Mainstream Diet Myths Debunked

1356

Replies

  • markiend
    markiend Posts: 461 Member
    You have to eat Cleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

    Sugar is the cause of all evil
  • nosebag1212
    nosebag1212 Posts: 621 Member
    you have to eat fast acting carbs within 30 mins of lifting weights to take advantage of the 'anabolic window'
  • professionalHobbyist
    professionalHobbyist Posts: 1,316 Member
    There is an easy way
  • snowflakesav
    snowflakesav Posts: 649 Member
    Don't eat anything white
    Don't eat after 8:00 pm
    Vinegar
    Lemon juice, cayenne water and vinegar
  • isulo_kura
    isulo_kura Posts: 818 Member
    Orphia wrote: »
    Here's a list of common diet myths that have been debunked by science.

    NOTE, THESE ARE MYTHS!

    1. Saturated fat is bad
    2. A low-fat diet is better for health
    3. Salt is the devil
    4. Sugar is the dietary devil with its empty kilojoules
    5. Eggs are evil
    6. Multiple small meals beats three square meals
    7. Low fat dairy is better for health and weight loss
    8. Cooking with olive oil is bad
    9. Skipping breakfast is a terrible idea
    10. Fasting slows your metabolism and increases cortisol

    http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/top-10-mainstream-diet-myths-debunked-20150213-13e1bo.html

    What other debunked myths are there? Add them to the list. Preferably with sources.

    The saturated Fat one has not been debunked as a myth. Despite what people keep saying. Even though there have been a couple of studies questioning this. The wealth of evidence is still that too much saturated fat is linked to high cholesterol. There has been thousands of studies over the decades supporting the link so one or 2 studies saying the opposite does not immediately 'debunk' all that has come before. That is why people like major Health Bodies like the American Heart Association, the British hear Foundation and the NHS in the UK still advise that people keep a check on the SF intake. We all need fat in our diet and the 80's lo fat Mantra was over the top. It seems to me that people want support for there bad habits which is why people are joyfully jumping on the Saturated Fat is good for you Mantra,

    So in reality I suppose something not being bad does not automatically mean it's good for you. People can make there own minds up but as the 'Chocolate is good for weightloss' study shows just believing what is in the popular press and the headlines is a dangerous game.

    What's interesting is the study that people always quote as saying saturated fat is good doesn't actually say that. In the study the conclusions actually stated Their findings
    “did not yield clearly supportive evidence for current cardiovascular guidelines that encourage high consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids and low consumption of total saturated fats.”

    That does not say saturated fats are good for you. Basically the waters are a bit muddy but they most defiantly have not been debunked.

    Personally if major health organisations and cardiologists are still saying that keeping an eye on saturated fat intake I think I'll stick with that.

    In reality rather than putting labels like good and bad it's far better to just aim for balance. I so despair at this faddy leaping from one extreme to another.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Isulo, they're saying its OK in moderation.

    But thanks for making me check. The article quoted Joseph Mercola, who should never be trusted about anything, but the rest of it was good.
  • Jgasmic
    Jgasmic Posts: 219 Member
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Jgasmic wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    Dnarules wrote: »
    IIFYM'ers never eat any vegetables.

    I thought you guys only ate twinkies?

    no it's ice cream/pop tart sandwiches

    I know this isn't serious, but that sounds really good.

    It actually is a real thing and it's awesome. This was my favorite combination.

    Chocolate chip cookie dough Pop Tar with Ben & Jerry's Half Baked ice cream.

    kdNu9Kq.png?1

    Oh wow.
  • dawniemate
    dawniemate Posts: 395 Member
    You must have breakfast or your metabolism won't kick in !!!!!
  • Sued0nim
    Sued0nim Posts: 17,456 Member
    Somebody should link this to some of the posts in the "super helpful" sticky :huh:
  • snickerscharlie
    snickerscharlie Posts: 8,578 Member
    edited May 2015
    Walking isn't real exercise.

    (Usually said by exercise snobs. ;) )
  • Chrysalid2014
    Chrysalid2014 Posts: 1,038 Member
    Orphia wrote: »
    Here's a list of common diet myths that have been debunked by science.

    [*] Sugar is the dietary devil with its empty kilojoules

    [*] Cooking with olive oil is bad

    [/list]

    What other debunked myths are there? Add them to the list. Preferably with sources.

    The sugar "myth" is hardly debunked by the article you linked. In fact the article reinforces everything the anti-sugar campaigners are saying:
    "... it delivers empty calories, completely devoid of nutrition.
    ... it messes with your insulin, making you want to go back for more. And more.
    ... it can cause metabolic problems, diabetes and even cardiovascular disease.
    We currently consume too much sugar and there is no doubt we need to dabble less in the sugar dance..."

    I haven't heard or ready any food activists saying "a little sugar is the dietary devil". They are saying we consume too much of it.

    And, they've misrepresented the olive oil "myth". It's actually that you shouldn't cook with extra virgin olive oil, not that you shouldn't cook with any olive oil. I asked our resident chef about that specifically on his thread and he agreed.
  • Chrysalid2014
    Chrysalid2014 Posts: 1,038 Member
    edited May 2015
    Myth: crash dieting is not effective and 'slow and steady' is the only sensible approach for weight loss.

    Debunkment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11164914/Crash-dieting-more-effective-than-gradual-weight-loss-study-suggests.html

    [Edit: this is the study referenced in the article above:]
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(14)70200-1/abstract
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    MrM27 wrote: »
    Jgasmic wrote: »
    SezxyStef wrote: »
    Dnarules wrote: »
    IIFYM'ers never eat any vegetables.

    I thought you guys only ate twinkies?

    no it's ice cream/pop tart sandwiches

    I know this isn't serious, but that sounds really good.

    It actually is a real thing and it's awesome. This was my favorite combination.

    Chocolate chip cookie dough Pop Tar with Ben & Jerry's Half Baked ice cream.

    kdNu9Kq.png?1

    That looks sooooo good.

    I wish Ben & Jerry's made lactose free ice cream, and if they do have it I have not been able to find it.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    Myth: crash dieting is not effective and 'slow and steady' is the only sensible approach for weight loss.

    Debunkment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11164914/Crash-dieting-more-effective-than-gradual-weight-loss-study-suggests.html

    Chrys, your source is not reliable because it's just a biased newspaper article without any linked studies.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member

    I haven't heard or ready any food activists saying "a little sugar is the dietary devil". They are saying we consume too much of it.

    And, they've misrepresented the olive oil "myth". It's actually that you shouldn't cook with extra virgin olive oil, not that you shouldn't cook with any olive oil. I asked our resident chef about that specifically on his thread and he agreed.

    Sugar: I've seen people here freaking out on MFP because they're "addicted to soda" but think they can't have any. That's the sort of people that need to learn this.

    Oil: there may be a few versions going around. The article is from here in Australia.

    Cheers.
  • Chrysalid2014
    Chrysalid2014 Posts: 1,038 Member
    SLLRunner wrote: »
    Myth: crash dieting is not effective and 'slow and steady' is the only sensible approach for weight loss.

    Debunkment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11164914/Crash-dieting-more-effective-than-gradual-weight-loss-study-suggests.html

    Chrys, your source is not reliable because it's just a biased newspaper article without any linked studies.

    My apologies. Here is the link to the study and I will add it to my original post. I thought the newspaper article was more interesting as it included comments from other experts on the study.
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(14)70200-1/abstract
  • fullylugged
    fullylugged Posts: 67 Member
    Any list you read on the internet MUST be right!
  • emilynbaldi
    emilynbaldi Posts: 5 Member
    Myth: I found "XYZ" in a study, that makes it an universal irrefutable truth. ;P
  • vschwgrt1
    vschwgrt1 Posts: 86 Member
    Atkins
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Myth: crash dieting is not effective and 'slow and steady' is the only sensible approach for weight loss.

    Debunkment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11164914/Crash-dieting-more-effective-than-gradual-weight-loss-study-suggests.html

    [Edit: this is the study referenced in the article above:]
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(14)70200-1/abstract

    The study's participants were far too few for those conclusions to be meaningful.

    See here:

    "I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How."
    http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800

    Thank you.
  • Chrysalid2014
    Chrysalid2014 Posts: 1,038 Member
    Orphia wrote: »
    Myth: crash dieting is not effective and 'slow and steady' is the only sensible approach for weight loss.

    Debunkment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11164914/Crash-dieting-more-effective-than-gradual-weight-loss-study-suggests.html

    [Edit: this is the study referenced in the article above:]
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(14)70200-1/abstract

    The study's participants were far too few for those conclusions to be meaningful.

    See here:

    "I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How."
    http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800

    Thank you.

    It's hardly comparable. The chocolate 'study' had 16 subjects. The crash dieting study had 200.

    But I thought it interesting how the chocolate story made the point that even well-funded, serious research into weight-loss science is confusing and inconclusive.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    Orphia wrote: »
    Myth: crash dieting is not effective and 'slow and steady' is the only sensible approach for weight loss.

    Debunkment:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/11164914/Crash-dieting-more-effective-than-gradual-weight-loss-study-suggests.html

    [Edit: this is the study referenced in the article above:]
    http://www.thelancet.com/journals/landia/article/PIIS2213-8587(14)70200-1/abstract

    The study's participants were far too few for those conclusions to be meaningful.

    See here:

    "I Fooled Millions Into Thinking Chocolate Helps Weight Loss. Here's How."
    http://io9.com/i-fooled-millions-into-thinking-chocolate-helps-weight-1707251800

    Thank you.

    It's hardly comparable. The chocolate 'study' had 16 subjects. The crash dieting study had 200.

    But I thought it interesting how the chocolate story made the point that even well-funded, serious research into weight-loss science is confusing and inconclusive.

    200 is very few, especially the even smaller percentage who lost weight then went on to the maintenance diet.

    We need a meta-study of good quality studies of thousands of participants. I'm certainly open to new evidence.

    Cheers.
  • Magseye
    Magseye Posts: 58 Member
    edited May 2015
    isulo_kura wrote: »
    Orphia wrote: »
    Here's a list of common diet myths that have been debunked by science.

    NOTE, THESE ARE MYTHS!

    1. Saturated fat is bad
    2. A low-fat diet is better for health
    3. Salt is the devil
    4. Sugar is the dietary devil with its empty kilojoules
    5. Eggs are evil
    6. Multiple small meals beats three square meals
    7. Low fat dairy is better for health and weight loss
    8. Cooking with olive oil is bad
    9. Skipping breakfast is a terrible idea
    10. Fasting slows your metabolism and increases cortisol

    http://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/diet-and-fitness/top-10-mainstream-diet-myths-debunked-20150213-13e1bo.html

    What other debunked myths are there? Add them to the list. Preferably with sources.

    The saturated Fat one has not been debunked as a myth. Despite what people keep saying. Even though there have been a couple of studies questioning this. The wealth of evidence is still that too much saturated fat is linked to high cholesterol. There has been thousands of studies over the decades supporting the link so one or 2 studies saying the opposite does not immediately 'debunk' all that has come before. That is why people like major Health Bodies like the American Heart Association, the British hear Foundation and the NHS in the UK still advise that people keep a check on the SF intake. We all need fat in our diet and the 80's lo fat Mantra was over the top. It seems to me that people want support for there bad habits which is why people are joyfully jumping on the Saturated Fat is good for you Mantra,

    So in reality I suppose something not being bad does not automatically mean it's good for you. People can make there own minds up but as the 'Chocolate is good for weightloss' study shows just believing what is in the popular press and the headlines is a dangerous game.

    What's interesting is the study that people always quote as saying saturated fat is good doesn't actually say that. In the study the conclusions actually stated Their findings
    “did not yield clearly supportive evidence for current cardiovascular guidelines that encourage high consumption of polyunsaturated fatty acids and low consumption of total saturated fats.”

    That does not say saturated fats are good for you. Basically the waters are a bit muddy but they most defiantly have not been debunked.

    Personally if major health organisations and cardiologists are still saying that keeping an eye on saturated fat intake I think I'll stick with that.

    In reality rather than putting labels like good and bad it's far better to just aim for balance. I so despair at this faddy leaping from one extreme to another.
  • Magseye
    Magseye Posts: 58 Member
    Agreed.
  • Orphia
    Orphia Posts: 7,097 Member
    The article was saying saturated fats are OK in moderation. On this we all agree. Cheers.
  • JPW1990
    JPW1990 Posts: 2,424 Member
    vschwgrt1 wrote: »
    Atkins

    Let me guess, you tried it once, for 2 weeks, did it wrong, it didn't work, therefore all the people who have successfully maintained for 5+ years are lying?
  • fr3smyl
    fr3smyl Posts: 1,418 Member
    markiend wrote: »
    You have to eat Cleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

    Sugar is the cause of all evil
    It is. I did some crazy things on the sugar...crazy things.
  • fr3smyl
    fr3smyl Posts: 1,418 Member
    But a banana a day will still make me fat, right? I was told it has some kinda indigestable carbs in it. That they just meld into your body and are released for energy after protein, fat, sugar, and other carbs have already been used up.
  • SLLRunner
    SLLRunner Posts: 12,942 Member
    fr3smyl wrote: »
    markiend wrote: »
    You have to eat Cleaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan

    Sugar is the cause of all evil
    It is. I did some crazy things on the sugar...crazy things.

    Actually.....it is not, whether or not you did crazy things.
  • This content has been removed.
This discussion has been closed.