We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Sunday, October 11. 2015
Mrs. BD's doc is a conservative sort, slow to change advice. This month he was impressed with her physical condition and her numbers. She told him she was either working out or doing Yoga daily and sticking to a low-carb diet with plenty of meat, fats, butter, olive oil, etc.
He told her that that was his new, revised recommendation to all of his patients, after years of advising low-fat, high-grain diet. He acknowledged his error and explained how carbs contribute to the inflammation which leads to arterial disease, not to mention to fat accumulation.
He is an internist and cardiologist, and is in incredible shape. Lifts and works out every day before making his hospital rounds.
Her Gyn doc races a swimming mile each morning before work. She has 3 kids, so I guess hubbie gets them ready for school. He's a surgeon. He doesn't look like he exercises at all.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
"so I guess hubbie gets them ready for school."
I have three kids. Except for their first year of school (kindergarten) i never "get them ready". And even then it was for a few months til they got into the routine.
They get up and go. For their formative years I wasn't even in the house. I was in the barn from 3:30am-7am. They were never late, never missed the bus, never had a wardrobe malfunction.
and surgeons generally are in surgery or prepping for surgery early early morning.
Don't mean to be argumentative but kids won't be self sufficient and independent if you hold their hands til they are 18.
And yet, in two of the most broadly-based studies ever undertaken, precisely the opposite proves true. Meat and eggs inflame arterial walls, and cutting them out entirely, along with oil, leads to weight loss and the restoration of health.
But religion being what it is, food fads shall persist.
That is not the latest consensus, it seems.
Anyway, we are all gonna die.
They are the latest consensus, actually, and in one case, was nation-wide in the single largest such study in history, which showed precise regional correlation between diet and health.
But your "carbs", are they egg-bearing like pasta and cake? Have dairy in them, or refined flours like store bread or pizza? Are they processed and do they contain oils and sweeteners?
Of course they do because that's the definition of carbohydrates in the West.
Yet, are they consumed with meals filled in with meat, dairy, and other processed foods? They are, aren't they? As you refer to them they're never plant carbohydrates and they're never consumed isolated from the things that do in fact inflame arteries, gain weight, and make you sick, those being the processed elements, animal agriculture, and additives. And in that context, where "carb" is slang for the other unhealthy American dietary fad that is our Epicurean, hedonistic, oddly patriotic, corporatized animal agriculture, they do indeed create dysfunction.
So your doc, having been by your lights completely wrong once before, can make an abrupt change of advice and you, being all scientific, can accept it this time because it aligns with your lifestyliing lifestyle and then assert it to others as if it were valid.
But it's not. A plant-based carbohydrate diet is without question the best way to restore both healthy weight and health itself and it's documented to be so. What you're actually referring to is a deeply unhealthy diet - you've almost certainly never tried or researched the plant diet - that requires a fixed, fairly stabilized level of ketosis in order to keep the weight off, which it does rather well, and then a highly energetic level of unnatural physical stress in order to keep the tone up.
But the brain and body burn sugar, BD, and despite the bad advice that fruit is flavored sugar, only plants and fruits contain the complexities and natural relationships between an enormous array of constituent components and nutrients found necessary throughout human evolution, quite evidently and scientifically.
There never was a paleo period of anywhere near enough duration, if at all, to constitute the evolutionary whole of human history and therefore justify the paleo food fad. The Paleo diet, in addition to being the most roundly and soundly condemned diet in medicine, has also been historically debunked.
American anti-carbohydratism is as faddish as it is stupid on its face. Strip your modern "carbs" of the rich, animal-centric, BD-style Italian cookery's "carbs", replace with real complex natural carbohydrates, leave out all the meat, cheese, eggs, and oils, and monitor your health, even without all the medicine-balling popular among stalwart individualistic conservatives and other Republicans.
It's your choice - and they have all but completely lost the plot, by the way, these quasi-rightist obsessionaries. It'd be nice if they'd not misinform others about the general topic by relying on pop press releases and neo-wives tales..
" only plants and fruits contain the complexities and natural relationships between an enormous array of constituent components and nutrients found necessary throughout human evolution, quite evidently and scientifically."
Oh please! This is outright gobbledygook. Your body does not know where the sugar comes from or what complex and natural relationships they held before digestion. If it is carbs it is converted to sugar before it can pass through the walls of your small intestine. There is no note attached to the sugar molecule listing the complex relationships and exotic fruits of it's origin. It is sugar pure and simple.
The fact that humans can indulge in fad diets be they vegetarian or paleo says more about how easily the human body can adapt to almost any food and how obvious it is we can and should eat almost any food. There is no evidence that any fad diet will prolong your life or shorten your life.
Then drink soda pop and cure cancer, Strawman.
Of course, what I said is not what you reframed it into, in yet another installment of your many odes to your amply airy opinion.
At any rate, if food is as irrelevant as you claim, first take it up with the paleo religionistas.
"Then drink soda pop and cure cancer"
Does that mean you think cancer is caused by the food you eat or aided in some way by the food you eat or can be prevented by the food you eat??? If the answer is yes for any of these can you be specific?
"Of course, what I said is not what you reframed it into"
My apologies for any misinterpretation on my part.
"yet another installment of your many odes to your amply airy opinion."
Thank you for your humor.
"if food is as irrelevant as you claim, first take it up with the paleo religionistas"
If you get all your daily requirements I do believe it is pretty irrelevant after that point what you eat. Of course there are some illnesses and genetic health conditions that require a specific diet but other than that you can eat whatever you like.
When culture is linked to health, then, as you food faddists say, genetics is linked to health. And if genetics and culture are linked - which health studies amply shows they are and which empirically we know them to be - then the question becomes, are you saying there is no link between diet and health?
Because if there is no link between diet and health you've just made a claim against the paleo fad, weight being part of health. From there it's a small step to link a convoluted definition of "carbs" to health, which again the paleo faddists do 24/7.
The question isn't whether I find a link between diet and health, it's if you do, because as far as I can tell, you're taking up both arguments - both faulty, by the way - against the third, excluded claim that the plant diet is both paleo and healthy...even as data shows.
I agree that many illnesses are genetic. I also agree that some genetic conditions require special diets. But for the vast majority of people if the food they eat provides the MDRs it doesn't matter if they than choose to eat mashed potatoes at every meal or bacon. Their diet simply does not matter as long as they are getting those MDRs. You can eat grains until they are coming out of your ears, or fast food and sugary sodas it makes no difference.
As for being over weight or obese both of those conditions are genetic predispositions. natural selection over a couple million years has selected those traits that allow us to store calories as fat. Until 100 years ago this was a very good thing and I have no doubt it will be again one day. I feel sad for those who because of their genes are unable to prevent themselves from becoming obese but I recognize it is genetic and not the result of carbs or fats in their diet.
I am unaware of cultural links to health, perhaps you could expand on that.
How long before MDRs are out the window, do you figure? Just curious how deep the dissonance first for and then against and then for official advice runs, is all...
And expanding on nutrition against common myths and wives tales serves what purpose. Wind? Remember, familiar blinders are as they're reaffirmed, and valid challenges to them shall be ignored, as you just have.
Will yet other input alter that view? How, exactly? Let me ask you: Does it seem sensible that with western disease being what it is, diet simply shall play absolutely no part? Why, because it's a dogma?
How could that be, exactly, when it plays every part with regard to weight per the paleo faddists? That's the second (and final) time I ask, because it's your contradiction, not mine, and it's not my denial.
See my point? This being a casual public board, you're here to assert and reassert a reality that you wish to believe exists. I'm simply curious to explore the denial. Or if, like BD's doc (very likely per special animal agriculture interests whether he knows it or not) y'all can reconsider and adopt abrupt change.
"Does it seem sensible that with western disease being what it is, diet simply shall play absolutely no part?"
YES! The lack of serious diseases in Western society is not due to our superior diet but due primarily to immunizations, Antibiotics, medical advances and clean water and effective sewer treatments.
Then you made some references to weight that aren't fully explained. I assume you mean that the Western diet is responsible for the often claimed obesity epidemic. Obesity is genetic, pure and simple. If you aren't obese or close to it you probably couldn't become obese if your life depended on it. As for simply being overweight that too is basically genetic and people who are prone to be overweight will when there is ample food available become overweight. It doesn't matter if they eat vegan or paleo. If you are overweight you must diet (restrict calorie intake) for the rest of your life. If you are lucky enough to not have this genetic propensity of girth it doesn't matter what you eat. Our obesity epidemic was caused by the change in 1998 in the way obesity is determined. That change doubled the numbers of obese people overnight without any weight gain. Those numbers have stayed about the same since then.
I am unaware of cultural links to health, perhaps you could expand on that. I would be interested in knowing what they are.
In other words, your opinion really matters, "plain and simple". Airy, I believe I once called it.
It's almost like I can predict your bias, isn't it, even/especially when you refuse simple questions and repeat contradictory myth.
So again, why exactly should I present you evidence you deny could ever exist? And do you really think conversation with you can ever be fruitful?
I am sincerely interested in whatever cultural connections to health you could elaborate on.
Everyone has a bias. I have in my life been talked out of a belief that I held; convinced that I was wrong or at least some of what I believed was in fact wrong. I'm pretty pragmatic, I believe in what I believe is true until the day I no longer believe it is true. So it would be possible for a discussion like this to be "fruitful".
I don't ignore simple questions. If you ask me a question and I can understand the question I will eagerly respond. I found your statements to be a little obscure, for example: "See my point? This being a casual public board, you're here to assert and reassert a reality that you wish to believe exists. I'm simply curious to explore the denial." I didn't understand that. I could have perhaps interpreted it in some way but I'm not sure it would be what you meant. It wasn't something I could answer, it appeared to me to be intentionally cryptic.
There are some of your posts that I enjoy and do not disagree with. In fact that is true for almost everyone who posts here. I even enjoy many of the posts that I do disagree with.
Best advice I ever saw or heard, from my oldest granddaughter when she was a pre-teen (20 years ago): Eat when you're hungry, quit when you're full.
I don't buy the inflammation claim. It seems unprovable and based in the voodoo world of supplements and organic foodies. Show me the inflammation!! Besides it seems to be the whipping boy of all sides of the issue; it's always the other guys diet choices that cause the dreaded "inflammation" (key scary music). More likely there is no inflammation and it was a brainchild of Kellogg or some other food nut. Is there really any "inflammation"? Is it caused by food or genetics? Does it cause harm, provable harm, early death, etc.? Is it actually prevented by giving up good food in preference to the food the nutcases advise us to eat? It smells like bullshit, it tastes like bullshit, I'm sure glad I didn't step in it.
the headline of a recent front page article in the Washington Post: “A thinning case that fat causes heart ills”? And, this is followed-up the very next day with “Congress questions the science behind dietary guidelines.” It seems to me that the government is finally beginning to walk back the disastrous low-fat dietary recommendations, that originated officially with the McGovern Committee (1977), but also bear the handiwork of physiologist/nutritionist Ancel Keys and rabid anti-fat nutritionist D. Mark Hegsted.
Keys is celebrated for his Seven Countries study, which purported to show that saturated fat consumption was a big risk factor for coronary heart disease (CHD), but is also less famous for the fact that he threw out non-conforming data from 15 other countries. Keys’ miserable work was criticized at the time it was released, and consistently afterward, yet was embraced with much alacrity for decades. Now that even the elites are finally going public about questioning his theories—and what they have wrought—one may ask how his ideas persisted for as long as they did.
In his book The Great Cholesterol Con: The Truth About What Really Causes Heart Disease and How to Avoid It, Scottish physician and well-known medical skeptic Malcolm Kendrick did his own 14-Country Study. He looked first at the seven countries with the lowest consumption of saturated fat (Georgia, Tajikistan, Azerbaijan, Moldova, Croatia, Macedonia, and the Ukraine), and compared this to their rate of CHD. He then took the seven countries with the highest consumption of saturated fat (Austria, Finland, Belgium, Iceland, Netherlands, Switzerland, and France) and compared this to their rate of heart disease. (All figures were from the World Health Organization, 1998)
The data clearly showed that every single one of the seven countries with the lowest consumption of saturated fat had significantly higher heart disease than every single one of the countries with the highest consumption of saturated fat.
Know a veterinarian who refers to the high-carbs, lots of grains diet as the "feedlot diet".
Exactly. It is called "finishing," and it is corn or sorghum plus sileage that will get the cattle to the higher weight desired for market.