Archives for posts with tag: carbohydrates




**ATTENTION**  


Before you start bashing Gary Taubes and this video, etc. I want you to hear me out. 


As part of one of my final exams we have been asked to watch and critique this video. It is a critical thinking assignment and I want to be as unbiased as I can about this so I’m hoping I can get feedback from both sides (if possible)


I have watched the video a few times, and as much as I agree with some of the things he says, there are a lot that I don’t agree with. Such as when he looks at poor populations in which overweight and underweight people coexist. For starters, he says that these people are overweight despite eating less than the recommended 2000 calories per day– one problem with this: overweight people are notorious for drastically underestimating how much they are consuming. He does have a good point about maternal instinct that a mother would not willingly allow her child to starve in order to feed herself. However the problem is that young children are often not able to digest the diet that the adults eat so they are often not able to consume enough to meet their caloric and protein needs, thus children become malnourished (ie: Kwashiokor and Maramus). 


Another problem is that he seems to think that you can create mass out of nothing (ie get fatter even in a starved state), although I have heard of stories of women gaining weight on very low calorie diets (<800 calories per day) so maybe there is some truth to that. 


He states that carbs cause insulin secretion and that insulin drives fat accumulation, but he seems to believe that carbohydrates are the only foods that increase insulin secretion –even though certain proteins can increase insulin almost to the same extent. You would have to eat a pretty much 100% fat diet in order to not secrete any insulin. 


…and if his theory was correct, that carbs and insulin will make you fat even in a starved state, then explain Sam! (sorry to single you out bud! haha) ..or explain any person who has had success on the Mc Dougal or 80-10-10 diet eating tons of carbs. I realize that lots of people have also had success on Atkins and other low carb diets. However it still seems to come back to calories in vs. calories out and consuming those calories from whole foods. Despite was Taubes says, if you were to overeat calories from fat or protein you would still gain weight (via de novo lipogenesis) 


Anyways, sorry for the long post! If anyone has more information (either for or against) I would love to hear it…. **cough**Tsurugi**cough**


(please note however I’m not looking for DR-esque ad hominem remarks like “Gary Taubes is a fat snake oil salesman”)


Thanks for listening 

“Deforestation is rapidly transforming primary forests across the tropics into human-dominated landscapes.”

Cultivated fruits were mostly consumed in the afternoon and evening, when farmers had returned home. The finding that females take greater crop-raiding risks than males differs from previous human-primate conflict studies, probably because of the low risks associated (as farmers rarely retaliated) and low intraspecific competition between males. Thus, the behavioral ecology of orangutans living in this human-dominated landscape differs markedly from that in primary forest, where orangutans have a strictly wild food diet, even where primary rainforests directly borders farmland.

Thus, the inclusion of high energy cultivated fruits (e.g. durian = 147 kcal and 27 g carbohydrates per 100 g; jackfruit = 94 kcal and 24 g carbohydrate per 100 g; [35]) would allow for these orangutans to meet their metabolic needs sooner than under natural forest conditions

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0020962

My sister recently started taking this supplement after watching Dr. Oz talk about it as a supplement to help melt fat but for people with emotional or stress eating issues. It’s supposed to burn excess carbohydrates and utilized them for energy rather than store them for fat. It also suppressed the appetite especially during those stressful days when emotional eating kicks in. My sister says she feels more energetic overall (no like a stimulant), she’s sleeping better, and lost 9 pounds since she’s been taking it for about two weeks give or take a few days. 

Has anyone ever heard of this?

Does anyone know anyone taking this?

Does anyone know more about this supplement?

I’m not too keen on this kind of stuff but I am interested because my sister believes it is working for her. She and I have similar body types and we face the same issues in regards to emotion/stress eating. I am reluctant to go out and purchase it until I have fully researched it and decide whether or not I should.

Any help is soooo very much appreciated!

Okay, long story short…
It has been almost two years since switching to a vegan diet.
The first 6 or so months I was in the 80/10/10 diet, and since then I have been on the McDougall’s diet.
I feel very well overall and most if not all of my health issues disappeared, BUT, if I can complain about something, that is my body composition.
What I mean is, although I exercise much more than ever before (6x a week, mainly
running, never less than 4 miles a day, and up to 35 miles a week, plus twice a week body weight exercises plus a lot of walking) my body composition is crap (today I acknowledged it, lol).
Let’s see. Until two years ago I was anorexic/bulimic, and I got my weight down to
143 lbs (I’m a 5’11” male). In spite of feeling like absolute crap I managed to do martial arts 3x a week, but that was ALL I DID as far as exercise goes. My calorie intake was around 1800 kcal, from oatmeal, eggs, milk, tuna, etc. Every couple of days/weeks I would binge big time on junk food too (that got worse and worse by the end of my illness).
Granted, I was ripped as hell. Yes, I felt like crap because I had low energy, mood swings, low testosterone, etc. But man, I was RIPPED. Abs showed without even flexing.
 
Now, I weigh the same (143 lbs), but I have no abs (if I flex you can barely see them), I still have some love handles, my chest looks like crap (I have always stored a lot of fat in the chest, and now it doesn’t look good at all),
and my calorie intake is around 2400-2800 kcal (but hey, I burn AT LEAST 400 kcal a day only by running, so the net calories are typically between 1600-2200 per day.
 
Ok, thinking about what is different from those times, I can think of my macronutrients’s breakdown. I remember eating only 100 g of carbohydrates or so.
It wasn’t a ketogenic diet, but carbs were pretty low.
Aside from some oatmeal, and two pieces of fruit, I would only eat tuna, eggs, milk, nuts and vegetables.
 
So I’m thinking in trying a low carb (VEGAN, sorry) diet, but my budget is SO LOW
right now, that I can’t afford to buy plenty of nuts, avocadoes or expensive stuff.
In my country food is very expensive, aside from what I’ve been eating (rice, legumes, potatoes and some veggies).
So, I’m wondering, how bad is peanut butter as a staple for a low carb diet?
That is definitely cheap, and I think I could try eating peanut butter, some oatmeal (for the little carbs I’d get),  low starch vegetables (like broccoli, leafy greens, etc.)
and every now and then adding some avocado and different nuts like walnuts and almonds to add some variety.
Oh, and I could add one or two teaspoons of chia seeds for some more omega 3′s.
Would that be a recipe for disaster? Do you consider it would hinder my running? 
Should I try it?
 
 
Thanks a lot in advance.

Five banana health/fun facts (courtesy of Freelee):

#1- Excess carbs from bananas are burned up through dietary thermogenesis. Dietary thermogenesis is a process where excess glucose is burned off through the heat that is created in the body due to normal physiological processes. So in the rare occasion that there are banana carbs overflowing your glycogen tank, they are not stored as fat, but burned off instead. You can eat as many bananas as you’d like and not gain an ounce of fat.

#2- You can’t overeat on bananas, and they stop you binging on fatty foods. The Water in a banana meal distends the stomach wall signaling the brain to stop eating, while fiber adds volume to the stomach & colon which adds to the satisfaction factor, and the sugar content satisfies our natural sweet tooth & signals to stop eating.

#3- Bananas are high in carbs, fiber, low in fat, and contain simple sugars that are broken down and digested very quickly without taxing your pancreas or liver, thus leaving you energized and wanting to move your body. Bananas also provide nutrition without fat, making them a great weight-loss food. A 10 banana meal contains only about 4 grams of healthy plant fats, 270 grams of carbs, and 13 grams of healthy plant proteins, while also providing tons of vitamins, minerals, fiber, and healthy calories.

#4- Bananas are high in potassium, B vitamins and low in sodium. While Potassium might not directly affect the metabolism, it does affect the body’s ability to use nutrients that do interact with the metabolism in powerful ways. Potassium has a direct effect on how your body burns calories and how the heart and other muscles regulate blood flow. Having adequate potassium levels in the blood is vital for muscle growth, which in turn leads to more calories burned due to increased muscle mass. Potassium also helps you balance the sodium levels in your cells, which helps aid weight loss.

#5- Bananas taste awesome, are very inexpensive, and satisfy your sweet tooth, thus allowing you to regularly consume more of this amazing staple fruit! And let’s not forget, the people that consume the most fruit and carbohydrates are the traditional Asian cultures which are the leanest people on the planet!

I really love this blog…I’ve been working my way through it over the past few weeks, and this article made me think of the 30 bad mandate of calories calories calories!  

Specifically:

NPY increases carbohydrate cravings first and foremost: NPY-injected animals show an enormous preference for sweet foods.   But NPY also has a fed-fasted-state feedback mechanism: after weeks of being fed either a high-carbohydrate or a high fat diet–so long as it is high calorie–NPY levels fall (though the animals certainly prefer the high-carbohydrate diet), and the animals stop craving carbohydrates that much.”

I know this is not news to some, but it was a major a-ha for me!  

AND:  I’m also kind of curious if anyone knows of a case where an obese individual successfully lost weight with 811 or 30 bad?  Since insulin resistance increases with body fat percentage, I assume that fruit-based diets don’t have much longevity for people with higher body fat.  I don’t remember seeing any before and afters that fit my query.

Here’s the rest of the article:

http://www.paleoforwomen.com/neuropeptide-y-appetite-macronutrients-and-yo-yo-dieting-or-why-restriction-breeds-carb-addicts-and-disordered-eaters/

Neuropeptide Y: Appetite, Macronutrients, and Yo-Yo Dieting, or, Why Restriction Breeds Carb-Addicts and Disordered Eaters

Neuropeptide Y is one of several neuromodulators involved in regulating feeding.   These include classic neurotransmitters such as serotonin, GABA, or dopamine, molecules derived from fatty acids like endocannabinoids, and neuropeptides.   (All of which I will discuss at length eventually.)   Every neuromodulator can be classified as orexic or anorexic.  Orexic cells drive feeding.  Anorexic cells do the opposite.  Neuropeptide Y is one of the orexic cells, and it is in fact one of the strongest.

In the photo below (a snapshot I took of a page in an excellent textbook–Appetite and Body Weight by Tim C Kirkham) orexic and anorexic drivers are compared.  On the left are the orexics, on the right, anorexics.  Note how Neuropeptide Y and Leptin are situated at the top of the respective sides, demonstrating their antagonistic behaviors against each other.

So NPY is strongly orexic.  When injected into the brains of several species of animals, NPY induces several-fold increases in food intake at any time in the dark-light cycle.  Additionally, it is highly involved in the motivation and search for food.  NPY-injected animals are ravenous and incessant: they will eat even when they have to work really hard for it, even if they have to tolerate electric shocks, and even when the food is altered from the natural product and may in fact contain substances they have aversions to, such as quinine.   In animals lacking NPY, eating is delayed and the animal’s efforts at attaining food are sluggish.

NPY delays satiety throughout a meal.  Thus it augments meal size, time spent eating, and meal duration, irrespective of what food is provided.   Animals certainly have preferences for what to eat, but they will take anything and eat it at length if they cannot get their paws on sweet foods.  This action of NPY, along with other orexins, explains why many disordered eaters need to eat and eat and eat,regardless of how much they like the food.

The most fascinating aspect of NPY, however, in my opinion, is the way in which it interplays with macronutrient cravings.    NPY increases carbohydrate cravings first and foremost: NPY-injected animals show an enormous preference for sweet foods.   But NPY also has a fed-fasted-state feedback mechanism: after weeks of being fed either a high-carbohydrate or a high fat diet–so long as it is high calorie–NPY levels fall (though the animals certainly prefer the high-carbohydrate diet), and the animals stop craving carbohydrates that much.

This all occurs in light of the fact that when one is starving at all, NPY levels rise.  They rise in response to fasting, in response to chronic food restriction, and in response to any sort of starvation signal whatsoever, for example, a drop in leptin levels.   NPY levels also continue to increase as the time spent in the fasting state gets longer and longer.   This means that the NPY-driven craving for sweets increases as the fasted state endures.

Once regular feeding is restored, however, NPY levels fall back to baseline.  In this way,  NPY is meant to moderate energy consumption, with a clear preference for carbohydrates.  Why?  Because glucose is the fastest way to get a “fed” signal firing in the brain, at least on an immediate time-scale.   Glucose spikes insulin levels and therefore leptin, which in turn  signals to the NPY right away that the organism is fed.  However, the “fed” state must endure through longer time scales than one simple meal in which leptin levels spike.   Therefore, a long-term undertaking of feeding with any type of macronutrient ratios should be sufficient to mitigate NPY-related problems, so long as energy intake is sufficient to account for energy expenditure.    In the short-term, however, as mentioned, sometimes glucose is the only way to get the NPY neurons (as well as the hypocretin neurons responsible for wakefulness while hungry) to shut up.

This phenomenon explains in part the failure of so many diets.  Neuropeptide Y is one of the strongest stimulators of appetite, and is it triggered first and foremost by low leptin levels and caloric restriction.  Any detection of a fasted state will lead  to the organism craving carbohydrates moreso than usual, and the cravings won’t really subside unless the organism can convince the NPY neurons that it’s not starving.   Herein lies the rub: people restrict, and drives toward feeding rise.  In particular because of NPY-type drives, that drive is focused on carbohydrates.  The more successful a person is at restriction and at willpower, the harder and harder it gets to maintain that level of restriction.   Eventually the stamina fails, and the organism caves, often to a sweet food.  Recall that NPY delays satiation and prolongs feeding quantity and duration.  What this means is that this one bite of sweet food the person allows himself is all-of-the-sudden one thousand bites of sweet foods.  Thiswillpowering individual feels awful about what he’s done, so he gets back into his routine of chronic restriction.   This is a hell of a cycle to be caught in.  My Pepper readers know this all too well.

Re: what NPY-type activity means for fasting and for ketogenic diets:

Glucose availability in the brain is important for NPY regulation.    Glucoprivation- that is, deliberately blocking glucose activity–has been shown to induce feeding and activate hypothalamic NPY neurons in rats.  What this means is that a brain that runs on limited glucose stores may have increased NPY activity.   Ketogenic organisms run on limited glucose stores.

Since many people who fast and/or undertake ketosis experience decreased appetite, there are clearly other, stronger mechanisms at play in the modulation of their appetite than NPY drives; for example, perhaps the simple strength of leptin sensitivity in signalling to the NPY is powerful enough in these individuals to squelch the drive to carbohydrates.   Or perhaps in some individuals moreso than others gluconeogenesis from the liver is functioning well-enough to get adequate glucose supplies to the brain.  I suspect that both of those ideas are in part true.  Nonetheless, NPY explains in part why some people binge so hard on sugar once they take a step off of the fasting or very-low-carb ladders, even if they are not in explicit restriction like the yo-yo dieters I mentioned above.

Many people talk about the addictive power of carbohydrates.  I agree–it’s horrible.  I’ve talked about it many times, and at great length.  Yet what might be worse in some cases is the physiological basis NPY demonstrates for carbohydrate longing.  And the role that restriction plays in the demonic need for sweet foods.   Being in a energy-restricted state might play one of the more powerful roles in why carbohydrate is so insidious in the contemporary American food psyche.

This is an excerpt from Matt Stone’s ebook 12 Paleo Myths that I thought people here would appreciate and could totally relate to, only, the guy whose telling his story isn’t talking about raw veganism: he’s talking about the health disasters that happened for him on low carb paleo.  The parallels are amazing, and the conclusions he comes to are fascinating.  The bolded bits are my emphasis.  Read on:

Luke’s Story

 Here is my story. I tried to keep it as related to low-carb paleo as I could.

Getting sick is easy. All you have to do is read some books and websites on health and nutrition, create rules for eating based on what you think is “good” or “bad”, and follow those rules at all costs even when your body screams at you to stop.

One of the most harmful rules I ever adopted was the “carbohydrates are bad, or at least suboptimal from a longevity and health standpoint” rule. This rule was based on the belief that our paleolithic ancestors did not have access to significant amounts of carbohydrates and so they subsisted mostly on fat, protein, and non-starchy and non-sweet carbohydrates.

The first dietary decision guided by this rule was to remove all grains from my diet. Over the course of a few years I went through periods of temporarily avoiding other carb sources like fruit and dairy while eating a predominantly raw food diet that included ample amounts of animal products, fats, vegetables, and all the other “paleo” foods. I acknowledged that most of my foods would not have been found in the wild habitats of my paleolithic ancestors, but my intention was to approximate the macronutrient ratios that I believed were ideal.

For the first few years after having gradually shifted from SAD to a mostly raw paleo diet I felt great. Benefits included clearer skin, more energy, better digestion, the ability to easily gain weight, a very light and clear feeling often associated with raw diets, and lessening of asthma symptoms. I was 18 years old at the time I started experimenting with diet, and I didn’t have any major health problems to begin with, aside from cat dander-induced asthma (which diet never healed). So my intention was to become even healthier.

I wasn’t too strict about avoiding carbs in the beginning, but upon noticing the development of some dental caries after eating lots of fresh summer berries, and having experienced many blood sugar swings from eating too much fruit, I decided to largely eliminate fruit from my diet. I figured I could get all of those nutrients from vegetables and without the sugar. My teeth stopped getting worse.

Around that time, I was experimenting with intermittent fasting and alternate day fasting. I loved the focused feeling fasting gave me. It was strikingly similar to the effects of a cup of coffee, like slow-release coffee, which I now realize was due to my adrenals pumping out extra stress hormones in response to the lack of food. Also around that time I started to notice my hair was falling out more than usual and was changing its texture. There were other minor changes like dandruff, brief periods of poor digestion and gas, inability to focus, and low energy.

After I graduated from college I started working a full time job-that I hated, which was a major source of stress. I would bike to and from work and I would often skip lunch. I was eating very few carbs. At that time, I started to experience more digestive problems which included lots of diarrhea and incomplete digestion of foods in general. I found it increasingly difficult to focus especially in the stressful environment of work and couldn’t think clearly. My brain wasn’t working well, and I felt like I was getting dumber. I was extremely emotional. My energy fluctuated greatly throughout the day, and I was exhausted most of the time. I wasn’t sleeping well and having very strange dreams when I did sleep.

My health fell apart over the period of a few months. In response to these health problems, I switched from eating mostly raw foods to mostly cooked foods, which seemed to digest better and not make me feel as ill when I ate them. At one point I ran out of money and was living on free potatoes and vegetables from a farmer’s market along with some high-quality organ meats and coconut oil. I had been avoiding carbs entirely except for a little fruit and so my body did not handle the starch in the sweet potatoes well. I had more bouts of diarrhea and all my problems worsened.

At that time I realized I had some serious gut dysbiosis, despite drinking copious amounts of EM probiotics and eating the standard list of fermented foods so popular among WAP folk, and so I thought the solution was to go even lower carb. After all, my symptoms got much worse when I tried to eat potatoes or if I ate too much fruit, and all the candida fear mongerers said starches and sugars were the problem. It made sense at the time. So I ate nothing but fat (butter and coconut oil by the spoon), animals (mostly organ meats, bone marrow, stocks/broths, and other WAP-type foods of the low-carb variety), and cooked vegetables. I eliminated all dairy (except for butter) and all sugars and starches.

After about three weeks of this diet all my digestive issues completely went away. My energy was way better, my skin was perfectly clear, and my hair stopped falling out. I did notice that I would have heart palpitations every night, and that cuts on my fingers would get infected and take a very long time to heal, and that I was peeing like crazy around noon and throughout the night, but those problems were minor compared to the major digestive disturbances I was experiencing before.

I began to read stories similar to mine, and I knew that carbohydrates were not the root of my problem. Besides, I used to eat all the carbs I wanted before I was concerned with this nutrition stuff and I felt great. Something had changed in my body and it could no longer effectively utilize carb-rich foods. I started to reconceptualize what health meant. Health is what I had when I was a kid — a robust body that can handle a wide variety of foods, a reservoir of energy. Health is not avoiding a bunch of “bad” foods and attaining a magical state of dietary perfection.

So I began eating more carbs, and slowly my health problems returned. They returned with a vengeance. Since eliminating all carbs helped me before, I tried it again out of desperation, but my condition worsened with this second attempt. I couldn’t digest anything, I couldn’t focus, and often I felt so bad I didn’t want to interact with other people. My heart would race and my brain would fog after every meal I ate. My lymphatic system was clogged up to the point of pain. I’m sure I was on my way to ulcerative colitis.

With every diet I tried and every rule I followed, low-carb or high-carb or whatever, my health worsened, aside from temporary improvements in some areas. I lost all trust in my mental ideas about health and diet because each one failed me miserably, and certainly, no external authority could tell me how to get healthy.

So what was the alternative? I abandoned everything I thought I knew about nutrition. I started to listen to my body and only my body 100% of the time. I really had no choice.  

That was the first time in my life I ever did that. It’s not that I never listened to my body before; if I was thirsty I would drink water. Duh! But until that point I was always operating within the framework of some dietary dogma I created for myself. It was quite something to let go of all that mental garbage, and learn to actually trust myself. To trust that my body knew exactly what it needed.

Everything that went into my mouth was judged, not based on what I read was “good” or “bad”, but how it reacted in my body and what my body was craving. Since I made that change, it’s been a slow, but steady healing process. All of my health problems have vastly improved. I’m hardly in a state of robust health, but I’m no longer on a downward spiral of disease. Not quite a fairy tale ending. My guess is it will take at least as long to regain my health as it did to lose it.

At one point, I thought I knew a lot about nutrition. I knew what caused disease and what created health. I fanatically pursued those practices for many years in an extremist fashion. And then life kicked me in the nuts. If there is one thing I do know, it’s that no food or macronutrient is inherently good or bad. The “goodness” or “badness” of any food can only be determined in relationship to the body of the person that is consuming that food.

Dietary rules are static, the body is not. Health has nothing to do with the amount of “good” foods you consume and the amount of “bad” foods you avoid; it has everything to do with how your body uses those foods, which is based on a long list of variables entirely unique to you. Give me any “good” food or any “healthy” habit, and I’ll give you a protocol to ruin your health with it.

I’ll be running my first half marathon in 3 weeks.

I have been a recreational runner for a bit more than a year.

 I always run first thing in the morning, in a fasted state. I’ve run a maximum of 17 km in this condition (with no problems at all), and I’m wondering if I should eat before this 21 km race.

I’m asking this question because the race will be at 7:30 am. I’ll have to wake up at ~5 am, and I don’t know if it would be wise to eat breakfast before going.

Besides, I’d like to know if you reckon I should take a small snack with me to eat during the race or not.

 

FWIW, I’m on the McDougall’s diet, so I eat plenty of carbohydrates everyday. My breakfast is generally a bowl of brown rice.

I also don’t eat anything processed, so I would like to avoid energy gels, sports drinks and all that stuff.

In case I should take a snack for the race I thought a few dates would be cool. What do you think?

 

I’ll appreciate any help.

I was wondering what your thoughts where on this.  I just finished reading Deep Nutrition, the author makes some very interesting points throughout the book.  The reason I ask is because I have found after 8 years on 811, I have found my body less able to process large fruit meals.  I also, had some blood work done showing low testosterone levels and high triglycerides.  I am quite active, so Harley’s arguments about needing to be active in order to burn the sugar effectively is shit.  It was not working for me.  Here is an piece from Deep Nutrition.  No screen shots this time. smiley

FRUIT SUGAR

Another big source of sugar that surprises many people is sweet, sugary fruit. We’ve heard time and again we should “eat fruits and vegetables,” as though the two are equivalent. But they’re not. Vegetables contain a higher nutrient-to-energy ratio than fruit. Even fruits with decent nutrient content—like wild blueberries—are full of sugar. When you eat citrus, you’re getting a wallop of sugar with very little nutrient thrown in. That’s why, for most people, eating one apple-sized portion of fruit per day is plenty. With all that sugar, fruit just doesn’t make the grade as a health food. As I tell my patients, fruit is a more natural alternative to a candy bar. And fruit juice, which lacks fiber and many of the antioxidants, is little better than soda.

People often protest the idea that fruit should be consumed in limited amounts. “At least it’s natural sugar!” they say. Sure, but all sugar is natural. Sugar cane is natural. So is the corn from which high fructose corn syrup is made. The difference between sugar in fruit and sugar in high-fructose corn syrup (or confectioner’s powder or granulated sugar) is that the former is still in its source material and the latter has been refined out of the source material and is devoid of other nutrients. And yes, that makes fruit a little better than sugar, but it’s nothing to get worked up about. Though fruits do contain fiber, minerals, tannins and other flavinoids, which can function as antioxidants, sweet fruit is mostly sugar. What about honey? Same idea—mostly sugar and very little of anything else. Vitamin C happens to be a type of sugar we can’t make and need to eat, and one orange a day gives us most of what we need. But then again, so does a green pepper (technically, a fruit), but without all the unneeded, damaging sugar.

To make matters worse for fruit lovers, fructose kicks your liver into fatstorage mode. Some believe the explosive growth of fructose consumption in the form of high fructose corn syrup may be responsible for the increased incidence of a condition calledfatty liver. So although nutritionists and doctors will still insist that fruit sugar is better than sucrose, others aren’t so sure. But everyone agrees we’re all eating a lot more sugar than we should.

 

CAN PEOPLE SURVIVE ON FRUIT?

 

 

Fruitarians, sometimes called fructarians, are a subset of vegetarians. Some people consider themselves fruitarians if at least half of their diet is fruit, while others go whole hog—if they’ll forgive the expression—eating nothing but fruit. There are many explanations for choosing this lifestyle, from biblical references to anecdotal evidence of health benefits. The most popular seems to be that, since we are related to monkeys and other fruiteating primates, living on fruit is only natural.

It’s important to remember that many primates, including monkeys, supplement their diet with other foods like leaves, bark, bugs, nuts, and sometimes meat—even, on occasion, flesh of smaller primates. Some animals can get away with eating lots of sweet fruit because their big, rounded bellies contain digestive systems specifically designed for that purpose. The digestive tracts of orangutans, birds, and other fruit eaters are specialized to ferment the simple nutrients into more complex ones, enabling them to get far more nutrition from fruit than you could.

 

Animals that live on fruit or other sugary foods don’t absorb very much sugar into their bloodstreams. The way their digestive tracts are organized enables these specialists to first ferment carbohydrates inside special chambers where bacteria, yeast, and other microbes grow, multiply, and manufacture vitamins, amino acids, and other nutrients (for their own use). These probiotic microbes ferment the sugar-rich fruits into a slurry teeming with life-supporting nutrients. By the time the slurry reaches a point along the digestive tract where absorption can take place, it has been transformed into something far more complex. The process is very similar to that employed by grass-eating animals to ferment high-cellulose foods into a more nutritious product. If our digestive tracts were designed like a gorilla’s, we could eat a lot more fruit. But since we’d need a longer intestine to do it, we’d be carrying around gorilla-sized tummies as well.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Deep-Nutrition-Your-Genes-Traditional/dp/0615228380/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1342031923&sr=8-1&keywords=deep+nutrition

First off let me just state that after extensively reading McDougall’s literature I can’t help but believe that this guy is impossibly biased.  I’ll add the content of the post to my McDougall Post ( long read, very wordy, but maybe worth it?)

http://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2012nl/jun/paleo2.htm

Low-carbohydrate (low-carb) diets are fueling the destruction of human health and our planet Earth. “Low-carbohydrate” means a diet high in animal foods and low in plant foods. Only plants synthesize carbohydrates (sugars). The body parts of animals, including red meat, poultry, seafood, and fish, and eggs, contain no carbohydrates. Animal secretions (like mammalian milk) contain sugars synthesized by plants (the cow eats the grass that made the sugar). The original Atkins Diet is the ultimate in low-carb eating. This diet works by starving the human body of carbohydrates in order to induce a state of illness (ketosis), which can result in weight loss. People become too sick to eat too much.

​So much wrong with this.  His introductory paragraph, trying to equate paleo with low-carb.

-Low carb =/=  low in plant foods.

-Animals synthesize carbs too you idiot.  TriGLYCERIDES (aka fat) – > glycerol -> glycolysis ->  glucose.   Also mussels are 18% carbs (fun fact)

-It’s a long stretch to try to say that lactose comes from plant sugars (u’ll see a ton more of this in my McD post

-Paleo =/= ketogenic diet.  He also says that the only benefits from low-carb diets is from starvation like chemo.  

-He also says that potatoes are excluded from the paleo diet.  Uhh tuber?

 

* Research published in the journal Nature (on June 27, 2012) reports that almost the entire diet of our very early human ancestors, dating from 2 million years ago, consisted of leaves, fruits, wood, and bark—a diet similar to modern day chimpanzees.

 

​Starting to sound like fruitarian cliff-hanging. 

 Dr. Cordain writes, “For most of us, the thought of eating organs is not only repulsive, but is also not practical as we simply do not have access to wild game.” (p 131).  In addition to the usual beef, veal, pork, chicken, and fish, a Paleo follower is required to eat; alligator, bear, kangaroo, deer, rattlesnake, and wild boar are also on the menu. Mail-order suppliers for these wild animals are provided in his book.

 

​No comment necessary (except this one……)

 

No mention is made by Paleo experts about the frequent and habitual practices of nutritional cannibalism by hunter-gather societies. (Nutritional cannibalism refers to the consumption of human flesh for its taste or nutritional value.) Archeologists have foundbones of our ancestors from a million years ago with de-fleshing marks and evidence of bone smashing to get at the marrow inside; there are signs that the victims also had their brains eaten. Children were not off the menu. And we are supposed to eat the favorite meats of our uncivilized, pre-Agriculture Revolution, hunter-gather, ancestors?
 

Yah…..

 

By nature, the Paleo Diet is based on artery-clogging saturated fats and cholesterol, and bone-damaging, acidic proteins from animal foods. 

We need to shortern artery-clogging-saturated fats to ACSF.

 

Dr. Cordain finishes his 2011 revision of his national best-selling book The Paleo Dietby warning, “Without them (starches, like wheat, rice, corn, and potatoes), the world could probably support one-tenth or less of our present population…” (p 215) Choose 10 close friends and family members. Which nine should die so that the Paleo people can have their uncivilized way? There is a better way and that is The Starch Solution.

 

​If you haven’t lost your respect for McDougall as professional you definitely will after the McD post.  

For my next update to the McD post I’d like to explore his rationale for the French Paradox.
He believes that the French don’t get CHD just because the time hasn’t caught up with em.  The stats don’t show it yet. 

Funny how he had a stroke at 18 because of the…. eggs, double cheese pizzas, and hot dogs .

​Curious how he can have a  stroke at 18 from his epic intake of SAD food while the French weren’t keelin over from it.  Hmm…I’d also love to explore under-reporting of CHD in Asian cultures amongst other things.

Onto the next one!