6 ms·

Carbohydrates are not a bad thing and are indeed an important part of health. The current suggested diet doesn't say, 'bread'. It specifically calls out Whole

by mkautzm 10y ago

Carbohydrates are not a bad thing and are indeed an important part of health. The current suggested diet doesn't say, 'bread'. It specifically calls out Whole Grains, which a great deal of evidence suggests are a Good Thing. Suggesting that grains, or even carbs, are somehow worse than literal fat is misleading at best, and delusional at it's worst.

pdq 10y ago
I'm referring to the original 1992 food pyramid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/media/File:USDA_Food_Pyramid.gif https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/medi... > Fats, oils, sweets: sparingly > Bread, cereal, rice & pasta: 6-11 servings Yes I am in the camp that believe fats and proteins are both much healthier than carbs, and especially refined sugars. The latest nutrition supports low carb diets, as can be seen with Atkins and Keto diets.
- teach 10y ago
  > The latest nutrition supports low carb diets The "latest nutrition" supports nothing of the sort. Dietitians still recommend you get roughly 50% of your calories from healthy carbs. Source: my wife is a registered dietitian and has a PhD in nutrition.
  - speeder 10y ago
    Not wanting to blast an entire profession, and I am not even the guy you are talking with... But to me, PhD in nutrition doesn't mean much, it is like PhD in underwater basket weaving, I am yet to met a single nutrition professional that could help me, and believe me, I looked really, really hard. In the end the only people that could help me, were endocrionologists, biologists, and other scientists in fields that are not directly relation to nutrition. And the reason for that, is precisely because of that high-carb recommendation, that is just insane, many cultures on earth lived just fine with low, or even zero carbs (extreme example: north-pole inhabitants, that in some places have diets that are 100% meat, organs included, since "regular" meat lacks some nutrients, like Vitamin C). In more tribal places (all over the world too, Africa, Asia, Americas...) hunter tribes also tend to be healthier than farmer tribes (but also tend to have much lower population numbers). And in many places, before FDA push for the vegetable agenda (I am not talking about veganism or vegatarianism, but about FDA constantly defending vegetable based food, including by accepting research that was fraudulent), people would happily eat lots of animal fats and meat, and live just fine. (example: in my country before the 60s, everyone used pork fat to fry stuff, and even make soap, but after vegetable oils became popular, and the government started to give strong subsidies to wheat, obesity, diabetes, etc... exploded, many common people still believe egg and cheese is absolutely evil, and prefer to stuff their faces with artificial sweeteners, soy milk, and salad with enough oily dressing to lubricate a car, than eat some eggs).
  - bobdole1234 10y ago
    The latest research shows exactly that. In 15 years or so, what gets taught will reflect that.
    - thenomad 10y ago
      Could you point to the studies that lead you to that conclusion? Meta-studies or similar ideally. (Not getting at you for your viewpoint - I'm making this comment to a few people in this thread who say that the latest research supports their argument. You may well be right, but I don't know enough about your background to take your word for it, so I'd be interested to see your sources. )
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - creepydata 10y ago
    When people say "the latest nutrition" they mean "the latest broscience I read on reddit."
- kuschku 10y ago
  > The latest nutrition supports low carb diets, as can be seen with Atkins and Keto diets. That statement is not supported by any reliable studies. The latest nutrition supports a healthy mix of carbs and fats, specifically whole grain and unsaturated fats. Not a monodiet of fat, nor a monodiet of carbs, nor processed carbs, nor saturated fats. Focusing too much on a fat-based diet causes massive kidney issues, just as a too much carb-based diet causes circulatory issues.
  - mastazi 10y ago
    I recently have had to conclude that HN is not the right audience to express this kind of ideas and not be downvoted. I am fine with people taking "religious" positions when it comes to a text editor or the latest web framework, the problem is that nutritional choices have environmental and health-related consequences, so I would rather them be fact-based. Also, I wonder what we're going to see next on HN, flat earth? Chemtrails? After a recent submission which was also related to nutritional topics, I have been considering leaving HN altogether.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - blhack 10y ago
    Source on the kidney thing? I haven't read that (except for that a LCHF diet can trigger issues on people who have an existing kidney disease)
    - kuschku 10y ago
      In previous HN threads on the topic, someone posted sources on this. So, take it as hearsay. But someone else in this thread posted sources on the claim, so you might want to read those sources.
  - thenomad 10y ago
    Could you point to the studies that lead you to that conclusion? Meta-studies or similar ideally. (Not getting at you for your viewpoint - I'm making this comment to a few people in this thread who say that the latest research supports their argument. You may well be right, but I don't know enough about your background to take your word for it, so I'd be interested to see your sources. )
- mastazi 10y ago
  > The latest nutrition supports low carb diets Our planet would like to differ though http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921100090X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919211...
jdminhbg 10y ago
The phrase "literal fat" shows just how successful the misguided low-fat crusade was: they don't even need any modifiers to show that they're "bad." At any rate, it's very easy to design a diet for humans without grains in it that's healthy and that you can thrive on, but impossible to design one without fat. So in that respect at least, literal fat is better than grains.
- mastazi 10y ago
  It is however hardly possible to design a human diet without carbs where the planet doesn't suffer from a large scale ecological disaster[1] (assuming most of the world's population would adopt that diet), unless unconventional animal food sources, such as insects or krill, become mainstream. I don't see that happening any time soon. [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921100090X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919211...
PKop 10y ago
I'm sorry but you have no idea what you're talking about. Typical carb intake in avg diet that doesn't remove grains and starches is literally worse for you than pure eating pure fat. Read about keto diet, read / watch presentations by Gary Taubes (his book "Why We Get Fat" is great). Your understanding of nutrition is about 20 years out of date.
- lkbm 10y ago
  I think their understanding of nutrition is up-to-date, but focuses on kidney health, not just weight, or the realities of the current American diet. Whole grains are great and very healthy, and a high-carb diet rich in whole grains and with an appropriate level of calories will be great. On the other hand, while a ketogenic diet is great for weight control and cardiovascular health, they're probably much worse for your kidneys. In the US, kidney issues are a problem, but cardiovascular health are a much bigger problem. Perhaps more importantly, people who don't do keto/high-protein usually aren't on a perfect veggie-rich, whole grain diet instead. They're on a diet of refined carbs and excessive calories. If you're really committed to a super-healthy diet, you should probably eat lots of carbs, but the right carbs--complex and mixed with fiber. If you're an average American who doesn't feel like a diet of veggies and whole grains, high-protein is probably a good route to take. I tend to go high protein (even as a vegetarian) because I enjoy the taste and it fills me up better than many others things I like. It fits my health vs. food enjoyment balance in a way I have the will-power to maintain. In short, complex carbs are great, but don't make perfect the enemy of the good, and don't set yourself up for failure.
  - naasking 10y ago
    > If you're really committed to a super-healthy diet, you should probably eat lots of carbs, but the right carbs--complex and mixed with fiber Then you should stop referring to them as carbs and just refer specifically to fiber. Way less confusion.
    - mjmasn 10y ago
      If you're looking to avoid confusion you should refer to them as starches, they are the complex carbs (such as rice, beans, potatoes etc.) that give us energy and should form the largest proportion of any healthy diet. - These starches should preferably be unrefined (yes, quit that white bread, discover the great taste of brown rice) and eaten alongside some green and yellow vegetables to get extra vitamins, minerals and fibre. - If you're trying to lose weight faster, avoid consuming oil and fatty foods (e.g. nuts, avocado), use sparingly otherwise. - Avoid dairy products at all costs. - Add meat in small amounts if you really can't live without it. You'll be getting more than your daily calorie/vitamin/mineral/fibre needs, and by not eating a tonne of refined carbs, fats, dairy, and meat you'll be less of a burden on the planet/country/healthcare systems too! I mostly follow the above advice, but I'm pragmatic when eating out, not everywhere caters to a vegan/plant based diet, or even vegetarian. So while you'll occasionally catch me eating a delicious chicken burger or even possibly a steak, 99%* of the time I eat a plant based diet with zero added oil. As for the myth of sugar turning to fat: it's a process known as de novo lipogenesis, and yes it happens efficiently in cows, but in humans not so much unless you're eating carbs in greatly excess of your body's energy needs[0]. In 99%* of normal circumstances, the human body will increase its metabolism to cope with the extra calories from carbs. The problem really _is_ consuming too much fat. * estimated ;) [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981 "Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE [total energy expenditure] does DNL [de novo lipogenesis] in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy. It is concluded that DNL is not the pathway of first resort for added dietary CHO, in humans."
will_brown 10y ago
>Suggesting that grains, or even carbs, are somehow worse than literal fat is misleading at best, and delusional at it's worst. Carbs/sugars trigger insulin production...fats don't do that. Just look at the Western diet and the substitution of fats with sugars in the food industry in the 70's and you will trace origins of type 2 diabetes that would begin appearing in children - yes, it used to be called adult onset diabetes - now over a million cases. Carbs are not inherently bad, but there is no doubt way to much in the Western diet and from poor sources.

by mkautzm 10y ago

pdq 10y ago

I'm referring to the original 1992 food pyramid: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/media/File:USDA_Food_Pyramid.gif https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/medi... > Fats, oils, sweets: sparingly > Bread, cereal, rice & pasta: 6-11 servings Yes I am in the camp that believe fats and proteins are both much healthier than carbs, and especially refined sugars. The latest nutrition supports low carb diets, as can be seen with Atkins and Keto diets.

teach 10y ago
> The latest nutrition supports low carb diets The "latest nutrition" supports nothing of the sort. Dietitians still recommend you get roughly 50% of your calories from healthy carbs. Source: my wife is a registered dietitian and has a PhD in nutrition.
- speeder 10y ago
  Not wanting to blast an entire profession, and I am not even the guy you are talking with... But to me, PhD in nutrition doesn't mean much, it is like PhD in underwater basket weaving, I am yet to met a single nutrition professional that could help me, and believe me, I looked really, really hard. In the end the only people that could help me, were endocrionologists, biologists, and other scientists in fields that are not directly relation to nutrition. And the reason for that, is precisely because of that high-carb recommendation, that is just insane, many cultures on earth lived just fine with low, or even zero carbs (extreme example: north-pole inhabitants, that in some places have diets that are 100% meat, organs included, since "regular" meat lacks some nutrients, like Vitamin C). In more tribal places (all over the world too, Africa, Asia, Americas...) hunter tribes also tend to be healthier than farmer tribes (but also tend to have much lower population numbers). And in many places, before FDA push for the vegetable agenda (I am not talking about veganism or vegatarianism, but about FDA constantly defending vegetable based food, including by accepting research that was fraudulent), people would happily eat lots of animal fats and meat, and live just fine. (example: in my country before the 60s, everyone used pork fat to fry stuff, and even make soap, but after vegetable oils became popular, and the government started to give strong subsidies to wheat, obesity, diabetes, etc... exploded, many common people still believe egg and cheese is absolutely evil, and prefer to stuff their faces with artificial sweeteners, soy milk, and salad with enough oily dressing to lubricate a car, than eat some eggs).
- bobdole1234 10y ago
  The latest research shows exactly that. In 15 years or so, what gets taught will reflect that.
  - thenomad 10y ago
    Could you point to the studies that lead you to that conclusion? Meta-studies or similar ideally. (Not getting at you for your viewpoint - I'm making this comment to a few people in this thread who say that the latest research supports their argument. You may well be right, but I don't know enough about your background to take your word for it, so I'd be interested to see your sources. )
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- creepydata 10y ago
  When people say "the latest nutrition" they mean "the latest broscience I read on reddit."
kuschku 10y ago
> The latest nutrition supports low carb diets, as can be seen with Atkins and Keto diets. That statement is not supported by any reliable studies. The latest nutrition supports a healthy mix of carbs and fats, specifically whole grain and unsaturated fats. Not a monodiet of fat, nor a monodiet of carbs, nor processed carbs, nor saturated fats. Focusing too much on a fat-based diet causes massive kidney issues, just as a too much carb-based diet causes circulatory issues.
- mastazi 10y ago
  I recently have had to conclude that HN is not the right audience to express this kind of ideas and not be downvoted. I am fine with people taking "religious" positions when it comes to a text editor or the latest web framework, the problem is that nutritional choices have environmental and health-related consequences, so I would rather them be fact-based. Also, I wonder what we're going to see next on HN, flat earth? Chemtrails? After a recent submission which was also related to nutritional topics, I have been considering leaving HN altogether.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- blhack 10y ago
  Source on the kidney thing? I haven't read that (except for that a LCHF diet can trigger issues on people who have an existing kidney disease)
  - kuschku 10y ago
    In previous HN threads on the topic, someone posted sources on this. So, take it as hearsay. But someone else in this thread posted sources on the claim, so you might want to read those sources.
- thenomad 10y ago
  Could you point to the studies that lead you to that conclusion? Meta-studies or similar ideally. (Not getting at you for your viewpoint - I'm making this comment to a few people in this thread who say that the latest research supports their argument. You may well be right, but I don't know enough about your background to take your word for it, so I'd be interested to see your sources. )
mastazi 10y ago
> The latest nutrition supports low carb diets Our planet would like to differ though http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921100090X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919211...

jdminhbg 10y ago

The phrase "literal fat" shows just how successful the misguided low-fat crusade was: they don't even need any modifiers to show that they're "bad." At any rate, it's very easy to design a diet for humans without grains in it that's healthy and that you can thrive on, but impossible to design one without fat. So in that respect at least, literal fat is better than grains.

mastazi 10y ago
It is however hardly possible to design a human diet without carbs where the planet doesn't suffer from a large scale ecological disaster[1] (assuming most of the world's population would adopt that diet), unless unconventional animal food sources, such as insects or krill, become mainstream. I don't see that happening any time soon. [1] http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S030691921100090X http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306919211...

PKop 10y ago

I'm sorry but you have no idea what you're talking about. Typical carb intake in avg diet that doesn't remove grains and starches is literally worse for you than pure eating pure fat. Read about keto diet, read / watch presentations by Gary Taubes (his book "Why We Get Fat" is great). Your understanding of nutrition is about 20 years out of date.

lkbm 10y ago
I think their understanding of nutrition is up-to-date, but focuses on kidney health, not just weight, or the realities of the current American diet. Whole grains are great and very healthy, and a high-carb diet rich in whole grains and with an appropriate level of calories will be great. On the other hand, while a ketogenic diet is great for weight control and cardiovascular health, they're probably much worse for your kidneys. In the US, kidney issues are a problem, but cardiovascular health are a much bigger problem. Perhaps more importantly, people who don't do keto/high-protein usually aren't on a perfect veggie-rich, whole grain diet instead. They're on a diet of refined carbs and excessive calories. If you're really committed to a super-healthy diet, you should probably eat lots of carbs, but the right carbs--complex and mixed with fiber. If you're an average American who doesn't feel like a diet of veggies and whole grains, high-protein is probably a good route to take. I tend to go high protein (even as a vegetarian) because I enjoy the taste and it fills me up better than many others things I like. It fits my health vs. food enjoyment balance in a way I have the will-power to maintain. In short, complex carbs are great, but don't make perfect the enemy of the good, and don't set yourself up for failure.
- naasking 10y ago
  > If you're really committed to a super-healthy diet, you should probably eat lots of carbs, but the right carbs--complex and mixed with fiber Then you should stop referring to them as carbs and just refer specifically to fiber. Way less confusion.
  - mjmasn 10y ago
    If you're looking to avoid confusion you should refer to them as starches, they are the complex carbs (such as rice, beans, potatoes etc.) that give us energy and should form the largest proportion of any healthy diet. - These starches should preferably be unrefined (yes, quit that white bread, discover the great taste of brown rice) and eaten alongside some green and yellow vegetables to get extra vitamins, minerals and fibre. - If you're trying to lose weight faster, avoid consuming oil and fatty foods (e.g. nuts, avocado), use sparingly otherwise. - Avoid dairy products at all costs. - Add meat in small amounts if you really can't live without it. You'll be getting more than your daily calorie/vitamin/mineral/fibre needs, and by not eating a tonne of refined carbs, fats, dairy, and meat you'll be less of a burden on the planet/country/healthcare systems too! I mostly follow the above advice, but I'm pragmatic when eating out, not everywhere caters to a vegan/plant based diet, or even vegetarian. So while you'll occasionally catch me eating a delicious chicken burger or even possibly a steak, 99%* of the time I eat a plant based diet with zero added oil. As for the myth of sugar turning to fat: it's a process known as de novo lipogenesis, and yes it happens efficiently in cows, but in humans not so much unless you're eating carbs in greatly excess of your body's energy needs[0]. In 99%* of normal circumstances, the human body will increase its metabolism to cope with the extra calories from carbs. The problem really _is_ consuming too much fat. * estimated ;) [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10365981 "Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE [total energy expenditure] does DNL [de novo lipogenesis] in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy. It is concluded that DNL is not the pathway of first resort for added dietary CHO, in humans."

will_brown 10y ago

>Suggesting that grains, or even carbs, are somehow worse than literal fat is misleading at best, and delusional at it's worst. Carbs/sugars trigger insulin production...fats don't do that. Just look at the Western diet and the substitution of fats with sugars in the food industry in the 70's and you will trace origins of type 2 diabetes that would begin appearing in children - yes, it used to be called adult onset diabetes - now over a million cases. Carbs are not inherently bad, but there is no doubt way to much in the Western diet and from poor sources.