Low carb vs. high carb diets

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

It has nothing to do with how much food, but with the types of food.

Suppose you and I eat exactly the same types of food. But you eat twice as much as I do.

You are saying that this makes no difference to our body weights?

Ok, if you insist.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Russian Rocket, I merely quoted a Harvard article ( not Harvard's own studies) which cited 31 studies done around the world, implicating red meat as a colon cancer risk factor.

No need to get so uptight. Feel free to eat whatever you want.

I'm posting what I want to post. Call it uptight if you want, but you are on here trying to convince people that red meat is bad, and I feel, and am showing that it's not.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

Oh look, Harvard says that red meat can cause heart disease

Shifting Protein Sources Away from Red Meats May Reduce Risk of Heart Disease in Women - August 16, 2010 -2010 Releases - Press Releases - Harvard School of Public Health


wait, no, Harvard says red meat doesn't cause heart disease. Only processed red meat
Eating Processed Meats, but Not Unprocessed Red Meats, May Raise Risk of Heart Disease and Diabetes - May 17, 2010 -2010 Releases - Press Releases - Harvard School of Public Health

and here he is again

Red and Processed Meat Consumption and Risk of Incident Coronary Heart Disease, Stroke, and Diabetes Mellitus

Errrrr, does this have anything to do with the 31 studies done by different scientists around the wired, on *colon cancer*?

Guess not. But feel free to carry on anyway, RR.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Suppose you and I eat exactly the same types of food. But you eat twice as much as I do.

You are saying that this makes no difference to our body weights?

Ok, if you insist.

wow, really?

Well, lets see. How much physical exercise would you get? When I eat more, I am more active too, and if we both ate red meat and chicken breast and veggies, and you ate half of what I ate, you'd be really skinny, while I wouldn't be really fat.

Body weight or body fat? Big difference. Calories don't make you fat. It's the types of foods that makes you fat. Eating a lot of healthy food, and being active, will keep you from getting fat. Eating not so much, but only junk food, will make you fat.

You are concerned with body weight, while I'm concerned with body fat. You can look at the scale, and I'll look at the mirror. I use all the food that I eat.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Errrrr, does this have anything to do with the 31 studies done by different scientists around the wired, on *colon cancer*?

Guess not. But feel free to carry on anyway, RR.

Actually yes, because in your article, it clearly states that the people they studied, ate high amounts of red meat AND processed meat. They did not distinguish between the two. The articles I posted, clearly show them distinguishing between the two, and finding out that non processed red meat barely has any effect on the ailments they were studying. If they redid the study and actually distinguished between the two, then the results would be different. And on top of that, they even say that a big reason for their results is an effect from meat being cooked in high temperatures. So, why blame the meat, when even this study is clearly showing that it's the preparation of the meat that's the problem? Did you even bothered reading what you posted? You're an intellegent guy, so I have no idea how you couldn't see the correlation between what you posted and what I posted. Instead you try to make my points moot.

I'm the last person to argue that processed meat isn't bad for you.

Did those people they studied eat McDonalds every day or did they eat farm raised beef steaks? Studies like that are pointless, because they ignore cause and effect, just as the China study ignored it, when they attributed colon cancer risk to consumption of animal products, even tho in reality, they only concentrated on casien protein.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

I'm posting what I want to post. Call it uptight if you want, but you are on here trying to convince people that red meat is bad, and I feel, and am showing that it's not.

I stated that red meat has been implicated as a risk factor for colon cancer.

That is currently the mainstream medical view, strongly validated by different scientists around the world.

(And anything you have to say about red meat and heart disease is ... Ummm, just irrelevant).

Who knows, the mainstream view on red meat + colon cancer may be wrong, in 5 years time, they may say something else. In the meantime, however, I think it is a reasonably logical approach for me to adopt their advice, rather than Russian Rocket's advice.

Personally for me, cutting down red meat is no big deal, I'm fine with my chicken and fish. For red meat lovers, I guess what I just said can be upsetting. Still their emotions would be a poor excuse for being illogical and dragging heart disease, or chickenpox, or dengue fever, or any other irrelevant illness into the discussion.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Errrrr, does this have anything to do with the 31 studies done by different scientists around the wired, on *colon cancer*?

Guess not. But feel free to carry on anyway, RR.

and where in your article did it say something about 31 studies?

I read it, and all I saw was

"The best evidence comes from a pair of large 2005 studies"

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

and where in your article did it say something about 31 studies?

I read it, and all I saw was

"The best evidence comes from a pair of large 2005 studies"

Perhaps you should try reading the same article, just slightly beyond the 3rd paragraph.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

wow, really?

Well, lets see. How much physical exercise would you get? .

Same as you, of course.

Why on earth would we allow extraneous, irrelevant and pointless variables into our little hypothetical example? You are not deliberately trying to be extraneous, irrelevant and pointless, are you?

All other things being equal, if a person eats more, he would be fatter. Is tis worth debating any further?

[Acting Like Godot]

I agree that the way food is prepared makes a difference to its health effects. This goes for red meat, white meat, vegetables, whatever.

I also think that the way red meat is COMMONLY prepared in Western countries is not healthy.

[Acting Like Godot]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

You are concerned with body weight, while I'm concerned with body fat. You can look at the scale, and I'll look at the mirror. I use all the food that I eat.

You miss the point again.

In a study of 400,000+ people, yes there will be a small proportion of anomalous individuals

eg very heavyweight low-fat bodybuilders;
heavy red-meat consumers who also consume high fibre;
individuals who exercise very vigorously;
people with a genetic predisposition to cancer;
people who cook their meat in an unusual manner etc etc.

But the idea of using a large sample size is precisely to negate these anomalous folks (mathematically averaging them out) and zero down to the specific issue being studied - whether red meat increases the average human being's chances of colon cancer or not?

Answer is yes, quite significantly. So say the studies anyway.

[Andras]

This is not "China Study", its only Harvard health research, but what do they know?

Originally Posted by russianrocket

No, no it's not. We have the China Study to blame for misinformation like that. Denise debunks that pretty easily in the first link I posted.

[votoshka]

Originally Posted by Andrew Gubb

And, uh, what does fat do? It doesn't need to be converted. It's fat. It's way easier for the body to store fat as fat than to use it as energy.

I do agree that certain branded "low fat" products are bad and that some fats are better than others. But a low fat diet is definitely a good thing. Animal saturated fat is way better than hydrogenated fat, but that doesn't make it good in and of itself.

The body stores fat when it gets a surge of insulin, which occurs when carbohydrates are consumed. If you eat fat without carbs, you tend not to store it as body fat. The best way to get fat is to eat fatty high carb foods .

BTW I have done a lot of research and reading, and while I'm not going to quote any studies or whatever, I will say that I have gone from believing that a vegan diet is best, to believing that a paleo diet is best (that being said, I'm vegetarian so I don't precisely practice what I preach but I do the best I can). I will ALWAYS tell people not to go veg*an for health reasons, but only to do it for ethical reasons (if that's what you believe). If not, eating healthy grass fed meat seems to be a healthy way of living, provided you stick to a diet full of "real" food rather than processed rubbish.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Andras

This is not "China Study", its only Harvard health research, but what do they know?

Way to ignore the dozen other posts in this thread.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by russianrocket

Way to ignore the dozen other posts in this thread.

Have you read any studies that correlate excessive red meat consumption and roid rage like temper? I always get this image in my mind of you pounding the keyboard while shaking a raw steak around in your mouth like a shark.

[Andras]

RussianRocket,

This pissing contest has gone far enough, this actually reminds me of global warming "science" debate. This is not a debate - it is a pissing contest. I have never posted that red meat is bad for YOU. I do not give a rat's ass what YOU eat! I personally will not eat meat, if I can help it. It is a personal choice. I have a doctor and I will be damned if a forum here will change my mind.
I will not comment anymore so you can carry on....
Cheers

[Andrew Gubb]

Originally Posted by votoshka

BTW I have done a lot of research and reading

Well, our research has lead us in different directions, but that's fine... At least you can admit that a vegan diet is healthy (and probably healthier than a standard diet)... I think the ethical reason is the most important thing to champion anyway.

[Acting Like Godot]

Any carbohydrate, protein or fat, consumed in excess, will be converted into fat.

Eg proteins will be broken down and they become amino acids. The amino acids are absorbed through the small intestine's lining and enter the blood stream. From here, some of the amino acids build the body's protein stores.

And the excess amino acids are converted to fats and sugars. That is all.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Have you read any studies that correlate excessive red meat consumption and roid rage like temper? I always get this image in my mind of you pounding the keyboard while shaking a raw steak around in your mouth like a shark.

If only I ate excessive amounts of red meat. Tho I guess on here, having a little piece of steak at dinner a couple times a week, constitutes excess. As far as roid rage temper. Time for you to learn not to judge a book by it's cover. I'm about as mild tempered as they get.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

Any carbohydrate, protein or fat, consumed in excess, will be converted into fat.

Eg proteins will be broken down and they become amino acids. The amino acids are absorbed through the small intestine's lining and enter the blood stream. From here, some of the amino acids build the body's protein stores.

And the excess amino acids are converted to fats and sugars. That is all.

Again, not all foods are created equal. The protien molecule is much less likely to turn into triglycerides

Calorie counting is a farce. It does not work. Lowering calories usually means lowering carbs and other foods that would get you fat. Raising calories, usually means raising carbs and other foods that will get you fat.

It's quite hard to eat too much protein. You can only eat so much steak, tuna, and chicken.

Just because two objects ( 1 gram of carb and and one gram of protein) has the same caloric output, does not mean that they will at in your body in the same fashion. Food is not just numbers. Calorie in calorie out.

We can both eat till we are completely full, but you stick with low protein high carb and I'll stick with high protein low carb, and we'll see where we end up. I have a high cal diet, with a lot of protein, and some how I'm not fat.....

To just say "And the excess amino acids are converted to fats and sugars. That is all." is such an ignorant statement, because you don't even mention at what point are there excess amino acids? Are ALL the excess amino acids converted? Too much aminio acids, and it starts to spill over into your urine.

FATS AND PROTEINS are not made equal. There is no " every gram of fat or protein turns into, such and such" There are far too many variables.

It all boils down to insulin levels. It's not that protein doesn't turn into fat compared to carbs. It's the protein doesn't have to turn into fat. It's all about how your body treats the two, and just pretending like all food is equal, is dismissing the mountains of evidence against it.

[Acting Like Godot]

This is where your pissing contest turns really funny.

In your eagerness to piss, you have ended up imputing to me a wide range if views I never expressed and actually do not hold.

[russianrocket]

Originally Posted by Acting Like Godot

This is where your pissing contest turns really funny.

In your eagerness to piss, you have ended up imputing to me a wide range if views I never expressed and actually do not hold.

Go on, show me which views I imputed on you that you didn't express.

And considering that both of us are claiming we are right and the other wrong, I'd say this contest is two sided. Takes at least two to form a contest.

[Andras]

It is interesting that someone has changed the theme/title of this thread. It is so, because I never wrote high carb. The vegan diet I find good, is mainly nuts/legumes/beans and lots of fruits and vegetables, then some vegie based protein (perhaps fish) - finally then some carbs - and so on.
This is quite misleading from the start. Of course very high carb will make you fatter and also might cause diabetes.

[Criseyde]

Originally Posted by Andras

It is interesting that someone has changed the theme/title of this thread. It is so, because I never wrote high carb. The vegan diet I find good, is mainly nuts/legumes/beans and lots of fruits and vegetables, then some vegie based protein (perhaps fish) - finally then some carbs - and so on.
This is quite misleading from the start. Of course very high carb will make you fatter and also might cause diabetes.

I didn't change the theme or title of your thread. I moved all the posts about low carbs, red meat, etc to a new thread: this one. Your thread is still there with its original question, under its original title: New vegan by doctor's order

Also, legumes, fruits, and vegetables are carbs.

[Lifeisamazing]

For those that are interested in the debate of high-carb vs low-carb, Christopher Gardner and his team made a very cool study that they talk about in this lecture: The Battle of the Diets: Is Anyone Winning (At Losing?) - YouTube

He found that a low-carb diet was better for fat loss than a high-carb diet. This is, of course, nothing new and seems to be shown time and time again. The cool thing about Mr. Gardner is that he is a vegetarian.

[Lifeisamazing]

Originally Posted by votoshka

The body stores fat when it gets a surge of insulin, which occurs when carbohydrates are consumed. If you eat fat without carbs, you tend not to store it as body fat. The best way to get fat is to eat fatty high carb foods .

BTW I have done a lot of research and reading, and while I'm not going to quote any studies or whatever, I will say that I have gone from believing that a vegan diet is best, to believing that a paleo diet is best (that being said, I'm vegetarian so I don't precisely practice what I preach but I do the best I can). I will ALWAYS tell people not to go veg*an for health reasons, but only to do it for ethical reasons (if that's what you believe). If not, eating healthy grass fed meat seems to be a healthy way of living, provided you stick to a diet full of "real" food rather than processed rubbish.

This makes me say "Wow!" You're a smart and a good person.

[firenexx]

There are different types of high-carb diets. Some people follow a high-carb diet by eating white bread, pasta, rice, etc. all day long. So basically most Westerners. As well as people in poor countries that can only afford grain. Or the people in refugee camps who are fed big bags that say "Corn/Soy Blend" with a U.S. Flag stamped on it, which is probably worse than what we feed cattle.
Also some people eat a high-carb diet where nearly all of the carbs are from fruit, and some from vegetables. I guess Dr. Graham's 80-10-10 comes to mind here.

For all of y'all experts out there, is there a difference in these two extremes of the high-carb diet? Is the difference significant? In terms of weight loss, blood sugar stability, etc.

If you had an 80-10-10 ratio except the 80 was mostly rice and ♥♥♥♥, and Bob had an 80-10-10 ratio except the 80 was mostly mangos 'n' ♥♥♥♥, after 90 days, who would win the 5k? Who would have more stable energy throughout the day? Is there even a difference between getting your carbs from fruit and getting them from potatoes? Just some things to ponder.

[Andras]

...technically, beans etc. contain SOME (25-30%) carbs AND protein(35%) etc so there are nothing like bread or pasta.

Originally Posted by Criseyde

Also, legumes, fruits, and vegetables are carbs.