Low carb... Is it a diet fad?

1111214161729

Replies

  • nvmomketo
    nvmomketo Posts: 12,019 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Stating that a low carb diet is not healthy is just an opinion. Your opinion. A predjudice against eating more fats than average perhaps? My personal experiences with a LCHF diet certainly does not support the idea that it is unhealthy either.

    Sure someone could eat a less healthful version of a LcHF diet but that is again true of all diets.

    And I did not say any diet was "unhealthy". All I have said is that LCHF diets can be healthier for some. I think we can agree that people have different dietary needs for good health based on their circumstances.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    I think we can agree that people have different dietary needs for good health based on their circumstances.

    Yes.

    I hope you agree that your circumstances make you an outlier on the graph of averages.
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

  • stevencloser
    stevencloser Posts: 8,911 Member
    edited January 2016
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    Why do people always come with the SAD when someone says keto/low carb isn't inherently better than other good diets? Why? Are you joking? Trolling? Just out of arguments?

    To answer your question, a good diet is a diet that meets all your nutrient needs, does not lead to uncontrolled weight gain and is sustainable to you, so you tell me if that applies to the SAD or not.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    uhm...progress of medicine, perhaps?
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,372 MFP Moderator
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    If implemented correctly, one can definitely low carb in an extremely healthy manor, unfortunately, the way its discribe on our forum (bullet proof coffee, high sat fats, low veggie and fruit). But if one had a lot of veggies, low sugar fruits, low sat fats but high unsaturated fats (especially poly/mono and omega threes) it could be superior to many diets.

    That isn't to say that an equivalent high carb diet couldnt contain just as many nutrients dense foods. And personally i would never try to rank one diet over another if it addresses nutritional goals and is implemented correctly.

    But i do think it would be just as wrong to label or lump all lchf diets into the unhealthy category.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,372 MFP Moderator
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    Also, add in the fact that NO ONE on MFP has stated they strive to follow the SAD diet.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    uhm...progress of medicine, perhaps?

    Uh yeah sure but no.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    edited January 2016
    psulemon wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    Also, add in the fact that NO ONE on MFP has stated they strive to follow the SAD diet.

    I made a third point but I deleted it and that was that there is no real SAD, it's an aggregate picture. It's a huge and diverse country.
  • WhatLouAte
    WhatLouAte Posts: 155 Member
    edited January 2016
    Everyone is different, LCHF IS a healthier way to eat for ME and others. I feel like crap if I am still eating bread, pasta, rice and still in a deficit. It makes me sluggish, tired, moody, you name it. LCHF is healthier in my opinion. Not eating sugar and wheat has to be healthier?? I have read Wheat Belly and Grain Brain which makes me want to eat this stuff less and less.

    Also most people have been brainwashed since the whole food pyramid was created, eats lots of healthy wholegrains and cut out fat, people don´t want to believe anything else.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    edited January 2016
    Everyone is different, LCHF IS a healthier way to eat for ME and others. I feel like crap if I am still eating bread, pasta, rice and still in a deficit. It makes me sluggish, tired, moody, you name it. LCHF is healthier in my opinion. Not eating sugar and wheat has to be healthier?? I have read Wheat Belly and Grain Brain which makes me want to eat this stuff less and less.

    Because of all the junk science in these books I take it. But as for finding a diet that works for you that's the important point.
  • psuLemon
    psuLemon Posts: 38,372 MFP Moderator
    Everyone is different, LCHF IS a healthier way to eat for ME and others. I feel like crap if I am still eating bread, pasta, rice and still in a deficit. It makes me sluggish, tired, moody, you name it. LCHF is healthier in my opinion. Not eating sugar and wheat has to be healthier?? I have read Wheat Belly and Grain Brain which makes me want to eat this stuff less and less.

    Also most people have been brainwashed since the whole food pyramid was created, eats lots of healthy wholegrains and cut out fat, people don´t want to believe anything else.

    Personally, I source my nutrition information from non biased sources that haven't been disproved like many books. Personally, I rather look at nutrition journals, university studies and various aspects of diets from the healthiest parts of the world.

    But that is awesome that you found a sustainable diet for yourself.
  • Gianfranco_R
    Gianfranco_R Posts: 1,297 Member
    psulemon wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    Also, add in the fact that NO ONE on MFP has stated they strive to follow the SAD diet.

    I made a third point but I deleted it and that was that there is no real SAD, it's an aggregate picture. It's a huge and diverse country.

    Well, yeah, better to talk about Western diet pattern (also not limited to the US)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_pattern_diet
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    Everyone is different, LCHF IS a healthier way to eat for ME and others. I feel like crap if I am still eating bread, pasta, rice and still in a deficit. It makes me sluggish, tired, moody, you name it. LCHF is healthier in my opinion. Not eating sugar and wheat has to be healthier?? I have read Wheat Belly and Grain Brain which makes me want to eat this stuff less and less.

    Also most people have been brainwashed since the whole food pyramid was created, eats lots of healthy wholegrains and cut out fat, people don´t want to believe anything else.

    actually we are all pretty much the same from a dietary/nutrition stand point..hit a calorie target, get micros, and meet macro needs. So sorry but LCHF is not any healthier than any other way of eating.
  • Wheelhouse15
    Wheelhouse15 Posts: 5,575 Member
    edited January 2016
    psulemon wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    Also, add in the fact that NO ONE on MFP has stated they strive to follow the SAD diet.

    I made a third point but I deleted it and that was that there is no real SAD, it's an aggregate picture. It's a huge and diverse country.

    Well, yeah, better to talk about Western diet pattern (also not limited to the US)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_pattern_diet

    Yes, wiki is the ultimate source, but ask yourself, how much of this is skewed by certain individual diet trends such as high fat or high carb diets? You also haven't addressed the key point that the SAD can be easily adjusted by adding a little more protein and more fruits and vegetables. Also, adding back in activites will greatly reduce health risks.

    ETA btw macros for SAD are 50/15/35 but for Mediteranian Diet it's 50/20/30 so based strictly on macros you couldn't really tell much of a difference.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Stating that a low carb diet is not healthy is just an opinion. Your opinion. A predjudice against eating more fats than average perhaps? My personal experiences with a LCHF diet certainly does not support the idea that it is unhealthy either.

    Sure someone could eat a less healthful version of a LcHF diet but that is again true of all diets.

    And I did not say any diet was "unhealthy". All I have said is that LCHF diets can be healthier for some. I think we can agree that people have different dietary needs for good health based on their circumstances.

    its funny you keep saying that opinion word as the majority of your comments about LCHF are just that, an opinion.

    LCHF is not any healthier than any other way of eating. Unless you have some peer reviewed sources backing up your claims? IF not, I think it is time to just stop.
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    psulemon wrote: »
    lemurcat12 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    nvmomketo wrote: »
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    sorry, LCHF is not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros….

    I do hit my micros and macros though.

    I had a piece of cake the other day. It was small but had sugar. I also had a higher carb meal (for me). Within 24 hours my autoimmune arthritis was acting up rather badly (first time in past 6 months when I avoided sugary cake) and my blood glucose was up for over 24 hours...

    So in your opinion, LCHF is still not healthier for some people with health issues like that?

    its not healthier than any other way of eating that hits micros and macros, period.

    I don't believe we were discussing medical conditions in this thread.

    Medical conditions determine a large part of some people's health.

    Gluten free isn't healthier than not gluten free either, even though there's people with medical conditions that should never take anything containing it.

    True... Gluten free is only healthier for those people with gluten sensitivity. A healthier way to eat for some people.

    I am not sure if that is what you are getting at here.

    It means it's not healthier, it's just better for some people because something is inherently wrong with how their body works.
    Peanut allergy the same. Any other allergies, PKU and aspartame, and so on.
    Would you raise your eyebrows if a post on here would say "I chose to not eat peanuts because I want to live healthier."?

    And to spell it out, LCHF is only healthier if you have a medical condition that prescribes it.

    I guess we could apply that to all diets in existence. A diet is only healthier if there is a medical need for that specific diet.

    No, some diets are healthier than other diets.

    Low carb is not one. One can do a healthy or a super non healthy version of low carb, and even the healthy version will be no more healthy than many other good diets.

    On the other hand, I'm allergic to penicillin. That doesn't make penicillin bad for the average person who has an infection it would help with. It would be bad for me. I would not claim it was "unhealthy."

    Probably you are right, but you should define what is a "good diet". Do you think, for instance, that the SAD is a good diet?

    You do realize you have shifted the meaning of the word "diet" here now. The term has been used in the case of weight loss for the most part and now you are talking about it in terms of habitual eating patterns. Now, this is more correct but that's not what we are talking about.

    Secondly, if SAD is really so bad then why are people living longer than ever on it? Perhaps the bigger issue is that they just aren't active enough to sustain the caloric intake and thus the problem with rising obesity rates. You can also easily modify SAD to end up with a diet that's healthy and is lower in caloric intake.

    Also, add in the fact that NO ONE on MFP has stated they strive to follow the SAD diet.

    I made a third point but I deleted it and that was that there is no real SAD, it's an aggregate picture. It's a huge and diverse country.

    Well, yeah, better to talk about Western diet pattern (also not limited to the US)
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_pattern_diet

    Yes, wiki is the ultimate source, but ask yourself, how much of this is skewed by certain individual diet trends such as high fat or high carb diets? You also haven't addressed the key point that the SAD can be easily adjusted by adding a little more protein and more fruits and vegetables. Also, adding back in activites will greatly reduce health risks.

    that does not fit their narrative…..
  • WhatLouAte
    WhatLouAte Posts: 155 Member
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Everyone is different, LCHF IS a healthier way to eat for ME and others. I feel like crap if I am still eating bread, pasta, rice and still in a deficit. It makes me sluggish, tired, moody, you name it. LCHF is healthier in my opinion. Not eating sugar and wheat has to be healthier?? I have read Wheat Belly and Grain Brain which makes me want to eat this stuff less and less.

    Also most people have been brainwashed since the whole food pyramid was created, eats lots of healthy wholegrains and cut out fat, people don´t want to believe anything else.

    actually we are all pretty much the same from a dietary/nutrition stand point..hit a calorie target, get micros, and meet macro needs. So sorry but LCHF is not any healthier than any other way of eating.

    Don´t agree, but you will disagree to the end so I´ll leave it here...
  • ndj1979
    ndj1979 Posts: 29,139 Member
    ndj1979 wrote: »
    Everyone is different, LCHF IS a healthier way to eat for ME and others. I feel like crap if I am still eating bread, pasta, rice and still in a deficit. It makes me sluggish, tired, moody, you name it. LCHF is healthier in my opinion. Not eating sugar and wheat has to be healthier?? I have read Wheat Belly and Grain Brain which makes me want to eat this stuff less and less.

    Also most people have been brainwashed since the whole food pyramid was created, eats lots of healthy wholegrains and cut out fat, people don´t want to believe anything else.

    actually we are all pretty much the same from a dietary/nutrition stand point..hit a calorie target, get micros, and meet macro needs. So sorry but LCHF is not any healthier than any other way of eating.

    Don´t agree, but you will disagree to the end so I´ll leave it here...

    the nice thing about facts is that they do not require your belief.....