"Five A Day Fruits,Veggies"-untested advice promoted globally.
KETOGENICGURL
Posts: 687 Member
This 2010 post by a Brit reporter has to be shared..once again it is ONE person* who altered the face of global diet advice... tracking HOW this came to be is interesting.
The good it may have done is replace some carbs and junk food calories with real veggies and fruits. But most people choose bananas, oranges, apples and corn/peas to meet the advice..all high sugar, higher carb.
It all began with a catchy number and a marketing campaign - not hard
science. < I'm not surprised, are you?
How the five-a-day mantra was born
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.philosophy.humanism/2010-04/msg00113.html
<snip>.....So, from where did the US Government get the idea for the number five, if
not the scientific studies? .....Marion Nestle, nutrition
professor at New York University, thinks she remembers exactly where.
"It was Susan Foerster, the head nutritionist in California. She had the
bright idea of promoting fruit and vegetable consumption in a state which
was a big fruit and vegetable producer."
The American National Cancer Institute admits that "no studies have tested
the impact of specific numbers of servings on cancer risk". But it says five
was chosen in California in 1988, as it doubled the average consumption, and
"the number five was memorable and provided a platform for creative message
and programme delivery".
Britain, though, has taken California's 1980s marketing policy and run with
it."We have to abandon this idea that there's something miraculous in diet,"
says Paulo Boffetta, the doctor behind last week's study. "It's not true for
fruit and vegetables as a whole, and even less true for fruit and vegetables
individually."
<close snip>
Copyright 2010 Times Newspapers Ltd.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
* It was a non meat eating intern under McGovern in the 70's who wrote the FINAL USDA proposal to alter the American diet forever..with no proof whatsoever.. ( From Good Calories Bad Calories by G. Taubes
** The California Dairy lobby also had " Milk is good for everybody" until lawsuits followed..... follow the Money and MOST campaigns profit the special interest behind them.
The good it may have done is replace some carbs and junk food calories with real veggies and fruits. But most people choose bananas, oranges, apples and corn/peas to meet the advice..all high sugar, higher carb.
It all began with a catchy number and a marketing campaign - not hard
science. < I'm not surprised, are you?
How the five-a-day mantra was born
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Uk/uk.philosophy.humanism/2010-04/msg00113.html
<snip>.....So, from where did the US Government get the idea for the number five, if
not the scientific studies? .....Marion Nestle, nutrition
professor at New York University, thinks she remembers exactly where.
"It was Susan Foerster, the head nutritionist in California. She had the
bright idea of promoting fruit and vegetable consumption in a state which
was a big fruit and vegetable producer."
The American National Cancer Institute admits that "no studies have tested
the impact of specific numbers of servings on cancer risk". But it says five
was chosen in California in 1988, as it doubled the average consumption, and
"the number five was memorable and provided a platform for creative message
and programme delivery".
Britain, though, has taken California's 1980s marketing policy and run with
it."We have to abandon this idea that there's something miraculous in diet,"
says Paulo Boffetta, the doctor behind last week's study. "It's not true for
fruit and vegetables as a whole, and even less true for fruit and vegetables
individually."
<close snip>
Copyright 2010 Times Newspapers Ltd.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
* It was a non meat eating intern under McGovern in the 70's who wrote the FINAL USDA proposal to alter the American diet forever..with no proof whatsoever.. ( From Good Calories Bad Calories by G. Taubes
** The California Dairy lobby also had " Milk is good for everybody" until lawsuits followed..... follow the Money and MOST campaigns profit the special interest behind them.
5
Replies
-
Ansel Keyes, President Eisenhower's heart attack and Eisenhower's cardiologist played a big role as predecessors to that mess also. Frankly, I think we've all been mislead.2
-
Yep. What a mess. If only they'd listened to Yudkin instead of Keyes.3
-
Right along with this is how distorted portion sizes are , so in many cases one serving of high glycemic vegetable is actually two or three.2
-
Atkins proved to be more or less correct, after all.6
-
I am so not surprised to learn this!1
-
When I TRY to mention about Eisenhower and how his heart attack lead the national fear of them and fats, etc. my docs don't get it..no one conventionally trained learned the big picture...remember when Reagan liked Jelly beans? Jelly belly shot to $$$ fame, Bush hated broccoli--it fell in favor..leaders, sports guys, "move stars" all influence us..and BIASED interns writing position papers!!!!
Most of you know Adkins was ALSO called to describe ideal diet to McGovern's USDA committee in 70's, but run out of town by peers and Keys..what a shame.
I'd love to see a SciFI movie showing our nation/world if Adkin's was believed instead...what would be different? Little obesity? No fast food on every corner? We'd all be biking and walking instead of gyms and autos everywhere. Only a few % rise in T1 diabetes instead of 800% of T2!!!! in just 30 years....2 -
I have run across doctors who do prescribe low carb diets to their patients, who know about the food pyramid scandal, and who understand the basics of how carbohydrates are processed in the body. It seems to me that this is finally becoming better known.
Otherwise, I mostly ignore what doctors say. Most of them -- with the exception of my new GP -- seem to be woefully out of touch with current research.3 -
KETOGENICGURL wrote: »This 2010 post by a Brit reporter has to be shared..once again it is ONE person* who altered the face of global diet advice... tracking HOW this came to be is interesting.
"It was Susan Foerster, the head nutritionist in California. She had the
bright idea of promoting fruit and vegetable consumption in a state which
was a big fruit and vegetable producer."
The American National Cancer Institute admits that "no studies have tested
the impact of specific numbers of servings on cancer risk". But it says five
was chosen in California in 1988, as it doubled the average consumption, and
"the number five was memorable and provided a platform for creative message
and programme delivery".
Britain, though, has taken California's 1980s marketing policy and run with
it."We have to abandon this idea that there's something miraculous in diet,"
says Paulo Boffetta, the doctor behind last week's study. "It's not true for
fruit and vegetables as a whole, and even less true for fruit and vegetables
individually."
<close snip>
+1 @KETOGENICGURL.
Nothing like the brassy simplicity of one-size-fits-all sloganizing."Be good to your feet....
Treat them to 6 Pair of Size 9 Air Jordans every year! "0 -
I have run across doctors who do prescribe low carb diets to their patients, who know about the food pyramid scandal, and who understand the basics of how carbohydrates are processed in the body. It seems to me that this is finally becoming better known.
Otherwise, I mostly ignore what doctors say. Most of them -- with the exception of my new GP -- seem to be woefully out of touch with current research.
My doctor was the one who suggested I try LCHF. He's a big Tim Noakes fan, turns out...4 -
I have run across doctors who do prescribe low carb diets to their patients, who know about the food pyramid scandal, and who understand the basics of how carbohydrates are processed in the body. It seems to me that this is finally becoming better known.
Otherwise, I mostly ignore what doctors say. Most of them -- with the exception of my new GP -- seem to be woefully out of touch with current research.
It's a political thing. And a sort of indoctrination thing. Apparently, doctors are traditionally trained to be all authoritative and "I'm the doctor, so I'm right" all the time. The end result is that their ego/reputation/pocketbook/whatever has a vested interest in sticking to their original statement, even when that statement is proven wrong. (There are also some that are bound by requirements/rules from laws and/or accreditation boards to perpetuate the bad information, even when they know it's wrong.)
That's slowly being dismantled, as knowledge is more easily attainable, and people are empowered to advocate for themselves, instead of blindly listening to their doctors. People are realizing that doctors are humans (not gods), and so can be wrong or un/misinformed, and that's okay (as long as the doctor is willing to admit such and learn the new/correct thing). It's ultimately a good thing (as it holds them accountable to higher standards), but that first step off that pedestal is a doozy.3 -
The five fruits & veggies is the ONLY thing I miss on WOE. Especially the fruits. Could be why last blood test my tryglcerides (sp) went up - a massive bowl of berries while watching TV thinking "Hey it is a good thing - I need all this fruit - it is 4 servings of the 5"4
-
When I mentioned to an acquaintance my LC lifestyle and how pleased I am with my weight and my improved health, she proudly replied that she too follows a healthy WOE. She admitted she was somewhat puzzled why her weight wasn't going down and in fact had gone up. Afterwards I did a rough estimate of the fruit-packed breakfast smoothie she described to me: somewhere around 150 carb grams all by itself.2
-
mandycat223 wrote: »When I mentioned to an acquaintance my LC lifestyle and how pleased I am with my weight and my improved health, she proudly replied that she too follows a healthy WOE. She admitted she was somewhat puzzled why her weight wasn't going down and in fact had gone up. Afterwards I did a rough estimate of the fruit-packed breakfast smoothie she described to me: somewhere around 150 carb grams all by itself.
Heavens!
There's no "diet" yet concocted that some investor won't pronounce "healthy," "fat-burning," or "age-defying."
The Drinking Man's Diet was no exception, nor, apparently, is the Hummingbird Diet your acquaintance has embarked on!2 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »It's a political thing. And a sort of indoctrination thing. Apparently, doctors are traditionally trained to be all authoritative and "I'm the doctor, so I'm right" all the time. The end result is that their ego/reputation/pocketbook/whatever has a vested interest in sticking to their original statement, even when that statement is proven wrong. (There are also some that are bound by requirements/rules from laws and/or accreditation boards to perpetuate the bad information, even when they know it's wrong.)
That's slowly being dismantled, as knowledge is more easily attainable, and people are empowered to advocate for themselves, instead of blindly listening to their doctors. People are realizing that doctors are humans (not gods), and so can be wrong or un/misinformed, and that's okay (as long as the doctor is willing to admit such and learn the new/correct thing). It's ultimately a good thing (as it holds them accountable to higher standards), but that first step off that pedestal is a doozy.
Oh, well said @Dragonwolf, well said!
0 -
Dragonwolf wrote: »It's a political thing. And a sort of indoctrination thing. Apparently, doctors are traditionally trained to be all authoritative and "I'm the doctor, so I'm right" all the time. The end result is that their ego/reputation/pocketbook/whatever has a vested interest in sticking to their original statement, even when that statement is proven wrong. (There are also some that are bound by requirements/rules from laws and/or accreditation boards to perpetuate the bad information, even when they know it's wrong.)
That's slowly being dismantled, as knowledge is more easily attainable, and people are empowered to advocate for themselves, instead of blindly listening to their doctors. People are realizing that doctors are humans (not gods), and so can be wrong or un/misinformed, and that's okay (as long as the doctor is willing to admit such and learn the new/correct thing). It's ultimately a good thing (as it holds them accountable to higher standards), but that first step off that pedestal is a doozy.
Oh yeah.
I lived most of my young adult life wondering why I felt so awful when various doctors were telling me there was nothing physically wrong with me (it was obviously all in my head).
Then a doctor at the herpes clinic at UBC (I had cold sores 50% of the time) took a single glance at my neck and wrote a fairly strong letter to my current GP, which resulted in a blood test/visit to endocrinologist/thyroid medication. All it took was for someone to actually LOOK at me.
I am now fortunate enough to have a GP who understands the importance of patient empowerment and encourages me to fill in his knowledge limitations with visits to a licensed naturopath. He listens without judging. He is constantly updating his knowledge. But he is an exception.
3 -
@LauraCoth - one supplement that has helped me 1,000,000 times over with cold sores, if like me, any event of stress has them flaring up like crazy - is to add L-Lysine. Adding 500 mg 1-2 times a day as preventative or 1000 mg twice a day when in a flare has cut down my issue to, well, other that the one I treated, I haven't had one in the 3-4 months since I started supplementing, despite crazy stress over moving, car problems, and all sorts of stuff... Just a bug to put in your ear. It has to do with balancing out L-Arginine which is high in chocolate, among a number of other things...
0 -
You know, once I began taking Synthroid the cold sores just stopped. It had obviously got to the point where I just had no immune system left and the virus was constantly attacking me. I don'think I've had five cold sores in the last 20 years, since I was diagnosed.1
-
@LauraCoth - I SOOO did not have that reaction (if anything they ramped up), but I'm on the generic, levothyroxine, so I don't know if brand named Synthroid would make a difference. I might have to research that...0
-
KnitOrMiss wrote: »@LauraCoth - I SOOO did not have that reaction (if anything they ramped up), but I'm on the generic, levothyroxine, so I don't know if brand named Synthroid would make a difference. I might have to research that...
I wonder if that would help? It might be worth a shot.
Or maybe, in my case, I had been hypo for so many years that anything would have helped me (my symptoms started at 6 and I wasn't diagnosed until 39).
On the other hand, Synthroid gave me terrible foot cramps and insomnia. Life is just generally better on my Erfa Thyroid.
0 -
My endo really doesn't want to switch me off of levo since I've done okay with it on labs. Since adding the T3, I don't know if he's going to want to switch me. I know he would if I pushed the issue, but his concern was me feeling crappy again while transitioning. @LauraCoth - did you have transition issues? Did your thyroid respond better to lower levels? Higher? I've been hypo for a long time, too, and only been on meds a few years now (the first time was less than 2 months and not helpful, etc.)...0
