It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 10:22 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 
 Nutrition Myths 
Author Message

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 10:42 pm
Posts: 148
Post Nutrition Myths
I recently had dinner with a cousin of mine who is a doctor and she was explaining how the best type of cooking oil to use is canola oil because it was high in polyunsaturated fats. 'Coconut oil is bad because it's high in saturated fat.' Uhhhhhh....no! Im definitely not as well informed about this stuff as others on the board are but I knew that I totally didn't agree with what she was saying. I didn't have any facts to justify arguing with her and so I just sat there listening to her telling my aunts and uncles about what they should and shouldn't eat.

Afterwards I tried doing some research about stuff like this and came upon a lot of interesting articles on fat, cholesterol, heart disease, etc. I then asked another doctor friend of mine what his thoughts are about cholesterol and CHD. He then cited the Framingham Study about how cholesterol and CHD were linked. I on the other hand have found a bunch of articles saying the Framingham study failed to find a significant link between the two and that many other studies also failed to find a link.

Sure I love me some conspiracy theories and Im pretty sure my doctor cousin and friend would say that this is what it is but I really don't think agree.

I just wanted to know what you guys think about stuff like this and what other nutritional myths are out there. Could be about cholesterol and CHD or even everyday stuff like how many eggs to eat in a day or why not to eat fruit. =)

Any websites or books you recommend? If so let's list them for people who might be interested. It would be nice to get reliable info that isn't force fed to us by the media.


Sun Aug 15, 2010 8:23 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:37 pm
Posts: 3319
Location: Emeryville, CA
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Here I go (you all saw it coming):

The cholesterol and sat. fat myths are civil service phenomena. (aka the public/government sector, which came into being when government became open to the public in the 1700s.) Diet advice is distorted in both the pharmaceutical and agricultural sectors, which prosper through lobbying, not science. Lobbying produces bad scientists, who eat good scientists for breakfast. Economic policy works in this same way. Bad science depends on job creation in the civil service over producing good results since it can't produce good results, and it propagates this information through major press and schools to stay in business. People are led to believe the information is useful when long-term effects are disastrous, like certain parasites or the tax-collecting sector in Greece. Eat a lot of meat, avoid pharmaceuticals, and stay out of debt.

_________________
Eric Jacobus
The Stunt People - FB Profile


Sun Aug 15, 2010 10:31 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:51 pm
Posts: 1572
Location: Dangerland
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Eric is right. A lot of what we've come to accept as common nutritional knowledge is mostly bullshit that has been distorted by parties with an agenda. It's always better to get the facts from an impartial source, someone who's more concerned about the effects of nutrients on the human body than about where their paycheck comes from.

As for the topic at hand, I'm not all that knowledgable about fats, but I do know that the link between saturated fat and heart disease (if there is indeed such a link) is almost negligible compared to what we'd been told for decades, and Scientific Weekly recently reported that different nutritional scientists conducting several completely unrelated studies found absolutely no correlation between saturated fat intake and heart disease/high cholesterol. It's one of the most common naturally occuring fats and has been digested by all carnivorous animals (including humans) for bajillions of years. So there ya go.

_________________
Rather be forgotten than remembered for giving in.


Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:06 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:37 pm
Posts: 3319
Location: Emeryville, CA
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
And it's hard not to have an agenda when you can move billions in tax breaks or subsidies to your sector. Science goes out the window, and you end up with bad studies everywhere by bad scientists. These are the same douchebags who preach about the miracle of reason and the horrors of religion.

_________________
Eric Jacobus
The Stunt People - FB Profile


Mon Aug 16, 2010 4:23 am
Profile WWW

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 10:42 pm
Posts: 148
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
I don't know much about Gary Taubes but I think this is a good example of some of what you guys have said.





edit:

Gary Taubes youtube binge ;)

2002 interview


Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:59 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:37 pm
Posts: 3319
Location: Emeryville, CA
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Lady's full of shit. She and other dietitians been telling people this same stuff forever. They created the food guidelines that pin a single steak at 150% of your daily saturated fat intake and a single egg at 79% of your daily cholesterol intake, stuff that you can find on the ground on the side of the road, but a can of soda's only 14% of your daily carbohydrate intake. Go ahead and drink 7 of those! Insane. People can do this math easily and they follow these guidelines, and they still become obese and/or diabetic.

_________________
Eric Jacobus
The Stunt People - FB Profile


Mon Aug 16, 2010 1:52 pm
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:51 pm
Posts: 1572
Location: Dangerland
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
It's actually downright preposterous how many grams of carbs the daily recommended value on most packages recommends. Fat is still being condemned wholesale just because of the connotations surrounding the word... it's no less important to get an adequate amount of saturated fat than it is all these vitamins and minerals everybody is always preaching about.

_________________
Rather be forgotten than remembered for giving in.


Mon Aug 16, 2010 5:14 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:37 pm
Posts: 3319
Location: Emeryville, CA
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Command structures have to be designed so they produce the desired results. It's the reason that Jackie Chan's HK films have great action and his Hollywood films don't (until he was given more control). Jackie Chan was 100% accountable for making a good action film in Hong Kong since he controlled the whole production. If he had been subordinate to his DP and editor then we never would have heard of him.

The medical field on the other hand doesn't produce the desired results. It's accountable to the public sector, which defends its existence by propagating bad ideas and sending out people like the stupid old lady in the last clip. These agents speak with a condescending tone without giving specifics, citing studies without touching on any principles, and they like the phrase "it's complicated." But they have to! They operate using a version of science that resembles Creationism and Global Cooling theory, and this hurts their internal organs because it's so blatantly false and dumb, so it becomes hard to make coherent sentences, and they end up being very disturbed people who have to live with the fact that their dietary advice kills people. If they don't do this they get fired!

I don't like them.

_________________
Eric Jacobus
The Stunt People - FB Profile


Mon Aug 16, 2010 8:04 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 3:22 pm
Posts: 159
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
'Global Warming and other Bollocks' has some good stuff on healthy eating and diets though as you may gather from the title its somewhat preaching to the converted. 'Scared to Death' is an excellent example of what Eric's talking about - science perverted by ideology, cronyism and beurocracy to produce all sorts of knuckleheaded disasterous polocies.


Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:10 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 278
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
I would highly recommend Gary Taube's "Good Calories, Bad Calories" if you're interested in this stuff. It's not a quick read, it's long and covers so much stuff in exhausting detail - but that's also it's biggest strength. It examines both the science of nutrition - with a specific emphasis on separating the good from the bad - as well as the politics behind our current mainstream nutritional guidelines. It's not a diet book at all - it's about understanding what the hard science says about how food affects the body, and from there you can make your own determinations about what to eat.

There are a lot of critics of his book out there - but they nearly all come back to the same argument. He dismisses most large population surveys as unscientific - but those studies are the ones that most nutritionists/dietitians use to justify their recommendations. He's right to dismiss them though - population studies can't control for hundreds or thousands of variables that might affect their results, so while they make a good starting point for determining what to study they aren't suitable for drawing conclusions in and of themselves.

_________________
http://www.vimeo.com/itdonnedonme


Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:06 pm
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:37 pm
Posts: 3319
Location: Emeryville, CA
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
It's been sitting on my shelf for a year now :|

_________________
Eric Jacobus
The Stunt People - FB Profile


Wed Aug 18, 2010 5:48 pm
Profile WWW

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 10:42 pm
Posts: 148
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Been going at it for the last 3 days. You're right. Definitely not a light read but it is very interesting. Never imagined how much bs is involved in this subject.

What are some the arguments his critics have about his book?


Fri Aug 20, 2010 11:53 pm
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 11:51 pm
Posts: 1572
Location: Dangerland
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Too many pages.

_________________
Rather be forgotten than remembered for giving in.


Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:34 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2009 5:37 pm
Posts: 3319
Location: Emeryville, CA
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Amazon probably has a fair share of one-star reviews that could start you off. I've still yet to hear anything original as criticism against his type of advice. It always falls back on US standard nutrition, the AHA studies, etc. And it's usually pretty empirical, but it's an argument I guess.

_________________
Eric Jacobus
The Stunt People - FB Profile


Sat Aug 21, 2010 12:40 am
Profile WWW
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 278
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Main arguments seem to be:

1) He ignores population surveys - my take on this is above

2) he's not a dietician or doctor so can't know what he's talking about

His training is in applied physics and journalism, and he's been doing science journalism for nearly 30 years. I actually think that's one of the strengths of the book though - he approaches the topic from a general scientific perspective rather than that of a professional nutritionist. He also spent over five years on the book after completing his initial article, so it's likely he's done as much or more research on the subject than many nutritionists. He also doesn't have real horse in the race - he doesn't make money from selling diet foods, or exercise plans or weight loss counseling or whatever. While I'm sure selling books is important for him, his previous books are on physics and his next book is as well - so he's not really in the business of making a living as a nutrition writer, and fans of this book aren't necessarily likely to read his other books.

_________________
http://www.vimeo.com/itdonnedonme


Sat Aug 21, 2010 5:31 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:10 pm
Posts: 115
Post Re: Nutrition Myths
Quote:
population studies can't control for hundreds or thousands of variables that might affect their results, so while they make a good starting point for determining what to study they aren't suitable for drawing conclusions in and of themselves.


That's not necessarily true. It depends if the conclusions can produce predictive results of a significant level while factoring in the outside variables. Some results of population statistics are self-evident despite the thousands of variables. But if the critic can produce a working theory with similar predictive results with identical variables, it casts a great amount of doubt on the original theory (it doesn't necessarily support his conclusion either, it hints more towards a placebo effect). This is due to the law of "ceteris paribus".

But at the same time there has to be that quantification. If he is simply ignoring those statistics primarily as an excuse for the predictive weakness of his theory, there's a good chance he's full of baloney.

Even if you're a brilliant master of Biology (like myself) it doesn't mean you understand anything about Nutrition. A lot of people who are outside of a scientific field really have a hard time understanding the models and successes of that particular science. Because different sciences have different models for creating predictive results and a model that works in physics may seem 'common sense' right, but may not be able to present the same level of predictive success in another field because its too conservative and not adaptive. I find a lot of Physics majors have a problem understanding medical science for example, because they don't really appreciate how vastly different each case can be, despite having similar or even identical symptoms. Which is also why you don't go online and self-diagnosis otherwise you'll discover that you have every freaking sickness under the sun.


Thu Oct 21, 2010 11:40 am
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 16 posts ] 


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Protected by Anti-Spam ACP Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forums/DivisionCore.