What's the deal with low carb diets?
Options
Replies
-
Wow, getting big time larry vibes (none of you will get that).
dude. brutal. look it all up. The OP is 'what's the deal with low carb diets.' Those of us who have been forced to look into it have found things. The general population is well behind the play, but you can look up scholarly articles yourself and find out what's going on. Rather than just search old data. Science has done a 180 in the last 10 yrs, and quite a lot of it has not caught up. And yes, science is a political issue in the US where so many university funders have a vested interest. US government is munted. Search from other nations' universities.1 -
Wow, getting big time larry vibes (none of you will get that).
dude. brutal. look it all up. The OP is 'what's the deal with low carb diets.' Those of us who have been forced to look into it have found things. The general population is well behind the play, but you can look up scholarly articles yourself and find out what's going on. Rather than just search old data. Science has done a 180 in the last 10 yrs, and quite a lot of it has not caught up. And yes, science is a political issue in the US where so many university funders have a vested interest. US government is munted. Search from other nations' universities.
You are saying things in these posts that I believe are not well-founded in old or recent science, either one.
Now, you seem to be advancing a "things that don't agree with me are biased" argument.
OK.
Others will come to their own conclusions, I'm sure, about what constitutes well-researched, well-reasoned, or biased.14 -
Wow, getting big time larry vibes (none of you will get that).
dude. brutal. look it all up. The OP is 'what's the deal with low carb diets.' Those of us who have been forced to look into it have found things. The general population is well behind the play, but you can look up scholarly articles yourself and find out what's going on. Rather than just search old data. Science has done a 180 in the last 10 yrs, and quite a lot of it has not caught up. And yes, science is a political issue in the US where so many university funders have a vested interest. US government is munted. Search from other nations' universities.
You make a lot of statements and accusations that just have no backing.
There have been many arguments against your "theories" here on these forums for many years by many professionals and your view is not going to be accepted without a lot more links. Where are you finding this stuff?? You sound like some secret conspiracy theorist, ya know?12 -
Wow, getting big time larry vibes (none of you will get that).
dude. brutal. look it all up. The OP is 'what's the deal with low carb diets.' Those of us who have been forced to look into it have found things. The general population is well behind the play, but you can look up scholarly articles yourself and find out what's going on. Rather than just search old data. Science has done a 180 in the last 10 yrs, and quite a lot of it has not caught up. And yes, science is a political issue in the US where so many university funders have a vested interest. US government is munted. Search from other nations' universities.
Brutal? Maybe. True? Full stop.
12 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)5 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
I'd even go that far to say that substantial amounts of people, from various age groups grew up with high carb diets. Not because of some fad diets but because it's the normal way of eating: lots of bread several times per day, veggies and potatoes for dinner, with some meat or fish, 1-2 pieces of fruit. Oddly, diabetes type II and being overweight is quite a lot lower in large parts of continental Europe (because that's what I'm talking about) than in the US. Wonder why that might be. @Bridgie36 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
I'd even go that far to say that substantial amounts of people, from various age groups grew up with high carb diets. Not because of some fad diets but because it's the normal way of eating: lots of bread several times per day, veggies and potatoes for dinner, with some meat or fish, 1-2 pieces of fruit. Oddly, diabetes type II and being overweight is quite a lot lower in large parts of continental Europe (because that's what I'm talking about) than in the US. Wonder why that might be. @Bridgie3
Yes. That's spot on. Most over the last 50 yrs have been high carb low fat. In America anyway; and here in New Zealand the more 'woke' were going very low fat. This has led to a generation of diabetics. Not directly from eating carbs. Indirectly, from eating sugar which was put into low fat foods to make them edible.
Remember weight watchers and their 'scrapings of butter'? The 3 scant tsp of fat you were allowed per day. Everything was 'remove all visible fat'. Cheese was edam or cottage.
And we all starved. Starved and starved.
I remember 'lean beef and lamb' - all the fat cut off before you buy it in the shops. The systematic, 20 or 30 yrs of removal of any fat from everything. Dressings: no fat, but lots of sugar! Cookies: make them with applesauce! That's even worse, that's fructose! 'fat free' foods loaded with sugars and HFCS. But the heart tick? The heart tick was fine for high sugar so long as the food was low fat.
The foundation of eating has spent thirty odd years shifting such that the current generation's 'normal' is so far away from natural eating it's not funny and they have no way of knowing. Look in the 'new foods' thread for all the strange and mutated items people now can eat to avoid the particular food group they fear. I talk in other threads about eating natural food, being 'what would have been available 300 yrs ago' and people argue that. I mean, it's not even arguable but they find a way.
They have no idea what's normal because it was destroyed years before they were born.
So me attempting to say anything is simply failing. I guess I'll just look to my own. Take care of myself and my children. In a family where the women stay very thin but die of dementia, I'm going to die fatter, but hopefully not of dementia. I'll see if avoiding statins and eating high fat will save me. It's already lowered my cholesterol reading, and my fatty liver has gone down, the nausea and exhaustion are going away.
My mother, bless her, all 52kg of her, is wasting away of 'Diabetes type 3' in an old folks' home. Her life spent avoiding all traces of fat, eating fruit like it was going out of style, taking statins to 'lower her cholesterol' Much good it has done her. Much good indeed.
I'll just take care of myself and leave who will to take care of themselves.2 -
Come on hun, take a step back, relax. You're just making it worse.8
-
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
Just to clarify, the investigations done due to I think it was Nixon having a heart attack and wanting answers, involved looking at the eating habits of a number of countries, and seeing what correlations could be viewed. They came upon some direct 1:1 correlations, they thought, between fat consumption and heart disease.
France didn't fit as they weren't dying of heart attacks despite eating a ton of fat.
Japan didn't fit because they ate low fat but they all karked of heart attacks;
These two 'outliers' were removed as they were not fitting the model properly. And once you took those two pesky countries out of the mix, you had a pretty compelling argument that increased fat consumption causes increased heart attack rates.
Interestingly, most western countries had similar stats on sugar consumption as fat consumption. Except of course the France situation (low sugar) and the Japan situation (high sugar). So if they'd left them in they might have been forced to link causality to sugar instead of fat. but no.
There's books on it. There's movies on it. It's like, everywhere.
Anyway, that's it from me.
1 -
...and yet, no links. Just talking in vague geographical references?7
-
Carb is an energy source as is fat and protein. I have never been able to gorge on protein or fat. Perhaps it is a genetic defect but when it comes to carbs I can gorge. Carbs from plants are key for gut microbiome health. In my case low carb does provide some pain management. A high carb high fat can drive inflammation which is not good for longevity.
Getting eating advice from other humans can be dangerous. Ones body offers the best eating advice typically.0 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
I'd even go that far to say that substantial amounts of people, from various age groups grew up with high carb diets. Not because of some fad diets but because it's the normal way of eating: lots of bread several times per day, veggies and potatoes for dinner, with some meat or fish, 1-2 pieces of fruit. Oddly, diabetes type II and being overweight is quite a lot lower in large parts of continental Europe (because that's what I'm talking about) than in the US. Wonder why that might be. @Bridgie3
I don't disagree, but the claim is often made that the US focus on low fat recommendations at one point (largely focused on sat fat in reality) led to people eating higher carb/low fat diets and that led to the current issues with obesity. The truth is that the US on average has never eaten a low fat diet, the amount of fat consumed did not go down, and the US's average macro mix is by no means unusual across the world or the reason for the obesity issues here. The specific food sources changed and the ubiquity of easy and high cal snack foods (which were increasingly more like homemade or otherwise tastier than they had been, arguably), and cultural ideas about eating (to some extent). I think it makes more sense to look to those things than the (non existent) shift to low fat eating.2 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
I'd even go that far to say that substantial amounts of people, from various age groups grew up with high carb diets. Not because of some fad diets but because it's the normal way of eating: lots of bread several times per day, veggies and potatoes for dinner, with some meat or fish, 1-2 pieces of fruit. Oddly, diabetes type II and being overweight is quite a lot lower in large parts of continental Europe (because that's what I'm talking about) than in the US. Wonder why that might be. @Bridgie3
Yes. That's spot on. Most over the last 50 yrs have been high carb low fat.
Was yirara suggesting it was a recent change (last 50 years only) or that it was bad/led to people overeating as you seem to be reading her post? Because I don't think so.1 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
Just to clarify, the investigations done due to I think it was Nixon having a heart attack and wanting answers, involved looking at the eating habits of a number of countries, and seeing what correlations could be viewed. They came upon some direct 1:1 correlations, they thought, between fat consumption and heart disease.
France didn't fit as they weren't dying of heart attacks despite eating a ton of fat.
Japan didn't fit because they ate low fat but they all karked of heart attacks;
These two 'outliers' were removed as they were not fitting the model properly. And once you took those two pesky countries out of the mix, you had a pretty compelling argument that increased fat consumption causes increased heart attack rates.
Interestingly, most western countries had similar stats on sugar consumption as fat consumption. Except of course the France situation (low sugar) and the Japan situation (high sugar). So if they'd left them in they might have been forced to link causality to sugar instead of fat. but no.
There's books on it. There's movies on it. It's like, everywhere.
Anyway, that's it from me.
I can tell what you've been reading from this (it was Eisenhower, not Nixon, btw), and you are wrong re the conspiracy theory stuff about the countries study.
Here's a good discussion: https://deniseminger.com/2011/12/22/the-truth-about-ancel-keys-weve-all-got-it-wrong/
More significantly, and the point I made that you ignored, in the US at least the diet never became low fat. So claiming low fat diets did this or that makes no sense in how the country, on average, actually ate. Maybe (I doubt it, but I don't care enough to research it) NZ is an outlier to this, but the idea that it was a low fat/high carb shift that drove obesity rates does not fit the facts in the US (whereas some other obvious things make a lot more sense as theories) or various other countries.10 -
I agree with what several others have said also, but I want to respond to one specific thing:Most of us grew up in the 80s, 90s, noughties - on low fat, high carb diets. Can you see a problem?
I recall low carb diets being pretty common during various portions of that period of time, and low fat being out of vogue, or out of vogue off and on, but even more significantly -- and not merely based on my recollection -- the US never actually ate a low fat diet based on stats. Low fat may have been trendy at times or recommended, but it was not followed. (Similarly, the recommendations to reduce snacky foods and eat at least a certain minimum serving of veg and of fruits were also not followed on a population average.)
I'd even go that far to say that substantial amounts of people, from various age groups grew up with high carb diets. Not because of some fad diets but because it's the normal way of eating: lots of bread several times per day, veggies and potatoes for dinner, with some meat or fish, 1-2 pieces of fruit. Oddly, diabetes type II and being overweight is quite a lot lower in large parts of continental Europe (because that's what I'm talking about) than in the US. Wonder why that might be. @Bridgie3
Yes. That's spot on. Most over the last 50 yrs have been high carb low fat.
Was yirara suggesting it was a recent change (last 50 years only) or that it was bad/led to people overeating as you seem to be reading her post? Because I don't think so.
Exactly1 -
Three generations of Americans were encouraged to reduce fat. It was bad science and still is, but there is no denying the pervasive movement. More recently, carbs have become public enemy number one. Also bad science. Also pervasive. And we have bred an entire generation of people with imagined food allergies and intolerances. Also bad science - almost no one is actually allergic to anything in the ordinary diet.
But, each of these phobias has, in its own way, assisted in reducing calorie intake and therefore reducing obesity. That's a good thing.
0 -
Isn't there enough hostility in the world without such a hostile disagreement over carbs? Come on people now. Smile on your brother. Everybody get together and try to Love one another right now.
Over 50 years ago by the Youngbloods 1966.
0 -
Oh I want the disagree button!!12
-
By the way re carbs - a jacket spud slathered in butter? Absolute bliss 😀9
-
claireychn074 wrote: »By the way re carbs - a jacket spud slathered in butter? Absolute bliss 😀
Carbs AND fat?
Fight it out!5
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions