 Why do the federal dietary guidelines sometimes favor the interests of the food and drug industries over the public's interest in accurate and impartial dietary advice? The first problem may be who's in charge— potential conflicts of interest at the USDA. The mandate of the US Department of Agriculture is to promote agribusiness, but also give dietary advice. So no conflict when it comes to fruits and veggies, but what about the stuff we're supposed to eat less of, though? How can they say eat less meat and sugar, for example, and still fulfill their primary mission to promote these products? That may be why the eat more messaging recommendations are clear. Fruit and vegetable intake, period. But when it comes to eat less messaging, recommendations resort to speaking in code, talking only about biochemical components, reduced intake of solid fats, major sources of saturated and trans fatty acids. But what does that translate into in terms of actual foods to avoid? Let's break the code. Reduce intake of saturated fat means reduced intake of cheese, ice cream, pizza, and chicken. And reduced trans fats means reduced intake of cakes, cookies, animal products, and margarine. But they can't just come out and say that. In their letter to the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, the National Pork Board, and what almost sounds like a threat, cautions the committee against making any decisions which would limit the ability of Americans to choose more pork.