Diets


#61

Ms doing weight watchers. Yeah, old school, right?

Basically every food is given a points value, and you put in your height/weight/age etc and get given an allotment of points per day/week.

90% of the changes are portion control and using less fat/oil when cooking.

 

Do you even catalyst??

 

Not ■■■■ stirring here, but I honestly believe the hype around lowering carb intake and increasing natural fat consumption as an energy source (not protein as much). Not necessarily as a path to weight loss, because if that is the goal, most people will yoyo, but for the aim of lowering inflammatory diseases, diabetes, heart disease etc. I know that people who are entrenched in the old heart tick way of doing things are going to launch at me for this, and I may be proven wrong, but for me it feels right, and I think it will become mainstream thinking in the next ten years as more science comes out. 
Did anyone watch the catalyst episode? If not, you should, even if you disagree with it, its an interesting view on how sports people eat and the concept of carbohydrate intolerance. I am keen to see what people think. 
 


#62

That catalyst episode was totally biased and one sided


#63

Megz must be internally combusting everytime she comes in here!


#64

That catalyst episode was totally biased and one sided

Are you talking about the heart disease one that they got hammered for?


#65

The normal open discussion I come to expect on Blitz. 


#66


That catalyst episode was totally biased and one sided

Are you talking about the heart disease one that they got hammered for?

I read about them getting hammered for being one sided but nothing about the heart stuff. A lack of nutrition when whole grains are left out, poor gut health etc but nothing on the heart.

#67

 

 

That catalyst episode was totally biased and one sided

Are you talking about the heart disease one that they got hammered for?

I read about them getting hammered for being one sided but nothing about the heart stuff. A lack of nutrition when whole grains are left out, poor gut health etc but nothing on the heart.

 

Sorry I was confused, the episode I was on about was about the statin (drugs) saying "hey everybody, stop using your medication!" I have literally zero idea about the episode you're talking about but I would tend to side with the pro over the amateur most times...

 

 

But shows need to very, very careful about the message that comes across. Catalyst used to be very good with their fact-checking & balance. Always thoroughly canvas professional opinions and policies.

Not so much now?


#68

ABC can still be as shifty as ■■■■. They just desguise it better.


#69

 

Ms doing weight watchers. Yeah, old school, right?

Basically every food is given a points value, and you put in your height/weight/age etc and get given an allotment of points per day/week.

90% of the changes are portion control and using less fat/oil when cooking.

 

Do you even catalyst??

 

Not **** stirring here, but I honestly believe the hype around lowering carb intake and increasing natural fat consumption as an energy source (not protein as much). Not necessarily as a path to weight loss, because if that is the goal, most people will yoyo, but for the aim of lowering inflammatory diseases, diabetes, heart disease etc. I know that people who are entrenched in the old heart tick way of doing things are going to launch at me for this, and I may be proven wrong, but for me it feels right, and I think it will become mainstream thinking in the next ten years as more science comes out. 
Did anyone watch the catalyst episode? If not, you should, even if you disagree with it, its an interesting view on how sports people eat and the concept of carbohydrate intolerance. I am keen to see what people think. 
 

 

my wife went to a health forum the other day and they had a few doctors speak, more or less saying most people dont die from old age anymore they die from illness...inflammatory dieses and also they were concerned about australias obescity epidemic and high rate of diabetes.

Now the alarming thing about diabetes, is the recommended diabetes meal plans are carbohydrate based.  Diabetes is a condition where the body cannot tolerate carbohydrate load. So simply reduce that load and replace it with a higher healthy fat fuel.

 

http://lowcarbdownunder.com.au/


#70

 

 

Ms doing weight watchers. Yeah, old school, right?

Basically every food is given a points value, and you put in your height/weight/age etc and get given an allotment of points per day/week.

90% of the changes are portion control and using less fat/oil when cooking.

 

Do you even catalyst??

 

Not **** stirring here, but I honestly believe the hype around lowering carb intake and increasing natural fat consumption as an energy source (not protein as much). Not necessarily as a path to weight loss, because if that is the goal, most people will yoyo, but for the aim of lowering inflammatory diseases, diabetes, heart disease etc. I know that people who are entrenched in the old heart tick way of doing things are going to launch at me for this, and I may be proven wrong, but for me it feels right, and I think it will become mainstream thinking in the next ten years as more science comes out. 
Did anyone watch the catalyst episode? If not, you should, even if you disagree with it, its an interesting view on how sports people eat and the concept of carbohydrate intolerance. I am keen to see what people think. 
 

 

my wife went to a health forum the other day and they had a few doctors speak, more or less saying most people dont die from old age anymore they die from illness...inflammatory dieses and also they were concerned about australias obescity epidemic and high rate of diabetes.

Now the alarming thing about diabetes, is the recommended diabetes meal plans are carbohydrate based.  Diabetes is a condition where the body cannot tolerate carbohydrate load. So simply reduce that load and replace it with a higher healthy fat fuel.

 

http://lowcarbdownunder.com.au/

 

 

Yeah I read about this conference. It seems that the diabetes link is starting to grow. Its of personal interest to me with two type 1 diabetic siblings, and there are more and more studies coming out on the glucose level control increasing once the carbohydrate cycle is broken. The problem, in my uneducated yet practical opinion, is that diabetics are so entrenched in the carb cycle of eat carbs, take insulin, that its actually quite dangerous for them to make radical diet changes like that to test. I like the concept of carbohydrate intolerence. 

 

Edit: I am also very interested in the links that are  drawn between diet and inflammatory conditions, from rheumatoid arthitis all the way through to snoring.  Does anyone know much about this? Positive or negative, I am not trying to fill conference seats. Constructively negative, preferably :P
Also, W.R.T the abc and the catalyst, I was surprised by how one sided it was. I don't know what they would be trying to achieve by that though. 


#71

 

Ms doing weight watchers. Yeah, old school, right?

Basically every food is given a points value, and you put in your height/weight/age etc and get given an allotment of points per day/week.

90% of the changes are portion control and using less fat/oil when cooking.

 

Do you even catalyst??

 

Not **** stirring here, but I honestly believe the hype around lowering carb intake and increasing natural fat consumption as an energy source (not protein as much). Not necessarily as a path to weight loss, because if that is the goal, most people will yoyo, but for the aim of lowering inflammatory diseases, diabetes, heart disease etc. I know that people who are entrenched in the old heart tick way of doing things are going to launch at me for this, and I may be proven wrong, but for me it feels right, and I think it will become mainstream thinking in the next ten years as more science comes out. 
Did anyone watch the catalyst episode? If not, you should, even if you disagree with it, its an interesting view on how sports people eat and the concept of carbohydrate intolerance. I am keen to see what people think. 
 

 

 

Can you give me a brief run down on the principles of this, Im interested but don't want to watch a whole episode.

 

 

Also what are natural fats, and where can I find them, how are they to be prepared etc. Roasted chicken skin? Sardines? Nuts?


#72

 

 

Ms doing weight watchers. Yeah, old school, right?

Basically every food is given a points value, and you put in your height/weight/age etc and get given an allotment of points per day/week.

90% of the changes are portion control and using less fat/oil when cooking.

 

Do you even catalyst??

 

Not **** stirring here, but I honestly believe the hype around lowering carb intake and increasing natural fat consumption as an energy source (not protein as much). Not necessarily as a path to weight loss, because if that is the goal, most people will yoyo, but for the aim of lowering inflammatory diseases, diabetes, heart disease etc. I know that people who are entrenched in the old heart tick way of doing things are going to launch at me for this, and I may be proven wrong, but for me it feels right, and I think it will become mainstream thinking in the next ten years as more science comes out. 
Did anyone watch the catalyst episode? If not, you should, even if you disagree with it, its an interesting view on how sports people eat and the concept of carbohydrate intolerance. I am keen to see what people think. 
 

 

 

Can you give me a brief run down on the principles of this, Im interested but don't want to watch a whole episode.

 

 

Also what are natural fats, and where can I find them, how are they to be prepared etc. Roasted chicken skin? Sardines? Nuts?

 

 

I will find some of the more relevant sites and post them when I get home from work. The problem is like all issues like this, that people are trying to make money off the growing popularity, so it kind of takes away from the potential findings and warps truths. My general positive thoughts towards it are through mostly gut feel (pun intended) and not based on a literature review or anything, so definitely interested in discussion. 

 

Oh and for the catalyst thing, it was only based around a few people, but what they showed from the few studies they mentioned is that the concept of carb loading for sport is not necessarily the right way to do it, and that a high fat diet (once an athlete had adapted over weeks to months), provided a more consistent energy platform. 
 


#73

 

 

 

Ms doing weight watchers. Yeah, old school, right?

Basically every food is given a points value, and you put in your height/weight/age etc and get given an allotment of points per day/week.

90% of the changes are portion control and using less fat/oil when cooking.

 

Do you even catalyst??

 

Not **** stirring here, but I honestly believe the hype around lowering carb intake and increasing natural fat consumption as an energy source (not protein as much). Not necessarily as a path to weight loss, because if that is the goal, most people will yoyo, but for the aim of lowering inflammatory diseases, diabetes, heart disease etc. I know that people who are entrenched in the old heart tick way of doing things are going to launch at me for this, and I may be proven wrong, but for me it feels right, and I think it will become mainstream thinking in the next ten years as more science comes out. 
Did anyone watch the catalyst episode? If not, you should, even if you disagree with it, its an interesting view on how sports people eat and the concept of carbohydrate intolerance. I am keen to see what people think. 
 

 

 

Can you give me a brief run down on the principles of this, Im interested but don't want to watch a whole episode.

 

 

Also what are natural fats, and where can I find them, how are they to be prepared etc. Roasted chicken skin? Sardines? Nuts?

 

 

I will find some of the more relevant sites and post them when I get home from work. The problem is like all issues like this, that people are trying to make money off the growing popularity, so it kind of takes away from the potential findings and warps truths. My general positive thoughts towards it are through mostly gut feel (pun intended) and not based on a literature review or anything, so definitely interested in discussion. 

 

Oh and for the catalyst thing, it was only based around a few people, but what they showed from the few studies they mentioned is that the concept of carb loading for sport is not necessarily the right way to do it, and that a high fat diet (once an athlete had adapted over weeks to months), provided a more consistent energy platform. 
 

 

Random thoughts/rant

 

I could track down the studies and large evidence base (science, as opposed to "I feel") but I promised myself not to get too deeply involved in this thread or it will do my head in.

 

Carbs are not evil, neither is fat. It's about balance. The healthy eating guidelines are based on over 10,000 pieces of scientific literature. And before you argue that we've had them for years and are fatter than ever consider these facts:

 

- 7% of the population meet the recommended servings of veg a day

- On average people take in 30-40% of their energy intake from "discretionary foods" (this is NOT including fats like olive oil, avocado etc etc) rather than the "not needed for health" category they fall in the dietary guidelines.

 

Plus. Diabetes is NOT carbohydrate intolerance, particularly in type 1. That's a basic misunderstanding the the condition.

 

And both catalyst episodes (heart disease and carb one) were totally biased and one sided.

 

The diet with actual SCIENCE behind it in regards to heart disease is the Mediterranean diet (hight fruit and veg, legumes, wholegrains, fish, olive oil. Less meat and discretionary foods)

 

If you want to know about carbs and fats etc in sports performance I suggest you look up @LouiseMBurke on twitter. She is the AIS dietitian and written so many studies on diet and sports performance. THE guru in Australia on this.

 

This is why bugman won't let me watch diet shows. He's afraid I'll break something.

 

- megz


#74

There's a book called The Mediterranean Diet by a woman called Catherine Itsiopoulos that makes the point that a lot of what is said to be mediterranean diet is in fact not what people were eating day to day, but is what they ate, when they could get it, for celebrations like Christmas, weddings and so on.  The day to day diet has very little meat in it.  The book has lots of recipes of that kind.  It's great to eat 250 or 300 grams of lamb fillet with a big plate of Greek salad, but it's not what the mediterranean peasants were eating after a day in the fields and while it's better than the equivalent quantity of Kentucky Fried, a fat desk worker is not likely to lose much weight on it. 


#75

Hi Megz!

 

I will check out Louises twitter now. 

 

I am not going to argue with you line for line, as I dont really know, but if you could comment on this that would be good.

 

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

 

Albeit not 10000 peer reviewed papers, it is 23 randomized controlled trials published in fairly respectable looking journals over the last 11 years and summarised.

 

Wikipedia says that one of the major criticisms is that there were no long term studies as this is a relatively new kind of "fad" in that it was born in the 90s and that the emergence of these longitudinal studies over the past 5  years or so is starting to change perception of long term risk. 

 

I have these questions:

 

- is it still thought in scientific circles that there is a benefit in eating lean meat over fatty meat and if so, why? i.e. should I cut my fat off steaks?
- Is it still good to eat "plenty of cereals" as recommended by the national dietary guidelines?
- Is a high fructose diet, i.e. the Mediterranean, suited for everyone, and isn't there evidence these days of fructose being the devil, as we can only process a limited amount and the excess leads to triglyceride increase etc?

 

I have lots more, but I don't want anything broken. Feel free to ignore them


#76

cut the sugar

 

wanna eat carbs, fine, then MOVE

 

med fat 

 

nom nom protein, veges

 

water


#77

Avoid Diets.  

Especially ones that advocate low carbs and high protein.  

Couple of basic facts,  Carbs are fuel for Muscle.   Stop eating fuel for muscle your body starts eating its own muscle for muscle energy.

 Muscle weighs more than Fat, Hence why losing "weight" (not girth/feel) + a diet of low carbs always reachs its goal quickly.

Once you go off that diet, like eating alot of carbs, you will be worse off because you lost the muscle that burns...Carbs. (going to live low carb for the rest of your life?  )

 

Long story short, read this book from a reputable source i read along time ago:

 

The Diet Dilemma by Rosemary Stanton. 

http://www.angusrobertson.com.au/books/the-diet-dilemma---explained-rosemary-stanton/p/9781865082561

Great book with alot of common sense and science.   Short to read and lots of info.

 

Also check out this site:

http://www.eatforhealth.gov.au/

 

Carbs are fuel for muscle, which is why the body produces its own. Your muscles are not going to starve if you stop eating carbs.


#78

Hi Megz!
 
I will check out Louises twitter now. 
 
I am not going to argue with you line for line, as I dont really know, but if you could comment on this that would be good.
 
http://authoritynutrition.com/23-studies-on-low-carb-and-low-fat-diets/
 
Albeit not 10000 peer reviewed papers, it is 23 randomized controlled trials published in fairly respectable looking journals over the last 11 years and summarised.
 
Wikipedia says that one of the major criticisms is that there were no long term studies as this is a relatively new kind of "fad" in that it was born in the 90s and that the emergence of these longitudinal studies over the past 5  years or so is starting to change perception of long term risk. 
 
I have these questions:
 
- is it still thought in scientific circles that there is a benefit in eating lean meat over fatty meat and if so, why? i.e. should I cut my fat off steaks?
- Is it still good to eat "plenty of cereals" as recommended by the national dietary guidelines?
- Is a high fructose diet, i.e. the Mediterranean, suited for everyone, and isn't there evidence these days of fructose being the devil, as we can only process a limited amount and the excess leads to triglyceride increase etc?
 
I have lots more, but I don't want anything broken. Feel free to ignore them


Wholegrain cereals in "moderation" yes still good
Fructose is so not the devil. The only studies that show it are in rats who digest it very differently to us. Plus the amounts that show this are far beyond whatever even the most dedicated consumer eats. I had a great blog on this yesterday but I can't find it
And Catherine Istiopolous was my mentor :) has done much studies and her PhD on the Mediterranean diet.

#79

I dont think this will surprise anyone but:

http://mobile.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/damon-gameau-goes-super-size-on-the-sweet-stuff-in-shocking-sugar-experiment/story-fneuzkvr-1227127957935


#80

Healthy guy eats processed foods and suffers. What a shock