>For about 90% of my lifetime to date there was a standard food groups chart in use that was promoted as being the healthy way to go. Then, 6-8 years ago, it was turned upside down and backwards and this NEW pyramid became THE healthy way to go.
>I decided to ignore the new one on the basis that I had lived reasonably healthily (genetic disease aside) and it didn't make sense to me that it suddenly could change so much.

I read this loud and my wife (being specialized in food hygiene and nutrition) pulled out a pack of rice and looked at the current pyramid. Two things stick out immediately: too much emphasis on cereals, and huge amount of everything. Added, the stuff amounts to about 20 "servings" a day, which is two ounces in case of rice.

The fruit and vegetables are stuffed in the second layer. She said the leguminous stuff (beans, peas...) should actually be in the lower layer, on expense of the cereals.

Take standarda American breakfast, cereals and juice. That's 500 kilocalories (aka calories in USA), whereas for a sitting job, or moderately physically involved, the norm is 1800 to 2000. Add the sugar from the coffee, coke, and whatever... which people usually don't count.

I once heard the cereal merchants are a worse mafia than the oil companies.

>Not too much later I heard how the new pyramid evolved, and how the various "interests" all got their say in finalizing it. So things were added and measure counts were increased to satisfy all the interested parties to get them to endorse it.
>I got the distinct impression that what got published was quite different than what had been originally proposed.
>That only made me feel more comfortable in my choice to ignore the new one.

A new, improved, enhanced and enriched (more ad words, anyone?) meaning of "composed by a committee".

>Even irradiation labels are under review to allow a euphamism in place of the word itself.

The committee has two opposing goals: to do something in the way of warning, and to make that warning invisible.