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.

(io9)   The 11 biggest lies that mainstream nutrition has told you   (io9.com) divider line 60
    More: Fail, HDL, food choices, bad cholesterol, nutrition, kidney diseases, gluten, Dietary mineral, long-term experiment  
•       •       •

27600 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Feb 2013 at 9:33 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2013-02-16 09:40:51 PM  
7 votes:
this is a fabulous example of confirmation bias.
2013-02-16 09:53:09 PM  
6 votes:
I recall reading somewhere (Jared Diamond?) that early agrarian societies tended towards substandard nutrition, overall poorer health and earlier death than hunter-gather societies because the common people ate one type of grain as their main source of food with very little variety, while the hunter-gatherers were individually healthier because of their varied diet.  Agrarian won due to numbers and organization.

Honestly after years of back and forth nutrition advice, the only constants seem to be eat a wide variety of stuff and eat stuff that is as unprocessed as possible.
2013-02-16 09:47:09 PM  
6 votes:
Alternate title

Countering food myths with other food myths or how I learned to stop eating carbs and love the Atkins diet.
2013-02-16 10:05:24 PM  
4 votes:
Anyone ever notice that the obesity epidemic actually started when the government put out that stupid Food Pyramid with whole grains as the base? It's not a coincidence.
2013-02-16 10:02:23 PM  
4 votes:
So, basically, eat what you like, look how you like, because something or other - probably cancer or heart attack - is going to kill you one day. No one has all of the answers because not everything works for everyone.

Bottom Line: Enjoy life.
2013-02-16 10:09:16 PM  
3 votes:

win95o: Hobo Jr.: Don't eat grains?

What?

Their argument is wheat in large amounts is unhealthy. It is like the time I overheard a 300lbsreal women in a scooter telling her friend that bread was the worst thing to eat to lose weight.

No lady, stuffing your face with chocolate and lard is bad, having a piece of toast is fine.

Sure, stuffing your face with (sweetened) chocolate would be bad for you (because of the sugar).  But bread and other complex carbohydrates actually are quite bad for you.  As the article points out, humans have evolved to eat mainly protein, fat, and simple carbohydrates (those found in vegetables).  When you eat high carbohydrate foods your blood sugar will rise and your body produces a surge of insulin to lower it.  Insulin instructs cells to store fat, which is the primary mechanism through which one gains weight.  Eating a strict low carbohydrate diet will result in weight loss because fat won't be stored.  The total caloric intake actually isn't that important.

I'm on a strict low carbohydrate diet to control reactive hypoglycemia (high protein, high fat).  Despite eating about 2500 calories a day, I have actually lost weight (I'm not overweight and am not trying to lose weight).  It's really not that complicated, and I'm amazed that people think low carbohydrate dieting is a fad when humans have eaten low carbohydrate diets for tens of thousands of years.


Listen, if you are eating so much bread that you are gaining a deal of weight then it isn't your diet.

It is the fact that you are a lazy bum who gets absolutely no exercise.

Two keys to losing weight and only two.
1. Eat sensible portions of whatever you stuff in face. Somethings are better for you(fresh fruits, veggies, etc) and somethings aren't(bacon, cheesecake, sodas) but if you eat only what fills you up and have some variety in your diet then as long as the portions are sensible sizes then you are fine.
2. Exercise. Thirty to forty minutes a day, 3-5 days a week

Boom, I just gave everyone the foolproof plan to losing weight and staying in shape.
2013-02-16 10:05:18 PM  
3 votes:

Doktor_Zhivago: That article was so full of shiat I don't even know where to start...

Lets ask Dr. Atkins about how awesome the low carb diet is... What's that? He died of a heart attack from his cholesterol clogged arteries?


Actually he died from head trauma.
2013-02-16 10:03:39 PM  
3 votes:
That article was so full of shiat I don't even know where to start...

Lets ask Dr. Atkins about how awesome the low carb diet is... What's that? He died of a heart attack from his cholesterol clogged arteries?

Yeah... Why don't we just eat a little everything in moderation.  Seems to work better than OMG DON'T EAT [insert random fad food of the week here]!!
And people have been eating grains since well before the agricultural revolution. You think ancient peoples ate meat every day? Maybe once every few weeks if they were lucky.  Most of the time they subsisted on wild plants, like berries, fruits and starchy roots and wild grasses. OMG those are carbs?!?!?  Read a farking book before you start talking out of your ass author, god I hate cherry picked bullshiat articles. This current anti-gluten thing will turn out to be as big a pile of bullshiat as every other diet fad before it.  Someone explain to me how all of western civilization managed to survive since it began if everyone is so allergic to this horrible unhealthy gluten.  I think it doesn't matter what you eat as long as you exercise and your diet is not filled with refined sugar (the only point the author got right).  Our ancestors ate whatever the fark they could find but they were on their feet 12+ hours a day working their asses off chasing after deer and mammoths and shiat so they didn't turn into a bunch of diabetic fat farks.

/goes back to his job professionally sitting
//eats a loaf of bread out of spite.
2013-02-16 09:52:09 PM  
3 votes:
In before the Fark Vegans!

Actually, I used to be one of them. But being a vegan ballooned my weight into the obese range, made me a borderline pre-diabetic, gave me raging mood swings, and was all in all a miserable experience. Then I went on the New Atkins Diet, which reversed all of that: normal weight now, fasting blood sugar of 88, normal blood chemistry, no mood swings, and I love the food. I eat lots of eggs and meat, along with all the veggies I can stand, and two servings of fresh fruit a day. Just no wheat, rice, potatoes or pasta. The high fat content naturally turns off my appetite, so I consume fewer calories and have lost 40+ pounds.
2013-02-16 09:44:14 PM  
3 votes:

dolphinburger: this is a fabulous example of confirmation bias.


Yeah...when I got to the 'I'm a big fan of low carb diets' part, I gave up on the article. Big fan = not able to be unbiased.
2013-02-16 09:41:13 PM  
3 votes:
Bottom Line:

Eating food causes DEATH!
2013-02-17 12:19:24 PM  
2 votes:
So, who told the mainstream media all of this stuff was bad for you anyhow?

Eating stuff in moderation and getting your fat arse off the couch now and then should be just fine. However, our lifestyles have changed remarkably since the 1960's.

Several milestones have altered the American diet and health tremendously, and not necessarily for the better:

The proliferation of fast food places, followed by supersizing.

The Computer age, which greatly reduced physical labor along with the introduction of a mass of labor saving devices.

The mass production of the car and the advertising efforts by car makers for people to own more than one contributed to a major decrease in exercise, like walking. Plus, along with the car came a host of problems including major pollution.

Mass advertising. You can't find a media which doesn't have advertising on it or in it. Advertising has nearly become a plague. It took an act of congress to stop those old, huge billboards from lining the major highways so densely that you couldn't see the scenery beyond. Now, your internet experience is cluttered with unwanted ads.

(Odd, isn't it, how those video ads that self start when you open a site manage to do so faster and better than things you want to see on your video player.)

As far as recorded history takes us, people have eaten bread made from grains. Bread has been a basic staple for thousands of years. Now, over the centuries we've weeded out several species of grains, settling down for a handful from which to make bread, based on the ability to grow in various places, how fast it grows and how much it yields.

Modern times even weeded out several variations of corn, choosing one or two to grow. These decisions were usually financial, based on productivity and bottom line.

Who cares if the wheat is short on some nutrients, so long as you can meet the demand and reap a good profit? Genetically alter the form and patent the seeds so farmers will have to buy from you only. If the hold back seed to save on costs for next years planting, engineer it so the seed is not viable.

Then, they must buy from you.

Infomercials and crack pot advertising. Pus products that do not do what you say they do and watch the money pour in. Take advantage of people's desires and fears. Not getting much sunlight due to cancer scares? How about new and improved Vitamin D pills, with Omega 3 fish oil added, since eating fish is healthy and expensive.

Distort, exaggerate and obscure the truth.

Lard was OK when you worked your butt off from sunrise to sunset. You burned it up as additional calories. Most of society no longer gets up at dawn to feed the stock, plow the fields, milk the cows and split wood, so the fatty foods now turn into body fat. However, they're still pushed by businesses for profit and tasty bits like bacon are lauded in 100 ways to increase your consumption of the stuff.

Some time in the 70's, soda companies started adding cheap corn sugars to their product. Making their sugary drinks even sweeter. Some other genius decided that since Coca Cola had added cocaine to it's original brew as a pick me up, why not add caffeine to various sweet drinks? After all, caffeine is legal. Cocaine is now illegal.

So, folks drink more for the taste and the 'kick'.

However, they move less, meaning all of these enhanced foods keep piling on the calories they can't burn off.

Truth in Advertising laws haven't been strong enough to prevent exaggerated claims about the health benefits of some form of vitamin pills, newly developed and lawyers have managed to include barely readable disclaimers to help prevent the producers of dubious products from getting biatch slapped for lying.

Then toss in the lunatic fringe who really don't know what they're talking about, but do so anyhow, the surveys and poles which can easily be rigged like never before and those whose job it is to exaggerate the great benefits of a product that actually has few and may have even more bad ones.

Infomercials for example.

So, our diet is actually affected by our technology. Our technology can affect our business practices.

Like packaging. A tiny amount of pills in a big pill bottle. Seen those? Kinda wasteful. Yet companies know that if they reduce the packaging in certain things, people will feel cheated and buy less. Plus, food items do NOT have to be organically grown to be labeled organic. They must be organically grown to obtain the USDA Organic seal.

That means, over 50% of the higher priced organic stuff you buy is not what you think.

BTW. Obesity will kill you. We've known that for generations. Look at old movies made in the 20s through the 60's and see if you can spot as many tubs of lard waddling about as you do today. Especially in old news reels.

Now, we live longer, our foods are actually healthier in general, along with the preparation processes. (Sweepings from the slaughterhouse floors, including dirt and sawdust are no longer allowed to be sold to potted meat makers, who cooked it all down and sold the garbage, heavily seasoned, to the public. Nor are things like neural tissue or pituitary glands allowed to be processed into ground meats.) And still we find ways to make ourselves unhealthy.

Just remember: for every action there is a reaction -- and not every reaction is good.
2013-02-16 11:44:16 PM  
2 votes:
I changed my diet by cutting out all the hidden corn.  It's amazing how much food they sneak it into in one form or another.  High Fructose Corn Syrup, and other chemicially altered forms of corn, they're snuck into so many foods.  It's astounding.  I'm not entirely anti-corn, I like cornbread, and a good corn tortilla, but I don't want all the corn that's hidden in everything these days.

I still intake a fair amount of sugar, but I only go for real sugar, and avoid all the artificial and chemical "sweeteners".

I've ended up losing quite a bit of weight.  Part of it, I'm sure, was the giving up soda, but I've also found myself eating less, both in frequency and volume.  I still eat when I'm hungry, but I'm not as hungry as I used to be.

And I still get to eat pretty much all the same food I did before, only my lady friend is making them at home, rather than us buying things pre-made.  And it all tastes better too.

It's a fantastic diet, because it's not really a diet.  I'm not missing anything- I can pick up a soda made with real sugar if I'm craving one, and I still eat fried food - fried at home, in peanut oil- so I have no "wagon" to fall off of; it was a lifestyle change, and one for the better.  The only problem I have is not having enough belts - I've lost enough weight that my pants keep falling down without one.

//I also started using company provided cigarette breaks to take a 10 minute walk twice a workday, since I don't smoke cigarettes.  Stick to that most days, too.
2013-02-16 10:26:02 PM  
2 votes:
The problem is almost everything we eat is fake, maple syrup is not even maple syrup anymore.
2013-02-16 09:57:58 PM  
2 votes:

Hobo Jr.: Don't eat grains?

What?

Their argument is wheat in large amounts is unhealthy. It is like the time I overheard a 300lbsreal women in a scooter telling her friend that bread was the worst thing to eat to lose weight.

No lady, stuffing your face with chocolate and lard is bad, having a piece of toast is fine.


Sure, stuffing your face with (sweetened) chocolate would be bad for you (because of the sugar).  But bread and other complex carbohydrates actually are quite bad for you.  As the article points out, humans have evolved to eat mainly protein, fat, and simple carbohydrates (those found in vegetables).  When you eat high carbohydrate foods your blood sugar will rise and your body produces a surge of insulin to lower it.  Insulin instructs cells to store fat, which is the primary mechanism through which one gains weight.  Eating a strict low carbohydrate diet will result in weight loss because fat won't be stored.  The total caloric intake actually isn't that important.

I'm on a strict low carbohydrate diet to control reactive hypoglycemia (high protein, high fat).  Despite eating about 2500 calories a day, I have actually lost weight (I'm not overweight and am not trying to lose weight).  It's really not that complicated, and I'm amazed that people think low carbohydrate dieting is a fad when humans have eaten low carbohydrate diets for tens of thousands of years.
2013-02-16 09:56:30 PM  
2 votes:
Eggs Are Unhealthy

lnnewyork.blob.core.windows.net

MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!!
2013-02-16 09:49:44 PM  
2 votes:
The author of that article definitely has a bias towards keto/Atkins. She referenced two studies to show that low carb dieters lost more weight than low fat dieters but
1) Neither of the studies controlled for number of calories, and
2) Almost every diet meta-analysis shows that there's no big weight loss difference between diets and calories are more important.
2013-02-17 09:46:59 PM  
1 votes:

Smackledorfer: IPKnightly: The bottom line is that I know several people who follow Atkins religiously and are way overweight, and got that way while on the diet.

Unless you counted carbs right there beside them, I call bullshiat.  I know plenty of people who failed at atkins miserably by doing it wrong, and I know people who fell off the wagon and ballooned up like a motherfarker, but I've never spoken to someone who followed it with bad results that weren't explained by, well, them not following it.


This.
And a lot of people think they're doing it right, while actually doing it wrong.  For instance, one person I talked to who was in the intro phase was eating lots of peas and carrots for their vegetables, both of which are highly sugary.  If I hadn't pointed that out they'd probably have failed and declared that it doesn't work even though they "followed Atkins religiously" -- even when they didn't.
2013-02-17 02:25:18 PM  
1 votes:
1) If calories in > calories out, you get fat
2) some foods are more satisfying than others, but there are no magic bullets and rule 1 always applies
3) stop stuffing your face, fatty.  See rule 1.
4) get up and exercise.  one minute is better than no minutes.  See rule 1.
5) be reasonable, you didn't get fat overnight, you don't get skinny overnight
6) eat different stuff, but remember rule 1.
7) Don't eat ramen noodles
2013-02-17 01:24:30 PM  
1 votes:

willfullyobscure: All else is lack of education or observation. Fad diets are expensive woo. Paleo, and HCLF and Atkins- all boil down to woo. People just don't realize how much calories they consume(a serving of pasta is ONE CUP, fyi) and when they cut out calorie dense grains(or fats), they remove an excess of calories and they lose weight. Plain and simple. Unless you're a frutarian(and therefore functionally retarded), losing weight boils down to eating less calories. Look at Weight Watchers for a sensible, functional, approach to modifying dietary habits.


Calorie counting is in the same boat as the fad diets. Calorie counting assumes that the body is a simple machine with simple linear characteristics. It has been shown time and again that the calories in calories out equation doesn't hold up in experiments and professional experiences but people won't stop believing in it.

There are many dangers to the "losing weights is simply less calories" mindset. First is the diet soda and low calorie food trap. People gulp down liters of diet soda wreaking havoc on their bodies with artificial sweeteners. Other chemicals like MSG and free glutamate in low calorie foods make it tasty and "savory" by fooling the tongue but results in mind-wrenching cravings. The end result is that these low calorie food makes people ravenous.

If you don't mind living your life feeling hungry all the time and constantly fighting food, calories in calories out is workable.

Yes, we have the most wonderful variety of foods available in the history of humanity but a lot of people after a good hearty meal end up feeling guilty and regretting it.
2013-02-17 12:18:49 PM  
1 votes:
Did you ever stop to think that if commonly "believed" nutritional science was actually accurate, we would not have this problem?
Between the lack of sound science and the lies/misdirection in the name of Holy Profit, is not what we corrently accept obviously flawed?
2013-02-17 12:03:32 PM  
1 votes:

willfullyobscure: december: willfullyobscure: its all calories, stupids. calories incalories out. Nothing else means anything.

your handle is appropriate. this myth has been debunked in a number of ways.

here's one: 100 calories of protein are processed by your body in a very different manner than 100 calories of sugar. one needs to be broken down while the other does not. in order to break down calories the body uses calories.

Don't compound the stupid. That's a reductio ad absurdum, any kind of mono-diet like that is bad for you. But high-fat/low-fat/low carb/high carb, given an adequate baseline of nutrition(the USDA guidelines are fine), is not important at all. just eat less calories than you expend, and you will lose weight. or vice versa. Everything else is personal preference or woo. Sorry.


Your name should be willfullyobtuse, not willfullyobscure.

Calories in calories out is accurate but meaningless because not all calories are created equal.  The type you consume and the way you consume them will have a direct effect on things, and should not be ignored. And that is going on the presumption that calories are even measured properly in the first place, which they often are not.

None of that is to say that if one is gaining weight eating less isn't a good idea.  But there are smart ways to do it and stupid ways to do it, and reducing things down to "durr it doesn't matter, a calorie is a calorie" isn't doing any favors for the people who have trouble managing their weight. If it were easy and our bodies worked like a furnace they wouldn't have gotten fat in the first place.
2013-02-17 11:57:14 AM  
1 votes:

IPKnightly: The bottom line is that I know several people who follow Atkins religiously and are way overweight, and got that way while on the diet.


Unless you counted carbs right there beside them, I call bullshiat.  I know plenty of people who failed at atkins miserably by doing it wrong, and I know people who fell off the wagon and ballooned up like a motherfarker, but I've never spoken to someone who followed it with bad results that weren't explained by, well, them not following it.
2013-02-17 09:43:33 AM  
1 votes:

Dadoody: Regular grain consumption began a measly 10,000 years ago by most estimates. Before the Agricultural Revolution, humans had a couple hundred thousand years of not having any regular consumption of grains, (and, are you ready for this) studies show that human brain function and physical ability peaked just prior to the agricultural revolution as well.  Since the dawn of agricultural practices, archeological evidence shows a gradual but steady decline in human strength.


First of all, if grains contain protein and certain grains can combine to provide complete protein, how can you say grains are devoid of nutrients? I agree that they shouldn't form the base of our diet (and note that the food pyramid has been revised to a plate which is much more vegetable/fruit based.

The fact is, our bodies ARE equipped to digest grain. I agree that in the way back our ancestors did not eat grains, but in reality we DO NOT know exactly what they ate. (I mean one school says they ate lots of meat and a little vegetables, others say lots of vegetables and little meat.)

I don't think that you can speculate that grain alone has made humans weak, infertile, and susceptible to chronic diseases. We might be weak because now that we have simple machines we don't need physical strength. Infertile because our tools, food sources, and medicine have decreased the deaths of babies and the same fertility would cause a population explosion. The chronic diseases one is even simpler- our life expectancy has greatly increased since 10,000 years ago- so how can you say we are sicker now???

I think the diet you are eating is probably very healthy and is working great for you and I agree that people who are stuffing their faces with bread and grains alone are unhealthy. That said, grains are not poison and the fact is that about half of the humans in the world are getting most of their protein from grains (combined with vegetables).
2013-02-17 08:38:27 AM  
1 votes:
Ok, so I am sure there is a lot of thoughtful, intelligent commentary here. But I am stuck on my phone, and reading it is giving me a headache. So instead, I'll give my completely biased story, which, granted, is only one data point.

I left the military and got a desk job for several years. Got fat. Last year I started deploying as a civil again. The guys I was supporting were paleo / crossfit freaks. I did not work out with them (couldn't hang & no time) but I had no choice but to eat like they did. I lost 20 lbs in 6 months.

I came home to the wife insisting that we try and keep the weight off by going on the "It starts with food " Whole 30 plan . After 5 mos I have lost another 15+ lbs, and my latest pre-deployment physical indicates I am healthier than I have been in a long time.

/YMMV
//IANANutritionist
2013-02-17 05:48:20 AM  
1 votes:
How to be healthy and not fat:

1. Avoid consuming any and all items (except water) that have: 0 fat, 0 calories, 0 sugar, or 0 ____. Also avoid all items that are advertised with "low" prefacing the terms: fat, calories, sugar, or _____.
2. Eat the regular version (ie, the one that has normal fat, calories, sugar, etc) of whatever you were going to eat from step 1.
3. Eat less of the regular version you ate in step 2 than you were planning to eat in step 1.
4. Get active.

So to wrap it up:  Follow none of the nutrition advice/fads out there. Eat a mixed diet.  Burn around the same amount of calories you consume on a weekly basis.  Alternatively, you could just move to Europe, where steps 2 and 4 are pretty much a given.

And whatever you do, don't make your dietary decisions based on what may or may not have been the eating habits of Western Civ humans 10000 years ago, which you have absolutely no proof of.  It's as stupid as pretending your single, domesticated dog has a pack mentality cause that's how they used to be.
2013-02-17 02:11:36 AM  
1 votes:
dadoody
What just happened there?

....should someone be dialing 911?
2013-02-17 02:08:32 AM  
1 votes:

Hobo Jr.: SpdrJay: Bottom Line:

Eating food causes DEATH!

100% of people who eat, die.

Think about that before hopping in bed with big food.



Time to give  Breatharianism a shot.
2013-02-17 01:58:33 AM  
1 votes:
When I check out at the grocery store with a cart devoid of any grain products, I get occasional odd glances. When my kids won't eat donuts because of the health ramifications, most people don't think anything of it. When our entire family refuses the "healthy whole grain" bread at a restaurant or party, uproar ensues.

But why? People ask, "Grains are healthy and give you necessary fiber!" and "What about the nutrients in grains?" or my favorite, "But they are low-fat!" It was surprising to me when I first learned that all the hype about grains really was just that, hype.

"Haven't people always eaten grains?" you ask? I used to think so too, heck, even the Bible mentions grains, so they must be good. Interestingly, scientific and historical research show that not only have humans not always eaten grains, but the human body is not designed to function well on grains at all!

Hang on tight, this explanation gets messy!

Regular grain consumption began a measly 10,000 years ago by most estimates. Before the Agricultural Revolution, humans had a couple hundred thousand years of not having any regular consumption of grains, (and, are you ready for this) studies show that human brain function and physical ability peaked just prior to the agricultural revolution as well.  Since the dawn of agricultural practices, archeological evidence shows a gradual but steady decline in human strength.

Grains contain Phytic Acid, a mineral blocker that prevents absorption of calcium, magnesium, iron, copper and zinc. This phytic acid is found in the bran of all grains as well as the outer coating of seeds and nuts. Even after grains became more mainstream during the agricultural revolution, grains were allowed to sit in the fields for several weeks before thrashing. This allowed the grains to be exposed to the elements and to sprout. Evidence shows that sprouting increases the content of many important vitamins, and breaks down the phytic acid. Unfortunately, grains today are not sprouted and are consumed in much larger quantities than ever before. The presence of the phytates blocks the absorption of calcium, a risk factor for osteoporosis and other bone-related problems. Unfortunately, many doctors provide a low-fat, high-fiber diet and a calcium supplement for those with osteoporosis but the calcium isn't being absorbed anyway because the phytates block its uptake.

Perhaps you noticed the general consensus among medical professionals that grains are not only healthy, but the necessary foundation of our diet (solidly nested at the base of our "food pyramid").  The trend lately is to acknowledge that processed grains are bad but to deify those "healthy whole grains" that supposedly provide the bulk of our nutrition is just 6-11 servings a day!

The sad truth is that grain consumption, especially in the the forms found today, are a blatant departure from the way humans have eaten for almost our entire history. The ability to grow and process grains more easily allowed more people to afford grain products like flour, a "luxury" previously reserved for the wealthy. The important thing to remember here is that just because humans seem to have no immediate negative effects from grains, doesn't mean our bodies can handle them or that we can function optimally while consuming them.

Besides the phytic acid which strips your body of nutrients, another serious disadvantage to grain consumption is the astronomical spike in insulin production which throws a monkey wrench in hormone production in the body. Insulin production is an important process for storing nutrients and processing glucose in the bloodstream, but our bodies simply can't handle the insulin requirements we throw at them with the carb load we consume these days.

Let's take a trip back to freshman Biology, shall we? When carbohydrates enter the body (whatever the source, be it grains, fruit, sugar, etc) they are eventually broken down into glucose. Any extra glucose floating around in the body that we are not immediately using to replenish glycogen stores is stored as fat. This is a natural response of our bodies that has allowed humans to survive for thousands of years. If we aren't using the fuel now, our bodies store it for future use in the form of fat. Unfortunately,  as we are not commonly faced with famine, we don't often get the chance to use up these stores, and the fat accumulates. If the carbohydrate consumption is excessive (milkshake anyone?) the body throws in the added bonus of cortisol and adrenaline production to handle the extra load. This whole hormonal song and dance does the tango on the body's endocrine and immune systems and creates inflammation in the body.

With the dawn of the roller mill in 1872, flour became accessible to virtually everyone, though the bran and germ were stripped out, leaving very little of the minuscule nutritional value the grain had to begin with. Surely though, as grains are the center of our diet, an important source of fiber, and a low-fat staple, the general health of the American population must have dramatically increased from this novel invention? Or not...

In the last 130 years of increased grain consumption, chronic disease rates have skyrocketed, fertility has fallen and the average weight of the population has steadily risen. The more consumption of grains rose, the more fertility rates fell. Research from the University of Missouri, the average sperm count of American males has dropped 50% since the 1930s. To add insult to impotence, testicle size tends to have an inverse relationship with grain consumption.

We have found that grains can deplete nutrients, cause weight gain and infertility, but don't they still have nutrients? Unfortunately, grains do not have the nutritional profile that all the granola-pushing commercials of late make them out to have. It makes much more sense to get your nutrients from foods like vegetables, fruits, proteins and healthy fats, which offer much higher nutrient profiles without the drawbacks.

Back to the insulin equation for a second... It is no secret that the United States is facing a very real epidemic of insulin sensitivity, Type 2 Diabetes, insulin resistence and obesity. If the corresponding rates of disease and weight gain with grain consumption over the last 130 years aren't enough to convince you, consider this: when ground into flour the surface area of a grain is increased to 10,000 times the surface area of the grain itself. The resulting high-starch food is biologically similar to consuming pure table sugar. Consider the fact that flour is often mixed with sugar to create recipes (or used to make wall-paper paste, your choice) and you have a virtual diabetic coma in a bowl (or can).

Sounds bad enough to me, but there are still a few villains left in this mystery story! Behold gluten and lectins! These two are the Bonnie and Clyde of digestive health.

Gluten is a sticky, water soluble protein that is found in your favorite grains (wheat, rye, barley, etc). Grains like corn, rice and oats have similar proteins that cause problems over time. Gluten and similar grain-based proteins work to break down the microvilli in your small intestine, eventually letting particles of your food leech into your blood stream (a lovely term called "leaky gut syndrome") causing allergies, digestive disturbances or autoimmune problems.

Gluten's sidekicks, the posse of  Lectins, are mild toxins the inhibit the repair of the GI track. Lectins are not broken down in the digestive process and bind to receptors in the intestine, allowing them and other food particles to leech into your bloodstream. Nothing like pre-digested food circulating the blood stream! The body views these lectins and the food they bring with them as dangerous invaders and initiates an immune response to get rid of them. This immune response to particles of common foods explains the allergy creating potential of grains.

Gluten and Lectin now move their destructive dance to the gallbladder. The Gall bladder releases bile salts that help break down and properly digest foods. When the intestines are damaged, the chemical responsible for starting this bile secretion is not released. Bile backs up in the gall bladder, and cholesterol that is left there crystallizes into little "stones" that are usually surgically removed with the rest of the gall bladder. Talk about cutting off the nose to spite the face!

These chain-reactions created by grain consumption are shown to increase your risk of:

Various cancers including, drumroll please:pancreatic, colon, stomach and lymphomaAutoimmune diseases like Hashimoto's ThyroiditisInfertilityDiabetesObesityArthritisAutismDepression, Anxiety and SchizophreniaAllergiesIt all boils down to this: Grains are not healthy and are toxic to the body. That is the way they were designed. The non-digestible proteins that wreak havoc in our system allow grains to pass un-harmed through the intestines of animals and emerge victorious and in a pile of fertilizer at the other end. Good for the grains-bad for us! Studies have shown, and I have seen in my own work with clients, that a no-grain diet can lower cholesterol, lower blood pressure, reduce inflammation, promote weight loss, alleviate dermatitis or acne, end digestive disturbances like heart disease,  increase fertility and dramatically improve  energy levels.

Did she just say no-grain? That means pasta, bread, pastries, desserts, rolls, crackers, etc! (I would actually add white potatoes, corn, and any forms of "whole grains" to that list.) Say it isn't so!

Trust me, I like them too and used to live on them! From personal experience I can tell you that there is no comparison between how you feel when you don't eat grains and when you do. I realize that you like grains, probably a lot, and that your doctor probably even encourages you to eat them. I understand that the idea of giving them up might sound absurd, even impossible. I also know that giving up the grains is one of the best things you can do for your health.

Do you want to lose weight, or do you suffer from any of those medical conditions above? You can continue on the high insulin, pre-diabetes and cancer rollercoaster, or you could try cutting the grains for a couple months and let your body tell you what it thinks. (Important Note: Even a little exposure to grains every couple weeks can keep the intestines damaged, so to see improvements, you will have to completely cut grains like wheat, barley, oats, rice, rye, millet, corn etc and it also helps to limit beans and legumes)

Try it for 90 days! If you hate it, you can always go back to your carb consuming ways and live the rest of your life in bagel paradise. Instead you might discover that you feel better than you ever have, have more energy than you did as a kid and don't even want the grains anymore.

If you need help making the switch, check out some
2013-02-17 12:37:50 AM  
1 votes:

Eps05: Hobo Jr.: exercise

I have a problem with that. I want to do more exercise but i can't find the motivation. it's a chore. I don't feel like i have more energy after. I don't enjoy it at the beginning nor after I've been doing for a while. I have a stationary bike and an elliptical in my home, but i barely use them. Doing exercises is about as interesting as doing the dishes and passing the vacuum cleaner - except that my apartment and counters look better when i do the 2 latter.

I try setting myself some objectives (usually reach X calories on the device's counters), sometimes i don't even get there before I get fed up.


My parents have an exercise bike and weights and always exercise while they watch TV (Downtown Abbey for mom, Startrek for dad). I have a dog who will literally paw until I get off my ass and walk (which helps), but I also try making upbeat playlists which makes running not torture. Also took up letterboxing which is kind of like geocaching and involves long hikes. I also turn on some upbeat music and do some weight lifting and I usually end up doing extra exercise so that I can listen to a few more songs.  If there are any active things that you enjoy at all then you should latch on and make that your exercise. I took aerobic kickboxing classes with some friends a while back and loved every minute of it.

I have done the exercise bike thing and I found it so ungodly boring and WAY too easy to just step off of it.

This might sound stupid, and keep in mind that I'm a girl, but one day last week I just searched for you-tube videos on 'how to dance' and practiced dancing for about 40 minutes which ended up being more of a work out than I thought.

If there are things that would make exercising easier for you- do them. For example, I hated running in winter because my face would get cold and hurt. I got some earmuffs, gloves, generally better running clothes and now nothing stops me from venturing out.
2013-02-17 12:34:18 AM  
1 votes:
2013-02-17 12:23:27 AM  
1 votes:

I eat mop: ensign_noname: The problem is almost everything we eat is fake, maple syrup is not even maple syrup anymore.

the hell you say!


Pure maple syrup you buy as pure maple syrup sure is. If you're buying something that just says "syrup" on the bottle, even if it used to be maple syrup back in the day, it's repackaged HFCS.
2013-02-17 12:10:03 AM  
1 votes:

Hobo Jr.: exercise


I have a problem with that. I want to do more exercise but i can't find the motivation. it's a chore. I don't feel like i have more energy after. I don't enjoy it at the beginning nor after I've been doing for a while. I have a stationary bike and an elliptical in my home, but i barely use them. Doing exercises is about as interesting as doing the dishes and passing the vacuum cleaner - except that my apartment and counters look better when i do the 2 latter.

I try setting myself some objectives (usually reach X calories on the device's counters), sometimes i don't even get there before I get fed up.
2013-02-16 11:55:37 PM  
1 votes:

suziequzie: Gaddiel: Amos Quito: So I'll just keep eating eggs fried in buttery bacon grease as usual.

That's basically what the article says you should do. Although, apparently you may want to avoid toast with that.

DAMMIT! What am I gonna dip in the yolk then, huh? HUH?


Bacon.
2013-02-16 11:47:17 PM  
1 votes:

pxlboy: Interesting that you should say that. A friend of mine who went vegan lost some weight, but he appears to be getting fatter now.

Hmmm


In the transition from a Mediterranean-style diet to the vegan diet I did loose some weight at first, but gained it all back within a few months and then set off climbing into obesity. The problem for me was that the carbs would give me a blood sugar rush, followed by a crash, followed by OMFG I'M HUNGRY! Carbohydrates stimulate insulin production, which is very effective at storing the carbs you eat as fat in your cells, then stimulating your hunger response to eat more...rinse and repeat. Get rid of the carbs (insulin stimulus) and the yo-yo goes away, letting the fat you eat turn off the hunger response and letting your weight return to normal.
2013-02-16 11:28:04 PM  
1 votes:
"Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants"-Michael Pollan.
2013-02-16 11:19:54 PM  
1 votes:
My hipster nutritionalist was into all these rules before anyone else.
2013-02-16 11:10:26 PM  
1 votes:

LiteWerk: Yeah, but that's NOTHING compared to the lies our Government has been telling us for, oh, the last 50 years!

/if you know what I mean


Chemtrails, right?
2013-02-16 11:04:42 PM  
1 votes:
Lie number 12: Anything you ever do will "save your life"

It only prolongs your life, if something else doesn't end it first.
2013-02-16 10:49:06 PM  
1 votes:

win95o: Hobo Jr.: Don't eat grains?

What?

Their argument is wheat in large amounts is unhealthy. It is like the time I overheard a 300lbsreal women in a scooter telling her friend that bread was the worst thing to eat to lose weight.

No lady, stuffing your face with chocolate and lard is bad, having a piece of toast is fine.

Sure, stuffing your face with (sweetened) chocolate would be bad for you (because of the sugar).  But bread and other complex carbohydrates actually are quite bad for you.  As the article points out, humans have evolved to eat mainly protein, fat, and simple carbohydrates (those found in vegetables).  When you eat high carbohydrate foods your blood sugar will rise and your body produces a surge of insulin to lower it.  Insulin instructs cells to store fat, which is the primary mechanism through which one gains weight.  Eating a strict low carbohydrate diet will result in weight loss because fat won't be stored.  The total caloric intake actually isn't that important.

I'm on a strict low carbohydrate diet to control reactive hypoglycemia (high protein, high fat).  Despite eating about 2500 calories a day, I have actually lost weight (I'm not overweight and am not trying to lose weight).  It's really not that complicated, and I'm amazed that people think low carbohydrate dieting is a fad when humans have eaten low carbohydrate diets for tens of thousands of years.


Wrong way round. COMPLEX carbohydrates are the ones that are good for you. Brown rice, whole wheat, and vegetables. SIMPLE carbohydrates such as refined white flour, white sugar and fructose are the ones which are bad for you. They are absorbed quickly into the bloodstream, where they spike blood glucose. This leads to crashing later, and also prompts insulin to store energy as fat. Which in excess can result in insulin resistance (type II diabetes). Note: hypoglycemia means high blood sugar. Insulin resistance.
2013-02-16 10:35:18 PM  
1 votes:
FTFA: "The most common grain in the western diet, by far, is wheat... "

Pretty sure it's corn..
2013-02-16 10:28:30 PM  
1 votes:

neongoats: So protein, veggies and good fat and avoid sugars, grains carbs and processed crap as much as possible. That's not "fad dieting", it's common sense.

Uhm, I realize that your raging mt dew diets are forcing you to rail against common sense, but unless you are performing heavy labor, shoving huge piles of pasta, sugar and starch down your fat face is bad for most people. There is pretty much no actual nutrition there, just energy that you are just going to pack onto your ass because you are a fat lazy slug.


I just want to point out that if you really think that grains have 'no nutrition' it is possible you don't understand why the invention of agriculture was so important. All grains contain protein. The protein is not a complete protein that provides all of the amino acids we need (like animal protein), but if you combine different grains and vegetables then you WILL have a complete protein. That is why grains and vegetables CAN provide a healthy diet, just like meat and vegetables CAN provide a healthy diet. The problem, clearly, is that people go overboard and do it wrong.
2013-02-16 10:23:12 PM  
1 votes:
All of the men in my family, going back 5 generations, have had the same body type. No matter what they eat, how they live, how active, inactive, whatever - same body type.

So fark it. I'll eat what I likes because I don't look like a male model and lost the genetic lottery. WOO!
2013-02-16 10:18:02 PM  
1 votes:

Babbs: Anyone ever notice that the obesity epidemic actually started when the government put out that stupid Food Pyramid with whole grains as the base? It's not a coincidence.


wat?

Whole grains are good for you. Processed grains aren't. Besides, whole grains have never been at the base- grains, minus the whole, are at the base. People have seen that and decided that they need to eat a lot of white bread, which is a problem. Seeing that and eating whole wheat bread isn't an issue, and you would be much better if you switched to whole grains entirely.
2013-02-16 10:15:46 PM  
1 votes:
So protein, veggies and good fat and avoid sugars, grains carbs and processed crap as much as possible. That's not "fad dieting", it's common sense.

Uhm, I realize that your raging mt dew diets are forcing you to rail against common sense, but unless you are performing heavy labor, shoving huge piles of pasta, sugar and starch down your fat face is bad for most people. There is pretty much no actual nutrition there, just energy that you are just going to pack onto your ass because you are a fat lazy slug.
2013-02-16 10:15:08 PM  
1 votes:

foothor: The author of that article definitely has a bias towards keto/Atkins. She referenced two studies to show that low carb dieters lost more weight than low fat dieters but
1) Neither of the studies controlled for number of calories, and
2) Almost every diet meta-analysis shows that there's no big weight loss difference between diets and calories are more important.


Controlling for the number of calories is silly.  In order for a diet to be realistic and sustainable people have to be able to eat until they are satiated.  What commonly happens on low fat diets is that people lose weight but ultimately feel starved because carb rich diet makes them hungry and they eventually cave in and eat more than before.
2013-02-16 10:13:37 PM  
1 votes:

Babbs: Anyone ever notice that the obesity epidemic actually started when the government put out that stupid Food Pyramid with whole grains as the base? It's not a coincidence.


1950 something?

The balloning of America started in the 80s and 90s. About the time fast food exploded along with frozen meals and cheap chemically pumped boxed meals.
2013-02-16 10:11:08 PM  
1 votes:

Hobo Jr.: Don't eat grains?

What?

Their argument is wheat in large amounts is unhealthy. It is like the time I overheard a 300lbsreal women in a scooter telling her friend that bread was the worst thing to eat to lose weight.

No lady, stuffing your face with chocolate and lard is bad, having a piece of toast is fine.


The problem with your example is that people aren't making those simple decisions like that.  There is actually little difference between eating a piece of toast and eating a piece of chocolate and as the article says, the lard itself would be fine, but combined with sugar it is not.

If someone ate lard until they were full with no sugar/carbs they would not gain weight.  It is not as simple as telling people to eat less because the sugars/carbs they are eating will make them hungry again very quickly.  Being active helps but it is unrealistic, inefficient and unnatural to expect someone to spend an hour a day running in order to maintain body weight.  People you see eating fatty foods may tend to be fatter in general but that is probably because the fat tends to come paired with sugar, burgers with bun and fried, fat/sugary ice cream etc  Also if someone doesn't eat any fat and only eats carbs they will be thin but not necessarily healthy.

Just remember next time you finish off a decent sized meal and you are craving desert... are you hungry for more meat, eggs, butter and other fat?  Probably not, you will be eating ice cream, brownies, pie, cake, etc

Obviously the article is biased by the author's opinions but there are a lot of good points in there.
2013-02-16 10:09:12 PM  
1 votes:

MrHappyRotter: Mainstream nutrition.  Is that a thing now?


It's run by a few elite obese people.
2013-02-16 09:58:56 PM  
1 votes:
Eat reasonable meals.  Get off the damn couch every once in a while.
2013-02-16 09:58:18 PM  
1 votes:
Can we not just say that, for most people, moderating your sugar, sodium, and fat intake is the most important facet of your food intake?
2013-02-16 09:57:13 PM  
1 votes:
I knew most of these.

The biggest key is that in general, the more processed a food is, the less you should be eating it. Pasteurization is important and obviously, cooking for many things is important. We were told about the food pyramid as kids, and that's basically what you  should try to follow. Don't overdo it, and use balance.Things like chips and desserts should always be kept in the minority.
2013-02-16 09:54:35 PM  
1 votes:
12. Vegetables are food. Actually, vegetables are what food eats.
2013-02-16 09:54:07 PM  
1 votes:

This space intentionaly left blank: You can eat your eggs and bacon, just don't eat your toast/bagles/pancakes/waffles...


What most people don't realize is that bagles are amazingly terrible for you, even just dry and plain. They're denser than a drunken defensive lineman.

Bread and most carbs turn to sugar. Be sensible with it, even 'slightly better for you' versions of 'turns to pure sugar' still...turn to sugar.  It's empty calories, nutrition light compared to hearty veg/fruit.
2013-02-16 09:51:56 PM  
1 votes:

dolphinburger: this is a fabulous example of confirmation bias.


i.imgur.com
2013-02-16 09:48:52 PM  
1 votes:
Don't ever tell me not to eat bread.

Bread is the only substance that is actually food. Everything else exists to give bread some variety.

Beer's okay too because it's made from the same stuff. But mostly, bread.
2013-02-16 09:48:33 PM  
1 votes:
12. io9 is a good place to get health information.
2013-02-16 09:47:42 PM  
1 votes:
I'm calling bullshiat on the 6 meals a day thing.  Everything else is simple common sense.

/the best diet is to be too poor to afford food
2013-02-16 09:44:54 PM  
1 votes:
Don't eat grains?

What?

Their argument is wheat in large amounts is unhealthy. It is like the time I overheard a 300lbsreal women in a scooter telling her friend that bread was the worst thing to eat to lose weight.

No lady, stuffing your face with chocolate and lard is bad, having a piece of toast is fine.
2013-02-16 09:37:34 PM  
1 votes:
I was waiting for them to say exercise is bad for you
 
Displayed 60 of 60 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report