Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.

What are your unpopular opinions about health / fitness?

1207208210212213358

Replies

  • SezxyStef
    SezxyStef Posts: 15,268 Member
    edited August 2017
    SezxyStef wrote: »

    LOL Gladly but the US has already performed the DEFINITIVE study lasting several decades with tens of millions of participants...
    I will acknowledge up front that correlation does not prove causation... But.
    From the time the US Food Guide came out turning the wisdom of lifetimes (eat meat and vegetables and supplement with a little starch 'cause it's cheap calories... remember you feed prisoners bread and water, or your poor bread and beer) completely upside down with carbs as the majority on the base of a "food pyramid" Obesity and diabetes have gone up in a logarithmic scale every year.
    "Adult Onset Diabetes" was NEVER (yes I'm using an absolute) seen In ANYONE under 25 before this. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease had also NEVER been seen in a child.
    Both of these conditions are now common. There is a PERFECT 1:1 correlation.
    Not proof? Sure, the same way there was no "proof" that smoking was harmful in the 70s.
    I can also just look in a mirror or at my Dexa history.
    The thermogenic effect of food has also shown numerous times that while carbs and protein each provide 4 calories per gram, protein requires energy expenditure to process.

    Do you know what makes up most of the calories in vegetables? Hint: it's neither fat nor protein.

    And guess what also happened at the same time as any food guidelines came out? A never before in history seen abundance of food for virtually everyone in society from the poorest to the richest alongside the steady decline of physical jobs.

    Not to speak of the fact that the people never actually followed the guidelines to begin with (which btw. called for lots of vegetables and a decent amount of protein...).

    And smoking was considered a health hazard for a very long time, you're parroting a bunch of myths here.

    And lastly the TEF of foods is so small it's basically insignificant. It's 7 calories per 10% of protein per 1000 calories eaten, i.e. if you eat 2000 calories and eat a whopping 200 grams of protein (more than enough for any bodybuilder) = 40% of your calories vs. eating 50 grams of protein (absolute minimum recommendation) = 10% of your calories that's 7 calories * 2 * 3 = 42 extra calories. Big deal.

    So tl;dr: not a single thing you just said was true.

    BTW. that's 1:1 exactly the same arguments I've seen countless times repeated, do you guys get a pamphlet somewhere?

    1) Food was both abundant and cheap in North America throughout the 1950s and 1960s
    2) Diabetes was not common, and most instances were genetic conditions
    3) No case of non alcoholic fatty liver disease had ever been recorded in anyone under 50
    4) No case of type 2 diabetes had ever been recorded in a child (thus the no longer valid name "Adult Onset Diabetes")

    I acknowledge your inference that vegetables are carbs... and submit that I don't think a vegetarian lifestyle is healthy or natural for humans, we don't have have hooves. :-)

    Denial is not just a river in Northern Africa. It's also one of the reasons for record breaking storms, rising sea levels, the obesity epidemic, and childhood diabetes.
    Until recently it was also the reason the Flintstones and Buggs Bunny were allowed to advertise cigarettes.

    The mainstream is just beginning to acknowledge that more fat and less carbs than have been recommended for decades are far healthier. (the CBC even recently publicized a large, peer reviewed study promoting that conclusion)

    Mark my words.
    Carbs should be the smallest of your macros. (fats and protein are what you evolved over millions of years to run on)

    Climate change is scientific fact, not a theory (and human activity is its primary cause)

    Populations have thrived on high carb diets. I suggest you read up on Blue Zones.

    Here's an image showing a breakdown of the diet from one of the populations studied, the traditional Okinawan diet (note that I said traditional, not the diet there that's had Western food introduced).

    tjq4da55hkje.jpg

    The most interesting thing to me to note about that diet is the overall calorie consumption. It's quite low.

    I know that someone else can come along and pull out another population that thrived with another macro mix, and I think that's the point. I'd be interested mainly in their overall calorie consumption, not in their macro mix. I wouldn't be surprised if it was similar to the Okinawans.

    The Inuit people actually have a diet high in fats and protein.

    I believe the average calorie consumption is quoted at 3100...with 50% of it coming from fat.

    Then there is the Masai..

    I know that there has been research done on both populations and have found some issues with it like bone density etc but per one study I read...

    "...research often times brings forth more questions than answers...."

    I don't think that pulling out "extremes" in today's climate of all the available food really proves anything other than this is what they did and they are in an extreme.

    What's your point?

    I'm not trying to illustrate extremes here, I'm trying to show that carbs aren't the enemy.

    Note I should have said calorie consumption in relation to TDEE. I'm sure that the overall need for calories among the Innuit is higher given the climate, possible need for hunting, etc.

    my point? ...okay you said you would be interested in the overall calorie of another macro mix I was just throwing that out there....(you have since clarified but at the same time knowing 1785 is for the centurians means that their TDEE might account for the lower calorie consumption)


    I agree carbs are not evil...I think a well round WoE is beneficial and that includes carbs..

    ETA: I have to note however that the pie chart used was strictly based off of the centurians that were alive at that point...not just general Okinawan population.
  • wmd1979
    wmd1979 Posts: 469 Member
    wmd1979 wrote: »
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    In response to the bold, you are one of the people that you are complaining about. You literally just said:

    "Mark my words.
    Carbs should be the smallest of your macros. (fats and protein are what you evolved over millions of years to run on)"

    That is your opinion that you defend by cherry picking bits and pieces of information yet you you state it as an absolute.

    I don't see those statements as necessarily contradictory. They can (are?) both be true.

    Or perhaps... I may have softened my stance in light of a couple of well thought out replies which used facts and examples rather than dogma and "bro science" (like CICO) to make a point?

    What other "bro science" would you be referring to then if you were being sarcastic when you mentioned CICO? I ask because I didn't see anything but actual logic being used to refute what you were saying. Even if you were being sarcastic, this is your second post in a short time to mention CICO in a negative light. I find that odd especially since you were listing off facts such as climate change earlier. Whether you believe it or not, CICO is fact in relation to weight loss.
  • lemurcat12
    lemurcat12 Posts: 30,886 Member
    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    But even in the US we didn't actually reduce our fat consumption. (It went down a bit as a percentage as we increased other sources of calories, but did not go down as a total amount.) We also did not do most of the other things that were recommended, like eating more fruits and veg, limiting added sugar/treats, limiting fried foods/fast food (those have increased), exchanging whole grains for refined.

    So blaming the guidelines seems wrongheaded to me, or blaming any particular macro mix (the US has a poor average diet in a lot of ways, but our macro mix is pretty mainstream and considered by comparison more on the high fat than the high carb side).

    We eat too much (probably due to the loss of cultural restrictions and habits, like a focus on 3 meals a day and eating at home, and home cooked food), the incredibly prevalence and cheapness of foods that many people seem to find hyperpalatable, and, especially, the increase in the # of people with very sedentary lifestyles.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    You think people followed the guidelines? Think again. There is more "I know I shouldn't eat this but..." than meets the eye. You're talking as if people have been eating nothing but rice cakes since the recommendations. From the chart you will notice countries with a whole spectrum of obesity rates at any fat intake level, and in this screenshot in particular all the countries that eat less fat have a lower obesity rate than the US. You can't pin obesity on carbs or the perceived (not real) lack of fat.

    9mfj4zx72l7c.png

    Not sure where you live but I have a very difficult time finding full fat yogurt, ice-cream, even sour cream...
    The whole dairy isle is low fat, reduced fat, or no fat...
    No fat yogurt?? I call that pudding!

    The same is true of almost every isle in almost every grocery store here. The fat has been removed and replaced with sugars or chemicals.

    It's insidious. The general public thinks they're making healthy choices but they are in fact doing the exact opposite.

    Margerine is another great example... butter is full of saturated fat, and is quite healthy but people were convinced that margerine, full of trans dats and devoid of any nutrional value was the healthier choice... That's just a couple examples but there are thousands...

    Are you outside of the US? I am in the US and every grocery store I visit has full fat ice cream, sour cream, milk, and butter. Most of them also have full fat yogurt (I know, because that's the kind my husband prefers).

    Every aisle of the grocery store still has full fat versions of products that have reduced fat options. Mayo, cookies, frosting, Pop Tarts, all of these are still available in their regular versions (despite also having lower fat alternatives).

    Either you're outside of the US, you don't shop personally, or you are very non-observant.
  • jamesakrobinson
    jamesakrobinson Posts: 2,149 Member
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    You think people followed the guidelines? Think again. There is more "I know I shouldn't eat this but..." than meets the eye. You're talking as if people have been eating nothing but rice cakes since the recommendations. From the chart you will notice countries with a whole spectrum of obesity rates at any fat intake level, and in this screenshot in particular all the countries that eat less fat have a lower obesity rate than the US. You can't pin obesity on carbs or the perceived (not real) lack of fat.

    9mfj4zx72l7c.png

    Not sure where you live but I have a very difficult time finding full fat yogurt, ice-cream, even sour cream...
    The whole dairy isle is low fat, reduced fat, or no fat...
    No fat yogurt?? I call that pudding!

    The same is true of almost every isle in almost every grocery store here. The fat has been removed and replaced with sugars or chemicals.

    It's insidious. The general public thinks they're making healthy choices but they are in fact doing the exact opposite.

    Margerine is another great example... butter is full of saturated fat, and is quite healthy but people were convinced that margerine, full of trans dats and devoid of any nutrional value was the healthier choice... That's just a couple examples but there are thousands...

    Are you outside of the US? I am in the US and every grocery store I visit has full fat ice cream, sour cream, milk, and butter. Most of them also have full fat yogurt (I know, because that's the kind my husband prefers).

    Every aisle of the grocery store still has full fat versions of products that have reduced fat options. Mayo, cookies, frosting, Pop Tarts, all of these are still available in their regular versions (despite also having lower fat alternatives).

    Either you're outside of the US, you don't shop personally, or you are very non-observant.

    I'm in Canada... and I assure you I search and even often have to go to more than one store to get "real" foods, especially dairy.
  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    You think people followed the guidelines? Think again. There is more "I know I shouldn't eat this but..." than meets the eye. You're talking as if people have been eating nothing but rice cakes since the recommendations. From the chart you will notice countries with a whole spectrum of obesity rates at any fat intake level, and in this screenshot in particular all the countries that eat less fat have a lower obesity rate than the US. You can't pin obesity on carbs or the perceived (not real) lack of fat.

    9mfj4zx72l7c.png

    Not sure where you live but I have a very difficult time finding full fat yogurt, ice-cream, even sour cream...
    The whole dairy isle is low fat, reduced fat, or no fat...
    No fat yogurt?? I call that pudding!

    The same is true of almost every isle in almost every grocery store here. The fat has been removed and replaced with sugars or chemicals.

    It's insidious. The general public thinks they're making healthy choices but they are in fact doing the exact opposite.

    Margerine is another great example... butter is full of saturated fat, and is quite healthy but people were convinced that margerine, full of trans dats and devoid of any nutrional value was the healthier choice... That's just a couple examples but there are thousands...

    Are you outside of the US? I am in the US and every grocery store I visit has full fat ice cream, sour cream, milk, and butter. Most of them also have full fat yogurt (I know, because that's the kind my husband prefers).

    Every aisle of the grocery store still has full fat versions of products that have reduced fat options. Mayo, cookies, frosting, Pop Tarts, all of these are still available in their regular versions (despite also having lower fat alternatives).

    Either you're outside of the US, you don't shop personally, or you are very non-observant.

    I'm in Canada... and I assure you I search and even often have to go to more than one store to get "real" foods, especially dairy.

    Well, in the US, the situation is quite different.

    Although when I was in Canada a few years ago, I had no problem eating a satisfying amount of fat (I prefer a moderate fat diet, not a low fat one). Maybe it was just my particular location and I got lucky? I didn't have to eat a single low fat product and I was able to eat a lot of the products that I was familiar with from the US.
  • cwolfman13
    cwolfman13 Posts: 41,879 Member
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    You think people followed the guidelines? Think again. There is more "I know I shouldn't eat this but..." than meets the eye. You're talking as if people have been eating nothing but rice cakes since the recommendations. From the chart you will notice countries with a whole spectrum of obesity rates at any fat intake level, and in this screenshot in particular all the countries that eat less fat have a lower obesity rate than the US. You can't pin obesity on carbs or the perceived (not real) lack of fat.

    9mfj4zx72l7c.png

    Not sure where you live but I have a very difficult time finding full fat yogurt, ice-cream, even sour cream...
    The whole dairy isle is low fat, reduced fat, or no fat...
    No fat yogurt?? I call that pudding!

    The same is true of almost every isle in almost every grocery store here. The fat has been removed and replaced with sugars or chemicals.

    It's insidious. The general public thinks they're making healthy choices but they are in fact doing the exact opposite.

    Margerine is another great example... butter is full of saturated fat, and is quite healthy but people were convinced that margerine, full of trans dats and devoid of any nutrional value was the healthier choice... That's just a couple examples but there are thousands...

    Every grocery store I've been in has varying degrees of fat in dairy from full to none...also, reduced fat dairy products do not add sugar and other chemicals...

  • janejellyroll
    janejellyroll Posts: 25,763 Member
    cwolfman13 wrote: »
    @jamesakrobinson Koalas and rabbits don't have hooves either and they're herbivores. ;)

    LMAO OK
    I was just trying to illustrate a point with a bit of levity.

    Too many people here seem to think in absolutes. My point has never been that my carnivorous preference is necessarily the "best" way to eat for everyone, nor that it is the only way to get lean. Different people have different metabolisms, and that is almost certainly also influenced by genetics too... where your ancestors evolved (ergo what available foods allowed them the opportunity to thrive and reproduce) and what kind and how much activity you do are huge factors too.

    Marathon runners and strength athletes have different needs... and so people don't take those as absolute too... also everything in between or even being sedentary. (in which case I think less calories are a good idea)

    My most important point is less about the evils of carbs and much more about the importance of fat!

    Demonizing fat is the giant disservice that the US FDA did in the 1970s. That was the biggest instigating factor in starting the obesity and diabetes epidemic that has since begun to spread around the world.

    You think people followed the guidelines? Think again. There is more "I know I shouldn't eat this but..." than meets the eye. You're talking as if people have been eating nothing but rice cakes since the recommendations. From the chart you will notice countries with a whole spectrum of obesity rates at any fat intake level, and in this screenshot in particular all the countries that eat less fat have a lower obesity rate than the US. You can't pin obesity on carbs or the perceived (not real) lack of fat.

    9mfj4zx72l7c.png

    Not sure where you live but I have a very difficult time finding full fat yogurt, ice-cream, even sour cream...
    The whole dairy isle is low fat, reduced fat, or no fat...
    No fat yogurt?? I call that pudding!

    The same is true of almost every isle in almost every grocery store here. The fat has been removed and replaced with sugars or chemicals.

    It's insidious. The general public thinks they're making healthy choices but they are in fact doing the exact opposite.

    Margerine is another great example... butter is full of saturated fat, and is quite healthy but people were convinced that margerine, full of trans dats and devoid of any nutrional value was the healthier choice... That's just a couple examples but there are thousands...

    Every grocery store I've been in has varying degrees of fat in dairy from full to none...also, reduced fat dairy products do not add sugar and other chemicals...

    I suggest you read the label

    What, exactly, do you think is being added to skim milk? Please be specific.
This discussion has been closed.