mikesbytes wrote:Yeh 10% fat max is a figure that has been used for a while.
It's wrong as a general guide.
Standard cows milk only has 3.3% fat by grams, but 49% fat by calories. Percentage of calorie intake is what matters. All this time people have been misinformed. They think they are eating low fat, but aren't.
The average AU diet is 31% fat by calories.
mikesbytes wrote:Unfortunately the food industry latched on to it and brought out low fat versions of their existing portfolio where they simply replaced the fat with sugar with the end result being just as many calories and feeling hungry, a recipe for disaster.
Yes they did this. So they replaced very high density foods (fats & oils) with other high density foods (primarily sugars, and more processed carbs) and often more salt. No surprise, but don't believe that because of this that everyone was suddenly eating low fat and getting fat.
Fat consumption on average was still increasing, as were processed foods, regardless of whether high fat or high carb/sugar. Which is the real problem. The "sugars and carbs are making us fat" is just a "red herring" thrown up by the high fat camp to defend their own addiction(s) or position. Of course, sugars and processed carbs add weight, but so do many other things. I don't want to be in a camp, but people need to ditch the packaged processed foods, processed grains, animal products, restaurant/take_away foods, sugars, oils, salt, limit high density foods like high fat foods, reduce protein and add fibre. Then most people will find their body weight should drop easily.
Too difficult? It's the individual's problem then. But most people won't commit because they are addicted to their foods and/or their lifestyle. They obviously don't want the weight reduction/health enough. And since many would rather die than change their lifestyle, nothing is going to change any time soon. Good for the big food industries, good for Big Pharma and good for the various medical practices. Bad for the individual and the tax payer in the long term.
Anyway the "sugar is bad, therefore lets go back to eating lots of meat (20+% fat) with the token veg", like in the '60s, isn't the answer either. People were dying of heart disease and getting diabetes long before the advice to have a low fat diet came along. If you have any doubt about what causes diabetes, you shouldn't after reading the links below. But this has been discussed many times before in the Diet Thread. If people choose not to believe it, it's not my problem.
http://nutritionfacts.org/2016/11/17/fa ... -diabetes/
http://www.pcrm.org/nbBlog/conquering-d ... bohydrates
mikesbytes wrote:Load the plate up with green vegetables and its much easier to keep within limits one has set for other stuff
True, but colour isn't overly important. A variety of veg would be beneficial. Also, as said above, there's also plenty to take off the plate if interested in maximising health.
The
govt guideline for veg is 6 serves and 2 serves for fruit.
I usually get about:
17 serves of veg, (no lugumes)
14 serves of fruit
2 serves of (whole) grains
1 serve of seeds/nuts (which comes under the protein group)
0 serves of dairy/alternatives
0 discretionary
According to Cronometer combined with WHO recommendations, I get everything I need without dairy and only 1 serve of nuts/seeds.
Since the observational science doesn't support the need for separate dairy, protein, or discretionary groups, it could be the industries' influence that keeps them there. After all, these guidelines as supposed to be about what you
should eat according the known nutritional science. Not compromises. They should raise the bar higher IMO.
Still working well for me.
