Diet guidelines with a pinch of ideology and a dash of over-reach

Such a diversion based on ideological agendas would erode any currency the Australian Dietary Guidelines holds, nutrition experts and beef industry leaders have warned.

The ADGs, last issued in 2013, are currently under review by the National Health and Medical Research Council, which has just called for expressions of interest for people with expertise to join a special sustainability working group advising the process.

The NHMRC said sustainable diets - that is accessible, affordable and equitable diets with low environmental impacts - were identified as one of the priority areas during the initial stages of the ADG review.

Expressions of interest for joining the group close on March 5.

It's the first time the ADGs have diverted from the purpose of providing advice on what to eat to promote health and prevent disease.

The science is far from supportive of any case for limiting beef and lamb in Australian diets as a climate change solution - lamb is carbon neutral and beef has a target of being carbon neutral by 2030.

However, the fear is anti-meat lobbyists will look to have a dominant influence in the committee and red meat intake recommendations will indeed be affected.

Already, the industry has been battling the appointment of a university lecturer who has repeatedly publicly demonstrated an anti livestock production agenda on the larger review committee.

Peak grassfed cattle producers group Cattle Australia said this latest development would "create a dangerous channel for misguided ideology, not robust nutritional science, to advise the nation's consumers."

Chief executive officer Dr Chris Parker said the inclusion of environmental messaging would fail to grasp the reality of modern beef production and muddy the waters for consumers on how best to optimise their health through nutrition.

Victorian beef and lamb farmer Loretta Carroll, Mudgegonga, who is a CA regional consultative committee member, described the move as a "complete farce".

Current ADG recommendations are that people limit intake of unprocessed red meat to 65 grams a day.

Many beef producers, and indeed nutritionists, question that limit. They certainly don't want to see red meat intakes further reduced based on misinformation around beef's carbon footprint.

"Meat is one of the most important, staple foods and cutting it would actually have a huge impact on the health of people," Ms Carroll said.

Her main fear was that the real science would be ignored.

She said the complexities of measuring methane from livestock production were enormous and asked which of the many models the group would draw on.

Sustainability incorporated far more than environmental measures as well - how would benefits to local communities, jobs, social value and natural resource protection be factored in, she said.

The Red Meat Advisory Council described the move as an over-reach that goes well beyond the policy intent of providing recommendations on healthy foods and dietary patterns.

"The red meat industry has a strong story about sustainability. Our concerns are because it's not the role of the dietary guidelines nor is it the expertise of the Dietary Guidelines Expert Committee," RMAC chair John McKillop said.

"Expanding the scope of the dietary guidelines into other non-nutritional related areas will create confusion, undermine their purpose and the public's confidence in them.

"We completely agree that sustainability considerations are important for government policy making and consumer purchasing decisions, but they should not underpin our nation's dietary recommendations.

"People should have the right to feed their families nutritious food, without mixed messaging about the environment or other sustainability considerations."

Nationals leader David Littleproud was even more forward, saying the NHMRC should "stick to their knitting."

The idea that consumers should eat less steak and lamb and instead favour chicken, due to a lower carbon footprint, was driven by ideology rather than common sense, he said.

"Dietary guidelines should be about food, not elitist agendas trying to control people," he said.