Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So people who lived 100 years ago did not eat potatoes or bread? Really?
Maybe you meant 1000. Even so back then grains were a staple in the global diet. Where do you anti grain people get this garbage from?
The bread of 100 years ago has absolutely NOTHING in common with bread consumed in the present day.
The bread of 100 years ago has absolutely NOTHING in common with bread consumed in the present day.
I eat quinoa, farro, bulgar, brown and wild rices, organic sprouted wheat, and I splurge on artisan sour dough breads. I have never, ever had a problem with grains. I also know no one that has a problem with them either. And we are all pretty darn healthy. You would have us believe all grains are poisoning people.
This shows there is no benefit to the low fat approach. It was 8 years long.
"The results, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed no benefits for a low-fat diet. Women assigned to this eating strategy did not appear to gain protection against breast cancer,(1) colorectal cancer,(2) or cardiovascular disease.(3) And after eight years, their weights were generally the same as those of women following their usual diets.(4)"
This shows there is no benefit to the low fat approach. It was 8 years long.
"Of these, 19,541 were randomly assigned to follow a low-fat diet. Their goal was to lower their fat intake from almost 38% of calories to 20%."
20% of calories coming from fat is "low-fat"? Furthermore, the women in this study failed to even get to 20%:
"Some nutrition experts say that the WHI Dietary Modification Trial doesn’t really lay to rest the low-fat hypothesis because the women in the study only modestly lowered their fat, from 38% to 29%. Had they reached the trial’s target of 20%, benefits from the low-fat approach may have become more apparent, these nutritionists suggest."
This shows there is no benefit to the low fat approach. It was 8 years long.
"The results, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, showed no benefits for a low-fat diet. Women assigned to this eating strategy did not appear to gain protection against breast cancer,(1) colorectal cancer,(2) or cardiovascular disease.(3) And after eight years, their weights were generally the same as those of women following their usual diets.(4)"
The article you cited was not about low-carb. It was about low-fat. However, even in that article you can see what happens if you go low-carb and replace the carbs with animal products such as red meat and dairy that contain saturated fat.
"Many lines of evidence indicate that the type of fat is very important to long-term health. Replacing saturated and trans with natural vegetable oils can greatly reduce the risk of heart disease and diabetes. In the Nurses’ Health Study II we have seen that women who consume high amounts of red meat and high-fat dairy foods during their early adult years are at increased risk of developing breast cancer."
The article you cited was not about low-carb. It was about low-fat. However, even in that article you can see what happens if you go low-carb and replace the carbs with animal products such as red meat and dairy that contain saturated fat.
"Many lines of evidence indicate that the type of fat is very important to long-term health. Replacing saturated and trans with natural vegetable oils can greatly reduce the risk of heart disease and diabetes. In the Nurses’ Health Study II we have seen that women who consume high amounts of red meat and high-fat dairy foods during their early adult years are at increased risk of developing breast cancer."
I understand the article was about low fat. Low fat is really the alternative to low carb. There is a ton of evidence supporting low carb vs low fat. I'm not going to get in a pi$$ing contest with you because you are going to believe what you want to believe.
I'm finding that I'm allergic to a lot of grains, especially oats. I can still eat rice and have done ok with farro and quinoa. If I eat processed grains such as bread, I break out as well. Recently learned that I can't eat sweet potatoes either, but I can eat regular potatoes. Weird.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
