General

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

whakaheke — Sun, 16 Oct 2011 22:47:14 GMT

Sieben, you seem to be missing the point of a lot of the paleo and Taubesian argument, which is precisely that eating certain kinds of neolithic and industrial foods leads to appetite disregulation (which is not explanatorily reducible to the starvation signaling and fat-oxidation-stimulating molecule leptin) which leads to more frequent, lasting, and intense hunger which leads inter alia to caloric excess which exacerbates the situation. This is a modification of chain of causation regarding caloric excess, from primary cause to intermediary, not a claim that caloric intake is completely irrelevant. This is also the reason ad libitum diets under normal living conditions are stressed re: the clinical study lit (eg http://www.dietdoctor.com/weight-loss-time-to-stop-denying-the-science).

Your first reference is based on analysis of 8 sets of Neanderthal teeth from a single burial location. A sample of 8 from a single location doesn't have much external validity for "paleolithic man." There is plenty of loud debate on the quality of life among paleolithic humans vs. neolithic and there is a high level of uncertainty. Hunter-gatherers are susceptible to environmental crises, just like farmers, but farmers are more susceptible to famine than hunter-gatherers to the degree they rely on a large yields from monocultivar crops like rice or corn or wheat. A drought that wipes out your mono crop will less likely wipe out the diverse cultivars of hunter-gatherers. However, grains can be more easily stored for longer periods of time.

The idea that we are evolutionarily adapted to frequent starvation and thus to preferentially eat and store caloric excess as bodyfat is the thrust of the "thrifty gene" hypothesis of obesity. It has problems, e.g.:

In this review I present details of the evidence supporting the famine hypothesis and then show that this idea has five fundamental flaws. In essence, famines area relatively modern phenomenon and occur only about once every 100–150 years. Consequently, most human populations have only experienced at most 100 famine events in their evolutionary history. Famines involve increases in total mortality that only rarely exceed 10% of the population. Moreover, most people in famines die of disease rather than starvation and the age distribution of mortality during famine would not result in differential mortality between lean and obese individuals. A simple genetic model shows that famines provide insufficient selective advantage over an insufficient time period for a thrifty gene to have any penetration in the modern human population

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16784175

There is little doubt that paleolithic humans did not eat as frequently as constantly-snacking Americans, and may have often gone through prolonged periods of fasting with more concentrated feasting (primarily on meat). Most paleo writers do advocate intermittent fasting for bodyfat loss, and that is made easier by ketogenic/paleo diet and that's largely the point.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 23:41:56 GMT

It is also interesting that the human brain is very dependent on cholesterol and saturated fat.

Studying Dr Price, one sees that isolated, self sufficient communities (which do not require banks for credit or governments for control), that they could be destroyed by simply inserting refined white flour, sugar, and other food products of industry. That this was enough to lay waste to independence, to elicit dependency. Whether or not that was the intention, the affect was to make these once free people dependent on commerce and government.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

bbnet — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 23:13:35 GMT

limitgov wrote:
"... why did they (gov) create the flawed dietary guidelines that promote the flawed idea of eating little to no cholesterol and saturated fats?..."

Aldous Huxley wrote in essay entitled 'Politics of Ecology':
"...This is not surprising. Death control, as I have already remarked, is easy, cheap, and can be carried out by a small force of technicians. ..."

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:16:15 GMT

The best diet for diabetes is a low carb, high fat and high protein diet, yet physicians are telling those with diabetes to eat low fat. Doctors I've worked with have stated that this advice is killing millions worldwide on the false notion that natural animal fats cause heart disease.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:07:17 GMT

Diabetes Diet: A Simple Cure for Diabetes - Without Drugs

http://www.diabetes-diet.org.uk/

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

limitgov — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 16:05:16 GMT

"Am I supposed to believe you even though you don't have a hyperlink to the study?"

Just google diabetes II raw foods. There are plenty of people curing themselves. Just a couple of months ago, there was a doctor here in houston that was curing patients using this. If you can't understand the difference btw junk food vs healthy food, I don't see us getting any further along with debating. You really need a study to tell you raw foods are better for you then junk foods?

You need a study to understand that 100 calories of organic spinach is better than 100 calories of corn syrup?

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Daniel James Sanchez — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:41:52 GMT

Sieben, I've set your account to be banned for a month, but the system isn't executing it. Please stop posting. I will delete all further posts from you, and I ask other mods to help me in doing so.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Sieben — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:13:48 GMT

Actually you ignored two sources showing that regular random historical tribes lived on the brink of starvation.

It doesn't matter if they have more vitamins because if you don't have calories, you die. Which is what I'm saying.

It ALSO doesn't matter if tyranny causes more starvation because the point is that historically, all tribes and cultures and villages and cities have dealt with STARVATION. It is the single GREATEST way in which our modern diet differs from ANY historical diet.

But yeah you ignored all of this... Barely literate or cognitive dissonance or both?

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:13:33 GMT

You acuse me of cherry picking, when I state explicitly that I am infact cherry picking. I look at isolated tribes who survive for generations on nutrient dense foods with artisan methods of food storage. This wisdom is what I seek a return to, combined with the benefits of modern technology and commerce.

We disagree about calorie restriction, you've presented your evidence, I've presented mine, and we will never agree, so hows about we agree to disagree, because there's not much more I can add. But to summarise, somebody eating a high calorie diet from MacDonalds will tend to put on weight, whilst somebody eating a high calorie diet from the farmers market will tend to loose weight, so long as they do not have too many starchy vegetables and too much grain.

That is my position, take it or leave it. Or you can believe the government.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:07:25 GMT

Yes, many people have lived under tyranny where much of the wealth is taxed and they cannot provide for risk and famine. Dr Price found that isolated tribes had TEN TIMES more fat soluble vitamins in their diet. Their diets were nutrient dense.

Sure, peasants in medieval England starved, but that was because they lived under tyranny.

In contrast, isolated people's who are not taxed a major portion of their output can store plenty of food for most eventualities, but if you have the King's men coming around stealing from your food stores, then sure, you will starve at times of lack.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Sieben — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:00:39 GMT

Zzzzzzzzzzz

I don't care what Dr. Crazy observed. Merely being able to preserve food doesn't mean there's enough food to eat yearround. Here I'ma give you some citations so you can ignore them, but maybe you'll realize deep down that you're wrong.

Here's a source (yeah its an article, but it has a link to the research in it) showing that historical man was frequently very close to starvation, and would in fact cannibalize his fellow man if necessary. It makes perfect sense evolutionarily speaking, but I seriously doubt you would advocate either constant near-starvation or cannibalism. Because you just cherry pick which parts of the historical lifestyle you like, and ignore the ones you don't like. Like an ideologue.

Here's a list of famines. You will notice the death toll is sometimes in the millions. I quote from the opening: "Between 108 BC and 1911 AD there were no fewer than 1,828 major famines in China," So this is like, MAJOR famines that affected ENTIRE regions. Let alone localized famines affecting individual village/tribe units.

And here's another source confirming what any third grader could guess; that historical man frequently died because of lack of food/water.

So again, the greatest way in which modern diets differ from historical diets is that they didn't have enough food. They were under intense calorie restraints. So not only should you starve yourself if you take historical diets seriously, you should also pause and realize that what I have been saying ALL ALONG is CALORIE RESTRICTION.

So I'm actually more paleo than you. A guy who eats nothing but twinkies for 1500 calories all day is more paleo than you. Again, you just cherry pick whatever pseudo/fake-evidence tells you what you want to do. Bla bla bla religious zealot.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 13:43:56 GMT

Actually, this is wrong. Dr Price saw isolated people's eating much as they would have for thousands of years, including hunter gatherers. They had elaborate ways of preserving foods, such as curing meat, fermenting vegetables as sauerkraut, drying meats, making pemmican, fermenting and freezing. Pemmican, for example, is a blend of cured meat and fat that has been demonstrated to last for 30 years and stay safe. Through traditions, and artisan methods of food preservation, communities and families would have abundance throughout the year, planning ahead for risks.

It is these methods which differentiate humanity from beasts.

Under anarchy, communities and traditions kick in to produce well planned life patterns that provide for risk and future, creating abundance.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Sieben — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 13:21:14 GMT

No phil. The biggest way in which historical man's diet differed from modern diets are seasonal periods of starvation. You want to spend all this time and energy crying about how plant fats are different from animal fats, but they're even more different than NOTHING. And NOTHING is what cavemen ate for months at a time (okay maybe some berries, but extreme caloric deprivation).

Caloric restriction has been shown to improve your lifespan. So whaddaya gonna do? There's A) Paleo evidence for it and B) Scientific evidence for it, but you're going to ignore it because it doesn't fit your personal religion.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Phil Ridley — Fri, 16 Sep 2011 08:59:33 GMT

Sieben, I personally do not support intermittent fasting, and your comments are beginning to sound a bit silly.

Re: Why Did Federal Government Create the Recommended Dietary Guidelines If Data Was Flawed?

Sieben — Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:41:47 GMT

limitgov:
There is so much info on the damage fake food does to your body and so much info on the healing good food does, you just merely have to do some google searching.

Okay so you're talking past me by shifting the goalposts. My claim was that FAT GAIN/LOSS (read: not necessarily cholesterol) is going to be basically the same no matter what "quality" of food you're eating.

And there are actually good studies showing that blood chemistry improves on weight loss diets, despite the source of calories. This study shows that virtually ALL fat loss diets cause similar beneficial changes in cholesterol levels.

limitgov:
Take for example, doctors and nutrionists who are curing people with Diabetes Type II with nothing but raw foods. in some cases in 2 weeks!

Are calories controlled? Am I supposed to believe you even though you don't have a hyperlink to the study? Why can't I just ignore it like you ignore mine?

limitgov:
Surely, you don't believe beef from McDonalds which is treated with ammonia and full of growth hormones and antibiotics is just as good for you as grass fed beef full of more omega fatty acids and no growth hormones or antibiotics? Do you really need a study for that? Really?

No. But if you make specific claims, like you'll get fat eating 1000 calories of mcd but not 1000 calories of organic food, then we have a problem. Cus when you make specific claims about outcomes, you need studies demonstrating those outcomes.

Like I wouldn't go out of my way to put oral growth-hormone in my body, but I also couldn't tell you how bad it is. It may actually be relatively harmless. Does that make sense? You can make dietary choices without spazzing out about ZOMG PROCESSED CHEMICALS and pretending like that's as good as real evidence. I don't know how bad a lot of chemicals are.

Has it ever crossed your mind that some of the "artificial" chemicals might actually be beneficial? Impossible. "Artificial" just means "bad" to you people.

limitgov:
Do you really need some scientists to tell you that eating white processed flour with almost no nutrional value is the same as eating raw organic vegetables? Really? Come on dude. Wake up. Real food vs fake food.

Again, in what context? In weight loss, probably they are the same. In cardio health, maybe they're the same too. In terms of vitamin deficiencies... well that depends on the whole diet. But lets say they do cause vitamin deficiencies - how bad are they? How low will your magnesium levels get? Is this problemmatic?

These are relevant questions. Again, you have no grounds to spazz out and make it the freaking FOCUS of your nutritional philosophy. Calories are much much more important (see mah studies. Or don't. Ignore them so you can be a religious fanatic like Phil).