Healthy diet *not any!*

[intpz]

After reading "Liquid Lunch" thread, I began to wonder: what is healthy diet? What food is best avoided, and what food is best consumed? What can I eat to stay healthy AND get all the vitamins and shit that I need? And I don't mean "stay thin" or whatever the fuck "healthy" means nowadays...

That is, of course, independent of the price, as I've no choice of what to eat.

 

[Moocow]

I think it's pretty simple... you can reasonably suspect that all packaged, processed goods are going to contain things like high fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeteners, MSG, preservatives, or other things you just won't want. I cut them out of my diet completely whenever I have the choice but without expecting to have a perfect score.

I think it helps to find yourself a good staple food as all cultures have. It could be like a healthy variety of brown rice, or maybe potatoes, but for me it's pinto beans. That's because I can get an enormous bag of pinto beans for very cheap, then pressure cook a couple week's worth of them and freeze whatever I can't eat within a few days. Cost effective, very healthy, and delicious if you know how to prepare them. Add some onions and jalapenos, a little salt, some spices, a little oil, and eat them with whole grain tortillas or chips and homemade salsa (get a blender, throw raw ingredients in blender, voila).

Then find a staple vegetable- for me, jalapenos, onions, and spinach, or anything else that I'll frequently want to pair with the pinto beans. If I can connect all the different food groups together into a dish that I like on a daily basis, it makes it much easier to eat consistently healthy. One way to look at veggies, is that there's an enormous variety out there if you have a decent grocery store, and it's fun to explore something different every week. I just recently discovered fennel, which has a surprising taste for a sort of cabbagey bulb thing.

Greatly moderating meat consumption appears to be a good idea for health and for economic, social, and environmental reasons. I mostly eat fish and occasionally red meat. I think, as a general rule, we need to have it but we don't need very much.

The hard part is coming to grips with the fact that if you actually eat healthy, you can't eat 99% of the the stuff sold in any given store. It's eye opening, but not impossible to get used to.

 

[Moocow]

There is also this option, thanks to Jamie Hyneman of mythbusters:

http://www.reddit.com/r/food/comments/ag10g/jamie_hynemans_444/

 

[ℜεмїηїs¢εη¢ε]

I think ideally you would want to eat mostly fruits and vegetables with occasional meat/fish. Limit your grains and dairy. All processed foods have something wrong with them, even simple things like salt are processed in such a way which is harmful to our health. Because of this you should try to get fresh fruits/vegetables from local farms whenever you can. Don't drink bottled/tap water, get a filter. I usually have oranges or a melon for breakfast, a big salad with some meat/fish for lunch, and some more melon or other fruits/berries for dinner. Sometimes I have some nuts in between meals. I only drink water, rarely I have some tea. It's working pretty well for me, I feel healthy.

Basically it means you have to give up all of the nice tasty things you've been taught to eat and have what is proven to be better for your body. Do the logical thing, don't let society control you

 

[Architect]

An optimal diet is one that promotes longevity and well being. This is my definition which I think is a reasonable one, feel free to create one of your own. At this point we know what an optimal diet is, the science is very clear on the subject. What's confusing is that there are many people who don't like the answer so you've got a lot of dissenting voices out there. That doesn't at all affect the scientific truth of the matter.

People refuse to be reasonable and accept science when it comes to religion and health. I'm not sure why this is, clearly they prefer what they were taught growing up on these subjects and not what science tells them now.

 

[typus]

Personally, I've categorized dieting techniques with religions and political views as far as consturcitve debate goes, so I really would not trust a forum to give you any tips to actually go by. If you look into the suggestions posed (and miraculously find a reliable source') it might be useful, but just going by what people say will probably do no good.

 

[skip]

There is no one optimal diet that suits everyone. For example, I can't eat many starches and sugars without putting on weight, but I can eat fat fat all day long without seeing a rise in my weight or my cholesterol. The opposite might be true for someone else. A lot of it is simple trial and error. Also, what diet keeps you healthy and at a good weight changes throughout your life.

The best source for objective nutrition information I've found is the ADA's web site, Eat Right. You can start with their recommendations and go from there.

 

[BigApplePi]

I began to wonder: what is healthy diet?

That is a good question. Here are some thoughts:

1. Must one have something of protein, carbos, fat, minerals, vitamins as a minimum? For example, depending on one's activity, doesn't one need a minimum of protein for maintenance for protein used up?

2. Is there a healthy amount to eat? That is, too little and one loses weight and perhaps somethings essential; too much and one can wear something out maintaining this extra weight.

3. When to eat? That is all at once and fast or make it even keel and regular.

4. Tailor a diet for your uniqueness? I.e. there may be special allergies, special indigestibles for you, special pre-existing health conditions. Also any diet would depend on life style energy expended. I've lifted weights and run. What does that do and require?

5. Lifestyle. Is one eating for longevity or for energy? How does one affect the other?

6. What does non-essential "food" do? Does it pass through or does it act as a slow poison?

7. Another factor: what foods eaten encourage hunger rather than reduce it? Sugar, unrefined carbos raise and then lower blood sugar encouraging hunger. Nuts, for example, are satisfying.

 

[SpaceYeti]

Look into the food pyramid. It's pretty much that easy. Avoid fat, avoid salt (though there's a compromise to be made, since those are the two things which make food tasty).

 

[ℜεмїηїs¢εη¢ε]

Look into the food pyramid. It's pretty much that easy. Avoid fat, avoid salt (though there's a compromise to be made, since those are the two things which make food tasty).

I'm not much of a fan of the pyramid myself, I think they tell you to eat too much grain and dairy products, but we are talking about healthy food here. Personally I don't care what food tastes like anymore so long as I think it's healthy for me.

There is no one optimal diet that suits everyone. For example, I can't eat many starches and sugars without putting on weight, but I can eat fat fat all day long without seeing a rise in my weight or my cholesterol.

As far as I know, starches aren't good for anyone...

EDIT: Well, maybe a little, but not a lot of starches.

 

[snafupants]

Look into the food pyramid. It's pretty much that easy. Avoid fat, avoid salt (though there's a compromise to be made, since those are the two things which make food tasty).

@SpaceYeti

Sugar? You should know this scrumptious food enhancer, cupcake avatar. I guess there's fat in there too though. From a biological standpoint, it makes sense that humans would crave sugar. Aside from the glucose and quick energy factor, fruits in nature usually aren't poisonous and they confer nutritional benefit if consumed sparingly, which our ancestors did. Anyway, there are three chief types of fat, which vary on their benignity. Fats are necessary for cell health, organ functioning, digestion, energy (densest energy source), and growth. Back to the point, trans fats are the unnatural fats that should be avoided. I'm not as keen on carbohydrates and grains as the food pyramid from the eighties would advise. I also feel that corn and dairy receive too many subsidies in the United States. Corn isn't that healthy a plant and dairy products are literally watered down in the US today.

 

[SpaceYeti]

I'm not much of a fan of the pyramid myself, I think they tell you to eat too much grain and dairy products, but we are talking about healthy food here. Personally I don't care what food tastes like anymore so long as I think it's healthy for me.

You do realize food pyramid serving sizes are tiny, right?

 

[snafupants]

You do realize food pyramid serving sizes are tiny, right?

I've actually seen tripartite recommendations based on percentage for fats, carbs, and proteins.

 

[SpaceYeti]

@SpaceYeti

Sugar? You should know this scrumptious food enhancer, cupcake avatar. I guess there's fat in there too though. From a biological standpoint, it makes sense that humans would crave sugar. Aside from the glucose and quick energy factor, fruits in nature usually aren't poisonous and they confer nutritional benefit if consumed sparingly, which our ancestors did. Anyway, there are three chief types of fat, which vary on their benignity. Fats are necessary for cell health, organ functioning, digestion, energy (densest energy source), and growth. Back to the point, trans fats are the unnatural fats that should be avoided. I'm not as keen on carbohydrates and grains as the food pyramid from the eighties would advise. I also feel that corn and dairy receive too many subsidies in the United States. Corn isn't that healthy a plant and dairy products are literally watered down in the US today.

Sugar isn't much of a flavorer for foods you'd eat in order to be healthy. I mean, they can be, but savory meats and vegetables are far more common than sweet. Also, I personally dislike many sweeter meals. At any rate, it's salt and fat you'd be counting for a typical meal-time health value. Sugar is mostly found in desserts, which you don't eat for it's health benefits.

And you're correct about the kinds of fats and everything, but the fact remains that you need so little fat that it's easier to simply avoid it in general than to count up to whatever number of grams per day (~30, I think?).

Also, in the end, it's good to learn to trust your body. If you get some kind of craving for a particular food, good chance it has something your body needs more of.

The best strategy with a diet, as with anything, is temperance. Don't eat too much, don't eat too little, and your little vice isn't bad if you can minimize it instead of trying to go cold turkey. After all, it's about quality of life more than quantity.

 

[skip]

Personally I don't care what food tastes like anymore so long as I think it's healthy for me.

Interesting. Have you ever been passionate about food taste? I have a friend who's mostly indifferent to it. He's always amazed by how much I enjoy certain foods, he just doesn't have that experience at all.

As far as I know, starches aren't good for anyone...

EDIT: Well, maybe a little, but not a lot of starches.

It's the most common carbohydrate in [most] human diets: wheat, rice, potatoes, corn, etc. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean it's good for you.

 

[ℜεмїηїs¢εη¢ε]

Interesting. Have you ever been passionate about food taste? I have a friend who's mostly indifferent to it. He's always amazed by how much I enjoy certain foods, he just doesn't have that experience at all.

It's the most common carbohydrate in [most] human diets: wheat, rice, potatoes, corn, etc. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean it's good for you.

I used to be addicted to junk food but I grew out of it, I realized that my health is more important to me.

These carbs are fine in moderation especially if they are natural/good quality but I guess the problem is that they are often not. Having mashed potatoes, a biscuit, and corn in KFC won't be too healthy for you. Having some white rice in a Chinese buffet with some soy sauce won't be too good for you either. If you make the stuff at home with good ingredients then it's probably healthy in moderation. You still better be shoveling those greens though lol.

You do realize food pyramid serving sizes are tiny, right?

I can't prove this is the best way to eat but this is a quick chart I made on approximately how I try to eat:

This of course ignores serving size but that's exactly what I do, I ignore serving size/calories.

 

[skip]

I used to be addicted to junk food but I grew out of it, I realized that my health is more important to me.

I meant have you ever been passionate about real food, not junk food? Gourmet food, different cuisines, cooking, etc.?

 

[ℜεмїηїs¢εη¢ε]

I meant have you ever been passionate about real food, not junk food? Gourmet food, different cuisines, cooking, etc.?

Passionate is kind of a strong word, lol. I don't think I ever was passionate about food. I've been told that when I was a toddler I refused to eat anything unless I was forced to.

 

[A22]

Exercising is more important than eating well.

Someone actually made a list of the ideal diet, consisting of all nutrients and in what quantity one should have per day, including each vitamin and protein - for the average american I guess.

I can't seem to find the link to it, though.

 

[snafupants]

Exercising is more important than eating well.

@A22

Ask Jim Fixx about that assessment. That's clearly wrong. I could put someone on a dietary regimen that absolutely promised to deteriorate their health in predictable ways, irrespective of exercise, but a good diet without exercise wouldn't be that dire.

 

[BigApplePi]

Jim Foxx died running is my understanding. But he had a pre-existing condition. If we want to compare exercise and diet, I'd say set up a control group and decide what you want to test. Are we looking for the median-average person or do we want to take outliers like Foxx for results?

 

[intpz]

I think it's pretty simple... you can reasonably suspect that all packaged, processed goods are going to contain things like high fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeteners, MSG, preservatives, or other things you just won't want. I cut them out of my diet completely whenever I have the choice but without expecting to have a perfect score.

I think it helps to find yourself a good staple food as all cultures have. It could be like a healthy variety of brown rice, or maybe potatoes, but for me it's pinto beans. That's because I can get an enormous bag of pinto beans for very cheap, then pressure cook a couple week's worth of them and freeze whatever I can't eat within a few days. Cost effective, very healthy, and delicious if you know how to prepare them. Add some onions and jalapenos, a little salt, some spices, a little oil, and eat them with whole grain tortillas or chips and homemade salsa (get a blender, throw raw ingredients in blender, voila).

Then find a staple vegetable- for me, jalapenos, onions, and spinach, or anything else that I'll frequently want to pair with the pinto beans. If I can connect all the different food groups together into a dish that I like on a daily basis, it makes it much easier to eat consistently healthy. One way to look at veggies, is that there's an enormous variety out there if you have a decent grocery store, and it's fun to explore something different every week. I just recently discovered fennel, which has a surprising taste for a sort of cabbagey bulb thing.

Greatly moderating meat consumption appears to be a good idea for health and for economic, social, and environmental reasons. I mostly eat fish and occasionally red meat. I think, as a general rule, we need to have it but we don't need very much.

The hard part is coming to grips with the fact that if you actually eat healthy, you can't eat 99% of the the stuff sold in any given store. It's eye opening, but not impossible to get used to.

That doesn't sound half bad, your choices. For me, it would be potatoes, they cost half a buck per kilo I think, or less.

However, I disagree with what you said about eating the same thing on a daily basis. That's just utterly boring, I get bored of the same food, depending on how good it tastes, every 2-4 weeks. Unfortunately I eat the same thing for a year or two now. Or maybe 3 or 4; I can't tell anymore. But anyway, later you somewhat "corrected" that.

I also disagree with the fact that the realization that 90% of what's in a store shouldn't be eaten - the 10% tastes fucking good compared to the 90% of shit. If I had the choice, I wouldn't eat any stuff that needs to be heated to be eaten, I wouldn't eat all those packed bullshit stuff that is supposed to taste good but tastes like donkey's ass. I wouldn't eat sausage. I wouldn't eat most types of bread. I wouldn't eat most types of diary products. And I wouldn't eat a lot of other shit that I am too lazy to think of at the moment.

I think ideally you would want to eat mostly fruits and vegetables with occasional meat/fish. Limit your grains and dairy. All processed foods have something wrong with them, even simple things like salt are processed in such a way which is harmful to our health. Because of this you should try to get fresh fruits/vegetables from local farms whenever you can. Don't drink bottled/tap water, get a filter. I usually have oranges or a melon for breakfast, a big salad with some meat/fish for lunch, and some more melon or other fruits/berries for dinner. Sometimes I have some nuts in between meals. I only drink water, rarely I have some tea. It's working pretty well for me, I feel healthy.

Basically it means you have to give up all of the nice tasty things you've been taught to eat and have what is proven to be better for your body. Do the logical thing, don't let society control you

Are you shitting me? I'd love a melon! I could eat one or two every day for a month! And the rest, that also sounds like awesome food. Of course I would want a lot more variety for my ration...

In any case, I would drink tea, coffee, juice, not only water. Unfortunately we don't have enough money to buy water though, the tap water tastes like shit and I drink the stuff every fucking day. I really don't understand what's the problem you're having with tea, juice, etc., they are helthier than water. Also, I do agree that giving up cookies and candy (at least at the moment I feel like that, because I haven't had any for months) at all isn't cool.

I don't understand what you are talking about when you say "society control," how does the society control me? People buy what they like, where does the control come in?... Who "teaches" us to eat certain food? To the far extend, we get suggestions by friends, friends telling us what they like. Thats not control, you can refuse their opinion and make your own, like I do. Taste the fucking thing, then make your opinion, try something new once in a while...

An optimal diet is one that promotes longevity and well being. This is my definition which I think is a reasonable one, feel free to create one of your own.

That is what I meant by creating this thread... I've even explicitly mentioned that I'm not talking about all the "get thin" bullshit.

At this point we know what an optimal diet is, the science is very clear on the subject. What's confusing is that there are many people who don't like the answer so you've got a lot of dissenting voices out there. That doesn't at all affect the scientific truth of the matter.

People refuse to be reasonable and accept science when it comes to religion and health. I'm not sure why this is, clearly they prefer what they were taught growing up on these subjects and not what science tells them now.

The same people refuse a lot more than just religion and health man, you are limiting your argument A LOT. The same people prefer what they are used to and are afraid of change. The same people who wouldn't integrate computers in their fucking companies because they believe they are evil, even though they could increase the productivity and CREATE JOBS for people like me.

Personally, I've categorized dieting techniques with religions and political views as far as consturcitve debate goes, so I really would not trust a forum to give you any tips to actually go by. If you look into the suggestions posed (and miraculously find a reliable source') it might be useful, but just going by what people say will probably do no good.

I trust people on this forum on a subject like this more than I trust my opinion based on absolutely nothing. I am also too lazy to read hundreds of articles, papers and books to be able to make an opinion on this sensitive subject. That's what we do here folks, we discuss shit!

There is no one optimal diet that suits everyone. For example, I can't eat many starches and sugars without putting on weight, but I can eat fat fat all day long without seeing a rise in my weight or my cholesterol. The opposite might be true for someone else. A lot of it is simple trial and error. Also, what diet keeps you healthy and at a good weight changes throughout your life.

The best source for objective nutrition information I've found is the ADA's web site, Eat Right. You can start with their recommendations and go from there.

I'll be sure to check that out if I get a job which will allow me to actually buy costler stuff like "fancy" food. As for weight and me, I don't get weight whatever I eat, but I'm in my early 20s, so that may be the cause. I'm also lacking energy A LOT lately, but all I eat is bread, sausage and eggs right now... Occasionally some potatoes with meat, 1-3 times a week. But that's that.

That is a good question. Here are some thoughts:

1. Must one have something of protein, carbos, fat, minerals, vitamins as a minimum? For example, depending on one's activity, doesn't one need a minimum of protein for maintenance for protein used up?

2. Is there a healthy amount to eat? That is, too little and one loses weight and perhaps somethings essential; too much and one can wear something out maintaining this extra weight.

3. When to eat? That is all at once and fast or make it even keel and regular.

4. Tailor a diet for your uniqueness? I.e. there may be special allergies, special indigestibles for you, special pre-existing health conditions. Also any diet would depend on life style energy expended. I've lifted weights and run. What does that do and require?

5. Lifestyle. Is one eating for longevity or for energy? How does one affect the other?

6. What does non-essential "food" do? Does it pass through or does it act as a slow poison?

7. Another factor: what foods eaten encourage hunger rather than reduce it? Sugar, unrefined carbos raise and then lower blood sugar encouraging hunger. Nuts, for example, are satisfying.

1. That is too person-oriented.
2. I don't think anybody would use a weighter (is that the word?) to weight the exact amounts of food to eat: "Let's see… 438 grams of eggs, 0.5 grams of pepper, 765 grams of meat..."
3. I believe it is better to eat at regular times, however I prefer to eat when I want to eat and not limit myself to routine. I hate routine.
4. This is absolutely implicit...
5. = 1.
6. This is a shady topic for me, but I bet it's the latter, cancerogens to be precise.
7. Why, would you avoid eating food that makes you hungry?

Look into the food pyramid. It's pretty much that easy. Avoid fat, avoid salt (though there's a compromise to be made, since those are the two things which make food tasty).

I hate salt. My mom makes VERY salty food, I hate the damn thing. I always eat meat with a shitload of bread. Two small steaks = half a kilo of bread, or somewhere close to that. I can't eat it otherwise...

@SpaceYeti

Sugar? You should know this scrumptious food enhancer, cupcake avatar. I guess there's fat in there too though. From a biological standpoint, it makes sense that humans would crave sugar. Aside from the glucose and quick energy factor, fruits in nature usually aren't poisonous and they confer nutritional benefit if consumed sparingly, which our ancestors did. Anyway, there are three chief types of fat, which vary on their benignity. Fats are necessary for cell health, organ functioning, digestion, energy (densest energy source), and growth. Back to the point, trans fats are the unnatural fats that should be avoided. I'm not as keen on carbohydrates and grains as the food pyramid from the eighties would advise. I also feel that corn and dairy receive too many subsidies in the United States. Corn isn't that healthy a plant and dairy products are literally watered down in the US today.

Corn, I eat it rarely as it costs a lot, but I like how it tastes. I eat a mix (is that the word?) though, not just the whole goddamn thing.

I'm not much of a fan of the pyramid myself, I think they tell you to eat too much grain and dairy products, but we are talking about healthy food here. Personally I don't care what food tastes like anymore so long as I think it's healthy for me.

Would you eat food if it tasted literally like shit but was really good for you?

Sugar isn't much of a flavorer for foods you'd eat in order to be healthy. I mean, they can be, but savory meats and vegetables are far more common than sweet. Also, I personally dislike many sweeter meals. At any rate, it's salt and fat you'd be counting for a typical meal-time health value. Sugar is mostly found in desserts, which you don't eat for it's health benefits.

And you're correct about the kinds of fats and everything, but the fact remains that you need so little fat that it's easier to simply avoid it in general than to count up to whatever number of grams per day (~30, I think?).

Also, in the end, it's good to learn to trust your body. If you get some kind of craving for a particular food, good chance it has something your body needs more of.

The best strategy with a diet, as with anything, is temperance. Don't eat too much, don't eat too little, and your little vice isn't bad if you can minimize it instead of trying to go cold turkey. After all, it's about quality of life more than quantity.

I do tend to dislike a lot of sweeteners in my food as well. Mostly I drink non-sweatened tea or coffee.

You still can get the fat required by eating something else, or get more fat one day for two or three days (I think that counts?). In short, I don't think he's implied that you have to eat fat, he said that you should avoid only particular type of fat.

Right now my body is craving for red fish, alcoholic candy, a shitload of sweet cookies, and a shitload of various fruits and vegetables.

The last paragraph is kinda implicit as well... Well, to most people anyway.

Interesting. Have you ever been passionate about food taste? I have a friend who's mostly indifferent to it. He's always amazed by how much I enjoy certain foods, he just doesn't have that experience at all.

It's the most common carbohydrate in [most] human diets: wheat, rice, potatoes, corn, etc. Of course that doesn't necessarily mean it's good for you.

I do tend to like certain types of food a lot, but I have an excellent sense of taste and smell. That has been proven repeatedly. So anyway, it may be very related, also the "too much salt" mentioned earlier may be related to this as well. The good thing is, I can smell it when my mom makes food that got old because she forgot about it staying in the bag somewhere in her trash and now trying to pass it to me as good.

These carbs are fine in moderation especially if they are natural/good quality but I guess the problem is that they are often not. Having mashed potatoes, a biscuit, and corn in KFC won't be too healthy for you. Having some white rice in a Chinese buffet with some soy sauce won't be too good for you either. If you make the stuff at home with good ingredients then it's probably healthy in moderation. You still better be shoveling those greens though lol.

Why would the same rice made at home be healthier than the same rice at the Chinese place? Except what @Architect mentioned somewhere about them being dirty pigs (restaurants), but excluding that, I don't see any obvious reason.

Passionate is kind of a strong word, lol. I don't think I ever was passionate about food. I've been told that when I was a toddler I refused to eat anything unless I was forced to.

Everything.

Exercising is more important than eating well.

Someone actually made a list of the ideal diet, consisting of all nutrients and in what quantity one should have per day, including each vitamin and protein - for the average american I guess.

I can't seem to find the link to it, though.

It isn't.

I bet it's "how to not get fat" diet, "average American."

 

[skip]

Exercising is more important than eating well.

LOL, only when you're young! The cumulative effects of a poor diet will show up in unpleasant ways if you stay with it long enough.

 

[intpz]

@A22 skip's ain't full of shit, I'm living proof of it. Are you an ESxJ coach at high school by any chance?

 

[BigApplePi]

Spoiler

Originally Posted by BigApplePi

1. Must one have something of protein, carbos, fat, minerals, vitamins as a minimum? For example, depending on one's activity, doesn't one need a minimum of protein for maintenance for protein used up?

2. Is there a healthy amount to eat? That is, too little and one loses weight and perhaps somethings essential; too much and one can wear something out maintaining this extra weight.

3. When to eat? That is all at once and fast or make it even keel and regular.

4. Tailor a diet for your uniqueness? I.e. there may be special allergies, special indigestibles for you, special pre-existing health conditions. Also any diet would depend on life style energy expended. I've lifted weights and run. What does that do and require?

5. Lifestyle. Is one eating for longevity or for energy? How does one affect the other?

6. What does non-essential "food" do? Does it pass through or does it act as a slow poison?

7. Another factor: what foods eaten encourage hunger rather than reduce it? Sugar, unrefined carbos raise and then lower blood sugar encouraging hunger. Nuts, for example, are satisfying.

1. That is too person-oriented.
2. I don't think anybody would use a weighter (is that the word?) to weight the exact amounts of food to eat: "Let's see… 438 grams of eggs, 0.5 grams of pepper, 765 grams of meat..."
3. I believe it is better to eat at regular times, however I prefer to eat when I want to eat and not limit myself to routine. I hate routine.
4. This is absolutely implicit...
5. = 1.
6. This is a shady topic for me, but I bet it's the latter, cancerogens to be precise.
7. Why, would you avoid eating food that makes you hungry?

1. Don't you qualify as a person?
2. On a more macroscopic scale there is a "weighter." It's called a scale I believe. You get on it and it tells you if you have gained or lost three-five pounds. You proceed toward homeostasis.
3. I tend to eat when I want to except for dinner. My wife gets annoyed should I avoid her cooking and it's usually a hot meal.
6. Salt, food preservatives, added sugars are questionable.
7. You risk hunger controlling you rather than the other way around.

Would you eat food if it tasted literally like shit but was really good for you?

What if it tasted like that but smelled like roses or raspberries?

 

[snafupants]

Jim Foxx died running is my understanding. But he had a pre-existing condition. If we want to compare exercise and diet, I'd say set up a control group and decide what you want to test. Are we looking for the median-average person or do we want to take outliers like Foxx for results?

@BigApplePi

How does setting up a longitudinal study in which one group eats nothing but bacon and cake, while exercising, and another group consumes healthy foods, while living a sedentary lifestyle sound? If proper exercise is in all cases, ages, and circumstances more salubrious than proper diet then it can be expected that the former group will have better BMI and lower mortality rates over, say, seventy years than the latter group that eats well but ignores physical exertion.

 

[BigApplePi]

@snafuP

How does setting up a longitudinal study in which one group eats nothing but bacon and cake, while exercising, and another group consumes healthy foods, while living a sedentary lifestyle sound? If proper exercise is in all cases, ages, and circumstances more salubrious than proper diet then it can be expected that the former group will have better BMI and lower mortality rates over, say, seventy years than the latter group that eats well but ignores physical exertion.

Excellent test in theory, but how to set up such a test? You have not stated what the bacon-cake group drinks. If they exercise and drink more liquids than the healthy-sedentary group, we lack proper control. Also weight. Are both groups to maintain weight or is that part of the study? Not sure I grasp the study length. Seventy years? No problem. We could have the scientific team go for three generations to keep track. One more serious problem. It's the apples/oranges thing. If we carefully track results, to what are they to be attributed? The diet or the exercise? This test fails to keep either constant.

Please report back here before I start the study so I don't have to do the 70 years over again. Once I start I like to keep rolling. There is no need to report tonight as I'm watching a horror flick and may be too scared to make any important decisions.

 

[snafupants]

@snafuP


Excellent test in theory, but how to set up such a test? You have not stated what the bacon-cake group drinks. If they exercise and drink more liquids than the healthy-sedentary group, we lack proper control. Also weight. Are both groups to maintain weight or is that part of the study? Not sure I grasp the study length. Seventy years? No problem. We could have the scientific team go for three generations to keep track. One more serious problem. It's the apples/oranges thing. If we carefully track results, to what are they to be attributed? The diet or the exercise? This test fails to keep either constant.

Please report back here before I start the study so I don't have to do the 70 years over again. Once I start I like to keep rolling. There is no need to report tonight as I'm watching a horror flick and may be too scared to make any important decisions.

@BigApplePi

While I agree that the initial conditions were rudimentary (and subsequently present many of your inquiries) and that the test itself might be ecologically and practically difficult (time frame problems?), I feel that with enough subjects (i.e., over ten thousand cordoned to one culture) and with strict enough guidelines (e.g., absolutely zero "exercise," which can be fine-tuned later) the case will be made. Or another experiment can supplant this proposal. This might be necessary because nothing is really vacuumed for long periods of time apropos longitudinal studies. In other words, cultural changes might affect health and therefore the study's results; I guess it's unrealistic to think that the independent variables of diet and exercise can be perfectly isolated. The real concern I have, however, is that since conditions like atherosclerosis develop over long periods of time the study will not be long enough and the instruments will not be sensitive enough to measure veritable, perhaps negative, changes attributable to terrible diet and keen exercise. Maybe an even more important question is thus: how is health (the putative dependent variable) defined? An ancillary question is, how should poor diet be defined? The inverse of the food pyramid's suggestions or something that promotes disintegration of health? Again, how is health defined?

 

[Proletar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet


The way to go. Seriously.

 

[ℜεмїηїs¢εη¢ε]

Are you shitting me? I'd love a melon! I could eat one or two every day for a month! And the rest, that also sounds like awesome food. Of course I would want a lot more variety for my ration...

I like melon too Well, there are plenty of different kinds of fruits and vegetables but yea sometimes it's hard to get a variety of them if you aren't too familiar with them.

In any case, I would drink tea, coffee, juice, not only water. Unfortunately we don't have enough money to buy water though, the tap water tastes like shit and I drink the stuff every fucking day. I really don't understand what's the problem you're having with tea, juice, etc., they are helthier than water. Also, I do agree that giving up cookies and candy (at least at the moment I feel like that, because I haven't had any for months) at all isn't cool.

At my house we've got one of these: http://www.bigberkeywaterfilters.com/big-berkey.html
I know it's a bit expensive but the water tastes awesome! I mean like really, really good lol. Way better than bottled water, for sure.

I like to drink tea from herbs made at home but something just seems wrong with making it from those tea bags you can get at the store. The teas I've tried just seem fake to me idk why. Fruit juice has a lot of sugar, and vegetable juice tastes like shit. I'm fine with eating the vegetables but I don't see the point with the juices made from them.

I don't understand what you are talking about when you say "society control," how does the society control me? People buy what they like, where does the control come in?... Who "teaches" us to eat certain food? To the far extend, we get suggestions by friends, friends telling us what they like. Thats not control, you can refuse their opinion and make your own, like I do. Taste the fucking thing, then make your opinion, try something new once in a while...

Meh, I could have probably left that part out. I guess it's just the American culture, it's focused on a pretty awful diet.

Would you eat food if it tasted literally like shit but was really good for you?

If it made me substantially healthier then sadly yes. The good thing is over time I've learned to appreciate fruits and vegetables so they no longer taste bad for me. I've gotten so used to this diet that eating junk food actually makes me really sick, I actually don't like it anymore. No,I'm not contradicting myself from what I said before, I said I didn't like vegetable juices but it doesn't matter because I can still eat the vegetables.

Why would the same rice made at home be healthier than the same rice at the Chinese place? Except what @Architect mentioned somewhere about them being dirty pigs (restaurants), but excluding that, I don't see any obvious reason.

Fried rice isn't good for you and and neither is white rice. Boil some brown rice and you're good to go !

 

[Architect]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet


The way to go. Seriously.

No, that is completely wrong. The scientific evidence is absolutely clear on this. Atkins made a fortune on the gullibility of people, telling them that eating excessive protein and fat isn't bad for them, no, it's actually good. Meanwhile he died a fat, sick old man who couldn't keep his feet on a patch of ice.

You've been lied to, but it is within your power to understand what the truth is.

 

[intpz]

At my house we've got one of these: http://www.bigberkeywaterfilters.com/big-berkey.html
I know it's a bit expensive but the water tastes awesome! I mean like really, really good lol. Way better than bottled water, for sure.

I like to drink tea from herbs made at home but something just seems wrong with making it from those tea bags you can get at the store. The teas I've tried just seem fake to me idk why. Fruit juice has a lot of sugar, and vegetable juice tastes like shit. I'm fine with eating the vegetables but I don't see the point with the juices made from them.

That IS costly.

You can buy tea in specialized stores, skip the teabags. And the teabags, I kinda liked Earl Grey's tea and Lipton's tea. I say kind because I don't mean "they're awesome." I think that they are costly though, I haven't gotten any for a long time now. But the again, the tea from specialized stores is costlier, I haven't gotten that for years now. Green Tea's supposedly very healthy.

Meh, I could have probably left that part out. I guess it's just the American culture, it's focused on a pretty awful diet.

It's still not society controlling you, unless you do what most others do. But still, I think that Americans choose to eat fast food, I've heard it's cheap in the US.

If it made me substantially healthier then sadly yes. The good thing is over time I've learned to appreciate fruits and vegetables so they no longer taste bad for me. I've gotten so used to this diet that eating junk food actually makes me really sick, I actually don't like it anymore. No,I'm not contradicting myself from what I said before, I said I didn't like vegetable juices but it doesn't matter because I can still eat the vegetables.

Isn't that make-believe? But anyway, I find it odd that some people don't like a certain group of food. I see that as another make-believe...

Fried rice isn't good for you and and neither is white rice. Boil some brown rice and you're good to go !

Speaking of brown rice, I wanted to try them a lot recently, but when I saw the price, "fuck!" I thought. They cost $3 or so per 200g, I think. Too lazy to check it and see no reason to.

 

[Architect]

Exercising is more important than eating well.

No that is commonly believed and completely wrong. As others have said, there are many, many examples of athletes who are dying of affluence diseases because of this idea. I've experimented with diet (animal based to plant based with every variation in between) and exercise (running, swimming, cycling and weight lifting) and personally verified the research, which is that exercise is a small part of your overall health. I'd place it at around 80% diet 20% exercise. Just take a few minutes and consider how much you have to exercise to burn off a cheeseburger.

Which is why elite athletes are going vegan. Cyclists especially for some reason, some of the other forms are slower on the update.

 

[intpz]

Spoiler

Originally Posted by BigApplePi

1. Must one have something of protein, carbos, fat, minerals, vitamins as a minimum? For example, depending on one's activity, doesn't one need a minimum of protein for maintenance for protein used up?

2. Is there a healthy amount to eat? That is, too little and one loses weight and perhaps somethings essential; too much and one can wear something out maintaining this extra weight.

3. When to eat? That is all at once and fast or make it even keel and regular.

4. Tailor a diet for your uniqueness? I.e. there may be special allergies, special indigestibles for you, special pre-existing health conditions. Also any diet would depend on life style energy expended. I've lifted weights and run. What does that do and require?

5. Lifestyle. Is one eating for longevity or for energy? How does one affect the other?

6. What does non-essential "food" do? Does it pass through or does it act as a slow poison?

7. Another factor: what foods eaten encourage hunger rather than reduce it? Sugar, unrefined carbos raise and then lower blood sugar encouraging hunger. Nuts, for example, are satisfying.

1. Don't you qualify as a person?
2. On a more macroscopic scale there is a "weighter." It's called a scale I believe. You get on it and it tells you if you have gained or lost three-five pounds. You proceed toward homeostasis.
3. I tend to eat when I want to except for dinner. My wife gets annoyed should I avoid her cooking and it's usually a hot meal.
6. Salt, food preservatives, added sugars are questionable.
7. You risk hunger controlling you rather than the other way around.
What if it tasted like that but smelled like roses or raspberries?

1. Look Marge, all those 7b persoN are alive!
2. A scale, maybe I'll remember that.
3. Hot meals stay hot for long.
4.
5.
6. Sugar and salt isn't as bad as preservatives to my knowledge.
7. If you're an idiot with no self-control, like those impulsive shoppers, I agree with you, however since I am not that stupid, I don't relate to it.

You smell it, look at it, and taste it. I should get popcorn and watch what you do for the next 15 minutes. Licking your carpet?

 

[BigApplePi]

Spoiler

While I agree that the initial conditions were rudimentary (and subsequently present many of your inquiries) and that the test itself might be ecologically and practically difficult (time frame problems?), I feel that with enough subjects (i.e., over ten thousand cordoned to one culture) and with strict enough guidelines (e.g., absolutely zero "exercise," which can be fine-tuned later) the case will be made. Or another experiment can supplant this proposal. This might be necessary because nothing is really vacuumed for long periods of time apropos longitudinal studies. In other words, cultural changes might affect health and therefore the study's results; I guess it's unrealistic to think that the independent variables of diet and exercise can be perfectly isolated. The real concern I have, however, is that since conditions like atherosclerosis develop over long periods of time the study will not be long enough and the instruments will not be sensitive enough to measure veritable, perhaps negative, changes attributable to terrible diet and keen exercise. Maybe an even more important question is thus: how is health (the putative dependent variable) defined? An ancillary question is, how should poor diet be defined? The inverse of the food pyramid's suggestions or something that promotes disintegration of health? Again, how is health defined?

@@snafuP

While the experts are working on refining your proposal, here are two more experiments. No reason to hold up science.

(1) Have two alike groups, one with vegetarian diet and the other without. Check out health results every five years.

(2) Have two like groups exactly the same except, one from Road Runners and the other random. That's the only difference, hold all other variables constant. Check results every five years.

 

[Proletar]

No, that is completely wrong. The scientific evidence is absolutely clear on this. Atkins made a fortune on the gullibility of people, telling them that eating excessive protein and fat isn't bad for them, no, it's actually good. Meanwhile he died a fat, sick old man who couldn't keep his feet on a patch of ice.

You've been lied to, but it is within your power to understand what the truth is.

I know that there are three kinds of digestable types of energy (or four with alcohol) - carbohydrates, proteins and fats. I also know that the consumption of fat has decreased in the past century, whilst the consumption of carbohydrates has increased along with obesity and all kinds of diseases. (Cancer and diabetes used to be rare for dogs sake.)

Also, the science is not clear on this, since the science has been revisioned. The swedish 'national board of health and welfare' claimed to have "thousands of studies" some years back, proving the hazard of saturated fat. Then, people started asking them to show these studies to the public. So they threw out 12, and in the end all of them were disgarded. And now, the national board of health and welfare advocates the low carb diet.


People trust white coats too much.

 

[Architect]

I know that there are three kinds of digestable types of energy (or four with alcohol) - carbohydrates, proteins and fats. I also know that the consumption of fat has decreased in the past century, whilst the consumption of carbohydrates has increased along with obesity and all kinds of diseases. (Cancer and diabetes used to be rare for dogs sake.)

Correlation is not causation. Biggest mistake people make in considering data. I absolutely guarentee that if you beat a drum whenever an eclipse happens, the sun will come back. Additionally you have to consider data integrity, was cancer and diabetes as well measured in the past? Are you comparing apples to apples?

Also, the science is not clear on this, since the science has been revisioned.

That's nonsensical. Science works by revision, especially in the biological sciences the latest research - revisions and improving on the old, is usually better. Certainly over time it circles and reaches the truth. On this topic we definitively know, as of in the last few years, the story on diet. People are so confused however (due to listening to close to early results) that they can't get the message.

People trust white coats too much.

They don't trust them enough. These are difficult subjects, and instead of listening to an expert who spent their life on it, will pull some opinion out of their backside based on little experience and data.

 

[Milo]

No, that is completely wrong. The scientific evidence is absolutely clear on this. Atkins made a fortune on the gullibility of people, telling them that eating excessive protein and fat isn't bad for them, no, it's actually good. Meanwhile he died a fat, sick old man who couldn't keep his feet on a patch of ice.

You've been lied to, but it is within your power to understand what the truth is.

You should probably get your facts straight... Adkins was not fat at all. Want to read about it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Atkins_(nutritionist)

I eat only meat, dairy, and vegetables (barely any vegetables though). There are also studies that have shown brain shrinkage on a low-fat diet.

 

[Architect]

You should probably get your facts straight... Adkins was not fat at all. Want to read about it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Atkins_(nutritionist)

I've studied him plenty. His family hides the exact story of how he died, having threatened lawsuits to those who knew. So to be fair the exact story of his health and how he died isn't published, but the facts seem pretty clear.

Regardless ketosis is a mechanism that evolution developed to deal with marginal conditions - starvation basically, as a way to derive calories by eating your own protein source (muscles). The body tries to avoid it however through protein sparing, since it 'knows' that muscles should be preserved at all cost. It certainly isn't a method for weight loss and health.

Easiest way to lose weight is to go on an all vegetable, no refined foods diet. Works every time - take a look at Bill Clinton to see some typical results.

I eat only meat, dairy, and vegetables (barely any vegetables though).

So meat and dairy then. Your choice, a bad one unfortunately, it's at the opposite end of the spectrum from an optimal diet.

There are also studies that have shown brain shrinkage on a low-fat diet.

Who is eating a low-fat diet? You wrongly assume that science implicates fat, which was previous generation conclusions. Up to date research shows that a moderate fat diet is best, which I follow.

Remarkably - or not considering, the optimal diet looks very much like what primates in the wild eat. This shouldn't be surprising considering that our digestive system certainly evolved from primates. Meat and dairy eating aficionados often cite the Ice Age, but that's really wasn't long or significant enough to fundamentally alter our digestive system. At any rate, primates primarily eat vegetables, some nuts and seeds, with meat intake less than 5%, mainly opportunistic. They don't eat any dairy, actually there is no animal planet that eats dairy except for man, past puberty.

 

[intpz]

@Architect Somewhat similar to what you've said:

Spoiler

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=0O-ehIkwGME

 

[Milo]

I've studied him plenty. His family hides the exact story of how he died, having threatened lawsuits to those who knew. So to be fair the exact story of his health and how he died isn't published, but the facts seem pretty clear.

Regardless ketosis is a mechanism that evolution developed to deal with marginal conditions - starvation basically, as a way to derive calories by eating your own protein source (muscles). The body tries to avoid it however through protein sparing, since it 'knows' that muscles should be preserved at all cost. It certainly isn't a method for weight loss and health.

Easiest way to lose weight is to go on an all vegetable, no refined foods diet. Works every time - take a look at Bill Clinton to see some typical results.



So meat and dairy then. Your choice, a bad one unfortunately, it's at the opposite end of the spectrum from an optimal diet.



Who is eating a low-fat diet? You wrongly assume that science implicates fat, which was previous generation conclusions. Up to date research shows that a moderate fat diet is best, which I follow.

Remarkably - or not considering, the optimal diet looks very much like what primates in the wild eat. This shouldn't be surprising considering that our digestive system certainly evolved from primates. Meat and dairy eating aficionados often cite the Ice Age, but that's really wasn't long or significant enough to fundamentally alter our digestive system. At any rate, primates primarily eat vegetables, some nuts and seeds, with meat intake less than 5%, mainly opportunistic. They don't eat any dairy, actually there is no animal planet that eats dairy except for man, past puberty.

Like you said before correlation does not necessarily mean causation, so why even bother saying there is a controversy in Adkin's death? When you eat less carbs, your body produces more hgh which preserves your muscle and causes you to burn off fatm, and since insulin and hgh cannot be produced simultaneously, carbs will only leave your muscles at risk for loss. I am at 3% body fat and am getting more and more muscle as this diet continues. My energy is at the highest it has ever been and my cognition has improved remarkably. I get most of my calories from animal fats, not nuts or seeds since it is less efficient for obtaining b-vitamins.

Also the stomach's of primates are much different than ours. There are also completely carnivorous primates out there. A gorilla has a stomach that converts carbohydrates into fat. We do not have this mechanism. Your appendix is the vestigial organ for that.

The ice age lasted for millions of years, so I'm pretty sure it had a much greater effect on the human species than you have described.

B vitamins are also the most important vitamins for your nervous system which are found primarily in meat. Nuts and seeds have them too, but it a much smaller quantity. You should not have to take supplements at all with your diet either.

Here is an interesting read that I have posted once before on this subject. http://inhumanexperiment.blogspot.com/2009/09/two-brave-men-who-ate-nothing-but-meat.html

 

[intpz]

B is important, B6 and B12. I failed to find a good source for them, so supplements should be used, unless I missed something.

P.S. I need a job, because now all I eat is what is very unhealthy. Damn fucks declining technology...

 

[Milo]

B is important, B6 and B12. I failed to find a good source for them, so supplements should be used, unless I missed something.

P.S. I need a job, because now all I eat is what is very unhealthy. Damn fucks declining technology...

The best source is meat. Lol.

 

[skip]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet

The way to go. Seriously.

That's somewhat misleading as the type of carbohydrate matters. This is a long video and he might lose you (the general "you," not you specifically, Proletar) in some of the chemistry depending on what your academic background is, but it's worth watching.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

 

[Proletar]

Like you said before correlation does not necessarily mean causation, so why even bother saying there is a controversy in Adkin's death?

Oh snap! You ISTPs are all right.

 

[intpz]

The best source is meat. Lol.

I eat eggs, meat, bread, and I have a quite severe deficiency for B.

@skip Do you naturally include things like "(the general "you," not you specifically, Proletar)" when writing and/or talking? Just curious...

 

[skip]

@skip Do you naturally include things like "(the general "you," not you specifically, Proletar)" when writing and/or talking? Just curious...

No, I just didn't want Proletar to think I was singling him out for some reason.

 

[snafupants]

I've studied him plenty. His family hides the exact story of how he died, having threatened lawsuits to those who knew. So to be fair the exact story of his health and how he died isn't published, but the facts seem pretty clear.

Regardless ketosis is a mechanism that evolution developed to deal with marginal conditions - starvation basically, as a way to derive calories by eating your own protein source (muscles). The body tries to avoid it however through protein sparing, since it 'knows' that muscles should be preserved at all cost. It certainly isn't a method for weight loss and health.

Easiest way to lose weight is to go on an all vegetable, no refined foods diet. Works every time - take a look at Bill Clinton to see some typical results.



So meat and dairy then. Your choice, a bad one unfortunately, it's at the opposite end of the spectrum from an optimal diet.



Who is eating a low-fat diet? You wrongly assume that science implicates fat, which was previous generation conclusions. Up to date research shows that a moderate fat diet is best, which I follow.

Remarkably - or not considering, the optimal diet looks very much like what primates in the wild eat. This shouldn't be surprising considering that our digestive system certainly evolved from primates. Meat and dairy eating aficionados often cite the Ice Age, but that's really wasn't long or significant enough to fundamentally alter our digestive system. At any rate, primates primarily eat vegetables, some nuts and seeds, with meat intake less than 5%, mainly opportunistic. They don't eat any dairy, actually there is no animal planet that eats dairy except for man, past puberty.

Since science is always vindicated in hindsight, perhaps everybody should follow Architect's advice.

 

[Milo]

I eat eggs, meat, bread, and I have a quite severe deficiency for B.

What brings you to that conclusion? If you overcook the meat, the Bs will be destroyed.

 

[intpz]

What brings you to that conclusion? If you overcook the meat, the Bs will be destroyed.

Well mom mostly adds a shitload of salt and fries the meat, I eat that 1-2-3 times a week, sometimes there's also potatoes. I also eat a lot of (especially lately) sausage, which isn't cooked at all, just a mix of whatever they throw in the grinder. So according to you, I should have a lot of B6/12, which I don't. I also have other deficiencies too, by the way, as I eat vegetables or fruit once in 2-4 months, nuts once half a year or rarer, rice and stuff like that once every 4-8 months, but if rice then white, I have never tasted brown rice.