An Urban's Rural View

Cattle raisers had to be thrilled when the government's latest dietary guidelines put steak at the top of the food pyramid. (https://www.dtnpf.com/…)

They got a bonus thrill when the man behind that change, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., told cattlemen he eats beef twice a day, his favorite cut being strip steak. (https://www.youtube.com/…)

The thrills turned to chills when the American Heart Association issued its "2026 Dietary Guidance to Improve Cardiovascular Health." As you would expect, AHA recommended switching from meat to "healthy sources of protein" like legumes and nuts, adding that "if red meat is desired, choose lean cuts, avoid processed forms, and limit portion size." (https://www.ahajournals.org/…)

RFK Jr. rejects the conventional wisdom linking saturated fats and heart disease. In addition to being pro-meat, he urges Americans to drink whole milk and cook with butter and beef tallow. He boasts of "ending the war on saturated fats."

The heart doctors embody the conventional wisdom. AHA's guidance is to "choose sources of unsaturated fat in place of sources of saturated fat." It specifically suggests replacing butter and beef tallow with plant oils, including the seed oils Kennedy and his MAHA followers disdain.

The government and the doctors used to be on the same page. Now, on this point at least, they're clashing. Neither, however, has the power to make people do anything. The government's guidelines, like the AHA's guidance, are (for most Americans) just advice.

That raises a question. In this age of widespread distrust of experts and institutions, whose advice will the public take? Will Americans eat more red meat, as Kennedy recommends? Or less, as the cardiologists advise?

Public opinion polls put the doctors ahead by a mile. According to a February 2026 poll by the Annenberg Public Policy Center, 82% of Americans are confident that the American Heart Association provides trustworthy information. Only 38% have confidence in Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (https://www.annenbergpublicpolicycenter.org/…)

But the polls may underestimate Kennedy's influence. With some Americans, he's pushing against an open door. I'm thinking, for example, of those young American men for whom meat has become a way of expressing masculinity.

And among Americans of all ages, there's a dirty little national secret that could give Kennedy a boost: We trust what doctors tell us about health, but we don't always follow their advice. Or if we do, maybe we don't cut back as much as the doctors would like us to.

Speak for yourself, you might say. I do, though I can't believe there aren't a lot of others like me. I'm a lifelong carnivore. If my aunts and uncles were still alive, they'd still be talking about the family reunion when I ate my age in hamburgers -- nine. In college, my usual menu when cooking for myself was a burger -- no bread, no condiments -- and a fried egg.

Over the decades since, my doctors have cautioned me about my cholesterol, and I believe them. According to the Annenberg poll, 86% of Americans trust their primary care provider. At my doctors' behest, then, I've cut back on red meat. I'm not shy, though, about ordering a steak at a nice restaurant or a burger at a fast-food joint.

Now, I'm among those whose default reaction to most of Kennedy's preachings about health is skepticism. Others, though, may be more open-minded. If they're already cheating a bit on their cutbacks, might not Kennedy's endorsement nudge them to cheat a bit more? Yes, they'll think, my doctor won't approve, but how much difference will a little extra meat really make?

Let's face it, Americans by and large love red meat. Yes, they believe what their doctors tell them; still, having to cut back saddens them. The doctors are telling them to eat their spinach. Kennedy is telling them what they want to hear.

So, while Americans are more likely to believe their doctors, Kennedy's pro-beef evangelism could make a difference.

Cattlemen would applaud save for one thing: After years of slim to no profits, they're enjoying today's high prices; the Trump administration wants to lower them. It's talking, for example, about increasing imports from Argentina.

"Why is it that beef has to remain 'affordable' at the cost of cow-calf operations?" lament DTN's Jennifer Carrico and ShayLe Stewart. (https://www.dtnpf.com/…) "Why are cattle producers expected to be poor?"

Both producers and consumers will be watching what Washington does rather than what it says. Will this pro-beef administration really end up helping the voters who eat at the expense of those who produce? That would be a bitterly ironic pill for cattle raisers to swallow.

Urban Lehner can be reached at urbanize@gmail.com

(c) Copyright 2026 DTN, LLC. All rights reserved.