 Author
|
Topic: Oh for goodness sake... (Read 1278 times)
|
An Alchemist
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
Haha. Maybe I'm confused then. The problem is that people are *following* the guidelines, and this is why they've gained weight? Really?!?! Every poll I've seen published about eating the govt guidelines has shown abysmal compliance. Even babies are supposed to eat whole milk only as babies, and for the simple reason of consuming more calories while they're developing. I doubt most of us need extra calories.  Since when is traditional wisdom that eating more fat is better for you? Low fat isn't bad (mind you, low fat isn't no fat...eating lower fat versions of food means it's still easy to get the recommended max of 50-60 g fat). And furthermore, it has been shown that too much fat can lead to vitamin A toxicity, not a good thing. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sanchiaza
|
I can't speak for traditional wisdom but here's my 10-cents' worth:
Since I was old enough to know, I have thought that the pyramid was the Holy Grail and that fat was the enemy. In my nutrition classes, it has been exhaustively pointed out that gram-for-gram, fat has almost double the energy of carbohydrate. My personal belief is that this has encouraged a "less is more" approach: if a foodstuff contains fewer calories, theoretically you can eat more of it to maintain your average daily intake of overall energy. Psychologically, diets are usually linked with a deprivation mentality because they are viewed as restrictive - I have never, ever started a diet thinking "Great, I can eat more whatever" (celery does not count here!). The focus is always on what you can't eat. Sometimes this is overt and sometimes it is a lot more subtle. So, couple the "less is more" approach with a (potential) deprivation metality (because for a lot of people, food is not just about energy or fuel for the body, it is about so much more) and what you get is a paradigm in which dropping the most calorie-dense foodstuff (either through outright elimination or tinkering with them to reduce their energy content) seems like common sense. Because then, theoretically, you can eliminate less food to decrease overall energy or you can make food swaps (1tbsp butter = 2 slices bread). Eliminate the fat and you can have lots more carbohydrate in its place which, for some, is a more emotionally comfortable place to be.
I know we all have choices, and this is part of the point that you are making, Alchemist. But when confronted with so many choices, it is sometimes really hard to know which is the right choice. There are so many voices out there clamouring that their way is the best way (and the cheapest!) that it is easy to become completely overwhelmed. And sometimes my subconscious has already chosen for me and no amount of conscious choice or castigating myself for my poor food choices is going to change that. As much as I hate it and my mother criticises me, I have a jolly good emotional reason to be fat. Food is not just about energy and fuel for the body and fat is not just about excess adipose tissue. And expert recommendations based on laboratory tests and mathematical calculations about fibre, vitamins, calories and minerals would be great if only people were all reasonable, rational, mathematical, simple and two-dimensional. But laboratory rational and emotional rational are two different things. Otherwise I would have been bingeing on vegetables instead of on doughnuts.
About fats: I have been ingesting close to 250ml avocado oil per week and I have never felt better. I'm 2.4kg down in two weeks, my skin, which has always been horrible, has improved exponentially. I couldn't binge if I tried. I got an unexpected TOM, which was a blessing (I have PCOS). The last time my mood was this stable, I was on serious doses of antidepressants. I made serious headway in therapy yesterday because I'm not anaesthetising myself with food. I now feel that I have a choice to be picky about the quality of food I put in my mouth whereas before, any old doughnut would do. All the emotions and reasons for eating and staying fat are still there (and I'm breathing through the panic of being thinner), but the oil has made it possible for me to look at them rather than be driven by them. And I've never had this before, not even when I was eating a seriously healthy diet and losing weight by willpower and self-flagellation.
For me, traditional wisdom is to be found inside myself - the reasons I overate made sense to me or else I wouldn't have done it in the face of so much evidence contradicting it. I stumbled upon the SLD method and ingesting the oil feels right and benefits me. And I will continue to do it even if I don't drop another gram because my body relishes it. This is my choice and it is, on reflection, the harder one because not only does it fly in the face of a vast body of research (a.k.a. conventional wisdom) when my family finally notices that I've lost weight and I tell them how, well, let's just say that I'd better get my spade ready.
But I also have an intuition that all us SLDers who have given up dieting and eating the way we've been told to eat for so long in favour of oil (yes, and sugar water and noseclips but most especially oil) are just the crest of a very big wave.
I'm now going off to have a glass of full cream milk. A big one. (But I'll let you know how that goes because I haven't been able to finish one yet!)
|
|
|
|
|
TalkingRat
|
That's what sold me on getting more oil in my diet, Sanchiaza. The noticeable improvement in hair/skin/mood made it obvious that adding fat was a healthy choice nutritionally, beyond the benefits of getting to a healthier weight. Butterfat was a less dramatic effect, but I think it's helping, too.
|
|
|
|
|
August
|
Let me point something rather icky, but pertinent: while it is possible to eat too much fat in one sitting, you are far more likely to throw it up than have it stick on your love handles. Now, you have to eat past some serious warnings; extra dark chocolate bars still taste lovely, but I almost immediately get a message to pace myself! I've also come to understand why the standard serving for brisket is three ounces... Anyway, there isn't anything comparable for the low fat side. I suppose one could ape the effect by eating enough fiber to expand the stomach to uncomfortable levels, but what's the point? Lettuce isn't very nutritious, and if you happen to be one who went through a lot of dental work when you are young, you'll get really upset when you realize you would have avoided that if your parents had the real info rather than government propaganda: http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2009/12/malocclusion-disease-of-civilization.htmlSo, normal people don't like the feeling of nausea, which means, if they eat a diet of 70% fat (esp. saturated fat), they aren't going to overeat! Of course, once you get used to eating this way, you start to understand appropriate portion size and what your body is particularly sensitive to, so this isn't something you have to experience very often. But add in carbohydrates to the mix, and it's pretty amazing how much one can eat. I used to eat go home and make a rice dish consisting of meat/veg/rice practically every night before I started dieting. One day I got on-line and tried to figure out how many calories it all was. I think it was close to 1500! I know it was over 1000. Include breakfast, lunch, drinks, snacks- I was blowing way past what I needed. |
|
|
|
|
An Alchemist
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
Going too much in any direction (too much fat, too much carbs, too much protein) is a bad idea. Nobody's advocating that, not even 'THE MAN'. Eating a diet to make yourself feel sick? No thanks. There are better ways to learn portion control. But back to the original idea, that low fat dairy makes people fat-deficient: 2 T ELOO 1 oz nuts 3 serving lowfat dairy = already near 50 g. Add to this any other meat, fish, oils, nuts, eggs, etc, and we're way past too low fat to function. I do steer clear of lowfat cheese tho, cause it's not very tasty. Better to eat less of the full-fat stuff instead. But lowfat youghurt and milk are fine. Smart choices is what it's about. Sorry about your sensitivity to dark chocolate. I'm blessed to be able to eat as much as I desire without the ill feeling.  Or maybe cursed if you're a pessimist, since it means learning to control portion sizes myself. Small price to pay.  |
|
|
|
|
|
Sanchiaza
|
Alchemist, don't be mean. Defending your position on low fat dairy until the, er, cows come home is one thing but veiled insults and subtle put downs are not nice. That's not how we do things here.
|
|
|
|
An Alchemist
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
Don't be so sensitive and intolerant!  Just because I'm in the minority in this crowd doesn't make me mean... But to follow your cow puns...I'm not part of the herd. And that's a good thing, for sure. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TalkingRat
|
I don't think anybody said they thought lowfat dairy makes people fat deficient. There are obviously other fat sources. It's more an issue of losing something essential by limiting fats to a select few. It wasn't that the 'good' vegetable oil was necessarily bad, either, it was how they processed it that made it harmful. I find I do better with some butterfat in my diet. My yogurt culture is happier with whole milk, too. The concern over Vitamin A toxicity from whole milk is misplaced. Wiki puts the toxicity level at 21,000 IU when taken over an extended period of time. A cup of whole milk has 249 IU. Besides, nonfat milk has twice the Vitamin A of whole milk. Another instance of the government saying "we know best." With babies, it is not "for the simple reason of consuming more calories while they're developing." As Shovelqueen already said, the fat is essential. Babies need it for brain development. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
August
|
Alchemist,
You know perfectly well I'm not picking a diet in order to make myself sick. I'm merely pointing out a high fat diet is self-limiting in a way low-fat diets are not.
Low fat dairy is a processed food. The fat is good for you- and judging by the list you just gave- you really need it, but there are also a range of synergistic effects you are missing out on.
So far as I can tell, pasteurized dairy is probably best avoided in all it's forms; I'll inevitably find a pimple or two somewhere when I break with the 'no grains, legumes, or dairy' regime. I have tried some raw milk and appeared to have no ill effects, so I will likely experiment a bit more with it. But an argument between whole milk versus grey water seems kinda funny after observing the natural product- a good six inches of cream at the top!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
An Alchemist
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
Vitamin A overdose doesn't come from the milk, it comes from the increased absorption that comes from consuming a lot of fat. You absorb more vitamin A from your entire diet when you eat more fat. That link within the link on low fat diets causing cancer is broken. But here's a link that shows prostate cancer is best treated with a low-fat diet (plus it reduces the risk of diabetes): http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2005nl/may/050500pufavfive.htmWhen I look further, I find there are two studies that suggest that low-fat "may increase the risk of malignancy" of cancer, but not cancer risk overall. And two studies isn't many, in the scheme of things, and other studies suggest a risk with any dairy at all. Finally, this came to my email box this morning, from Dr. Weil's website. Even he suggests limiting both trans and saturate fat (not just trans). The idea is that trans fat is worse that saturated fat, not that trans fat is bad but saturated fat is good. http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/TIP03760/Triglycerides-High-Try-These-6-Suggestions.htmlI notice his suggestions on this list actually mesh pretty well with the government guidelines, too. Mind you, I respect him and think he's interesting to read, but he's not an oracle and can't be an expert in every area. I just integrate what he says with the rest of my knowledge. Lastly, I never claimed anyone was intentionally making themselves sick. I simply stated that I would never personally choose a diet that would cause me to feel ill, simply as a means of losing weight. It doesn't matter if it's 'self-limiting' or not, I think personally it's a not good mental-health wise to make my diet impose a restriction in that way--I'd rather learn to manage my diet myself. |
|
|
|
|
|
anacara
|
Sorry Alchemist but I really don't understand why you persist in advocating a way of eating (i.e. low fat) that involves processing. It's such basic common sense that any organism, including human beings, thrives best on a natural diet close to what it evolved eating. We have been consuming full fat dairy for at least 10,000 years, and low fat dairy for, what? About 30 years? Dairy is probably not such a great idea in any case, as 10,000 years is not really very long at all in the scheme of things, but it sures beats 3 decades. Sometimes I wonder whether you're just being contrary and we are just wasting our time.
|
|
|
|
|
An Alchemist
Newbie
Posts: 46
|
I'm not advocating low-fat per se, but simply saying that eating low-fat dairy isn't bad. Does low fat involve processing? Yes, but so does pasteurization, and most people would still rather consume processed (pasteurized) dairy than the more natural version that has been consumed for thousands of years. And yeah, I'm aware there are people out there who believe raw milk cures everything, but that's simply wishful thinking.
Maybe I can sum my belief about the guidelines more succinctly by putting it this way:
They should be taken as a whole, and as a whole they make sense.
I've copied them here again for clarity, and maybe this will be easier to see then.
1. Eat fewer calories.
2. Get more of your food from plants.
3. Eat more fish.
4. Switch to low-fat dairy. (This helps with #6, since low-fat dairy reduces sat fat)
5. Eat only moderate amounts of lean meats, poultry and eggs.
6. Reduce intake of added sugars and solid fats (i.e. saturated fats).
7. Reduce sodium and refined grains.
8. Exercise!
This meshes very well with Michael Pollan's oft repeated mantra: "Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants."
My personal take?
Don't eat a super high-fat diet (moderate fat is better...doesn't need to be a low fat diet per se).
Focus on liquid fats (MUFAs, PUFAs, omega-3s).
Limit meat consumption and focus on high-quality, grass-fed, hormone-free meat whenever possible.
Avoid refrined grains, but don't be carbo-phobic (complex carbs are good!).
Try to eat for health, but still enjoy sweets from time to time.
And yes, exercise. Even if it takes some motivation.
Boring? Yes. Does it work? Better than the old ways I've tried. Is it magic? No, but magic fixes don't exist. Is it boring? Yes...no sexy gimmicks here. But yeah, I'm going to continue to defend #4, because when taken AS A WHOLE with the recommendations (nothing exists in a vacuum, right?), it makes good sense and can lead to good health.
Now what if you're adhering to a totally unprocessed diet? Then go for the whole-fat dairy. Because your otherwise unprocessed and natural diet is hopefully more healthy than the typical diet, and you're entitled to some indulgences, regardless of whether or not they may or may not be good for you.
That's my take.
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
sethroberts.net forums
Logged
