You Should Study Nutrition - The Other Perspective

CoachReddy thanks for all the links to peruse!!

I think it's a sign of the times when people that strive to eat clean and healthy foods are called a term equating them with having a disorder.

If someone is restricting their calories to the point of starvation, now that's a completely different story.

And yes there are zelots in every aspect of life. Here is a quote by Dr. Mercola which I think has a lot of merit:

"Unfortunately, it’s not always just about the nutrition. All too often raw food converts (just as some advocates of other radical dietary protocols) possess a near frenzied religious fervor, attaching spiritual, puritanical, even moralistic significance to the virtues of their "superior" 100 percent raw, vegan or vegetable-food diet. Coined "Orthorexia Nervosa" in Health Food Junkies by Dr. Steven Bratman and David Knight, this phenomena has been personally observed within numerous healthy food communities. Unfortunately, it ends up being dysfunctional and unsustainable, reflecting obsessive need to control and to be right, with a bottom line that essentially makes the enjoyment of eating into a guilty vice.

It’s highly counterproductive, dissociative and unhealthy (especially for the greater conscious community of people who are waking up about the truth in food and agriculture) for various food and dietary philosophies to be in a constant game of superiority and one-upmanship. Even worse is exclusionism--continuing to maintain a "WE HAVE THE ONLY WAY" type of attitude. This is just as bad as religious wars."

I agree with Dr. Mercola. However, to lump anyone that is actively seeking to eat a healthy diet into this category is ridiculous. We may all disagree on exactly what constitutes a "healthy diet". And as people become more aware and educated on the topic their ideals may change. I think at least being on this path is so important, no matter where in the journey one is. Our bodies are sacred. You realize that once good health has vanished. So wanting to being aware of how to best feed ourselves is just common sense and should be looked at as being NORMAL and not dysfunctional. For me, it isn't just about calories in calories out. It's about nutrients, micronutrients, phytonutrients, minerals, beneficial micro-organisms . . . and it's also about not gumming up the works with toxins . . . and it's about not clogging up my arteries with harmful fats . . . and it's about not stressing my adrenals with stimulants . . . and it's about not messing up my pancreas with simple sugars and a high fat diet . . . and it's about getting enough sun to stimulate vitamin D production (or supplementation) . . . and it's about getting enough daylight through my pupil to stimulate my endocrine system, etc. I LOVE LIFE and I ENJOY learning about my body and treating it with respect. IT MAKES ME FEEL GOOD.

I wonder if the term orthorexia was actually created by the processed/fast food giants to degrade anyone that doesn't eat their crap, lol.

...even professionals are leading you in the wrong direction. Learning about proper nutrition will save you a lot of wasted time and you'll get to your goals faster.

When I take on clients I make them do ridiculous amounts of research. Its not enough for me to just summarize things to them. People always end up trying to tweak things when they don't understand the mechanics of proper nutrition. It never works out as well as it could have. I always tell them that if they spent two less hours training a week and used those two hours to read they would inevitably reach their goals faster in the long run. I believe that when I say it.

There are people, trainers, professionals, who will want to tell you that by focusing on what kinds of foods you eat, you are displaying "orthorexic" tendencies. Orthorexic is defined by Alan Aragon as “an unhealthy obsession with eating healthy food.”

Don't listen. Obviously food shouldn't consume your every waking thought, and you should enjoy your life and your friends, but a care and a concern for the things you put in your mouth can serve you incredibly well on your journey. Do you want to have a stronger, healthier body? Do you want to avoid disease? Do you want to recover faster, require less sleep, function at a more optimal level? Do you want to be bounding up stairs at 60, 70 years old? Do you want to be doing yoga when you're 80 like I do?

Then here are some great resources to help get you started!

http://www.westonaprice.org/

http://chriskresser.com/

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/

http://wrightnewsletter.com/about/

http://www.ted.com/talks/william_li.html

http://www.eattodefeatcancer.org/

http://www.drweil.com/

http://drkevinlau.blogspot.com/

If you read all that you'd know more than ~99% of people everywhere. You can learn it in a month easily. Spend all your time learning. But if you want to ask questions, that's not a bad thing either.

Oh dear, I don't have to follow many of these links to find a sorry collection of cranks and people trying to sell you snake oil and I wouldn't call that research. As for professionals moving in the wrong direction................... now how many times have I heard that the experts were wrong and someone who can tell a good anecdote (true or false) or who clearly has an interest in what he can sell you, is right.

My friend can I recommend a book to you "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre, maybe put some of this stuff in perspective and point out the value of true documented trials under controlled conditions. I doubt you'd like what you'd read but it might be an education for you.

I agree with you, but I have to wonder why there's this automatic knee jerk reaction opposing understanding nutrition, how the body works and removing unhealthy choices from how we eat? It's like folks want to eat pop tarts and feel smug about it?

that's exactly what it is, and no - i don't understand it either.

On the other hand, I don't know why there's this automatic knee jerk reaction that opposes moderation. It's like people want to be super restrictive and feel smug about it......

do you think i oppose moderation when I say 10-20% of your calories can be discretionary?

Yes.

Good for you for eating a pop tart. I honestly was giving you some credit last week when you agreed to disagree or had a rational discussion about a couple of points.

However, I'm not giving you a moderation merit badge just yet. I think you are have very extreme viewpoints about food. And I'm pretty sure you've argued them quite often here. My concern is that people get sucked in by the "clean" (paleo/vegan/lowcarb/juicing/cleansing/etc/etc/etc) viewpoints - they often struggle to maintain that extreme. Some people thrive on it (kudos to you, I guess!) but many, many more cannot maintain it and it sets them up for further failure.

...even professionals are leading you in the wrong direction. Learning about proper nutrition will save you a lot of wasted time and you'll get to your goals faster.

When I take on clients I make them do ridiculous amounts of research. Its not enough for me to just summarize things to them. People always end up trying to tweak things when they don't understand the mechanics of proper nutrition. It never works out as well as it could have. I always tell them that if they spent two less hours training a week and used those two hours to read they would inevitably reach their goals faster in the long run. I believe that when I say it.

There are people, trainers, professionals, who will want to tell you that by focusing on what kinds of foods you eat, you are displaying "orthorexic" tendencies. Orthorexic is defined by Alan Aragon as “an unhealthy obsession with eating healthy food.”

Don't listen. Obviously food shouldn't consume your every waking thought, and you should enjoy your life and your friends, but a care and a concern for the things you put in your mouth can serve you incredibly well on your journey. Do you want to have a stronger, healthier body? Do you want to avoid disease? Do you want to recover faster, require less sleep, function at a more optimal level? Do you want to be bounding up stairs at 60, 70 years old? Do you want to be doing yoga when you're 80 like I do?

Then here are some great resources to help get you started!

http://www.westonaprice.org/

http://chriskresser.com/

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/

http://wrightnewsletter.com/about/

http://www.ted.com/talks/william_li.html

http://www.eattodefeatcancer.org/

http://www.drweil.com/

http://drkevinlau.blogspot.com/

If you read all that you'd know more than ~99% of people everywhere. You can learn it in a month easily. Spend all your time learning. But if you want to ask questions, that's not a bad thing either.

Oh dear, I don't have to follow many of these links to find a sorry collection of cranks and people trying to sell you snake oil and I wouldn't call that research. As for professionals moving in the wrong direction................... now how many times have I heard that the experts were wrong and someone who can tell a good anecdote (true or false) or who clearly has an interest in what he can sell you, is right.

My friend can I recommend a book to you "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre, maybe put some of this stuff in perspective and point out the value of true documented trials under controlled conditions. I doubt you'd like what you'd read but it might be an education for you.

What I got out of that reply:

I agree with you, but I have to wonder why there's this automatic knee jerk reaction opposing understanding nutrition, how the body works and removing unhealthy choices from how we eat? It's like folks want to eat pop tarts and feel smug about it?

that's exactly what it is, and no - i don't understand it either.

On the other hand, I don't know why there's this automatic knee jerk reaction that opposes moderation. It's like people want to be super restrictive and feel smug about it......

do you think i oppose moderation when I say 10-20% of your calories can be discretionary?

Yes.

Good for you for eating a pop tart. I honestly was giving you some credit last week when you agreed to disagree or had a rational discussion about a couple of points.

However, I'm not giving you a moderation merit badge just yet. I think you are have very extreme viewpoints about food. And I'm pretty sure you've argued them quite often here. My concern is that people get sucked in by the "clean" (paleo/vegan/lowcarb/juicing/cleansing/etc/etc/etc) viewpoints - they often struggle to maintain that extreme. Some people thrive on it (kudos to you, I guess!) but many, many more cannot maintain it and it sets them up for further failure.

traditional doctors would be viewed the same way if they weren't paid by pharmaceutical industries and insurance companies, and instead had to sell prescriptions to you themselves on an individual basis.

I prefer my research from medical and other peer reviewed journals. AJCN, Pub-med, EJCN, Science and others are great resources.

But thanks anyway.

Since it seems you are referring to what you believe to be doing "good" for people, I think that's great. I do not like to discount others approaches along the way. There are many ways to reach an answer. 1+3=4 so does 2+2 or even 1+1+1.

Oh dear, I don't have to follow many of these links to find a sorry collection of cranks and people trying to sell you snake oil and I wouldn't call that research. As for professionals moving in the wrong direction................... now how many times have I heard that the experts were wrong and someone who can tell a good anecdote (true or false) or who clearly has an interest in what he can sell you, is right.

My friend can I recommend a book to you "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre, maybe put some of this stuff in perspective and point out the value of true documented trials under controlled conditions. I doubt you'd like what you'd read but it might be an education for you.

Do you think that conventional medicine should fail to consider or examine the potential benefits that alternative medicine can bring on a therapeutic basis?

I can assure you that many young doctors or undergrads don't share that view...

No not at all, there should be no limits on investigation, but it has to be carried out in a controlled fashion so the results are believable. Take homeopathy for example, it has no scientific basis, and there has been no controlled study which shows it is effective, indeed there is a $1 million prize available for anyone who can prove it works in controlled conditions. Strangely not a single homeopath has taken up the challenge.

And yes there is an unmeasurable benefit, the placebo effect, which is very real and documented in actual trials, from pharma and alternative therapies, but it is not repeatable, ie two people who have the same disease can have very different results, not the case with properly tested drugs (and that is not always the case either!)

All I can say is read the book.

I agree with everything here!

Also, I've never seen a chiropractor and try to make it a general habit to stay away from them and other fake doctors.

Also, my doc doesn't get paid by insurance companies or drug companies and cannot prescribe anything other than generics. So any concern on that front is wildly misguided.

I eat clean 90% of the time but only because that's what I prefer. I ate mostly clean and got fat, ate mostly clean and maintained and now am eating mostly clean and losing weight.

to say that any concern on that front is wildly misguided based on your experience with one doctor is also wildly misguided... to be fair...

Oh dear, I don't have to follow many of these links to find a sorry collection of cranks and people trying to sell you snake oil and I wouldn't call that research. As for professionals moving in the wrong direction................... now how many times have I heard that the experts were wrong and someone who can tell a good anecdote (true or false) or who clearly has an interest in what he can sell you, is right.

My friend can I recommend a book to you "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre, maybe put some of this stuff in perspective and point out the value of true documented trials under controlled conditions. I doubt you'd like what you'd read but it might be an education for you.

Do you think that conventional medicine should fail to consider or examine the potential benefits that alternative medicine can bring on a therapeutic basis?

I can assure you that many young doctors or undergrads don't share that view...

No not at all, there should be no limits on investigation, but it has to be carried out in a controlled fashion so the results are believable. Take homeopathy for example, it has no scientific basis, and there has been no controlled study which shows it is effective, indeed there is a $1 million prize available for anyone who can prove it works in controlled conditions. Strangely not a single homeopath has taken up the challenge.

And yes there is an unmeasurable benefit, the placebo effect, which is very real and documented in actual trials, from pharma and alternative therapies, but it is not repeatable, ie two people who have the same disease can have very different results, not the case with properly tested drugs (and that is not always the case either!)

All I can say is read the book.

I don't think mice are affected by the placebo effect.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22818235