Carbs are Killing You (infographic)

I think that a little of everything is ok....to live on just meat cannot be too good either. Common sense always rules. Before man made tools to kill big game.....what was he to eat with just bare hands?

 

I'm not saying a little of everything is bad for everyone.

But what I find kinda funny is the example that you gave.... before industrialization man's diet actually consisted of almost purely the things that AREN'T carbs...and no, it's not just meat or big game. There was small game and fish. Nuts, seeds, berries... other wild fruits and veggies. There was a wide variety of possible food but one thing that was def more lacking was carbs.

 

and here I thought that there were big loaves of bread just for the taking growing on trees....no? lol

 

The shift to agriculture did far more more harm than simply inducing the high carb diet, it spawned the concepts of surplus and deficit, of money and lending, and other detrimental psychologys, like laying around drinking beer all day, lol

 

Go back only two or three generations in history and you find much greater calorie burns each day due to a variety of necessary manual labor tasks.

Burn at least 3000 calories every day, and eat enough to balance it, and you'll find it much easier to achieve a good balance in food variety. And your daily fiber total pretty much takes care of itself. Take away industrial processed fake foods, and you have the natural conditions under which our bodies evolved, and for which they are fine tuned.

Aversion to exercise of all kinds is a national epidemic which has lasted for decades, but it is well beyond its peak. I grew up in small towns where it was quite impossible to walk anywhere, due to road design and traffic conditions. Even suburban businesses side by side were usually built with barriers of various sorts to force everyone to drive from one to the other. Later on, when building sidewalks came back in style, people used to stop and ask me if my car had broken down. Now, the sidewalks of my town are busy every day.

 

I haven't read all the posts and I don't know if this has already been posted, but I think it could help some:

http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/

Lots of people talk like "I think", or "in my humble opinion", "in my opinion"... sure, we all are entitled to say whatever we want. Let us just make the difference between people's beliefs and scientific evidence.

I'm waiting to see more evidence when they do statistics for longer than the ones reported, but there is more and more already done that kinds of tells us we should at least question the way we've been eating. I invite you all to read and make yourself aware and open to change your "IMO" in case science gives the opposite side some evidence.

I don't do Atkins and I'm not radical in any direction, but it'd be a disservice to my own health to ignore science.

Just be critical. Even when you're reading a peer reviewed article.

I strongly recommend learning about the workings of the pancreas and the liver and about stuff as the metabolic syndrome and insulin resistance. And everything that can make you live longer and healthier. And, please, do share your findings.

 

That is an excellent article! Highly recommended for anyone who wants proof of just how effective low carb diets are compared to low fat diets.

In the past month I have upped my fat intake to around 85% of my total caloric intake, while I have limited carbs to around 5% of my total caloric intake. I have never felt better.

 

I've read/heard a lot in the past year or so regarding the health benefits of a low carb/high (healthy) fat diet. I'm surprised there are so many skeptics in this thread.

 

The article below is about mis-reporting the amount of calories eaten and physical energy expended by identical twins where one person of the twins was obese and the counterpart was not. The rationale was to preclude genetic differences as contributing factors to the weight status of the subjects. In this study, the results showed that the obese counterparts under-reported how many calories they consumed and over-reported how much exercise they performed. The state of obesity can be attributed to a real (although not perceived by the obese person) calorie surplus and not a result of genetic factors.

For obese people, under-reporting of intake calories was 3.2 MJ (765 kcal) per day and over the over-reporting of physical activity was 1.8 MJ (431 kcal) per day.

Total mis-reporting: 765 + 431 = 1196 kcal per day

The mis-reporting by the obese represents a calorie surplus of about 1200 calories per day. That's a major surplus that favors weight gain (or favors maintaining an overweight condition).

The misreporting didn't happen in the non-obese subjects.

It shows that there are perceptual issues that are part of the problem of weight management. The study also shows how unreliable data can be when self-reported. Consider all of the diet studies that have been done that relied on self-reporting.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20010905

Int J Obes (Lond). 2010 Mar;34(3):437-45. doi: 10.1038/ijo.2009.251. Epub 2009 Dec 15.
Inaccuracies in food and physical activity diaries of obese subjects: complementary evidence from doubly labeled water and co-twin assessments.
Pietiläinen KH1, Korkeila M, Bogl LH, Westerterp KR, Yki-Järvinen H, Kaprio J, Rissanen A.

 

Yes except I don't think it is very motivating to say "carbs are KILLING you". It's counter-productive if somebody wants to pursue health. It just keeps it in crisis mode and crisis thinking, which perpetuates and maintains dysfunction leading to illness and unwellness.

'tis all

Be Well.

:daisy:

 

Thank you.
I remembered hearing this,( I think it was on NPR or something) which is why I made the statement, unfortunately my feeble search skills did not yield the info.. thanks again

 

Yep, not gonna deny that is true.

 

There would be no concept of surplus/deficit and debt/lending before the development of agriculture? I doubt it.

 

Also, we now have modern prosperity spoiling us, indoctrinating us that being a little bit hungry now and then or not eating as much as we want at every meal is some kind of horrible ordeal that no human should ever have to endure. Truth is, it's not so bad after you get used to it. Without some self-discipline in that area, almost any middle aged person is going to gain weight.

 

Hunter-gatherers and the mythology of the market
https://libcom.org/history/hunter-gatherers-mythology-market-john-gowdy

 

It could have to do with a kind of food neurosis passed down through the generations from the depression era, where many people were actually threatened with starvation.
How many of us have grandparents who's parents were children during the depression and were taught never to waste one single scrap of food, or suffer guilt for it...to eat every bit of fat on a pork chop or steak, to eat huge portions and second helpings followed by big desserts, as if it were your last meal.

 

Thrifty gene theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrifty_gene_hypothesis

Selfish brain theory

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selfish_brain_theory

 

Good thing I had to endure all those meals when I still had a teenager's metabolism. I could eat like Ms. PacMan.

I think it also ties into the consumer mentality where we are told to instantly address every want or need, no matter how insignificant, by spending money. Hungry? Don't want to wait until dinner? Burger King has a special on extra-large fries and milkshakes! No waiting at the drive-through window! Visa and MasterCard accepted!

 

Very true, and I think It's really quite insidious in American society. People are indoctrinated at an early age. I was certainly not immune to it, and even with the awareness, it's a deeply ingrained psychology thats extremely difficult to completely vanquish.