Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Sugar, The Bitter Truth
Replies
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 thanks for sharing that the type of calories consumed can make a difference in weight loss/gain.
For the 1000000th time, no they don't.
If they did, I would have never lost weight. Calories are a unit of measurement. Nutrition is not calories.10 -
ForecasterJason wrote: »In the quantities with which some people eat/drink sugar, I would say that fructose is toxic. Alan Aragon agrees that drinking a half dozen cans of soda a day is a toxic amount of sugar. I did a quick search on the Internet and can see that some people do indeed drink that much a day.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
6 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 below is some research that drives home the validity of video that you posted by addressing that High Fructose can lead to IR which we know makes weight loss much harder.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025195
Pancreatology. 2016 May-Jun;16(3):347-52. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Mar 10.
Alpha lipoic acid attenuates high-fructose-induced pancreatic toxicity.
Topsakal S1, Ozmen O2, Cankara FN3, Yesilot S4, Bayram D5, Genç Özdamar N6, Kayan S6.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Chronic consumption of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) causes several problems such as insulin resistance. The goal of the study was to investigate pancreatic damage induced by chronic HFCS consumption and the protective effects of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) on pancreatic cells.
METHODS:
Wistar Albino, 4-month-old, female rats weighing 250-300 g were randomly distributed into three groups, each containing eight rats. The study included an HFCS group, an HFCS + ALA-administered group and a control group (CON). The prepared 30% solution of HFCS (F30) (24% fructose, 28% dextrose) was added to the drinking water for 10 weeks. ALA treatment was begun 4 weeks after the first HFCS administration (100 mg/kg/oral, last 6 weeks). Rats were anaesthetised and euthanised by cervical dislocation 24 h after the last ALA administration. Blood samples for biochemical tests (amylase, lipase, malondialdehyde (MDA) and catalase (CAT)) and tissue samples for histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations (caspase-3, insulin and glucagon) were collected.
RESULTS:
Comparing the control and HFCS groups, serum glucose (150.92 ± 39.77 and 236.50 ± 18.28, respectively, p < 0.05), amylase (2165.00 ± 150.76 and 3027.66 ± 729.19, respectively, p < 0.01), lipase (5.58 ± 2.22 and 11.51 ± 2.74, respectively, p < 0.01) and pancreatic tissue MDA (0.0167 ± 0.004 and 0.0193 ± 0.006, respectively, p < 0.05) levels were increased, whereas tissue CAT (0.0924 ± 0.029 and 0.0359 ± 0.023, respectively, p < 0.05) activity decreased in the HFCS group significantly. Histopathological examination revealed degenerative and necrotic changes in Langerhans islet cells and slight inflammatory cell infiltration in pancreatic tissue in the HFCS group. Immunohistochemically there was a significant decrease in insulin (2.85 ± 0.37 and 0.87 ± 0.64, respectively, p < 0.001) and glucagon (2.71 ± 0.48 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.001) secreting cell scores, whereas a greater increase in caspase-3 (0.14 ± 0.37 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.05) expression was seen in this group compared with the controls. In the ALA-treated group, all of these pathologic conditions were improved.
CONCLUSIONS:
This study indicated HFCS induced pancreatic lesions, but ALA had ameliorative effects.
Copyright © 2016 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Alpha lipoic acid; High-fructose corn syrup; Immunohistochemistry; Oxidative stress; Pancreas; Pathology
PMID: 27025195 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
8 -
cerise_noir wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 thanks for sharing that the type of calories consumed can make a difference in weight loss/gain.
For the 1000000th time, no they don't.
If they did, I would have never lost weight. Calories are a unit of measurement. Nutrition is not calories.
Did you even watch the video in the OP?0 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »cerise_noir wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 thanks for sharing that the type of calories consumed can make a difference in weight loss/gain.
For the 1000000th time, no they don't.
If they did, I would have never lost weight. Calories are a unit of measurement. Nutrition is not calories.
Did you even watch the video in the OP?
What does that have to do with the thread of the ongoing conversation?
Lustig is claiming that carbohydrate intake increased in that video, but as Alan Aragon rebutted:While Lustig correctly points out that the nation’s overall caloric consumption has increased, he proceeds to blame carbohydrates as being the primary constituent. The thing is, he uses data spanning from 1989-1995 on children aged 2-17. Survey data is far from the gold standard of evidence, but if you’re gonna cite it, you might as well go with something more recent that includes adults.
Here’s the latest from the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), which tracked the percent of total daily calories of the range of food groups from 1970-2007. The actual spreadsheet of the following figures can be downloaded here, click on the “Percents” tab at the bottom (note that these figures are updated regularly by the ERS, so the version you download may be different from what’s reported here) [1]:
Meats, eggs, and nut kcals decreased 4%.
Dairy kcals decreased 3%.
Percentage of fruit kcals stayed the same.
Percentage of vegetable kcals stayed the same.
Flour and cereal product kcals increased 3%.
Added fat kcals are up 7%,
Added sugars kcals decreased 1%
Total energy intake in 1970 averaged 2172 kcal. By 2007 this hiked up to 2775 kcal, a 603 kcal increase.
Taking a hard look at the data above, it appears that the rise in obesity is due in large part to an increase in caloric intake in general, rather than an increase in added sugars in particular.
Lustig's biggest pitfall is the fact that he's a pediatric endocrinologist working above his pay grade.
12 -
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.0 -
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
So your argument is "animal products give you all the nutrients you need and if the nutrition guidelines disagree it's because they're wrong."12 -
This content has been removed.
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 below is some research that drives home the validity of video that you posted by addressing that High Fructose can lead to IR which we know makes weight loss much harder.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025195
Pancreatology. 2016 May-Jun;16(3):347-52. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Mar 10.
Alpha lipoic acid attenuates high-fructose-induced pancreatic toxicity.
Topsakal S1, Ozmen O2, Cankara FN3, Yesilot S4, Bayram D5, Genç Özdamar N6, Kayan S6.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Chronic consumption of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) causes several problems such as insulin resistance. The goal of the study was to investigate pancreatic damage induced by chronic HFCS consumption and the protective effects of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) on pancreatic cells.
METHODS:
Wistar Albino, 4-month-old, female rats weighing 250-300 g were randomly distributed into three groups, each containing eight rats. The study included an HFCS group, an HFCS + ALA-administered group and a control group (CON). The prepared 30% solution of HFCS (F30) (24% fructose, 28% dextrose) was added to the drinking water for 10 weeks. ALA treatment was begun 4 weeks after the first HFCS administration (100 mg/kg/oral, last 6 weeks). Rats were anaesthetised and euthanised by cervical dislocation 24 h after the last ALA administration. Blood samples for biochemical tests (amylase, lipase, malondialdehyde (MDA) and catalase (CAT)) and tissue samples for histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations (caspase-3, insulin and glucagon) were collected.
RESULTS:
Comparing the control and HFCS groups, serum glucose (150.92 ± 39.77 and 236.50 ± 18.28, respectively, p < 0.05), amylase (2165.00 ± 150.76 and 3027.66 ± 729.19, respectively, p < 0.01), lipase (5.58 ± 2.22 and 11.51 ± 2.74, respectively, p < 0.01) and pancreatic tissue MDA (0.0167 ± 0.004 and 0.0193 ± 0.006, respectively, p < 0.05) levels were increased, whereas tissue CAT (0.0924 ± 0.029 and 0.0359 ± 0.023, respectively, p < 0.05) activity decreased in the HFCS group significantly. Histopathological examination revealed degenerative and necrotic changes in Langerhans islet cells and slight inflammatory cell infiltration in pancreatic tissue in the HFCS group. Immunohistochemically there was a significant decrease in insulin (2.85 ± 0.37 and 0.87 ± 0.64, respectively, p < 0.001) and glucagon (2.71 ± 0.48 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.001) secreting cell scores, whereas a greater increase in caspase-3 (0.14 ± 0.37 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.05) expression was seen in this group compared with the controls. In the ALA-treated group, all of these pathologic conditions were improved.
CONCLUSIONS:
This study indicated HFCS induced pancreatic lesions, but ALA had ameliorative effects.
Copyright © 2016 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Alpha lipoic acid; High-fructose corn syrup; Immunohistochemistry; Oxidative stress; Pancreas; Pathology
PMID: 27025195 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001
I'm not sure if you linked the wrong study or if there's a misunderstanding here.
The study you linked attempts to identify whether or not the addition of ALA had a protective effect on pancreatic cells. The study does not show that HFCS cause insulin resistance.
Worth noting, both HFCS groups in this study were eating in an energy surplus as evidenced by the weight gain whereas the control group did not gain weight.12 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
So your argument is "animal products give you all the nutrients you need and if the nutrition guidelines disagree it's because they're wrong."
Not really...I'm not sure how you got that. More along the lines of nutrition guidelines are based on SAD diets and an animal based diet is far from being a SAD diet. Calcium and vitamin C are good examples of that.
Diets based upon animal products (meat, eggs, ofal, bone broth, dairy) are generally quite healthy. I have never seen a paper on how that leads to nutrient deficiencies? I have seen articles and papers discussing how healthful diets without refined carbs, sugars, and even plant matter can be.
So your argument is "I'll twist her words because I can't prove she's wrong, and throw it in quotations so it looks like I am quoting odd statements that she made."4 -
stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
So your argument is "animal products give you all the nutrients you need and if the nutrition guidelines disagree it's because they're wrong."
Not really...I'm not sure how you got that. More along the lines of nutrition guidelines are based on SAD diets and an animal based diet is far from being a SAD diet. Calcium and vitamin C are good examples of that.
Diets based upon animal products (meat, eggs, ofal, bone broth, dairy) are generally quite healthy. I have never seen a paper on how that leads to nutrient deficiencies? I have seen articles and papers discussing how healthful diets without refined carbs, sugars, and even plant matter can be.
So your argument is "I'll twist her words because I can't prove she's wrong, and throw it in quotations so it looks like I am quoting odd statements that she made."
Are you saying people on meat based diets require less of certain nutrients than people on a SAD? How does that work?3 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
So your argument is "animal products give you all the nutrients you need and if the nutrition guidelines disagree it's because they're wrong."
Not really...I'm not sure how you got that. More along the lines of nutrition guidelines are based on SAD diets and an animal based diet is far from being a SAD diet. Calcium and vitamin C are good examples of that.
Diets based upon animal products (meat, eggs, ofal, bone broth, dairy) are generally quite healthy. I have never seen a paper on how that leads to nutrient deficiencies? I have seen articles and papers discussing how healthful diets without refined carbs, sugars, and even plant matter can be.
So your argument is "I'll twist her words because I can't prove she's wrong, and throw it in quotations so it looks like I am quoting odd statements that she made."
Are you saying people on meat based diets require less of certain nutrients than people on a SAD? How does that work?
For some nutrients (micronutrients), yes. Some. Not everything. Some are more bioavailable, and other just don't need to be as high because of the foods you are putting into your body. Highly refined foods tend to make one require more nutrients.
It isn't a huge difference, and not for everything, but there is a difference.2 -
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
RDAs are not based on the SAD diet. They are derived by the requirements that people need to achieve good health. SAD is the polar opposite of that.4 -
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
RDAs are not based on the SAD diet. They are derived by the requirements that people need to achieve good health. SAD is the polar opposite of that.
I disagree. RDA is set up for the typical person eating a SAD diet. Nutrient intake and absorption/usage can vary based upon foods.2 -
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
RDAs are not based on the SAD diet. They are derived by the requirements that people need to achieve good health. SAD is the polar opposite of that.
I disagree. RDA is set up for the typical person eating a SAD diet. Nutrient intake and absorption/usage can vary based upon foods.Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDAs) have been prepared by the Food and Nutrition Board since 1941. The first edition was published in 1943 to provide ''standards to serve as a goal for good nutrition." Because RDAs are intended to reflect the best scientific judgment on nutrient allowances for the maintenance of good health and to serve as the basis for evaluating the adequacy of diets of groups of people, the initial publication has been revised periodically to incorporate new scientific knowledge and interpretations. This is the tenth edition.
RDAs are defined in Chapter 2 as the levels of intake of essential nutrients that, on the basis of scientific knowledge, are judged by the Food and Nutrition Board to be adequate to meet the known nutrient needs of practically all healthy persons. This definition has remained essentially unchanged since 1974 (eighth edition). Individuals with special nutritional needs are not covered by the RDAs.
In principle, RDAs are based on various kinds of evidence: (1) studies of subjects maintained on diets containing low or deficient levels of a nutrient, followed by correction of the deficit with measured amounts of the nutrient; (2) nutrient balance studies that measure nutrient status in relation to intake; (3) biochemical measurements of tissue saturation or adequacy of molecular function in relation to nutrient intake; (4) nutrient intakes of fully breastfed infants and of apparently healthy people from their food supply; (5) epidemiological observations of nutrient status in populations in relation to intake; and (6) in some cases, extrapolation of data from animal experiments. In practice, there are only limited data on which estimates of nutrient requirements can be based.
https://www.nap.edu/read/1349/chapter/24 -
I disagree. RDA is set up for the typical person eating a SAD diet. Nutrient intake and absorption/usage can vary based upon foods.
Then you should research how RDAs are derived.
https://ods.od.nih.gov/Health_Information/Dietary_Reference_Intakes.aspx6 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 below is some research that drives home the validity of video that you posted by addressing that High Fructose can lead to IR which we know makes weight loss much harder.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025195
Pancreatology. 2016 May-Jun;16(3):347-52. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Mar 10.
Alpha lipoic acid attenuates high-fructose-induced pancreatic toxicity.
Topsakal S1, Ozmen O2, Cankara FN3, Yesilot S4, Bayram D5, Genç Özdamar N6, Kayan S6.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Chronic consumption of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) causes several problems such as insulin resistance. The goal of the study was to investigate pancreatic damage induced by chronic HFCS consumption and the protective effects of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) on pancreatic cells.
METHODS:
Wistar Albino, 4-month-old, female rats weighing 250-300 g were randomly distributed into three groups, each containing eight rats. The study included an HFCS group, an HFCS + ALA-administered group and a control group (CON). The prepared 30% solution of HFCS (F30) (24% fructose, 28% dextrose) was added to the drinking water for 10 weeks. ALA treatment was begun 4 weeks after the first HFCS administration (100 mg/kg/oral, last 6 weeks). Rats were anaesthetised and euthanised by cervical dislocation 24 h after the last ALA administration. Blood samples for biochemical tests (amylase, lipase, malondialdehyde (MDA) and catalase (CAT)) and tissue samples for histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations (caspase-3, insulin and glucagon) were collected.
RESULTS:
Comparing the control and HFCS groups, serum glucose (150.92 ± 39.77 and 236.50 ± 18.28, respectively, p < 0.05), amylase (2165.00 ± 150.76 and 3027.66 ± 729.19, respectively, p < 0.01), lipase (5.58 ± 2.22 and 11.51 ± 2.74, respectively, p < 0.01) and pancreatic tissue MDA (0.0167 ± 0.004 and 0.0193 ± 0.006, respectively, p < 0.05) levels were increased, whereas tissue CAT (0.0924 ± 0.029 and 0.0359 ± 0.023, respectively, p < 0.05) activity decreased in the HFCS group significantly. Histopathological examination revealed degenerative and necrotic changes in Langerhans islet cells and slight inflammatory cell infiltration in pancreatic tissue in the HFCS group. Immunohistochemically there was a significant decrease in insulin (2.85 ± 0.37 and 0.87 ± 0.64, respectively, p < 0.001) and glucagon (2.71 ± 0.48 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.001) secreting cell scores, whereas a greater increase in caspase-3 (0.14 ± 0.37 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.05) expression was seen in this group compared with the controls. In the ALA-treated group, all of these pathologic conditions were improved.
CONCLUSIONS:
This study indicated HFCS induced pancreatic lesions, but ALA had ameliorative effects.
Copyright © 2016 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Alpha lipoic acid; High-fructose corn syrup; Immunohistochemistry; Oxidative stress; Pancreas; Pathology
PMID: 27025195 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Then why even do studies on animals?0 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
7 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
But supposedly "It has been WELL ESTABLISHED in the scientific community that animal studies don't seem to correlate the same results with humans."0 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
But supposedly "It has been WELL ESTABLISHED in the scientific community that animal studies don't seem to correlate the same results with humans."
@ParadigmShifter it has been known like forever that the correlation of animal testing to humans is no where a 1:1 ratio.
Lab animals typically are not trapped from the back door of local greasy spoons but are typically bred to be better test models for human related comparisons.
In high school or college dissecting the frog was for training of people interested in medical science or to find out they were not interested for the most part.
How to set up a research project and carry through to completion is a huge feature of doing animal studies without breaking the bank. When many of us do n=1 self studies we like to read and understand lab animal research to know the level of risks that we may be taking.
A study of say 10,000 humans can show very diverse results because there are no two humans that are alike. Because many human diseases seem to originate from mental thought patterns plus epigenetic factors, etc means there is nothing close to a high correlation possible.
Some of the negative remarks about animal studies may come from people opposed to animal testing period.1 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
But supposedly "It has been WELL ESTABLISHED in the scientific community that animal studies don't seem to correlate the same results with humans."
Science tries it's best to observe and create hypothesis if a test is done on an animal and how it MAY affect a human.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
5 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Marigolds333 wrote: »https://youtu.be/dBnniua6-oM
Sugar, The Bitter Truth.. This is about an hour long , but VERY worth watching. Very informative.
@Marigolds333 below is some research that drives home the validity of video that you posted by addressing that High Fructose can lead to IR which we know makes weight loss much harder.
https://ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27025195
Pancreatology. 2016 May-Jun;16(3):347-52. doi: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001. Epub 2016 Mar 10.
Alpha lipoic acid attenuates high-fructose-induced pancreatic toxicity.
Topsakal S1, Ozmen O2, Cankara FN3, Yesilot S4, Bayram D5, Genç Özdamar N6, Kayan S6.
Author information
Abstract
OBJECTIVES:
Chronic consumption of high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) causes several problems such as insulin resistance. The goal of the study was to investigate pancreatic damage induced by chronic HFCS consumption and the protective effects of alpha lipoic acid (ALA) on pancreatic cells.
METHODS:
Wistar Albino, 4-month-old, female rats weighing 250-300 g were randomly distributed into three groups, each containing eight rats. The study included an HFCS group, an HFCS + ALA-administered group and a control group (CON). The prepared 30% solution of HFCS (F30) (24% fructose, 28% dextrose) was added to the drinking water for 10 weeks. ALA treatment was begun 4 weeks after the first HFCS administration (100 mg/kg/oral, last 6 weeks). Rats were anaesthetised and euthanised by cervical dislocation 24 h after the last ALA administration. Blood samples for biochemical tests (amylase, lipase, malondialdehyde (MDA) and catalase (CAT)) and tissue samples for histopathological and immunohistochemical examinations (caspase-3, insulin and glucagon) were collected.
RESULTS:
Comparing the control and HFCS groups, serum glucose (150.92 ± 39.77 and 236.50 ± 18.28, respectively, p < 0.05), amylase (2165.00 ± 150.76 and 3027.66 ± 729.19, respectively, p < 0.01), lipase (5.58 ± 2.22 and 11.51 ± 2.74, respectively, p < 0.01) and pancreatic tissue MDA (0.0167 ± 0.004 and 0.0193 ± 0.006, respectively, p < 0.05) levels were increased, whereas tissue CAT (0.0924 ± 0.029 and 0.0359 ± 0.023, respectively, p < 0.05) activity decreased in the HFCS group significantly. Histopathological examination revealed degenerative and necrotic changes in Langerhans islet cells and slight inflammatory cell infiltration in pancreatic tissue in the HFCS group. Immunohistochemically there was a significant decrease in insulin (2.85 ± 0.37 and 0.87 ± 0.64, respectively, p < 0.001) and glucagon (2.71 ± 0.48 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.001) secreting cell scores, whereas a greater increase in caspase-3 (0.14 ± 0.37 and 1.00 ± 0.75, respectively, p < 0.05) expression was seen in this group compared with the controls. In the ALA-treated group, all of these pathologic conditions were improved.
CONCLUSIONS:
This study indicated HFCS induced pancreatic lesions, but ALA had ameliorative effects.
Copyright © 2016 IAP and EPC. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
KEYWORDS:
Alpha lipoic acid; High-fructose corn syrup; Immunohistochemistry; Oxidative stress; Pancreas; Pathology
PMID: 27025195 DOI: 10.1016/j.pan.2016.03.001
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Then why even do studies on animals?
It's cheap and you can experiment on hundreds of subjects in minimal space.3 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
But supposedly "It has been WELL ESTABLISHED in the scientific community that animal studies don't seem to correlate the same results with humans."
True, but critters are the only thing available until safety is proven. Once safety is shown, they can then progress to humans to test efficacy.2 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
But supposedly "It has been WELL ESTABLISHED in the scientific community that animal studies don't seem to correlate the same results with humans."
This depends on what you are studying - if gastrointestinal - then swine, if vasculature - then rabbit, etc. Animal studies give a preclinical team understanding on how a specific drug, marker, device will behave. Based on this information then the study is expanded to human population.
The obvious problem with humans is that you lose control of the variables and can only track behavior within the clinic. This is compounded with any issue that is linked to behavior, such as weight management.4 -
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
No, but that does make it much easier. Sort of like how spinach is a better source of calcium than carrots but you don't need to eat spinach to get calcium (if a vegetarian).
Not overcooking meat helps too.
It's funny you should mention calcium.
Meat is almost devoid of calcium.
If you include eggs and dairy, you will need to drink about a liter of milk a day for your calcium. Fine, that's possible.
You'll still be lacking Vitamin C and Manganese first and foremost and probably some other things I didn't see at first glance.
RDA's are set up for people who eat SAD.
Vitamin C recommendations are ridiculously high for those who have removed refined foods from their diet.
Calcium? There is a lot of calcium in animal products. Drink bone broth, eat cheese, eat fish... The muscle of the animal is not the only animal product out there that people eat. Dairy is not the only source of calcium out there, nor is it the best. Plus the K2 and D in animal products tends to aid with Ca absorption more than what you'd get in plant products.
For manganese, a trace mineral, it is in animal products, especially those that are raised in a more natural manner like grass fed beef. Shell fish are fairly high in manganese too.
And for those who like ofal, or like to incorporate it into food, that is a very high source of many vitamins and minerals. My point was that it is not a necessary source of vitamins and minerals for people who eat largely carnivorous. Just like collard greens are not mandatory for vegetarians. Both are helpful but not crucial to good health.stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
This isn't true of many healthy carnivores. Some eat it but it isn't needed.
RDAs are not based on the SAD diet. They are derived by the requirements that people need to achieve good health. SAD is the polar opposite of that.
I disagree. RDA is set up for the typical person eating a SAD diet. Nutrient intake and absorption/usage can vary based upon foods.
Where are you getting this from?0 -
ParadigmShifter wrote: »ParadigmShifter wrote: »
Then why even do studies on animals?
Because they can't do any human studies until they prove that whatever it is they are testing won't kill all the mice.
But supposedly "It has been WELL ESTABLISHED in the scientific community that animal studies don't seem to correlate the same results with humans."
In some cases animals are used because it wold be unethical to do the same things to people (intentional infection, as an example).3 -
This content has been removed.
-
stevencloser wrote: »RuNaRoUnDaFiEld wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »Tazzie0208 wrote: »Sugar is not to be omitted from your diet. Your brain needs sugar. We function with the help of sugar. What needs to be done is as we all know, follow a balanced diet. Everything in moderation. Be mindful. That is all.
No your body doesn't need sugar. It doesn't need carbs at all, for that matter (and a few people manage to function just fine with a diet containing virtually no carbs) (not me!). the body can make everything it needs from fats and proteins.
so then how does one get the nutrients they need that fruits and veggies provide? those things are carbs(sugar)
I think they mean that dietary sugar or carbs are not needed, which is true.
... I think my carb total for this month during an animal products challenge is about 30g. Carbs definitely haven't been needed.
they may not be needed to function, but if you cut out fruits and veggies would you not be denying your body of certain nutrients only those things can provide? how is the body going to make certain nutrients from fats and protein if the food doesnt contain it?
All nutrients are available in animal products. Some are actually more bio available in that form.
Fibre is about the only thing that is missing but it is really only a benefit when digesting plant matter. It is not needed for a animal based diet.
You have to eat offal to get the full spectrum though don't you?
Yep. Raw meat and/or organs on the regular.
1
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions