In 1942, in the midst of wartime chaos, Canada introduced its first official food guide, The Official Food Rules. Originally, it was published as a source for the public; many were desperately struggling with rations and at a hopeless dead-end nutrition wise. Since then, the guide has undergone numerous changes and revisions. However, the sole purpose has remained constant: to serve Canadians as a guide in food selection and a promoter of national nutritional health. It was in 1977 that Canada’s Food Guide officially debuted. Guided by reports from the Nutrition Canada National Survey (1973), the guide was revolutionary.
In 1977, new food groups, including the now popular dairy and meat alternatives, were introduced along with combining of fruit and vegetables into a single category. The guide was again drastically revamped in 2007. Along with a brand-new title, “Eating Well with Canada’s Food Guide”, the guide was published mainly as a response to the growing issue of nutrition-related chronic illness. Since 2007, the health and wellness world has exploded; people are more conscious than ever before of what they are putting into their bodies and how diet affects their daily lives. Many have realized that the patterns and habits of the average Canadian citizen are leading to long term health issues and severe lifestyle concerns. On January 22nd, 2019, the Canadian Government Officially updated their national food guide once again; answering the call for change in the guidelines from thousands of concerned Canadians. Since its initial release, the new Food Guide has become a hot topic for Canadians across the country. Many are praising the guide for its core message, easy to follow format and stance on the environmental and ethical aspect of diet. Others, however; particularly those involved in significant food industries, are calling for a retraction, expressing concerns for the adverse outcomes the new food guide recommendations will have on the economy.
With the history lesson out of the way, I move on to discuss the actual elements of the seemingly mundane government document that has caused such a buzz in Canadian society. The most prominent and notable change: there are three food groups, not four. Since that first release in 1942, the four food groups have been a benchmark of the guide. It was in 1992 that Grain Products, Vegetables and Fruit, Milk Products, and Meat and Alternatives became the basis for the Canadian diet.
Jump to 2019, and the guide now consists of only three primary groups: fruits and vegetables, whole grains and, wait for it, protein. That’s right. No specific recommendations for meat, eggs, beans, milk, tofu, etc. Just clean and simple “protein”. For many, this is a revolutionary change. Tthe reinforcement that fruit and vegetables should also comprise 50% of the daily diet is a significant change for the Canadian consumer; one that has the majority of health professionals ecstatic. In keeping with this, the second major amendment is the elimination of dairy as a categorical food group. It is a tale as old as time (or as early as 1940, the introduction of federally funded milk advertisements): drink milk for strong bones and a gorgeous smile. Now, with the realization that the nutrition available in milk (and other dairy products) is also available in other protein sources, the dairy industry is no longer going to be able to spin their anthem: “Got Milk.” Here, (as should have been expected) is where the first major backlash against the new guide arises. Dairy farmers are not satisfied with their incremental portion in the new “protein” category. The Dairy Farmers of Canada have made a statement saying that the new guide “does not reflect the most recent and mounting scientific evidence available.” and are making claims that the recommendations will have negative outcomes for the health of future generations, and the economic circumstances for farmers all across Canada. According to an article in Maclean’s, agriculture lobbies were free to participate in open consultation over the course of the amendments to the food guide however, Health Canada refused to meet with any of them directly. Canadians will have to sit back and watch the dairy drama unfold before them; be warned, “Got Milk” may be gone forever.
A less contentious element of the 2019 guide is the newly included recommendations for consumption patterns. Gone are the days of explicate portions and daily serving recommendations. The new guide gives the consumer choice in what to fill their plate with and, according to Hasan Hutchinson, the director of the Office of Nutrition Policy and Promotion in Health Canada, “it is not about portions, per se, but about proportions.” It is a straightforward message: Fill half of your plate with vegetables and fruits, one-quarter with protein and one-quarter with whole grain. The specifications of that plate? They’re up to you!
The next recommendation is to “drink more water”! You would think this to be a fairly straightforward addition, however, a sub-story of the new change has emerged: the fight for fruit juice. The new guide labels 100% fruit juice in the category of “sugary drinks” which are associated with “dental decay, obesity and type 2 diabetes”. What!? Fruit juice, the healthy alternative to soda pop, the go-to breakfast companion! Well, it turns out the government no longer feels as though the previously recommended portion of fruit juice in the fruit and vegetable section of the food guide is in keeping with the progressive health changes seen in the rest of the guide. The recommendation to drink more water and less juice has become a reality which has left the fruit juice industry fuming.
The Canadian Beverage Association has fought back hard against this last recommendation (This is a group that is funded by several large beverage corporations including Coke and Pepsi, both of which are companies that own major juice companies such as Tropicana, Five Alive and Minute Maid). Beginning in 2017, the CBA organized a letter-writing campaign from several fruit associations and cooperatives across the country claiming that the government was using its authority to harm the juice industry. They advocated for a more “neutral” tone regarding the consumption of processed food (including fruit juice). Many studies that the CBA put forward in support of their argument have been financed by the association and include loosely constructed arguments such as “Juice is a good source of vitamin C, potassium and other nutrients, particularly for those who can’t meet their fruit-intake recommendations.” These claims have been debunked multiple times over by Canadian nutritionists and dieticians alike. The CBA has made the argument that the new changes will have dramatic effects on the employment of fruit farmers across the country; however, the majority of Canadian juice drinkers are consuming imports rather than locally made blends.
Lastly and I believe, most importantly, the new Food Guide has made remarkable changes to their behavioral guide. Phrases like “be mindful of your eating habits,” “cook more often,” “enjoy your food” and “eat more meals with others” are scattered across the new government page. Over past years, there have been several negative implications associated with unhealthy diets, missed opportunities for kids to gain cooking skills and the decline of family meals. These include long term nutritional and psychological effects on children. These new recommendations suggest ways to address and improve behaviors around food and diet.
The new food guide is a significant step forward for the nation of Canada. It is a beacon of hope for the generations of the future. It has changed and it will undoubtedly change again but, for now, I feel it is safe to say Canadians are satisfied.
.gifs from https://giphy.com/