7 ms·

This is great. A no-nonsense, modern take on healthy nutrition. It's simple (no more food groups, portions, etc.), and actually healthy (e.g. not catering to th

by benzor 8y ago

This is great. A no-nonsense, modern take on healthy nutrition. It's simple (no more food groups, portions, etc.), and actually healthy (e.g. not catering to the dairy industry with a daily glass of milk recommendation, pizza is not a vegetable, etc.). Compare it to this: https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/archived_projects/FGPPamphlet.pdf https://www.cnpp.usda.gov/sites/default/files/archived_proje...

village-idiot 8y ago
Oh, it’s still catering to some industries, they’re just far less blatant about it than in America.
- ramy_d 8y ago
  Do you have anything to back that statement up? https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-guide/resources/evidence.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-...
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Food science in general is as corrupt as it gets, with the vast majority of research funded by and favorable to agriculture businesses. Even stuff that we take for granted as healthy, such as fruit and vegetables, often have their benefits massively overstated by the companies that stand to benefit by such proclamations of health. The area has been an absolute miserable failure in its obstensible goals, making us healthy. The western world has been pretty diligent about following the recommendations of the food scientists, especially around eliminating saturated fat, and the results have been a complete and utter disaster. Yet we continue to listen to the exact same people hashing the exact same advice as the population continues to get fatter, sicker, and die sooner.
    - hnnh44 8y ago
      If the food industry doesn't fund research, are we better off with none at all? Yes, individual vegetables and products matter relatively little compared to balanced eating. But saying this guide isn't useful is factually incorrect. Its an improvement over the previous guide. That makes it useful. It tells people to eat more veggies. That makes it useful. Unfortunately we live in a world with imperfect information and while it's not the perfect guide for everyone, no gude ever will be. The biggest issue with your rant is simply that you're complaining needlessly without offering a useful alternative. You've made some obviously incorrect statements. The fact is that people are living longer, and dying of "sicknesses" they wouldn't live long enough to reach in the past. America hasnt one so well on those metrics, but the world as a whole has significantly improved. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=World+wide+life+expectancy+trend http://lmgtfy.com/?q=World+wide+life+expectancy+trend
    - ramy_d 8y ago
      I don't understand. You're saying a diet based around fruits and vegetables is unhealthy and favourable to the agriculture business but saturated fats are ok? What a tail spin.
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        I'm not saying that fruits and vegetables are unhealthy per se, but that their benefits have been vastly overstated, especially for fruits. Triply so for juice, which is basically the same as soda. Saturated fat is good for you, the pop science you've been fed about saturated fat is complete garbage. Sure, saturated fat increases "bad" cholesterol, LDL. Unfortunately it turns out there are two types of LDL, only one of which is actually correlated with heart attacks. Turns out cutting out saturated fat from your diet might drop your LDL, but it also reduces expected lifespan. Oops! You could also take Statins for those "dangerous" levels of LDL, but it turns out they do nothing to improve your all-cause mortality stats unless if you fall within a narrow portion of the population. It's only a tailspin because you've been fed garbage information about food your whole life. But given the absolute catastrophic state of public health within the United States, I'm genuinely surprised that anyone listens to the official health guides at all.
        ramy_d 8y ago
        > Triply so for juice, which is basically the same as soda. https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendations/make-water-your-drink-of-choice/sugary-drinks/ https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendatio... did you even read the guideline?
- benj111 8y ago
  Such as?
  - zxcvbn4038 8y ago
    Milk is a huge deal in the US, the dairy farmers association has it engrained in every American that they need milk and only milk for calcium - never mind broccoli, almonds, figs, sardines, etc., in fact they go through great pains to not mention alternate sources of calcium. It only works because so much of the US population is lactose tolerant.
    - kcmastrpc 8y ago
      One might argue we are lactose tolerant because of the ridiculous amount of lobbying they did in the 50s and 60s.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      Calcium in milk is also not bio-available once it’s been homogenized, because it’s stripped out of its protective fat layer and expose to lactose which binds to it in a way that humans can’t undo on our own. Milk is a fantastic source of calcium, when you don’t mess with it too much. Why wouldn’t it be? It’s evolved specifically to grow mammals up to full size as quickly as possible, which includes growing a lot of bone. The issue is that we’ve monkeyed with it in a way that’s convenient for producers, but bad for consumers.
      - benj111 8y ago
        Do you have any links? It's not a claim I've ever heard before.
        village-idiot 8y ago
        Not a link, but a book. Deep Nutrition, by Catherine Shanahan. She cites a couple hundred studies in the book, worth a read if you’re into this stuff.
- bb101 8y ago
  In the Pork and apple skillet dinner[1], they recommend using canola oil, a recommendation one doesn't see all that often. With canola oil having been engineered in Canada, is it an oil of choice for Canadians? [1] https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-guide/tips-healthy-eating/meal-planning-cooking-healthy-choices/recipes/speedy-pork-apple-skillet-dinner.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-...
  - freeone3000 8y ago
    I'm surprised you don't see that recommendation often. It's a very cheap, versatile cooking oil. I wouldn't say it's anyone's favourite, but it's effectively the default?
    - RugnirViking 8y ago
      No? At least where I'm from, the default is sunflower oil and if you want to upgrade its olive oil. I've never heard of canola oil
      - tom_mellior 8y ago
        FWIW, you may know it as rapeseed oil. "Canola was originally a trademark name of the Rapeseed Association of Canada, and the name was a condensation of "Can" from Canada and "ola" from other vegetable oils like Mazola,[6][7] but is now a generic term for edible varieties of rapeseed oil in North America and Australia. The change in name serves to distinguish it from natural rapeseed oil, which has much higher erucic acid content." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canola_oil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canola_oil
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      Because it’s awful for your health?
  - lhopki01 8y ago
    All the vegetable oil I buy here in the UK is actually 100% canola oil. You have to look at the ingredients list to realise it since it's just labeled as vegetable oil.
leethargo 8y ago
I like it, too. Pretty much what I've been following for the last 1-2 years. Would like more clarification on the saturated fats front, though (compare coconut oil, butter, palm oil, trans fats).
- leethargo 8y ago
  Basically, many of their healthy fat oils are actually highly processed (which are not recommended), while the non-processed unsaturated fats (such as olive oil) are not suitable for (high-temperature) cooking.
  - lelima 8y ago
    "unsaturated fats (such as olive oil) are not suitable for (high-temperature) cooking." That's not true, another human myth. here is the paper, TLDR: olive oil retains most of its nutritional benefits even when heated in high temperatures. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf020506w https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf020506w go for healthy fat! :)
    - pugio 8y ago
      You're missing the point – oils are (un)suitable for cooking primarily based on the risk of oxidation via heat. That study is only about the polyphenol content of olive oil (which, according to the study, do not get degraded as much as we might have thought), but it says nothing about the oxidation of poly-unsaturated fats. Unsaturated fats are at a much higher risk of oxidation, which is why cooking with canola oil (7.4% saturated, 28.1% polyunsaturated), for instance, is so dangerous – without the hydrogen armor around the carbon backbone, the fat is at high risk for oxidation, after which point it becomes toxic. The study you linked to even alludes to this danger: > It is worth noting that all the heating methods assayed resulted in more severe polyphenols losses and oil degradation for Arbequina than for Picual oil, which could be related to the lower content in polyunsaturated fatty acids of the latter olive cultivar. These findings may be relevant to the choice of cooking method and olive oil cultivar to increase the intake of olive polyphenols. Suggesting that if you want to cook at higher heats with olive oil, you should search for one with an exceptionally low polyunsat content.
sharmi 8y ago
https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendations/make-it-a-habit-to-eat-vegetables-fruit-whole-grains-and-protein-foods/choosing-foods-with-healthy-fats/ https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendatio... It seems to stick to more traditional lines of avoid saturated fats (butter, ghee,coconut oil) and favour olive oil, canola oil etc. And reduce fat in general
sridca 8y ago
They both look the same (except for use of pyramid vs circle). What exactly are the major differences as you see?
- folkrav 8y ago
  The new Food Guide doesn't really discriminate by food groups apart from "eat fruits and veggies" and does away with daily portions per food type. What are the similarities you see?
sonnyblarney 8y ago
"This is great. A no-nonsense, modern take on healthy nutrition. " Even though it's technically 'no nonsense' - it actually is effectively 'nonsense' from a communications perspective. It's almost meaningless, and un-actionable, and I don't think it will have any effect, on any group. I wonder if this should simply be a single page of points urging us to 'eat healthy' and that should be it. Consider the main takeaway points: 'Enjoy your food' 'Eat protein' 'Eat lots of vegetables' 'Chose whole grain foods' Seriously? This is essentially very traditional approach to food, with noticeably less focus on carbs (we don't work on farms anymore), and also the absence milk, cheese and almost absence of meat which I believe is likely a shade ideological as opposed to nutritional. It surely is good advice, but it's not specific at all, and essentially boils down to 'eat healthy, don't each junk food'. Seriously consider this: https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendations/enjoy-your-food/ https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendatio... It's the page on 'how to enjoy your food'. "tasting the flavours" "being open to trying new foods" "developing a healthy attitude about food" Seriously - a page devoted to instructing us to 'taste the flavours' of food. Here the section on your 'eating environment': Influences on eating and drinking. These can include: distractions where you eat who you eat with what you are doing while you are eating Eating environments can affect: what you eat and drink the amount you eat and drink ow much you enjoy eating It's really an eerie thing to read. I should add: the recipes look really good however.
- cknoxrun 8y ago
  It’s important to note that this is taught in schools starting from as early as grade 1. I do believe that teaching children about the joys of eating food and sharing meals could have a positive impact. Consider France, arguably one of the healthiest nations when it comes to food, where this is culturally ingrained from an early age.
  - decasteve 8y ago
    > It’s important to note that this is taught in schools starting from as early as grade 1. My kids come home with hungry with half-eaten lunches complaining how they didn’t have enough time to eat. They get rushed to finish within 10-15 minutes and go outside. This is a universal complaint among parents. We’re culturally ingraining eating as something you rush through on the way to something else.
maxlybbert 8y ago
> Compare it to this: ... The USDA updates the guidelines every so often. They no longer use a pyramid, and they’ve silently backed away from recommending so many carbs. Compare Canada’s guide to https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ .
131012 8y ago
Even if I agree with the guide, one has to remember it is election year in Canada, and Canada is one of the largest grower of pulses and legumes. Nothing is devoid of political ramifications.
- dwild 8y ago
  https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-plate/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-... https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ Both use a pretty similar graphic and both dedicate 50% of the plate for fruit and vegetable. I'm Canadian and the milk industry seems like a much bigger political issues (and it was already one after the USMCA).
- igrekel 8y ago
  While it is not completely impossible, if political ramifications were the prime drivers, meat, dairy and grain would have a lot more space and would have suffered when comparing to previous version of the guide. The guide as likely little effect outside the country, its effect is more on small institutional kitchens (daycares, schools, clinics etc.), its content is unlikely to affect international sales. Its political effect is more likely to be felt internally, through perception of people in the affected industries rather than the effect the guide may have on their sales. Some of the not so favoured are powerful industries what occupy a lot of land across several provinces (wheat), have suffered recently and are getting more politically active (dairy) or are in areas where the party currently in power needs to keep its support for the next election (meat).

by benzor 8y ago

village-idiot 8y ago

Oh, it’s still catering to some industries, they’re just far less blatant about it than in America.

ramy_d 8y ago
Do you have anything to back that statement up? https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-guide/resources/evidence.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-...
- village-idiot 8y ago
  Food science in general is as corrupt as it gets, with the vast majority of research funded by and favorable to agriculture businesses. Even stuff that we take for granted as healthy, such as fruit and vegetables, often have their benefits massively overstated by the companies that stand to benefit by such proclamations of health. The area has been an absolute miserable failure in its obstensible goals, making us healthy. The western world has been pretty diligent about following the recommendations of the food scientists, especially around eliminating saturated fat, and the results have been a complete and utter disaster. Yet we continue to listen to the exact same people hashing the exact same advice as the population continues to get fatter, sicker, and die sooner.
  - hnnh44 8y ago
    If the food industry doesn't fund research, are we better off with none at all? Yes, individual vegetables and products matter relatively little compared to balanced eating. But saying this guide isn't useful is factually incorrect. Its an improvement over the previous guide. That makes it useful. It tells people to eat more veggies. That makes it useful. Unfortunately we live in a world with imperfect information and while it's not the perfect guide for everyone, no gude ever will be. The biggest issue with your rant is simply that you're complaining needlessly without offering a useful alternative. You've made some obviously incorrect statements. The fact is that people are living longer, and dying of "sicknesses" they wouldn't live long enough to reach in the past. America hasnt one so well on those metrics, but the world as a whole has significantly improved. http://lmgtfy.com/?q=World+wide+life+expectancy+trend http://lmgtfy.com/?q=World+wide+life+expectancy+trend
  - ramy_d 8y ago
    I don't understand. You're saying a diet based around fruits and vegetables is unhealthy and favourable to the agriculture business but saturated fats are ok? What a tail spin.
    - village-idiot 8y ago
      I'm not saying that fruits and vegetables are unhealthy per se, but that their benefits have been vastly overstated, especially for fruits. Triply so for juice, which is basically the same as soda. Saturated fat is good for you, the pop science you've been fed about saturated fat is complete garbage. Sure, saturated fat increases "bad" cholesterol, LDL. Unfortunately it turns out there are two types of LDL, only one of which is actually correlated with heart attacks. Turns out cutting out saturated fat from your diet might drop your LDL, but it also reduces expected lifespan. Oops! You could also take Statins for those "dangerous" levels of LDL, but it turns out they do nothing to improve your all-cause mortality stats unless if you fall within a narrow portion of the population. It's only a tailspin because you've been fed garbage information about food your whole life. But given the absolute catastrophic state of public health within the United States, I'm genuinely surprised that anyone listens to the official health guides at all.
      - ramy_d 8y ago
        > Triply so for juice, which is basically the same as soda. https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendations/make-water-your-drink-of-choice/sugary-drinks/ https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendatio... did you even read the guideline?
benj111 8y ago
Such as?
- zxcvbn4038 8y ago
  Milk is a huge deal in the US, the dairy farmers association has it engrained in every American that they need milk and only milk for calcium - never mind broccoli, almonds, figs, sardines, etc., in fact they go through great pains to not mention alternate sources of calcium. It only works because so much of the US population is lactose tolerant.
  - kcmastrpc 8y ago
    One might argue we are lactose tolerant because of the ridiculous amount of lobbying they did in the 50s and 60s.
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Calcium in milk is also not bio-available once it’s been homogenized, because it’s stripped out of its protective fat layer and expose to lactose which binds to it in a way that humans can’t undo on our own. Milk is a fantastic source of calcium, when you don’t mess with it too much. Why wouldn’t it be? It’s evolved specifically to grow mammals up to full size as quickly as possible, which includes growing a lot of bone. The issue is that we’ve monkeyed with it in a way that’s convenient for producers, but bad for consumers.
    - benj111 8y ago
      Do you have any links? It's not a claim I've ever heard before.
      - village-idiot 8y ago
        Not a link, but a book. Deep Nutrition, by Catherine Shanahan. She cites a couple hundred studies in the book, worth a read if you’re into this stuff.
bb101 8y ago
In the Pork and apple skillet dinner[1], they recommend using canola oil, a recommendation one doesn't see all that often. With canola oil having been engineered in Canada, is it an oil of choice for Canadians? [1] https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-guide/tips-healthy-eating/meal-planning-cooking-healthy-choices/recipes/speedy-pork-apple-skillet-dinner.html https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/canada-food-...
- freeone3000 8y ago
  I'm surprised you don't see that recommendation often. It's a very cheap, versatile cooking oil. I wouldn't say it's anyone's favourite, but it's effectively the default?
  - RugnirViking 8y ago
    No? At least where I'm from, the default is sunflower oil and if you want to upgrade its olive oil. I've never heard of canola oil
    - tom_mellior 8y ago
      FWIW, you may know it as rapeseed oil. "Canola was originally a trademark name of the Rapeseed Association of Canada, and the name was a condensation of "Can" from Canada and "ola" from other vegetable oils like Mazola,[6][7] but is now a generic term for edible varieties of rapeseed oil in North America and Australia. The change in name serves to distinguish it from natural rapeseed oil, which has much higher erucic acid content." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canola_oil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canola_oil
  - village-idiot 8y ago
    Because it’s awful for your health?
- lhopki01 8y ago
  All the vegetable oil I buy here in the UK is actually 100% canola oil. You have to look at the ingredients list to realise it since it's just labeled as vegetable oil.

leethargo 8y ago

I like it, too. Pretty much what I've been following for the last 1-2 years. Would like more clarification on the saturated fats front, though (compare coconut oil, butter, palm oil, trans fats).

leethargo 8y ago
Basically, many of their healthy fat oils are actually highly processed (which are not recommended), while the non-processed unsaturated fats (such as olive oil) are not suitable for (high-temperature) cooking.
- lelima 8y ago
  "unsaturated fats (such as olive oil) are not suitable for (high-temperature) cooking." That's not true, another human myth. here is the paper, TLDR: olive oil retains most of its nutritional benefits even when heated in high temperatures. https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf020506w https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jf020506w go for healthy fat! :)
  - pugio 8y ago
    You're missing the point – oils are (un)suitable for cooking primarily based on the risk of oxidation via heat. That study is only about the polyphenol content of olive oil (which, according to the study, do not get degraded as much as we might have thought), but it says nothing about the oxidation of poly-unsaturated fats. Unsaturated fats are at a much higher risk of oxidation, which is why cooking with canola oil (7.4% saturated, 28.1% polyunsaturated), for instance, is so dangerous – without the hydrogen armor around the carbon backbone, the fat is at high risk for oxidation, after which point it becomes toxic. The study you linked to even alludes to this danger: > It is worth noting that all the heating methods assayed resulted in more severe polyphenols losses and oil degradation for Arbequina than for Picual oil, which could be related to the lower content in polyunsaturated fatty acids of the latter olive cultivar. These findings may be relevant to the choice of cooking method and olive oil cultivar to increase the intake of olive polyphenols. Suggesting that if you want to cook at higher heats with olive oil, you should search for one with an exceptionally low polyunsat content.

sharmi 8y ago

https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendations/make-it-a-habit-to-eat-vegetables-fruit-whole-grains-and-protein-foods/choosing-foods-with-healthy-fats/ https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendatio... It seems to stick to more traditional lines of avoid saturated fats (butter, ghee,coconut oil) and favour olive oil, canola oil etc. And reduce fat in general

sridca 8y ago

They both look the same (except for use of pyramid vs circle). What exactly are the major differences as you see?

folkrav 8y ago
The new Food Guide doesn't really discriminate by food groups apart from "eat fruits and veggies" and does away with daily portions per food type. What are the similarities you see?

sonnyblarney 8y ago

"This is great. A no-nonsense, modern take on healthy nutrition. " Even though it's technically 'no nonsense' - it actually is effectively 'nonsense' from a communications perspective. It's almost meaningless, and un-actionable, and I don't think it will have any effect, on any group. I wonder if this should simply be a single page of points urging us to 'eat healthy' and that should be it. Consider the main takeaway points: 'Enjoy your food' 'Eat protein' 'Eat lots of vegetables' 'Chose whole grain foods' Seriously? This is essentially very traditional approach to food, with noticeably less focus on carbs (we don't work on farms anymore), and also the absence milk, cheese and almost absence of meat which I believe is likely a shade ideological as opposed to nutritional. It surely is good advice, but it's not specific at all, and essentially boils down to 'eat healthy, don't each junk food'. Seriously consider this: https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendations/enjoy-your-food/ https://food-guide.canada.ca/en/healthy-eating-recommendatio... It's the page on 'how to enjoy your food'. "tasting the flavours" "being open to trying new foods" "developing a healthy attitude about food" Seriously - a page devoted to instructing us to 'taste the flavours' of food. Here the section on your 'eating environment': Influences on eating and drinking. These can include: distractions where you eat who you eat with what you are doing while you are eating Eating environments can affect: what you eat and drink the amount you eat and drink ow much you enjoy eating It's really an eerie thing to read. I should add: the recipes look really good however.

cknoxrun 8y ago
It’s important to note that this is taught in schools starting from as early as grade 1. I do believe that teaching children about the joys of eating food and sharing meals could have a positive impact. Consider France, arguably one of the healthiest nations when it comes to food, where this is culturally ingrained from an early age.
- decasteve 8y ago
  > It’s important to note that this is taught in schools starting from as early as grade 1. My kids come home with hungry with half-eaten lunches complaining how they didn’t have enough time to eat. They get rushed to finish within 10-15 minutes and go outside. This is a universal complaint among parents. We’re culturally ingraining eating as something you rush through on the way to something else.

maxlybbert 8y ago

> Compare it to this: ... The USDA updates the guidelines every so often. They no longer use a pyramid, and they’ve silently backed away from recommending so many carbs. Compare Canada’s guide to https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ .

131012 8y ago

Even if I agree with the guide, one has to remember it is election year in Canada, and Canada is one of the largest grower of pulses and legumes. Nothing is devoid of political ramifications.

dwild 8y ago
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-plate/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/healthy-eating-... https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ https://www.choosemyplate.gov/ Both use a pretty similar graphic and both dedicate 50% of the plate for fruit and vegetable. I'm Canadian and the milk industry seems like a much bigger political issues (and it was already one after the USMCA).
igrekel 8y ago
While it is not completely impossible, if political ramifications were the prime drivers, meat, dairy and grain would have a lot more space and would have suffered when comparing to previous version of the guide. The guide as likely little effect outside the country, its effect is more on small institutional kitchens (daycares, schools, clinics etc.), its content is unlikely to affect international sales. Its political effect is more likely to be felt internally, through perception of people in the affected industries rather than the effect the guide may have on their sales. Some of the not so favoured are powerful industries what occupy a lot of land across several provinces (wheat), have suffered recently and are getting more politically active (dairy) or are in areas where the party currently in power needs to keep its support for the next election (meat).