Probably is better, but it doesn't mean enriched is bad or harmful.
That is not the point w]you were making though is it? Are you really going to pretend it is? We can all see your posts. You can just admit you were wrong for once. Because we can all go and read where you said people should practically eliminate carbs from their diet. It's all in the last 3 pages of this thread. Because I'm going to start quoting your earlier posts and you're going to look silly and I just want to ask, why? Why do this, everyone can see you're wrong? Is it just for you? Can you still convince yourself, even with all the goalpost shifting? Like what does this serve, is it just to waste my time? Because you write such long posts, to so many people, it has to be time consuming for you too?
Then why are fries bad for you? If I take a potato (not bad for you) and slice it then fry it in oil (not bad for you) why would they be bad for you?
But that has nothing to do with the dietary recommendations because they also called for heavily restricting sugar intake. People misinterpreting recommendations doesn't mean the recommendations were bad. Again, the reason fats SHOULD be restricted is they are incredibly calorie dense compared to carbs and proteins. With 2000 kcal diet consisting wholly of fats (Obviously impossible because, apart from things like oils, all fat sources would also have some amount of the other macronutrients but just as a thought experiment) you ate half a pound of food in the entire day you would be in a calorie surplus.
I've stated multiple times that the health issues surrounding diet today are around eating far too much processed, calorie dense food and has nothing to do with a specific macronutrient. My claim was that people have always eaten carbs in a greater amount than they ate fats.
Awareness of the ancestral human diet might advance traditional nutrition science. The human genome has hardly changed since the emergence of behaviourally-modern humans in East Africa 100-50 x 10(3) years ago; genetically, man remains adapted for the foods consumed then. The best available...
pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
.
Again, fats having more than twice the calories of carbs means that they were eating about 2.25:1 carbs to fats. If anything the biggest change has been protein intake. I eat a high protein diet and still come to about a quarter of my calories coming from protein. Most people eat far less protein than I do.
Alright Mr. "I just follow the research". You read somewhere and it's not unbelievable to you? Jesus.
Also, you on the previous page:
Starting to back pedal now that you realise you're talking shit to someone who knows what they're talking about? Because this was you making a pretty definitive statement. And, again, you also said:
You have literally said people should go on the keto diet and almost completely eliminate carbs.
And we'll get back to breakfast, don't worry. You were advocating for eating almost no carbs and now you're trying to back pedal on that because you're own studies show that, gram for gram, your carb intake should be roughly over twice your fat intake.
You're either trying to pretend that you didn't say what you said, or you're so uninformed on the subject that you don't even realise that you are advocating for very specific diet protocols. Ketogenic diet, cutting out carbs so your body uses fat for energy is called ketosis. It certainly works but it's not magic. It is no better or worse than using carbs for energy when combined with correct energy balance and appropriate physical activity. You also, later in this post, insist that you should eat all your meals in a specific window. That's intermittent fasting. The evidence for it is far from conclusive and you stating it like it's a fact shows that your claims of just following research are laughable. Almost all of the research surrounding IF fail in one of three ways.
1.)Studies are on lab animals.
2.)Studies are too small in scope
3.)They don't control for diet and calorie intake. Many of the studies have the IF group skip breakfast but eat a comparable lunch and dinner to the control group who did eat breakfast meaning that the issue again is overconsumption, not time of consumption.
That is quite clearly not what you said. You advocated for extremely restricting
what you eat and
when you eat. Everyone can see that.
... Yes it will because sugar is a carb. But that doesn't mean that carb intake was the problem. If a person was getting 200g of carbs from healthy sources and an additional 30g of carbs from pop then they're still getting 200g of healthy carbs.
There are many doctors who are shameless grifters trying to sell you their book or meal plan. Jim Stoppani is one of the worst but there's many others. Michael Mosley is another "Doctor" who uses his title in a misleading way to seem like an expert in the field of nutrition. You shouldn't believe any individual because people have agendas,
There's also no reason not to. Like I mentioned before, there is no strong evidence that IF promotes a healthy lifestyle more than any other protocol when energy balance and food quality are equated.
I eat five to six times a day. ANd I consume less than when I stuck to a 3 meal structure. Because I don't get so hungry I over indulge. People are different. What works for one person doesn't work for everyone. That's something anyone who isn't trying to sell a book or a miracle weight loss plan will agree on.
No. It isn't. If you do not consume enough food to have leftover calories stored as fat you will not become obese. If you eat at maintenance your body will stay the same size because you are consuming the correct amount of energy to fuel your body. Consume too little you will lose weight through stored energy, muscle glycogen, fat and even muscle.
Yup, but they're still not obese because obesity is not a symptom of insulin resistance, it can cause insulin resistance. Well, more specifically the over consumption that leads to obesity can also cause insulin resistance.
So the recommendations aren't the problem. Glad we agree.
Do you even remember what you're trying to argue at this stage? What people know and what's advised are two different things. You were trying to claim dietary advice is bad.
So again, the issue is people misinterpreting the guidelines rather than the guidelines?
Nah dude, you care about "what you read somewhere" and what's "not unbelievable". The reason I bring up politics is because what you believe about diet and the amount of evidence it takes for you to believe it, says a lot about you and lines up so perfectly with so many other things. Again, the fact that I can predict what you believe about diet based entirely on what you believe about trans healthcare is hilarious to me because you think you're this super rational free thinker who follows the science and cuts through the bullshit but everything you believe is so predictable. The fact that you believe so strongly in this dietary information despite the fact that at best there's little to no supporting evidence for your claims and at worst the research says the opposite shows me you took a bunch of people at face value without looking into it because despite your claims that marketing doesn't work on you you have ended up pushing the ketogenic diet without even knowing what it is because of your youtube algorithm.
No dude, you have made very specific claims about carbs being bad and how we should massively restrict carb intake. That's all there for us to see.
No you're not saying that. You are saying people should follow a keto diet and practice intermittent fasting. You said that. Own it.
Like I said, there is no strong supporting evidence for this. IF isn't bad by any means but there's no evidence that it's any better. If you can stick to it, you do you, if you can't just control overall calorie intake and you'll see the same results.
I eat breakfast everyday. Usually something small, 300-350 calories with about 25g to 30g of protein. I will then eat a sandwich for lunch. About 500 calories with 40g of protein. A couple of snack throughout the day and a pint of milk brings me in another 700ish calories and 60g of protein. And then I'll have dinner for the rest. I tend to undershoot my calorie intake a little because I don't bother actually counting the fruit and veg so that usually fills in the difference.
