The controversy about our proposed 2015 Dietary Guidelines and meat consumption has risen to international attention following the publication of The BMJ, formerly the British Medical Journal, feature article. At heart, the controversy is whether low carbohydrate diets are legitimate.

I, for one, think that the piece raises important issues about particular studies and methods.

That said, I’d like to submit the following notes for consideration:

1. Good science is derived from good questions and good scientists never squelch questioning (even if it makes us wince). Asking questions is not akin to incivility.
2. It doesn’t matter who asks the question or where the question comes from, just that the questions are being asked. It doesn’t matter the age, religion, sexual identity, ethnicity or occupation of the questioner.
3. Good editing matters. Much of the controversy, confusion and complications we have now would have melted if a good editor worked on the DGAC report before its release.
4. The DGAC members are not at fault for the controversy. They were simply volunteers fulfilling a charge. The support staff need to be held accountable now. Our professional organizations and each of us as professionals should help to clarify the questions, discussion and resolution to this controversy.
5. Stop the proxy wars. The Dietary Guidelines are not about global warming, political parties, corporate interests, animal rights, farm practices or which states have the most muscle.They are simply about the food we eat and the effect that food has on our health.

The work we do is predicated on the assumption that all of us as participants enter with sound mind and good will. When that is violated, the process won’t work.

Let’s be fair and mend our ways!