The New Food Pyramid: Packing the Plate for GDP

by Brian Czech

Say what you will—pro or con—about the nutritional merits of the Trump Administration’s new food pyramid, but the thing is a masterclass in political artistry. It systematically serves vested interests, a political party, and an ever-competing president. And, I’ll argue, it’s subtly designed for a surge in GDP.

On its face, it certainly is an artistic endeavor, designed to grab you from several angles. The first thing to catch your eye is its surprising disposition. Why, this thing labeled a “pyramid” is not a pyramid at all! Not unless you consider an upside-down pyramid a pyramid nonetheless. Others, though, would view it as the opposite of a pyramid; a downright “nabla” in calculus terms.

So perhaps we have detected a subliminal message: President Trump has the power to turn all government programs upside down, as well as inside out or just straight off. And it’s a message he likes to rub into Democrats (aka “Others”).

Let’s have a closer look at this new concoction of comestibles and see what else we might find between the foodstuffs. Anyone else at the trough aside from the meat and dairy industries? Does it help us solve the “omnivore’s dilemma”? What are the implications for environmental and economic sustainability?

There’s the Beef!

With the new pyramid, no one’s going to be asking, “Where’s the beef?” There’s no way to miss that big, juicy rib-eye steak in the upper left, nor that ten-pound turkey tyrannizing the top tier. There’s also the pan of ground beef wedged in between, like a lasagna layer just waiting for the oven.

The whole nabla evokes a colorful piece of pizza with all the toppings, but it’s the meaty top items that will especially catch your eye. Depending on your palate and political propensities, you’re likely to feel hungry, happy, hangry, or just plain angry.

If you’re a meat eater weary of the meat-wary literature, you’re a step closer to hog heaven. If you’re a vegetarian—especially for ethical reasons—your ire is hereby drawn. (Chalk up another “Trubbin,” a Trump rub-in combined with a drubbing.) Even if you’re neither, the mere size and placement of the meats will command your attention.

Now consider the fact that only four percent of Americans are vegetarians, while almost 90 percent eat red meat. No need to insult your intelligence by going further into the electoral properties of the pyramid. Whether it teaches anyone to eat better is up for debate, but it ought to be food for thought in Poli Sci 101.

And sure, there is also the standard special-interest steering. Four of the nine panelists behind the pyramid had financial ties to the meat and dairy industries. To wit:

• Thomas Brenna declared relationships with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association, the Texas Beef Council, and the Global Dairy Platform.
• Donald Layman declared relationships with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Dairy Council.
• Ameer Taha declared relationships with California Dairy and Dairy Management Inc.
• Heather Leidy declared relationships with the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Pork Board.

Gives a whole new meaning to “pork-barrel politics,” doesn’t it?

Mehmet Oz: Wizard of Growth?

Does anyone doubt that Trump has advisors recommending all the ways they can possibly think of to increase GDP? Kevin Hassett (National Economic Council), Scott Bessent (Secretary of the Treasury), and Howard Lutnick (Secretary of Commerce) make the Club of Growth look like an austerity measure. Beyond these high-level growthists, we should not be surprised if Trump has lower-level economists focused full-time on devising policies for GDP growth.

Remember, Trump claimed credit for “the greatest economy in the history of our country” during his first term, and must have been frustrated beyond reason as covid brought the economy to its knees. As with practically all presidential politicians, Trump still marches to the 20^th century beat that hails GDP as the Holy Grail of Economics. “The greatest economy,” to him, means the biggest one with the fastest-growing GDP.

Now unfettered by covid, he wants to finish the job in his second term. Just this week he doubled down on the CBS Evening News, “Look, I’ve created the greatest economy maybe in history.” (Evidently the “maybe” was a bow to the pre-covid economy “he created.”) He wants to go down in the history books as the King of GDP, probably even more than he wants a Nobel Peace Prize.

I suspect Trump has not only his cadre of economists keeping their eyes open for growth opportunities, but rather his entire collection of appointees. That would explain the lane-shifting of Dr. Mehmet Oz, the one-time TV surgeon recruited by TV-savvy Trump to run the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Oz was Trump-like with a wandering contribution to the rollout of the new guidelines, touching on Ozempic, schools, healthcare affordability, and Medicare taxes, among other things.

Toward the end of his part, Oz piqued the press, “But let me give you one last number.” He proceeded to describe how the new food pyramid could lead Americans—“so vital, so strong, so bullish about their future”—to retire not at the current average age of 61, but rather at 62. This, he argued, would “increase the overall GDP of our nation by trillions of dollars.”

Grubbing and Gorging for GDP

I doubt that President Trump is particularly interested in such long-term effects of dietary guidelines. He’s almost 80 years old with narcissistic tendencies, and his political concerns revolve around short-term electoral cycles. He wants GDP growth now. And he’ll get it from the new food pyramid.

While some lament its inversion (and some spoof it), the new pyramid might be more accurately described as tilted, especially in terms of ecological economics. Simply tilting it 60° to the right provides it a natural base of grains, fruits, and vegetables. In fact, tilted thusly, it becomes similar to the long-running food pyramid launched by the USDA in 1992, revised in 2005, and retained as the centerpiece of the Health and Human Services’ (HHS) dietary guidelines until the MyPlate approach commenced under President Obama in 2011. (Presumably the MyPlate website is short for this world, but hadn’t been taken down at the time of this writing.)

Tilting the new food pyramid also brings back its trophic structure, with plants at the base and animal products above. In the economy of nature, plants are the producers (via photosynthesis) and animals are the consumers. The old food pyramid with its natural trophic structure implied that we should be eating largely grains, primarily in the form of breads and cereal products, and plenty of fruits and vegetables. This implication was supplemented by detailed guidelines.

Animal products such as milk, cheese, and eggs were to be reasonably common in the diet. Animals themselves (beef, poultry, pork, and fish) would be consumed in lesser quantities.

Refined oils were included as healthy forms of fat, rounding out the macronutrients—proteins, carbohydrates, and fats—required for human health.

But the new food pyramid is not tilted thusly. It is indeed inverted, with profoundly different implications and guidelines. As Dr. Oz put it, the new pyramid “will dramatically change the natural history of how children are able to participate in life.” As an ecologist might add, our kids will be “eating up the world’s food web” and thereby increasing the trophic score of Homo sapiens.

I’m sure Oz wasn’t prompted to add, “By the way, friends, you’re going to be spending way more at the grocery store!” If anything, all involved would have been warned to keep this damnable devil in the details out of the rollout. But to the degree you adhere to the new pyramid, you’ll find yourself buying less of the cheaper items (grains, breads, cereals) and more of the expensive ones (meats, fish, and refined oils).

Big Deal at the Margin

Lest anyone think the new food pyramid is no big deal, or that few will heed it, think again. Dietary guidelines are not like government advice on bunk beds or magnets. The biggest difference of all is the level of relevance: Every single person on Earth must eat.

Next, consider that public schools are required by law to adhere to USDA guidelines. Adherence won’t take forever, either, because the National School Lunch Program is overseen by Brooke Rollins, the Secretary of Agriculture. She was the co-sponsor, with HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., of the pyramid.

No, the new food pyramid will manifest in the schools faster than you can say “Medium rare.” And there is a long list of other federal and state food programs for seniors, low-income families, kids on summer break, and even prisoners. SNAP alone (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) helped feed around 42 million Americans in 2024. That’s about twelve percent of the population! And SNAP, too, is overseen by Rollins.

Furthermore, Trump has considerable influence over those who vote for him. His base, especially, will passionately follow his lead, as they did with covid masking (or without it, to be more precise). This will especially be the case with something that many Republicans are already more inclined toward, like eating meat.

Democrats could hardly countervail the Make America Meaty Again movement by strategically lessening their own, already-lower meat consumption. In fact, they too could easily end up eating at a higher trophic level, if not with steak then with salmon or shrimp.

Perhaps vegetarians (regardless of party) would like to dietarily remonstrate, but they can hardly move any lower in their trophic selection. And they are few enough in number that their effects would be minimal.

Evidently, following the new guidelines will cost you about $175 per week for groceries. A bit of math gives us a current estimate closer to $100 per week ($1,000/month per household, with the average household comprising 2.5 people). Assuming a difference, then, of $75 per week, your monthly bill will go up about $300.

The American population stands at roughly 340 million. Even if the new food pyramid only resulted in an average of $300 per year of increased grocery expenditures, all else equal, GDP would increase by $102 billion. Only 37 of the 111 federal departments and agencies listed at USASPENDING.gov spend more than $100 billion per year.

Yes, the all-else-equal assumption (or “ceteris paribus” in econo-speak) is flawed. In order to follow the new guidelines, some will have to sacrifice other goods and services to afford their new grocery bill, moderating their contribution to GDP growth. But in a nation where disposable personal income is well over $20 trillion/year, “let them eat steak” is ready to rock the markets.

And the GDP pump is primed. For Trump, ever-hungry for the GDP crown, that’s the most appetizing item on the platter of public policy. But for a nation far into overshoot, it is systematically devastating, transcending today’s affordability issues and next year’s cholesterol levels. For years and potentially decades, the new food pyramid as GDP turbocharger will be undermining our environment, our economy, national security, and international stability.

---

Brian Czech is CASSE’s Executive Director.