Opinions on the keto diet??
Replies
-
Some put down the media when they can not understand the science of the subject in an article in the said media.14
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »Some put down the media when they can not understand the science of the subject in an article in the said media.
Well I guess you would know about that because you can't seem to understand any of the science based links that have been posted in this thread or others that you have been a part of. Meanwhile, you've post things about eating by the Zodiak and inaccurate speculation about how people ate 10,000 years ago. That last one was addressed by an actual anthropologist.
So do tell.....8 -
And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.14 -
And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
I liked it so much better when the "Mediterranean Diet" was all the rage...5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »At least this subject is in the current news cycle.
https://nypost.com/2018/03/16/how-cutting-carbs-completely-made-me-a-better-runner/
He did so well... Only placed 11,362.. so close16 -
And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.14 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.10 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/10 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
We should rename you the woo master .You probably have the world record of Woo in mfp's history.6 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
There you go, still beautifully demonstrating my point. Thanks :drinker:12 -
-
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
There you go, still beautifully demonstrating my point. Thanks :drinker:
Lol, the absurdity of the assumptions there are mind boggling! I don't think I've ever seen anyone advocate a high carb / fat processed food diet on MFP! And this coming from a regular advocate of McDonalds as part of his "W.O.E." (Don't forget the capitalization. It makes all the difference
) 6 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
What we also know is carbohydrates are extremely healthy and help metabolic markers, which has been proven by thousands of studies, especially all plant based carbs. We also know a diet high in omega 3s and focused on unsaturated fats can improve health.
But all of that is based on maintaining a healthy body weight and exercising. Which is why blue zones are so healthy. They eat around 1700 calories, have active jobs and are lean. They arent packing down tons of processed meats from fast food restaurants, over weight or eating tons of baked goods and convenience foods/drinks.
Ultimately, the diet plans little role outside of compliance and an ability to achieve a specific goal.
6 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
11 -
diannethegeek wrote: »cheryldumais wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »
I think most of us see the woo button as "that's nonsense". I rarely ever use the woo button unless I think someone is pushing an unhealthy/dangerous plan on someone else or the community at large. Some use it as woo hoo but I don't really think that was the intention by the programmers.
Never heard anyone say "woo" as "that's nonsense". Woo is meant to be woo-hoo.
That's not what the site staff have said: http://community.myfitnesspal.com/en/discussion/10570889/new-community-reaction-woo#latest
Thanks.. I find that very misleading and now feel bad because I thought I was cheering people on
4 -
^ This is absolutely hilarious.GaleHawkins wrote: »I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
10 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.11 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.8 -
^ This is absolutely hilarious.GaleHawkins wrote: »I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Lol! Gotta agree!! 2 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
Pretty sure you completely missed the point. Not surprised. Must be that mental clarity you get from keto.9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.6 -
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
For what it's worth, I think anyone without an axe to grind got your point and agrees fully with the above.5 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.
I totally agree with you about the different Blue Zones WOE.
Is it best that one puts water, gas or motor oil in their car?
Can we agree it depends on the needs of that car in question?
One that lived and ate their Blue Zone WOE for 100 years I would be against them moving to Keto or a high carb/fat processed food WOE.
This is why n=1 is the only thing that matters to me. If a WOE works well then that is well. If a WOE is killing one then that is not well.
In my case 40 years of high carb/fat processed food was flat out killing me. 3.5 years eating something between Keto and Low Carb High Fat as reversed my health decline back about 30 years so far and now I am learning the science behind it. I could have cared less about the science of Keto until I realized it was like magic in my case. As a scientist I do not believe in magic so I went looking for the science that made Keto/LCHF seemed like magic and found it.10 -
Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.7 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.
I totally agree with you about the different Blue Zones WOE.
Is it best that one puts water, gas or motor oil in their car?
Can we agree it depends on the needs of that car in question?
One that lived and ate their Blue Zone WOE for 100 years I would be against them moving to Keto or a high carb/fat processed food WOE.
This is why n=1 is the only thing that matters to me. If a WOE works well then that is well. If a WOE is killing one then that is not well.
In my case 40 years of high carb/fat processed food was flat out killing me. 3.5 years eating something between Keto and Low Carb High Fat as reversed my health decline back about 30 years so far and now I am learning the science behind it. I could have cared less about the science of Keto until I realized it was like magic in my case. As a scientist I do not believe in magic so I went looking for the science that made Keto/LCHF seemed like magic and found it.
To the bolded:
This is the funniest thing I've ever read on these forums. You have got to be kidding me. You are not a scientist. Scientist doesn't mean what you think it means.11 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
First, thanks for questioning my integrity based on my use of the Blue Zones in an argument???
My point, which shockingly you missed, is that the Blue Zones are IMO a valid argument against keto being the "best" diet. I didn't say or even hint that the SAD and the Blue Zone diet are similar. But I can just as easily eat a diet similar to the Blue Zone diet right here in the good ole USA as I could eat keto.
I get that you are misrepresenting my point in order to have your own argument about things we aren't even discussing here, that's fine. You pretty much demonstrated my point though, that there is this ridiculous all-or-nothing slant to these arguments that you either stuff yourself full of fast food and junk while remaining horrifically hungry or you eat "insert morally superior diet name here".
Keto WOE would make NO sense in a Blue Zone period in my view period.
I did keto before I knew about keto just trying to reverse health issues stemming from 40 years of eating high carb/fat processed foods. My first 20 years of eating was the food that we produced in our fields with manual labor for the most part.
I get it that perhaps you have some emotion need to slam Keto and hopefully you will start using more science.
Since I have never planned to eat Keto I am not sure if I will eat keto long term but at my age even if I make it to 110 long term may not seem that long.
Why do you or anyone one see anyone WOE applying to everyone? We are all different.
Someone mentioned cars as an example. One might use a different motor oil in a car 100K mile car that has been abused/misused than in the same car that had been cared for by the manual. Some of our eating and living lifestyles have done long term harm to our bodies that need to be lessen if not reversible.
I actually am not arguing any point other than to not make misleading statements about different WOE's. All WOE are valid if they are reversing health issues from eating the wrong WOE or as in the cases of the Blue Zones if they are preventing eating lifestyle diseases.
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
If you don't think Keto is necessarily the healthiest way of eating, please feel free to stop quoting me and arguing against something I didn't even say. I'm not saying Keto isn't best for some, I'm wondering why some people say it's best period.
My question was honest and legitimate, and I'm disappointed you continue to hijack it and misrepresent it.
I totally agree with you about the different Blue Zones WOE.
But there aren't different Blue Zones WOE. They all eat a diet based in veggies, whole grains, beans, nuts, and fruit. Some are vegetarian, some eat a little fish, some have meat on special occasions. None are LCHF. I'm not saying LCHF isn't healthy, but I'm wondering why if it's optimal, it is the opposite of what the areas of the world where optimal results are being achieved are eating.9 -
GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »Tiny_Dancer_in_Pink wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »GaleHawkins wrote: »And to me, this is the problem. All of the keto threads I see eventually end up with "Keto is better because otherwise you are eating nothing but junk carbs and chemicals" and/or "Yes, it all comes down to CICO but keto has other benefits that other WOEs don't". Either of these statements could be true for specific individuals, but not for all. And I'll add the purported health benefits of keto, which I've seen some vague IRL evidence of but not in controlled settings where you can be sure other variables weren't involved, are still being investigated. They are often put forward as facts that anyone in the know is aware of, which is a bit irresponsible IMHO.
And in one of these threads, JUST ONE, I would like for someone to explain to me why keto is all of a sudden the right way for humans to eat, when all of the Blue Zones and other less dramatic but still long-lived and healthy areas of the world eat a higher carb diet of grains, veggies, fruits, and beans with small amounts of fish, meat, nuts, and oil.
While keto has been around for many thousands of years ask yourself why to the Blue Zones not eat processed carbs with added chemicals.
Blue Zones do not live on processed foods containing added sugar and other chemicals. In fact most blue zones have not historically even had access to SAD (Standard American Diet) that is available in the USA today.
I see using the term Blue Zones to support the eating of high carbs in the USA as an integrity fail.
Blue zones also dont consume loads of saturated fats and processed fats like pork rinds, sausage and chicken wings.
So whats your point.
What you just quoted above is my point. Below is more on Blue Zones. What we know is Blue Zones do not live on high carb/fat processed foods that is so common to the posters on MFP.
https://huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/10/23/the-blue-zones-diet-can-help-you-live-longer-and-be-healthier_a_21588550/
Don’t you eat at McDonald’s every morning?
Seldom do I eat breakfast at McDonald's because I start the day with about a 1000-1200 calorie breakfast at home. Yesterday I did eat lunch and supper at McDonald's of their Keto WOE options.
Do you have a personal problem with where people choose to eat Keto/LCHF?
McDonald's is just like Kroger's (USA at least). You can select the WOE you wish.
You eat a lot of saturated fat and processed meat while knocking the blue zones diet. I thought it odd.
Why would you make a fake post like this? Only a fool would knock a blue zone WOE that has been working well for the persons for 100+ years of their lives.
So if you acknowledge that blue zone diets, which are high in carbs but low in saturated fats, are very healthy, then why talk about the superiority of ketogenic diets, why talk about how unhealthy carbs are, how those carbs were killing you? Why not try eating a blue zone diet, with the longevity and health benefits that often result from that lifestyle, since longevity is something that you’ve often discussed as something you’re striving for, living to be 110.7 -
My question, to folks who continue to insist that Keto is the healthiest way of eating, was: If High fat/low carb is the best WOE, how do you explain the Blue Zones?
keto = a real case of carbophobia. Irrational but trendy phobia of carbs.
4
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K 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
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions