What do people think of this?

MissusMoon wrote: »

Oh yes, this was recently posted by one of the anti-sugar zealots who then claimed to be an investigative reporter (not the OP, of course). Nonsense.

I don't think it is "nonsense". It seems like a fair bit of common sense and modern science. Here's the gist of it all:

1. Eating Fat Does Not Make You Fat
2. Saturated Fat Does Not Cause Heart Disease. Full fat dairy is likely protective.
3. Processed foods labelled ‘low fat’, ‘lite’, ‘low cholesterol’ or “proven to lower cholesterol” should be avoided.
4. Limit starchy and refined carbohydrates to prevent and reverse Type 2 diabetes.
5. Optimum Sugar Consumption For Health is ZERO. (I assume this means added sugars and not fruits)
6. Industrial Vegetable Oils Should Be Avoided
7. Stop Counting Calories (Calorie focused thinking has damaged public health.)
8. You cannot outrun a bad diet.
9. Snacking will make you fat (Grandma was right!)
10. Evidence Based Nutrition Should Be Incorporated In to Education Curricula For All Healthcare Professionals.

I think of it is overly simplistic but overall it makes a bunch of sense.

At the very least, I can't see anything wrong with it - I can't see anything here that could hurt someone's health. The advice is sound if not simplistic. At worst, it is neutral advice for healthy people with good genetics, and helpful advice for those with some health issues.

JMO

The only sugars I believe we should eat are natural sugars from fruits and veggies. Science is proving (not willing to say has proved) that sugar feeds cancer. So I can see where zero processed sugar is a good thing. Also the no counting calories... the only thing I keep a watch on is my carbs as I am a type 2 diabetic. While I am not a huge fan of the Ketogenic diet, I have seen amazing results before and after pictures of those who are. The only negative I see with Keto, is if a person decides to no longer follow the ketogenic diet, the likelihood of regaining all weight lost is extremely high. That is why I have chosen to follow the Gabriel Method. And because of the Gabriel Method, I am now a gym junkie. lol...

trish55011 wrote: »

The only sugars I believe we should eat are natural sugars from fruits and veggies. Science is proving (not willing to say has proved) that sugar feeds cancer. So I can see where zero processed sugar is a good thing. Also the no counting calories... the only thing I keep a watch on is my carbs as I am a type 2 diabetic. While I am not a huge fan of the Ketogenic diet, I have seen amazing results before and after pictures of those who are. The only negative I see with Keto, is if a person decides to no longer follow the ketogenic diet, the likelihood of regaining all weight lost is extremely high. That is why I have chosen to follow the Gabriel Method. And because of the Gabriel Method, I am now a gym junkie. lol...

It's okay if I eat sugar from sugar cane and sugar beet, but not from cooked sugar cane and sugar beet. What?

nvmomketo wrote: »

MissusMoon wrote: »

Oh yes, this was recently posted by one of the anti-sugar zealots who then claimed to be an investigative reporter (not the OP, of course). Nonsense.

I don't think it is "nonsense". It seems like a fair bit of common sense and modern science. Here's the gist of it all:

1. Eating Fat Does Not Make You Fat
2. Saturated Fat Does Not Cause Heart Disease. Full fat dairy is likely protective.
3. Processed foods labelled ‘low fat’, ‘lite’, ‘low cholesterol’ or “proven to lower cholesterol” should be avoided.
4. Limit starchy and refined carbohydrates to prevent and reverse Type 2 diabetes.
5. Optimum Sugar Consumption For Health is ZERO. (I assume this means added sugars and not fruits)
6. Industrial Vegetable Oils Should Be Avoided
7. Stop Counting Calories (Calorie focused thinking has damaged public health.)
8. You cannot outrun a bad diet.
9. Snacking will make you fat (Grandma was right!)
10. Evidence Based Nutrition Should Be Incorporated In to Education Curricula For All Healthcare Professionals.

I think of it is overly simplistic but overall it makes a bunch of sense.

At the very least, I can't see anything wrong with it - I can't see anything here that could hurt someone's health. The advice is sound if not simplistic. At worst, it is neutral advice for healthy people with good genetics, and helpful advice for those with some health issues.

JMO

1. Agree.. i think we all agree on this one.
2. Not enough available information to justify the responses. Of all the studies posted in this thread sat fat seemed to be 15% of less of total calories. But it potentially would suggest that sat fat from whole sources would have less of an impact. But a blanket statement that SFA isn't a concern would be wrong.
3. I would call most of it creative marketing. Oatmeal is labeled cholesterol lowering and that has been supported by some studies because it acts as a binding agent.
4. I don't see how limiting potatoes would prevent diabetes
5. I agree that limiting added sugar can be beneficial in favor of whole foods while trying to lose weight, but it doesn't make it optimal. Optimal is subjective based on a lot of factors.
6. Don't really disagree.
7. Calorie counting is a tool... no different than counting carbs, points or using fancy containers. What matters is finding a solution for you.
8. You can, but its very hard (i.e. - olympic/pro athletes have to eat "bad" to maintain weight)
9. ehh..
10. I would agree.

I've lost about 85 pounds and have eaten plenty of carbs along the way. But I kept up a calorie deficit.