I truly hope to see them review the evidence on low carb high fat in its various iterations. I switched from an active job to a desk job and over the course of 2 years put on 20lbs. eating like I always had. After cutting out all refined grains, products with added sugars and the high starch foods and focusing on adding in more fats and whole vegetables I've had a huge turnaround. In 1 month I've lost 10lbs. My once to twice a week headaches have completely gone away, which I have had for nearly a decade at this point. The hunger pangs that preceded every normal meal time disappeared within about 3 days. My general appetite has been lower as well, enough that I seamlessly moved to an intermittent fasting window of 6 hours to eat, 18 hours fasting to take advantage of the benefits of autophagy.

That ends my experiential portion next I wanted to find out why this sort of diet works so I went through all the research I could find on the diets in question and other diets. I wanted to find out what the evidence said. Specifically the randomized control studies which can track actual correlations where the epidemiological studies only appear to show loose associations to create the basis for deeper review.

My general finding was that a majority of the issues run back to two root causes high insulin levels caused by high blood sugar, and high levels of inflammation do to the extremely high Omega-6 to Omega-3 ratio in the average person. The Omega-3 issue actually being the simpler of the issues to solve, the recommendations on what oils to cook with would have a large effect by adding fewer Omega-6's to the process, ex. coconut oil/butter and recommending either an Omega-3 supplement or more seafood focusing on seafood options low in mercury would be ideal. Better Omega-3 to Omega-6 ratios have long been associated with lower risks for a slew of diseases from cancer to cardiovascular issues to auto immune diseases.

The blood glucose/insulin issue has gotten pretty heated with everyone claiming to have the correct dietary answer. So here's my claim to the correct answer. It's going to depend on how each persons body handles the specific carbs they are taking in I'd point to the research of Prof. Eran Segal and Dr. Elinavs of the Weizmann Institute of science, based on the differences in the individuals a person could eat an ice cream with no effect on their blood glucose level, but would have huge spikes with a bowl of white rice. In fact the aggregate data showed that white rice affected 65% of their study participants more than ice cream 35%. This creates a problem as recommendations of what carbs to eat could be counter intuitive for some individuals and the tolerance to carbs in general can range so widely for individuals that some may not be able to tolerate any while others experience no high blood sugar/insulin issues in levels up into the 70% carb range as some studies of other cultures have shown, albeit without the processed foods. I believe that this is the number one reason that the low/ultra low carb diet has been so effective for people, without a personal glucose monitor and knowing your specific response removing the majority of the carbs from your diet simplifies keeping the blood glucose and therefore the insulin levels under control. Replacing the carbs only leaves 2 options fats and proteins, excess amounts of protein induce gluconeogenesis and create more glucose so that only leaves the fats. Which is how the conclusion became to keep fats high, carbs as low as feasible(most recommend 5-10% of quality whole vegetable carbs) and proteins on the low moderate end somewhere in the 15-30% range. To make that work you need fatty cuts of meat as well as good healthy sources of fats. An ongoing treatment plan by virta health has been running for 1 year and is seeing excellent results with reversing type II diabetes using a ketogenic diet, that being an extremely low carb diet. Results available at virtahealth.com/research

What are healthy sources of fats becomes the next question. When ignoring the epidemiological studies for the obvious problem that they show association and are meant to find data to determine a hypothesis to test, but lack the scientific rigor to show a level of correlation, the various randomized control trials on the subject continue to show no statistically significant effects from raising or lowering ones saturated fat intakes on heart disease or all cause mortality. Given that lack of correlation on saturated fats and the high degree of correlation between high insulin levels cause by prolonged excess glucose levels the safe move appears to be less processed carbs and sugars and more fats for the general population.

Estimates vary, but approximately 2-5% of the US population is now identifying as either Vegetarian or Vegan. It would also be advisable when making the new guidelines to provide more targeted guidelines to address their unique health needs primarily focusing on the most common vitamin and mineral deficiencies such as Zinc, Iron, Choline, B12, DHA & EPA, Calcium, Iodine, and Magnesium and where specifically those deficiencies could come from and how to correct them via supplementation or through dietary adjustments to avoid the foods higher in anti-nutrients. This could be especially important for pregnant women who are vegan as there appears to be an association with low DHA & EPA levels with autism which does not appear to be correctable after age 2, also children with ADHD are highly likely to be low in DHA & EPA, Zinc, and Iron cause and effect relationship unknown. To be clear that last bit is an association and no correlation has yet been proven, but the consistency of the vitamin and mineral deficiencies is well known and common so adding some advice to help them stay healthy while maintaining their ethical stances would be a very important addition to the guidelines.