What is behind all the mixed advice

Health, Fitness, Insurance, ...
Post Reply
Michael_00005
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 12:26 pm
Location: Charlotte

What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Michael_00005 » Tue May 09, 2017 6:03 pm

The internet can be an extremely useful tool, but it can also be a minefield when it comes to sifting the truth from the rubbish.

After viewing public comments I’d have to say , don’t take anyone’s advice in nutrition, unless you can see them in person or maybe on video. If there is any depth in the nutrition question, the only way to find the answer is through personal experimentation. And the great thing here is that, results come pretty quick, and the down side is that the body heals slowly, especially if it’s been abused for decades… the optimization process can easily go on for years before it fully corrects itself.

When a person is eating right they will be thin or HWP, their skin and eyes will be clear and bright and they will be overflowing with energy. Another great thing about a clean, high energy diet is that most chronic ailments and disorders like depression and anxieties start to fall away by themselves over time. When your energy starts to go through the roof you will automatically start to look for ways to exercise, thus paving the way for greater improvement. If you really have good health you will know it, and what’s more, people see it in you! It’s not uncommon for a people to walk past you and give a second glance, it’s almost as if they say, “something about that person looks different”. And why not, almost everyone is eating a sickly diet, maybe 2% of the population goes on to optimize their own health… most don’t know it’s even possible. If you want health insurance, this is it.

Like any good theory, it can be tested and self-proven though sacrifice and will power. Things to watch out for:
• Anything the herd (sheep) are doing is almost always backwards
• The optimal path, almost always starts off as difficult, but the rewards pay for themselves a thousand times over in the long run
• Follow the money or advertising and you will see why things are, the way they are
• What’s good for you, is good for the environment, is good for nature, is good for every living being on this planet. It’s almost as if “as you sow, so shall you reap” is a self-fulfilling prophecy


There is an older nutrition book, but it holds up very well, it's called: “Living Foods for Optimum Health” (Brian Clement). After refining my diet for about twenty years, this is was the key that unlocked the magic. Personally I don’t get into an all raw diet, but increasing your raw to cooked ratios make a huge difference... I never go though a day without eating a good amount of raw fruits and dark leafy greens.
Last edited by Michael_00005 on Mon May 15, 2017 7:03 pm, edited 2 times in total.

James_0011
Posts: 254
Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2016 12:00 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by James_0011 » Tue May 09, 2017 7:12 pm

Check out a nutrition writer named Ray Peat, only science based health writer out there.

User avatar
Dragline
Posts: 4277
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 1:50 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Dragline » Tue May 09, 2017 7:28 pm

Michael_00005 wrote:
Tue May 09, 2017 6:03 pm
The internet can be an extremely useful tool, but it can also be a minefield when it comes to sifting the truth from the rubbish.

After viewing public comments I’d have to say , don’t take anyone’s advice in nutrition, unless you can see them in person or maybe on video.
Basically what Paul Chek (Eat, Move, Be Healthy) says.

He's also the creator of the famous "Poopie Policemen" lineup illustration that has been misappropriated by everyone, including this guy who is essentially reading from Chek's book: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHXosEZNuP0

User avatar
Riggerjack
Posts: 1670
Joined: Thu Jul 14, 2011 3:09 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Riggerjack » Tue May 09, 2017 7:39 pm

Read " the hungry brain", if you actually want to know what's up with the mixed advice. It breaks down the competing theories, without really endorsing any of them.

Is obesity caused by insulin resistance, leptin uptake, lack of exercise? I'm not sure one answer works for everyone, so knowing all the theories will give a good starting point for self experimenting.

But it sounds as though you found what works for you, so further reading may not interest you.

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by ThisDinosaur » Wed May 10, 2017 7:40 am

The mixed advice about diet can be blamed on food questionnaires and p-hacking.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you ... nutrition/

All studies correlating diet with some health outcome are intrinsically flawed. They rely on people's faulty memory about what they 'typically' eat, and then misuse statistical methods to correlate a particular food with some health outcome. But media (including books written by "gurus") profit from our fear of disease. Experts can't agree, because the highest quality studies don't agree. So people religiously support the diet that fits their preexisting worldview, and disregard the one's that don't.
Image

IlliniDave
Posts: 1559
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2014 7:46 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by IlliniDave » Wed May 10, 2017 8:30 am

A diet of wine, tomatoes, lemon, carrot, olive, and onion (selected because the minimum risk estimate "appears" to excur from neutral less that the maximum risk estimate) is the way to go I guess. Yum. :(

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by ThisDinosaur » Wed May 10, 2017 8:56 am

@IlliniDave
That's just for cancer. The meta analysis for heart disease or body composition would look very different.
Case in point; meat. That chart makes meat look like the devil because it doesn't prevent cancer. But Atkins dieters definitely lose weight, improve their glucose tolerance, and probably slow or reverse coronary artery disease. That's because glucose, one of the most fundamental building blocks of all living things, is toxic to endothelial cells and leads to blood vessel injury and organ damage. Atkins tried for years to find some evidence that cancer risk was improved with a meat-heavy diet to no avail. Vegans call this a victory, but a plant diet isn't magic either. Look up cucurbitin/toxic squash syndrome. The vegetables aren't there to keep us healthy. Like every other edible organism, they're only looking out for themselves.

Michael_00005
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 12:26 pm
Location: Charlotte

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Michael_00005 » Sat May 13, 2017 7:27 pm

The graph is very interesting, there should be more images like this; it's a great way to see the data. They should also show who funds the studies, that seems key.
But Atkins dieters definitely lose weight, improve their glucose tolerance, and probably slow or reverse coronary artery disease.
; wow, where does this come from, Atkins died of heart disease, did he not? When Dr. Greger started spilling the beans on the negative effects of the diet, the Atkins company threatened to sue him, it was something like "shut up, or we will sue you", shortly after that he posted their letter online and created this site... quiet funny. http://www.atkinsexposed.org/

Turns out they never sued him. There were probably thinking "what a PR nightmare, this guy knows how to research!".

"Heart bypass surgery typically costs about $70,000-$200,000" http://health.costhelper.com/heart-surgery.html

The facts are always good to hear, no matter the results, but almost always the pro-meat side post comments with no source/proof, and that means absolutely nothing. When it comes right down to it though, studies are nice for reference, and they give you a place to start. But the only thing that really counts is practice, a correct diet will prove itself.

I've been vegetarian for over twenty years (a few years back moving toward a plant based diet to optimize) and know hundreds of people following the lacto veg. diet, many in their 60-80, and I have never once heard of anyone having atherosclerosis. Almost everyone has excellent health and a normal body weight, also they generally look 10-20 years younger than their actual age.

At 48, and a biometrics test 3-21-17 – here are the numbers
Weight 169 (same as college)
BMI 22.1
Glucose 82
TC 151
HDL 46
Blood P. 108/73

These are very normal numbers, for anyone following a PBD. My numbers were about the same 5 years back, and expect same 10 years forward assuming there’s still wick on the candle. Atherosclerosis, the same disease that brutalized my father, will never be an issue in my life.
Last edited by Michael_00005 on Sat May 13, 2017 7:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by BRUTE » Sat May 13, 2017 7:36 pm

Michael_00005 wrote:
Sat May 13, 2017 7:27 pm
wow, where does this come from, Atkins died of heart disease, did he not?
Atkins slipped on ice and hit his head.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by BRUTE » Sat May 13, 2017 7:45 pm

Weight 169 (same as college)
BMI 22.1
Glucose 82
TC 151
HDL 46
Blood P. 108/73
TC of 151 is just out of normal range: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond ... T-20048186
HDL: 46 isn't dangerous, but it's not good either. >60 is considered desirable. http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond ... t-20046388

trig/HDL ratio is considered the best predictor of heart disease. 151/46=3.28 isn't quite "at danger", which is >4. but it's also far from ideal (<2). for reference, brute eats mostly meat and has a ratio <2. brute's fasting glucose is also lower, though 82 isn't bad. brute's blood pressure is higher.

main point not being that brute is awesome, but that vegetarianism doesn't seem to necessarily lead to better health markers. brute has eaten a stick of butter today, and that's in addition to lots of red meat. animal products, incorporated in the right diet, can lead to very good health.

Michael_00005
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 12:26 pm
Location: Charlotte

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Michael_00005 » Sat May 13, 2017 7:52 pm

Good catch there, did not know that. I was reading some material about his autopsy where he had atherosclerosis. I'd have to research to confirm it, but probably won't because I'm lazy! --- edit and correction -- the article was medical records showing he had heart problems, not autopsy, which must be public info once a person passes.
Last edited by Michael_00005 on Sun May 14, 2017 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

Michael_00005
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 12:26 pm
Location: Charlotte

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Michael_00005 » Sat May 13, 2017 8:11 pm

A vegetarians numbers will never be normal, in a society which bases it's food on meat. They don't even know how to rate optimal health, what they assume are low numbers for a person is still eating meat... in this case they could be correct for imbalance. But in regards to plant based eating this is perfectly normal and superior in every way to the standard diet.

I don't see us coming to an agreement here, which is perfectly fine. It would be of great interest to check back 10+ years forward and see who has the better health. This of course would depend on your age, most people start to go down hill in health in their 40-60's. If you are pre-40, you're still operating under the grace period of general good health.

Best of luck in your chosen path, the truth of the matter will indeed show itself in time. I've seen what a poor diet can do to a man's health, and would not wish the suffering on anyone.
Last edited by Michael_00005 on Sat May 13, 2017 8:13 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by BRUTE » Sat May 13, 2017 8:12 pm

he did apparently have atherosclerosis, that's why he started researching his diet in the first place. but he did not die from it, according to what brute has read. there are also stories about his weight at time of death that are disputed, and his wife seems to have denied interested parties access to his medical records, which some of those parties interpret as "Atkins diet == unhealthy".

in any case, brute doesn't care much for Atkins the person, he cares that eating meat and animal fats don't seem to cause bad health markers. quite the opposite, actually.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by BRUTE » Sat May 13, 2017 8:13 pm

Michael_00005 wrote:
Sat May 13, 2017 8:11 pm
I don't see us coming to an agreement here, which is perfectly fine. It would be of great interest to check back 10+ years forward and see who has the better health.
deal. good luck to Michael_00005 as well.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5186
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by jennypenny » Sun May 14, 2017 7:14 am

I think the mixed advice is because there isn't one specific diet that's beneficial to everyone. Genetics is proving that. When you read a book like The Sports Gene, you realize how different we all are under the hood.

Even in my house, DH and I thrive on very different diets. I'm low carb all the way and can't tolerate wheat and certain types of beans. DS18 is the same. DH does better on a carb/fruit rich diet with less meat, and his numbers are always better when he eats mostly healthy carbs and beans. DD21 is the same. DS14 is on a high-salt high-fat diet that's for a specific disease so that doesn't really count, except that it does show how unique each person's optimal diet can be.

If I ever get up the nerve, I'll show before and after pictures of me to show how life-changing a low carb diet can be for some people. I still find it a little shocking when I look back at some older pics.

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by ThisDinosaur » Sun May 14, 2017 9:10 am

Michael_00005 wrote:
Sat May 13, 2017 7:27 pm
But Atkins dieters definitely lose weight, improve their glucose tolerance, and probably slow or reverse coronary artery disease.
; wow, where does this come from
There's lots of studies on the effect of diet on CAD risk factors. Here's a meta analysis of studies comparing randomized controlled trials of low fat vs. low carb diets:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3530364/
Both diets reduced participants' blood pressures, total to HDL cholesterol ratios, and total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, triglycerides, blood glucose, and serum insulin levels and raised HDL cholesterol; however, participants on low-carbohydrate diets had greater increases in HDL cholesterol and greater decreases in triglycerides but experienced less reduction in total and LDL cholesterol compared with persons on low-fat diets.
jennypenny wrote:
Sun May 14, 2017 7:14 am
I think the mixed advice is because there isn't one specific diet that's beneficial to everyone.
I think this a really frequently overlooked point. Humans are very genetically diverse. Even before we invented agriculture, we were well established on six continents where none of the same food grew. The Inuit have lived for thousands of years on a diet of fish and blubbery mammals. Native south americans got most of their calories from a variety of wild fruits and vegetables, and had meat only every few weeks. My favorite example of this is dairy foods. If you're ancestry is Middle Eastern, West African, or Northern European, there is a good chance you can drink unprocessed milk without getting GI issues. That's not true for most adult humans, or even most adult mammals. There are probably several other genetic adaptations for drinking milk yet to be discovered beyond just the lactase persistence gene. The same logic applies to other foods as well. You may be better adapted to eating certain foods your ancestors ate than someone else from a different part of the world.

7Wannabe5
Posts: 2545
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:03 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by 7Wannabe5 » Mon May 15, 2017 7:00 am

Right, I just read "Unprocessed: My City-Dwelling Year of Reclaiming Real Food" by Megan Kimble, and learned a few new things. There's a lot of damned if you do, and damned if you don't in nutritional decisions. For instance, raw milk products and whole grains that are not stored properly or eaten quickly after initial crude "processing" can cause some rather serious health or nutritional problems. Eating a whole bag of Doritos may kill you slow motion if oft repeated, but eating a giant bag of raw almonds as your main food source for a week is not a good idea either.

People wish to find a simple, linear-like, solution set to what is a very, very complex problem involving multiple complex systems, inclusive of everything from soil science to exercise physiology to inheritable mental health conditions. As soon as any one of us knows as little as 3 things about ourselves that differentiates us from some average person in a statistical study, we likely ought to attempt to make our own best decisions. For instance, I am female, suffered from severe asthma as a child, have hormonal tendency towards storing most of my body fat subcutaneously, mild inherited manifestation of bi-polar disease symptoms (cyclothymia) and I am pigeon-toed on the right side. Therefore, for instance, any study/article that attempts to argue that running is the best exercise for all humans will instantly be dismissed from my consideration, because I know that it is not the best exercise for me, and I am a human.

My mother, 3 sisters and I all have the inherited symptom tendency of strong sugar craving that accompanies bi-polar disease. My two children did not inherit this tendency, so one of our family jokes has to do with how often I baked cookies "for my children" when they were young. What works best for me in terms of subjective feeling of health/balance is increased fat and more healthy sugar source consumption. For instance, whole milk yogurt with nuts and banana or catfish with spinach/blue cheese and big bowl of cherries. And, one hour of moderate exercise and one hour of being outside/combined if possible, at least 6 days/week. I have also often found it to be true that this is a realm in which the "great" can be the enemy of the "good." Sometimes the desire to signal the appearance of health/fitness for status reasons will trump more moderate practice that would actually better serve the purpose. For instance, to my knowledge nobody has yet died from cellulite on their thighs, so anything done with sole motivation of banishing thigh cellulite could run risk of ill effect.

Michael_00005
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu May 04, 2017 12:26 pm
Location: Charlotte

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Michael_00005 » Mon May 15, 2017 7:39 pm

There is a lot of money to be made, hence we get mixed advice. Advertisers play you like sheep, these people are not stupid when it comes to their money and future interests... this is what they say in their secret meetings, "just slip in a little doubt, and the sheep will throw up their hands in defeat and say what's the point", and because people are lazy it works.
jennypenny wrote:
Sun May 14, 2017 7:14 am
I think the mixed advice is because there isn't one specific diet that's beneficial to everyone.
We see countries where they mostly eat a simple plant based diet, do indeed have superior health, but yes, avoid allergy foods. Most will never experience it, due to a lack the will, desire, or we could call it addiction. A lot of the science that has been coming out originated from this fact. One example here, an older video but exceptional: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qOj4rzSkqok. The medical community effectively buried this information for a long time, but this guy knows how to research!

A couple points to make in the graph above, the negative studies for potatoes and corn is almost certainly related to processed foods like potato chips, greasy fry's, and other junk foods. Generally this is how people get their potatoes and corn, it has nothing to do with the whole plant foods which are healthy.

You're on the right track if you are researching diet, the average health care costs in retirement are around $260,000, and of course this number is going up much faster than the pace of inflation. The most important factor has to do with chronic aliments, “the twenty-year old from the 1990’s might live ten of those years with chronic disease, whereas now it’s more like thirteen years with heart disease, cancer, diabetes, or a stroke.” - from the book, "How Not to Die", where almost every comment is based on a referenced study.

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by BRUTE » Mon May 15, 2017 8:51 pm

brute is allergic to plants

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by ThisDinosaur » Tue May 16, 2017 12:03 am

https://chriskresser.com/why-you-should ... gan-diets/

Vegan diets lack a lot of essential nutrients that humans cannot make without consuming animals. Many plants actually contain antinutrients that inhibit absorption of specific micronutrients.

Cholesterol is an essential building block of every one of your cells. Its also necessary for making steroid hormones, like testosterone and estrogen. Fortunately, your body can make cholesterol out of glucose. In fact, you are much more likely to develope high cholesterol on a high calorie, high carbohydrate diet than you are on a low calorie, high fat diet. In other words, being overweight and out of shape can raise your blood cholesterol levels regardless of the specifics of your diet.

Michael, is there anything that would change your mind about the perfect diet? Not that its important for me to change your mind, I'm just curious if anything would.

batbatmanne
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:35 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by batbatmanne » Wed May 17, 2017 7:10 am

ThisDinosaur wrote:
Tue May 16, 2017 12:03 am
https://chriskresser.com/why-you-should ... gan-diets/

Vegan diets lack a lot of essential nutrients that humans cannot make without consuming animals. Many plants actually contain antinutrients that inhibit absorption of specific micronutrients.

Cholesterol is an essential building block of every one of your cells. Its also necessary for making steroid hormones, like testosterone and estrogen. Fortunately, your body can make cholesterol out of glucose. In fact, you are much more likely to develope high cholesterol on a high calorie, high carbohydrate diet than you are on a low calorie, high fat diet. In other words, being overweight and out of shape can raise your blood cholesterol levels regardless of the specifics of your diet.

Michael, is there anything that would change your mind about the perfect diet? Not that its important for me to change your mind, I'm just curious if anything would.
Chris Kresser is a hack and should not be giving out nutritional advice. Unfortunately it is drivel like this that causes so much of the confusion regarding nutrition.

Regarding B12, B12 comes from bacteria in dirt. The reason that we cannot easily get B12 easily in our diet is because we wash our food. Often, animal products contain B12 because the animals themselves were given B12 supplements (injections). This is an easy vitamin to supplement for cheap, and is the only thing that vegans should look specifically at.

There is plenty of calcium in green vegetables which you should be eating plenty of every day. It is easy to consume plant-based products that have fortified calcium. Likewise, there is plenty of iron and zinc in beans and legumes. EPA and DHA are fairly cheap and easy to supplement using algae based supplements and this is recommended if one doesn't consume fish (in fact, these supplements are able to avoid contaminants contained in fish oil products). ALA to DHA and EPA conversion is weak in humans and there is good benefit, particularly for your brain, in supplementing these. None of the vitamins are found exclusively in omnivorous diets. In fact, it is laughable that Chris claims that vitamins A-D are difficult to get from plants and this really highlights how he is pushing an agenda and not paying careful attention to nutritional science. The only additional supplement that I would recommend here is vitamin D3 (which can be sourced vegan from lichens). Vitamin D is produced by your body from sun exposure, so this recommendation has nothing to do with your diet and everything to do with your sun exposure.

Everything else about that article is wrong. He argues that while populational studies show that vegetarians and vegans are healthier, that this is causally attributable to their general disposition to live healthier (i.e. to not smoke and to exercise). He does not provide any evidence that this is the case, and what might be an otherwise reasonable point completely disintegrates when you recognize that animal fat is the primary cause of atherosclerosis, the precursor to heart and cardiovascular disease. Yes, the "essential" dietary cholesterol that comes from animal products is not only synthesized in our own bodies, but causes significant cardiovascular problems if consumed in excess. The ideal intake for dietary cholesterol is zero. There is also good reason to believe that animal protein (IGF-1 is the culprit) increases risk for cancers. I haven't even considered the issues of hormone or heavy metal contaminants in any detail (and I'm not the expert that should be consulted in any case).

This is easily available from the literature, and the fact that Chris makes arguments from holism in order to discredit populational studies and mechanistic data, and the fact that he relies on tired arguments about B12 in order to discredit veganism, shows his intellectual dishonesty. Every respected nutritional organization recognizes that veganism can be perfectly healthy for all stages of life. Yeah, you're going to have to pay some attention to where you source your nutrients from with a vegan diet if you want to approach optimality, but this is true for any diet.

Finally, I want to point out that the "evolutionary" reasoning typical of paleo diet pushers is a horrible and increasingly ubiquitous kind of reasoning. Is Chris Kresser seriously suggesting that he knows anything about the evolution of human metabolism and how this relates to optimal dietary intake (which need not closely resemble the predominant diet of our ancestors)? Has he ever done any serious research in his life? Take a look at some criticism of evolutionary psychology (yes, the entire field of study). It turns out that it is not very difficult at all to come up with plausible evolutionary "just-so stories" that can be used to push any preconceived view about functions in biology. Anybody who uses this kind of reasoning without hard evidence should be seen as highly suspect.

I often wonder what ethics would look like if we were different creatures (but were still intelligent). What if we were carnivores? What if we had a reproductive cycle more similar to hive insects? What if we relied on the slavery of members of other sentient species, or even our own (hint: we did)? Fortunately for me, as of the time that I am writing this, there are strong ethical, ecological and health-based arguments that all point in the exact same direction: veganism. For intellectually honest folk there are many nuances in reasoning required when considering ethics, ecology, human health and specifically how all of these things relate and should ultimately guide our actions. Many of these nuances can be completely avoided by becoming vegan. In my experience, nearly all of the arguments against veganism can be reduced to selfish hedonism. If you have any interest in ethics or civic responsibility, I can tell you first hand that it is relieving to recognize that you don't have to choose between these things and your personal health. Get yourself some vegan B12, D3 and EPA-DHA supplements and follow the new four food groups daily intake guide. A cursory search for a source for these supplements and a few changes in your pantry/recipe book is all that is needed, and it will put you ahead of almost every other human in terms of achieving a diet that is optimal for health. If you have fitness goals, look closer at getting more protein in through your diet, and supplement a vegan protein powder for whatever the remainder might be. Easy.
Last edited by batbatmanne on Wed May 17, 2017 8:31 am, edited 2 times in total.

ThisDinosaur
Posts: 478
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2015 9:31 am

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by ThisDinosaur » Wed May 17, 2017 7:41 am

@batbatmanne
I dont read chris kresser. I was looking for a single quick link that summarized a lot of the nutritional problems with strict veganism. I agree with most of what you wrote.

What algal supplements do you use and how much do you take? I've read that consuming too much algae can cause kidney stones and gout due to the high nucleic acid content. Especially if consumed for years.

The issue with calcium/minerals and fat soluble vitamins is not the measurable amount in the food, but the form and how well its absorbed by humans.

Also, you will get no argument from me that evolutionary psychology is mostly nonsense. And, since you mentioned the paleo diet

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... qR7LhoBs6A

batbatmanne
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Sep 19, 2014 10:35 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by batbatmanne » Wed May 17, 2017 9:22 am

ThisDinosaur wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 7:41 am
What algal supplements do you use and how much do you take? I've read that consuming too much algae can cause kidney stones and gout due to the high nucleic acid content. Especially if consumed for years.
I am currently consuming Source Naturals algae-based EPA and DHA. I will likely choose other products if the discount on that brand stops being offered. Deva is another brand that I am looking at. I am not familiar with the problems of kidney stones and gout that you mention, I'll take a look for some information. I follow Dr. Greger's recommendations for dosages.
ThisDinosaur wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 7:41 am
The issue with calcium/minerals and fat soluble vitamins is not the measurable amount in the food, but the form and how well its absorbed by humans
I am not an expert in nutrition, so I do not have much to say about "bioavailability." I will say though, that this is another term that throws up red flags for me. I can only imagine that the issue of bioavailability is very complicated and requires a holistic approach to diet in order to determine the facts on the ground. As I mentioned in my previous post, I find the use of arguments from holism, and references to the bioavailability of nutrients considered in isolation to be misleading precisely because of the complexity involved. A nutrient dense approach to food with a reasonable inclusion of fat should be sufficient to absorb vitamins and minerals. Is there any particular mechanism of action that would prevent calcium in leafy greens or fortified products from being absorbed compared to dairy?

User avatar
BRUTE
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Dec 26, 2015 5:20 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by BRUTE » Wed May 17, 2017 9:51 am

batbatmanne wrote:
Wed May 17, 2017 7:10 am
when you recognize that animal fat is the primary cause of atherosclerosis, the precursor to heart and cardiovascular disease. Yes, the "essential" dietary cholesterol that comes from animal products is not only synthesized in our own bodies, but causes significant cardiovascular problems if consumed in excess. The ideal intake for dietary cholesterol is zero.
false. the primary cause of atherosclerosis is excessive carbohydrate intake, especially fructose. total cholesterol does not at all correlate with heart disease, but triglycerides over HDL does very well - and that's optimal in a high-meat, low-carb diet. vegans typically have high trigs and low HDL, resulting in a dangerously high ratio. as observed by brute earlier in this very thread, when there were example numbers given.

Felipe
Posts: 175
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2015 10:06 pm

Re: What is behind all the mixed advice

Post by Felipe » Sun May 21, 2017 5:15 pm

+1 Michael
Incentive caused bias.

Post Reply