Food for Thought: Science and Politics of Nutrition

nvmomketo

This is not so much a debate topic as watching the "experts" debate diet, nutrition, and sustainability at the Swiss Food for Thought conference.

http://institute.swissre.com/events/food_for_thought_bmj.html?utm_source=Diagnosis+Diet+Website+Subscribers&utm_campaign=af40655fe5-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_06_25_12_51&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_9c1de9d3bb-af40655fe5-111813681#tab_4

There are two days of presentations. Some are decidedly LCHF but most are not, and tend towards a simple move more eat less approach. What is a LOT of fun to watch are the panel debates on topics such as what to trust and LCHF. The first panel has a lot of known LCHF names like Taubes, Malhotra, and Harcombe. The second panel discussion is on LCHF; most panelist are neutral to higher carb, and then there is Sarah Hallberg discussing her trials. Quite good.

I have not looked at day 2 yet but there are some big names in there too like Salim Yusif.

I found how the experts interpret data was quite interesting. Some consider randomized clinical trials the way to go. Others want clinical trials but people given a choice as to what diet they do to improve compliance, and yet others debate the validity of food diaries in studies.

The only thing they seem to agree on is that introducing a diet high in refined and highly processed carbohydrates tends to negatively affect health, and once that happens then your dietary choices for recovering good health is more limited. They seem to agree that until one becomes ill, there are numerous diets and macros that create good health, and there is mainly one type if diet that correlates with failing health and weight gain and that's the diet high in refined and highly processed carbs.

MadisonMolly2017

@nvmomketo Thank you so much for this!

snickerscharlie

You lost me at "Taubes."

https://www.wired.com/story/how-a-dollar40-million-nutrition-science-crusade-fell-apart/

nvmomketo

Your missing out.

Here's the debate he participated in, if you are interested. The topic is "what evidence can you trust?"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Eby6L0FVM0&list=PLqX9CJC6-DiX2B4CqWxydd73yF87hBd0Q&index=1

100_PROOF_

Ya we know already. We're all IR because we love the evil carbs even though have great panels each year. We're clueless carb peddlers because we don't drink whipping cream and oil in the morning and our tanned buff bodies don't make us healthy because we are evil carb lovers..... yeppers.....


Still waiting on those progress pics though even though it's been a few years...

nvmomketo

Yes, I forgot to put quotes around my typing of the word "experts" a second time.

Like the "expert" who said all people who lose weight are in a state of ketosis, and the woman who insists that pregnant women must eat at least moderate carb levels but refused to address how fluctuating blood glucose levels are not ideal for fetal development. I can't remember if that was the second debate or not...

100_PROOF_

nvmomketo wrote: »

Your missing out.

Here's the debate he participated in, if you are interested. The topic is "what evidence can you trust?"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Eby6L0FVM0&list=PLqX9CJC6-DiX2B4CqWxydd73yF87hBd0Q&index=1

What evidence can I trust? Nothing from taubes.

nvmomketo

100_PROOF_ wrote: »

nvmomketo wrote: »

Your missing out.

Here's the debate he participated in, if you are interested. The topic is "what evidence can you trust?"

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7Eby6L0FVM0&list=PLqX9CJC6-DiX2B4CqWxydd73yF87hBd0Q&index=1

What evidence can I trust? Nothing from taubes.

Strong argument.

ladyreva78

Honestly.... I'm very skeptical of a conference organized by a re-insurer. Because that's what Swiss Re is... nothing to do with Switzerland or Switzerland's politics and position on nurtition.

AnvilHead

ladyreva78 wrote: »

Honestly.... I'm very skeptical of a conference organized by a re-insurer. Because that's what Swiss Re is... nothing to do with Switzerland or Switzerland's politics and position on nurtition.

I'm very skeptical of anything involving Taubes. His pet theories have been scientifically torn to shreds, even in studies commissioned by his own organization (NuSI, which is currently crumbling around him), and he has publicly admitted that he himself wonders if he is, in fact, a crackpot.

At this point he's just riding out the money train until his 15 minutes of fame are over. His True Believers are about all he has left. Maybe then he'll go back to being just a journalist instead of pretending to be a nutrition researcher/authority.

snickerscharlie

AnvilHead wrote: »

ladyreva78 wrote: »

Honestly.... I'm very skeptical of a conference organized by a re-insurer. Because that's what Swiss Re is... nothing to do with Switzerland or Switzerland's politics and position on nurtition.

I'm very skeptical of anything involving Taubes. His pet theories have been scientifically torn to shreds, even in studies commissioned by his own organization (NuSI, which is currently crumbling around him), and he has publicly admitted that he himself wonders if he is, in fact, a crackpot.

At this point he's just riding out the money train until his 15 minutes of fame are over. His True Believers are about all he has left. Maybe then he'll go back to being just a journalist instead of pretending to be a nutrition researcher/authority.

I can see Fake News peddler in his future.

Oh, wait...

L1zardQueen

snickerscharlie wrote: »

AnvilHead wrote: »

ladyreva78 wrote: »

Honestly.... I'm very skeptical of a conference organized by a re-insurer. Because that's what Swiss Re is... nothing to do with Switzerland or Switzerland's politics and position on nurtition.

I'm very skeptical of anything involving Taubes. His pet theories have been scientifically torn to shreds, even in studies commissioned by his own organization (NuSI, which is currently crumbling around him), and he has publicly admitted that he himself wonders if he is, in fact, a crackpot.

At this point he's just riding out the money train until his 15 minutes of fame are over. His True Believers are about all he has left. Maybe then he'll go back to being just a journalist instead of pretending to be a nutrition researcher/authority.

I can see Fake News peddler in his future.

Oh, wait...

It’s all a vast right wing conspiracy!

Noreenmarie1234

Thanks for sharing, I didn't watch the whole thing yet, but I found what I did watch I found the "food policy and politics" one pretty interesting. I think people should be more focused on calories because what happens is people are told eat low fat, so then just switched to eating more grains, etc. Or they are told to eat low carb, so then they eat more fat. Whatever recommendations are given, people will just eat around them and still take in too many calories, which is what matters in the long run for obesity and thus causes all of the obesity related health issues.

I think governments should promote counting CALORIES instead of limiting carbs or fat or red meat or whatever because without counting calories, the general population will just eat more of something else, thus maintaining obesity rates (and health issues that come with it). Yeah, maybe we exercise more like they said, but we eat more so it's no surprise there is no improvement in obesity.

L1zardQueen

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

Thanks for sharing, I didn't watch the whole thing yet, but I found what I did watch I found the "food policy and politics" one pretty interesting. I think people should be more focused on calories because what happens is people are told eat low fat, so then just switched to eating more grains, etc. Or they are told to eat low carb, so then they eat more fat. Whatever recommendations are given, people will just eat around them and still take in too many calories, which is what matters in the long run for obesity and thus causes all of the obesity related health issues.

I think governments should promote counting CALORIES instead of limiting carbs or fat or red meat or whatever because without counting calories, the general population will just eat more of something else, thus maintaining obesity rates (and health issues that come with it). Yeah, maybe we exercise more like they said, but we eat more so it's no surprise there is no improvement in obesity.

This is so true, counting calories is straightforward. When low fat diets were promoted in the 70’s and 80’s, it backfired. Food makers replaced fat with sugar to make them taste better. Demonizing food groups just doesn’t work.

AnvilHead

L1zardQueen wrote: »

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

Thanks for sharing, I didn't watch the whole thing yet, but I found what I did watch I found the "food policy and politics" one pretty interesting. I think people should be more focused on calories because what happens is people are told eat low fat, so then just switched to eating more grains, etc. Or they are told to eat low carb, so then they eat more fat. Whatever recommendations are given, people will just eat around them and still take in too many calories, which is what matters in the long run for obesity and thus causes all of the obesity related health issues.

I think governments should promote counting CALORIES instead of limiting carbs or fat or red meat or whatever because without counting calories, the general population will just eat more of something else, thus maintaining obesity rates (and health issues that come with it). Yeah, maybe we exercise more like they said, but we eat more so it's no surprise there is no improvement in obesity.

This is so true, counting calories is straightforward. When low fat diets were promoted in the 70’s and 80’s, it backfired. Food makers replaced fat with sugar to make them taste better. Demonizing food groups just doesn’t work.

It sells lots of books, diet foods and "supplements", though. And gets lots of web clicks to drive advertising revenue. Which is really the bottom line for the snake oil peddlers.

Pretending that obesity/weight management is primarily driven by anything other than CICO is ludicrous. Science has repeatedly proven CICO, and science refuting CICO has repeatedly failed.

nvmomketo

There was a lot of LCHF debate in all talks. Most seemed to be in terms of using it more to treat health conditions and letting go of past dietary recommendations. Not any mention of magic or limb regrowth.

Most talks were in terms of better health through food with reducing obesity as only one way to improve health. Weight loss was not a focus overall except in terms of improving specific health issues, such as in the LCHF debate where one speaker discussed that there are only 3 ways to reverse T2D:

1. Bariatric surgery (basically a very calorie restricted diet although there may be other factors at work)
2. A calorie restricted diet, possibly after weight loss too.
3. LCHF diets, with or without weight loss

The debate on what evidence we can trust. It's the one with Taubes for those who wish to not hear what he is saying.

https://youtu.be/7Eby6L0FVM0


The LCHF debate

https://youtu.be/txXzd5VRPI8


This is the debate on Food Politics and Policy.

https://youtu.be/oH94AQbn7Yc


I finally finished watching the closing comments debate which was quite good. Salim Yusif is a great speaker..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oNxw9AFD2s0&feature=youtu.be

fishgutzy

when I did a LCHF, though my C was not quite as low as recommended, my A1C dropped from borderline to the normal range, triglycerides dropped From over 300 to 45.
Doctor thought I was listing the foods I cut out when I said whole eggs, sausage, pork, steak, chicken with the skin.

Fuzzipeg

Thank you for this thread.

janejellyroll

Noreenmarie1234 wrote: »

Thanks for sharing, I didn't watch the whole thing yet, but I found what I did watch I found the "food policy and politics" one pretty interesting. I think people should be more focused on calories because what happens is people are told eat low fat, so then just switched to eating more grains, etc. Or they are told to eat low carb, so then they eat more fat. Whatever recommendations are given, people will just eat around them and still take in too many calories, which is what matters in the long run for obesity and thus causes all of the obesity related health issues.

I think governments should promote counting CALORIES instead of limiting carbs or fat or red meat or whatever because without counting calories, the general population will just eat more of something else, thus maintaining obesity rates (and health issues that come with it). Yeah, maybe we exercise more like they said, but we eat more so it's no surprise there is no improvement in obesity.

Yeah, my feeling is that no matter what macronutrient is currently out of favor, it isn't going to produce positive results for Americans because we simply eat too much. That's the heart of the problem.