11 sats \ 4 replies \ @0371279ce5 1 Nov \ on: PC: Limiting sugar in infancy reduces the risk of diabetes and hypertension science
Let's make something very clear: food questionnaires, and especially meta-analyses based off said questionnaires, are heinously poor at making assumptions anywhere near correct. We have been in fact reducing sugar intake overall while obesity and sickness continue to climb.
We need to stop with the "sUgAr aNd cArBs aRe bAd" nonsense. Post WWII, humans used to eat 3500-4000 calories per day, staying only moderately active at best, while weighing an average of ~155lbs. Much of that was sugar which, in actuality, is very pro-metabolic. You can find that information in US Army documents and other non-military literature.
There are MANY other things in our food, especially in the United States, that are making us sick and unhealthy. The list is quite long.
Our metabolisms have been compromised. Fix that and you'll be able to enjoy your food again instead of subjecting yourself to incredibly restrictive "diets".
This isn't about all ages men and women but it also addresses about infants and small kids. So, what you're talking is okay and I agree but for l ds we need to be cautious with added sugar intakes.
reply
I'd like to hear more about why you think this:
We need to stop with the "sUgAr aNd cArBs aRe bAd" nonsense.
In my personal experience over the past year, after adopting an animal based, mostly carnivore diet, I've felt far better than ever before, and numerous health markers have gotten lots better. I'm NEVER going back to plants, unless there's some kind of famine and I can't get meat.
Have you ever had a chance to look at Nina Teicholtz's book, The Big Fat Surprise? It's an amazing work, walks you through the history of the nutritional guidelines and the abysmal science they were based on. It's about 10 years old now, and won a lot of awards:
Named one of The Economist’s Books of the Year 2014 Named one of The Wall Street Journal’s Top Ten Best Nonfiction Books of 2014 Kirkus Reviews Best Nonfiction Books of 2014 Forbes’s Most Memorable Healthcare Book of 2014
I wrote a post about the book a while back. It's what first convinced me to start eating more meat and fewer carbs.
This book is blowing my mind - The Big Fat Surprise by Nina Teicholtz
ps. Nina Teicholtz agrees with you about food questionaires, and how bad they are. But unfortunately that's what our current nutritional guidelines are based off.
reply
I did carnivore for about two years consisting of just two ribeyes/day with the occasional strip steak or sirloin. It worked well during those two years until it didn't. After it stopped working, I started gaining all the weight back that I'd lost and my energy TANKED. Many carnivores experience the same. Some do well on it, but it seems that if you're fat:protein ratio is too low, you're more likely to experience those symptoms.
I too was in the "carbs are terrible" camp for a very long time, even though my carnivore experience was declining. I figured it was something else. I kept pursuing it to my detriment and I've only recently started figuring out how to get my energy back (thanks Ray Peat).
I'd recommend reading link within this post: #750135. It absolutely blew my mind and the more I follow Ray Peat's work and those who've branched off of him, the more sense things make.
This guy is a great example of someone doing a very high carb diet and only experiencing benefits. I've also strategically added a lot of carbs into my diet. I haven't gained any weight and my energy is coming back. I say "strategically" for a reason as you will discover if you get into the "Peaty" side of things.
The body is very complicated and there is no one-size-fits-all approach. Mostly carnivore may work well for you, but understand that things may change. Always keep an open mind.
reply
Why do you think it worked well for two years and then didn't, do you have any theories? Was it the fat protein ratio?
reply