 |
Reply
| | From:  rensielk (Original Message) | Sent: 12/21/2007 1:09 AM |
What if Bad Fat is Actually Good For You?
http://www.menshealth.com/cda/article.do?site=MensHealth&channel=health&category=heart.disease&conitem=a03ddd2eaab85110VgnVCM10000013281eac____&page=2#
This article debunks many myths about nutrition, propagated by the low-fat crowd, and other food faddists. The author has come to the conclusion (supported by anthropology) that we evolved on high-fat low-carb diet, and that low-carb diets do more to prevent disease than high-carb and/or low-fat diets.
What is the evidence that meat, cooked or otherwise, is not healthy, or that things like fruits and grains are somehow the more suitable basis for our diets? We should not accept all of Ray Peat's claims uncritically. He has some good advice, but many of his claims are dubious, like the claim we need carbohydrates for good health. There may not be "essential fatty acids", but there are no "esssential carbs" either. |
|
 First
Previous
2-4 of 4
Next
Last
|
|
Reply
| |
You seem to have a habit of jumping to conclusion. Especially in nutritional science it is often the case that the best one can do is to examine the evidence and say, "this seems best at this moment." I've never told anyone to accept everything Ray Peat says without question, and in fact I've said I eat raisins, even though he recommends against it, for instance.
And I'm not really interested in what some "author" thinks about what people ate 50,000 or so years ago. There's no doubt that the brain wants sugar (basic physiology), for example, and I have no problem granting that request. I've read more than one anthropologist point out that speculating about the diets of early humans is just that, speculation (and even if the speculation is best, this does not mean that such a diet was optimal, just that people did go extinct on it). This is where I get a bit irritated, because this forum is supposed to be about examining the evidence, or at least stating the "mainstream" case and asking if there is any strong evidence against it. You seem to have convinced yourself of something and you don't appear to care what the evidence actually suggests.
As to the cooked meat issue, let's confine that to thread I started yesterday on that topic specifically. |
|
Reply
| |
Hans, you post news articles all the time and make comments on them. So do other members. How is that scientific? You've not said anything that addressed the article I cited. If you want to ignore history and evolution, fine. Ray Peat told me he eats cooked beef and lamb (boiled). You can cite a bunch of study abstracts, but where is the proof you have read most of them? You must not have read the article in Men's Health.
Humans don't "crave" anything when they are born. They're conditioned by what their parents give them. The best one can do is to read and experiment widely, not pick abstracts of studies sthat supports the way you want to eat. You can overcome any craving for something non-essential..
Any claims science makes about what fat does (unsaturated or not) exists in the context of the modern diet, high in refined sugar and white flour, white rice, potatoes, and so forth. This fails to isolate the effects of the fat from the carbohydrate, as the article pointed out. You can believe fruit is a perfect food, but this is really just because you want to eat it. |
|
Reply
| |
This site "rensielk" cited is worth reading, some misconceptions about omega-3 but quite a few citations showing the benefits of saturated fat (of animal origin):
http://www.biblelife.org/heart.htm
http://www.biblelife.org/saturated_fat.htm
QUOTE:
This web site will prove the most healthy diet for humans is:
70% total fat on a calorie basis
31% saturated fat
7% polyunsaturated fat
25% monounsaturated fat
7% other fats
27% protein
3% carbohydrates (20 gm of which 3 gm or less is fiber).
UNQUOTE. |
|
|
First
Previous
2-4 of 4
Next
Last
|
|
Free Forum Hosting
Important Announcement
Return to Nutrition