Diet Thread

Forum rules
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.
Nobody
Posts: 10316
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Aug 03, 2015 8:41 pm





For those who haven't seen the "Fat vs Sugar" documentary, it's on SBS.
http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/27 ... at-vssugar

warthog1
Posts: 14309
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
Location: Bendigo

Re: Diet Thread

Postby warthog1 » Tue Aug 04, 2015 12:02 pm

Thanks Nobody. I watched that, well worth a look.
Dogs are the best people :wink:

Nobody
Posts: 10316
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Wed Aug 05, 2015 12:14 pm



Yearly report from Dr Greger.

Interesting parallels drawn by him on (industry driven) attitudes toward diet now versus smoking in the '50s. Since diet in America has bumped off smoking as the No.1 killer (starts at 56:00).

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Diet Thread

Postby casual_cyclist » Mon Aug 10, 2015 1:41 pm

Interesting discussion developing over at the "liquid calories" thread here: viewtopic.php?f=49&t=85563&start=25" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

but it got a bit off topic and is more related to the Diet Thread really, so here is a post I responded to:
rapunzel wrote:
rapunzel wrote:Being very diet obsessed smacks of more modern affluence to me. When you don't have access to adequate food or particular types of foods, the concept of cutting out whole food classes or worrying over whether you had one or two biscuits seems more than ridiculous. But context...
casual_cyclist wrote:just eat a sensible diet in moderation.
Yes
casual_cyclist wrote:However, I really think there is a lot more to this.
Yes. Hence me stating ‘context’. Most Australians are affluent enough to be able to make of choices in what they eat – and as a society we have enough free time to spend analysing, discussing, and judging foods and diets – here we are… My point was that as a nation we are gifted with the affluence that allows us to make food choices based on health, environment, and ethics as opposed to just trying to get enough calories in any form. However, it does not mean that we exercise that choice very well at all times – but this must be seen within our own context and circumstances. My reminder of the fact that we are extremely lucky to have these choices as an affluent society is meant to be more about trying to maintain a balanced perspective on food in general.
casual_cyclist wrote:I am certain this can be put down to three main things: activity, food and attitudes to food.
Agreed - probably a lot to do with it.
Personally, I find the ‘attitudes to food’ skewed – and not just in relation to those making poor food choices. There is a lot of psychology involved. How many people use language like ‘I earned this’ or ‘I feel guilty about all the X I ate’ or ‘I’m going to have to do extra to pay for that’ or just the judgements made about others based on their food choices (especially in relation to their appearance and size…).

Missed here: I think there is so much we do not understand about the body, food, digestion, genetics, etc. Posted above the article about neurobiology of sweetness; just one person’s look at it.
casual_cyclist wrote:there is something very wrong with the food being sold. Mostly convenience foods will be cheap, tasty, easy to consume, nutritionally poor but calorie rich.
Yes
casual_cyclist wrote:You could easily blame the new wave of overweight and obese on being inactive (lazy) and eating too much (greedy).
Here I disagree. Mainly with your wording – ‘lazy’ and ‘greedy’. (Edit - sorry, in clarification C_C, I don't think you were labelling people lazy and greedy) Sedentary lifestyles have much to do with health issues, but being sedentary does not automatically = lazy. In fact, I’m sure if you were to survey people, a great percentage would say that they wish they were more active. And active does not = thin; and inactive does not = large.

And eating too much does not automatically = greedy. There are a myriad number of reasons for eating and overconsumption. As in someone’s earlier post above that I agreed with – things like depression and a serotonin hit (isn’t it also interesting that one of the key hormones in the digestive system is serotonin?); hence my interest (also posted above) in the TV program trying to explore the reasons people eat the way they do.

As you said – there is more to it.
casual_cyclist wrote:…a diet packed full of hyperpalatable, hyperprocessed foods is extreme.
Yes
casual_cyclist wrote: In any case, the reason for this cutting out whole food classes stems back to trying to get people to eat less processed foods.
Yes – I am a proponent of reducing processed foods. But cutting out: e.g. choose one: all dairy, all meat, all carbs, all grains, all fats, all sugars, etc, etc depending on the person you listen to… is not a cure for the eating problems of everyone. Diets and related discussions have become the religion of a secular society. Like religion, people get very fired up for their one, just cause. It is very interesting.
casual_cyclist wrote:I have not actually seen any diet program that cuts out whole food group. Can you think of any?
Those based originally on religious reasons and/or ethical ones – vegetarianism (many different types) and veganism. Religious and/or ethical choices I understand. Health-wise, not necessarily healthier than other diets depending on the individual’s practices.

Many of the low carb diets propose you cut all carbs for a period, and if you then reintroduce them, they are still restricted in line with a set of rules.

Currently popular diets to drop sugar propose you cut all fruit for a period, and then only consume certain limited varieties thereafter. Since when are apples so horrible for you?

Diets to cut out fat – where many people would push to ridiculously low levels… suddenly the trend is going the other way as we better understand the different types and effects. But we understand very little.

Don’t eat eggs! Cholesterol! Oh, wait….

And not to mention the number of people who cut things out of their own diets or their children's diets because they think they have an allergy is on the rise.

Again – way off topic of the original thread. Maybe we should take it to the diet thread :oops: But I also had to throw in :P :

Image
<removed by request>

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Diet Thread

Postby casual_cyclist » Mon Aug 10, 2015 1:42 pm

And here is my response:

Look, I generally agree with much of what you have said, but just some comments on what you said that I found interesting. Not having a go at you personally.
rapunzel wrote:
casual_cyclist wrote:I have not actually seen any diet program that cuts out whole food group. Can you think of any?
Those based originally on religious reasons and/or ethical ones – vegetarianism (many different types) and veganism.
Vegetariansim and veganism both allow foods from the 5 basic food groups.
rapunzel wrote:Many of the low carb diets propose you cut all carbs for a period, and if you then reintroduce them, they are still restricted in line with a set of rules.
Not quite correct. They still eat vegetables, and vegetables are carbs. Some cut all grains, but grains aren't a food group. The 'grains' food group includes seeds and lots of the paleo types still eat seeds. Amaranth, buckwheat, and quinoa anyone? ;)
rapunzel wrote:Currently popular diets to drop sugar propose you cut all fruit for a period, and then only consume certain limited varieties thereafter. Since when are apples so horrible for you?
Sugar is not a food group. Fruit is a food group in some charts, although I am used to seeing it with vegetables. Anyway, as you point out you still consume fruit after an intial period.
rapunzel wrote:Diets to cut out fat – where many people would push to ridiculously low levels… suddenly the trend is going the other way as we better understand the different types and effects. But we understand very little.
Fat is not a food group.

I get interested when I see nutritionists being interviewed on tv, and carrying on about people quitting sugar because they shouldn't quit a whole food group. Sugar is not a food group. You would think a nutritionist would know that right?

Formally (currently), in Australia, there are 5 food groups:
1) Grain (cereal) foods, mostly wholegrain and/or high cereal fibre varieties (note this includes quinoa and other seeds for the paleo types)
2) Vegetables and legumes/beans (I don't know of any wacky diet fad that bans all vegetables)
3) Lean meats and poultry, fish, eggs, tofu, nuts and seeds and legumes/beans (I don't know of any wacky diet fad that bans all of these)
4) Milk, yoghurt, cheese and/or alternatives, mostly reduced fat (note the 'or alternatives' such as soy or almond milk for vegans, I don't know of any wacky diet fad that bans all of these)
5) fruit. You might have me on that one because I know some paleo types have no fruit. That said, most allow at least berries.

The main things to "quit" are fat (not a food group, so no food groups are omitted), sugar (not a food group, so no food groups are omitted), "carbs", which most closely relates to the grains group but they still eat seeds (from the grains group), vegetables (high in carbs), and most eat some from the fruit group (high in carbs), so again, no food group is omitted.

https://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/sites/d ... _large.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
<removed by request>

rapunzel
Posts: 66
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 7:54 pm

Re: Diet Thread

Postby rapunzel » Mon Aug 10, 2015 5:13 pm

^ Thanks for moving it, C_C.... totally agree re: not food groups. I was sloppy in vocabulary even referring to 'food classes' in that it is open to misinterpretation.

No issues with people quitting sugar - but think telling them to dump fruit, even for several weeks and then limiting it - is not necessary.

Quitting fat - bad idea, unless it is specific types and or excessive quantities. The body requires fat for function.

Dairy or wheat - why quit unless there is an allergy? Yes, I have seen all the gluten arguments, but again, unless someone is clearly shown intolerant or allergic, why quit?

Cutting carbs - I guess for some people this is the only way to move away from a diet dominated by processed products and on to better carbs from veg. It can be just a way to shake up habit, and change = something different for the body and can trigger weight loss and/or other functional differences. Personally, carbs rate highly with me in relation to activity levels, esp when doing lots of endurance. And I mean the rice, potato, bread, pasta, sweet potato, cereal, barley, quinoa kind of carbs, some processed, some not. I eat a lot of veg and legumes, too. I work from the 'fuel to function' viewpoint rather than the energy out = I can indulge in something or 'I must work off x calories because I ate y"

User avatar
toolonglegs
Posts: 15463
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Diet Thread

Postby toolonglegs » Mon Aug 10, 2015 5:25 pm

I love my liquid meals ... a 1200gr smoothie is about 500 Kcal for a pretty tasty one. Good on the digestive system too.
The one I just had for breakie has a breakdown of Kcal-504 Fat-3.1g Protein-13.8g Carbs-99.1g Fibre-16.4g ... seems like a good break down to me.

Fat... I don't crave fat, tiny bit of olive oïl in cooking, coconut milk every so often and an avocado a couple of times a week. The oïl I could cut out (and I might as I am starting to try and be careful again ).

Dairy, don't miss milk at all, but I do miss hard cheese a bit, but not too hard to live without.

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Diet Thread

Postby casual_cyclist » Mon Aug 10, 2015 5:49 pm

rapunzel wrote:^ Thanks for moving it, C_C.... totally agree re: not food groups. I was sloppy in vocabulary even referring to 'food classes' in that it is open to misinterpretation.
Don't be too hard on yourself. Nutritionists in Australia do the same thing!
rapunzel wrote:No issues with people quitting sugar - but think telling them to dump fruit, even for several weeks and then limiting it - is not necessary.
It depends on what else they are eating but I don't have a problem with fruit. Actually, at the time I was eating the most fruit, I lost the most weight. But that would correlate with eating less highly processed foods and a lot less refined sugar.
rapunzel wrote:Quitting fat - bad idea, unless it is specific types and or excessive quantities. The body requires fat for function.
Ouch! Don't let Nobody hear you say that. :shock: Cue nutritionfacts.org videos.
rapunzel wrote:Dairy or wheat - why quit unless there is an allergy? Yes, I have seen all the gluten arguments, but again, unless someone is clearly shown intolerant or allergic, why quit?.
Wheat, because it is the base for many junk foods, is not nutritious but has a lot of energy. Empty calories? What is in wheat that you can't easily get from fruit, vegetables, legumes and other (healthier) grains. Same for dairy, what is in dairy that you can't easily get from fruit, vegetables, legumes and whole grains?
rapunzel wrote:Cutting carbs - I guess for some people this is the only way to move away from a diet dominated by processed products and on to better carbs from veg. It can be just a way to shake up habit, and change = something different for the body and can trigger weight loss and/or other functional differences.
Like with your earlier admission, this is just sloppy terminology on the part of the diet promoters who tell people they are quitting "carbs". Just like the "sugar" quitters who promote the use of dextrose and rice malt syrup (both are sugars), the "carb" quitter still eat lots of veggies and some fruit (both are carbs). So really, they are not quitting "carbs" at all, they are quitting grains and sometimes legumes. The reason this works is because people are quitting highly processed foods. The reasoning for it, that grains and legumes contain lectins (poisons) and anti-nutrients, is a load of baloney. If you want your mind blown, google lectins anti-nutrients leaky gut. Example: http://www.precisionnutrition.com/all-about-lectins" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; :roll:
<removed by request>

Nobody
Posts: 10316
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Aug 10, 2015 6:50 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:
rapunzel wrote:Quitting fat - bad idea, unless it is specific types and or excessive quantities. The body requires fat for function.
Ouch! Don't let Nobody hear you say that. :shock: Cue nutritionfacts.org videos.
Did you forget that Greger is a advocate of eating nuts & seeds? I eat 14g of linseed daily.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/walnuts ... -function/
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/which-p ... nded-life/ (The answer is nuts & veg.)
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/flax-se ... ertension/

The essential fat specification by this AU government site can be met with a small amount of nuts and seeds daily. This PCRM article only specifies a minimum for omega-3 and says to keep omega-6 fats low. While Esselstyn says to eat linseed daily, but not to eat nuts if you have advanced heart disease already. Thomas Campbell of the China Study and Campbell Plan books agrees with Esselstyn.
Last edited by Nobody on Mon Aug 10, 2015 7:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Mon Aug 10, 2015 6:58 pm

Nobody wrote:
Yearly report from Dr Greger.

Interesting parallels drawn by him on (industry driven) attitudes toward diet now versus smoking in the '50s. Since diet in America has bumped off smoking as the No.1 killer (starts at 56:00).
yep, his reports just keep getting better. makes it a no brainer that national dietary guidelines are wayyy behind the science.

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Mon Aug 10, 2015 7:20 pm

toolonglegs wrote:I love my liquid meals ... a 1200gr smoothie is about 500 Kcal for a pretty tasty one. Good on the digestive system too.
The one I just had for breakie has a breakdown of Kcal-504 Fat-3.1g Protein-13.8g Carbs-99.1g Fibre-16.4g ... seems like a good break down to me.

Fat... I don't crave fat, tiny bit of olive oïl in cooking, coconut milk every so often and an avocado a couple of times a week. The oïl I could cut out (and I might as I am starting to try and be careful again ).

Dairy, don't miss milk at all, but I do miss hard cheese a bit, but not too hard to live without.
One of my smoothies

250g or 4-5 very ripe smaller lady finger bananas (I buy these in bulk, ripen them right up and freeze)
4 pitted dates (~25 grams) it's best to put these in tupperware container of water overnight, to hydrate them so they blend better. I hydrate a whole packet and leave it in the fridge...lasts about 4-5 weeks due to the high level of sugar, which suppresses bacterial growth.
30 grams of dark green leafys
15 g broccoli
50g berries
1 teaspoon ground omega 3 seed (flax, chia) 7g I think it's better to soak these overnight too, but don't bother. maybe I can just throw complete seeds into the same container as the dates.
5g ginger

~400 Calories, fat 4g, pro 8g, cho 77g = 9%,8%,80%

keeps me going til lunch time, along with green tea or soy flat white for morning tea.

User avatar
casual_cyclist
Posts: 7758
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 11:41 am
Location: Kewdale

Re: Diet Thread

Postby casual_cyclist » Tue Aug 11, 2015 12:25 pm

Nobody wrote:Did you forget that Greger is a advocate of eating nuts & seeds?
I must have seen an earlier video where I recall he was going nuts about nuts? Anyway, it appears it has been updated and corrected? I'm not sure, because I don't really follow it. Here is what he said:
Note: I updated the video on August 25, 2012. I am indebted to Jeff Nelson for pointing out my mischaracterization of the 2007 Natoli & McCoy review. I've not only corrected the video, but expanded it (by 8 minutes!) to cover all of the studies published in the 5 years since. The evidence is stronger than ever that the consumption of nuts does not lead to the weight gain one would expect.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/nuts-an ... -evidence/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't ask me what that is all about.
<removed by request>

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Aug 11, 2015 1:59 pm

casual_cyclist wrote:
Nobody wrote:Did you forget that Greger is a advocate of eating nuts & seeds?
I must have seen an earlier video where I recall he was going nuts about nuts? Anyway, it appears it has been updated and corrected? I'm not sure, because I don't really follow it. Here is what he said:
Note: I updated the video on August 25, 2012. I am indebted to Jeff Nelson for pointing out my mischaracterization of the 2007 Natoli & McCoy review. I've not only corrected the video, but expanded it (by 8 minutes!) to cover all of the studies published in the 5 years since. The evidence is stronger than ever that the consumption of nuts does not lead to the weight gain one would expect.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/nuts-an ... -evidence/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Don't ask me what that is all about.
Yes nuts are one of the least efficiently absorbed foods...and it is well known expected weight gain is rarely met when nuts are used to overfeed.

User avatar
toolonglegs
Posts: 15463
Joined: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:49 pm
Location: Somewhere with padded walls and really big hills!

Re: Diet Thread

Postby toolonglegs » Tue Aug 11, 2015 2:25 pm

Good tip on the dates CK. I like a bit of ginger in my smoothies too but I usually make a huge one in the morning and share with the kids... Fruit is ok but they wouldn't go for the greens and ginger... Yet ;)

User avatar
singlespeedscott
Posts: 5510
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: Elimbah, Queensland

Re: Diet Thread

Postby singlespeedscott » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:11 pm

I love ginger in my salad dressing. I free the ginger and then shave it off as I need with a knife. When it's shaved it nearly disolves into the lemon/lime juice and fish sauce I use in the dressing
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:12 pm

toolonglegs wrote:Good tip on the dates CK. I like a bit of ginger in my smoothies too but I usually make a huge one in the morning and share with the kids... Fruit is ok but they wouldn't go for the greens and ginger... Yet ;)
sounds like the kids' sweet teeth have been over-accommodated.
maybe you could make the greens more enticing by adding an extra date or three.
anyway, I'd suggest using dates to sweeten rather than sugars because dates don't spike insulin as severely.

User avatar
singlespeedscott
Posts: 5510
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: Elimbah, Queensland

Re: Diet Thread

Postby singlespeedscott » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:16 pm

CKinnard wrote:
toolonglegs wrote:Good tip on the dates CK. I like a bit of ginger in my smoothies too but I usually make a huge one in the morning and share with the kids... Fruit is ok but they wouldn't go for the greens and ginger... Yet ;)
sounds like the kids' sweet teeth have been over-accommodated.
maybe you could make the greens more enticing by adding an extra date or three.
anyway, I'd suggest using dates to sweeten rather than sugars because dates don't spike insulin as severely.
That and the fact they are just plain yum.
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:19 pm

singlespeedscott wrote:I love ginger in my salad dressing. I free the ginger and then shave it off as I need with a knife. When it's shaved it nearly disolves into the lemon/lime juice and fish sauce I use in the dressing
I've been smashing Vietnamese Pho this winter, with ginger++...love it with all the other pho ingredients....like this
http://www.taste.com.au/recipes/22639/vietnamese+pho" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Supposed to have a significant anti-prostate hypertrophy/cancer effect too.

User avatar
singlespeedscott
Posts: 5510
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 4:35 pm
Location: Elimbah, Queensland

Re: Diet Thread

Postby singlespeedscott » Tue Aug 11, 2015 7:23 pm

CKinnard wrote:
singlespeedscott wrote:I love ginger in my salad dressing. I free the ginger and then shave it off as I need with a knife. When it's shaved it nearly disolves into the lemon/lime juice and fish sauce I use in the dressing
I've been smashing Vietnamese Pho this winter, with ginger++...love it with all the other pho ingredients....like this
http://www.taste.com.au/recipes/22639/vietnamese+pho" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Supposed to have a significant anti-prostate hypertrophy/cancer effect too.
That looks good but it must a bit salty between the Chicken stock, tbs of fish sauce and 2 x teas soy sauce.
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 3459
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Wed Aug 12, 2015 6:50 am

singlespeedscott wrote:
CKinnard wrote:
singlespeedscott wrote:I love ginger in my salad dressing. I free the ginger and then shave it off as I need with a knife. When it's shaved it nearly disolves into the lemon/lime juice and fish sauce I use in the dressing
I've been smashing Vietnamese Pho this winter, with ginger++...love it with all the other pho ingredients....like this
http://www.taste.com.au/recipes/22639/vietnamese+pho" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Supposed to have a significant anti-prostate hypertrophy/cancer effect too.
That looks good but it must a bit salty between the Chicken stock, tbs of fish sauce and 2 x teas soy sauce.
Much of the deleterious effects of salt can be offset by taking it with a lot of water, such as soup!
There's also new research showing salt intake is not that bad. Many of the salt studies from the past haven't controlled well for hydration, poor diet, stress, sedentary lifestyle, bmi. http://ajh.oxfordjournals.org/content/e ... ajh.hpu164" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
If you want to stump a GP who harps on about the dangers of salt, ask him how much salt you should take if you go for a 4 hour bike ride and sweat out 1g salt per hour.

Nobody
Posts: 10316
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Sat Aug 15, 2015 11:13 pm


ball bearing
Posts: 951
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2012 1:43 pm
Location: Watching the ships on the Southern Ocean

Re: Diet Thread

Postby ball bearing » Mon Aug 17, 2015 8:45 pm

Just watched The World's Best Diet on SBS and it was a real eye-opener. They travel around the world and get the locals to display their weekly food shopping - I didn't realise how bad things are. Processed foods are truly causing misery to many millions of addicted folks.


http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/503553603748" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
ZepinAtor
Posts: 1558
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 7:46 pm
Location: Brizzzzbane Everton Hillzzzz

Re: Diet Thread

Postby ZepinAtor » Mon Aug 17, 2015 9:59 pm

ball bearing wrote:Just watched The World's Best Diet on SBS and it was a real eye-opener.
Yep that was a shocker all right, country after country of large people eating rubbish on a daily basis. Couldn't quite grasp the diabetic amputee footage from one of those countries.
Gas propulsion.......it's natural don't fight it.

warthog1
Posts: 14309
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 4:40 pm
Location: Bendigo

Re: Diet Thread

Postby warthog1 » Mon Aug 17, 2015 10:16 pm

I forget which country it was but the state of the teeth on those children was criminal. The narrator had to leave before he cried :(
Australia was up there with the worst too.
Dogs are the best people :wink:

Nobody
Posts: 10316
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Aug 17, 2015 11:09 pm

Thanks BB. It looks like your link is a preview. Below is the link for the on-demand video.
http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/49 ... -best-diet

I take issue with some of the things presented.

At 04:15 they paint white rice as sub optimal for you, but there are plenty of thin Asians out there that have been eating it all their life. There was also the Kempner Rice Diet which used white rice and got extraordinary success in weight loss and reversing chronic illnesses like type 2 diabetes.
https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2013nl/dec/kempner.htm
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/kempner ... nto-shape/

Then later they present an English traditional low carb breakfast as seemingly beneficial because obesity rates were extremely low in the '60s. Sure, you can lose weight on low carb, but the genetically susceptible (about 40% of population) to heart disease won't fare well. That is without all the other chronic diseases animal product consumption can contribute to.

They didn't present the whole story about the Inuit/Eskimo culture either.
https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2015nl/apr/eskimos.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

If I used that program as the basis for knowledge about diet, I think I'd still be pretty confused. I'd be more aware of processed foods and sugar, but there appeared to be mixed messages about fats/oils and animal products in general. Not surprising considering the other documentaries about diet I've seen. Most are more infotainment rather than truly educational.
Last edited by Nobody on Tue Aug 18, 2015 6:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users