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, May 6. 2018
The idea that government knows how we ought to eat is absurd. Many of us assume that government is stupid, but even your Mom doesn't know.
Nobody can say what a "healthy" nutrition plan is because humans and all higher primates are omnivorous. That means humans can thrive on almost anything as long as it contains sufficient calories to support life. I've seen enough kids grow big and strong enough to play varsity football on peanut butter and jelly sandwiches on Wonder Bread to be convinced of that.
Yes, that "low fat" high carb advice was totally wrong, terrible advice for almost everybody. As was the "low salt" advice (for most people). How Big Government Backed Bad Science and Made Americans Fat
Because of the ambiguity of being omnivorous, everybody has an opinion about what is best. "Clean diet," paleo diet, low-fat diet, high-fat diet, vegetarian diet, vegan diet, Mediterranian diet, bla bla bla. My advice is to eat moderate amounts of everything. Small meals are best for health, fitness, energy, and mental clarity.
With a few comments:
- If overweight and if you do not want to be, cut the carbs and cut the volume. Don't be a pig. If fat and happy, that's fine with me because I am neither your doctor, parent, or spouse.
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
Many people actually followed government nutrition guidelines
Which is totally a weasel statement. 1 million people is "many", but in a nation of 330 million people (today) is still "almost no one" (less than 1 percent).
Even if you scroll back to 1970 and say it was 5 million people you're still looking at 1/2 of 1 percent.
As I argued elsewhere, almost no one follows the USG Nutrition guidelines.
And while I will agree that the guidelines are suboptimal, if you DO follow them you won't get fat. You might be tired, grumpy and a bit mal-nourished, but not fat.
Because the guidelines also include portion sizes. And those two people in that picture? They weren't eating proper portion sizes.
Note that I'm not arguing that the guidelines are "right", or even "good". I'm just arguing that *NO ONE FOLLOWED THEM*. For statistical values of "no one". Which could still be "many".
Politics is downstream from Culture and bureaucracies are downstream from both.
People were pushing the low-fat, grain/soy based diet for a LONG time before.
Hell, read the history of Kellog--which was based on Seventh Day Adventist doctrines (many of which are vegetarian).
The "government" didn't make us fat. We're americans. At any given time most (as defined as more than half) of us are trying to tell the government to go away and leave us alone. We just can't all get together and decide to support the other half of the people in that.
Well, except for the libertarians. But they're no fun at parties.
I know what you mean.
Still, I think it infused the culture more than you might realize.
Agree +1000. It not only infused the culture but thanks to the perverse incentive of truth in labeling laws virtually forced companies making processed foods to up the carb content via HFCS in order garner the coveted 'fat free' label. For proof, see such absurdities as promently advertising flavored geletain as 'gluten free'.
Rightist counter-signalling infuses the culture. The whole no-carb obsession is nutritional bullshit. But it ain't vegan, goes the shrieking, and that's what counts.
NYT’s Jane Brody has been giving bad advice for years.
Here's some perfect dietary advice: Eat what you want, but not too much.
Get the MDR's and you are 90% there. The rest is simply eating enough to maintain a healthy/correct weight. Eat a variety of foods, eat what you like, don't eat what you don't want. If you have a health problem that can be aggravated or aided by a specific diet than by all means follow that diet.
I enjoy cooking and find myself reading cooking magazines and cookbooks. I am blown away at the number of recipe that use kale. This is a fad and is not "healthy" eating. It is as if the foodies follow a leader and then every day have to check the box. Kale in everything, no gluten in anything and don't even talk about white rice. I can eat kale but I have to ask why? If there were no other food available I would eat it but if there are chips and cookies available no kale for me.
Your ignorance is almost as remarkable as the bias it takes to maintain it.
I know: But muh Oreos.
I eat kale because I like it, as I like nearly all greens, and it's extremely easy to grow. I don't eat it because I buy the silly argument that it's some kind of magic food, though. People are really superstitious about food.
People are really superstitious about people they say are really superstitious about food. The most ignorant? Naturally the first group.
The original post is wrong in many ways. More or less in order, here's the usual boilerplate and then the reality.
-"Nobody can say what a "healthy" nutrition plan is", Rubbish. There are at least 700 individual scientific studies that draw a really good bead on what kills and what heals.
-"because humans and all higher primates are omnivorous." At best that's an observation that has nothing to do with health. At worst, research shows that the paleo myth is built on a disproved view of ancient man. What did modern man develop on or from? The trigger was the root vegetable - with the COMPLEX SUGAR - and obviously not fifteen helpings from the meat and dairy case a week.
-"That means humans can thrive on almost anything as long as it contains sufficient calories to support life." It obviously means nothing of the sort. Humans thrive on healthy diets. They subsist on poor diets with some rather important variations to their health. Disease statistics exactly show this to be true.
-"I've seen enough kids grow big and strong enough to play varsity football on peanut butter and jelly sandwiches on Wonder Bread to be convinced of that." An obvious fallacy: I've seen many kids run between moving busses out on state road 123 therefore kids belong in traffic as much as out of it.
-Yes, that "low fat" high carb advice was totally wrong, terrible advice for almost everybody. Nonsense. The data overwhelmingly supports the evident fact that the mixed, processed Western diet is totally wrong, not carbs. Get off it, recover, and you can just about eat all the unprocessed and especially plant carbs you can pack in your stomach. Star athletes do it, regular people do it, formerly fat people do it, and the key to it is getting the fat out of the processed carbs and then having recovered, eat what best processes directly to the complex sugars you run on, which happen to be plants.
-"As was the "low salt" advice (for most people)." Also untrue because obviously it's correlated with the diet in general. See how well you do exclusively on bacon nitrites.
-"Small meals are best for health, fitness, energy, and mental clarity." Good meals are associated with health, fitness, energy, and mental clarity, whatever that is when you're not really thinking this through. Small meals in a sequence of junk, junk, and junk will pretty much kill you.
-"If overweight and if you do not want to be, cut the carbs and cut the volume." Considering the above, that's just hella advice, isn't it? You could just as well say "cut the overweight".
-"If you exercise hard daily, especially with heavy weights, keep daily protein up to around 80-90 gms/day for adequate muscle repair, and eat some sugar - Coke, candy, fruit - before the workout." Wow. First, what's the clinical term for protein deficiency? Second, which has more protein, that burger or these black beans? Third, processed sugar versus the entire complex content of fruit? Precious little nutritional resemblance, I'm afraid. I understand the obsessional bias, but for heaven's sake, eat some freaking fruit if you fancy yourself a bronzed god and somehow need to mainline pure corn syrup in order to get through your expensive club workout.
-"If you hate vegetables, take a multivit." Wrong (and why do you hate vegetables?) As with the fruit thing, vegetables have the complex nutritional spectrum that synthesized multi-vitamins simply do not. It's why they work (and it's maybe accidentally related to our exercise experts here blundering into proclaiming shelf vitamins a fraud in other of their many invaluable health missives.)
-"If you think fruit is "healthy", show me the data. (There is none. Fruit is dessert or a quick sugar fix.)" People won't accept the data if it pays them to come over and clean their house. Be serious.
-"If you worry about overly-high bad triglycerides, discuss with your doctor. Bear in mind that elevated cholesterol does not appear to correlate with heart disease." It correlates with arterial inflammation all day long. Wonder what that's related to? Discuss with your doctor (who might just be fine with the stock advice to basically do whatever you want before he opens up your chest later).
A very selective point of view. You are proving the argument that everyone defends their own biases and ignores any evidence to the contrary. It appears you are either clueless that you are doing this or are so convinced you are correct that you feel it is your duty to push your agenda and disparage everyone else. I doubt that you think you have ever been wrong about anything. You have so much to learn and no inclination to do so
Wow, that's rich. And deeply, stunningly ironic. In your world does reactionary, emotional opinion like that always displace rational observation stemming directly from fact?
A recent comprehensive study (130,000 over nine years in about twenty developing-so overeating an insignificant factor-countries) demonstrated quite comprehensively that higher levels of fat in the diet compared to carbs lead to longer lifespans with reduced cardiac problems and that there is an inverse relation between saturated fats and strokes. Given that fats lend more satiety to the hungry than any other food-type, it seems conclusive that the best way not to be fat is to eat fat.
Personally, it has worked. I love fatty foods and I'm no fatter now (as in, not at all) than I was as a teenager-I must qualify this by saying that I have a profession that requires a lot of physical activity.