Agriculture digests new dietary guidelines

Most of us didn’t learn about nutrition from a federal report. We learned it at the kitchen table—what showed up on our plates and what we were expected to eat. My mother, to this day, cooks hearty suppers and full-scale Sunday dinners that include some form of meat, potatoes, vegetables, bread and, of course, dessert. On our farm, that’s how you balanced diets. That’s how I learned to feed my own family. 

Mom’s meals were—and often still are—my Dietary Guidelines.

Every five years, though, the federal government updates its own Dietary Guidelines for Americans. The latest version was released in January, a joint effort between the USDA and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The policy pushes a “return to the basics,” prioritizing nutrient-dense foods—protein sources, dairy, vegetables, fruits, healthy fats and whole grains—and calls for reduced consumption of highly processed products.

In many ways, the new guidelines feel familiar. They bring back the old food pyramid but this time turned upside-down. The original pyramid, created in 1992, had grains forming the base and fats and sweets stacked at the top. The inverted 2026 version places protein and vegetables across the broad top, while grains occupy a smaller share of the picture. You can see the new pyramid and the full report at realfood.gov.

What we were taught at home, of course, was shaped by tradition as much as science. Nutrition guidance evolves, and it should. But when the federal government updates the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, it does more than revise recommendations—it influences how consumers think about food, how schools and institutions plan meals and how entire markets respond. For agriculture, that shapes demand, messaging and, ultimately, the viability of the crops and livestock producers raise.

That’s why the latest guidelines landed with such force across farm country. 

For many parts of agriculture, the message was validation. The recommended intake of protein nearly doubled, a change welcomed by livestock and pulse crop producers. The guide also recognizes dairy’s nutritional value across all fat levels.

“No set of dietary guidelines will ever fully capture how Americans actually eat or how farmers actually feed them.”

Other ag sectors were left uneasy. Soybean groups are concerned about negativity toward seed oils, which have long been promoted as part of a balanced diet. Corn and wheat producers, meanwhile, worry that downplaying grains could discourage consumption, despite research supporting their role in healthy eating.

Nutrition policy rarely produces universal agreement. The guidelines are meant to serve public health, not individual commodities, but the ripple effects are real. 

At the end of the day, no set of dietary guidelines will ever fully capture how Americans actually eat or how farmers actually feed them. But as these recommendations continue to evolve, agriculture must be part of the conversation, not just subject to the outcome. Long after charts are updated and pyramids flipped, it’s still the food on the table—and those who grew it—that matter most.