyPlate was that they all said to limit saturated fats. The recommendation to limit saturated fats remains intact in the newest guidelines, yet they also encourage people to eat foods higher in saturated fats, including full-fat dairy and red meat, and list butter and beef tallow as options for cooking with “healthy fats.”
The problem is that it would be nearly impossible for people to follow the guidelines’ suggestions on protein and dairy while staying under the 10% saturated fat limit it recommends.

The influence of health advocacy groups and medical societies can be seen still and is likely the reason for the contradicting recommendations on saturated fat.

Nina Teicholz, author of the 2014 book “The Big Fat Surprise” and head of the advocacy group Nutrition Coalition is someone that I have referenced many times on this site over the years. I trust her research and opinion on nutrition.

The positive messaging about butter, beef tallow, and red meat are “impossible to reconcile” with limitations on saturated fat, Teicholz said, suggesting that Kennedy and his advisers may have been reluctant to stick their necks out as the only country in the world without limits on saturated fat. They also may have been wary of challenging the nutritional establishment, she said.

LOW-CARB

A low-carbohydrate is included in a section called “Special Populations & Consideration” as a possible option for people with chronic disease (obesity, diabetes, other metabolic diseases). But as I mentioned already, achieving this low-carbohydrate diet, which will be higher in protein, will be nearly impossible with the continued 10% cap on saturated fats.

FOOD GROUP TIES

I’ve written in the past about the influence of lobbyists and those tied to the food industry on these guidelines.

Unfortunately, these ties still remain. Three of the nine members of the HHS panel that wrote these guidelines have received grants or done consulting work for the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. One of those also received a research grant from and serves as an adviser to the National Pork Board. At least three members, including two of the same ones who have done work for red meat groups, have financial ties to dairy industry organizations, such as the National Dairy Council.

Overall, while they are not perfect, I’m very pleased with the direction these new guidelines have taken. That’s the first time I’ve ever been able to write that!

Every 5 years around June, I write an article about the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. This is because they are reviewed every five years to advise on what Americans should eat to prevent chronic disease. They were first released in 1980, yet the U.S. obesity rate has tripled since then.

The recommendations were designed primarily for healthy bodies, which most Americans don’t have. Not only are 74% of us overweight or obese, but about 40% are insulin-resistant or pre-diabetic. Only around 12% of Americans are metabolically healthy. The guidelines don’t account for the dysfunctional metabolic state of our bodies and frankly assume that people live a healthy lifestyle that consists of frequent exercise and minimal stress.

These Dietary Guidelines are used by professional associations such as the American Medical Association and the American Diabetes Association. They are used to determine what foods to feed our children (National School Lunch Program), what military rations consist of, and what foods are available on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and WIC (Special Nutritional Program for Women, Infants and Children). Feeding programs for the elderly are also based on the Dietary Guidelines. So even though most Americans may know very little about the actual Guidelines, they are used to sculpt advice from medical professionals and even what foods are available to anyone that is fed by a government program.

From the original food pyramid in 1992 to the introduction of MyPlate in 2011, the recommendations have included large portions of processed carbohydrates. Americans suffering from insulin resistance, obesity and diabetes need less carbohydrates in their diets. Excessive carbohydrate intake fuels high insulin levels, as insulin manages the rise in blood sugar caused by carbs. High carbohydrate consumption reduces the clearance of insulin from the body, which further increases blood lipid levels. A 2024 study found that insulin levels rose from 28% to 41% between 1998 and 2018.

There is plenty of evidence to support the notion that when metabolically vulnerable people consume less carbohydrates, their insulin levels decrease. Yet until recently, doctors and scientists advocating low-carb diets were viewed skeptically by the nutrition and cardiology communities.

Processed carbohydrates, often sugar, are particularly damaging and not to be confused with healthy high-fiber carbohydrates in fruits and vegetables. Processed carbs are packed with energy and are absorbed rapidly into the bloodstream, adding to the metabolic chaos.

The current dietary guidelines recommend that 45% to 65% of daily calories come from carbs. That percentage is too high for the metabolically challenged bodies that have become the norm, especially since most people consume carbs in the ultra-processed form. The interior isles of grocery stores are full of cereals, soda, chips, pastas, candy, baked goods, bread, bagels, frozen pizza and other processed carbohydrates that crush our metabolic system.

While I still hear the “calories in versus calories out” theory when it comes to losing weight, that does not mean that your body doesn’t care what those calories consist of. Cutting calories from carbohydrates will lower insulin levels, which in turn helps mobilize fat from fat cells and burn that fat for fuel. Low-carbohydrate diets also keep people feeling full longer and prevent fluctuating feelings of hunger.

So back to the guidelines. In 1990, Congress passed the National Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act, which mandated that the Dietary Guidelines be published jointly by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) every five years. They were last updated in 2020, so it’s time again.

If you pay attention to the news, you know that the new Secretary of HHS is Robert F. Kennedy Jr.. He came out decently and said that he intends to revise Dietary Guidelines for Americans by the end of this summer.

Kennedy and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins have voiced concerns that the previous guidelines were overly influenced by the food industry and not based on sound science.

Some organizations like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) express concern that RFK Jr’s personal beliefs could override scientific evidence. CSPI argues that lack of adherence to the current 2020 guidelines, not the guidelines themselves, is the real issue. But data shows the increase in obesity and metabolic disease in this country has risen proportionally with the introduction and consumption of processed foods.

However, as I wrote in 2020, even at the time, those guidelines faced criticism regarding industry ties, exclusion of certain research, and lack of clarity on topics like sugar and alcohol intake.

So what might we see in the 2025 version? Kennedy said "We're going to have four-page dietary guidelines that tell people essentially, eat whole food, eat the food that's good for you.”

Kennedy also told lawmakers that HHS would study food additives and suggested food packaging should contain labels indicating the presence of some additives.

My hope is that the new guidelines not only recommend reduced processed carbohydrate consumption, but will talk about healthy fats. The 2020 MyPlate avoids fats altogether. This likely confirms some unfounded fears of fat and steers consumers toward low-fat, high-carbohydrate foods. Eating butter and healthy oils, like olive, avocado coconut in cooking, on salads, and at the table should be part of everyone’s diet. These healthy fats reduce harmful cholesterol and are good for the heart, and Americans don’t consume enough of them each day.

I would like to see the recommended daily portion of protein and type be increased. A hot dog is not the same as a good piece of salmon. The consensus from people I trust is between 0.8 and 1.2 grams of protein per pound of body weight daily.  There are variables that must be accounted for, such as a person’s activity level, age, any medical conditions they have, and their health goals. For reference, under these recommendations, someone who weighs 180 pounds would need between 144 grams and 216 grams per day.
Not all protein is created equal and the guidelines should emphasize protein from both animal-based (red meat, chicken, fish, eggs) and plant-based options.

The current U.S. Dietary Guidelines recommend that protein make up 10-35% of your daily calories and the recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) is just 0.8 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight (this is only 0.36 grams per pound), which is roughly 65 grams for the 180 pound person I referenced. Nowhere near enough.

While you might consider it nit-picky, I would like to see the guidelines distinguish between types of vegetables. Americans are particularly deficient in their vegetable consumption—except for potatoes and french fries. Potatoes are chock full of rapidly digested starch, and they have the same effect on blood sugar as refined grains and sweets. Believe it or not, some people (and school lunch programs) consider eating deep fried onion rings a vegetable. Or a sweet potato with brown sugar and marshmallows as a healthy vegetable.

MyPlate recommends dairy at every meal, even though there is little if any evidence that high dairy intakes protect against osteoporosis, and there is considerable evidence that too-high intakes can be harmful. As for sugary drinks, MyPlate says 100% fruit juice counts as part of the Fruit Group. I would like to see the new guidelines talk about consuming mostly water with some coffee or tea (not your sugary Starbucks drink).

The new guidelines don’t have to be published until December 31, 2025, but I am hopeful that RFK Jr and his team at the HHS will make some improvements over the previous recommendations.

Unfortunately, neurological conditions are back in the news due to several celebrities making public their struggles with disorders such as epilepsy, Alzheimer's, ALS, Dementia and Aphasia. Neurological disorders are medically defined as disorders that affect the brain as well as the nerves found throughout the human body and the spinal cord. Structural, biochemical or electrical abnormalities in the brain, spinal cord or other nerves can result in a range of symptoms.

The specific causes of neurological problems vary, but can include genetic disorders, congenital abnormalities or disorders, infections, lifestyle or environmental health problems and injuries to the head or spinal cord.

The “lifestyle or environmental health” causes are the ones that are most fascinating to me. These can be controlled and have been studied quite a bit over the last few years. Some of the evidence should be alarming to everyone but seems to go unnoticed.

I determined long ago that I wanted to do all that I could to maintain my physical abilities as I aged. It’s no secret that physical decline begins in the decade of the 50s and worsens as we age, especially for those who don't exercise. I want to be self-sufficient and independent as long as I can, so I do things like lifting heaving things, pushing myself physically on a regular basis and eating healthy.

But what about maintaining mental health as I grow older? How do I not only make myself harder to kill physically, but mentally? I don’t want to be the ripped-up 85-year-old in the nursing home that doesn’t know where he is!

Until recently, there wasn’t much research that had explored the association between specific dietary patterns and the risk of neurological disorders. However, if you look at research over just the last three years, it suggests that oils widely used in cooking and added to commonly consumed foods, could harm brain cells and heighten the risk of mental decline.

A 2020 study in mice showed that consumption of soybean oil leads not only to weight gain, but also to gene dysregulation that could cause higher rates of neurological conditions like autism, Alzheimer’s disease, anxiety, and depression.

Another study found that feeding mice the equivalent of 2 tablespoons of canola oil per day is associated with worsened memory, learning ability and weight gain, along with “considerable neuronal damage” and increased formation of beta-amyloid plaques, the signature of Alzheimer’s disease.

Need more evidence or don’t think mice are relative enough to humans? How about the results of this study on baby pigs that found increasing the amount of calories from vegetable oil from 1.2% daily to 10.7% daily compromised neurodevelopment. Americans now consume nearly twice that amount, and most baby formulas include vegetable oil as one of the first ingredients.

Are monkeys close enough to humans to believe test results? This study changed the diets of a group of 36 monkeys to a Western diet for 27 months. The change is the monkeys was amazing. They became depressed! The percent time spent depressed was positively correlated with higher concentrations of monounsaturated fats, a higher polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) ratio and higher concentrations of omega-6 PUFAs. Omega-6 fatty acids can be found in sunflower, safflower, soy, sesame, and corn oils.

Vegetable oils, while nearly nonexistent a hundred years ago, now account for over 20% of Americans’ calories and have made their way into nearly every packaged food and restaurant meal we eat, like cookies, salad dressing, bread, crackers, chips, candy, vegetable puffs, granola bars, and even nut milks.

Unlike the name, these oils are not made from vegetables. Vegetable oils are oils extracted from seeds.  Specifically, vegetable oils include:

• Canola oil (also known as rapeseed oil – lovely name)
• Sunflower oil
• Safflower oil
• Grapeseed oil
• Soybean oil
• Cottonseed oil
• Sesame oil
• Corn oil

While some of these seeds in their whole food form are healthy, it’s the crazy amount of processing that must take place to extract oil from the seeds that results in a product that contains unnaturally high levels of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), which are highly unstable and prone to further oxidation when heated. 

So what can I (and you) do to protect ourselves from these “brain killers”? I’ve been looking for these dangerous oils for years now. Ever ssince reading Cate Shanahan’s book Deep Nutrition. Despite my efforts, it’s nearly impossible to completely avoid these oils, but there are some things that I do.

Read food labels carefully.  While most foods found in a box or package contain vegetable oils, not all do. I’ve found crackers, chips and even some bars that are free from them.

Don’t cook with vegetable oils.  When it comes to cooking, stick with extra virgin olive oil, coconut oil, or avocado oil. You can get them in spray form, which is helpful as well.

Eat at home or try making your favorite packaged foods at home. This takes some time and lots of trial and error, but there are lots of helpful links online now to recipes.

Don’t feel like it’s not worth the effort. I promise that there is not a single person suffering from a neurological disorder that wouldn’t give anything to go back in time and at least try everything they could to prevent it.

Leading up to my trip to Greece where I will race in the Spartan Trifecta World Championships, I had to get a medical release form signed. While I was having this physical done, I asked that I have a blood panel done as well. It has been a few years since I had this done and even all of my efforts to be healthy are no guarantee that something might be going on that I’m unaware of.

The normal panel measures several things. For each one, I'll give my results as compared to the "normal" or "recommended" ranges. This range is a set of values that includes upper and lower limits of a lab test based on a group of otherwise healthy people. When comparing my (or your) results to these ranges, there are a few important things to consider:

• A "normal" result in one lab may be abnormal in another: You must use the range supplied by the laboratory that performed your test to evaluate whether your results are "within normal limits." While accuracy of laboratory testing has significantly evolved over the past few decades, some lab-to-lab variability can occur due to differences in testing equipment, chemical reagents used, and analysis techniques. Consequently, for most lab tests, there is no universally applicable reference value.
• A normal result does not promise health: While having all test results within normal limits is certainly a good sign, it's not a guarantee. For many tests, there is a lot of overlap among results from healthy people and those with diseases, so there is still a chance that there could be an undetected problem. Lab test results in some people with disease fall within the reference range, especially in the early stages of a disease.
• An abnormal result does not mean you are sick: A test result outside the reference range may or may not indicate a problem. Since many reference values are based on statistical ranges in healthy people, you may be one of the healthy people outside the statistical range, especially if your value is close to the expected reference range. However, the abnormal value does alert your healthcare provider to a possible problem, especially if your test result is far outside the expected values.

Blood test results generally use the metric system of measurement and various abbreviations, including:

• cmm: cells per cubic millimeter
• arb'U: arbitrary unit
• g/dL: grams per deciliter
• U/L: international units per liter
• mEq/L: milliequivalent per liter
• mg/dL: milligrams per deciliter
• mL: milliliter
• mmol/L: millimoles per liter
• ng/mL: nanograms per milliliter
• pg (picograms): one-trillionth of a gram

Now that we’ve covered all of that, let’s jump in to my results:

Total Cholesterol - 179 mg/dL

The "recommended" range is under 200. Cholesterol is a waxy, fat-like substance produced primarily in the liver. It is used to repair cells, maintain proper hormone levels, vitamin D absorption from the sun, salt and water balance, digestion of fats. It is essential to joint health, hormone regulation, healthy cell membranes, fighting infections, etc. People tend to think of Cholesterol as something bad, but it's essential to a healthy body. Cholesterol is in the body to help, not harm you. Most recent evidence suggests that dietary cholesterol alone (what comes from the food you eat), in the presence of a healthy diet, does not negatively affect blood lipids.

The other part of the lipid panel that gets a lot of attention is the LDL-C.

LDL-Calculated - 94 mg/dL

According to the range listed on my results, anything under 100 is good. But if you notice, the "C" at the end of LDL-C stands for calculated. So your LDL cholesterol is determined using an equation. If you have a higher HDL and lower triglycerides, the calculation will be significantly skewed higher. There is a way to actually measure the number of LDL particles and to distinguish the size of LDL. This requires what is called a NMR Lipoprofile test. You want to see more of the large particles than the small particles. However, if your triglycerides are under 70 and your LDL is over 70, you can assume that most of your LDL is the good kind.

My Lipid Panel measured VLDL, which are the small, dense particles.

VLDV - 9 mg/dL

This is a very small amount of those little guys as anything below 40 is considered good.

So that leads me right into my Triglycerides number.

Triglycerides - 44 mg/dL

Anything under 150 is considered in the good range. I think that lower triglycerides are a much more key marker than total cholesterol and LDL-C. Even though my results said that anything under 150 mg/dL is good, I've heard that under 70 is the optimal number to shoot for. The more unhealthy carbohydrates that you eat, the higher your triglycerides will typically be.

I've skipped over HDL earlier because I wanted to talk about it in conjunction with Triglycerides.

HDL - 76 mg/dL

HDL is what people like to call the "good" kind of cholesterol. Anything at or above 60 mg/dL is considered good. I eat a pretty good amount of saturated fat, but adding even more of these healthy fats will also boost my HDL. When you reduce your triglycerides by cutting the processed carbohydrates in your diet, while consuming more fat to increase your HDL, it’s a fantastic one-two punch. I firmly believe that higher HDL and lower triglycerides are much more indicative of good heart health than the total and LDL cholesterol numbers that most people focus on.

Another number that appeared on my results was CHOL/HDL ratio. This is just the total cholesterol number divided by the HDL number.

CHOL/HDL ratio - 2.3

I don't feel like that total cholesterol number is very important, so this ratio doesn't mean much to me. Even if it was over 3.0, I still wouldn't be worried as long as my HDL was in the 75-100 range.

Triglycerides/HDL Ratio - 0.57

Anything under 1.0 is great!

_______________________________________________________________________

Now let's move on to minerals.

Sodium - 139 mmol/L

The recommended range is between 136 and 145 mmol/L, so I'm within range. Sodium is both an electrolyte and mineral. It helps keep the water (the amount of fluid inside and outside the body's cells) and electrolyte balance of the body. Sodium is also important in how nerves and muscles work. It is possible to have low sodium levels following physical activity, but for blood taken under non-extreme conditions, a low level of blond sodium is usually due to a condition such as Addison's disease, diarrhea, diuretic administration, or kidney disease. A high blood sodium level is almost always due to dehydration.

Potassium – 5.1 mmol/L

Normal range is between 3.4 and 5.4 mmol/L. Potassium helps keep the water and electrolyte balance of the body and is important in how nerves and muscles work. Potassium levels can be affected by how the kidneys are working, the blood pH, the amount of potassium you eat and hormone levels in the body. A common cause of high levels of Potassium is kidney disease. Low levels can be attributed to diarrhea or dehydration.

Chloride - 104 mmol/L

Normal range is between 98 and 107 mmol/L. Most of the Chloride in the body comes from the salt that you eat. It is absorbed by your intestines when you digest food. Excess chloride leaves the body through urine. Low levels of blood chloride can be caused by low blood sodium, congestive heart failure, chronic lung diseases and loss of acid from the body. High levels usually indicate dehydration, but can also be caused by Cushing syndrome or kidney disease.

Carbon Dioxide - 26 mmol/L

Normal range is between 22 and 29 mmol/L. In the body, most of the CO2 is in the form of a substance called bicarbonate (HCO3-). Therefore, the CO2 blood test is really a measure of your blood bicarbonate level. When bicarbonate levels are higher or lower than normal, it suggests that the body is having trouble maintaining its acid-base balance or that you have upset your electrolyte balance, perhaps by losing or retaining fluid. Both of these imbalances may be due to a wide range of dysfunctions. Low levels can be a warning sign for Addison's disease, diabetic ketoacidosis or Kidney disease. High levels can be cuased by Cushing syndrome, Conn syndrome or lung diseases.

Calcium - 9.0 mg/dL 

Normal range is 8.4 to 10.2 mg/dL. Calcium is the most common mineral in the body and one of the most important. The body needs it to build and fix bones and teeth, help nerves work, make muscles squeeze together, help blood clot, and help the heart to work. Almost all of the calcium in the body is stored in bone. Blood calcium levels do not indicate levels of bone calcium but rather how much calcium is circulating in the blood. Normally the level of calcium in the blood is carefully controlled. When blood calcium levels get low (hypocalcemia), the bones release calcium to bring it back to a good blood level. When blood calcium levels get high (hypercalcemia), the extra calcium is stored in the bones or passed out of the body in urine and stool. It is important to get the right amount of calcium in your food because the body loses calcium every day. Foods rich in calcium include dairy products (milk, cheese), eggs, fish, green vegetables, and fruit. Most people who have low or high levels of calcium do not have any symptoms. Calcium levels need to be very high or low to cause symptoms. Some causes of high levels of calcium are hyperthyroidism, sarcoidosis, excess Vitamin D, HIV/AIDS and cancer. Low levels can be caused by liver disease, renal failure or malnutrition.

Anion Gap – 9 (arb'U)

Normal range is between 5 and 13 arb/U. The anion gap measures the difference—or gap—between the negatively charged and positively charged electrolytes in your blood. If the anion gap is too high, your blood is more acidic than normal. If the anion gap is too low, your blood isn't acidic enough.

Total Proteins – 6.9 g/dL

Normal range is 6.3 to 8.2 g/dL. Total protein measurements can reflect nutritional status and may be used to screen for and help diagnose kidney disease or liver disease. A low total protein level can suggest a liver disorder, a kidney disorder, or a disorder in which protein is not digested or absorbed properly. I talked about blood proteins quite a bit in my posts on gluten. A high total protein level may be seen with chronic inflammation or infections such as viral hepatitis or HIV. It also may be associated with bone marrow disorders such as multiple myeloma. It's worth mentioning that a high-protein diet doesn't cause high blood protein. High blood protein is not a specific disease or condition in itself.

My report shows total protein, albumin, globulins, and the calculated ratio of albumin to globulins, termed the A/G ratio. Normally, there is a little more albumin than globulins, giving a normal A/G ratio of slightly over 1. Because disease states affect the relative amounts of albumin and globulin, the A/G ratio may provide a clue as to the cause of the change in protein levels.

Albumin - 4.7 g/dL

Globulin - 2.2 g/dL

A/G Ratio - 2.1

A low A/G ratio (under 1.1) may reflect overproduction of globulins, such as seen in autoimmune diseases, or underproduction of albumin, such as may occur with cirrhosis, or selective loss of albumin from the circulation, as may occur with kidney disease. A high A/G ratio (over 2.5) suggests underproduction of immunoglobulins as may be seen in some genetic deficiencies and in some leukemias.

_______________________________________________________________________

The Liver Panel is used to screen for, detect, evaluate, and monitor acute and chronic liver inflammation (hepatitis), liver disease and/or damage. The liver serves several important functions in the body, including changing nutrients into energy for the body and breaking down toxic substances. The liver panel consists of four tests.

Total Bilirubin - 0.4 mg/dL

Normal Range is between 0.2 and 1.3 mg/dL. Bilirubin is a brownish yellow substance found in bile (helps digest food). It is produced when the liver breaks down old red blood cells. When bilirubin levels are high, the skin and whites of the eyes may appear yellow (jaundice). Jaundice may be caused by liver disease (hepatitis), blood disorders (hemolytic anemia), or blockage of the tubes (bile ducts) that allow bile to pass from the liver to the small intestine. Low levels of bilirubin are not generally a concern and are not monitored.

AST (aspartate aminotransferase) / SGOT - 100 U/L

Normal range is between 15 and 46 U/L. An AST test measures the amount of this enzyme in the blood. AST is normally found in red blood cells, liver, heart, muscle tissue, pancreas, and kidneys. When body tissue or an organ such as the heart or liver is diseased or damaged, additional AST is released into the bloodstream. Very high levels of AST (more than 10 times normal) are usually due to acute hepatitis, sometimes due to a viral infection. Low levels of AST are not a concern. The AST test is usually done at the same time as a test for alanine aminotransferase, or ALT.

ALT (alanine aminotransferase) / SGPT - 104 U/L

Normal range is between 13 and 69 U/L. As with the AST test, ALT is used to identify liver disease, especially cirrhosis and hepatitis caused by alcohol, drugs, or viruses. AST and ALT are considered to be two of the most important tests to detect liver injury, although ALT is more specific to the liver than is AST. In most types of liver diseases, the ALT level is higher than AST, and the AST/ALT ratio will be low (less than 1).

While both my AST and ALT are outside the normal range, levels need to be closer to 1000 U/L before there is concern around serious liver damage. I do not drink alcohol very often and when I do it’s usually just one drink. I am not on any medications either, which can cause long-term liver damage. I did have a beer the night before the bloodwork, so that might have causes the minor elevation. I will likely ask my doctor if another rest is recommend.

ALP (alkaline phosphatase) - 59 U/L

Normal range is between 38 and 126 U/L. The liver makes more ALP than the other organs or the bones. ALP helps break down proteins in the body and exists in different forms, depending on where it originates. Some conditions cause large amounts of ALP in the blood. These conditions include rapid bone growth (during puberty), bone disease (such as Paget's disease or cancer that has spread to the bones), a disease that affects how much calcium is in the blood (hyperparathyroidism), vitamin D deficiency, or damaged liver cells. A deficiency in zinc may cause low ALP levels. Malnutrition or protein deficiency as well as Wilson disease could also be possible causes for lowered ALP. It may also be caused by celiac disease or a deficiency in vitamins and minerals.

_______________________________________________________________________

Next I'll move on to the Kidney tests. Kidney's not only remove waste products and excess fluid from the body, they regulate of the body's salt, potassium and acid content. The kidneys also produce hormones that affect the function of other organs. So needless to say, these little bean-shaped dudes are very important. The blood tests will show how well your kidneys are doing their job and how quickly the waste is being removed.

BUN (Blood Urea Nitrogen) - 10 mg/dL

Normal range is between 7 and 20 mg/dL. The BUN test is primarily used, along with the creatinine test, to evaluate kidney function in a wide range of circumstances, to help diagnose kidney disease, and to monitor people with acute or chronic kidney dysfunction or failure. If your kidneys are not able to remove urea from the blood normally, your BUN level rises. Heart failure, dehydration, or a diet high in protein can also make your BUN level higher. Liver disease or damage can lower your BUN level. BUN levels can increase with the amount of protein in the diet. High-protein diets may cause abnormally high BUN levels while very low-protein diets can cause an abnormally low BUN.

Creatinine – 0.95 mg/dL

Normal range is 0.7 to 1.5 mg/dL. Creatinine is a waste product formed by the breakdown of a substance (creatine) important for converting food into energy (metabolism). The creatinine is filtered out of the blood by the kidneys and then passed out of the body in urine. If the kidneys are damaged and can't function normally, the amount of creatinine in the urine decreases while the amount of creatinine in the blood increases. Low blood levels of creatinine are not common, but they are also not usually a cause for concern. They can be seen with conditions that result in decreased muscle mass. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) and creatinine tests can be used together to find the BUN-to-creatinine ratio (BUN:creatinine). A BUN-to-creatinine ratio can be used to check for problems, such as dehydration, that may cause abnormal BUN and creatinine levels. My ratio was 10.7 - the normal range is between 10 and 20.

_______________________________________________________________________

Glucose - 90 mg/dL

Normal range is 74-106 mg/dL. A blood glucose test measures the amount of a type of sugar, called glucose, in your blood. Insulin is a hormone that helps your body's cells use the glucose. Insulin is produced in the pancreas and released into the blood when the amount of glucose in the blood rises. Normally, your blood glucose levels increase slightly after you eat. This increase causes your pancreas to release insulin so that your blood glucose levels do not get too high. Blood glucose levels that remain high over time can damage your eyes, kidneys, nerves, and blood vessels. There are several different types of blood glucose tests, but the one I had done was a Fasting Blood Glucose (FBG). It measures blood glucose after you have not eaten for at least 8 hours. It is often the first test done to check for prediabetes and diabetes. Anything over 126 mg/dL on this FBG test would indicate diabetes. With a family history if diabetes, this is a number that I will always keep a close eye on.

A1C - 5.60%

Normal range is 4.0-6.0%. The A1C test is a blood test that provides information about a person’s average levels of blood glucose, also called blood sugar, over the past 3 months. The A1C test is based on the attachment of glucose to hemoglobin, the protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen. In the body, red blood cells are constantly forming and dying, but typically they live for about 3 months. Thus, the A1C test reflects the average of a person’s blood glucose levels over the past 3 months. The A1C test result is reported as a percentage. The higher the percentage, the higher a person’s blood glucose levels have been.

Now that I’m over 40 years old, I will strive to stay as healthy as possible and will continue to have a blood panel done once every year or two to try and catch anything that might be of concern.

If you haven't had a Basic Metabolic Panel (BMP) in the last few years, I would suggest you talk to your healthcare provider about having it done. The results can give your health practitioner important information about the current status of your overall health, including health of the kidneys, blood glucose level, and electrolyte and acid/base balance. Abnormal results, and especially combinations of abnormal results, can indicate a problem that needs to be addressed. The earlier you catch somethings, they better off you are!

Kelly Anne Hyndman, a kidney function researcher at the University of Alabama at Birmingham will tell you that staying hydrated is definitely important, but the idea that the simple act of drinking more water will make people healthier isn’t true. Nor is it correct that most people are walking around chronically dehydrated or that we should be drinking water all day long.

We’ve probably all heard that eight, 8-ounce glasses of water per day is the magic number for everyone, but that notion is a myth according to Tamara Hew-Butler, an exercise and sports scientist at Wayne State University. If you are reading this on my website, then you’ve undoubtedly heard me say that there is never “one size fits all” for anything. Water consumption is no different. Unique factors like body size, outdoor temperature and how hard you’re breathing, and sweating will determine how much water you need.

A 200-pound person who just ran 6 miles of trails in the heat (like I did as part of a Ragnar relay race this past weekend), will obviously need to drink more water than a 120-pound person who spent the day in a temperature-controlled building.

The amount of water you need in a day will also depend on your health. Someone with a medical condition like heart failure or kidney stones may require a different amount. Or you may need to alter your intake if you’ve been ill, with vomiting or diarrhea.

For most people, the best way to stay hydrated is simply to drink when you’re thirsty. This goes for anyone that is healthy. This method should be used at all times. While exercising and while sitting at a desk. The term “Drink to Thirst” is one that I heard over 10 years ago from Tim Noakes and is a motto I repeat to myself often. A study in 2018 confirmed that “it would appear that conditions exist where ad libitum/drink to thirst fluid intake will be sufficient to meet needs.”

And despite popular belief, don’t rely on urine color to accurately indicate your hydration status. While it’s possible that dark yellow or amber urine could mean that you’re dehydrated, there’s no solid science to suggest that the color, alone, should prompt a drink.

While most people have never tried to rely on listening to their body when it comes to thirst, it’s a good idea to start. The notion that staying hydrated requires complex calculations and instantaneous adjusting to avoid dire health consequences is just bunk, the experts said. And one of the best things you can do is to stop overthinking it. Getting in tune with your body has many benefits and paying attention to how thirsty you are is a good way to start this practice.

What about electrolytes?

Gatorade and Powerade might have you thinking you need to constantly be replenishing electrolytes to keep their levels in check, but there’s no scientific reason for most healthy people to drink beverages with electrolytes according to Dr. Hew-Butler.

Electrolytes like sodium, potassium, chloride and magnesium are electrically charged minerals that are present in the body’s fluids (like the blood and urine) and are important for balancing the water in your body. They’re also essential for proper functioning of the nerves, muscles, brain and heart.

Most people get enough electrolytes to sustain bodily functions from food. So unless you are exercising and sweating excessively, don’t even worry about electrolytes.

If you are exercising and are losing electrolytes, look for non-sports drink options. Sports drinks do contain electrolytes like sodium and potassium which are lost through sweat, but they are often higher in sugar and calories than soda! Healthier alternatives like infused water combinations, watermelon juice, and coconut water are options that I have successfully used before. Just look for added sugars on the label.

These Dietary Guidelines are used by professional associations such as the American Medical Association and the American Diabetes Association. They are used to determine what foods to feed our children (National School Lunch Program), what military rations consist of, and what foods are available on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and WIC (Special Nutritional Program for Women, Infants and Children). Feeding programs for the elderly are also based on the Dietary Guidelines. So even though most Americans may know very little about the actual Guidelines, they are used to sculpt advice from medical professionals and even what foods are available to anyone that is fed by a government program.

The Guidelines also direct FDA (Food and Drug Administration) regulations on food, including the information required on packaging. For example, the Guidelines inform health claims (whether a food can be advertised as “healthy”) and the information listed on the back of the package (the “Nutrition Facts” panel).

The Guidelines were last updated and released in 2015. So, guess what that means? They are due to be updated again this year.

The Dietary Guidelines are updated by a group of people know as the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC).

Several weeks ago, a non-profit, non-partisan educational organization called The Nutrition Coalition raised some serious concerns about the DGAC. The Nutrition Coalition was founded in 2015 with the primary goal of ensuring that U.S. nutrition policy is based on rigorous scientific evidence. For several reasons, they are questioning the integrity and trustworthiness of the current Committee.

The allegations range from deleting scientific reviews without public notice to failing to adopt reforms mandated by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM). The NASEM identified numerous ways that the DGAC needs to be reformed in order to ensure a scientifically rigorous process and, in their words, for this policy to be “trustworthy”.

• One or more of the member(s) from inside the DGAC has come forward with allegations reflecting a process that continues to be flawed. These concerns include.
• Lack of time to finish the scientific reviews
• Reviews deleted or added by DGAC without required public notice
• Lack of consistent standards across DGAC Subcommittees
• Lack of time for USDA to adopt reforms mandated by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM)
• Inconsistent evaluation of scientific evidence
• Exclusion of major bodies of evidence, including almost all the studies on weight loss and virtually all studies on low-carbohydrate diets
• Restricted communication among members of the DGAC

“With 60 percent of Americans diagnosed with one or more chronic illness, the guidelines have self-evidently been unable to flatten the curve on the rates of these diet-related diseases. Given that data across countries show that people with these diseases affected by Covid-19 have higher rates of hospitalizations and critical care, the need for nutrition policy that is effective and trustworthy is all the more important. This means the member(s) who are blowing the whistle and exposing potentially serious flaws should be taken all the more seriously by USDA-HHS. The federal government cannot ignore these allegations and should delay publication of the DGAC expert report to address and potentially remediate them,” stated Nina Teicholz, Executive Director of the Nutrition Coalition.

The Nutrition Coalition are not the only ones that think the DGAC is rushing into these revised Guidelines. U.S. Representative Dusty Johnson, Ranking Member of the House Agriculture subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations stated, in a letter,  “…after repeated failures of the DGA to prevent, much  less reverse, the worsening diet-related health of Americans, it is time for the DGAC to stop digging the hole it’s standing in.”

The Nutrition Coalition wrote a letter to the HHS and USDA detailing these concerns. I read the letter and there are a few of these issues that are of great concern to me.

• The committee excluded scientific studies that were going to require more in-depth review. So basically, if the study was too complicated or looked at more than one variable, they tossed it out because there was “not enough time” to do a thorough review of the results.
• They are often relying on previous DGA reviews (from the 2015 Dietary Guidelines) as the foundation of their current work. In effect, they “inherit” a review, along with its potential biases, from a previous DGAC. In my opinion, they should start from scratch and review new evidence. America continues to get sicker and gain more weight. They have had five years to do research. Why rely on Guidelines that are clearly not working?
• Many substantive concerns were raised regarding the 2015 DGAC report and the process used to develop the 2015-2020 Guidelines. In response, Congress mandated the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NASEM) to review the DGA process, resulting in two reports in 2017, at a cost to taxpayers of approximately one million dollars. In 2019, the DGAC stated that it would not be able to adopt quite a few of the NASEM recommendations due to “time and resource constraints”. So sounds like $1M was wasted and the process that was deemed flawed by Congress was used once again this time around.
• It was reported by one or more members of the DGAC that they were instructed to limit and reduce the number of studies to be examined by the DGAC. I found a document that shows 2652 articles and studies that were excluded.
• There is no mechanism for dissent among DGAC members or further conversations to harmonize standards where inconsistencies exist. Conversations in full committee on these inconsistencies have been very brief and are often left unresolved.
• The 2020 DGAC has chosen to exclude virtually all the science on weight loss, at a time when a large majority of Americans are suffering from overweight or obesity, conditions that are closely tied to the development of other diet-related diseases such as hypertension, Type 2 diabetes, and certain cancers.

The conclusion and summary from The Nutrition Coalition is that these issues pose a serious threat to the integrity and trustworthiness of the 2020 Dietary Guidelines (DGA). Ensuring that all the best and most current science is properly reviewed for the purposes of establishing the 2020 DGA is fundamental, and any action to rely upon unreliable reviews or exclude scientific evidence must be considered flawed.

The DGAC submitted a scientific advisory report to USDA and the Health and Human Services Department just days ago. The next step will be the USDA and HHS posting the final report online July 15^th for public review and then public oral comments will be allowed on August 11^th with the goal of releasing the new guidelines by the end of 2020.

The Nutrition Coalition and other groups, including the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics (AND), Food 4 Health Alliance and the Low-Carb Action Network are all asking that the deadline for the 2020 DGA be postponed so that the DGAC can implement its reviews fully and systematically, according to the standards recommended by the NASEM. They also point out that there are seven medical doctors who are members of the DGAC and whose attention may have been focused on addressing the COVID-19 crisis in recent months.

I was able to track down a sneak peak at some of the recommended changes to the DGA and I did find that they are reducing the recommended added sugars from 10% of your daily energy (calories) down to 6%. So that is a step in the right direction. They also appear to be reducing the recommended limit on alcohol consumption for men from 2 drinks a day to 1 a day. It was already at 1 per day for women. They also found zero health benefits to drinking any type of alcohol (including wine).

The Guidelines will recognize the direct link between what you eat and your overall health and wellness. There still seems to be a disconnect between the two for a lot of people, so the more this message is relayed, the better. For the first time ever, they are addressing infants and children under age two in the guidelines. They are also promoting extended breast feeding for infants, which is a good change.

However, they are still recommending people stay away from fats and salt and will recommend people consume 3 servings of low-fat or fat-free dairy per day.

The Committee recognizes that the diets for adults will fail to meet nutrient goals for choline, iron, Vitamin D and Vitamin E. Animal source foods are very important sources of these key shortfall nutrients, not just iron and zinc, but choline and long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids. However, animal foods will be eliminated in the Guidelines due to caps on saturated fats, making nutritionally adequate diets impossible.

The Committee also fails to recognize diverse ethnic/racial needs. Most of the studies included in the report are based on white, middle-class Americans.

Grains will also still be a huge part of the recommended diet. There are many reasons why they are always there and unfortunately will likely never leave or even be reduced. Wheat Subsidies in the United States totaled $47.8 billion from 1995-2019…so you do the math.

Keep an eye out for updates as the final report is released next month. I will be able to get more details then.

October is coming to an end. So you know what that means? It’s time for “No Sugar November”! Can you go from November 1^st until Thanksgiving (that’s only 21 days this year) with no sugar? It might seem like a monumental task, but take a few minutes to read the rest of this post and I’ll guide you through the three weeks that will hopefully change your life.

Before getting into the details of the challenge, I feel like I should take a minute to remind everyone why sugar needs to be eliminated from your diet. Here are some of the things that sugar/sweeteners do:

• Promotes fat storage and weight gain
• Decreases your body’s production of leptin, a hormone critical for appetite regulation (i.e., it makes you not realize that you are full).
• It thickens the blood
• Compromises your immune system
• Fuels cancer cells (cancer LOVES sugar)
• Disrupts transfer of amino acids to muscles
• Triggers inflammation
• Causes Type 2 diabetes
• Causes nerve damage
• Causes Cardiovascular Disease
• Has addictive properties
• Causes tooth decay

If you want to know more about all of the horrible things that happen to your body when you consume sugar and/or artificial sweeteners, do a simple Google search.

So if you want to join me in the challenge, here’s what you do:

Starting now, look at the labels of everything that you eat. If the word “sugar” (in any form) is listed in the ingredients, don’t eat it. But it’s not that simple. Sugar can come in many forms. It can be very tricky to find hidden sugar in foods that you don’t even think of as being sweet. It’s obvious that candy bars and donuts are off limits, but would you ever think that pasta sauce, peanut butter and yogurt have added sugar? Even simply drinking a glass of sweet tea can trigger the release of huge amounts of dopamine into the brain. It’s the same chemical that causes people to become addicted to gambling, alcohol, drugs, sex, etc.. So when your brain gets this release from even a small amount of sugar, it makes you want it more. The only way to keep from getting cravings is to cut it out completely.

Hidden Forms of Sugar to Look For:

So what should you look for on labels other than just the word “sugar”? Check for sucrose, fructose, glucose, dextrose, galactose, lactose, maltose, dextrin, corn syrup, HFCS (high fructose corn syrup), fruit juice concentrate, cane crystals, and evaporated cane juice.

​All of these are off limits. Even though the artificial sweeteners don’t have the calories of their natural counterparts, they are toxic to your body and send mixed signals to your brain. Artificial sweeteners cause you to actually eat more because they break the connection between a sweet sensation and a high-calorie food, thereby changing your body’s ability to regulate calorie intake naturally.

What about eating at a restaurant?

So what about when you are not buying your food from the grocery and you are out to eat at a restaurant? When you are not preparing the food, it’s a little more difficult to find the hidden sugars. I usually try and order a salad with oil and vinegar instead of the dressings listed on the menu. Nearly every salad dressing out there has added sugar. Many salads also have caramelized nuts, so look to avoid those or just pick them off. Ketchup and BBQ sauces will always contain sugar. Often, sandwich meats at fast food restaurants are treated or injected with a sugar solution to add to the flavor. It’s not easy, but it can be done if you take the time to look at the menu and ask the server questions. Things can be left off or put on the side very easily if you just ask.

• Motivation – Once you start reading labels and being mindful of sugar intake, you will find yourself making better choices in other areas of health and fitness. You will be motivated to eat the salad at lunch instead of the sandwich. You will want to exercise as you get more energy and see the pounds coming off!
• Better Sleep – Sugar triggers the release of the hormone cortisol, which interferes with sleep. By giving up sugar, you should be more awake and alert during the day, and also better prepared to fall asleep at bedtime.
• Clearer Thinking – Keep forgetting things? Sugar could be the culprit. A study at UCLA found that a diet high in sugar hinders learning and memory. Over time, eating sugar may actually damage communication among your brain’s cells, the study showed.

I hope you will give No Sugar November a try this year. Get your spouse or partner on board and make it a challenge. If you slip up, start again. Let’s take this journey together and see how much better it makes you feel. And you can still enjoy that pumpkin pie and sweet potato casserole on Thanksgiving!