LCHF- Low Carb / High-Healthy Fat lifestyle.

Remove this Banner Ad

haden1999 said:
Agree that there isn't one diet for all humans but the general population eat too many processed carbs. Everyone should, in unison, scream that this is a very bad idea.
Click to expand...
Take out (or just reduce significantly) processed carbs and processed inflammatory oils and you've probably improved 99% of diets.
Simple sugars and bleached white flour offer almost nothing except calories.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

SJ said:
How come you only bang on about athletes on LCHF diet when they are performing?

Not your best.
Click to expand...

Watson does suck, but it would be interesting to see his fitness levels compared to the other Aus players.

I didn't hear much from you about Port Adelaide later in the season last year ;)
 
lewigie said:
Watson does suck, but it would be interesting to see his fitness levels compared to the other Aus players.

I didn't hear much from you about Port Adelaide later in the season last year ;)
Click to expand...
Because I'm not the one arguing for or against anything.
 
SJ said:
Because I'm not the one arguing for or against anything.
Click to expand...
Futurama_fry_looking_squint2.jpg
 
Big Bryza said:
Watson is in the team. Siddle is not. You mad.
Click to expand...
Starc is in the team too - what's his diet?
Can't be pies, he's too busy chucking them
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mofra said:
Given the amount of processed s**t most people eat, eating heathier (as opposed to healthiest) can't be too hard.

Some basic rules can't hurt i.e. if it provide calories but no real nutrition - reduce or avoid.
Click to expand...
The question is how did we get here? In the 50s most people had a reasonably fine diet compared to now, although there was a problem with heart disease. Ansel Keys targeted saturated fat, it became the accepted bad nutrient amongst nutritionists, and the market and industry responded. Saturated fat was taken out of foods, food was marketed as being low fat, carbohydrates took up the reigns as the major macronutrient energy source, and became the taste filler for processed foods. We know the result.

Flip that around and make Ansel Keys say refined carbs are the bad nutrients instead. What's to say there wouldn't have been a similar poor health outcome for most of the populace?

That's what the BMJ article is talking about.
 
clogged said:
Flip that around and make Ansel Keys say refined carbs are the bad nutrients instead. What's to say there wouldn't have been a similar poor health outcome for most of the populace?
.
Click to expand...
This 106 page thread gives you the answer to that.
 
Bazzar said:
Bit like Piers Akerman, but at least he didnt hide behind a monitor.
Click to expand...
Piers Akerman faced a class bowler. I'd love to have a go given opportunity, although admittedly I'm not the greatest batsman.
This isn't one of your better trolls BTW
 
clogged said:
The question is how did we get here? In the 50s most people had a reasonably fine diet compared to now, although there was a problem with heart disease. Ansel Keys targeted saturated fat, it became the accepted bad nutrient amongst nutritionists, and the market and industry responded. Saturated fat was taken out of foods, food was marketed as being low fat, carbohydrates took up the reigns as the major macronutrient energy source, and became the taste filler for processed foods. We know the result.
Click to expand...
Agree with all of that

clogged said:
Flip that around and make Ansel Keys say refined carbs are the bad nutrients instead. What's to say there wouldn't have been a similar poor health outcome for most of the populace?
That's what the BMJ article is talking about.
Click to expand...
Your hypothetical assumes a large number /the majority of people care about eating correctly. Posts earlier in this thread show that many (most?) people aren't eating according to the 'healthy' food pyramid, so what affect would changing the guidelines have for many people if they already ignore them?

The question needs to be asked: what cheap, abundant and easily transportable food would have filled the breach instead?
Many people eat to their taste-buds and for convenience, not health. McDonalds have 17 ingredients in their fries (seriously)!
 
Bazzar said:
And maccas openly publish their ingredients where as most supermarket products try as hard as possible to dumb it down to the bare legal minimum
Click to expand...
Yep - "emulsifier" appears quite a lot on labels, often with just a number next to it.
e.g. 'yoghurt-coating' on "Nice & Natural" roasted bars in our kitchen is the 2nd ingredient on the label so on the product in high quantities, ingredients for coating are "Sugar, Vegetable fat (emulsifier 492)".

A sugar & vegetable fat coating, on a product marketed as healthy. Tasty.
 
theres also a loophole in our labelling requirements in that any ingredient that makes up less than 5% of the total doesnt have to be listed. So if they add say 'margarine' or 'vegetable oil' they just list it as that rather than the individual ingredients contained within margarine. You can imagine how many additives are smuggled in as a result of that.
 
Mofra said:
Yep - "emulsifier" appears quite a lot on labels, often with just a number next to it.
e.g. 'yoghurt-coating' on "Nice & Natural" roasted bars in our kitchen is the 2nd ingredient on the label so on the product in high quantities, ingredients for coating are "Sugar, Vegetable fat (emulsifier 492)".

A sugar & vegetable fat coating, on a product marketed as healthy. Tasty.
Click to expand...
Not sure what your point is. All what you said is just common standard marketing hype.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top