Free Capitalist Network - Community Archive
Mises Community Archive
An online community for fans of Austrian economics and libertarianism, featuring forums, user blogs, and more.

USDA Dietary Guidelines Worse Than Ever

This post has 67 Replies | 4 Followers

Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960
Phil Ridley Posted: Mon, Sep 12 2011 4:22 PM

Current USDA dietary guidelines are based on the flawed notion that cholesterol and saturated fat are unhealthy. They are unrealistic, unworkable, unscientific and impractical; they have resulted in widespread nutrient deficiencies and contributed to a proliferation of obesity and degenerative disease, including problems with growth, behavior and learning in children. The US government is promoting a lowfat, plant-based diet that ignores the vital role animal protein and fats have played in human nutrition throughout the ages.

The pyramid with its strictures against fat consumption does not recognize variations in human metabolism. Recommendations for fat restriction are predicated on the assumption that fat causes weight gain and heart disease; several recent studies have shown that that restriction of natural fats actually leads to more obesity in both children and adults, while the refined carbohydrates, polyunsaturated and trans fats that frequently replace natural saturated fats contribute to weight gain and chronic disease. Restriction of animal fats in children leads increased markers for heart disease and to deficiencies of vitamins A, D and K2, needed for growth, strong bones, immunity, neurological function, and protection from tooth decay.

Unfortunately this is what happens when families delegate their responsiblity for nutrition to the State. It sells its advice to the highest bidder and naturally, in an economy dominated by corporate monopolies funded by the inflation from fractional reserve banking, the guidelines are designed to promote the products of commodity agriculture. The products of mixed family farms which built the nation, from where the Founding Fathers were born and raised do not get a look in because they are the natural competition to commodity agriculture.

Read more here: http://www.westonaprice.org/basics/comments-on-the-usda-dietary-guidelines

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 7:36 PM

I would like some citations for the research you claim, but otherwise I agree that government pushing nutrition is bad. It's likely that there is no silver bullet for nutrition, but that instead everyone has his own thing.

I agree that meat gets a bad rap.

What would be more useful to the public (rather than a nutrition pyramid) is an activity pyramid including watching TV, sitting down, exercising, etc. Of course, I wouldn't trust the government to make it, and it has no power to make it, but really, people need to see that sitting down actually increases your chance of death by heart related problems even if you exercise regularly. So stand up and exercise more.

/rant

P.S. Source:

http://www.sciencealert.com.au/opinions/20111108-22489.html       which says:

Our research has shown that even when people exercise regularly, watching large amounts of television is independently associated with an increased risk of premature death.

And their citation:

http://circ.ahajournals.org/content/121/3/384.short

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 7:52 PM

I don't know that people actually eat the food pyramid. And whatever they do eat is worse than the food pyramid. So Idk how you can blame government's (maybe bad) advice for the majority of dietary ailments.

MOD EDITED: KEEP COMMENTS CIVIL

Banned
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 8:14 PM

The pyramid is taught widely in public schools and people do use it to justify their habits if questioned a little more.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 8:25 PM

What people try to justify and what people actually do are *very* different things. The food pyramid is bad, but its still in the right direction compared to the standard american diet. By far the most important thing is to reduce calories, and the USDA is asking people to do that. So I don't really see any major problems.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 9:03 PM

More grains than vegetables?

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 10:29 PM

So what? Vegetables period is an improvement over what they're eating now. And they're saying that you should replace existing refined grains with whole grains. That's not bad either.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 10:59 PM

More grains than vegetables?

We evolved from cattle.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Mon, Sep 12 2011 11:05 PM

We evolved from lots of stuff.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Sieben wrote the following post at Tue, Sep 13 2011 1:52 AM: I don't know that people actually eat the food pyramid.

All schools using Federal funding for school lunches is forced to comply with the food pyramid. So for example, full fat milk is not allowed in schools, yet the vitamin D is necessary to utilize calcium and, fats in the cream stimulate metabolism meaning that skim milk cause more weight gain than full fat milk. This is why pig farmers feed skim milk to pigs.

In addition, Federal Penetentuaries enforce the guidelines.

Dr Price, in his book, devoted a chapter to the connection between malnutrition and criminality, suggesting that the use of the food pyramid in schools will exacerbate the number of criminals and that time in prison could cause amplification of criminal tendancies, particularly if inmates are in their teens and still developing physically. The Weston A Price Foundation is currently taking action against Illinois which provides a diet of 70% soy for prisoners: http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-soy-diet-for-illinois-prisoners

One of the way this happens is that malnutrition leads to a smaller pallate and skull, leaving less space for the hypathalamus which is the seat of impulse control.

"deformed palates are present in 19 per cent of the ordinary population, 33 per cent of the insane, 55 per cent of criminals, but in no less than 61 per cent of idiots."

http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/price19.html

 

Caption: The photographs of Dr. Weston Price illustrate the difference in facial structure between those on their native diets and those whose parents had adopted the "civilized" diets of devitalized processed foods. The "primitive" Seminole girl (left) and Samoan boy (third from left) have wide, handsome faces with plenty of room for the dental arches. The "modernized" Seminole girl (second from left) and Samoan boy (right), born to parents who had abandoned their traditional diets, have narrowed faces, crowded teeth and a reduced immunity to disease.

 

FIG. 122. Criminals. Were their unsocial traits related directly to incomplete brain organization associated with prenatal injury?

 

FIG. 123. Note the marked lack of normal facial development of these notorious young criminals. Nixon is only 18. These are typical samples seen frequently in the daily press.

 

NOTE: I do not have time to provide citations for every claim I make, so please, do not criticize my comments for lack of citations but if you find a citation that conflicts with my comments then I will comment. Please play fair.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

This video from Zoe Harcombe explains the link between obesity and compliance with the Foody Pyramid: http://vimeo.com/26994290

Also, here, Sally Fallon starts off with noting the Food Pyramid then, goes on to explain how it contrasts so badly with traditional diets: http://vimeo.com/10489302

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 8:08 AM

@ Clayton: is that a serious remark? Cattle doesn't eat grains anyway. It eats grass.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 8:14 AM

Phil Ridley:
All schools using Federal funding for school lunches is forced to comply with the food pyramid.
You cannot comply with the food pyramid in one meal per day.

Oh and I'll need a source on this. As usual, your statements are complete garbage. See from memory all of my schools fed me pizza and cheeseburgers, which are high in saturated fat.

And this also doesn't prove that people actually FOLLOW the food pyramid. Its another red herring. What do people actually do in real life Phil? Hmm?

Phil:
Federal Penetentuaries
Nice spelling retard.

Phil Ridley:
The Weston A Price Foundation is currently taking action against Illinois which provides a diet of 70% soy for prisoners: http://www.westonaprice.org/soy-alert/cruel-and-unusual-punishment-soy-diet-for-illinois-prisoners
Not only does that article have no outside citations, its claim is prima facie implausible. First, getting 70% of your diet from soy would be insanely expensive compared to alternatives. Soy calories are more expensive than rice, nuts, and milkfat calories. Second, this AGAIN does not prove that most americans are influenced by the food pyramid. Third, THE FUCKING FOOD PYRAMID DOES NOT ADVOCATE 70% SOY YOU MASTURBATING FUCK.

Phil Ridley:
"deformed palates are present in 19 per cent of the ordinary population, 33 per cent of the insane, 55 per cent of criminals, but in no less than 61 per cent of idiots."
AAAAAAAAAHAHAHAH How stupid are you? 19% of the ordinary population has a deformed palate? Try 0.01% of the population in the 1950s had it. They don't even keep track any more because its SO rare.

Oh my god... next you'll be telling us that 48% of the population has testicular cancer from Soy or something. Nothing is too retarded for you to believe as long as you can copypaste from your propaganda website (which you have implied you work for... lolololololol).

Phil Ridley:
NOTE: I do not have time to provide citations for every claim I make, so please, do not criticize my comments for lack of citations but if you find a citation that conflicts with my comments then I will comment. Please play fair.
At this point, you are INSANE. We'd ask for citations but they'd be oh... I don't know... an open letter to the illinios prison system. Is that what you think counts as evidence? What WOULDN'T count as evidence Phil? What would the WOAP foundation have to say for you to not believe them? How off the wall do they have to be before you stop literally having BLIND FAITH in them?

Oh yeah. I also linked you 9 studies all of which you ignored. So I guess citations don't even matter to you. Cus who cares about controlled studies demonstrating that you're wrong; you already know the truth!

 

 

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Wheylous wrote the following post at Tue, Sep 13 2011 2:08 PM:

@ Clayton: is that a serious remark? Cattle doesn't eat grains anyway. It eats grass.

Indeed, cows are not supposed to eat only grains, but modern confined agriculture feedlot operations, (CAFO's), feed only grain. This results in too much omega 6, and very little omega 3 and, a very limited supply of fat soluble vitamins A, D & K to name just two implications. Visit realmilk.com  for local sources of grass fed milk. Unfortunately organic in USA does not necessarily mean grass fed.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Sieben wrote the following post at Tue, Sep 13 2011 2:14 PM:

Phil Ridley:
All schools using Federal funding for school lunches is forced to comply with the food pyramid.
You cannot comply with the food pyramid in one meal per day.

Indeed, but most mothers have been convinced via marketing and propaganda to switch to low fat options at home. And at school, they comply by providing lean meat, skim milk, lots of starchy potatoes and by using toxic veg oil to cook in rather than heat stable saturated fats. The chips are fried in veg oil meaning that they are high in polyunsaturated rather than saturated fats and this is where the problems lie because these fats are not stable and they cause inflamation that causes heart disease.

As mentioned Sieben, if you are interested and require sources to believe me, then go look for some and stop asking for me to do legwork for you. It is common knowledge that most federal funding comes with strings attached. In this case, the strings are that schools comply with the USDA's dietary guidelines. In addition, please provide details as to why you are incapable or researching these claims for yourself. If the weblinks and videos I have provided do not satisfy you, then that is no justification to get arsey, it is a reason for you to get off your hind end and do some of your own research.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 8:41 AM

Phil Ridley:
Indeed, but most mothers have been convinced via marketing and propaganda to switch to low fat options at home.
So what? How much fat do the wind up with? Do they go from eating a diet of 50% fat to a diet of 40% fat? Or do they get to 10% fat? What do they ACTUALLY do Philtard?

Phil Ridley:
And at school, they comply by providing lean meat
Lol no they don't. For example, the CA board of education's program just says "ounces of meat". And then fruits and vegetables (AAAA WHY SO UNHEALTHY?!)

Phil Ridley:
by using toxic veg oil to cook in rather than heat stable saturated fats.
Again, source. On both of these claims. A) That they use toxic vegetable oil and that B) Vegetable oil is in fact toxic to cook with. Sheesh.

Phil Ridley:
The chips are fried in veg oil meaning that they are high in polyunsaturated rather than saturated fats and this is where the problems lie because these fats are not stable and they cause inflamation that causes heart disease.
Chips are low in saturated fat? Okay. What counts as low? Seriously put some god damn numbers down so you can be disproved you little twat.

Phil Ridley:
As mentioned Sieben, if you are interested and require sources to believe me, then go look for some and stop asking for me to do legwork for you.
I already have and they say you're wrong. Whats more is that when I show you the sources, you ignore them because you're an ideologue. So... I'm doing just fine. Thanks!

Phil Ridley:
It is common knowledge that most federal funding comes with strings attached. In this case, the strings are that schools comply with the USDA's dietary guidelines.
USDA dietary guidelines =/= food pyramid. And I just showed you a damn source showing that they do not in fact emphasize lean meats. So what the hey.

Phil Ridley:
In addition, please provide details as to why you are incapable or researching these claims for yourself
By my count, i've used about 15 links to studies and such. You have used zero. All your links are to your stupid little WOAP website. Talk about being a biased little re-re.

Phil Ridley:
If the weblinks and videos I have provided do not satisfy you, then that is no justification to get arsey, it is a reason for you to get off your hind end and do some of your own research.
Would you spend hours of your time watching my videos? No. You wouldn't. Because you have faith that you're right. You haven't even read the references that you throw at us. Its a TOTAL joke. You are debating on faith. Too bad faith doesn't make you healthy.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 8:41 AM

Oh and you also completely ignored my counterevidence to your claim that 19% of the population has a deformed palate. So does that mean I'm right?

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 8:45 AM

Philtard

You are sounding a lot like a neocon, Sieben:

libtard

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 8:47 AM

Yeah. Cus neocons always ask for controlled studies.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,260
Points 61,905
ForumsAdministrator
Moderator
Staff
SystemAdministrator

Sieben what happened to your usual imperturbability?  Please, no more insults.

"the obligation to justice is founded entirely on the interests of society, which require mutual abstinence from property" -David Hume
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 9:11 AM

I am not usually imperturbable. I find it is a poor strategy when dealing with dishonest opponents.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 9:24 AM

I just meant that ad hominems don't convince your opponents of anything.

  • | Post Points: 35
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Abusive ad hominem (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to attack his claim or invalidate his argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but apparent character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:06 AM

Actually its only fallacious if I claim you're wrong because you're a retard. But you're wrong whether or not you're actually retarded. I just added in there just so you know that I know you're retarded. I used these things called studies to debunk your actual claims.

Still waiting on you to substantiate your claim that 19% of the US population have cleft deformities.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 50 Contributor
Posts 2,679
Points 45,110
gotlucky replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:10 AM

Wheylous:

I just meant that ad hominems don't convince your opponents of anything.

No, but they are the highlight of my morning.

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

More than 19% of Americans require braces to make their teeth fit into their mouth. I would define that as a deformity to the bone structure of the jaw. I do not need to provide any study to demonstrate that because you can see this by visiting any school or simply by walking down the street and observing how many children have braces now.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:16 AM

LOL. Good job shifting the goalposts. Could you just give a damn number for how many people have "cleft deformities"? Note that braces are used to treat overbite. Except overbite is not considered abnormal. In fact, lack of an overbite is abnormal. Here's the source. You will notice it is not from www.crazyfatchickwhohatesvegans.com.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Wheylous wrote the following post at Tue, Sep 13 2011 1:36 AM:

Our research has shown that even when people exercise regularly, watching large amounts of television is independently associated with an increased risk of premature death.

 

 

The problem is, that individuals eating toxic foods will consume more of the bad stuff when they excercise. Excercise therefore only does its job when a person is eating a good healthy diet. How many people do you know who use going down the gym as excuse for eating junk?!

 

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:21 AM

Phil Ridley:
Excercise therefore only does its job when a person is eating a good healthy diet.
Here's a study showing that people who exercised lost more weight than people who didn't exercise but ate a "healthy" calorie restricted diet.

I guess exercise does work even if you don't eat healthy.

Durrrrrrrrrp. Durrrrp. Sorry its not from www.whitesuburbia4life.com

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 150 Contributor
Posts 768
Points 12,035
Moderator
ladyattis replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:25 AM

Phil... *headdesk* Please don't go down this pseudo-science rabbit hole. I've already seen it curb stomped on other sites. Just step back and accept that getting fat is the result of EATING TOO MUCH and not moving around enough.

"The power of liberty going forward is in decentralization.  Not in leaders, but in decentralized activism.  In a market process." -- liberty student

  • | Post Points: 50
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:29 AM

He said that he's put a lot of time and money into the videos he's linking. This implies that he works for the WOAP foundation. He's being paid to troll internet forums.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

ladyattis wrote the following post at Tue, Sep 13 2011 4:25 PM:

Phil... *headdesk* Please don't go down this pseudo-science rabbit hole of race realism. I've already seen it curb stomped on YT by several people with cited sources, counterarguments, and refutations. Please take a step back and breathe. K?

What I have to say has nothing to do with race. Dr Price stressed, contrary to common belief in the 1930's, that proper genetic expression was a function of nutrition, not race. The only reason Price looked at specific races was because they were examples of isolated people eating their traditional foods. He studied whites in Europe, Indians in America and Canada, Blacks in Africa, and on, and on. Each time, he found that people showed optimum health when they ate their traditional foods, and that the same genetic pool would have the modern diseases of civilization if they adopted the refined, processed foods of the West, and dropped the nutrient dense foods of "primitive" society.

Here is a 1min video of Dr Price showing that he came as a missionary from the primitive people to teach the West their wisdom:

 - http://files.meetup.com/1463924/Price_speaking_movietone2.wmv

 

And you will see if you read his book that he talks about nutrition, not race:

 - http://journeytoforever.org/farm_library/price/pricetoc.html

 

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

ladyattis replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 4:25 PM

Phil... *headdesk* Please don't go down this pseudo-science rabbit hole. I've already seen it curb stomped on other sites. Just step back and accept that getting fat is the result of EATING TOO MUCH and not moving around enough.

Then why do a vast majority of diets fail. It is because the calories in, calories put on equasion does not work. That is a mis-application of the laws of thermodynamics because the human body is not a closed system.

The government tell us to replace sugar with starchy vegetables, yet starch provides more calories per pound than sugar, and both break down into glucose. They also tell us to not eat fat, yet not all fat is used for energy, whilst all glucose is either burned as energy or stored as fat.

A vast amount of fat and protein, is used for making cells and carrying out other functions in the body. This is why you put on weight with carbs, but loose it with a high fat/protein diet, because all carbs are used for energy or stored as fat, whilst only some of the fat and protein you eat is used for energy, and excess protein is excreted in the form of urea. This is why a low carb, high fat diet actually works for those wanting to loose weight, and is why those on such a diet need not count their calories.

 - Please watch this video where Zoe Harcombe explains this fully: http://vimeo.com/26994290

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 12:22 PM

Phil Ridley:
Then why do a vast majority of diets fail.
People don't actually follow their diets. See thats a study. And it shows that obese people, on average, underreported their calorie intake by almost 50%. Gee I wonder if eating 50% more calories than you're supposed to could cause a diet to fail.

HMMMMMMM......

Phil Ridley:
It is because the calories in, calories put on equasion does not work. That is a mis-application of the laws of thermodynamics because the human body is not a closed system.
Actually, the whole point of the Ebal equation is to model an OPEN system. And hint - the laws of thermodynamics apply to... oh. I don't know. The Universe? You don't have to have an open/closed system for thermodynamics to be valid.

But yeah I am really interested to see what kind of carb fairies you think come in the middle of the night and force you to get fat cus you ate some bread.

Phil Ridley:
The government tell us to replace sugar with starchy vegetables, yet starch provides more calories per pound than sugar,
That's probably why they're telling you to replace sugar with starchy vegetables, not pure starch. I mean, its one thing to say stupid crap thats totally unsubstiated by any sort of controlled studies. Its another thing to make yourself look stupid without even being factually incorrect.

They also tell us to not eat fat
Actually they tell people to eat less fat. How much fat do americans eat and why is this the optimal amount of fat? Lol.

yet not all fat is used for energy,
Right some of the fat gets deposited in adipose tissue. Actually, the vast majority of it. Its just a question of how much fat you burn when you're not eating. There's no magic here.

whilst all glucose is either burned as energy or stored as fat.
Kind of like fat. But actually the conversion of carbs to fat is called "De Novo Lipogenesis" and only ocurrs to significant degree during chronic carb overfeeding.

But that's cute that you FAILED TO MENTION THAT DIETARY FAT IS STORED AS BODY FAT.

A vast amount of fat and protein, is used for making cells and carrying out other functions in the body.
Source? What kind of numbers are we talking about. You are hiding behind vague vocabulary like "vast". But here's a hint - does your body just poop out "used" fat from fat cells? What is the degredation process? This will be funny. Oh wait no it won't because you won't get back to me because you're an ideologue.

whilst only some of the fat and protein you eat is used for energy, and excess protein is excreted in the form of urea.
Oh but you're neglecting fat. What does fat do? Hmm? Do you poop out fat? Fyi you don't even excrete large amounts of protein. It is prima facie implausible that an organism evolving over millions of years of alternating periods of starvation would waste any appreciable amount of energy or nutrients.

This is why a low carb, high fat diet actually works for those wanting to loose weight, and is why those on such a diet need not count their calories.
I challenge you to find a study where people are losing bodyfat on a 5000 calorie atkins diet. Oh wait, you won't. Not only because you won't try, but because you can't. Doubtless you think that magic fat-gremlins come and steal all the fat away, so that no matter how much fat you eat, for some reason it just disappears.

zzzzzzzzzzz

Banned
  • | Post Points: 5
Top 200 Contributor
Posts 468
Points 8,085
Wibee replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 7:47 PM

What is a serving?  That drove me nuts.  is a serving of Apple = serving of orange?  Same with chicken vs cow vs pork. 

Marks Daily apple website is a food plan I can get behind

  • | Post Points: 5
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 6,885
Points 121,845
Clayton replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:10 PM

@ Clayton: is that a serious remark? Cattle doesn't eat grains anyway. It eats grass.

No, it's facetious. Why the hell would anyone think that human beings should primarily eat grains? Or did I miss the part where we descended from the great Grain-Eating Apes of Zanzabar?

Cattle do, in fact, eat grain.

And grain is just the dried seed of grasses.

Clayton -

http://voluntaryistreader.wordpress.com
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 10 Contributor
Male
Posts 4,987
Points 89,490
Wheylous replied on Tue, Sep 13 2011 10:53 PM

Sorry for slight off-topic, but in nature, what do cows do in the winter? Do they just hang out on plains?

Even more off-topic and more of a rant: those spots on cows... is that fur or is their coloration simply their skin? Because when I think of a cow I think of how it looks, but never of how it would feel to touch it...

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Actually, in nature cows consume small amounts of grain in the fall, which helps to fatten them up for the winter. However, the primarily consume grass and other similar green matter.

And here is the key. They turn cellulose into the saturated fat that you find in cream. These are the fats with the omega 3 & 6 balance that suit humans perfectly, and it is within these fats that you get the key fat soluble vitamins that Dr Price identified, being A, D & K2. However, a cow only eating grains will have too much omega 6 and hardly any of the fat soluble vitamins, because they lack the cellulose that the cow requires. This is the key reason why cows in a feedlot in confined agriculture is not as good for you. Left to graze freely, in nature, they choose primarily green grass and other similar herbage.

Traditionally, cows were fed root vegetables, hay and silage (fermented green grass) during winter, with some grains to supplement. A Confined Agriculture Feedlot Operation in the States, feeds them nothing but grains all year round, this is unprecedented in agricultural history. Here in Britain we are blessed with pastures that work all year round, but in the States, cows must be bought into the barn for much of the year. However, you could choose traditional breeds like bison which would be far more hardy than the modern Holstein, allowing the cows to be outside for more of the year.

  • | Post Points: 20
Top 25 Contributor
Male
Posts 3,592
Points 63,685
Sieben replied on Wed, Sep 14 2011 8:21 AM

Or you could just. Oh. I don't know. Take fish oil caps so you can get the clinically validated dose of omega 3's instead of just shoving both thumbs up your ass and getting the "natural" amount from "natural" beef.

Banned
  • | Post Points: 20
Top 500 Contributor
Posts 118
Points 1,960

Actually, I take Green Pasture's fermented cod liver oil. It is a far better source of nutrients than fish oil. I take a teaspoon per day along with some high vitamin butter oil. Dr Price's book shows studies of when he used that to treat rickets, etc. These supplements have been forumated to match the nutrient density of dairy and cod liver oil found in primitive tribes.

That provides the essential fatty acids I require, but does not by-pass my need to have a balance between omega 3 and 6 in the rest of my diet, which I achieve my eating pastured, ideally organic eggs, meat and raw dairy.

This is the kind of diet that has satisfied people for millenia. The question is why, and understanding that could allow us to better what our ancestors achieved, but we would be silly to ignore their collective wisdom and simply do what the government tells us to do, by adopting a low fat diet and shunning the foods our grandparents ate.

  • | Post Points: 35
Page 1 of 2 (68 items) 1 2 Next > | RSS