It is Time to End the War on Saturated Fats

[Pedaling Fool]

Amen! It's Bacon Time :D


http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-saturated-fat-20131022,0,2193813.story#axzz2iWjYBK7k


Excerpt:


"Virtually all the truths about preventing heart attacks (http://www.whiteblaze.net/topic/health/physical-conditions/heart-attack-HEISY000062.topic) that physicians and patients have held dear for more than a generation are wrong and need to be abandoned, Malhotra writes. He musters a passel of recent research that suggests that the "obsession" with lowering a patients' total cholesterol with statins, and a public health message that has made all sources of saturated fat verboten to the health-conscious, have failed to reduce heart disease.

Indeed, he writes, they have set off market forces that have put people at greater risk. After the Framingham Heart Study showed a correlation between total cholesterol and risk for coronary artery disease in the early 1970s, patients at risk for heart disease were urged to swear off red meat, school lunchrooms shifted to fat-free and low-fat milk, and a food industry eager to please consumers cutting their fat intake rushed to boost the flavor of their new fat-free offerings with added sugar (and, of course, with trans-fats).

The result is a rate of obesity (http://www.whiteblaze.net/topic/health/physical-conditions/obesity-HEDAI0000057.topic) that has "rocketed" upward, writes Malhotra. And, despite a generation of patients taking statins (and enduring their common side effects), the trends in cardiovascular disease have not demonstrably budged.

Malhotra cites a 2009 UCLA (http://www.whiteblaze.net/topic/education/colleges-universities/university-of-california-los-angeles-OREDU0000192268.topic) study showing that three-quarters of patients admitted to the hospital with acute myocardial infarction do not have high total cholesterol; what they do have, at a rate of 66%, is metabolic syndrome -- a cluster of worrying signs including hypertension (http://www.whiteblaze.net/topic/health/physical-conditions/high-blood-pressure-HEPHC0000023.topic), high fasting blood sugar, abdominal obesity, high triglycerides and low HDL ("good" cholesterol)."

[Sarcasm the elf]

I'm confused. Based on the excerpt the author demonstrated that people traded one unhealthy type of diet for another unhealthy type of diet.

So where's the surprise in concluding that they're still unhealthy?

[Rasty]

Where is the war on gluttony?


I'm sorry, I forgot it can't be my fault.

[Pedaling Fool]

I'm confused. Based on the excerpt the author demonstrated that people traded one unhealthy type of diet for another unhealthy type of diet.

So where's the surprise in concluding that they're still unhealthy?
Maybe my choice of exerpt was wrong, but the point was that the 1970 study that linked sat fat with heart disease was flawed.

Me, I'm skeptical of all studies concerning human health, but this new study does present some very valid points, especially the last sentece of the excerpt.


I don't fret over saturated fats, so far the best advice is the old saying: "Except for bacon, all in moderation". ;)

[Cookerhiker]

Last March, I listened to a program on The Peoples Pharmacy (http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2013/03/09/895-the-great-cholesterol-myth/) in which the authors of a new book, The Great Cholesterol Myth, Why Lowering Your Cholesterol Won't Prevent Heart Disease--and the Statin-Free Plan That Will. (http://books.google.com/books?id=0IHE2vK3-fwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=sinatra+bowden+great+cholesterol+myth&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Nwg5Uca1E4GK9QTU_oGYBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAQ) The authors - one a nutritionist, one a cardiologist - assert that inflammation caused from sugar is the primary culprit threatening heart health, not high cholesterol. Furthermore, even the "bad" LDL cholesterol is too simplistic because there are different components comprising the LDL. I purchased the book and am following their dietary recommendations, the most important of which is to reduce sugar. As for fats, the problem isn't saturated fat intake as much as imbalances in unsaturated fats between Omega 3 sources and Omega 6s. Ideally they should be 50-50 but eating processed foods give us a disproportionate amount of Omega 6.

I've taken myself on and off statins over the years, but now I'm off them for good.

[FarmerChef]

I agree. Many saturated fats are actually quite GOOD for you, not the horrible evil past studies have said they were. I eat two eggs a day and a pork product at breakfast, cook with lard every day, drink whole milk and eat plenty of meat. That said, I maintain a 1700 calorie diet and eat plenty of fresh vegetables and fruit and very few processed foods coupled with an hour of exercise 6 days a week. Sure, I'm just one person and not a representative sample but my doctor said my last physical was excellent, including my cholesterol counts - this despite eating cholesterol and fat (according to my nutrition calculators) that's way, way above the food pyramid or other "standard" recommendations. Me thinks there's something to that.

And I agree that over-eating and a lack of exercise plays a large role in overall weight gain for which there is a likewise correlation with heart disease. Though I feel that we have been "duped" in part into believing that the "light" or "low-fat" foods were better for us and that we could eat more of it (instead of focusing on calories per serving - I mean, who measures a serving?).

I enjoyed Food Inc's take on the modern food chain and the market and government forces that drive it and
Michael Pollan's book: In Defense of Food as it looked at sustainable agribusiness and some of the challenges of big agribusiness

[FarmerChef]

Last March, I listened to a program on The Peoples Pharmacy (http://www.peoplespharmacy.com/2013/03/09/895-the-great-cholesterol-myth/) in which the authors of a new book, The Great Cholesterol Myth, Why Lowering Your Cholesterol Won't Prevent Heart Disease--and the Statin-Free Plan That Will. (http://books.google.com/books?id=0IHE2vK3-fwC&printsec=frontcover&dq=sinatra+bowden+great+cholesterol+myth&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Nwg5Uca1E4GK9QTU_oGYBA&ved=0CDoQ6AEwAQ) The authors - one a nutritionist, one a cardiologist - assert that inflammation caused from sugar is the primary culprit threatening heart health, not high cholesterol. Furthermore, even the "bad" LDL cholesterol is too simplistic because there are different components comprising the LDL. I purchased the book and am following their dietary recommendations, the most important of which is to reduce sugar. As for fats, the problem isn't saturated fat intake as much as imbalances in unsaturated fats between Omega 3 sources and Omega 6s. Ideally they should be 50-50 but eating processed foods give us a disproportionate amount of Omega 6.

I've taken myself on and off statins over the years, but now I'm off them for good.

Yes. I read Dr. Phil Maffetone's "Big Book of Endurance Racing and Training" while preparing for my first marathon and he good me hooked on the idea that the balance of consumed fats is critical to correctly controlling inflammation as well as fat's interacting with glucose in the blood and it's role in metabolic syndrome. My macros are 40% fat, 40% protein, 20% carbohydrates nearly all come from all manner of fruits and vegetables and very limited whole-grains under the sun. And of course, beer. That's whole-grain, right :D

[Cookerhiker]

I agree. Many saturated fats are actually quite GOOD for you, not the horrible evil past studies have said they were....

I enjoyed Food Inc's take on the modern food chain and the market and government forces that drive it and
Michael Pollan's book: In Defense of Food as it looked at sustainable agribusiness and some of the challenges of big agribusiness

The book I referred to recommends grass-fed beef as an excellent protein source. Michael Pollan's first book on this subject - The Omnivore's Dilemma - describes among other things his experience with a Virginia farmer (not far from the AT coincidentally) who raises cattle on grass and gets a better yield than his neighbors simply because he rotates his stock to different pastures on a set schedule. Needless to say, there are no anti-biotics or growth hormones administered to the cattle.

[Sailing_Faith]

Where is the war on gluttony?


I'm sorry, I forgot it can't be my fault.

There are real changes as the OP suggests that have contributed significantly. I believe the research that suggests high fructose corn syrup is metabolized differently (as an example). The real changes though seem related to activity. I remember as a kid being told not to come inside until the street lights came on... Kids are now on facebook and playing video games rather then running outside or riding bikes.

There is some evidence that people are eating larger portions, restaurants cater to demand with larger and larger servings.... But I think the combination of these factors is to blame.

No one made me fat, I had to make deliberate changes to reverse the damage. I do agree with the OP, the low fat propaganda was wrong, and the increase in sweeteners to make up for the loss of flavor is the fat free foods did a lot more harm then good.

[Cookerhiker]

... whole-grains under the sun. And of course, beer. That's whole-grain, right :D

Among grains, oats are still the best (although hulled barley ranks high because of its glycemic index). So what better beverage is there than Oatmeal Stout?:D

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4996078939013199&pid=15.1

[FarmerChef]

Among grains, oats are still the best (although hulled barley ranks high because of its glycemic index). So what better beverage is there than Oatmeal Stout?:D

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/th?id=H.4996078939013199&pid=15.1

I have a coffee stout being bottle-conditioned as we type :D :D :D

[GeoRed]

Just stay away from anything fried. Fresh cold pressed olive and coconut oils are amazing for you and are saturated fats. Any other oil just avoid. Sugar is the worst substance your body can ingest. It promotes cancer cell growth and every human on the planet is born with cancer cells. If you have the willpower to avoid meat, do so. You will get enough protein in your diet from nuts, seeds, lagunes, vegetables, and grains. I lift weights and don't eat meat, I have no issues building muscle. I also have more energy than anyone I work with because I'm not bogged down trying to digest meat all the time. Meat also has cholesterol which does clog arteries. Not trying to turn anyone, just stating the facts. People usually get pretty upset when you tell them they are doing anything wrong and they should change, especially when it comes to their diets. So please don't assume that's what this was all about. I have a little knowledge on the subject, so I shared. That is all, good day :)

[Namtrag]

You cannot get all essential amino acids all vegan. At least add eggs to your list if you don't want to eat meat.

[max patch]

Just stay away from anything fried.

Except, of course, fried chicken.

The best advice I can give about nutrition is to not get any nutrition advice from WB.

[jeffmeh]

There has been much bad diet information, and it did become politicized with the ridiculous food pyramid and the recommendation to eat high-carb, low fat diets. Here is a decent article debunking a number of diet myths. Many may disagree with this, but the number of people who have been able to reverse type II diabetes and lean out following this is undeniable. http://www.businessinsider.com/13-nutrition-lies-that-made-the-world-sick-and-fat-2013-10?op=1

[GeoRed]

You cannot get all essential amino acids all vegan. At least add eggs to your list if you don't want to eat meat.

I'm sorry but you misinformed there. First off, there are at least half a dozen foods that have all the essential amino acids the are plant based. Quinoa and soybeans being amongst them. Second, all the essential amino acids can easily be accounted for by eating various plant based foods. Think of it like a puzzle. You just have to eat multiple types of foods to complete the puzzle. We do everyday no matter what. Also, I'm not vegan but I do try my hardest to avoid dairies due to the casein protein content. It' horrible stuff. I also don't eat eggs because I think they smell horrible and taste even worse.

[Rasty]

You cannot get all essential amino acids all vegan. At least add eggs to your list if you don't want to eat meat.

Rice and beans have all the essential amino acids.

[Dogwood]

TREAD LIGHTLY! BE CAREFUL, not to take an excerpt out of context or not be aware of the larger perspective. As is SO VERY OFTEN when it comes to nutrition and health it's much more complex of a picture than simply making the blanket statement "It is Time to End the War on Saturated Fats." I'll just state not all saturated fats are the same and the consumption of saturated fats doesn't affect all people in all situations equally. I think the author of the excerpt says that. Without going off on tangents or getting into the complexities, just of which I'm aware of, It is still wise for the VAST MAJORITY of people to limit saturated fats. The discussion of Cholesterol and statins are probably best reserved for an initial separate discussion(volume of books and studies) from saturated fats because that's more complex in itself than is typically reviewed.

[Sailing_Faith]

I like eggs. I like cheese. I like butter. I like bacon.

That these things go well together is a good thing.

I really like sourdough bread, but unless I am on the trail, I can not eat it. I can not eat wheat, rice, corn, or other carbs... Thankfully I can eat lots of great stuff, and really don't miss the things I can not eat.

Since I gave up carbs, I lost 80#, hike better and feel better. I eat lots of fatty food, but my LDL/HDL levels have improved. My heart disease risk factor was significantly improved by replacing carbs with fat.... Strange but true!

[Rasty]

Except, of course, fried chicken.

The best advice I can give about nutrition is to not get any nutrition advice from WB.

Except my advise. My advise is to eat fried chicken in direct proportion to the amount of exercise you get.

[Dogwood]

You cannot get all essential amino acids all vegan....

I'm not a vegan either but that is incorrect.

[Cookerhiker]

...The best advice I can give about nutrition is to not get any nutrition advice from WB.

I don't think WB is any worse than most other on-line sources. Here, you find a variety of nutrition opinions, often citing published studies. As Dogwood points out, it's a complex subject and not all the science is settled. People with more qualifications than any of us WBers have strong and fundamental disagreements on some nutritional issues.

[Sailing_Faith]

I don't think WB is any worse than most other on-line sources. Here, you find a variety of nutrition opinions, often citing published studies. As Dogwood points out, it's a complex subject and not all the science is settled. People with more qualifications than any of us WBers have strong and fundamental disagreements on some nutritional issues.

I agree, but I find it helpful to hear what is working for folks and what has not. I abandoned statins, just like WOO... Thankfully my diet changes worked to repair my numbers anyway.

I like to read how folks are approaching some of the same problems I seem to run into.

[perdidochas]

You cannot get all essential amino acids all vegan. At least add eggs to your list if you don't want to eat meat.

Actually, you can get all essential amino acids all vegan. you just have to be careful to vary your proteins. All essential amino acids can be found in plants. They can't all be found in a single plant.

[Namtrag]

I retract my claim....it is doable, but I still believe we are omnivores, so we are evolved to eat all types of food.

[googlywoogly]

I posted this on another thread, but it is worth repeating in this one. The video on the link below is worth an hour and 3 minutes of your time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf-tnVZtPgU


How Bad Science and Big Business Created the Obesity EpidemicDavid Diamond, Ph.D., of the University of South Florida College of Arts and Sciences shares his personal story about his battle with obesity. Diamond shows how he lost weight and reduced his triglycerides by eating red meat, eggs and butter.

[Namtrag]

Personal anecdote: I was into bodybuilding for a while and did a ketosis diet where I ate 6 meals a day, consisting in total of 10 whole eggs, 2 servings of meat, fish, or poultry, 2 protein shakes, 2 cups of green veggies, and a couple of handfuls of nuts. Yes you read that right, 10 eggs per day!

did blood work about 3 months in, and had triglycerides of 80, and while my total cholesterol was slightly high at 230, but my bad to good ratio was its best ever, and my VLDL was only 10. VLDL cholesterol is the really bad stuff, I think.

[max patch]

did blood work about 3 months in, and had triglycerides of 80

You were exercising, and didn't mention carbs or alcohol, so triglycerides of 80 sounds like it was right where one would expect it to be.

[Namtrag]

You were exercising, and didn't mention carbs or alcohol, so triglycerides of 80 sounds like it was right where one would expect it to be.

They were much higher on a low fat diet, with the same exercise. My point is that the establishment mantra against eggs would have indicated that my cholesterol would be sky high since I was eating 70 eggs per week.

[squeezebox]

You guys get way more exercise than the average American, My guess is most of these bell shaped curve, "normal boundaries " really do not count for you.

[Pedaling Fool]

I retract my claim....it is doable, but I still believe we are omnivores, so we are evolved to eat all types of food.Yes we are omnivores, because in nature we cannot get everything we need just on a plant diet. Vegans can do their diets today because of society and the availability of various plants by just going to the grocery store. Those plants are not even "natural", they've all been bred and most of them cannot live in a natural setting; in other words you don't have to worry about tomato plants (or any other cultivated crop) becoming invasive in the natural world. They are much like many of our pets; they are totally dependent on us.

If society were to fall apart everyone would need to eat some crazy stuff, including meats from animals we would not normally consider eating in order to survive. And insects would be on the menu.

[FarmerChef]

Yes we are omnivores, because in nature we cannot get everything we need just on a plant diet. Vegans can do their diets today because of society and the availability of various plants by just going to the grocery store. Those plants are not even "natural", they've all been bred and most of them cannot live in a natural setting; in other words you don't have to worry about tomato plants (or any other cultivated crop) becoming invasive in the natural world. They are much like many of our pets; they are totally dependent on us.

If society were to fall apart everyone would need to eat some crazy stuff, including meats from animals we would not normally consider eating in order to survive. And insects would be on the menu.

I've always wanted to try insects.

I eat 14 eggs a week plus bacon, ham, pepperoni, etc. and a diet high in whole fat dairy including cheese. Every day I cook with Lard or Olive Oil both high in saturated fats. Yet my numbers are considered excellent by my doctor. Again, I'm not saying I'm normative for anyone other than me. But I can say that after I greatly reduced my carbohydrate intake (not my calories, they have stayed consistent for the last 3 years) my incidence of inflammation related problems (headaches, for one) plummeted. I can't remember the last time I took an NSAID for a headache (or aspirin or tylenol for that matter). And the too full feeling I used to have after even moderate meals has been replaced with a more consistent energy, sense of satiety and non-bloated feeling throughout the day. Again, that's just me but it leads me to believe that reducing carbohydrates in favor of fats is a step in the right direction, at least for me. Oh and my wife has experienced the same thing as well.

[aficion]

I've always wanted to try insects.

I eat 14 eggs a week plus bacon, ham, pepperoni, etc. and a diet high in whole fat dairy including cheese. Every day I cook with Lard or Olive Oil both high in saturated fats. Yet my numbers are considered excellent by my doctor. Again, I'm not saying I'm normative for anyone other than me. But I can say that after I greatly reduced my carbohydrate intake (not my calories, they have stayed consistent for the last 3 years) my incidence of inflammation related problems (headaches, for one) plummeted. I can't remember the last time I took an NSAID for a headache (or aspirin or tylenol for that matter). And the too full feeling I used to have after even moderate meals has been replaced with a more consistent energy, sense of satiety and non-bloated feeling throughout the day. Again, that's just me but it leads me to believe that reducing carbohydrates in favor of fats is a step in the right direction, at least for me. Oh and my wife has experienced the same thing as well.

Me too. Can't cite the source, but remember reading of two adventurer/scientist types who visited the Inuit for about a year. They switched from a normal Western diet to the native one, mostly whale blubber, fish, and meat.
When they returned to "civilization" and had their numbers run they had both improved in every metric. Resting blood sugar, blood pressure, cholesterol, bmi, and body weight were all down significantly. No drugs, low carb, regular exercise, high natural fat and protein diet worked wonders.

[Sailing_Faith]

I've always wanted to try insects.

I eat 14 eggs a week plus bacon, ham, pepperoni, etc. and a diet high in whole fat dairy including cheese. Every day I cook with Lard or Olive Oil both high in saturated fats. Yet my numbers are considered excellent by my doctor. Again, I'm not saying I'm normative for anyone other than me. But I can say that after I greatly reduced my carbohydrate intake (not my calories, they have stayed consistent for the last 3 years) my incidence of inflammation related problems (headaches, for one) plummeted. I can't remember the last time I took an NSAID for a headache (or aspirin or tylenol for that matter). And the too full feeling I used to have after even moderate meals has been replaced with a more consistent energy, sense of satiety and non-bloated feeling throughout the day. Again, that's just me but it leads me to believe that reducing carbohydrates in favor of fats is a step in the right direction, at least for me. Oh and my wife has experienced the same thing as well.


Me too. Can't cite the source, but remenber reading of two adventurer/scientist types who visited the Inuit for about a year. They switched from a normal Western diet to the native one, mostly whale blubber, fish, and meat.
When they returned to "civilization" and had their numbers run they had both improved in every metric. Resting blood sugar, blood pressure, cholesterol, bmi, and body weight were all down significantly. No drugs, low carb, regular exercise, high natural fat and protein diet worked wonders.

so that makes three of us on this thread with the same experience (4 if you count the Farmers wife).

[googlywoogly]

so that makes three of us on this thread with the same experience (4 if you count the Farmers wife).

You may add me to the tally too. I've been eating like a cave man since 1 February, am 47 years old, and feel better now than I can ever remember feeling. I buy 3 dozen eggs a week from a local farmer. Her chickens live on a pasture and eat an organic non soy non GMO feed along with whatever bugs and salad they find on the pasture. My blood numbers blew my doctor away. He can't believe it though and still trying to put me on statins. Says my current good health/blood work is an "anomaly"...

[magneto]

Yes we are omnivores, because in nature we cannot get everything we need just on a plant diet. Vegans can do their diets today because of society and the availability of various plants by just going to the grocery store. Those plants are not even "natural", they've all been bred and most of them cannot live in a natural setting; in other words you don't have to worry about tomato plants (or any other cultivated crop) becoming invasive in the natural world. They are much like many of our pets; they are totally dependent on us.

If society were to fall apart everyone would need to eat some crazy stuff, including meats from animals we would not normally consider eating in order to survive. And insects would be on the menu.

Soy is a complete protein and is the only plant that contains all 9 essential amino acids in one place. Otherwise you eat a combination of plants to get complete protein. The only thing you can't get from pants is vitamin B12, which comes from micro-organisms. You can eat fortified plant foods that contain B12 or you can take supplements.

There is no need to eat any meat for health purposes.

[aficion]

Soy is a complete protein and is the only plant that contains all 9 essential amino acids in one place. Otherwise you eat a combination of plants to get complete protein. The only thing you can't get from pants is vitamin B12, which comes from micro-organisms. You can eat fortified plant foods that contain B12 or you can take supplements.

There is no need to eat any meat for health purposes.

Modern soy is corrupted like modern wheat.

[googlywoogly]

Modern soy is corrupted like modern wheat.

The only good soy is fermented soy. I am convinced soy sped the death of a friend who had breast cancer. She was a Vegetarian and ate a lot of soy right up till the end. I believe cancer cells feast on some of the chemicals in soy and it helped her cancer explode out of control. I strongly recommend folks eating non fermented soy products as meat substitute do further research. It really does appear to be bad news.

Fermented soy products appear to be viable options for healthy eating though...

The link below is a starting place for research.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/09/18/soy-can-damage-your-health.aspx

[Dogwood]

As is usual, even among nutritional experts, scientists, and MDs, no less the general public, it's so easy to take things out or context, go off on tangents, and over simplify nutrition and health. And, discussing it has become like TRYING to discuss politics or religion. What were we talking about again? I had to go back to PF's original post to find out. Oh yeah, saturated fat NOT ALWAYS being the huge enemy that some have made it out to be.

[Tuckahoe]

As is usual, even among nutritional experts, scientists, and MDs, no less the general public, it's so easy to take things out or context, go off on tangents, and over simplify nutrition and health. And, discussing it has become like TRYING to discuss politics or religion. What were we talking about again? I had to go back to PF's original post to find out. Oh yeah, saturated fat NOT ALWAYS being the huge enemy that some have made it out to be.

Wow the most logical statement.

[Rasty]

As is usual, even among nutritional experts, scientists, and MDs, no less the general public, it's so easy to take things out or context, go off on tangents, and over simplify nutrition and health. And, discussing it has become like TRYING to discuss politics or religion. What were we talking about again? I had to go back to PF's original post to find out. Oh yeah, saturated fat NOT ALWAYS being the huge enemy that some have made it out to be.

In my industry we have an expression "Fat is Flavor"

[russb]

IIRC it was the AgriIndustry which helped push the meat-is-bad philosophy in order to increase the demand for their soy-protein which was a byproduct from the oil manufacturing.

[aficion]

In my industry we have an expression "Fat is Flavor"

"Grease is good" if I may paraphrase.

[MuddyWaters]

Man made food products and fats, are far worse for you than natural ones ever were.

Your government, bought and paid for by agri-business , is largely responsible for the horrible health state of much of america.

[Odd Man Out]

I posted this on another thread, but it is worth repeating in this one. The video on the link below is worth an hour and 3 minutes of your time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf-tnVZtPgU


How Bad Science and Big Business Created the Obesity Epidemic

David Diamond, Ph.D., of the University of South Florida College of Arts and Sciences shares his personal story about his battle with obesity. Diamond shows how he lost weight and reduced his triglycerides by eating red meat, eggs and butter.

I watched this when you posted before and was having trouble finding it again. Thanks for reposting. I found this to be an excellent lecture. I will bookmark this time.

[Sarcasm the elf]

There is no need to eat any meat for health purposes.


Procuring Venison keeps me active and gets me in the woods for several weeks a year, try lugging a 200lb deer through the woods and then try to deny that it's good for your health, :D I lost several pounds thanks to all the activity last deer season. Raising my own chickens used to keep me just as busy and if I'm lucky I will be doing it again once I finally give up the lake life and get a bigger property,

[Sarcasm the elf]

Man made food products and fats, are far worse for you than natural ones ever were.

Your government, bought and paid for by agri-business , is largely responsible for the horrible health state of much of america.

I don't like conspiracy theories...and I especially hate it when they're completely true!

[atmilkman]

We keep telling each other over and over and over again. You're doing it wrong. Nobody seems to listen.

[Rasty]

I don't like conspiracy theories...and I especially hate it when they're completely true!

Con Agra and ADM paid everyone off.

[Another Kevin]

I've significantly improved my health (according to several objective surrogate measures) by following the rule, "if you hike all day, you can eat what you damned well please." That is my one-line summary about food for health.

[FarmerChef]

I've significantly improved my health (according to several objective surrogate measures) by following the rule, "if you hike all day, you can eat what you damned well please." That is my one-line summary about food for health.

Tee hee :)

[Sarcasm the elf]

I've significantly improved my health (according to several objective surrogate measures) by following the rule, "if you hike all day, you can eat what you damned well please." That is my one-line summary about food for health.

Personally i'm a fan of Michael Pollan's summary advice: "Eat [real] food, not too much, mostly plants."

[FarmerChef]

Personally i'm a fan of Michael Pollan's summary advice: "Eat [real] food, not too much, mostly plants."

Me too, unless I'm building muscle mass. Then I eat real meat a bit more (still mostly plants). :bse

[Sarcasm the elf]

Me too, unless I'm building muscle mass. Then I eat real meat a bit more (still mostly plants). :bse

I'm trying to make venison my staple meat. (I dont eat much meat to begin with) It's Lean, i know where it comes from and do all the butchering myself and it absolutely blows away all those expensively marketed pastured/grass fed meats in the store.

Plus like you alluded to, it's just plants with one degree of separation.

[perdidochas]

I retract my claim....it is doable, but I still believe we are omnivores, so we are evolved to eat all types of food.

I agree. I know we can get all of our protein from plant matter, that doesn't mean I would want to :-)

[perdidochas]

Yes we are omnivores, because in nature we cannot get everything we need just on a plant diet. Vegans can do their diets today because of society and the availability of various plants by just going to the grocery store. Those plants are not even "natural", they've all been bred and most of them cannot live in a natural setting; in other words you don't have to worry about tomato plants (or any other cultivated crop) becoming invasive in the natural world. They are much like many of our pets; they are totally dependent on us.

If society were to fall apart everyone would need to eat some crazy stuff, including meats from animals we would not normally consider eating in order to survive. And insects would be on the menu.

Fried crickets taste kind of like sunflower seeds.

[Cookerhiker]

I'm trying to make venison my staple meat. (I dont eat much meat to begin with) It's Lean, i know where it comes from and do all the butchering myself and it absolutely blows away all those expensively marketed pastured/grass fed meats in the store.

Plus like you alluded to, it's just plants with one degree of separation.

My red meat meals come from bison available at my local coop.

[Sarcasm the elf]

My red meat meals come from bison available at my local coop.

That's a bit much for me, it's hard enough dragging a deer out of the woods.:eek:

Oddly enough i was actually a vegetarian for a while. When i started eating meat again i got into hunting because I wanted to have control of where my meat came from and how they were killed. (I'm confident in claiming that the deer i shoot live a better life and are killed more humanely than animals on a CAFO). I also agree that the meat wild animals ( or animals that are raised on small farms) is healthier than what I can buy in the store.

[Dogwood]

WHEWWWW, max warp drive thread drift as is typical with the topic. Another similar textbook example of what happens when you get a bunch of individuals to pass along information unbeknownst to each other and how the story and info changes as it's passsed on to one another. The sky is blue story eventually can become the ball is red.

[jeffmeh]

I posted this on another thread, but it is worth repeating in this one. The video on the link below is worth an hour and 3 minutes of your time.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf-tnVZtPgU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf-tnVZtPgU)



How Bad Science and Big Business Created the Obesity Epidemic



David Diamond, Ph.D., of the University of South Florida College of Arts and Sciences shares his personal story about his battle with obesity. Diamond shows how he lost weight and reduced his triglycerides by eating red meat, eggs and butter.

Thanks for posting this. Another one that blows up the party line and has great entertainment value is Science for Smart People (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1RXvBveht0).

[Rasty]

That's a bit much for me, it's hard enough dragging a deer out of the woods.:eek:
.

Also a bit hard to find any wild bison in the northeast.

[Sarcasm the elf]

Also a bit hard to find any wild bison in the northeast.

You just have to know how to look for them.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_pfFakkafeqY/SJP0Q1y2DUI/AAAAAAAAAi4/hWf6n35y0p0/s200/nwm.jpg

[Cookerhiker]

Also a bit hard to find any wild bison in the northeast.

There's a bison ranch which supplies the meat for the coop. I don't remember the exact location but it's in KY.

[rocketsocks]

I don't fret over saturated fats, so far the best advice is the old saying: "Except for bacon, all in moderation". ;)...and M&M's ;)

[Dogwood]

I've significantly improved my health (according to several objective surrogate measures) by following the rule, "if you hike all day, you can eat what you damned well please." That is my one-line summary about food for health.

The word that jumped out at me in your post was surrogate. Immediately, all thoughts of nutrition and food ceased. I was thinking of a naked Helen Hunt and that gorgeous smile.

[Dogwood]

Fried crickets taste kind of like sunflower seeds.

Only if they are fried in sunflower oil! They have the texture of something like um.........a crunchy bug. Try adding some soy sauce MSG free of course. I had to keep it health conscious as well as tasty on this thread. They are terrible ....even with the soy sauce. I think I got a bad batch. I think they were made in China. Sauteed grasshoppers weren't so good either. Did like the chocolate covered ants though. Serious. The ants had the texture of something akin to chocolate covered Grape Nuts but tasted like crunchy smaller harder chocolate covered Raisinettes. Funniest thing, a friend who I was sampling these things(uh um food?) with tried feeding the dead chocolate covered ants to some live unchocolate covered ants and they weren't having any of it. I also tried feeding that crap that is passed off as "cheese food" - Velveeta that's sometimes mixed in with the regular REAL cheese to a mouse. I thought I was doing a good thing - feeding the homeless hungry mouse population(I think she had little mice mouths to feed). I was sure the hungry mouse would eagerly devour the chunk of Velveeta I tossed it. The mouse looked at it, picked it up, sniffed it, AND PUT IT DOWN, and quietly pitter pattered away. I thought this mouse doesn't know the smorgasbord I just tossed it. Threw it another small piece. The mouse did the same thing and then RAN away. Seems ants and mice have a better sense of what food is than humans.

[googlywoogly]

Thanks for posting this. Another one that blows up the party line and has great entertainment value is Science for Smart People (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1RXvBveht0).

Thank you for posting the Science for Smart People response. That is good stuff, and is worth 46 minutes of most peoples time. I liked his rats that milk cows don't have the technology to isolate individual protein line. It literally made me laugh out loud for some reason.

[Pedaling Fool]

Only if they are fried in sunflower oil! They have the texture of something like um.........a crunchy bug. Try adding some soy sauce MSG free of course. I had to keep it health conscious as well as tasty on this thread. They are terrible ....even with the soy sauce. I think I got a bad batch. I think they were made in China. Sauteed grasshoppers weren't so good either. Did like the chocolate covered ants though. Serious. The ants had the texture of something akin to chocolate covered Grape Nuts but tasted like crunchy smaller harder chocolate covered Raisinettes. Funniest thing, a friend who I was sampling these things(uh um food?) with tried feeding the dead chocolate covered ants to some live unchocolate covered ants and they weren't having any of it. I also tried feeding that crap that is passed off as "cheese food" - Velveeta that's sometimes mixed in with the regular REAL cheese to a mouse. I thought I was doing a good thing - feeding the homeless hungry mouse population(I think she had little mice mouths to feed). I was sure the hungry mouse would eagerly devour the chunk of Velveeta I tossed it. The mouse looked at it, picked it up, sniffed it, AND PUT IT DOWN, and quietly pitter pattered away. I thought this mouse doesn't know the smorgasbord I just tossed it. Threw it another small piece. The mouse did the same thing and then RAN away. Seems ants and mice have a better sense of what food is than humans.
This kind of reminds me of a conversation I had with someone about eating weeds, which as you know I'm into. His complaint was that wild plants, aka weeds, just don't have the kind of taste compared to his produce. And while I'm a big fan of eating weeds, I really can't argue with that point, unless of course I want to be totally biased and argue from that point, but that's not my style, what he says is just plain fact.

P.S. This guy is a serious medium-scale Landrace farmer, so he knows what he's talking about, WRT plants.

Sure I can point to some types of plants, especially wild onions and wood sorrel with unique tastes, but even they don't compare to many of the bred plants. This is because one of the traits bred into plants are designed to accentuate tastes. And it's not just plants, look at all types of food that we seem to have an obsession with tastes, nutrition is not our top priority, regardless of what many say, at best it comes in at second priority and sometimes it's not even close. This includes all types of foods, not just plants, but everything -- ever hear of Kobe beef, there are stories of people massaging cattle and playing classical music to soothe the animals so to improve the texture/taste. And it must work, because it's highly valued.


It does make you wonder how our tastes are evolving. Taste buds in nature serve a very important function, but outside of the natural setting none of us use our tastes as designed, rather it's all about satisfaction, i.e. wants, not needs. Just another reason to :rolleyes: when people talk about eating a natural diet. Go eat some weeds and a gamey squirrel or rat and some insects if you want to eat natural. There is nothing natural with natural foods one buys at a health food store that specializes in natural foods.


So easy to lie to yourself.

[1234]

Ol hog wash to all dem studies, my grand daddy smoke drank ate bacon every day fat back every day and lived to 85, my other grand daddy never drank, never smoked ate nice balanced meals, and he lived to 85. I eat what I want, do not go to gym, do not work out and I be willing to bet I live to about 85. I think we are just given a lot of genes that we have and nothin going to change our date with destiny. We all end up dead.

[Cookerhiker]

Ol hog wash to all dem studies, my grand daddy smoke drank ate bacon every day fat back every day and lived to 85, my other grand daddy never drank, never smoked ate nice balanced meals, and he lived to 85. I eat what I want, do not go to gym, do not work out and I be willing to bet I live to about 85. I think we are just given a lot of genes that we have and nothin going to change our date with destiny. We all end up dead.

I suspect that the swine who provided the bacon your grand daddy ate were not ingested with chemicals and raised in CAFOs.

[Sailing_Faith]

Thanks for posting this. Another one that blows up the party line and has great entertainment value is Science for Smart People (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1RXvBveht0).

That is an excellent video, and well worth watching. Thanks for posting it.

[WolfCBP]

Just like HYOH.......I say EYOF........Your body knows what it needs, all of us are different.

[Marta]

Just going by the numbers... There are many millions of vegans living in India, far more than there are Inuit subsisting on blubber in the Arctic.

My conclusion is that it's much too easy to jump to conclusions about what will increase health and longevity. One intriguing thing I've read a number of times over many years is that calorie-restriction is linked to longevity. Argh! That's exactly what I don't want to know. I'd much rather be told to buy this and eat more of that than to eat less.

Back to the original topic... Back in the 70's margarine was trumpeted as being the Fountain of Youth. The subject was often discussed in my extended family, with some swearing never to allow saturated fats to touch their lips, and others sticking to butter. (Now there's an image for you.) Carl Cori, 1947 Nobel laureate for his work on carbohydrate metabolism, and member of my extended family, was once asked by my mother-in-law to weigh in on the subject. He said he was still eating butter. He lived to be 87.

My father-in-law, who switched to margarine decades ago, and followed the anti-saturated fats plan for most of his adult life, passed away last year at the age of 86.

So...I'll stick with eating mostly unprocessed foods, with lots of fruits and vegetables, getting as much exercise as I can arrange, and striving to balance the two so as not to keep my body weight less than obese.

[Pedaling Fool]

I keep seeing anti-fat commercials and articles all over the place, but it's been shown this is wrong, not just thru studies, but we have seen that many peoples in the world live just fine on relatively high-fat diets.

Just like there were smokers that didn't want to believe that smoking is bad for you, it seems like a lot of people are not accepting that the war on saturated fat is over, i.e. the official claims against sat fat was dead wrong and probably lead to a lot of adverse health effects to many.

We look back at old cigarette commercials and just can't believe in the ignorance and one day people will look back on the anti-fat commercials and just shake their heads at our incredibly stupid, naive beliefs.

http://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/nutrition/why-experts-now-think-you-should-eat-more-fat-20141020

Excerpt:


For more than half a century, the conventional wisdom among nutritionists and public health officials was that fat is dietary enemy number one – the leading cause of obesity and heart disease.

It appears the wisdom was off. And not just off. Almost entirely backward.

According to a new study from the National Institutes of Health (http://www.nih.gov/), a diet that reduces carbohydrates in favor of fat – including the saturated fat in meat and butter – improves nearly every health measurement, from reducing our waistlines to keeping our arteries clear, more than the low-fat diets that have been recommended for generations. "The medical establishment got it wrong," says cardiologist Dennis Goodman, director of Integrative Medicine at New York Medical Associates (http://nymamed.com/intmed/). "The belief system didn't pan out."


Read more: http://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/nutrition/why-experts-now-think-you-should-eat-more-fat-20141020#ixzz3H4v6Ptve
Follow us: @mensjournal on Twitter (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rw?id=cyX_rCFByr4ABDacwqm_6l&u=mensjournal) | MensJournal on Facebook (http://ec.tynt.com/b/rf?id=cyX_rCFByr4ABDacwqm_6l&u=MensJournal)

[rickb]

Some how i got on Men's Journals e-mail list.

They sent this yesterday: http://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/nutrition/the-high-fat-diet-explained-20141021?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=102214_13&utm_medium=email&ea=cmlja2JvdWRyaWVAZ21haWwuY29t


Edit-- This is a different article from the same mag as Pedaling Fool just posted. More to to with why we have all been fooled-- if in fact we have.

[Pedaling Fool]

Some how i got on Men's Journals e-mail list.

They sent this yesterday: http://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/nutrition/the-high-fat-diet-explained-20141021?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=102214_13&utm_medium=email&ea=cmlja2JvdWRyaWVAZ21haWwuY29t (http://www.mensjournal.com/health-fitness/nutrition/the-high-fat-diet-explained-20141021?utm_source=newsletter&utm_campaign=102214_13&utm_medium=email&ea=cmlja2JvdWRyaWVAZ21haWwuY29t)


Edit-- This is a different article from the same mag as Pedaling Fool just posted. More to to with why we have all been fooled-- if in fact we have.I haven't read her book (Nina Teicholz's), but I do remember reading several of her articles; she's definitely been beating the drum on this issue for some time.

As for the "if in fact we have" remark, that's important to me, because it should be a reminder to us all that we really don't know the truth and we never will. While I'm always skeptical of just about everything, especially when it involves scientific consensus (after all this was scientific consensus for decades), I never tell myself that I know what the real answer is. I'm not sure there is a real answer. That's why I just adopt the All in Moderation approach, just in case some of the stuff I see as good is actually bad:D

[colorado_rob]

All good, but WHEN will myths like "sugar is poison" be understood? How about "organic foods? I tip my hat to the marketers, and as a grocery chain stock holder (KR), my wallet thanks these folks in two ways: 1) more profits for us stock holders by selling essentially the same food for much more and 2) making "non-organic" foods cheaper for some of us because of less demand.

Here's a good article on sugars, specifically about that evil HFCS:

http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/high-fructose-corn-syrup-myth-science/

[Pedaling Fool]

Another contradictory study, this time on Trans Fatty Acids (TFAs) -- I love it :D

http://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases/Last-5-years/New-research-suggests-not-all-trans-fatty-acids-are-bad-for-you

Excerpt:

"Artificial TFAs occur when oil goes through a process of hydrogenation, which makes the oil more solid. They are used as ingredients in processed foods, such as cakes, biscuits and pies, and for frying. It has been well-established that high levels of industrially produced TFAs in food can lead to high cholesterol, heart problems, strokes and diabetes, and they have even been linked to infertility, Alzheimer’s disease and some cancers. Action has been taken in the USA to reduce the amount of artificially produced TFAs in food, while intake of these has tended to be lower in most of Europe. However, until now it has been unclear what is the highest concentration of TFAs that is safe for humans, and whether or not there is any difference between industrially produced TFAs and naturally occurring ones.

Researchers in Germany, led by Dr Marcus Kleber, a post-doctoral researcher at the Vth Department of Medicine of the Medical Faculty Mannheim at Heidelberg University, measured the concentrations of TFAs found in the membranes of red blood cells in participants in the Ludwigshafen Risk and Cardiovascular Health (LURIC) study. A total of 3316 people living in south-western Germany joined the study between 1997 and 2000 after being hospitalised in order to have coronary angiographies to investigate heart disease, and 3,259 of them were analysed for this study. During a median follow-up period of just over 10 years (ranging from less than one year to nearly 12 years), 975 (30%) of these patients died.

The researchers analysed blood samples from the patients to identify the total concentrations of TFAs, as well as distinguishing between the concentrations of industrially produced and naturally occurring TFAs. They linked this with information on deaths, causes of death, medical history, and other factors that could affect results, such as whether or not the patient were taking cholesterol-lowering drugs, such as statins, and risk factors such as smoking, lack of physical exercise, body mass index (BMI), diabetes and high blood pressure.

Dr Kleber said: “We found that higher concentrations of TFAs in the membranes of red blood cells were associated with higher LDL or ‘bad’ cholesterol, but also with lower BMI, lower fats in the blood (triglycerides) and less insulin resistance and, therefore, a lower risk of diabetes. We were surprised to find that naturally occurring TFAs were associated with a lower rate of deaths from any cause, and this was driven mainly by a lower risk of sudden cardiac death.

“We were also surprised to see that increases in the concentrations of industrially produced TFAs were not followed by increased mortality, which stands in contrast to observations from the United States. The reason for this may be, that in our group of German patients, TFAs were in general much lower than those found in the United States, so that hardly anybody in the study reached concentrations common to people in the US.”

The proportion of TFAs in the blood of the study participants ranged from 0.27-2.40% of total fatty acids, with an average of just under one percent. Another study in the USA over a similar time period reported an average of more than 2.6% of total fatty acids."

[perdidochas]

You cannot get all essential amino acids all vegan. At least add eggs to your list if you don't want to eat meat.

You can get all essential amino acids all vegan. You just have to be careful.
http://healthyeating.sfgate.com/essentials-vegans-protein-amino-acids-4081.html
https://www.vrg.org/nutrition/protein.php

[Five Tango]

All good, but WHEN will myths like "sugar is poison" be understood? How about "organic foods? I tip my hat to the marketers, and as a grocery chain stock holder (KR), my wallet thanks these folks in two ways: 1) more profits for us stock holders by selling essentially the same food for much more and 2) making "non-organic" foods cheaper for some of us because of less demand.

Here's a good article on sugars, specifically about that evil HFCS:

http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/high-fructose-corn-syrup-myth-science/

Ok,I worked in the food industry for years.We bought HFCS by the truckload and sold it by the ounce.It makes certain foods taste better,and,YES,it is so much cheaper than sucrose.In and of itself,HFCS is no worse than sucrose or other sugars most likely.The real issue is that the food industry now adds it to EVERYTHING.I had a can of tomato soup the other day that did not taste like soup-tasted like syrup.They put it in everything from bread to baby formula and sugar is addictive so as your blood sugar spikes and falls you crave it like a junky on heroin and have to have another fix.Go watch Dr. Robert Lustig's presentation on YouTube,"Sugar the Bitter Truth."He is a real doctor and an authority on the subject of real and artificial sweeteners,cancer,and heart disease.Let's not forget diabetes while we are at it either.There's an epidemic of juvenile diabetes in America-so how did that happen?Putting my money where my mouth is,I have maintained a 60 pound weight loss since 2009 strictly by avoiding carbs as much as possible and absolutely avoiding anything with sugar or sugar substitutes added.I eat plenty of nuts,cheese,butter,bacon,fried chicken but mostly leafy greens and non starchy vegetables but include sweet potatoes etc.My doctor is pleased with my blood chemistry which is normal with a very high HDL number so it's working for me anyway.I would like to add that while exercise is a great thing,you do not have to be a gymn rat to lose weight if you get off sugar and carbs.Sorry for the rant...............

[Dogwood]

It's no myth that sugar in high dosages is toxic to the human body! According to many reliable unbiased scientific based sources the average U.S. citizen is consuming 60+ lbs of ADDED sugar annually or about 20-22 teaspoons daily or about 18% of daily calories(depends on total daily caloric load). This data is based on ADDED sugar that is basically added to just about EVERY highly processed highly refined intensively packaged food - food like product. Several estimates push the average consumption of refined sugar up well above the 120 lbs per yr mark.

The toxicity level has been far surpassed in the average U.S. citizen's diet. According to many scientific circles it is causing, or at least correlated with increases in illness and disease, lack of quality of life, and problematic imbalances in the human body.

[Pedaling Fool]

It's no myth that water in high dosages is toxic to the human body!

Virtually everything is toxic in too high of a dosage. Look at Iron, who's to say how much iron has caused health issues, but blamed on other things http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/13/a-host-of-ills-when-irons-out-of-balance/

However, I get your point, there too much sugar in our foods and I agree with that, but again the real problem is that people eat way too much and don't exercise.


Five Tango's Quote: "I would like to add that while exercise is a great thing,you do not have to be a gymn rat to lose weight if you get off sugar and carbs.Sorry for the rant..............."

You are absolutely correct, you can lose weight without exercise and in my case exercise doesn't really help with losing weight (or keeping it off), the only real way to keep it off is via my diet, meaning mostly to stop eating. However, exercise is crucial in keeping the body healthy and strong.

But in the end, I agree 100%, it's all about diet when losing weight, at least for many of us and definitely is the case with me.




P.S. I don't concentrate so much on restricting carbs, sugars, proteins, fats.... I just concentrate on limiting my eating. Eating three meals per day is wrong. There is something about calorie restriction (to the point where you are hungry -- very hungry), that does the body good. It is that simple.

The body doesn't need near the amount of food we stuff in our mouths, so the question is: Why does the body start the digestion process every time you eat? Why doesn't the food just sit there in your stomach? :-?

[rocketsocks]

I've come to agree with this, all about calories in and portion control. Our body's don't require that much food/fuel to run, o'coarse a sustained long distance hike requires more calories.

[ChrisJackson]

When I got off the sugar drug I lost weight without exercise. Lost roughly a pound a day for 45 days. You can't exercise enough if you have a high sugar diet. It's pointless. Don't know if it's been mentioned yet, but check out Dr. Robert Lustig's "Sugar: The Elephant in the Kitchen".

[Five Tango]

I am pretty sure I read or heard some health authority say that if you drink a regular 12 oz Coke you must walk 1.5 miles to burn it off.Most kids have several per day now plus lots of fatty carbs that they are washing down with them and there is no other outcome other than obesity,juvenile diabetes,and resultant health issues for them.The worst part is that it is all based on ignorance of the facts.And it's likely going to get worse before it gets better,if ever..............Worst of it is that most of us AARP types remember the day when obese kids and overweight kids were rare because we did not have a fast food,snack food,HFCS food based society the way we do now-BUT IT'S BEEN GREAT FOR SALES and PROFITS!

[Dogwood]

"...but again the real problem is that people eat way too much and don't exercise."

It's not that simple. I'm all for exercise and demonstrating personal responsibility when it comes to putting something in our bodies. However, your contention is that the ball is entirely in the public's court. NOT SO! The food industry has to shoulder a good amount of responsibility in getting the public addicted to salt, sugar, artificial sweeteners, additives, like MSG, fat/being fat, OVEREATING, etc so they can sell more food. Fat people eat more food. Thus, fat, even obese consumers are what MANY segments of the food industry desire. THIS IS DONE INTENTIONALLY BY THE FOOD INDUSTRY....just as a heroin dealer has a vested financial interest in creating heroin addicts and shaping their market so they can sell more heroin OR the tobacco industry KNOWS their product is addictive and a KNOWN carcinogen but has a vested interest in creating and shaping a market of addicts to sell more of their poison.


I don't buy that BS study of misdirection that Mickey Dees did having a customer eat 30 days of food, afterwards with supposedly no detriment to the persons's health, saying its all a personal choice in what we eat absolving themselves of being responsible for their unhealthy addictive low quality massively processed and highly refined foods they mass sell to the public.

[Pedaling Fool]

"...but again the real problem is that people eat way too much and don't exercise."

It's not that simple. I'm all for exercise and demonstrating personal responsibility when it comes to putting something in our bodies. However, your contention is that the ball is entirely in the public's court. NOT SO! The food industry has to shoulder a good amount of responsibility in getting the public addicted to salt, sugar, artificial sweeteners, additives, like MSG, fat/being fat, OVEREATING, etc so they can sell more food. Fat people eat more food. Thus, fat, even obese consumers are what MANY segments of the food industry desire. THIS IS DONE INTENTIONALLY BY THE FOOD INDUSTRY....just as a heroin dealer has a vested financial interest in creating heroin addicts and shaping their market so they can sell more heroin OR the tobacco industry KNOWS their product is addictive and a KNOWN carcinogen but has a vested interest in creating and shaping a market of addicts to sell more of their poison.Actually it is that easy. The idea that things like sugar is addictive is just crazy and that mindset only creates a victim mentality. If anyone should be addicted to sugar it's me, I've had more than my fair share, but I don't get the shakes when I force myself to go without.

There are plenty more like-minded people out there with you that believe people are NOT in control of their lives. The Biggest Loser show may be just another stupid reality show, but still it shows that sugar is not addictive and this issue of weight control is simply a matter of self control. All people need is education. However, keep telling them it's not their fault and certain foods are addictive and you'll only create a bunch of "victims".



I don't buy that BS study of misdirection that Mickey Dees did having a customer eat 30 days of food, afterwards with supposedly no detriment to the persons's health, saying its all a personal choice in what we eat absolving themselves of being responsible for their unhealthy addictive low quality massively processed and highly refined foods they mass sell to the public. I never paid much attention to that and it is probably a bunch of BS.

However, on the flip side so, was the documentary, Supersize Me​ by Morgan Spurlock.

[Five Tango]

On behalf of the food industry I must point out that low sugar and low salt products have been offered in the past but the public has spoken-they don't want it.The facts are that most people think they are overweight because they do not exercise enough.I know,I was one of them until I learned that you really are what you eat and that eating less and making the correct choices is what it takes to manage your weight.People eat like they do for lots of reasons,some of which are psychological,hence the term "comfort foods" etc.It is what it is.Exercise is a wonderful thing but it is not nearly as effective as discipline and eating the less fattening foods in the first place.

[Dogwood]

The food industry purposefully uses salt, sugar, fat, food additives, etc to habituate people to foods containing these. Them when food NOT containing these is offered consumers aren't having their dietary habits catered to, WHICH THE FOOD INDUSTRY INSTILLED IN CONSUMERS!

Water being toxic in high dosages is NOT a fair analogy to the process of placing high dosages of addictive and habituating chemicals and compounds in highly refined highly processed food like products or into a culture's diet. Humans are not generally perceived as being addicted to water.

[Dogwood]

If sugary foods was not so addictive and habit forming why are sweeteners, including sugar, added SO FREQUENTLY OFTEN IN LARGE AMOUNTS to so much highly refined highly processed food like products? for it's awesome nutritional content? I don't think so. :confused

[MuddyWaters]

thru hikers are positive proof, you can eat whatever you want, and lose weight. As long as you excercise enough.
Vitamin and micronutrient deficiencies aside.
People are fat, because they eat more than they need.
This is because its cheap, readily available, and they have no self control.
Its interesting to go to other countries and see fruit stands selling fruit on the street for snacks
No way that would work here. Maybe sugar infused fruit smoothies in yuppie areas.

[Dogwood]

If you're suggesting people are in absolute "control" of their lives and NOT influenced BY DESIGN by the food industry, and a host of others, that would sound really crazy and naïve.

[Dogwood]

The good news is that food preferences can change. We can break the junk food cycle as adults and develop better food preferences in adolescents. We don't have to always have that super sugary drink or food habit.

Excess sugar in the Western diet has ben shown to be complicated in obesity alarmingly so even in adolescent obesity and diabetes.

[Sarcasm the elf]

The good news is that food preferences can change. We can break the junk food cycle as adults and develop better food preferences in adolescents. We don't have to always have that super sugary drink or food habit.

Excess sugar in the Western diet has ben shown to be complicated in obesity alarmingly so even in adolescent obesity and diabetes.

Happy 10,000th post!!!

:banana:banana:sun

[MuddyWaters]

If you're suggesting people are in absolute "control" of their lives and NOT influenced BY DESIGN by the food industry, and a host of others, that would sound really crazy and naïve.

People have free choice.
Most know the difference, weve been teaching it in schools for 40 years
They are too lazy to go out of the way to obtain healthier choices
They are too weak to resist the sated feeling from quick carbohydrates
They really dont value their health and well being over immediate satisfaction

they arent necessarily ignorant and moldable by the food industry. They are just weak and ambivalent about it.

Similar to smoking and drinking alcohol regularly. There is a segment of the population who prefer short term rewards over long term benefits.

[Sarcasm the elf]

People have free choice.
Most know the difference, weve been teaching it in schools for 40 years
They are too lazy to go out of the way to obtain healthier choices
They are too weak to resist the sated feeling from quick carbohydrates
They really dont value their health and well being over immediate satisfaction

they arent necessarily ignorant and moldable by the food industry. They are just weak and ambivalent about it.

I have to partially disagree.

A person's diet and tastes are primarly developed during childhood, a time when they have almost no control over what they are allowed to eat. To make matters worse School lunch programs have been used as a dumping ground for cheap sugar, fat, dairy and fried food for decades, I remember learning about the four food groups and later the food pyramid in the classroom only to be shuffled down to the cafeteria and served heaping styrofoam trays of everything we were just taught was bad for us, as well as a small side of peas. However I am just lucky that my schools covered nutrition in depth, in a lot of districts it has barely been on the curriculum.

I am also lucky to not only live in an a suburban area where people are big into fitness, farmers markets and whole foods, but also to own a car so that I can easily navigate the sprawl and access these places. My friends who live in the inner city and can't afford a car have very limited options in regards to where they can realistically shop and they have much easier access to places that primarily sell processed foods than to places that sell fresh produce that isn't half spoiled on a bodega shelf.

Saying people have free choice is one thing, but when we have a system that is setting the general public up for overwhelming failure, then turning around and saying "well you had the option not to fail" is kind of a cop-out.

[Five Tango]

Anybody here eat eggs without salt and pepper on them?Just checking............

[Odd Man Out]

And now, back to the OP... Here are some good references to read. I find this to be an excellent site with advice based on sound research, which is hard to find in the nutrition world.

http://authoritynutrition.com/?s=saturated+fat

[Another Kevin]

Anybody here eat eggs without salt and pepper on them?Just checking............

I seldom add salt to eggs. Pepper is another story, but I haven't heard a lot about pepper's being harmful. I'm sure there's some study out there, because you can find a study condemning everything.

Moderation in all things. Including moderation.

[Dogwood]

"People have free choice."

What does that mean for you?

Consider, are choices truly made in complete freedom without a myriad of groups and individuals clamoring all over themselves to influence the choices of others? Are these influences always known to us?

Maybe, choices are not so freely decided upon! Maybe, free choice is an illusion.

Do you not suppose the powerful influential food industry lobby, and associated segments of the food industry, affect gov't nutritional info, food programs, suggestions, etc? Have you considered the nutritional info taught to you in the public school system has bee tainted and base in favo of segments of the food industry and their paid mouthpieces in medical academia and political circles?

[Dogwood]

..and biased in favor of segments of the food industry....

[rocketsocks]

Only two things I put salt on at the table, eggs, and watermellon. Niether of which I plan to give up.

[Pedaling Fool]

"People have free choice."

What does that mean for you?

Consider, are choices truly made in complete freedom without a myriad of groups and individuals clamoring all over themselves to influence the choices of others? Are these influences always known to us?

Maybe, choices are not so freely decided upon! Maybe, free choice is an illusion.

Do you not suppose the powerful influential food industry lobby, and associated segments of the food industry, affect gov't nutritional info, food programs, suggestions, etc? Have you considered the nutritional info taught to you in the public school system has bee tainted and base in favo of segments of the food industry and their paid mouthpieces in medical academia and political circles?Let me be clear. I don't argue that much of what you say about the food industry is true. However, the best way to combat that is thru education. It is not best to be telling people that they have been made addicted by the food industry. Yes the foods do have too much added things, such as sugar, salt..., but how are you going to change that?

I say thru education. You seem to be saying thru Govt. Good luck with that.

BTW, I'm perfectly fine with common sense govt regulations, don't try and apply the anti-govt label on me. I am the govt. I just know it's not the answer for everything, just as the free market is a great thing and very much what makes us great, but it also is not the answer to everything.


P.S. Addiction is a powerful thing, we shouldn't cheapen it by saying a food is addictive. I love, love, love my glazed doughnuts, but trust me, I'm not addicted. The decision to add salt and pepper to eggs is not an addiction:rolleyes:

[Pedaling Fool]

And now, back to the OP... Here are some good references to read. I find this to be an excellent site with advice based on sound research, which is hard to find in the nutrition world.

http://authoritynutrition.com/?s=saturated+fatInteresting link. My problem, though, is that every time I think I know what it takes to eat healthy, something crazy comes to light. Things like the diet of the tarahumara http://www.runnersworld.com/other-voices/the-tarahumara-diet-is-tough-to-swallow

And now you got the Fruitarian movement. These people eat only fruit, not veggies, just fruit. And some of them seems to be thriving. See here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irjr1OjCkRQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2E346ctf1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5Z1gKiD1s

BTW, those videos are about Mike Arnstein, not only is he an avid Fruitarian, but he's also a ultramarathon runner. The one drawback I see, though, is that these people need to eat tons and tons of fruit per day.

[rafe]

Carbs are what make most of us fat or overweight. Try a carb-free diet for a while (not easy to do!) and you will have a whole new outlook on what's offered in a typical supermarket. 90% of what's being offered is off-limits. Any form of bread, pasta, rice, corn, sugar, grain, cereal -- out the window.

What you're left with is meat, green veggies, fruits, dairy, nuts -- and not too much fruit either, because they have carbs in the form of sugar. OTOH, hikers will be pleased to note that bacon is not a carb.

[T.S.Kobzol]

Yes. For me this is what works. I've been active all of my life with hiking, kayaking, biking etc... yet slowly as the years went I kept on gaining weight. The reason is that as we get older our bodies have a harder time processing sugar. At best we just turn sugar into fat and at worst we get Diabetes which will kill us , eventually.


Tried a few ideas and everything failed in the long term until I severely reduced anything that turns into sugar after you consume it. When I say severely reduced, I mean it is REALLY hard to eliminate it altogether and it might not even be the healthiest choice. Sometimes I walk into a gas station for a quick snack and drink and literally EVERYTHING in there has carbs/sugar.

I started with the low carb approach sometimes in May and by now (October) I dropped a few sizes down, dropped 6 notches on my belt...I have not weighed myself yet (superstition) but I will be weighed at my annual physical next week. My guess is that I have dropped from 265lbs to about 220 lbs.

Also the idea of eating breakfast needs to be revamped. If you come home at 6pm and do nothing to burn all the food you eat at diner then why would you NEED to stuff your stomach in the morning? You should wait until you burn calories and eat on empty stomach around lunch time.

My usual meals are variations of salad and meat, full fat yogurt with cashews and berries, coffee with cream, milk, cheese, salami, smoked fish, sardines...

say NO to: rice, potatoes, bread, sugar, honey, sweet fruits, wine, beer ...

I substitute nuts for bread. I would drop cashews into tomato soup, eat nuts with cheese and salami etc...

Once in a while I break the rule for one day... it actually helps both ways...makes me happy and speeds my metabolism ...temporarily

I did start by saying that I have always been active. What I mean by this is that I am REALLY active. Active enough that those who promote exercise without low carb diet would be happy with me. For my body (the way my body processes sugar) this has never been enough. Every weekend I hike or bike or ski or seakayak on advanced trips burning at least 10000 calories per day. I bike to work at least 4 times per week (30 miles round trip), I walk during lunch time or bike during lunch time. Lately I started running - amazing - I could never do it before but the loss of weight has made it possible.


Carbs are what make most of us fat or overweight. Try a carb-free diet for a while (not easy to do!) and you will have a whole new outlook on what's offered in a typical supermarket. 90% of what's being offered is off-limits. Any form of bread, pasta, rice, corn, sugar, grain, cereal -- out the window.

What you're left with is meat, green veggies, fruits, dairy, nuts -- and not too much fruit either, because they have carbs in the form of sugar. OTOH, hikers will be pleased to note that bacon is not a carb.

[Odd Man Out]

Interesting link. My problem, though, is that every time I think I know what it takes to eat healthy, something crazy comes to light. Things like the diet of the tarahumara http://www.runnersworld.com/other-voices/the-tarahumara-diet-is-tough-to-swallow

And now you got the Fruitarian movement. These people eat only fruit, not veggies, just fruit. And some of them seems to be thriving. See here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irjr1OjCkRQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2E346ctf1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5Z1gKiD1s

BTW, those videos are about Mike Arnstein, not only is he an avid Fruitarian, but he's also a ultramarathon runner. The one drawback I see, though, is that these people need to eat tons and tons of fruit per day.

The problem is that most of these fads are not based on sound research. Also, even when there is good research, it is often misinterpreted or misrepresented. For example.

1. There is good research that food X is good for you so I should be eating a lot of food X.
2. There is good research that food X is good for you so I have to eat food X.

In the first case, the flawed assumption is that more is better. With nutrition, too much of a good thing is not a good thing. Focusing on one food tends to detract from a balanced diet. In the second case, the flawed assumption that only food X can provide the observed benefits. There are lots of healthy foods and you don't need to seek out the most obscure concoction from Central American runners to make you a good runner. Both of these logic flaws are fed by what I think is the worst term in all of nutrition - "superfood". Anytime I hear that (especially form Dr. Oz), I run away as fast as possible.

I read another article a while back from another good science-based nutrition source (can't find it now, alas). They surveyed lots of valid nutrition information and looked for similarities. From what I recall, they came up with a pretty simple list of things to do. Eat a balance diet. Eat a colorful diet. Eat real foods. Don't be afraid of food. If you are overweight, eat less, eat better, and live a more active lifestyle.

As for advice to avoid, there is a nice article in the Tufts University Health and Nutrition Newsletter (March 2015) that lists 10 Red Flags of Misleading Nutrition Claims. All of these really resonated with me. They say you should run away from recommendations that: promise a quick fix, give dire warnings about a single product or regime, sound too good to be true, draw simplistic conclusions from a complex study, are based on a single study, have statements refuted by reputable scientific organizations, list "good" and "bad" foods, that are made to help sell a product (I maybe would have listed this one FIRST!), are based on studies not peer reviewed, are fom studies that ignore differences among individuals or groups.

[rocketsocks]

Excellent post Odd Man Out, and not only does it apply to food, but to all that business would have us believe we need.

...think for your selves people's, or someone will do it for you.

[Pedaling Fool]

The problem is that most of these fads are not based on sound research. Also, even when there is good research, it is often misinterpreted or misrepresented. For example.

1. There is good research that food X is good for you so I should be eating a lot of food X.
2. There is good research that food X is good for you so I have to eat food X.

In the first case, the flawed assumption is that more is better. With nutrition, too much of a good thing is not a good thing. Focusing on one food tends to detract from a balanced diet. In the second case, the flawed assumption that only food X can provide the observed benefits. There are lots of healthy foods and you don't need to seek out the most obscure concoction from Central American runners to make you a good runner. Both of these logic flaws are fed by what I think is the worst term in all of nutrition - "superfood". Anytime I hear that (especially form Dr. Oz), I run away as fast as possible.

I read another article a while back from another good science-based nutrition source (can't find it now, alas). They surveyed lots of valid nutrition information and looked for similarities. From what I recall, they came up with a pretty simple list of things to do. Eat a balance diet. Eat a colorful diet. Eat real foods. Don't be afraid of food. If you are overweight, eat less, eat better, and live a more active lifestyle.

As for advice to avoid, there is a nice article in the Tufts University Health and Nutrition Newsletter (March 2015) that lists 10 Red Flags of Misleading Nutrition Claims. All of these really resonated with me. They say you should run away from recommendations that: promise a quick fix, give dire warnings about a single product or regime, sound too good to be true, draw simplistic conclusions from a complex study, are based on a single study, have statements refuted by reputable scientific organizations, list "good" and "bad" foods, that are made to help sell a product (I maybe would have listed this one FIRST!), are based on studies not peer reviewed, are fom studies that ignore differences among individuals or groups.


Yes, it's an excellent post and I totally agree with it and much of it I've said in past threads/posts. However, there is one problem....Facts.

The youtube links I posted was about an ultramarathon runner that claims to live on nothing but fruits and has been for years. He shouldn't be able to do what he does on this diet.

I'm one of the most skeptical persons out there and normally I don't believe crap. However, when things appear to counter my views I will reconsider my position. This is one of those cases. Again look at this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opvYWnG2TQA

Now, maybe he's lying about his food intake, but I'm inclined to believe him and so it makes me wonder. Is this guy just a freak of nature? Maybe, but these are the things that interest me, things that challenge our views.

BTW, I'm not considering starting this diet or changing what I do, just curious...

[Dogwood]

Let me be clear. I don't argue that much of what you say about the food industry is true. However, the best way to combat that is thru education. It is not best to be telling people that they have been made addicted by the food industry. Yes the foods do have too much added things, such as sugar, salt..., but how are you going to change that?

I say thru education. You seem to be saying thru Govt. Good luck with that.

BTW, I'm perfectly fine with common sense govt regulations, don't try and apply the anti-govt label on me. I am the govt. I just know it's not the answer for everything, just as the free market is a great thing and very much what makes us great, but it also is not the answer to everything.


P.S. Addiction is a powerful thing, we shouldn't cheapen it by saying a food is addictive. I love, love, love my glazed doughnuts, but trust me, I'm not addicted. The decision to add salt and pepper to eggs is not an addiction:rolleyes:


I thought I made it clear that the food industry and gov't entities are complicit. You got the wrong idea that I suggested anywhere gov't is "the answer." I'm a Reaganite. I don't believe more gov't is the answer to solve all of societies, or my, problems.


On that note, although it's often a loudly heralded fall back claim that education is the answer, it is not always "the answer." Right education can be part of the answers though. I prefer to use the words knowledge, and specifically wisdom, in place of education though.


Some of the most educated and knowledgeable people I've ever encountered knowing the destructiveness of nicotine are the addicted nicotine/tobacco users themselves. Where, it seems to me these highly educated folks lack, is in applying their "education" ...umm, wisdom.


My friend, I agree addiction is powerful. But it comes in different forms. Addiction doesn't just involve substance abuse but also compulsive behavior. Addiction can be physical, psychological, both, and fall under several other categories. Food ABSOLUTELY can be the focus of addiction...just as chocolate, soda, overeating, gambling, sex, shopping, adrenaline, alcohol, illicit drugs, legal drugs, exercise, work, internet, etc all can be. *There definitely is an attempt by the Food Industry to emotionally or psychologically addict the public to certain food products...in several aspects 1) by the compounds added to the food 2) marketing 3) through the refining and processing of food into food like products. Let us not forget that "food' also changes body and brain chemistry in KNOWN ways. So, there can be a physiological addictive and habituating component to highly refined highly processed foods. That's what refined processed means...having the ability to alter or tweak food into food like products with specific goals in mind....like increased profit...through instilling addictive and habitual behaviors and preferences in consumers.


Let's not muddle habits and addictions. You describing your glazed donut and pepper/salt on eggs consumption sounds like a habit not an addiction...it's a choice you make. If you wanted to stop you likely could.



Let's get back to your original question; I believe it's an excellent question: "Yes the foods do have too much added things, such as sugar, salt..., but how are you going to change that? First, and I've said this MANY times previously, ALL food is not highly refined highly processed with significant amounts of added sugar, salt, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, carcinogenic additives and colorings, like MSG, that is not only a flavor enhancer, but also interferes with brain chemistry that tells your brain you are satiated(so you keep eating MORE MORE MORE), etc.

Yes, after wading through a mountain of nutritional and dietary information and misinformation, consumers are shaping the food markets! You're seeing MORE INFORMED CONSUMERS opting for locally/regionally grown foods, switching to Organic WHOLE FOODS, moving away from highly refined highly processed food like products, local Farmer's Markets/Food Co-Ops on the rise, etc. Even, of all places, WalMart is answering the desires of consumers for healthier food that is not so refined processed, Non-GMO, and Organic. Krogers and Publix are increasing their selections of WHOLE FOOD ORGANIC products where consumers don't need a chemistry degree to understand what they are eating and drinking. Consumers are informing themselves. They are seeing the shady practices in the industrialized factory food industry they wish to keep hidden as they attempt to march onward to having control of food monopolies.

[rocketsocks]

Only two things I put salt on at the table, eggs, and watermellon. Niether of which I plan to give up.
...oh, and somethin' called a Salted Carmel Mocha, oh em Jee.

[Dogwood]

Interesting link. My problem, though, is that every time I think I know what it takes to eat healthy, something crazy comes to light. Things like the diet of the tarahumara http://www.runnersworld.com/other-voices/the-tarahumara-diet-is-tough-to-swallow

And now you got the Fruitarian movement. These people eat only fruit, not veggies, just fruit. And some of them seems to be thriving. See here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irjr1OjCkRQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2E346ctf1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5Z1gKiD1s

BTW, those videos are about Mike Arnstein, not only is he an avid Fruitarian, but he's also a ultramarathon runner. The one drawback I see, though, is that these people need to eat tons and tons of fruit per day.

If it sounds so crazy to you why all the fuss you give it. These are extreme situations, extreme dietary approaches, and individuals involved in extreme activities using ingredients that might be regionally more available. Everyone does not need to go to these extremes overall. How about just considering aspects of these approaches and apply them individually to your own diet rather than looking at the entirety of these ideas as wrong or right?

Heck, I always have nutritious rather inexpensive chia seed(SABA) and an assortment of fresh fruit in the house. They have some excellent nutritional properties. It doesn't mean I'm going to subsist on pinole/chia drinks or only fruit.

[Five Tango]

[QUOTE=Another Kevin;2007898]I seldom add salt to eggs. Pepper is another story, but I haven't heard a lot about pepper's being harmful. I'm sure there's some study out there, because you can find a study condemning everything.

Moderation in all things. Including moderation.[/QUOTE
Good news,Kevin.I read somewhere that pepper helps prevent cancer.I add it to every thing,but mostly because I like the taste.For anyone who wants to know,I never said salt was addictive but,yes,I believe sugar is because it causes cravings once the levels of blood sugar spike and "crash".Not in the sense that illegal drugs are addictive,but addictive nonetheless.Salt is something I likely use a little too much of but since it is not added to anything my wife cooks,I am left to my own devices.Lastly,the tastiest additive I have tried lately is something called Sriracha Sauce.Not addictive,but still pretty awesome!

[Dogwood]

What many find especially insidious is the nutritional "education" you so highly tout, and is tainted with influencing biases of the food industry, including public information offered and demanded be adhered to through gov't nutritional programs, which according to some very informed scientists, is more an instilling and indoctrination of the concepts and information the food industry only wants the public exposed to, is occurring at increasingly very young ages. The brain washing and marketing programming of food like products to instill habitual and ADDICTIVE responses to ever younger consumers is a whole study in itself revealing the deceptive and unethical practices of the food industry.




Children in public schools are taught and habituated, THEY ARE PROGRAMMED, to sugary drinks, associations with fast food chains(Yaco Bell, Pizzaz Hut, Mickey Dees, etc ), highly processed highly refined food like products, etc. While at the same eating whole foods as a primary staple of the diet are subtly frowned upon as being inconvenient, too time consuming to eat and prepare, too expensive, etc. And, also at a time when bought gov't entities further pave the way for greater control by segments of the already massively powerful and influential food industry.



And, yet, we still have posters speaking of free choice as if our food choices haven't been heavily influenced starting at a the youngest of ages.

[Sarcasm the elf]

Are we actually still debating if sugar is addictive? As far as I'm aware that was proven to be true decades ago.

Here is the first result from googling "is sugar addictive?"


“When you look at animal studies comparing sugar to cocaine,” DiNicolantonio told Here & Now’ (https://hereandnow.wbur.org/)s Lisa Mullins, “even when you get the rats hooked on IV cocaine, once you introduce sugar, almost all of them switch to the sugar.”

http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2015/01/07/sugar-health-research

[T.S.Kobzol]

Please enlighten this feeble northerner how do you use salt on watermellon. I am fond of watermelon but never used salt on it. :-)



Only two things I put salt on at the table, eggs, and watermellon. Niether of which I plan to give up.

[Odd Man Out]

So why exactly are we worried about salt? And in Authority Nutrition's top 20 list of nutrition myths, the "low fat" myth was #1 and the "low sodium" myth was #2

http://authoritynutrition.com/how-much-sodium-per-day/

http://authoritynutrition.com/20-mainstream-nutrition-myths-debunked/

[Odd Man Out]

And btw, myth #4 is one of my personal pet peeves. I could scream ever time I go to a restaurant and see something made with egg whites on their heart healthy menu. ARRRGGGGHHHH.

[Dogwood]

So why exactly are we worried about salt? And in Authority Nutrition's top 20 list of nutrition myths, the "low fat" myth was #1 and the "low sodium" myth was #2

http://authoritynutrition.com/how-much-sodium-per-day/

http://authoritynutrition.com/20-mainstream-nutrition-myths-debunked/


I like a lot about this site but take those two pts of contention in the limited context of their propositions.

And, I hope you noticed their panel is saying what I have repeatedly...eat REAL food...avoid highly processed highly refined food like products. If you want to know more specifically what this site means by REAL FOOD link to their 4 Meal Plans For Diets that are Supported by Science. Their real food lists don't include Pop Tarts, Snickers, Cheese Wiz, candy, Maruchan Ramen, Twizzlers, Little Debbies, packaged meals/foods, etc. They have purposefully kept things simple...they have given the broad brush strokes and simple enough to also go deeper if you so desire.

[rocketsocks]

Please enlighten this feeble northerner how do you use salt on watermellon. I am fond of watermelon but never used salt on it. :-)Well give a try, just a little sprinkle all around...I like it anyway.

[rocketsocks]

Please enlighten this feeble northerner how do you use salt on watermellon. I am fond of watermelon but never used salt on it. :-)


Well give a try, just a little sprinkle all around...I like it anyway.Try it on Cantaloupe too. While your at it, crack some fresh black pepper over vanilla ice cream, I'm serious now, it's good.

[Another Kevin]

My one-line summary of my approach to eating: "Stay reasonably active and eat what I durned well please."

It works well enough for me. My doc doesn't complain about my BP or lipid panel.

[Pedaling Fool]

I thought I made it clear that the food industry and gov't entities are complicit. You got the wrong idea that I suggested anywhere gov't is "the answer."...Sorry, I stand corrected. it's just that so many that make the same arguments as you opt for govt fixes, such as restricting size of sodas and such....If they get that, then what's next? Banning those large sugar bags on grocery shelves?...

So, if the fix is not in the govt, then it has to be education. What else is there? (Although I would say Science and Technology) The food industry won't change without govt intervention (or change in consumer behavior).

However, I'm not under some grand illusion that there will be some great educational system set up... This is one of those things that people's mistakes will provide much of the education. And the good information (as opposed to all the fad-ish information) will fill in the void. Good information being things like what Odd Man Out has been posting.


I'm sorry, but I don't see out of date farming practices, such as organic farming to survive too much longer into the future. GMO's and the modern food industry are the future. I know they are crude today, but all technology starts out this way. Science and technology got us in this predicament and it's the only thing that can provide a fix. Farmer's markets and the such are neat, but they are a thing of the past.

[Pedaling Fool]

If it sounds so crazy to you why all the fuss you give it. These are extreme situations, extreme dietary approaches, and individuals involved in extreme activities using ingredients that might be regionally more available. Everyone does not need to go to these extremes overall. How about just considering aspects of these approaches and apply them individually to your own diet rather than looking at the entirety of these ideas as wrong or right?

Heck, I always have nutritious rather inexpensive chia seed(SABA) and an assortment of fresh fruit in the house. They have some excellent nutritional properties. It doesn't mean I'm going to subsist on pinole/chia drinks or only fruit.Because it seems to be working for him...Why?

Talk about how bad sugar is for you in such large quantities, this guy is eating tons and tons of sugar, yet he seems to be doing fine. That goes against all that I know, it's a curiosity.

I'm quick to discount information like this when I read it, because so many people lie and fabricate things. However, after listening to this guy I'm not so quick to discount it, because I tend to believe him and he backs it up with great performances in ultrarunning. That's curious to me.

You say, "...I always have nutritious rather inexpensive chia seed(SABA) and an assortment of fresh fruit in the house....". This isn't about eating a larger than normal amount of fruits in one's diet. This guy lives off fruits, period. That's all he eats. Doesn't that cause you to question W T F is going on here. Not just some goof ball sounding off in some article.


I, like you, also have no plans to only subsist on pinole/chia drinks or only fruit. But, if one is really curious about nutrition and how the body works, you gotta ask yourself what's going on here...

[Dogwood]

Because it seems to be working for him...Why?

Talk about how bad sugar is for you in such large quantities, this guy is eating tons and tons of sugar, yet he seems to be doing fine. That goes against all that I know, it's a curiosity.

I'm quick to discount information like this when I read it, because so many people lie and fabricate things. However, after listening to this guy I'm not so quick to discount it, because I tend to believe him and he backs it up with great performances in ultrarunning. That's curious to me.

You say, "...I always have nutritious rather inexpensive chia seed(SABA) and an assortment of fresh fruit in the house....". This isn't about eating a larger than normal amount of fruits in one's diet. This guy lives off fruits, period. That's all he eats. Doesn't that cause you to question W T F is going on here. Not just some goof ball sounding off in some article.


I, like you, also have no plans to only subsist on pinole/chia drinks or only fruit. But, if one is really curious about nutrition and how the body works, you gotta ask yourself what's going on here...


I am a little interested PF, especially in regards to the details on how all the fructose is being assimilated, but not enough that I'm currently willing to thoroughly research it. I'm fine without having to know all things and certainly not all things related to every possible nutritional approach or extreme diet, which is what it seems but I may be acting in unfair harsh judgement concerning that which I limitedly understand..being a Fruitarian. Again, extreme lifestyles, and somewhat extreme people engaged in rather extreme activities.

[Dogwood]

"..such as restricting size of sodas and such....If they get that, then what's next? Banning those large sugar bags on grocery shelves?..."


If you're referring to Mayor Bloomberg's desire to limit sodas to 16 oz I get his intention...address one of the links or pathways to obesity...excessive sugar intake. No surprise his ban was shot down as he was up against some extremely powerful well politically connected groups and food industry sectors that would have had their profits restrained such as the restaurant industry, American Beverage Association, and other biz groups(Coca Cola, PepsiCo, Dr Pepper Snapple).




BTW, do you know how utterly enormous the profits are from soda? For some businesses, such as restaurants, and convenience stores, fountain sodas account for HUGE MARK-UPS. It's normal for a $1.60 retail 16 oz fountain soda to cost about 5 1/2 -7 1/2 cts total for the soda syrup and carbonated water/seltzer AND THE 16 oz cup, plastic lid, and straw to cost about 9 cts! The container the soda comes in cost more than the soda product in it!



No doubt, LOTS of push back against such a ban as Mayor Bloomberg desired.



So, you disagree with the FDA's decision to phase out partially hydrogenated oils in three yrs? Before you answer do you know the hazards of hydrogenated oils(trans fats) and where they originate and how they are developed?




Do you disagree with gov't stepping in any manner to regulate substances added into the public food supply?

[Dogwood]

"I'm sorry, but I don't see out of date farming practices, such as organic farming to survive too much longer into the future. GMO's and the modern food industry are the future. I know they are crude today, but all technology starts out this way. Science and technology got us in this predicament and it's the only thing that can provide a fix. Farmer's markets and the such are neat, but they are a thing of the past."



It's easy to gather these impressions if all you do is limit your biased information on the subject to what you see in popular science/technology mags such as Discovery, Science, Scientific American, etc. These mags and similar journals have strong biased ties to BIG chemistry, BIG Pharma, BIG Ag, High Tech, etc. They treat science and technology as the answer to all problems.


Don't get me wrong though. I read all three on occasion. BUT, they are biased pro science....


Here is what you usually don't read in those mags: non-GMOs, traditional farming techniques, and organic farming have as much worthy science behind them as GMOs and modern factory farming! Check out the Rodale Gardening Institute; they are a very scientific but organic approach to gardening and food production. I doubt any of those mags mention the Rodale Institute as having worthy SCIENTIFIC BUT ORGANIC SUSTAINABLE food production approaches



I you are going to make comments like Organic Farming is out dated and Farmers Markets are a thing of the past you should reconsider as you are incorrect. According to USDA data and those who follow Agricultural Trends Organic foods have held steady interest in the global and U.S. food markets. Organic farm acreage has been increasing. Just between 2008 to 2009 organic acreage increased 26% alone in the U.S. And, interest in Organic foods is even making conventional grocery chains like WalMart, Krogers, Publix etc increase the variety of organic products they carry. After the explosive double digit annual growth in new Farmer's Markets in the years following the instituting of the USDA Organic label in 2002 new Farmer's Markets have leveled off to about 4 % increases annually in the past three or so yrs BUT Framer's Markets are certainly not something of the past. Nor, is Organic Farming! Sorry, NOT, organic farming is not going away despite what you may be reading in some of those pro BIG chemistry, pro Monsanto, pro Syngenta, pro DuPont, articles.

[Smoky Spoon]

Very interesting thread, especially for a retired chef.

[Odd Man Out]

I went to a conference on sustainable agriculture back in around 1990. I found it interesting that the modern sustainable agriculture movement should not be viewed as old fashioned farming. Instead they embrace technology and innivation to make farming sustainable. The USDA has a large research presence in this area. The USDA Library (which coincidentally I could see from my backyard when growing up) maintains a resource page. https://afsic.nal.usda.gov/sustainability-agriculture-0

[Pedaling Fool]

....
BTW, do you know how utterly enormous the profits are from soda? For some businesses, such as restaurants, and convenience stores, fountain sodas account for HUGE MARK-UPS. It's normal for a $1.60 retail 16 oz fountain soda to cost about 5 1/2 -7 1/2 cts total for the soda syrup and carbonated water/seltzer AND THE 16 oz cup, plastic lid, and straw to cost about 9 cts! The container the soda comes in cost more than the soda product in it!



No doubt, LOTS of push back against such a ban as Mayor Bloomberg desired.



So, you disagree with the FDA's decision to phase out partially hydrogenated oils in three yrs? Before you answer do you know the hazards of hydrogenated oils(trans fats) and where they originate and how they are developed?




Do you disagree with gov't stepping in any manner to regulate substances added into the public food supply?Yes, I know of the profits from fountain sodas and they get my money also; I usually buy a 44oz soad at least once per week for 69 cents at a local convenience store. But that's over now, since the end of summer:(

On Trans Fat, I have no problems with the regulation to remove trans fat from foods, as indicated by me not really mentioning it here; although, there is research (and I've posted it once) counter to the common notion of it being as bad as many believe, but needs more research. But I have no problem in the govt requiring its removal.

As for disagreeing with the govt stepping in...Again, no I don't have a problem in general, but this is something that must be addressed on a case-by-case basis, because it's such a complicated issue, so you have to speak only on a specific case. So much is done in the name of Safety, which in many cases is really just a way to push an agenda.

BTW, I don't believe Bloomberg had some nefarious agenda, in that case it was simply misguided, simply because it put us on too much of a slippery slope. What's next? Banning those large sugar bags in grocery store shelves.

I agree totally with Bloomberg that some people are taking in way too much sugar, but if you want to fix this by regulations, then you really can't stop at just limiting the size of a soda. Totally different case of phasing out trans fat and limiting soda size.

[Pedaling Fool]

Here is what you usually don't read in those mags: non-GMOs, traditional farming techniques, and organic farming have as much worthy science behind them as GMOs and modern factory farming! Check out the Rodale Gardening Institute; they are a very scientific but organic approach to gardening and food production. I doubt any of those mags mention the Rodale Institute as having worthy SCIENTIFIC BUT ORGANIC SUSTAINABLE food production approaches



I you are going to make comments like Organic Farming is out dated and Farmers Markets are a thing of the past you should reconsider as you are incorrect. According to USDA data and those who follow Agricultural Trends Organic foods have held steady interest in the global and U.S. food markets. Organic farm acreage has been increasing. Just between 2008 to 2009 organic acreage increased 26% alone in the U.S. And, interest in Organic foods is even making conventional grocery chains like WalMart, Krogers, Publix etc increase the variety of organic products they carry. After the explosive double digit annual growth in new Farmer's Markets in the years following the instituting of the USDA Organic label in 2002 new Farmer's Markets have leveled off to about 4 % increases annually in the past three or so yrs BUT Framer's Markets are certainly not something of the past. Nor, is Organic Farming! Sorry, NOT, organic farming is not going away despite what you may be reading in some of those pro BIG chemistry, pro Monsanto, pro Syngenta, pro DuPont, articles.
I know all about Rodale, that's the organization that says we can fix the increased CO2 levels by simply changing our farming practices and not reducing co2 emissions. Personally...well I'm not suppose to talk about this subject here, so I'll leave it there...

As for things being out dated, I meant in the future, but not the very near future -- these things take time. In the 1930's people laughed at going to the moon. In this case it's not just a technical obstacle, but also a

Don't worry, there will always be Farmer's Markets in your life time.;)

[Pedaling Fool]

I didn't finish one of my thoughts above, but I think you get the gist...

[Dogwood]

I enjoy open discussion with you PF. I believe we are both willing to listen and consider each others pts of views. Even though it may seem like I disagree with you about much, it's more about me picking out that which I disagree and running with it. We share more in common than it may seem.

Anyone who has a garden as you, has considered planting paw paws, and has Foodie relatives can't be all that misguided. ;) :D

[Odd Man Out]

Interesting link. My problem, though, is that every time I think I know what it takes to eat healthy, something crazy comes to light. Things like the diet of the tarahumara http://www.runnersworld.com/other-voices/the-tarahumara-diet-is-tough-to-swallow

And now you got the Fruitarian movement. These people eat only fruit, not veggies, just fruit. And some of them seems to be thriving. See here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irjr1OjCkRQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2E346ctf1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5Z1gKiD1s

BTW, those videos are about Mike Arnstein, not only is he an avid Fruitarian, but he's also a ultramarathon runner. The one drawback I see, though, is that these people need to eat tons and tons of fruit per day.

Here is a blog post you may be interested in. He goes on at length to explain the "magic" of the ultra-low fat diet.

http://rawfoodsos.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-low-fat-a-call-for-some-evolution-of-thought-part-1/

[Pedaling Fool]

Here is a blog post you may be interested in. He goes on at length to explain the "magic" of the ultra-low fat diet.

http://rawfoodsos.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-low-fat-a-call-for-some-evolution-of-thought-part-1/Thank you for the link. It's one of those sites that I would probably not have paid much attention to, even do a big :rolleyes:, but after skimming over the page you linked it caught my attention and will read it much more in-depth.

I very much like her point copied below:

"I do want to make one thing abundantly clear before we continue, though. The title “In Defense of Low Fat” doesn’t imply its inverse, “In Attack of High Fat.” Quite the opposite! My goal here is to create a space where two very different dietary approaches can sit down for tea, respectfully coexist, and interact without any subsequent homicide investigations."


That's kind of funny and I like...:D

[Pedaling Fool]

I'm sure glad I follow my common sense (and taste buds;)) more than fads, even the fads brought on by scientific consensus. :D

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/06/for-decades-the-government-steered-millions-away-from-whole-milk-was-that-wrong/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_most

Excerpt:

"This shift in understanding has led to accusations that the Dietary Guidelines harmed those people who for years avoided fats -- as instructed -- and loaded up excessively on the carbohydrates in foods such as breads, cookies and cakes that were marketed as "low fat."It also has raised questions about the scientific foundations of the government’s diet advice: To what extent did the federal government, and the diet scientists they relied upon, go wrong? When the evidence is incomplete on a dietary question, should the government refrain from making recommendations?

The dietary science has drawn the skepticism of some on Capitol Hill. On Wednesday, a House committee will air concerns regarding the evidence for the guidelines with Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell.

[Read: Could 95 percent of the world's people be wrong about salt?] (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/05/26/could-95-percent-of-the-worlds-people-be-wrong-about-salt/)

The Dietary Guidelines have stepped back slightly from their blanket advice to reduce saturated fats, adding the caveat that saturated fats ought to be replaced with unsaturated fats. But Dariush Mozaffarian, a cardiologist, epidemiologist, and dean of the Friedman School of Nutrition Science & Policy at Tufts University said that in his view the Dietary Guidelines have yet to retreat far enough from the idea that saturated fat is a dietary evil, and their suspicion of whole milk is a good example. Judging a particular food solely on how much fat it contains, he said, can too easily blind people to its other benefits.

“If we are going to make recommendations to the public about what to eat, we should be pretty darn sure they’re right and won't cause harm,” Mozaffarian said. “There's no evidence that the reduction of saturated fats should be a priority."

[floid]

Just stay away from anything fried. Fresh cold pressed olive and coconut oils are amazing for you and are saturated fats. Any other oil just avoid. Sugar is the worst substance your body can ingest. It promotes cancer cell growth and every human on the planet is born with cancer cells. If you have the willpower to avoid meat, do so. You will get enough protein in your diet from nuts, seeds, lagunes, vegetables, and grains. I lift weights and don't eat meat, I have no issues building muscle. I also have more energy than anyone I work with because I'm not bogged down trying to digest meat all the time. Meat also has cholesterol which does clog arteries. Not trying to turn anyone, just stating the facts. People usually get pretty upset when you tell them they are doing anything wrong and they should change, especially when it comes to their diets. So please don't assume that's what this was all about. I have a little knowledge on the subject, so I shared. That is all, good day :)
As you point out meet has cholesterol. That is to say normal grocery beef. But that cow isn't eating cholesterol. It is eating corn and grains. Interesting that grass fed beef has much better cholesterol levels. I have read studies that strongly correlate grains with inflammation disease, which includes cholesterol.

I can tell you my wife does not need to take her blood pressure meds when she avoid grains and corn in her diet. Seems to match up with the studies, and the high cholesterol grain fed cow you speak of.

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

[Odd Man Out]

Meat contains cholesterol and cholesterol causes heart disease. This is restating the myth. Dietary cholesterol and saturated fats are not the enemy. Cholesterol is a necessary competent of all of your cell membranes and your body makes most of its own cholesterol. Here is another article about it.

http://chriskresser.com/the-diet-heart-myth-cholesterol-and-saturated-fat-are-not-the-enemy/

[Pedaling Fool]

Interesting link. My problem, though, is that every time I think I know what it takes to eat healthy, something crazy comes to light. Things like the diet of the tarahumara http://www.runnersworld.com/other-voices/the-tarahumara-diet-is-tough-to-swallow

And now you got the Fruitarian movement. These people eat only fruit, not veggies, just fruit. And some of them seems to be thriving. See here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irjr1OjCkRQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2E346ctf1k https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KE5Z1gKiD1s

BTW, those videos are about Mike Arnstein, not only is he an avid Fruitarian, but he's also a ultramarathon runner. The one drawback I see, though, is that these people need to eat tons and tons of fruit per day.
I'm still keeping track of Mike Arnstein, really curious if this diet presents some problem(s) in the future for him. I do wonder if him being so active is the reason it seems not to have negatively affected him as of yet....of course, this is all based on taking him at his word WRT to his 100% fruit diet.

I came across this article today and Ashton Kutcher didn't fare too well on the diet. He didn't adopt the diet for himself, rather he did it as part of research for his role in a movie about Steve Jobs, who apparently was into this Fruitarian movement. http://health.usnews.com/health-news/articles/2013/02/07/ashton-kutchers-fruitarian-diet-what-went-wrong

Excerpt:


"Method actors tend to go to extreme lengths to get inside the minds of the characters they portray. For Ashton Kutcher, that meant adopting Steve Jobs's fruitarian diet for one month, a regimen based solely on, well, fruit. He's portraying the late Apple CEO in jOBS, a biopic set to hit theaters in April.All that fruit—must be healthy, right?

Not exactly. "I ended up in the hospital two days before we started shooting the movie," Kutcher told reporters at the Sundance Film Festival. "I was doubled over in pain, and my pancreas levels were completely out of whack, which was terrifying, considering everything." Jobs died in October 2011, after a long battle with pancreatic cancer. His fascination with fruitarianism helped inspire his company's name.

Motivation for adopting the diet varies, but followers are typically swayed by health, religious, environmental, and political factors. Many tout fruitarianism as the original diet of mankind, and believe it encourages simple living and a holistic approach to health. Those who latch on are often propelled by a desire not to kill anything, including plants. The regimen comes with a rich history: Leonardo da Vinci was a fruitarian, and Mahatma Gandhi followed the plan for six months in the early 1900s."

[Pedaling Fool]

A very interesting topic on the vegetarian myth... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMCUr_mCJSg

I'm not a paleo guy, but this is still interesting about a person that was a vegan for 20 years, but had serious health problems as a result. She also has a book, if anyone is interested: http://www.amazon.com/The-Vegetarian-Myth-Justice-Sustainability/dp/1604860804