The conspiracy to make (and keep us) fat...
Replies
-
NM i just looked free range dont get the antibiotics as the others one do to prevent the disease they get
"Free range" doesn't mean "no antibiotics used." Chicken sold as "organic" is not allowed to have ever been treated with antibiotics, but there is "free range" chicken that is not "organic" and may have been treated with antibiotics.
and free range can even mean they are free to wander in cramped quarters in a barn. doesn't actually mean they're pasture fed.
Let's go ahead and cover "cage free" too, which may be one of the most misleading marketing terms in the history of chickens. This literally means that the chickens are not in a cage, but tells you nothing about how much room the chicken has to move. A pen packed full of chickens with no room to turn around are technically "cage free". (I'm spoiled. The vast majority of the chickens and eggs I eat are from chickens that truly are able to and actually do roam around a pasture.)0 -
Well you all keep believing that. I just finished two beers after downing half a bag of chips, 400 calories worth of Heath Bar Ice Cream, and am about to dig into some spicy chicken wings and fettuccine alfredo from the local pizza shop. I'd be happy to compare health stats any time.
I don't know, I used to be the same way, losing weight and running marathons and not worrying about quality of food so much as calories. I lost 60 lbs twice in this way, eating whatever, even McDonalds as long as it was "on plan". I also ran over 10 marathons (well 4 half, 4 full, and several 30Ks).
After about ten years of this lifestyle I became suddenly quite ill and thought for about 10 months I possibly had colon cancer it was so bad. I have learned the hard way that these kinds of things can indeed catch up to us and it has been a scary and humbling experience. I still have trouble sticking to eating clean but think it is well worth the effort.
How did you reach the conclusion that eating "clean" instead would have led to a different outcome? Or said another way, how did you determine that the specifics of your diet was the cause of your problems and not something else, for example, your weight (assuming you were overweight during that time)? Or perhaps a dietary deficiency that was the result of something you *were not* eating and not the result of something you *were* eating?
(Just curious. Not trying to make any baseless accusations with this. I'm just fascinated by the ability of the human mind sometimes to make associations and correlations with things that may or may not be associated or correlated.)0 -
Well you all keep believing that. I just finished two beers after downing half a bag of chips, 400 calories worth of Heath Bar Ice Cream, and am about to dig into some spicy chicken wings and fettuccine alfredo from the local pizza shop. I'd be happy to compare health stats any time.
I don't know, I used to be the same way, losing weight and running marathons and not worrying about quality of food so much as calories. I lost 60 lbs twice in this way, eating whatever, even McDonalds as long as it was "on plan". I also ran over 10 marathons (well 4 half, 4 full, and several 30Ks).
After about ten years of this lifestyle I became suddenly quite ill and thought for about 10 months I possibly had colon cancer it was so bad. I have learned the hard way that these kinds of things can indeed catch up to us and it has been a scary and humbling experience. I still have trouble sticking to eating clean but think it is well worth the effort.
Cum hoc ergo propter hoc
The problem is that you can't state definitively that your illness wouldn't have happened anyway. Likewise, the other side of the debate cannot state definitively that it would have happened anyway. In short, correlation does not imply causation.0 -
My old mans niece had to go to the Dr about a month ago. She just turned 9. She is already getting boobs and is a bit chubby. Dr changed her diet and she has slimmed down. I saw somewhere about the hormones used in chickens now are affecting ppl who eat those chickens. They use these hormones to speed up chicken growth to sell them faster. Kids love chicken nuggets. NOM NOM NOM lol
It's illegal to use hormones in chickens.
So whatever you saw was BS.
Not necessarily...
"...The FDA has done a poor job informing the public of increased hormone and additives to chicken. In fact, there is very little media that explains the use hormones and additives specifically in poultry ("What Do," 2010), which is one of the highest consumed proteins in the United States. Just poultry alone has a labeling system that is incredibly difficult and hard to manipulate and understand. This labeling system, which has been approved by the FDA, allows for major variance in interpretation, and by the time it is complete, companies can find loopholes that allow for more additives and hormones. Since, theoretically, specific hormones are not allowed in meat and poultry production, the FDA mandates "the claim 'no hormones added' cannot be used on the labels of pork or poultry unless it is followed by a statement that says 'Federal regulations prohibit the use of hormones'" ("What Do," 2010). It does not however, distinguish exactly what was used, how it was used, or how much was used...."
You can read the rest of the article here (which includes references). http://voices.yahoo.com/additives-hormones-our-food-growing-epidemic-10933986.html0 -
ugh i hate this.
she ate like **** and her system went crazy after a long period of time
she started eating clean and it solved the issues
could there be other factors at play? sure. but it's just as asinine to assume that food had NO involvement.0 -
That was all covered very well in movie: Hungry for Change
Awesome movie.0 -
Just wanted to add to this discussion, there are certain hormones that ARE allowed to be used in food production by the FDA.
" In the 1980s, it became possible to produce large quantities of pure bGH by using recombinant DNA technology. In 1993, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH), also known as bovine somatotropin (rbST) for use in dairy cattle. Recent estimates by the manufacturer of this hormone indicate that 30% of the cows in the United States (US) may be treated with rbGH. "
"There are six different kinds of steroid hormones that are currently approved by FDA for use in food production in the US: estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, zeranol, trenbolone acetate, and melengestrol acetate. Estradiol and progesterone are natural female sex hormones; testosterone is the natural male sex hormone; zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengesterol acetate are synthetic growth promoters (hormone-like chemicals that can make animals grow faster). Currently, federal regulations allow these hormones to be used on growing cattle and sheep, but not on poultry (chickens, turkeys, ducks) or hogs (pigs). The above hormones are not as useful in increasing weight gain of poultry or hogs. " http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/Factsheet/Diet/fs37.hormones.cfm
That is why I buy milk from cows not treated with the rbGH. I think its important that we become informed, educated consumers, that way, the more we know about the food we eat, the more demand will be placed on the food industry to do a better job with providing better quality products.0 -
... we're not told about the high amounts of proteins we can get from beans which are also very high in fiber, we are not told about the high amounts of proteins we can get from greens such as spinach and broccoli
Wish I could eat lots of beans and broccoli, but it would kill me (IBS). lol
I would have to get more creative. That said, I don't eat a heck of a lot of meat. I do like my fish, though.0 -
My old mans niece had to go to the Dr about a month ago. She just turned 9. She is already getting boobs and is a bit chubby. Dr changed her diet and she has slimmed down. I saw somewhere about the hormones used in chickens now are affecting ppl who eat those chickens. They use these hormones to speed up chicken growth to sell them faster. Kids love chicken nuggets. NOM NOM NOM lol
Yes, hormones in meat are a real problem for children. Puerto Rican girls' average age for menarche is now down to less than 9 years. It is thought to be caused by the large amount of hormone-laced chicken that Puerto Ricans eat.
adults can choose to not buy chicken nuggets and other over processed food to feed their kids. My daughter is 11 yrs old 5'3 ish and under 100 lbs because I control what she eats.0 -
ugh i hate this.
she ate like **** and her system went crazy after a long period of time
she started eating clean and it solved the issues
could there be other factors at play? sure. but it's just as asinine to assume that food had NO involvement.
She ate like you define to be s**t. Many people eat the same way (without eating to excess), with no ill health effects.
If she'd been eating what you define to be 'good' and then her system went crazy, you wouldn't make the same correlation.
You see the issue here?
For what it's worth, I'm not particularly on either side of this debate. You'd probably see my diet as 'pretty good', but I eat junk when I want it too. I just get irked when I see confirmation bias and logical fallacies.0 -
Just wanted to add to this discussion, there are certain hormones that ARE allowed to be used in food production by the FDA.
" In the 1980s, it became possible to produce large quantities of pure bGH by using recombinant DNA technology. In 1993, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH), also known as bovine somatotropin (rbST) for use in dairy cattle. Recent estimates by the manufacturer of this hormone indicate that 30% of the cows in the United States (US) may be treated with rbGH. "
"There are six different kinds of steroid hormones that are currently approved by FDA for use in food production in the US: estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, zeranol, trenbolone acetate, and melengestrol acetate. Estradiol and progesterone are natural female sex hormones; testosterone is the natural male sex hormone; zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengesterol acetate are synthetic growth promoters (hormone-like chemicals that can make animals grow faster). Currently, federal regulations allow these hormones to be used on growing cattle and sheep, but not on poultry (chickens, turkeys, ducks) or hogs (pigs). The above hormones are not as useful in increasing weight gain of poultry or hogs. " http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/Factsheet/Diet/fs37.hormones.cfm
That is why I buy milk from cows not treated with the rbGH. I think its important that we become informed, educated consumers, that way, the more we know about the food we eat, the more demand will be placed on the food industry to do a better job with providing better quality products.
I just can't believe they are allowing this garbage into the food supply. For those who don't know the company responsible for inventing all these lovely bovine hormones and convincing the government to allow it -- not to mention genetically modified foods, etc., just Google "Monsanto"0 -
ugh i hate this.
she ate like **** and her system went crazy after a long period of time
she started eating clean and it solved the issues
could there be other factors at play? sure. but it's just as asinine to assume that food had NO involvement.
She ate like you define to be s**t. Many people eat the same way, with no ill health effects.
If she'd been eating what you define to be 'good' and then her system went crazy, you wouldn't make the same correlation.
You see the issue here?
For what it's worth, I'm not particularly on either side of this debate. You'd probably see my diet as 'pretty good', but I eat junk when I want it too. I just get irked when I see confirmation bias and logical fallacies.
well besides heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, IBS, Crohns, Arthritis, etc, etc, etc....0 -
My old mans niece had to go to the Dr about a month ago. She just turned 9. She is already getting boobs and is a bit chubby. Dr changed her diet and she has slimmed down. I saw somewhere about the hormones used in chickens now are affecting ppl who eat those chickens. They use these hormones to speed up chicken growth to sell them faster. Kids love chicken nuggets. NOM NOM NOM lol
Yes, hormones in meat are a real problem for children. Puerto Rican girls' average age for menarche is now down to less than 9 years. It is thought to be caused by the large amount of hormone-laced chicken that Puerto Ricans eat.
adults can choose to not buy chicken nuggets and other over processed food to feed their kids. My daughter is 11 yrs old 5'3 ish and under 100 lbs because I control what she eats.
Thats not the point I could counter with the fact my son is 12 and for the better part of his life wouldnt eat anything but chicken nuggets and french fries. I finally have him eating the good stuff and not buying the other stuff so much as he grew out of that long long phase. I grew up eating chicken nuggets and chicken patties(alot of over processed foods etc) and I was thin also but I was very athletic. My old mans niece is a common 2k kid and doesnt do any sports or activities to counter her consumption. I buy half crap and half healthy for my kids because they burn through so many calories through the day. Problem was I ate the same things they ate but I did not burn the calories they are burning and with age my metabolism cant take that kind of fueling without exercise.0 -
ugh i hate this.
she ate like **** and her system went crazy after a long period of time
she started eating clean and it solved the issues
could there be other factors at play? sure. but it's just as asinine to assume that food had NO involvement.
She ate like you define to be s**t. Many people eat the same way, with no ill health effects.
If she'd been eating what you define to be 'good' and then her system went crazy, you wouldn't make the same correlation.
You see the issue here?
For what it's worth, I'm not particularly on either side of this debate. You'd probably see my diet as 'pretty good', but I eat junk when I want it too. I just get irked when I see confirmation bias and logical fallacies.
well besides heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, IBS, Crohns, Arthritis, etc, etc, etc....
You can say that all you want. Saying it doesn't make it true for every single person. All those things are linked to obesity, not necessarily a particular type of food.
Eating too much fast food (or any food) makes you obese.
Obesity causes health issues.
It does not follow that eating fast food in any quantity leads to health issues.
The most you can conclude is that eating too much food leads to health issues.
It would be interesting to see a long term study following a large representative sample of people eating a long term, macro-balanced, calorie controlled diet of fast food. I'd very much like to see that compared to the health stats of a similar group eating a macro-balanced, calorie controlled diet of 'clean' food.
Again, I'm not trying to swing this argument either way. I'm just pointing out that there is not direct evidence that fast food, in and of itself, is the demon it's made out to be. For now, at least, it's just caught up in the fallout of the fact that people in the western world eat too darn much.0 -
ugh i hate this.
she ate like **** and her system went crazy after a long period of time
she started eating clean and it solved the issues
could there be other factors at play? sure. but it's just as asinine to assume that food had NO involvement.
She ate like you define to be s**t. Many people eat the same way, with no ill health effects.
If she'd been eating what you define to be 'good' and then her system went crazy, you wouldn't make the same correlation.
You see the issue here?
For what it's worth, I'm not particularly on either side of this debate. You'd probably see my diet as 'pretty good', but I eat junk when I want it too. I just get irked when I see confirmation bias and logical fallacies.
well besides heart disease, diabetes, high blood pressure, cancer, IBS, Crohns, Arthritis, etc, etc, etc....
You can say that all you want. Saying it doesn't make it true for every single person. All those things are linked to obesity, not necessarily a particular type of food.
Eating too much fast food (or any food) makes you obese.
Obesity causes health issues.
It does not follow that eating fast food in any quantity leads to health issues.
The most you can conclude is that eating too much food leads to health issues.
It would be interesting to see a long term study following a large representative sample of people eating a long term, macro-balanced, calorie controlled diet of fast food. I'd very much like to see that compared to the health stats of a similar group eating a macro-balanced, calorie controlled diet of 'clean' food.
Again, I'm not trying to swing this argument either way. I'm just pointing out that there is not direct evidence that fast food, in and of itself, is the demon it's made out to be. For now, at least, it's just caught up in the fallout of the fact that people in the western world eat too darn much.
they're linked to processed meats and other questionable ingredients in all sorts of foods whether you're obese or not.0 -
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/11/63/abstract
study of half a million people. the conclusion?After correction for measurement error, higher all-cause mortality remained significant only for processed meat (HR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.25, per 50 g/d). We estimated that 3.3% (95% CI 1.5% to 5.0%) of deaths could be prevented if all participants had a processed meat consumption of less than 20 g/day.
fast food is processed meat.0 -
they're linked to processed meats and other questionable ingredients in all sorts of foods whether you're obese or not.
I presume then that the study I mentioned has been performed. I would be fascinated to read it.0 -
Just wanted to add to this discussion, there are certain hormones that ARE allowed to be used in food production by the FDA.
" In the 1980s, it became possible to produce large quantities of pure bGH by using recombinant DNA technology. In 1993, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the recombinant bovine growth hormone (rbGH), also known as bovine somatotropin (rbST) for use in dairy cattle. Recent estimates by the manufacturer of this hormone indicate that 30% of the cows in the United States (US) may be treated with rbGH. "
"There are six different kinds of steroid hormones that are currently approved by FDA for use in food production in the US: estradiol, progesterone, testosterone, zeranol, trenbolone acetate, and melengestrol acetate. Estradiol and progesterone are natural female sex hormones; testosterone is the natural male sex hormone; zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengesterol acetate are synthetic growth promoters (hormone-like chemicals that can make animals grow faster). Currently, federal regulations allow these hormones to be used on growing cattle and sheep, but not on poultry (chickens, turkeys, ducks) or hogs (pigs). The above hormones are not as useful in increasing weight gain of poultry or hogs. " http://envirocancer.cornell.edu/Factsheet/Diet/fs37.hormones.cfm
That is why I buy milk from cows not treated with the rbGH. I think its important that we become informed, educated consumers, that way, the more we know about the food we eat, the more demand will be placed on the food industry to do a better job with providing better quality products.
I just can't believe they are allowing this garbage into the food supply. For those who don't know the company responsible for inventing all these lovely bovine hormones and convincing the government to allow it -- not to mention genetically modified foods, etc., just Google "Monsanto"
And Obama just signed the outrageous "Monsanto Protection Act" into law. It is a law that specifically protects Monsanto from lawsuits brought by those harmed by their GMO crops. It is a total travesty of justice. Read about it and weep: http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-bill-blunt-agriculture-006/0 -
they're linked to processed meats and other questionable ingredients in all sorts of foods whether you're obese or not.
I presume then that the study I mentioned has been performed. I would be fascinated to read it.
ruh roh.
(please see my previous post citing a study that does just that)0 -
I posted about monsanto the other day and no one responded lol I guess ppl arent aware of what may or may not be going on so here it is again
http://gmo-awareness.com/2011/05/12/monsanto-dirty-dozen/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFgNq0Ve-28&feature=youtu.be 0 -
http://www.canada.com/health/Fast+food+damage+your+brain+study/5919856/story.htmlThe work — published in the journal Neurology — involved 104 people, ages 65 and older, enrolled in the Oregon Brain Aging Study. All were generally healthy elders, with few smokers or people with diabetes or high blood cholesterol.
When the study was launched in 1989, "the aim was to study the effects of age on dementia risk in people that don't have factors known to increase their risk at the time," Bowman said.
Other researchers have linked diet and dementia. But the usual strategy is to have people fill out questionnaires about the type and frequency of foods they eat — except people sometimes forget. Age can also affect how the body absorbs nutrients.
In the new study, researchers checked blood samples for markers of 30 different nutrients. Participants also did a raft of neuropsychological tests, and 42 had MRI scans of their brains as well. The team was interested in three things: cognitive function, total brain volume and white matter changes thought to be a sign of small vessel disease of the brain.
Among the key findings:
- The B vitamins, the antioxidants C and E and vitamin D all seemed to be working in concert in some way the researchers can't yet fully explain. But the B-C-E-D pattern was associated with greater total brain volume and better global cognitive function. People who scored low on this vitamin combination turned out to have less total brain tissue;
- People who had high levels of circulating trans fats had less brain volume. They also had poorer memory, attention, language and processing speed skills;
- People with higher levels of omega 3 fatty acids had better executive function — the ability to plan, problem solve, multi-task and perform other functions — as well as fewer white matter lesions on their brain scans.
The findings held after researchers took age, sex, education, hypertension and genetic and other factors into account.0 -
"...Obesity causes health issues..."
Then again, it may be that whatever is causing the obesity is also causing health issues. I was on the maximum dose of two blood pressure meds when I decided to go sugar free. I was able to taper right off of my blood pressure drugs in a matter of a couple of weeks---BEFORE I lost much weight. That's pretty impressive anecdotal evidence in my opinion. There is a bio-chemical reason for that if you are interested.0 -
http://www.canada.com/health/Fast+food+damage+your+brain+study/5919856/story.htmlThe work — published in the journal Neurology — involved 104 people, ages 65 and older, enrolled in the Oregon Brain Aging Study. All were generally healthy elders, with few smokers or people with diabetes or high blood cholesterol.
When the study was launched in 1989, "the aim was to study the effects of age on dementia risk in people that don't have factors known to increase their risk at the time," Bowman said.
Other researchers have linked diet and dementia. But the usual strategy is to have people fill out questionnaires about the type and frequency of foods they eat — except people sometimes forget. Age can also affect how the body absorbs nutrients.
In the new study, researchers checked blood samples for markers of 30 different nutrients. Participants also did a raft of neuropsychological tests, and 42 had MRI scans of their brains as well. The team was interested in three things: cognitive function, total brain volume and white matter changes thought to be a sign of small vessel disease of the brain.
Among the key findings:
- The B vitamins, the antioxidants C and E and vitamin D all seemed to be working in concert in some way the researchers can't yet fully explain. But the B-C-E-D pattern was associated with greater total brain volume and better global cognitive function. People who scored low on this vitamin combination turned out to have less total brain tissue;
- People who had high levels of circulating trans fats had less brain volume. They also had poorer memory, attention, language and processing speed skills;
- People with higher levels of omega 3 fatty acids had better executive function — the ability to plan, problem solve, multi-task and perform other functions — as well as fewer white matter lesions on their brain scans.
The findings held after researchers took age, sex, education, hypertension and genetic and other factors into account.
Coach is this why ppl these days are so much more stupid than at any other point in American History? If you have ever seen the movie Idiocracy the dude is eating something with his finger out of a huge tub and all the water systems are a gatorade like substance..no more water fountains AHAHHA. That is where we are headed.0 -
Coach Reddy, you seem to be laboring under the assumption that I am arguing one way or the other. I'm neither a food scientist, nutritionist or doctor, so make no claim to be able to prove anything either way. I was just pointing out that everything I had read in this post was purely correlation.
I'll happily read the links you provided later, since I'm cooking dinner right now. Fittingly, a whole grain pizza with a nice organic side salad. Nothing like getting the best of both worlds, I say.0 -
Coach Reddy, you seem to be laboring under the assumption that I am arguing one way or the other. I'm neither a food scientist, nutritionist or doctor, so make no claim to be able to prove anything either way. I was just pointing out that everything I had read in this post was purely correlation.
I'll happily read the links you provided later, since I'm cooking dinner right now. Fittingly, a whole grain pizza with a nice organic side salad. Nothing like getting the best of both worlds, I say.
haha fair enough. enjoy - sounds good!0 -
Well you all keep believing that. I just finished two beers after downing half a bag of chips, 400 calories worth of Heath Bar Ice Cream, and am about to dig into some spicy chicken wings and fettuccine alfredo from the local pizza shop. I'd be happy to compare health stats any time.
I don't know, I used to be the same way, losing weight and running marathons and not worrying about quality of food so much as calories. I lost 60 lbs twice in this way, eating whatever, even McDonalds as long as it was "on plan". I also ran over 10 marathons (well 4 half, 4 full, and several 30Ks).
After about ten years of this lifestyle I became suddenly quite ill and thought for about 10 months I possibly had colon cancer it was so bad. I have learned the hard way that these kinds of things can indeed catch up to us and it has been a scary and humbling experience. I still have trouble sticking to eating clean but think it is well worth the effort.
How did you reach the conclusion that eating "clean" instead would have led to a different outcome? Or said another way, how did you determine that the specifics of your diet was the cause of your problems and not something else, for example, your weight (assuming you were overweight during that time)? Or perhaps a dietary deficiency that was the result of something you *were not* eating and not the result of something you *were* eating?
(Just curious. Not trying to make any baseless accusations with this. I'm just fascinated by the ability of the human mind sometimes to make associations and correlations with things that may or may not be associated or correlated.)
This is a good question. Basically I was staying in a size 4 by following Weight Watchers, so through calorie restriction. I had been thin most of my life but had put on 60 pounds with my pregnancies for both of my children, and went on WW to get back in shape. However, I pretty much didn't worry about the good health guidelines, like servings of fruits and vegetables etc. I'd eat sushi and pineapples at one meal, and maybe McDonalds the next day, as long as I was within my Points. I was running marathons and thinking that as long as I was keeping my weight down this was the most important. Looking back though, I did get sick from a trip overseas, a parasite, so really maybe it wasn't all tied to food. But at the same time, I noticed in going through that and not knowing what it was I noticed that food definitely affected how I felt, and made me reconsider how I was ignoring nutrition for just staying thin. It seems to be common knowledge in health and nutrition that food is related to long term health and wellness. I guess as I'm struggling to not go back up in weight, I am thinking now that losing weight and staying thin the healthy nutritious way would be best.0 -
we're all going to die anyway...may as well enjoy the donuts and ice cream while we can :drinker: :bigsmile:
yep0
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