Lubomir Nokov, Co-founder and CEO at Harmonica Foods, recently shared something that made me stop scrolling: "🥩 Преди няколко дни Робърт Кенеди-младши реши да обърне хранителната пирамида на обратно: вместо корнфлейкс, пържоли. Хранителната пирамида е онзи държавен плакат в САЩ, който подрежда храните на етажи и казва кое трябва да е основата и кое да е рядко."

Translated and simplified, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. wants to flip the classic U.S. food pyramid: put steak where cornflakes used to be and declare a new hierarchy of "good" and "bad" foods.

Lubomir Nokov’s reaction was not to take sides in the "oats vs. beef" war. Instead, he pointed out something far more important: that changing one dietary dogma for another misses the real problem.

„Фокусът трябва да е как да се оправи здравната и хранителната система, а не да се сменя догмата с нова единствена истина. Една диета за всички е абсурд.“

That sentence has been stuck in my mind: the focus should be fixing the health and food system, not swapping one "universal" diet for another.

The Food Pyramid Was a Political Poster, Not a Law of Nature

The original U.S. food pyramid, and all the variations it inspired around the world, looks scientific. It has neat layers, color blocks, and serving suggestions.

But as Nokov reminds us, it’s ultimately a state poster – a visual guideline shaped by nutrition science, yes, but also by politics, lobbying, culture, and industry. When carbohydrates sat at the base, that reflected a certain moment in science and a certain agricultural reality: cheap grains, industrial food, the fear of fat.

Now, when someone proposes flipping the pyramid and putting animal protein at the base, it’s not necessarily a triumph of truth. It’s often just a new coalition of interests, data, and ideology pushing for its own "one right way".

Systems that affect millions of people rarely fit into a triangle.

One Pyramid, Many Bodies

Nokov writes that it is absurd to imagine a single diet for everyone, and then gives four quick examples: a Brooklyn vegan, a Texas worker, a fisherman in Alaska, and a single mother in Alabama. They do not have the same bodies, the same access to good food, the same time, or the same health care.

This is a crucial point for public health and nutrition policy.

Bio-individuality is real: genetics, age, metabolic health, gut microbiome, and physical activity all shape what works for a particular person. But social context is just as important: income, culture, geography, education, and work schedules define what is actually possible.

A fisherman in Alaska might have easy access to fresh fish but limited access to affordable fresh produce in winter. A single mother working two jobs in Alabama might rely on cheap ultra-processed foods because they are shelf-stable, heavily marketed to kids, and cost less upfront than fresh ingredients.

Telling both of them to "just follow the pyramid" – whether it’s grain-heavy or steak-heavy – is lazy policy.

The Real Enemy: Ultra-Processed, Empty Calories

Nokov sums it up clearly:

„Истинският проблем не е овес срещу телешко, а че все повече ядем евтини, свръхпреработени калории, които пълнят, но не хранят.“

Translated: the real problem is not oats versus beef, but that we increasingly eat cheap, ultra-processed calories that fill us up without nourishing us.

From a public health perspective, this is the heart of the crisis. Ultra-processed foods are engineered for taste, convenience, and profit, not for nourishment. They are often high in sugar, refined starches, and industrial fats, and low in fiber, micronutrients, and real ingredients.

They are also ubiquitous: in school cafeterias, vending machines, gas stations, discount supermarkets, hospital lobbies, and even many "healthy" packaged products. When the default environment is saturated with ultra-processed options, it is unrealistic – and unfair – to demand that individuals "just make better choices".

Health Is Not a Pyramid, It’s an Environment

Another line in Nokov’s post is worth reading twice:

„Здравето не е пирамида и не е една диета, а е среда: почви, вода, правила, контрол, достъпни цени.“

Health, he argues, is not a pyramid and not a single diet. It is an environment: soils, water, rules, oversight, and affordable prices.

This is where nutrition merges with ecology and governance:

Soils and water determine the nutrient density of our food, the presence of pesticide residues, and the resilience of agriculture in a changing climate.
Rules and control (regulation and enforcement) decide how much sugar can be hidden in products, how clearly labels must communicate risk, and how far marketing to children can go.
Prices and access shape whether "normal" food – fresh vegetables, fruit, legumes, quality grains, dairy, eggs, and meat – is an everyday option or a luxury.

If we care about public health, arguing about macro splits (high-carb vs. low-carb, plant-based vs. carnivore) is secondary to fixing these structural conditions.

The Role of the State: Not Diet Guru, but Referee

Nokov also insists that the state should not act as a dietician prescribing one correct way to eat. Instead, it should act as a fair arbiter:

„Държавата няма работа да е диетолог, а арбитър, да пази земята, климата и правилата, така че нормалната храна да не е лукс.“

In practice, this could mean:

Protecting agricultural land and water from pollution and short-term extraction.
Supporting regenerative and organic practices that keep soils alive and carbon in the ground.
Taxing or limiting the most harmful ultra-processed products, especially those targeted at children.
Making it easier and cheaper to buy minimally processed food than junk food.
Investing in school meals, public canteens, and hospital food as models of what "normal" food should look like.

When the state gets this right, people can follow many different diets – omnivore, vegetarian, Mediterranean, flexitarian, regional – and still end up reasonably healthy, because the baseline quality of food and environment is high.

Why This Matters for Bulgaria (and Everywhere Else)

Nokov writes that "И това важи с пълна сила за България." – this applies with full force to Bulgaria. In a country with rich agricultural traditions and serious demographic and health challenges, the stakes are especially high.

But the same logic holds in every country navigating obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, and environmental degradation. We cannot solve these with a new poster, a new slogan, or a new hero food.

We need living soils, clean water, transparent rules, and a food environment where the easiest choice is often the healthiest one.

Back to Basics: Eat Food, Not Too Much, Mostly Plants

Nokov closes by reminding us of Michael Pollan’s famously simple guideline:

„Яж храна. Не много. Предимно растения.“

"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."

It’s a deliberately modest recommendation – far from the grand claims of miracle diets. And that is exactly the point.

If we combine this simple personal rule with Nokov’s systemic view – focus on environment, not dogma – we get a realistic path forward: empower people with clear, flexible principles, and redesign the food system so that good choices are accessible, affordable, and aligned with the health of the planet.

The real revolution is not turning the food pyramid upside down. It is stepping away from pyramids altogether and building a food system that nourishes both people and the earth.

This blog post expands on a viral LinkedIn post by Lubomir Nokov, Co-founder and CEO at Harmonica Foods. View the original LinkedIn post →.