Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(New York Daily News)   Researchers say eating fatty foods may boost your memory. So you are better able to remember a distant time when you were skinny   (nydailynews.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

1868 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Apr 2009 at 11:13 AM (7 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



98 Comments   (+0 »)

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2009-04-30 08:06:46 AM  
If there's one thing people don't need, it's a reason to eat fatty foods.

/just throwin' that out there.
 
2009-04-30 08:13:39 AM  

TWINKIES FOR EVERYONE!!!!!

 
2009-04-30 08:24:52 AM  
Yeah, you got like a Rolodex of everything I've done wrong Darleen? You know why you remember that shiat! Cause your fat Darleen! Your a fat grudge keeping biatch Darleen! MANATEEEEEEEEEE!
 
2009-04-30 08:56:49 AM  
"TWINKIES FOR EVERYONE!!!!!"

upload.wikimedia.org

Twinkies are bad... Mmmmkay?
 
2009-04-30 09:19:18 AM  
You sound fat.
 
2009-04-30 09:29:47 AM  
FOODS WITH FATS IN THEM DONT MAKE YOU FAT

NUTRITION DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY
 
2009-04-30 11:14:14 AM  
Elephants never forget.
 
2009-04-30 11:15:54 AM  
why can't scientists just report that "moderation is everything" with everything and stop wasting time and money on crap like this.

eat fat, but not too much. drink wine, but not too much. diet sometimes, but not too much.

moderation people.
 
2009-04-30 11:16:20 AM  
Mmmm....

This just means I don't have to feel as bad when I crack open a can of olives for dinner...
 
2009-04-30 11:16:36 AM  
I'm on a diet now so I'm getting a kick...wait, what were we talking about again?
 
2009-04-30 11:18:26 AM  
I can't even remember what the last fat chick I was with looked like.
 
2009-04-30 11:18:35 AM  

tgregory: why can't scientists just report that "moderation is everything" with everything and stop wasting time and money on crap like this.

eat fat, but not too much. drink wine, but not too much. diet sometimes, but not too much.

moderation people.


so.... how much sex is too much sex?
 
2009-04-30 11:19:02 AM  
If this were true, I'd have a great memory. Sadly, I forget conversations I have within minutes of occuring. I might even forget I posted in this thread.
 
2009-04-30 11:19:45 AM  
Remember when I was thin and beautiful? And everyone loved me?


/Me neither
 
2009-04-30 11:20:48 AM  

que lastima: so.... how much sex is too much sex?


when it gets out of hand?
 
2009-04-30 11:22:08 AM  
GOOD FATS ARE GOOD FOR YOU. The traditional foods movement has known this for a long time. Nice to see someone's catching on. Lard, butter, and coconut oil are your friends. Sigh.
 
2009-04-30 11:23:05 AM  
I'm with the "you sound fat" crowd
 
2009-04-30 11:23:42 AM  

Bored Horde: FOODS WITH FATS IN THEM DONT MAKE YOU FAT

NUTRITION DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY


Well, given that they contain vast amounts of energy and are in a convenient form for storing away, it often does work that way.

Of course you still need to stay within the laws of physics - calories taken in minus calories used up = excess that the body will store somewhere.
 
2009-04-30 11:23:49 AM  

paquerette: GOOD FATS ARE GOOD FOR YOU. The traditional foods movement has known this for a long time. Nice to see someone's catching on. Lard, butter, and coconut oil are your friends. Sigh.


Don't forget the avocado. We raise my boy vegetarian, so to make up for the lack of fats he eats a ton of avocado, and he loves it to death.
 
2009-04-30 11:25:16 AM  

paquerette: GOOD FATS ARE GOOD FOR YOU. The traditional foods movement has known this for a long time. Nice to see someone's catching on. Lard, butter, and coconut oil are your friends. Sigh.


THIS. I've read about and used unprocessed coconut oil, always used butter, but can't quite bring myself to use lard.
 
2009-04-30 11:25:22 AM  
I get most of my fats from almonds, other nuts, avocados, flax seeds, flax seed oil, fish oil, fish, cheese, and steaks!
 
2009-04-30 11:27:27 AM  

Gothnet: Of course you still need to stay within the laws of physics - calories taken in minus calories used up = excess that the body will store somewhere.


Ahh yes, the engineering graduate perspective. Too bad it is a largely useless statement because it such an incredibly primitive view that totally neglects how the body processes macro nutrients.
 
2009-04-30 11:27:54 AM  
FTFA: Oleic acid, or OEA, is found in unsaturated fats - or so-called "good fat" - such as olive oil, grape seed oil and acai berries.

It promotes weight loss and lower cholesterol, but now it may help with memory, too.


So this is not about eating a cheeseburger and then getting a memory boost. And now we have our second fatty thread of the day, yay us. Well fine, Here's a pic of someone with fat, but it's all in the right places.

www.wired.com
 
2009-04-30 11:29:32 AM  

Gothnet: Bored Horde: FOODS WITH FATS IN THEM DONT MAKE YOU FAT

NUTRITION DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY

Well, given that they contain vast amounts of energy and are in a convenient form for storing away, it often does work that way.

Of course you still need to stay within the laws of physics - calories taken in minus calories used up = excess that the body will store somewhere.


Pretty much, yeah. Calories are key. 500 Calories from fat will not make you any fatter than 500 Calories from carbohydrate or protein.

Fat is more energy dense than carbohydrate or protein (9 Calories/gram compared to 4 Calories/gram), so fewer grams yield higher Calories. As such, eating comparatively small amounts of fat can yield a lot of Calories (see: salad dressings).

But the fat itself does not have any other properties that increase body fat production, at least not to any extent anyone should give a damn about.

It's been said already: moderation is key.

/nutrition major
//getting a kick
 
2009-04-30 11:29:47 AM  

OlafTheBent: TWINKIES FOR EVERYONE!!!!!


Well what if you don't like twinkies....
 
2009-04-30 11:31:40 AM  
Shakespeare's Monkey
Here's a pic of someone with fat, but it's all in the right placesimplants.
 
2009-04-30 11:31:58 AM  

Mr. McPeanut: Pretty much, yeah. Calories are key. 500 Calories from fat will not make you any fatter than 500 Calories from carbohydrate or protein.


You do realize that protein is much more difficult to store as fat...so 500 protein calories would not make you just as fat as 500 carb calories (a relatively easy one to store as fat)
 
2009-04-30 11:32:15 AM  
And all fats aren't created the same, I'm assuming they're speaking of omega-3 fatty acids like DHA, EPA, etc.

/drtfa
 
2009-04-30 11:33:55 AM  

ihatedumbpeople: And all fats aren't created the same, I'm assuming they're speaking of omega-3 fatty acids like DHA, EPA, etc.

/drtfa


That and ratios are important, I believe our ratio of omega3 to 6's is about 10 times what it should be. Even though omega 3, 6 and 9 are all good.
 
2009-04-30 11:34:08 AM  
We developed high functioning brains because we ate high calorie and nutrient food; meat and fat. Why do you think vegetarians are skinny, weak, and stupid?
 
2009-04-30 11:34:30 AM  

tweekster: Mr. McPeanut: Pretty much, yeah. Calories are key. 500 Calories from fat will not make you any fatter than 500 Calories from carbohydrate or protein.

You do realize that protein is much more difficult to store as fat...so 500 protein calories would not make you just as fat as 500 carb calories (a relatively easy one to store as fat)


500 protein calories will make you full, whereas 500 carb calories is a bag of M&Ms and a coke.
 
2009-04-30 11:38:16 AM  

geekluv: OlafTheBent: TWINKIES FOR EVERYONE!!!!!

Well what if you don't like twinkies....


Then you're a comunist.
 
2009-04-30 11:38:32 AM  

tweekster: Gothnet: Of course you still need to stay within the laws of physics - calories taken in minus calories used up = excess that the body will store somewhere.

Ahh yes, the engineering graduate perspective. Too bad it is a largely useless statement because it such an incredibly primitive view that totally neglects how the body processes macro nutrients.


Yes and no.

It is more complicated than just [Calories in - Calories out], because the body isn't a static system: it's dynamic, and can increase or decrease it's own energy needs (to some extent, at least) based on a change in diet. Also, a relatively small number of molecules of macronutrients will likely go towards creating other biologically important structures - membranes, hormones, ribose, etc.

But to say the approach of counting Calories is "largely useless" because of this is, IMO, wrong. Changes of a couple hundred Calories in the diet may go unnoticed, depending on the person and their starting intake, but larger cuts should result in weight loss, or at least halt any further weight gain.
 
2009-04-30 11:38:48 AM  

idrow: I'm on a diet now so I'm getting a kick...wait, what were we talking about again?


Hacker's Diet FTW (googleit).

It really is just about moderation. One doesn't have to quit twinkies or deep fried stuff, nor live on lettuce forever. It's just an energy balance.

The three (according to HD) most important things to know if you want to lose a bit of weight:

1. No matter where they come from, it takes close to 3,500 calories to put on (or lose)one pound of fat. This is thermodynamics. No way around it.

2. Depending on (basically just)size and body shape, an avg. male needs about 2000-2600 calories a day. Slightly less for females. More than that, you gain weight. Less than that, you lose it.

3. Excercise is good for you. It's just not a good way to lose weight (Seriously, when was the last time you ran for 1 hour non-stop? That only loses you a few hundred cals. Which is about 1 hamburger). Do it because you want to get healthy, not because you want to get skinny.

That's it. Simple = beauty.

/has lost around 10 lbs. 12 more to go.
//managing on around 1500-1700 cals a day. Had to lower beer intake but other than that it's not that difficult.
 
2009-04-30 11:39:29 AM  

Thunderpipes: We developed high functioning brains because we ate high calorie and nutrient food; meat and fat. Why do you think vegetarians are skinny, weak, and stupid?


So, you're saying you are a grass grazer then?
 
2009-04-30 11:42:07 AM  
At least when it comes to processed foods, one of the big problems is that most foods that are labeled as "low-fat" or "fat-free" versions of otherwise high-fat foods contain significantly more sugar than their high-fat counterparts (otherwise they'd taste even worse). As a result, the fat-carbohydrate-protein balance of the product, which probably wasn't very good to begin with, is thus totally screwed up.
 
2009-04-30 11:42:27 AM  
rat_creature

Here's a pic of someone with fat, but it's all in the right places implants.

That is the correct fat, and correct placement too. What's your point?
 
2009-04-30 11:43:37 AM  

Mr. McPeanut: But to say the approach of counting Calories is "largely useless" because of this is, IMO, wrong. Changes of a couple hundred Calories in the diet may go unnoticed, depending on the person and their starting intake, but larger cuts should result in weight loss, or at least halt any further weight gain.


I didn't mean to say counting calories was useless, but only paying attention to them while neglecting what ratios of protein carbs and fats make it up is a primitive view.

Diet modification typically should start with getting your ratios in line, then cutting 200 calories at a time. People that instantly cut their diet in half are just plain stupid. I remember one friend cut her diet to 900, I didn't say anything because she was gung ho on it, but I knew it wouldn't last more than a week anyways. It didn't.

I remember one study where the nutritionist actually increased calories and that accelerated weight loss.
 
2009-04-30 11:44:16 AM  
"A team of scientists found that oleic acids from fats are converted into a memory-enhancing signals in the part of the brain responsible for remembering emotional events."

Who the fark wants to remember emotional events?
 
2009-04-30 11:44:23 AM  

FuLinHyu: Thunderpipes: We developed high functioning brains because we ate high calorie and nutrient food; meat and fat. Why do you think vegetarians are skinny, weak, and stupid?

So, you're saying you are a grass grazer then?


Grass being steak, bacon, pork chops, sure. Other than that,

I live with my mom.

I win, again. Pusscake.
 
2009-04-30 11:46:06 AM  

A-Rth-Urp-Hil-Ipdenu: 1. No matter where they come from, it takes close to 3,500 calories to put on (or lose)one pound of fat. This is thermodynamics. No way around it.

2. Depending on (basically just)size and body shape, an avg. male needs about 2000-2600 calories a day. Slightly less for females. More than that, you gain weight. Less than that, you lose it.


My maintenance diet is 4000 calories a day.
 
2009-04-30 11:46:35 AM  

tweekster: Mr. McPeanut: Pretty much, yeah. Calories are key. 500 Calories from fat will not make you any fatter than 500 Calories from carbohydrate or protein.

You do realize that protein is much more difficult to store as fat...so 500 protein calories would not make you just as fat as 500 carb calories (a relatively easy one to store as fat)


Even fat has to go through a few biochemical hoops to actually be stored in adipose tissue.

you have pee hands: tweekster:
500 protein calories will make you full, whereas 500 carb calories is a bag of M&Ms and a coke.


500 Calories from protein is probably about twice or more than anyone actually needs, so yeah, it'll probably make you pretty damn full.


There's something to be said here for energy density: carbs and fats can be put into much smaller, denser packages that leave you less full after eating. In that way, since you will probably eat more afterward, they're quite likely to indirectly make you fatter.

My point is that 500 Calories is 500 Calories. You're body can only make so much new adipose tissue from that much energy. Which source your body had to break down, absorb and (re?)assemble into that fat matters relatively little in that regard.
 
2009-04-30 11:47:32 AM  
img505.imageshack.us
 
2009-04-30 11:48:38 AM  

Lampmonster: geekluv: OlafTheBent: TWINKIES FOR EVERYONE!!!!!

Well what if you don't like twinkies....

Then you're a comunist.


Well if I had to get fat I would rather eat 10 pints of Cherry Garcia ice cream by Ben & Jerry...
 
2009-04-30 11:50:27 AM  

anfrind: At least when it comes to processed foods, one of the big problems is that most foods that are labeled as "low-fat" or "fat-free" versions of otherwise high-fat foods contain significantly more sugar than their high-fat counterparts (otherwise they'd taste even worse). As a result, the fat-carbohydrate-protein balance of the product, which probably wasn't very good to begin with, is thus totally screwed up.


I also always assume no-trans fat means Interesterified fat if the product used to be made with trans fat e.g. factory baked goods.

Same manufacturing advantages without the years of evidence for negative health effects, labeling requirements and public awareness to overcome.
 
2009-04-30 11:51:44 AM  

Bored Horde: FOODS WITH FATS IN THEM DONT MAKE YOU FAT

NUTRITION DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY


This. Everyone knows that it's thyroid problems that make you fat. And since there's nothing that can be done about thyroid problems, it's not my fault I'm a blubber-bunny.
 
2009-04-30 11:52:16 AM  

tweekster: Ahh yes, the engineering graduate perspective. Too bad it is a largely useless statement because it such an incredibly primitive view that totally neglects how the body processes macro nutrients.


Ye kanne break the laws o'physics, Jim!

Now I know it's more complicated than that in terms of metabolism, what is easy/hard for the body to process and store, but when it boils down to it, the laws of thermodynamics are not there to be broken.
 
2009-04-30 11:53:41 AM  

Mr. McPeanut: 500 Calories from protein is probably about twice or more than anyone actually needs, so yeah, it'll probably make you pretty damn full.


Following that you would get a ludicrous amount of carbs. A 1/3 approach is a lot better. 1/3 fat, 1/3 carbs, 1/3 protein.

America isn't getting fatter from too much protein. The RDA guidelines are pretty controversial and should be overhauled.
 
2009-04-30 11:53:54 AM  

Thunderpipes: We developed high functioning brains because we ate high calorie and nutrient food; meat and fat. Why do you think vegetarians are skinny, weak, and stupid?


They're not. Of course, a lot of them believe that fish is a vegetable, so maybe I'm wrong about that.
 
2009-04-30 11:55:25 AM  

tweekster: Mr. McPeanut: But to say the approach of counting Calories is "largely useless" because of this is, IMO, wrong. Changes of a couple hundred Calories in the diet may go unnoticed, depending on the person and their starting intake, but larger cuts should result in weight loss, or at least halt any further weight gain.

I didn't mean to say counting calories was useless, but only paying attention to them while neglecting what ratios of protein carbs and fats make it up is a primitive view.

Diet modification typically should start with getting your ratios in line, then cutting 200 calories at a time. People that instantly cut their diet in half are just plain stupid. I remember one friend cut her diet to 900, I didn't say anything because she was gung ho on it, but I knew it wouldn't last more than a week anyways. It didn't.

I remember one study where the nutritionist actually increased calories and that accelerated weight loss.


Yeah, 900 is ridiculously low.

My own interest in nutrition did actually come from a major cut in my diet. I don't know how many Calories I was taking in, but I cut down to about 1800/day, and tried to get about 500 Calories of exercise in (about 30 minutes on a stationary bike), and lost 26 lbs in 10 weeks. Over an extended period I dropped from ~290 to about 200, where I still hover around now. But that was a combination of reduced Calories from some ridiculous high point, increased exercise AND balancing of energy nutrients.

It's actually kind of sad, because most of the nutrition field has been trying to get this message across for some time. But, instead, one or two studies (like this article) make their way into the media, and people run with it like it's the latest gospel from the nutrition field instead of what it really is - a study suggesting a possible link between reasonable fat intake and memory.
 
Displayed 50 of 98 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report