celticbhoy wrote:It took my wife saying "surely cutting 3 major foods groups (dairy, carbs and Fruit) can't be good" for me to actually face up to the fact that it isn't.
What exactly is a food group? How many total are there? When did Carbs become a food group? I must have missed that. How many are "necessary" for optimal health? Is it ok to cut 1? or 2? But THREE is too many?
"Food groups" are just an arbitrary designation by various national and world health/governmental type organizations who collectively have a track record of gotten a lot more wrong than they have right. On the watch of these organizations overall wellness has obviously declined in the past 100 years and the diabesity epidemic has spiraled out of control over the past 3 decades.
You say not to believe something just because it's in a book, but then you parrot the "food group" idea espoused by these organizations. "Food groups" have no real scientific basis on health/wellness issues, they were just a way to "make nutrition easy" for people. As with any type of "make it easy" approach, oversimplification in an inevitable result. According to "food groups" corn is freakin' vegetable for goodness sakes!
I had a niggling feeling that not eating fruit was just wrong. Don't know, and have never met a fat fruit addict.
Maybe they aren't "fat" in the classic sense, but that does not always tell the whole story. Well know "fruitarian" Steve Jobs recently died from complications involving the pancreas and the liver -- just the kind of things that a lot of recent research (in actual, factual biochemistry NOT epidemiological studies) points to excessive fructose consumption as a cause. That said, you are correct that TF does NOT do a good job differentiating here. I agree that eating a orange is a lot different than drinking orange juice. But, orange consumption can still be overdone.
I never posted the comment to argue with anyone, just share my thoughts. You're absolutely right, we have evolved to eat carbs, diary, fruit etc. Just like we evolved to read, speak etc. Just because you read something in a book (btw I think Tim is great) doesn't mean that process of evolution gets turned back - your body needs these things IT HAS EVOLVED OVER HUNDREDS OF YEARS.
From an evolutionary stand point, "hundreds of years" is a very small time-frame and likely not enough to assure that the species as a whole has adapted to a type of food, much less "need" it. Case in point, dairy. By most estimation, that's been introduced to the human diet on the order of thousands
of years and there are STILL many people that have intolerance issues. From an evolutionary standpoint, all evidence points to humans consuming meat on the order of millions
of years. It's not that he's saying evolution is being turned back -- just that it moves slower than you think.
The other issue was eating all types of meat, Organic is just too expensive here in the UK ie 2 chicken breasts would be $10-15. So that means realistically in the UK we have to eat processed meat with all sorts of chemicals in it. Not good at all and will probably end up giving you cancer (red meat shown to have a link - not sure re: organic red meat)
Organic, while preferred, is not necessary. Like TF said, most of the "toxins" in conventionally raised meats end up in the fat (that's a natural defense mechanism for the animal) so eat as low fat as possible if you go conventional and the add fats back from other source. I have yet to see a study that accounts for all the other variables that proves animal meat (even red meat) causes all the ills and evils that mainstream "medicine" says it does. The people in these "studies" are eating processed crap meat (not real, whole, fresh cuts) with 100 different additives -- look at the label of a "Slim Jim", THAT'S the kind of meat these people that "have more risk for cancer" are eating. They are also more likely to smoke, less likely to get a sensible amount of activity, eating their "red meat" with bread and pasta, etc, etc. There's no isolation of anything. The people running these studies blame the "red meat" because that's what they wanted to blame all along. I'm not sure if it's the same study that you mention because you didn't cite it, but the most recent study that causing everyone to scream "Oh, NO! The red meats are going to die us!" if you follow the money back were initiated by two people that are KNOWN shills for the vegetarian movement. Yup, they're going to be subjective about the matter!
Gary Taubes systemically lays out just how LITTLE proof there is that red meat/animal meat causes all the ills that Ancel Keyes and his cohorts claim it does in the first 100 pages of Good Calories, Bad Calories. If you haven't already read that, then I'd recommend it...but be prepared it WILL piss you off at the people involved claiming to be "scientists."
I have cut down on carbs and taken elements of the diet,
Not all carbs are created equal. A piece of wheat bread is a lot different than a sweet potato or summer squash even though they might contain the same amount of carbs. That's the problem with calling "Carbs" a "Food Group."
but I've decided to do what no one really wants to - take the hard route and work damn hard in the gym to shift the fat.
And you will likely fail as you will likely over-train, under-eat, not get enough sleep and cause so much internal stress that your body will be pumping cortisol (a hormone that promotes fat retention/storage) into your bloodstream 24/7 and instead of shifting the fat you will just feel toward, sore, cranky, and still fat -- especially if you are also limiting calories from the "just eat less and exercise more" mentality.
No one here is advocating skipping the gym, rather just recognizing when another trip to the gym will do harm rather than good. It's all about the minimum effective dose -- at some point "another workout" is going to just produce the negative side effects and provide none of the benefits. Doesn't it make sense to stop well before
you get to that point? More isn't always better!
I'd rather no one posts a 'your stupid' comment. I respect others and would like the same back. We're not school kids and I posted the comment to a) be constructive and b) see if someone out there could teach me differently.
No one is calling you stupid, and most understand that it takes time to peel away the layers of "What we've always been told" for the past 50 years or so. I'm assuming you are posting here because even though initially you haven't had the success you want, there's part of you that still questions the conventional wisdom that's been shoved people's throats for so long. As far as I can see, people only tried to provide you with information to explore that inner doubt.
My family are Dr's and they agree. Carbs, fruit, diary are all required. If you need supplements for a diet ... it's pretty obvious
On the other hand, if it's SO obvious, then why ARE you posting here?
Doctors are not the end all be all unquestionable authority on matters. They are just a person with a certain education/training -- and the content of that training varies widely from one doctor to the next, by necessity due to the huge amount of sheer information contained in the medical field. Consider that most getting their MD take perhaps ONE introductory course in nutrition. None take advance biochemstry and endocrinology courses unless they are specializing in that. Even then, the courses are all taught from the approach of "what we already KNOW to be true" from the past 50 years.
You don't need supplements on this diet. Other than the occasional Vit. D and/or a Multivitamin, I don't take anything. I know PLENTY of people that pop far more supplements on their "Just eat less, exercise more and get food from all of the food groups" diets. The supplements are for people that want to "hack" and while that's interesting, it's not something I'm interested in. Bottom line, supplements are NOT necessary. If anything I supplement LESS than I did 2 years ago.
Like Buddha said: “Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.”
This is confusing, though. You quote Buddha about "not believing" and then say "Well, my family is a bunch of Doctors, so I believe them."
As for me, I'm getting myself in the gym and will let everyone know how I got on
Good luck with that, but my experiences (along with many others) tell me that it won't work out the way you are hoping...