Breaking Down the New Dietary Guidelines 2025–2030: Evidence, Gaps, and Real-World Practice - Episode 4
Fiber, Whole Grains, and Other Gaps in the 2025–2030 Guidelines
In part 4 of the discussion, experts review notable omissions and oversights in the guidelines, including fiber, whole grains, and plant-based foods.
In part 4 of the panel discussion, Colleen Sloan, PA-C, RD, shifts the focus from what the 2025–2030 US Dietary Guidelines emphasize to what many clinicians and patients feel is underrepresented or missing altogether. Against the backdrop of active social media debate, the panel examines whether key dietary components like fiber, whole grains, plant-based milk alternatives, and alcohol guidance received sufficient attention in the latest iteration of the guidelines.
Sloan began by highlighting dietary fiber, particularly in the context of gut health, and questioned whether it was emphasized strongly enough. Viet Le, PA, acknowledged that fiber often struggles to gain prominence, in part because it is difficult to showcase visually and lacks the appeal of more controversial macronutrients.
Despite this, he stressed that fiber has long been a cornerstone in cardiology, citing its role in lowering LDL cholesterol, improving gut motility, and serving as a practical dietary “swap” that enhances overall health. From Le’s perspective, increasing intake of whole, fiber-rich foods remains one of the simplest and most effective interventions clinicians can recommend.
Catherine McManus, RD, expanded on the breadth of fiber’s health benefits, noting its associations with cardiovascular health, weight management, obesity prevention, and glycemic control. She emphasized that Americans consistently fall far short of recommended fiber intake across the lifespan.
While the guidelines continue to encourage fruit and vegetable consumption, McManus observed that fiber was not as directly emphasized as in prior versions. She also raised concern that the document’s stronger focus on animal-based protein sources relative to plant-based proteins may inadvertently deprioritize foods that are both protein-rich and high in fiber, such as legumes, nuts, and seeds.
Sloan pointed to another area of potential confusion: the visual food guide, which places whole grains near the bottom of the pyramid. From a consumer perspective, she noted, this could be interpreted as a signal to minimize whole grain intake, despite the written recommendation to consume 2 to 4 servings per day. McManus agreed, underscoring the importance of clinician-led education to reconcile these inconsistencies and reinforce the role of fiber-rich carbohydrates in health.
McManus also highlighted populations for whom adequate carbohydrate and whole grain intake is especially critical. She emphasized that carbohydrates are the body’s preferred energy source, particularly during periods of rapid growth and development such as infancy, adolescence, pregnancy, and lactation. In these contexts, visual messaging that appears to downplay whole grains may fail to convey their importance as a foundational energy source.
The panel then turned to another notable omission: plant-based milk alternatives. Sloan noted that the guidelines place strong emphasis on whole-fat dairy milk, which can be an excellent option but provide little guidance for individuals who are lactose intolerant or who avoid dairy for cultural, religious, or personal reasons.
McManus expressed surprise at the exclusion, particularly given the rapid growth in popularity of plant-based milks. She pointed out that previous guidelines offered practical recommendations, such as choosing fortified options and avoiding added sugars, and argued that including similar guidance would better serve a diverse population.
Le viewed this omission as another consequence of condensing the guidelines into an 11-page document. In his view, important topics inevitably fall away when brevity is prioritized, and he expressed hope that future iterations might reintroduce guidance that was lost in the process.
Finally, Sloan raised concerns about changes to alcohol guidance, noting that prior recommendations specifying limits by sex have been replaced with a more general directive to “limit” intake. While some view this as overly vague, Le offered a comparison to physical activity guidance, where simplified messaging such as “sit less, move more” has proven effective.
From his perspective, the greatest health benefit comes from reducing consumption, particularly for individuals with higher baseline intake, even if the guidance stops short of defining an optimal threshold. He acknowledged, however, that the simplified message may sacrifice clarity and that the optimal level of alcohol consumption remains none.
Our Experts:
Colleen Sloan, PA-C, RDN, pediatric physician assistant and registered dietitian.
Catherine McManus, PhD, RDN, LD, assistant professor of nutrition, Case Western Reserve University; Cleveland Clinic Foundation.
Viet Le, DMSc, MPAS, PA-C, FACC, preventive cardiology physician assistant and associate professor of research, Intermountain Health.
