That article was fine and jives with what I've been reading elsewhere, but... the concluding paragraph? A "switcheroo" over to the super-importance of anti-animal product environmentalism? Really?
Just try to get the same amounts of necessary protein from non-animal products. It may happen some day, but it's not here yet.
And, if you read some of the stories about eco-friendly animal product facilities, the awareness is already there. Watch the video, here: http://www.aei.org/publication/the-miracle-of-american-farming-illustrated-by-the-amazing-32000-cow-25000-acre-fair-oaks-dairy-farm/
The protein issue is important- when you're young your body is pretty good at utilizing most of the protein you take in. As you get older, your body is less efficient with the protein you put in, and so you need to increase your protein intake just to keep up. Being a vegetarian might not be a problem when you're young, but I'd love to see a study on older vegetarians and muscle mass.
I've held that we're supposed to eat well rounded diets and eat pretty much what I want, ignoring the 'nutrition alert du jour'. I've been vindicated time and again. Bacon, butter, salt, eggs, whole milk, sugar- it's all good. The problem for most people is they over-react and cut stuff out almost completely and screw up their body's self regulation and/or put it in starvation mode.
Even if there was some downside to some of those foods, I'm pretty sure the fact that they make me happy and the accompanying stress reduction far outweighs the negatives.
I think most of us can eat nearly anything and get away with it as long as we control our total calorie intake. But I am strongly persuaded by evidence of what happens to low-carb populations like Inuits when they encounter high-carb and especially refined carb cultures: the impact is remarkably clear in the form of rapid increases in obesity, diabetes, and alcoholism--much, much clearer evidence than any link between those problems and fat, sugar, trans-fat, high cholesterol foods, animal fats, or any other fashionable variable that's made the news in the form of shoddy meta-studies instead of well-constructed double-blind studies.
There's also some interesting evidence suggesting that having a high percentage of ancestors who adapted to agriculture a few thousand years earlier is significant protection against obesity, diabetes, and alcoholism. A dependence on carbs in the diet appears to be a challenge to the food metabolism we inherited from our deep ancestors. A dependence on fat and protein, as far as I can tell, is not.
Nevertheless, no one can get away with consistently taking in more than he burns.
There are interesting correlations between protein uptake and bone density in the aging, too. It turns out large increases in calcium alone doesn't cut it regarding increasing bone strength and density. Magnesium intake is needful, too, as that potentiates absorption of calcium into the bones. But that's not enough, either. Protein intake needs to be increased, as well: it's protein that provides the scaffolding on which the calcium can sit and build "strong bones."
Texan99 But I am strongly persuaded by evidence of what happens to low-carb populations like Inuits when they encounter high-carb and especially refined carb cultures: the impact is remarkably clear in the form of rapid increases in obesity, diabetes, and alcoholism--
I would like to emphasize "refined carb." I have also read of obesity and diabetes on the increase in the Southwest US. Corn has long been a staple in the SW US diet. However, it has been unrefined corn. Refined corn which has a longer shelf life because the germ has been refined out is what is used nowadays in the US for tortillas.
My experience of tortillas in Guatemala has been quite different from my experience of tortillas in the US. Tortillas in Guatemala taste like corn - which is NOT a characteristic of US tortillas. That is the difference between refined and unrefined corn. You don't see many obese people in Guatamala, even with their high carb diet of corn and beans.
For my personal diet, my experience is that I need to keep a tight watch on sugar and carbs.
Yes, introducing very low-carb cultures to any carbs causes a blip, but even a culture with long agricultural experience experiences a pretty big blip just from the introduction of cheap sugar on top of ordinary grain products. Things really got moving in Western cultures even in the 19th century, only to explode in the 20th and 21st.
As always, I urge caution in drawing conclusions from loose demographic studies rather than proper double-blind tests, but the historical pattern of metabolic and heart diseases fits the increase of sugar at least as well as, and I think better than, it fits any pattern of consumption of animal fats, trans-fats, tropical oils, or any of the other bad-fats theories people pulled out of thin air. The one area where I'm not completely skeptical is omega-3's. I think there's decent evidence that omega-3's are better for you than omega-6's or -9's, i.e., we do better eating meat or fish that ate green stuff, not grains. Maybe before I die someone will nail that down one way or another with some decent science for a change.
In additional to all the previous good comments...
...check the number of processed food products in the grocery aisles. It suggests that relatively few of us actually cook from scratch anymore. Compare the volume of fresh foods offered with the aisles and aisles of prepared, boxed, bagged, microwave-ready "food." Even salad fixings are pre-bagged; just open a package. Dump in a bowl. Toss.
Was in Mexico recently with grandkids (ages 12, 10, 8), who immediately noticed the flavor difference in the locally-purchased sweetened (with sugar) cereals and soft drinks from the HFCS-sweetened U.S. products that they're used to.
All of which is not exactly on point, but both of those represent modern-day eating changes dating from, maybe?, the 1950s birth of the prepared-food era via the invention of the Birds Eye frozen dinner. :-)
ColoComment Was in Mexico recently with grandkids (ages 12, 10, 8), who immediately noticed the flavor difference in the locally-purchased sweetened (with sugar) cereals and soft drinks from the HFCS-sweetened U.S. products that they're used to.
I hardly ever purchase soft drinks, but your comments has prompted me to try a comparison test- purchase a standard US soft drink to compare with a Mexican soft drink with cane sugar.
In this hot summer weather, I drink two quarts of cold water a day. In a similar climate- the Guatemalan jungle- a fellow rig worker gained 10 pounds in a month from using soft drinks for liquid refreshment. That was my first clue that soft drinks were a dietary item that needed limits placed on them.
I don't disagree. I don't buy soft drinks, nor flavored or vitamin-enhanced waters or whatever. Never have, not even for my kids when they were young. All day long, I drink chilled tap water flavored with [real] lemon. I would love to get this family pack of g'kids off their Gatorades and soft drinks, but their parents have chosen other hills to die on in the never-ending parental crusades.
Whoever believes that "sweet" quenches thirst, is an idiot. And a soft drink marketer's dream consumer.
10 comments:
That article was fine and jives with what I've been reading elsewhere, but... the concluding paragraph? A "switcheroo" over to the super-importance of anti-animal product environmentalism? Really?
Just try to get the same amounts of necessary protein from non-animal products. It may happen some day, but it's not here yet.
And, if you read some of the stories about eco-friendly animal product facilities, the awareness is already there. Watch the video, here:
http://www.aei.org/publication/the-miracle-of-american-farming-illustrated-by-the-amazing-32000-cow-25000-acre-fair-oaks-dairy-farm/
The protein issue is important- when you're young your body is pretty good at utilizing most of the protein you take in. As you get older, your body is less efficient with the protein you put in, and so you need to increase your protein intake just to keep up. Being a vegetarian might not be a problem when you're young, but I'd love to see a study on older vegetarians and muscle mass.
I've held that we're supposed to eat well rounded diets and eat pretty much what I want, ignoring the 'nutrition alert du jour'. I've been vindicated time and again. Bacon, butter, salt, eggs, whole milk, sugar- it's all good. The problem for most people is they over-react and cut stuff out almost completely and screw up their body's self regulation and/or put it in starvation mode.
Even if there was some downside to some of those foods, I'm pretty sure the fact that they make me happy and the accompanying stress reduction far outweighs the negatives.
I think most of us can eat nearly anything and get away with it as long as we control our total calorie intake. But I am strongly persuaded by evidence of what happens to low-carb populations like Inuits when they encounter high-carb and especially refined carb cultures: the impact is remarkably clear in the form of rapid increases in obesity, diabetes, and alcoholism--much, much clearer evidence than any link between those problems and fat, sugar, trans-fat, high cholesterol foods, animal fats, or any other fashionable variable that's made the news in the form of shoddy meta-studies instead of well-constructed double-blind studies.
There's also some interesting evidence suggesting that having a high percentage of ancestors who adapted to agriculture a few thousand years earlier is significant protection against obesity, diabetes, and alcoholism. A dependence on carbs in the diet appears to be a challenge to the food metabolism we inherited from our deep ancestors. A dependence on fat and protein, as far as I can tell, is not.
Nevertheless, no one can get away with consistently taking in more than he burns.
There are interesting correlations between protein uptake and bone density in the aging, too. It turns out large increases in calcium alone doesn't cut it regarding increasing bone strength and density. Magnesium intake is needful, too, as that potentiates absorption of calcium into the bones. But that's not enough, either. Protein intake needs to be increased, as well: it's protein that provides the scaffolding on which the calcium can sit and build "strong bones."
Eric Hines
Texan99
But I am strongly persuaded by evidence of what happens to low-carb populations like Inuits when they encounter high-carb and especially refined carb cultures: the impact is remarkably clear in the form of rapid increases in obesity, diabetes, and alcoholism--
I would like to emphasize "refined carb."
I have also read of obesity and diabetes on the increase in the Southwest US. Corn has long been a staple in the SW US diet. However, it has been unrefined corn. Refined corn which has a longer shelf life because the germ has been refined out is what is used nowadays in the US for tortillas.
My experience of tortillas in Guatemala has been quite different from my experience of tortillas in the US. Tortillas in Guatemala taste like corn - which is NOT a characteristic of US tortillas. That is the difference between refined and unrefined corn. You don't see many obese people in Guatamala, even with their high carb diet of corn and beans.
For my personal diet, my experience is that I need to keep a tight watch on sugar and carbs.
Yes, introducing very low-carb cultures to any carbs causes a blip, but even a culture with long agricultural experience experiences a pretty big blip just from the introduction of cheap sugar on top of ordinary grain products. Things really got moving in Western cultures even in the 19th century, only to explode in the 20th and 21st.
As always, I urge caution in drawing conclusions from loose demographic studies rather than proper double-blind tests, but the historical pattern of metabolic and heart diseases fits the increase of sugar at least as well as, and I think better than, it fits any pattern of consumption of animal fats, trans-fats, tropical oils, or any of the other bad-fats theories people pulled out of thin air. The one area where I'm not completely skeptical is omega-3's. I think there's decent evidence that omega-3's are better for you than omega-6's or -9's, i.e., we do better eating meat or fish that ate green stuff, not grains. Maybe before I die someone will nail that down one way or another with some decent science for a change.
In additional to all the previous good comments...
...check the number of processed food products in the grocery aisles. It suggests that relatively few of us actually cook from scratch anymore. Compare the volume of fresh foods offered with the aisles and aisles of prepared, boxed, bagged, microwave-ready "food."
Even salad fixings are pre-bagged; just open a package. Dump in a bowl. Toss.
Was in Mexico recently with grandkids (ages 12, 10, 8), who immediately noticed the flavor difference in the locally-purchased sweetened (with sugar) cereals and soft drinks from the HFCS-sweetened U.S. products that they're used to.
All of which is not exactly on point, but both of those represent modern-day eating changes dating from, maybe?, the 1950s birth of the prepared-food era via the invention of the Birds Eye frozen dinner. :-)
*prepared, boxed, bagged, AND microwave-ready "food."*
ColoComment
Was in Mexico recently with grandkids (ages 12, 10, 8), who immediately noticed the flavor difference in the locally-purchased sweetened (with sugar) cereals and soft drinks from the HFCS-sweetened U.S. products that they're used to.
I hardly ever purchase soft drinks, but your comments has prompted me to try a comparison test- purchase a standard US soft drink to compare with a Mexican soft drink with cane sugar.
In this hot summer weather, I drink two quarts of cold water a day. In a similar climate- the Guatemalan jungle- a fellow rig worker gained 10 pounds in a month from using soft drinks for liquid refreshment. That was my first clue that soft drinks were a dietary item that needed limits placed on them.
I don't disagree. I don't buy soft drinks, nor flavored or vitamin-enhanced waters or whatever. Never have, not even for my kids when they were young.
All day long, I drink chilled tap water flavored with [real] lemon.
I would love to get this family pack of g'kids off their Gatorades and soft drinks, but their parents have chosen other hills to die on in the never-ending parental crusades.
Whoever believes that "sweet" quenches thirst, is an idiot. And a soft drink marketer's dream consumer.
Post a Comment