Obama-era appointees and donors have led the charged to change federal Dietary Guidelines to tell women that they can drink as much as men – an unscientific alteration that could lead to a dangerous equivalence in the minds of young women.
“Men should consume no more than one alcoholic drink a day, according to a federal committee’s recommendations for new U.S. dietary guidelines,” the Wall Street Journal reported in August, reflecting the change from two to one drink recommended for a man.
But the move also creates an equivalence between how much a man and a woman can drink, causing concern that the unscientific policy shift at the behest of Obama-era donors could cause more harm than good.
Beyond the biological differences between men and women such as weight and height – which impact an individual’s ability to metabolize alcohol – the new guidelines reverse previous federal guidelines in place since the 1990’s.
Prior to the shift, the taxpayer-funded committee advised men should consume no more than two alcoholic beverages per day while the limit for women stood at one drink.
The Wall Street Journal identified Elizabeth Mayer-Davis, the chair of the subcommittee responsible for reviewing beverage recommendations, as catalyzing the policy reversal. Mayer-Davis was an appointee of former President Barrack Obama to the committee, tasked with “serving on the Advisory Group on Prevention, Health Promotion and Integrative and Public Health.”
Timothy Naimi, another individual on the subcommittee who extolled the change also has ties to Obama. He donated to both of the former president’s campaigns.
The move represents the federal government’s continued intrusion into the personal lives of Americans, fueled in part by the left’s perennial desire to downplay the differences between the two biological sexes.
As a result, the political correctness-fueled shift has garnered considerable criticism from the scientific community.
Dr. Eric Rimm, for example, who headed the same panel in 2010 before serving as Director of the Harvard School of Public Health’s Program in Cardiovascular Epidemiology, insisted the “science has not changed” and declared the committee’s swap to be “wrong”:
“The science has not changed in the last five years and all of the previous guidelines since 1990 have said up to one for women and two for men. Thus I think this committee got it wrong and was overly conservative about their advice for adults that drink moderately, can control their consumption and do not binge drink.”
And from a political perspective, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee (DGAC) disregarded the Department of Agriculture’s procedure of following the National Academy of Sciences’ standard for scientific review. Allowing the change to occur would, therefore, send a signal to later members of the DGAC that they could bypass parameters set by future administrations.
If adopted, the move would confuse consumers and hurt the bar and restaurant industry, already reeling from the COVID-19 pandemic.