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.
Why are most mfp users against holistic nutrition?
Replies
-
stanmann571 wrote: »Just like Chiro is great for shoulder/back/neck pain/disfunction, less good for digestive issues.
Do not let a chiropractor manipulate your neck.
Too many people have died from stroke after that.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-statement-on-cervical-manipulation-and-dissections/
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/early/2014/08/07/STR.00000000000000161 -
finny11122 wrote: »Do and enjoy what works for you and makes you healthy and happy .
"It worked for me" is NOT scientific evidence.
If it was, tinfoil hats would be covered by insurance companies.5 -
Sure, but what's your suggestion? Parent Licences? Neuter people under a certain IQ? Ultimately, there are no laws against being an airhead nutjob. And even if you or I think someone is making bad decisions, the right to religious freedom is enshrined in many democratic countries constitutions.
“The problem with today’s world is that everyone believes they have the right to express their opinion AND have others listen to it.
The correct statement of individual rights is that everyone has the right to an opinion, but crucially, that opinion can be roundly ignored and even made fun of, particularly if it is demonstrably nonsense!”
- Professor Brian Cox.12 -
stanmann571 wrote: »Just like Chiro is great for shoulder/back/neck pain/disfunction, less good for digestive issues.
Do not let a chiropractor manipulate your neck.
Too many people have died from stroke after that.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-statement-on-cervical-manipulation-and-dissections/
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/early/2014/08/07/STR.0000000000000016
A chiropractor manipulating my neck is the only think that's fixing a 6 month stint of extreme debilitating vertigo, caused by a bilateral atlas subluxation from a crush injury. No other thing has been able to assist. Thing is, I have a bloody good chiro who I trust implicitly. There's just so many sub-par crap practitioners now though.0 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Just like Chiro is great for shoulder/back/neck pain/disfunction, less good for digestive issues.
Do not let a chiropractor manipulate your neck.
Too many people have died from stroke after that.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-statement-on-cervical-manipulation-and-dissections/
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/early/2014/08/07/STR.0000000000000016
A chiropractor manipulating my neck is the only think that's fixing a 6 month stint of extreme debilitating vertigo, caused by a bilateral atlas subluxation from a crush injury. No other thing has been able to assist. Thing is, I have a bloody good chiro who I trust implicitly. There's just so many sub-par crap practitioners now though.
So you have to keep going to the chiropractor? How is that fixing it? Could be it's getting better on its own.
2 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Just like Chiro is great for shoulder/back/neck pain/disfunction, less good for digestive issues.
Do not let a chiropractor manipulate your neck.
Too many people have died from stroke after that.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-statement-on-cervical-manipulation-and-dissections/
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/early/2014/08/07/STR.0000000000000016
A chiropractor manipulating my neck is the only think that's fixing a 6 month stint of extreme debilitating vertigo, caused by a bilateral atlas subluxation from a crush injury. No other thing has been able to assist. Thing is, I have a bloody good chiro who I trust implicitly. There's just so many sub-par crap practitioners now though.
So you have to keep going to the chiropractor? How is that fixing it? Could be it's getting better on its own.
I promise you, it is not. Because it has been so wrong for so long, it's requiring a few treatments because of muscle stiffness and it resettling into the position it's been in for so long. After 6 months, and the most recent month almost incapacitated, it got immediate relief after the first visit. I've had 2 visits with the chiro and a follow up tomorrow. 2 weeks to fix a problem that has baffled 2 neuros, an ENT surgeon and my GP for 6 months.1 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »stanmann571 wrote: »Just like Chiro is great for shoulder/back/neck pain/disfunction, less good for digestive issues.
Do not let a chiropractor manipulate your neck.
Too many people have died from stroke after that.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/a-statement-on-cervical-manipulation-and-dissections/
http://stroke.ahajournals.org/content/early/2014/08/07/STR.0000000000000016
A chiropractor manipulating my neck is the only think that's fixing a 6 month stint of extreme debilitating vertigo, caused by a bilateral atlas subluxation from a crush injury. No other thing has been able to assist. Thing is, I have a bloody good chiro who I trust implicitly. There's just so many sub-par crap practitioners now though.
So you have to keep going to the chiropractor? How is that fixing it? Could be it's getting better on its own.
I promise you, it is not. Because it has been so wrong for so long, it's requiring a few treatments because of muscle stiffness and it resettling into the position it's been in for so long. After 6 months, and the most recent month almost incapacitated, it got immediate relief after the first visit. I've had 2 visits with the chiro and a follow up tomorrow. 2 weeks to fix a problem that has baffled 2 neuros, an ENT surgeon and my GP for 6 months.
I'm just saying that neck manipulation is fairly well attributed to causing strokes.3 -
My friend took a holistic course and some of the stuff he was telling me is just utter nonsense, with no evidence or studies to back it up. Im a chemistry major, and any diet fads or stuff like that I ask my teachers about.
Best thing I can say is if your having doubts, do your own research. There is lots of info on the internet, just make sure its peer reviewed. Just because someone is teaching a course and/or has a degree or certificate means they are correct.
2 -
That is for all sciences. See if there is any insight to it. Just because it was studied does not mean a good one. With nutrition I find Western science believes if they did not find or prove it then it is not true. Well, not necessarily true either. You may have just not found it yet or it really not be a reality. Allopathic medicine can be arrogant and greedy. I also find sadly...who will benefit from the research. Some issues I wonder are based on who can make money in the future.16
-
Some people speak in support of "Allopathic" medicine and against "Western" medicine.
Haven't they stopped to think how racist that sounds? Primitivism is not a good look.
Non-Westerners are conventional doctors, surgeons, scientists and specialists like anybody else.
6 -
Some people speak in support of "Allopathic" medicine and against "Western" medicine.
Haven't they stopped to think how racist that sounds? Primitivism is not a good look.
Non-Westerners are conventional doctors, surgeons, scientists and specialists like anybody else.
The talk of "Western" medicine as somehow the more modern and progressive is especially ironic when you think that doctors in Muslim countries were revolutionising surgery at a time when the "Westerners" were burning doctors at the stake.8 -
goldthistime wrote: »Not sure if I've told this story before on here, but last year a friend who had cancer got advice from someone who persuaded her to follow a juice diet. Her tumour had shrunk in half after starting a new chemo treatment and this new diet, and she didn't want to take the chance that it was the diet rather than the chemo, so carried on with this juice diet. She was advised to add a little avocado for fat and nuts for protein and was about to start having bone broth soup for "added protein" when she died. She starved to death. The whole thing was horrendous to watch and is painful to think about still. It left me with a very bad attitude towards holistic medicine.
OP I don't know if you're still reading this thread or if you've had to protect your investment in your education by ignoring the majority of posts, but I hope you find a different career path.
My mother also starved to death after having cancer 7 years. She was in the hospital under her personal Doctor/close friend's care. She couldn't eat enough/her body could no longer process food efficiently enough.
My brother couldn't eat because of throat cancer, was fed through a tube in his stomach. Couldn't process it.
It happens with cancer. Whatever you try to eat.
4 -
garlic7girl wrote: »That is for all sciences. See if there is any insight to it. Just because it was studied does not mean a good one. With nutrition I find Western science believes if they did not find or prove it then it is not true. Well, not necessarily true either. You may have just not found it yet or it really not be a reality. Allopathic medicine can be arrogant and greedy. I also find sadly...who will benefit from the research. Some issues I wonder are based on who can make money in the future.
So you don't think naturopaths/"alternative medicine" doctors make money?
And the thing that makes them even more deplorable than "Big Pharma" is that they're peddling bogus snake oils which have no scientific proof of even being effective - and have killed many people who may have been saved had they shunned the woo and used "conventional" "western" "Big Pharma" medicine.11 -
I was doing some reading this morning on post operative wounds, in the main how to keep infection at bay.
I came across an article that said they had had a rise in re admissions due to burns from people using Korean Pulsatilla on advice from naturopaths. They were massaging it in to their wounds.
Think I'll stick to keeping it clean and dry!6 -
BritishSpy007 wrote: »Difficult to *kitten* to this...
Amateur.2 -
corinasue1143 wrote: »goldthistime wrote: »Not sure if I've told this story before on here, but last year a friend who had cancer got advice from someone who persuaded her to follow a juice diet. Her tumour had shrunk in half after starting a new chemo treatment and this new diet, and she didn't want to take the chance that it was the diet rather than the chemo, so carried on with this juice diet. She was advised to add a little avocado for fat and nuts for protein and was about to start having bone broth soup for "added protein" when she died. She starved to death. The whole thing was horrendous to watch and is painful to think about still. It left me with a very bad attitude towards holistic medicine.
OP I don't know if you're still reading this thread or if you've had to protect your investment in your education by ignoring the majority of posts, but I hope you find a different career path.
My mother also starved to death after having cancer 7 years. She was in the hospital under her personal Doctor/close friend's care. She couldn't eat enough/her body could no longer process food efficiently enough.
My brother couldn't eat because of throat cancer, was fed through a tube in his stomach. Couldn't process it.
It happens with cancer. Whatever you try to eat.
A friend on here introduced me to the term cachexia. It helped me realize that there was more going on than just this ridiculous diet and helped with my anger issues after her death. I see someone woo'd your post, but I mostly agree with you, many cancer patients starve to death. In my friend's case though, she regained her appetite when her tumour shrank in half but she disciplined herself to stick with the diet.1 -
I love it. The responses in here kill me. My typos and, potential, grammatical mistakes I'll leave in, since I'm not going to re-read this after I've written it (and yet.. I had to re-read myself.. I modified for meaning only however, corrected names and improved for meaning only... I left in the rest)... Though it wasn't a common believe the "science" of the past would bleed people. Also, a common thought in the "science" of the past, the world was flat and the Earth is the middle of existence. Hypothesis, theorems...etc... Show ME the evidence AGAINST leaky gut. The actual goal of a scientific study is to prove oneself incorrect and NOT to prove oneself to be correct. To suggest that there are NO black swans is to always be on the search for a black Swan NOT to ignore one when you find one. Let's take the information from Ancel Keyes, and group, and break down what's occurred since his hypothesis was followed. The United States of America has gone down a road of spiraling out of control health crises. Diabetes, which was barely recognized in the seventies and eighties, is out of containment, a complete household word because SO many people have it now. You've gotten vegans and vegetarians arguing "facts" about agendas while THEY'VE got agendas. Absolute fact, as the show What The Health quotes on all the funding behind the different organisations, their "experts" and "researchers" are being paid by vegan organisations. Their research IS funded by those WANTING the results they're finding. Are you kidding me!?! Lies in plain sight by omittions are still lies. Misleading everyone because you BELIEVE something is wrong doesn't make it right. The perpetual argument that there are NO black Swans, while looking at a Black Swan, is not only self deceiving but is a complete destroyer of what you all are referring to as science. I don't have to bring evidence against sugar to suggest sugar is the problem, or the level of said sugar is the problem, you've got to prove it isn't the problem. THAT'S science!!! Let's take some true science into THIS discussion. You DON'T NEED carbs to live!!! It's proven... You can't live without Fats! PERIOD!! You can't live without proteins!! PERIOD!!! But you can live on ZERO carbs!!! I'm not suggesting it's the best way to live, BUT, you can!! So, here is my suggest to anyone wanting to prove that I'm incorrect, take the scientific test and ONLY live on Carbs!! You'll DIE but give it an honest go. People HAVE and DO live on NO carb diets. Welcome to a REAL scientific test. Stop purporting to know sciences when you aren't even trying to disprove what is in front of you. I don't care of you've got a Master's or a PhD, anytime you are proving yourself right YOU'RE NOT using a scientific method! I assume I'm going to now be slammed by those of you whom BELIEVE you know better, bring it! At the end of the day, you're wrong! I truly don't care what your thoughts on this topic are or what you think of me, you're wrong. Stay blind! But, if you want to prove my statement wrong... No supplements, no fats, no proteins... Carb only diet.. Prove it! Crud, just no fats and no supplements... Proteins and carbs!!! Go!!! Prove yourselves correct, and die in the process. Because you will... I'll drop this and you can now vulture attack me.35
-
mshanepace wrote: »I love it. The responses in here kill me. My typos and, potential, grammatical mistakes I'll leave in, since I'm not going to re-read this after I've written it... Though it wasn't a common believe the "science" of the past would bleed people. Also, a common thought in the "science" of the past, the world was flat and the Earth is the middle of existence. Hypothesis, theorems...etc... So ME the evidence AGAINST leaky gut. The actual goal of a scientific study is to prove oneself incorrect and NOT to prove oneself to be correct. To suggest that there are NO black swans is to always be on the search for a black Swan NOT to ignore one when you find one. Let's take the information from Angel Keyes, and group, and break down what's occurred since his hypothesis was followed. The United States of America has gone down a road of spiraling out of control health crises. Diabetes, which was barely recognized in the seventies and eighties, is out of containment, a complete household word because SO many people have it now. You've gotten vegans and vegetarians arguing "facts" about agendas while THEY'VE got agendas. Absolute fact, as the show What The Health quotes on all the funding behind the different organisations, their "experts" and "researchers" are being paid by vegan organisations. Their research IS funded by those WANTING the results they're finding. Are you kidding me!?! Lies in plain sight by omittions are still lies. Misleading everyone because you BELIEVE something is wrong doesn't make it wrong. The perpetual argument that there are NO black Swans, while looking at a Black Swan, is not only self deceiving but is a complete destroyer of what you all are referring to as science. I don't have to bring evidence against sugar to suggest sugar is the problem, or the level of said sugar is the problem, you've got to prove it isn't the problem. THAT'S science!!! Let's take some true science into THIS discussion. You DON'T NEED carbs to live!!! It's proven... You can't live without Fats! PERIOD!! You can't live without proteins!! PERIOD!!! But you can live on ZERO carbs!!! I'm not suggesting it's the best way to live, BUT, you can!! So, here is my suggest to anyone wanting to prove that I'm incorrect, take the scientific test and ONLY live on Carbs!! You'll DIE but give it an honest go. People HAVE and DO live on NO carb diets. Welcome to a REAL scientific test. Stop purporting to know sciences when you aren't even trying to disprove what is in front of you. I don't care of you've got a Master's or a PhD, anytime you are proving yourself right YOU'RE NOT using a scientific method! I assume I'm going to now be slammed by those of you whom BELIEVE you know better, bring it! At the end of the day, you're wrong! I truly don't care what your thoughts on this topic are or what you think of me, you're wrong. Stay blind! But, if you want to prove my statement wrong... No supplements, no fats, no proteins... Carb only diet.. Prove it! Crud, just no fats and no supplements... Proteins and carbs!!! Go!!! Prove yourselves correct, and die in the process. Because you will... I'll drop this and you can now vulture attack me.
Why did I try to decipher that before my 2nd cup of coffee? Now I have a headache.21 -
Why did I try to decipher that before my 2nd cup of coffee? Now I have a headache.
Sorry, I HAD TO edit some of it... It was pretty bad in places...lol... Ranting on a Swype based keyboard at 3ish in the morning was/is probably the wrong thing to do.
I even hit done and lost it once too. Can't sleep and reading this early on a Saturday morning is probably a bad combination.1 -
19 -
mshanepace wrote: »I love it. The responses in here kill me. My typos and, potential, grammatical mistakes I'll leave in, since I'm not going to re-read this after I've written it (and yet.. I had to re-read myself.. I modified for meaning only however, corrected names and improved for meaning only... I left in the rest)... Though it wasn't a common believe the "science" of the past would bleed people. Also, a common thought in the "science" of the past, the world was flat and the Earth is the middle of existence. Hypothesis, theorems...etc... Show ME the evidence AGAINST leaky gut. The actual goal of a scientific study is to prove oneself incorrect and NOT to prove oneself to be correct. To suggest that there are NO black swans is to always be on the search for a black Swan NOT to ignore one when you find one. Let's take the information from Ancel Keyes, and group, and break down what's occurred since his hypothesis was followed. The United States of America has gone down a road of spiraling out of control health crises. Diabetes, which was barely recognized in the seventies and eighties, is out of containment, a complete household word because SO many people have it now. You've gotten vegans and vegetarians arguing "facts" about agendas while THEY'VE got agendas. Absolute fact, as the show What The Health quotes on all the funding behind the different organisations, their "experts" and "researchers" are being paid by vegan organisations. Their research IS funded by those WANTING the results they're finding. Are you kidding me!?! Lies in plain sight by omittions are still lies. Misleading everyone because you BELIEVE something is wrong doesn't make it right. The perpetual argument that there are NO black Swans, while looking at a Black Swan, is not only self deceiving but is a complete destroyer of what you all are referring to as science. I don't have to bring evidence against sugar to suggest sugar is the problem, or the level of said sugar is the problem, you've got to prove it isn't the problem. THAT'S science!!! Let's take some true science into THIS discussion. You DON'T NEED carbs to live!!! It's proven... You can't live without Fats! PERIOD!! You can't live without proteins!! PERIOD!!! But you can live on ZERO carbs!!! I'm not suggesting it's the best way to live, BUT, you can!! So, here is my suggest to anyone wanting to prove that I'm incorrect, take the scientific test and ONLY live on Carbs!! You'll DIE but give it an honest go. People HAVE and DO live on NO carb diets. Welcome to a REAL scientific test. Stop purporting to know sciences when you aren't even trying to disprove what is in front of you. I don't care of you've got a Master's or a PhD, anytime you are proving yourself right YOU'RE NOT using a scientific method! I assume I'm going to now be slammed by those of you whom BELIEVE you know better, bring it! At the end of the day, you're wrong! I truly don't care what your thoughts on this topic are or what you think of me, you're wrong. Stay blind! But, if you want to prove my statement wrong... No supplements, no fats, no proteins... Carb only diet.. Prove it! Crud, just no fats and no supplements... Proteins and carbs!!! Go!!! Prove yourselves correct, and die in the process. Because you will... I'll drop this and you can now vulture attack me.
I didn't try to decipher most of what you wrote. Paragraphs and coherent arguments would be nice for readability...
But just that one little phrase stuck out at me: "You DON'T NEED carbs to live"
Actually you do. You need them so desperately (in the form of glucose) that the body decided somewhere along the line during its evolution, that it simply couldn't rely on the fickle environment to supply those desperately needed carbs. Liver cells go through the trouble of creating glucose (gluconeogenesis) at an energetic costs that won't be recovered when that glucose molecule is again broken down somewhere else in the body.
Even using the alternative metabolic pathways (keton production) and forcing the brain to learn to use those as alternative fuel, the body will still keep on producing glucose provided the liver cells themselves have enough fats for beta oxidation (i.e. enough energy to keep themselves alive while providing an expensive energy to other cells).
Sidenote: gluconeogenesis is actively carried out even when the body is not forced into starvation metabolic pathways: to neutralize lactate from anaerobic muscle use and the red blood cell metabolism (these kinda have no other choice than to produce lactate since they have no mitochondria though which they could use aerobic metabolic pathways and the lactate produced needs to be neutralized somehow).
(Little apologies: English is not my mother tongue and my schooling in nutrition is all in German. If some of my terminology is not on point, I do ask you to a) forgive me for that b) I'm always happy to learn something new. Reliable sources of terminology welcomed
)
But I'm actually curious what eating carbs has to do with holistic nutrition and why most MFP users are against those blood sucking leeches? (which is the topic of this discussion)24 -
Leeches, yes!
Black swans, no. The one making outrageous claims must prove their point. Hopefully with paragraphs.
Consider the history of medicine when the heart was once thought to be the seat of emotion and the brain a surplus organ, like the appendix.
Before the microscope, disease was blamed on an imbalance of the “humours”.12 -
Breaking it up for the purposes of comprehending and responding.mshanepace wrote: »I love it. The responses in here kill me. My typos and, potential, grammatical mistakes I'll leave in, since I'm not going to re-read this after I've written it (and yet.. I had to re-read myself.. I modified for meaning only however, corrected names and improved for meaning only... I left in the rest)...
Okay.Though it wasn't a common believe the "science" of the past would bleed people.
It was a common belief. It was not based on scientific research or evidence as we currently understand them. Thus, not a legitimate comparison to current science or medicine, if that's what you intend. If the point is just that we can be wrong about things and there are things we don't know, obviously. That doesn't mean that everything is equally reasonable (or reasonable at all, in many cases). That's the anti-intellectual POV that is distressingly common these days -- because knowing the truth may be hard, let's just believe aliens set it all up or simply believe what feels good to us to believe.Also, a common thought in the "science" of the past, the world was flat and the Earth is the middle of existence.
Actually, "scientists" of the time KNEW that the world was not flat, from the Greeks, at least. That people thought it was flat seems to be a popular misconception, not sure why. It is of course true that believing the Earth was the center was common -- at least until scientific evidence/efforts led people to conclude it was not (Copernicus, for example). The opposition to this was largely NOT scientific, but based in a reliance on the Aristotlean system and theology and, indeed, largely took the form of philosophical argument.Hypothesis, theorems...etc... Show ME the evidence AGAINST leaky gut.
Actually, if you are saying it happens and is significant, you would show the evidence FOR it. If something plays a significant role in medical problems, it would not do so without evidence. What you are saying is essentially like "maybe small pink fairies are poking my insides with invisible pins -- prove to me that's not so!"The actual goal of a scientific study is to prove oneself incorrect and NOT to prove oneself to be correct.
To have a testable hypothesis, sure. Not to disprove every possible idea we might be able to come up with (like the pink fairy thing). But leaky gut seems to be your hypothesis, so test it.To suggest that there are NO black swans is to always be on the search for a black Swan NOT to ignore one when you find one.
Here you seem to be using current overused jargon incorrectly.Let's take the information from Ancel Keyes, and group, and break down what's occurred since his hypothesis was followed.
I get the impression from this that you don't know much about Ancel Keys, what happened following his research, and how that relates to the discussion about leaky gut or holistic medicine (hint, it does not).
In some sense, any focus on diet -- which Ancel Keys was OBVIOUSLY a proponent of -- is the good kind of holistic medicine, as a good diet does matter to health. But we are talking about a different kind of "holistic medicine" where people trained only in quackery suggest replacing real medicine with dietary interventions that make no sense or worse, things like cleanses or colonics.
Anyway, on Ancel Keys:
https://www.thenutritionwonk.com/single-post/2016/04/13/Ancel-Keys-and-the-Seven-Country-Study-A-Response-to-The-Sugar-Conspiracy
For more detail, here's a paper co-authored by Walter Willett: http://www.truehealthinitiative.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/SCS-White-Paper.THI_.8-1-17.pdfThe United States of America has gone down a road of spiraling out of control health crises.
That's an exaggeration, but yes, obesity and obesity-related conditions are a problem. Blaming the dietary guidelines and Ancel Keys, however, is not based in evidence and -- especially relevant here -- is the topic of many other MFP threads, but NOT this one.Diabetes, which was barely recognized in the seventies and eighties, is out of containment, a complete household word because SO many people have it now.
Obvious reason: people are too fat. Second reason: we've changed the diagnosis of it, and especially reduced the standards for diagnosing "insulin resistance." But indeed, it is a problem, and a problem related to our crazy obesity stats (and IMO probably the SAD as currently practiced which is completely different from any diet the medical establishment, nutritionists, or Dr. Keys ever promoted, btw).You've gotten vegans and vegetarians arguing "facts" about agendas while THEY'VE got agendas. Absolute fact, as the show What The Health quotes on all the funding behind the different organisations, their "experts" and "researchers" are being paid by vegan organisations. Their research IS funded by those WANTING the results they're finding. Are you kidding me!?! Lies in plain sight by omittions are still lies.
This makes no sense, in that I cannot figure out what you are trying to say, maybe you left something out. However, to the extent you seem to be saying something about vegans financing the various US gov't and medical organizations responsible for the various "official" diet recommendations, um, what? That's ridiculous.Misleading everyone because you BELIEVE something is wrong doesn't make it right. The perpetual argument that there are NO black Swans, while looking at a Black Swan, is not only self deceiving but is a complete destroyer of what you all are referring to as science.
Makes no sense; misuse of the black swan thing again.I don't have to bring evidence against sugar to suggest sugar is the problem, or the level of said sugar is the problem, you've got to prove it isn't the problem. THAT'S science!!!
No, science does not prove a negative. That's not how it works.
Also, again, this is not a sugar thread, and standard dietary advice does not claim that sugar is irrelevant. Everyone has long advised that excessive sugary treats should be avoided. I mean, duh! This idea that people were told to eat lots of low nutrient sugary foods and not worry about, you know, vegetables and fruits and protein, so long as you just avoided sat fat is completely ridiculous and made up. And also -- have I mentioned? -- not the topic of this thread. (Nor does it have anything to do with the whole leaky gut theory which is usually about how grains, more so whole grains, and legumes are bad, bad, very bad.)Let's take some true science into THIS discussion.
Um, you might understand better if you had been following what this thread is about, as again you go off on something unrelated (and not scientific).You DON'T NEED carbs to live!!! It's proven...
Yes, your body is able to manufacture them. That shows they are important for life, not that they are bad for us.
Other facts: no culture is consistently in ketosis. Those who have diets that might otherwise put them there seem to evolve/adapt so that they are not. Interesting, hmm. Seems evidence worth exploring that there might be something non-desirable about long-term keto. Probably not a huge problem for the average person with access to medical tests and care, but if one is going to try to argue from biology it seems a problem for the pro keto zealots.
Also, your body clearly prioritizes/prefers running on carbs, and does so when possible.
Blue zones eat high carb diets for the most part, and not a lot of sat fat or meat (other than perhaps fish and smaller amounts).
And, yes, no traditional cultures are vegan either. Most eat some meat, not nearly as much as we do. Most also eat tons and tons of plant foods and very high fiber diets.
Also, you can't have no carbs without eating nothing but meat and oil, and whether the no carbs will kill you or not (I don't think they would), that would be an unhealthy diet and unless you were really careful and ate some meat raw regularly and ate all parts of the animal, it would kill you from lack of nutrients.You can't live without Fats! PERIOD!!
True, but no one is saying we can or should. The US diet is incredibly high in fat compared to what is needed, did not reduce total fat post Ancel Keys (which is fine, the macros of our diet are not the problem), and we certainly do not need sat fat. (I'm not saying it's bad for us -- I think it is in excess but am not particularly worried about it -- but if we are arguing based on "not needing" = "should be avoided" that should be considered.)You can't live without proteins!! PERIOD!!!
Yeah, yeah, but again, so what? You can live on way less than we get (same with fat, same with carbs). I think eating less protein is usually not the way to go, but Americans eat more than enough (with all our calories the only thing we don't eat more than enough of is probably vegetables).But you can live on ZERO carbs!!! I'm not suggesting it's the best way to live, BUT, you can!!
So? Do you think this is an argument for anything?
More significantly, what on earth does it have to do with this thread? Holistic medicine is not another term for "super low carb," you know.So, here is my suggest to anyone wanting to prove that I'm incorrect, take the scientific test and ONLY live on Carbs!! You'll DIE but give it an honest go.
Um, are you imagining that this thread is an argument about whether or not you can live on only carbs?
You do know that no one has promoted that or would recommend it.People HAVE and DO live on NO carb diets. Welcome to a REAL scientific test.
You seem not to understand what "science" is.Stop purporting to know sciences when you aren't even trying to disprove what is in front of you. I don't care of you've got a Master's or a PhD, anytime you are proving yourself right YOU'RE NOT using a scientific method! I assume I'm going to now be slammed by those of you whom BELIEVE you know better, bring it! At the end of the day, you're wrong! I truly don't care what your thoughts on this topic are or what you think of me, you're wrong. Stay blind! But, if you want to prove my statement wrong... No supplements, no fats, no proteins... Carb only diet.. Prove it! Crud, just no fats and no supplements... Proteins and carbs!!! Go!!! Prove yourselves correct, and die in the process. Because you will... I'll drop this and you can now vulture attack me.
I am actually mainly just curious why you think a "carb only" diet has anything to do with this thread (or Ancel Keys) or leaky gut or holistic medicine. Care to explain? It might be amusing.21 -
Leeches, yes!
Black swans, no. The one making outrageous claims must prove their point. Hopefully with paragraphs.
Consider the history of medicine when the heart was once thought to be the seat of emotion and the brain a surplus organ, like the appendix.
Before the microscope, disease was blamed on an imbalance of the “humours”.
Hypotheses is the beginning of evidence. Claims are to be investigated and the only way to prove a point in a scientific method is by not finding contrary evidence. Outrageous claims are deemed such because they do not fall into currently accepted thought. That doesn't cause them to be correct or incorrect.
I do concede that ANYONE making a claim should have backing to why they believe their thoughts though...
Your thought, based on the microscope, again proves the point on Black Swans, with more understandings they realized a deeper understanding which proved "humours" were not the root.14 -
TenderBlender667 wrote: »I'm 2 months into a holistic nutrition program and I can't help but question some of the things I'm learning. I've been on mfp for several years and I've learned quite a bit on here, but a lot of the information on mfp contradicts the information I'm learning in school. People think everything from a holistic standpoint is "woo" or BS. Even if I provide some scientific evidence, most people still disagree with any information I provide. It's upsetting since I'm a firm believer in using nutrition and lifestyle as a way to improve health and manage some chronic health conditions. The teachers in my school truly believe that leaky gut syndrome and candida overgrowth are REAL problems, even the one's who've practiced allopathic medicine and have years of education behind then. I go on mfp and it's the complete opposite of everything I'm learning. Am I being scammed?
The very beginning of this thread4 -
mshanepace wrote: »TenderBlender667 wrote: »I'm 2 months into a holistic nutrition program and I can't help but question some of the things I'm learning. I've been on mfp for several years and I've learned quite a bit on here, but a lot of the information on mfp contradicts the information I'm learning in school. People think everything from a holistic standpoint is "woo" or BS. Even if I provide some scientific evidence, most people still disagree with any information I provide. It's upsetting since I'm a firm believer in using nutrition and lifestyle as a way to improve health and manage some chronic health conditions. The teachers in my school truly believe that leaky gut syndrome and candida overgrowth are REAL problems, even the one's who've practiced allopathic medicine and have years of education behind then. I go on mfp and it's the complete opposite of everything I'm learning. Am I being scammed?
The very beginning of this thread
What does that have to do with the rest of your rant about carbs?13 -
mshanepace wrote: »TenderBlender667 wrote: »I'm 2 months into a holistic nutrition program and I can't help but question some of the things I'm learning. I've been on mfp for several years and I've learned quite a bit on here, but a lot of the information on mfp contradicts the information I'm learning in school. People think everything from a holistic standpoint is "woo" or BS. Even if I provide some scientific evidence, most people still disagree with any information I provide. It's upsetting since I'm a firm believer in using nutrition and lifestyle as a way to improve health and manage some chronic health conditions. The teachers in my school truly believe that leaky gut syndrome and candida overgrowth are REAL problems, even the one's who've practiced allopathic medicine and have years of education behind then. I go on mfp and it's the complete opposite of everything I'm learning. Am I being scammed?
The very beginning of this thread
Excuse me, but I find you to be very confusing. Could you please streamline your ideas and put them in some rational order? Thank you.15 -
Low carb zealots are so cute with their lack of basic physiology knowledge and their Alex Jones style ranting and conspiracy theories.11
-
mshanepace wrote: »I love it. The responses in here kill me. My typos and, potential, grammatical mistakes I'll leave in, since I'm not going to re-read this after I've written it (and yet.. I had to re-read myself.. I modified for meaning only however, corrected names and improved for meaning only... I left in the rest)... Though it wasn't a common believe the "science" of the past would bleed people. Also, a common thought in the "science" of the past, the world was flat and the Earth is the middle of existence. Hypothesis, theorems...etc... Show ME the evidence AGAINST leaky gut. The actual goal of a scientific study is to prove oneself incorrect and NOT to prove oneself to be correct. To suggest that there are NO black swans is to always be on the search for a black Swan NOT to ignore one when you find one. Let's take the information from Ancel Keyes, and group, and break down what's occurred since his hypothesis was followed. The United States of America has gone down a road of spiraling out of control health crises. Diabetes, which was barely recognized in the seventies and eighties, is out of containment, a complete household word because SO many people have it now. You've gotten vegans and vegetarians arguing "facts" about agendas while THEY'VE got agendas. Absolute fact, as the show What The Health quotes on all the funding behind the different organisations, their "experts" and "researchers" are being paid by vegan organisations. Their research IS funded by those WANTING the results they're finding. Are you kidding me!?! Lies in plain sight by omittions are still lies. Misleading everyone because you BELIEVE something is wrong doesn't make it right. The perpetual argument that there are NO black Swans, while looking at a Black Swan, is not only self deceiving but is a complete destroyer of what you all are referring to as science. I don't have to bring evidence against sugar to suggest sugar is the problem, or the level of said sugar is the problem, you've got to prove it isn't the problem. THAT'S science!!! Let's take some true science into THIS discussion. You DON'T NEED carbs to live!!! It's proven... You can't live without Fats! PERIOD!! You can't live without proteins!! PERIOD!!! But you can live on ZERO carbs!!! I'm not suggesting it's the best way to live, BUT, you can!! So, here is my suggest to anyone wanting to prove that I'm incorrect, take the scientific test and ONLY live on Carbs!! You'll DIE but give it an honest go. People HAVE and DO live on NO carb diets. Welcome to a REAL scientific test. Stop purporting to know sciences when you aren't even trying to disprove what is in front of you. I don't care of you've got a Master's or a PhD, anytime you are proving yourself right YOU'RE NOT using a scientific method! I assume I'm going to now be slammed by those of you whom BELIEVE you know better, bring it! At the end of the day, you're wrong! I truly don't care what your thoughts on this topic are or what you think of me, you're wrong. Stay blind! But, if you want to prove my statement wrong... No supplements, no fats, no proteins... Carb only diet.. Prove it! Crud, just no fats and no supplements... Proteins and carbs!!! Go!!! Prove yourselves correct, and die in the process. Because you will... I'll drop this and you can now vulture attack me.
I'm sorry . . . who here has argued that one can live completely on carbohydrates?
Or that one can live completely on protein and carbohydrates?
I've read this entire thread and I have no idea what has you so stirred up.
Disclosure notice: I am a vegan, although I missed the planning sessions where we got control of all the experts and researchers.17 -
mshanepace wrote: »TenderBlender667 wrote: »I'm 2 months into a holistic nutrition program and I can't help but question some of the things I'm learning. I've been on mfp for several years and I've learned quite a bit on here, but a lot of the information on mfp contradicts the information I'm learning in school. People think everything from a holistic standpoint is "woo" or BS. Even if I provide some scientific evidence, most people still disagree with any information I provide. It's upsetting since I'm a firm believer in using nutrition and lifestyle as a way to improve health and manage some chronic health conditions. The teachers in my school truly believe that leaky gut syndrome and candida overgrowth are REAL problems, even the one's who've practiced allopathic medicine and have years of education behind then. I go on mfp and it's the complete opposite of everything I'm learning. Am I being scammed?
The very beginning of this thread
What about it?3
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.3K 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
- 424 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