If you think I'm a Democrat or part of any party, you don't know me.

I'm virulently anti-tribalistic and it's hurt me professionally, socially and romantically my whole life. Trust me, I've got nobody. It's a big problem.

So yeah, the tribal claim, that's just you. You're just talking about yourself

This could certainly be fantastic, and very good advice. Or it could be a lot of bunk, I don't know. Given the source (i.e., RFK), I refuse to trust it.

The point of guidance like this is to be trustworthy and authoritative. If I have the ability to independently evaluate it myself, then I didn't really need it in the first place.

Of course, I might be mistaken to have ever trusted the government's nutrition guidance. It's not like undue influence from industry lobbying is unique to this administration.

This is really just bothsidesism. In reality there are fundamental differences between groups in the way that people evaluate events, evidence, even their own party's questionable actions. Papering it over with by claiming criticism is all just mindless tribalism just serves to excuse those with the worst behavior. In this specific case, government food policy has been drastically changed to suit the peculiar ideology of one man, with no public hearings, no debate, and no scientific consensus. Is it not appropriate to be skeptical, regardless of one's "tribe"??

If the actions and beliefs of a group are fundamentally morally repugnant to me, I think that it is reasonable to not expect me to be able to find "something positive" in it. We are not amoral automata with grocery-list style utility functions.

I have people in my personal sphere that make this sort of argument and it honestly feels like gaslighting. The undercurrent is: "Look, you don't like this guy, I get it. But if you can't see that he does some good, then you are the one who is irrational and not really in a sound state of mind." Meanwhile completely preventable, life-threatening, life-destroying diseases such as measles are back because of the obscurantist beliefs that come with this "new refreshing outlook". This is a bit like saying: "look, you can say what you want about the Spanish inquisition but they kept rates of extra-marital affairs down."

Corporations love this sort of feel-good campaign (the same way they love performative LGBTQ / feminism / diversity when the culture wars swing the other way) for two main reasons: (1) they distract from fundamental issues that threaten their real interests; (2) they shift the blame on big societal issues completely to the public. They do this with climate change, they do it with increase of wealth inequality and they most certainly do it with public health.

All developed nations have a problem with processed food. Granted, it is particularly severe in the USA, but the ONE THING that separates the USA from almost every other developed nation in our planet is the absence of socialized healthcare. This is the obvious salient thing to look at before all others, so also obviously, a lot of money will be spent to misdirect and distract from this very topic.

This 1000%.

A lot of people in this post need to do some self reflection.

That trite comment is intellectual dishonesty set to 11.

There are a number of lies and omissions here, as there have been from just about every administration due to agribusiness lobbying.

You're playing the tribalism game by setting up this strawman, you too are being played.

I'd personally be just as critical towards anyone who claimed they were fighting a "war on protein" that plainly doesn't exist. Americans consume more meat per capita than nearly any other country.

this is clearly a net loss for public health in general, politics aside. Having alcohol in dietary guidelines (without even stating a drink limit) is positively idiotic.

I was surprised how impressed I was by the website. The layout, design, focus on simple foods.

I think the person above may just feel skeptical of the scientific and medical opinion of most of the people running the US government. I know I do. When I read "gold-standard science and common sense," I rolled my eyes. Because the previous news cycle said they don't think meningitis vaccines are important for kids, yet say they follow gold-standard science. It's hard for me to reconcile the two.

EDIT: "rooted in...personal responsibility."

"America is sick. The data is clear. 50% of Americans have prediabetes or diabetes 75% of adults report having at least one chronic condition 90% of U.S. healthcare spending goes to treating chronic disease—much of which is linked to diet and lifestyle."

It also has this moralizing tone, and seems to make some pretty bold claims about why Americans have prediabetes or diabetes. For example, with the introduction of GLP-1 drugs, like Ozempic, people (including some I know well) have significantly reduced their diabetic risk. And they're still eating the same processed foods.

Also, "linked to diet and lifestyle" is a pretty broad claim. Maybe the undersleeping and overcaffeinating actually matters more for increased appetite and desire to eat less healthy foods.

In short, I just don't trust many people when they say health is so inextricably and exclusively tied to food source, especially when they tend to think most vaccines are net negatives for individuals and society.

Or the current man in control of Health and Human Services is at best saying nothing of value. (At worst, he's sidelining vaccines for multiple infectious diseases, but that's off topic)

Personally I don't care either way about RFK Jr's new food pyramid.

I think the bigger danger of giving this credit is lending any legitimacy to RFK Jr who is actively undermining actual medical advice and wrecking havoc on our childhood vaccine programs.

Just because a broken clock is right twice a day, doesn't mean you need to give the broken clock credit for being right.

By doing this "oh it's just tribalism" lends legitimacy to RFK Jr and furthers his ability to kill kids with preventable disease and further damage the credibility of modern medical science.

"Oh he has some good ideas" Yeah? Which ones? Does the average american have the time/curiosity/capability to sort through which of his ideas are good and which ones will kill their kids?

Bingo. It’s pretty annoying. My tribe can do no wrong (in fact my tribe will freely point out its faults because again, it can do no wrong). Anything from the other tribe isn’t just wrong, it’s evil and all that is wrong with everything. Those guys are Neanderthals, not even worthy of telling the time to. My tribe is incredibly smart and gifted. We can do no wrong!

Unfortunately the only way to opt out is to basically stop participating at all. No more consumption of tribal news media and since most news media is incredibly tribal (even saying it’s not tribal is in fact tribal)… it basically means no more news media consumption. Which makes you uninformed instead of merely misinformed.

I dunno the solution to this. It’s a complex web of everybody playing to their incentives including the algorithms that aggregate things for consumption.

Again though, I’ll firmly emphasize that it is the other tribe that is wrong. My tribe isn’t biased or hateful or outrage driven. We say we aren’t so clearly it’s not possible.

A broken clock is right twice a day. Doesn't mean it's not broken.