Revolution in American Food Culture!? "Butter and Beef Tallow are OK" — New U.S. Guidelines Shake Up "Common Sense Eating" and Cause a Social Media Uproar

1. "Beef Tallow is Healthy?"—The Shock of the "Upside-Down" Food Pyramid

In January 2026, the United States released new dietary guidelines. The message is extremely simple, emphasizing "Eat real food." It advocates reducing ultra-processed foods and focusing on protein, dairy, fruits and vegetables, quality fats, and whole grains. At first glance, it seems like a straightforward modern health theory.

However, what caught the public's attention was something else. The guidelines explicitly stated that **"while prioritizing oils containing essential fatty acids like olive oil, butter and beef tallow (beef fat) are also options."**

Furthermore, visually, the guidelines depicted a structure that overturned the traditional "carbohydrates as the foundation" symbol, placing protein and dairy at the top. Thus, beef tallow became the center of a major debate over American values, not just a topic of nutrition.

2. What is Beef Tallow: The Old and New "Frying Oil"

In short, beef tallow is "cooking fat refined and solidified from beef." It's similar to the "beef version" of lard used at home.
Its recent resurgence is due to a combination of nostalgia for taste ("fries tasted better in the past") and distrust of processed fats, particularly the backlash against plant oils known as "seed oils."

Fast food is a symbol that visualizes this trend. For example, Steak 'n Shake explicitly states on its website that "fried products are cooked 100% in beef tallow, eliminating seed oils."

The "change in oil" is not just a matter of cooking processes but a declaration of corporate identity (transparency, natural orientation, anti-ultra-processing), which is the crux of this uproar.

3. "Saturated Fat Should Be Within 10%"—The "Twist" in the Guidelines Sparks Controversy

The new guidelines maintain the traditional upper limit for saturated fats (found in butter, beef fat, fatty meats, etc.) at **"not exceeding 10% of total calorie intake."**

On the other hand, they actively promote lean meats and whole-fat dairy products, listing beef fat as a cooking fat. This creates an impression of "pressing the accelerator and brake at the same time."

In fact, medical and nutrition experts have criticized it, saying, "It's nearly impossible to adhere to the 10% limit while promoting lean meats and dairy products," and "The message is contradictory."

Additionally, there is strong opposition to treating animal fats high in saturated fats as "healthy fats." For example, UCLA Health warns that while social media narratives tend to incite anxiety, excessive consumption of beef fat, which is high in saturated fats, can lead to increased LDL cholesterol and cardiovascular risk—

making a relatively clear warning.
(Of course, the mainstream of modern nutrition is that fats should not be zero, and "quantity and substitution" are important.)

4. Why "Real Food" is Supported: The Enemy is Sugar and Ultra-Processed Foods

On the other hand, the new guidelines' direction to "significantly reduce ultra-processed foods" and "strongly curb added sugars" has received some positive evaluation from the medical community and public opinion. The guidelines prominently discuss how ultra-processed foods are linked to refined carbohydrates, added sugars, excessive sodium, and additives, forming the background of chronic diseases.

This point is relatively "easy to agree on" on social media.
"No matter the oil, a potato is a potato."
"First, do something about sugary drinks and snacks."

—Such reactions are common, which is why the debate has moved to the next stage (the pros and cons of fats) and has become more combustible.

5. Reactions on Social Media: Praise, Irony, and the "Cultural War"

This topic, beyond scientific validity, easily stimulates identity affiliation. As a result, three major reactions stand out on social media.

(A) "Eliminating Seed Oils is Justice"—Welcoming and the Story of "Deliciousness"

Narratives linking the switch to beef tallow to "no additives" and "transparency," like Steak 'n Shake, have strong dissemination power among supporters. Companies continue to communicate as a "journey," maintaining the fervor of a movement.
The sensory benefit of "bringing back the taste of old fries" resonates more than scientific debates.

(B) "Isn't it Contradictory?"—Critiques from the Nutrition and Medical Community

From a nutritional standpoint, the core criticism is that "it's impossible to adhere to the 10% saturated fat limit while promoting animal fats." STAT conveys through expert comments that this "twist" could cause confusion in the field.
Additionally, there is strong caution against the oil debate leaning towards definitive statements like "seed oils are poison."

(C) Memeification and Outrage: Laughter Accelerates Criticism

On Reddit, there is noticeable irony towards the pyramid diagram itself.
"The pyramid has five sides, so why show only one? What are they hiding?"
"Surprised there's no 'jar of beef tallow' depicted."

—Such half-joke, half-critique comments are common.

Moreover, when the messaging from fast-food chains takes on a political context, the intensity of the backlash increases. NRN (an industry media) reports that Steak 'n Shake made politically charged posts about beef tallow fries, being criticized for using fonts reminiscent of certain historical propaganda, and that this sparked a flood of opinions on social media.

At this point, the issue shifts from the components of the oil to "who is saying it" and "what movement it is associated with." Beef tallow becomes a **"symbol" reflecting societal division** rather than a topic of nutrition.

6. So, How Should We Perceive This?

This entire uproar demonstrates how a single ingredient (beef tallow) can connect

• government messaging design

• interpretation of scientific evidence

• corporate marketing

• emotions and memes on social media
  all at once, reflecting the information environment of the 2020s.

At this point, three things can be said with certainty.

1. The new guidelines strongly emphasize "reducing ultra-processed foods and added sugars."

2. On the other hand, by mentioning beef tallow and butter while maintaining the 10% saturated fat limit, the message appears contradictory.

3. On social media, "health debates" easily turn into "cultural wars," and even a company's change in oil becomes a political event.

The key to judging the pros and cons of beef tallow is not to definitively say "tallow is absolutely good/bad," but to not lose sight of the overall structure of the diet (frequency of ultra-processed foods, total calories, fat substitution, intake of vegetables and whole grains). This is what medical institutions and public health sources repeatedly emphasize.