OT:Good Calories, Bad Calories....

VVV wrote:Is my observation correct that at a certain age many of us hope to eat to cure all ills after spending 90% of our lives eating to cause all ills?

I think so, yes.

Liz, et al.,

Thanks for your responses on fiber. It's not that my consumption of vegetables has gone down on my diet. If anything, it's gone up. What's happened is that I've replaced some of my higher fiber carbs, like shredded wheat, with fats and protein and caused my overall consumption of fiber to go down. The consensus seems to be that it's not a problem.

Jay

I don't want to be an immortal teenager, too much angst!!! I want to be an immortal 30 year old but it's definitely way too late for that!!!

BlackSpinner wrote:

VVV wrote:Is my observation correct that at a certain age many of us hope to eat to cure all ills after spending 90% of our lives eating to cause all ills?

No. At a certain age we get smart enough to realize that what we put in our mouths really does count and we are not immortal teenagers. For some people it just takes a really long time to get there.

Someone mentioned "conventional wisdom" and historic food ways.

I just pick up a magazine "the Classical World" by Archaeology magazine. It has an article on the diet of gladiators

They turned up some surprising results. Compared to the average inhabitant of Ephesus, gladiators ate more plants and very little animal protein. The vegetarian diet had nothing to do with poverty or animal rights. Gladiators, it seems, were fat. Consuming a lot of simple carbohydrates, such as barley, and legumes, like beans, was designed for survival in the arena. Packing in the carbs also packed on the pounds. "Gladiators needed subcutaneous fat," Grossschmidt explains. "A fat cushion protects you from cut wounds and shields nerves and blood vessels in a fight." Not only would a lean gladiator have been dead meat, he would have made for a bad show. Surface wounds "look more spectacular," says Grossschmidt. "If I get wounded but just in the fatty layer, I can fight on," he adds. "It doesn't hurt much, and it looks great for the spectators."

So they got lots of exercise but were still fat.

Thanks for a fascinating link!

jnk wrote:http://donmatesz.blogspot.com/2011/07/r ... -diet.html

The comments were very interesting.

Actually the layer of weight is very useful in that kind of combat unlike what he was theorizing. I am quite familiar to re-creation combat. It is not a marathon. It is short busts of activity where often the weight component can make all the difference in whether you can batter your opponent out of the ring. Sleek, skinny guys are at a disadvantage unless they are super fast.
And the fights were more like WWW wrestling where the look of the fight is as important as the fight itself.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/2 ... 40155.html


Very surprised not one mention of Dr. Gupta.

ems wrote:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/2 ... 40155.html


Very surprised not one mention of Dr. Gupta.

A quote from that article

According to the Mayo Clinic, a heart-healthy diet is one that is low in saturated fat, sodium and cholesterol. Eating this sort of diet -- high in fruits, veggies and whole grains -- can help to keep weight, blood pressure and cholesterol down and under control, thereby fighting against heart disease.

A plant-based diet has also been shown in past research to help people with diabetes better control their glucose levels. And a 2008 study showed that eating this kind of diet can increase the enzyme telomerase, which lengthens telomeres. Telomeres are the ends of our chromosomes that are indicative of our lifespan, so the research shows that eating a plant-based diet could actually alter our genes for a longer life.

IIRC the Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn Jr. mentioned in the article is the guy who says don't eat anything with a face or that has a mother.

As long as there are medical pros like Mayo Clinic advocating the diet they do, the issue of low carb vs low fat will not be settled. The one area where there may be some agreement is to reduce processed food. But, unfortunately, without modern food processing in the mix there quite possibly would not be enough food to feed the populace.

And then you have to deal with stuff like this
http://prof77.wordpress.com/2011/01/02/ ... -our-food/

Neotame is a highly concentrated artificial food sweetener (40 times sweeter than NutraSweet, 8000 times sweeter than sucrose or ordinary “table sugar”). As a food ingredient you’d think it would be listed in the “List of Ingredients”. You’d be wrong. Neotame is NOT required to be listed.

Food ingredients that are “trace ingredients” (that are a “flavor, or flavor enhancer”) under FDA rules do NOT have to be named individually in the food’s “List of Ingredients.” (Source1: FDA, 21 CFR 101.100(a)(3), and Source2) Because Neotame is so highly concentrated it takes only an insignificant “trace” to flavor (i.e., sweeten) foods and, thus, does NOT have to be disclosed. QED

And certified organic doesn't help you.

Neotame is approved to be added to foods under USDA Certified classification “Contains Organic Ingredients”–without any disclosure to consumers.

On Jan. 1, I stepped on the scale and noted that in 2011 I managed to take off 31 lbs. via Weight Watchers, but I had been at a plateau for many weeks on that day. It is now mid-March, and after switching over to the Wheat Belly plan (albeit not 100%---more like 95%) for a week, I have FINALLY broken the plateau! In the last week, I have taken off another 1.4 lbs. I do not feel deprived at all... the fats are quite satiating and I do enjoy the protein. I am experimenting with some creative replacements for the wheat products by making coconut flour muffins, bread, and a peanut butter 'bread' that has not one bit of any kind of flour in it (weird, but it looks like bread when it bakes! And it tastes great!) So....we will see how it goes. After reading Wheat Belly, I am just so PO'd at the game Big Agriculture, Big Food, and Big Pharma have played on us in pursuit of huge profits. I found Dr. Davis's explanation of the science to be fairly easy to understand for someone who is not science oriented at all. I am working on Taubes' Good Calories, Bad Calories now.

I wish there was a simple list of what we should and should not eat, or how much to eat of what. I get that I shouldn't have bread, but I stand there holding the chummus and thinking, "5 grams of carbs for 2 tbsp with 1 gram of fiber... Does this mean, I should or should not eat this?!"

SleepingUgly wrote:I wish there was a simple list of what we should and should not eat, or how much to eat of what. I get that I shouldn't have bread, but I stand there holding the chummus and thinking, "5 grams of carbs for 2 tbsp with 1 gram of fiber... Does this mean, I should or should not eat this?!"

Yes the first few weeks were the hardest. I was reading and measuring everything. That is why I hunted up a few cook books. I had the same thing when Mom was first diagnosed with diabetes and was coming to stay with me for 2 weeks. Read all labels, got a cook book and measured everything. Later we went Macrobiotic, same routine.

by SleepingUgly on Sat Mar 24, 2012 6:58 pm

I wish there was a simple list of what we should and should not eat, or how much to eat of what. I get that I shouldn't have bread, but I stand there holding the chummus and thinking, "5 grams of carbs for 2 tbsp with 1 gram of fiber... Does this mean, I should or should not eat this?!"

Try this http://www.dietdoctor.com/lchf
I don't think it can get much simpler!