Doctors challenge 2025 Dietary Guidelines, accusing industry influence and mixed health messages

A group of physicians petitioned the US Department of Health and Human Services and the US Department of Agriculture to withdraw the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, arguing that parts of the newly released guidance reflected food industry influence and risked confusing consumers about what constitutes a healthy diet.

• A doctors’ group petitioned HHS and USDA to withdraw the 2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, citing alleged industry influence and internal inconsistencies.

• The physicians said several recommendations around protein, dairy, fats, and processed foods conflicted with established nutrition science.

• They argued the Guidelines could steer consumers toward less healthy dietary choices despite some advice aligning with public health evidence.

In a detailed critique, the physicians acknowledged that some elements of the Guidelines aligned with long-standing nutrition advice, but said other recommendations muddied the picture and undermined public health goals. Their central concern was that the document blended useful guidance with messages that could push Americans toward higher intakes of animal products and saturated fat, despite evidence linking those foods to chronic disease risk.

The first guideline, which encouraged people to “eat the right amount for you,” was described as sensible in principle but difficult to apply in practice. The doctors argued that without clearer boundaries around food choices, calorie balance alone was unlikely to improve health outcomes, particularly when paired with other recommendations they viewed as contradictory.

Protein guidance drew sharper criticism. The Guidelines encouraged people to make protein a priority at every meal, consume a mix of animal and plant proteins, and aim for 1.2 to 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight. According to the physicians, most people already met their protein needs without special effort by eating a varied diet centered on plant foods. They said emphasizing animal protein ignored evidence linking higher intakes to increased risk of chronic diseases, while downplaying the protective effects of legumes, beans, and other plant-based protein sources. They also pointed to research showing that avoiding processed meat significantly reduced the risk of heart disease and colorectal cancer.

Recommendations around dairy were another focal point. The Guidelines advised three daily servings of dairy, including full-fat options. The doctors argued that this advice conflicted with evidence linking dairy, particularly full-fat dairy, to higher saturated fat intake. They said plant-based alternatives such as soy products supported heart and bone health and were associated with reduced risk of certain cancers. In their view, dairy did not provide unique nutrients that could not be obtained through plant-based foods, and they noted that many people were unable to digest dairy products effectively.

On fruits and vegetables, the physicians largely agreed with federal guidance. They said encouraging people to eat fruits and vegetables throughout the day was supported by strong evidence. While the suggested intake of two servings of fruit and three servings of vegetables was described as a good starting point, they said higher consumption levels were associated with greater health benefits.

The Guidelines’ treatment of fats prompted further concern. Federal advice encouraged “healthy fats” from a wide range of sources, including meats, eggs, seafood, dairy, butter, and beef tallow, while recommending that saturated fat remain below 10% of daily calories. The doctors argued that many of the listed foods contained high levels of saturated fat relative to unsaturated fats, making the target difficult to achieve if animal products were consumed regularly. They identified seeds such as chia, flax, and hemp as more reliable sources of essential healthy fats and said that major contributors of saturated fat in the American diet included cheese, pizza, ice cream, and eggs.

Guidance on grains was viewed as partially sound but overly restrictive. The Guidelines promoted fiber-rich whole grains and discouraged refined carbohydrates. While the physicians agreed that whole grains supported good health, they said the blanket discouragement of refined grains ignored evidence that some processed grain foods, such as certain cereals and tortillas, were compatible with healthy dietary patterns. They also noted that diets associated with reduced diabetes risk often included more than the recommended two to four servings of grains per day.

The doctors took a similar stance on processed foods. While they agreed that excess sugar and highly processed junk foods harmed health, they said not all processed foods deserved equal treatment. In particular, they argued that some processed plant-based foods could support weight management and improved health outcomes. Sugary drinks were singled out as especially harmful, while packaged foods that were plant-based and low in fat were described as preferable options.

Alcohol guidance was another area where the physicians said the federal advice fell short. While the Guidelines recommended limiting alcoholic beverages, the doctors argued that evidence showed no amount of alcohol consumption was beneficial to health.

Finally, the group challenged the claim that vegetarians and vegans were likely to fall short on key nutrients. They said complete nutrition was achievable through diets built around grains, beans, vegetables, and fruit, combined with a reliable source of vitamin B12, such as a standard supplement.

Taken together, the physicians said the 2025 Dietary Guidelines sent mixed signals that risked undermining public understanding of healthy eating. By petitioning federal authorities to withdraw the document, they said they aimed to prompt a reassessment of how nutrition science was interpreted and applied, and to reduce what they described as unlawful industry influence on national dietary advice.