Everything You Are Eating is Wrong

[MercenaryChef]

So as to not clog up the paleo thread with differing opinions and debates.

I am pro grain. for me I look at cultures who have had a rice and legume rich diet for centuries.

For me I find it unlikely that these people have been doing it wrong for generations.

However if a certain diet gives you results you enjoy I say go for it.

I would personally like to see the paleo diet studied for a number of years by professionals and see if it is the holy grail of eating that we are led to believe.

[Brogden]

Don't over eat and exercise every now and then. I'm not going to spend half my free time worrying about what I'm eating constantly. I'm still going to die sometime past 60 (hopefully) anyway.

[Sci-2]

IIRC in the Obesity thread Fragile or someone posted [an article] about how grains are more fattening than they previously were.

That seems like a reason to avoid them to some extent?

[aceluby]

Put me in the anti-grain column, at least how they are today. A piece of whole wheat bread has more sugar in it than an entire snickers bar. That is simply not good for your body. I also think there is a direct link of when the 'food pyramid' was introduced, stating people should eat 8-15 servings of grain a day, and our obesity epidemic. All that sugar is converted to stored fat, spikes insulin, and causes diabetes, another huge problem in the US.

In the end I find that my best diet consists of simply eating three regular, average meals. Don't overeat, don't drink beer/wine, moderately exercise, and my body seems to be happy.

[Tempra]

Put me in the anti-grain column, at least how they are today. A piece of whole wheat bread has more sugar in it than an entire snickers bar. That is simply not good for your body. I also think there is a direct link of when the 'food pyramid' was introduced, stating people should eat 8-15 servings of grain a day, and our obesity epidemic. All that sugar is converted to stored fat, spikes insulin, and causes diabetes, another huge problem in the US.

In the end I find that my best diet consists of simply eating three regular, average meals. Don't overeat, don't drink beer/wine, moderately exercise, and my body seems to be happy.

So, in other words, don't eat more calories than you burn. That's every diet ever.

[MercenaryChef]

Buy better bread

[Inigima]

I do think people massively overeat carbohydrates -- hell, they're everywhere -- but I think demonizing them to the point of full avoidance is silly.

If you eat mostly "real" food that you make yourself, and make even a token attempt at a balanced diet that includes lots of vegetables, some form of protein (meat or otherwise), and a limited carbohydrate intake, and mostly avoid desserts, I think you'll be fine. If you eat a piece of cheesecake once in a blue moon, no big deal. If you do that four times a week, not so good.

If you're working on high performance athletics obviously you'll have slightly different needs: higher caloric intake, lots and lots of protein if you're lifting or otherwise trying to build muscle, some carbohydrates if you're a distance runner. But basic nutrition doesn't really have to be micromanaged all that much if you're eating real food.

[Nichole]

I really like the title of this thread. It seems like there is always some new study coming out telling us that whatever we previously thought was good for us is actually killing us. I think basics like eating more veggies and not eating much sugar is good guildline for everyone, but after that different foods effect different people in different ways.

I personally like to do all things in moderation, but with a focus on protein and vegetables.

I'm kind of curious to see what new food will become all the rage for eating to stay healthy. Last year it seemed to be kale. Personally, I can't seem to find a way to really enjoy the stuff, but I hear all the time just how good it is for me.

[Weeping Sore]

I'm kind of curious to see what new food will become all the rage for eating to stay healthy. Last year it seemed to be kale. Personally, I can't seem to find a way to really enjoy the stuff, but I hear all the time just how good it is for me.

Now they're saying kale can be a thyroid disruptor, excacerbating hypo-thyroidism (under-active thyroid). So there you go. Though the thyroid disruption is mitigated by cooking the kale. So you might be better off with cooked rather than raw or juiced kale, particularly if you have any signs of hypo-thyroidism.

[Shryke]

Don't over eat and exercise every now and then. I'm not going to spend half my free time worrying about what I'm eating constantly. I'm still going to die sometime past 60 (hopefully) anyway.

I'm betting stressing over what you eat when on one of these fad diets is worse for your health then just eating more veggies and fruits with every meal. :p

[Shryke]

But interestingly, almost all diets get you to reduce your carbs even if they are not nominally low-carb.

"Why Weight Watchers is actually a low carb diet."

They are low calorie and since carbs are probably most people's greatest source of calories...

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

I really like the title of this thread. It seems like there is always some new study coming out telling us that whatever we previously thought was good for us is actually killing us. I think basics like eating more veggies and not eating much sugar is good guildline for everyone, but after that different foods effect different people in different ways.

I swear I was going to post the thing thing, especially about how people react differently to certain foods, so that no one "diet" is ever going to work for everyone.

And the basic guideline of low sugar, more veggies, and cooking for yourself instead of packaged food should be good for most people.

[Greywolf2375]

I'm betting stressing over what you eat when on one of these fad diets is worse for your health then just eating more veggies and fruits with every meal. :P

Yep, stress reduction is one of the biggest things people ignore when trying to make lifestyle changes.

[Tempra]

How is it oversimplified bullshit? Does the hormone insulin not play a role in the regulation of fat

It does. But a temporary spike in insulin around meal time does not prevent the body from using stored fat as energy throughout

the day when the body consumes fewer calories than it burns. If you eat a piece of toast at breakfast, your body will not store everything you eat as fat long term. What do you think your body uses for energy once it has burned through the calories you have consumed?

One of the points Taubes makes is that we actually do have research showing that there are plenty of seriously heavy people who are not eating in what anyone would consider glutonous (sp) ways. Something else appears to be going on. Calories in v. calories out is not a sufficient explanation.

Small amounts of excess calories add up over one year, two years, or ten years time.

Do you really think that if you eat 500 calories over maintenance (the amount Of calories you burn) each day that you will not gain weight? You will. Or conversely, that you will not lose weight if you eat 500 calories under maintenance?

That's not to say that the quality of the food you eat isn't important. It is certainly is important. For instance, your body needs certain certain amounts of fat For proper hormone production. You need certain nutrients, etc,for optimal health that you won't get on a 2000 calorie Coke diet.

We're fat because we over consume and under exercise. Between 1971 and 2000, women's caloric intake jumped by 22% and men's by 7%. For women, that equates to an extra 335 calories a day, or 35 pounds a year*. Is it shocking that the rates of obesity increased from ~11% to ~30% during the same time?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/06/health/06CARB.html

Edit: * Women wouldn't have Gained 35 lbs in the year 2000 because women weighed more in 2000 than 1971 and, therefore, burned more calories a day. But they would have gained weight until they hit an equilibrium between calories burned and consumed.

[Muttering Bill]

A piece of whole wheat bread has more sugar in it than an entire snickers bar.

So a Snickers bar has less than... what, 4 grams of sugar? Way to exagerate. :thumbsup:

[Fragile Bird]

Tempra, the problem is you are over-simplifying by merely saying "eat less, lose weight", a discussion we always get into when we talk about weight and obesity.

The article linked in your post specifically talks about the increased calories largely coming from carbs like cookies, candy bars and soda, which is why many people have gone on low-carb diets. But you also have to look at the US food guidelines, which is briefly mentioned in the article as well. The Senate hearings in 1970 led by George McGovern which led to the modern food pyramid and the identification of fat being the enemy is also identified as a culprit, because of the big increase in grain and fruit consumption it encouraged. Scientists who introduced studies before the panel showing that carbs were the culprit were outright rejected by McGovern, who said he and the American people could not wait for studies, decisions had to be made.

Take a look at this video, Diet, Health and the Wisdom of Crowds, by Tom Naughton, which discusses the history of the identification of fat as the enemy, the increase in obesity and the resulting search by people for alternative ways to lose weight. As he says at the beginning, for the past 35 years we have been told to reduce consumption of fat, eat carbs, and avoid red meat, and it hasn't worked.

[Yagathai]

I like Michael Pollan's advice. It's pithy, but reasonably accurate as far as I can tell: "Eat food, not too much, mostly plants".

[The Boar of Gore]

Michael Pollan also says "Don't eat anything your grandparents wouldn't have recognized as food". A good rule of thumb.

[Galactus]

Michael Pollan also says "Don't eat anything your grandparents wouldn't have recognized as food". A good rule of thumb.

That means fish-bones are in, yay!

[Arkhangel]

Michael Pollan also says "Don't eat anything your grandparents wouldn't have recognized as food". A good rule of thumb.

 

Our grandparents recognised some pretty disgusting stuff as food: http://www.collectorsweekly.com/articles/the-1950s-most-nauseating-jell-o-soaked-recipes/