The article is nothing more than a sell for low-carb dieting. Every item on it is there to support low-carb as a healthy lifestyle.
Low-carb may or may not be suitable. For some people it works. For others it doesn't. It isn't absolutely necessary.
Show me a diet article that looks at the healthy human body, rather than focuses on pushing a particular diet strategy, and we can talk about how great that one is.
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
9,692 2/12/13 2:54 P
AJRAGS, I'd say that "everything in moderation" is a perfectly acceptable philosophy, and it's the one that SP preaches the most. You don't have to eliminate anything to be healthy, at least not with most people. I've gotten where I am eating "fattening" stuff and carbs, both refined and complex, fats, you name it. And I'm not dead yet. :)
2/12/13 1:51 P
There is a lot of info on that page - especially in the comments. However, I am more confused than ever. I would like to go with everything in moderation (I'm not a fan of denying myself), some of those people make it sound like if you eat something once you're gonna die or develop a major disease...
interesting, but as with everything i read about food, i take it with the grain of salt i don't use.
2/12/13 12:39 P
I could pick holes in the details of some of the information presented, but I appreciate what is behind this article:
"There’s one thing that nutrition professionals have had remarkable success with… and that is DEMONIZING incredibly healthy foods."
In my opinion this is a big problem. It has so many implications. It sets up an unhealthy "food is the enemy" relationship between us and our sustenance. It drives people into the arms of the "Industrial Food System" by making simple, natural foods (eggs, dairy/animal products, fat) sound unhealthy or even outright dangerous... "so be safe - buy these low fat dairy free no sugar added pudding cups, crackers, and pre-packaged frozen entrees..." Yeahhhh.... no.
Funny though, she starts off with indicating how wrong it is to demonize food, and then... kinda takes a run at wheat.... which seems to be "the popular food for demonization" these days... but other than that.... good message, overall.
2/12/13 12:26 P
It is an interesting article.
It does take the one size fits all approach. I have come to the conclusion that what works for me doesn't work for everyone. I feel great when I eat grains, sick and hungry when I don't.
Fitness Minutes: (67,704)
3,522 2/12/13 11:50 A
thank you for sharing, it is an interesting read.
Fitness Minutes: (2,581)
2/12/13 11:35 A
Not a fan of the article, because everything seems geared to tout the low carb diet as somehow superior to others.
Fitness Minutes: (120)
2/12/13 11:35 A
I agree w/ all of them, to a point. The grain thing is still up for debate, and really depends on the individual. I personally see no negative affects from eating grains, although I don't eat a lot of them because, like the article says, they're mostly empty calories. But, I love my pasta :) I'll have a sandwich maybe once a week but otherwise I try to fill my calories with fats and proteins, since those help me stay full, while bread does not. I also know others have greatly benefited from doing a low carb/paleo type diet.
Fitness Minutes: (14,252)
9,692 2/12/13 11:20 A
I agree with most, except #3 and #9.
#3 is a common thought, but the research just doesn't support it. I do agree that not everyone needs gluten, and that for some people, it's not a good thing, but the idea that *no one* should be eating is is silly and unsupported by research.
#9 annoys me because it's presenting the low fat diet as the only alternative. When you compare low-carb versus low-fat, yes, low-carb is superior. But what about a simply calorie-restricted diet without restricting either fat or carbs? Where's the comparisons with a normal, balanced diet?
I don't think low carb is bad. I think it's necessary for some people, and good for others, but as with ALL nutrition plans, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. I thrive on good, complex carbs. NO carb, however, is nasty stuff. That's what most people are demonizing, not actual reasonable lower carb diets.
I don't think *any* diet that restricts food or types of food is necessary, nor is it successful for the vast majority of people. Diets, period, aren't a good idea. Sparkpeople has proven that what WORKS is healthy LIVING. Not dieting.
I read so much about nutrition and, honestly, there is so much information out that that contradicts itself that it's hard to know what's true and what's been manipulated to fit the author's point. So, I've chosen to listen to my body and do what's best for me (which is everything in moderation).
There is no one size fits all for anyone trying to lose weight or get healthier. Everyone has different (health) issues or requirements, so what may be good for one person isn't for another. That doesn't mean the one person is necessarily healthier than the other it just means that "healthy" may be different for them.
As someone who has spent a lot of wading through many diet crazes (low-fat, no meat in the 90's to Atkin's in the 2000's), I should've given up reading about what someone else feels is best for me a long time ago...
Fitness Minutes: (555)
2/12/13 9:00 A
This author is manipulating some of the studies... he is implying that gluten is associated with schizophrenia, when in fact, the studies state that those with gluten sensitivities have higher incidence of schizophrenia... not the general public who eat gluten... when authors manipulate data, I have to disregard everything they say, which is unfortunate, because I do think he had some great points- especially when he stated that simply eating fats (even saturated) do not make us fat, which I do agree with.
SparkPeople, SparkCoach, SparkPages, SparkPoints, SparkDiet, SparkAmerica, SparkRecipes, DailySpark, and other marks are trademarks of SparkPeople, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
SPARKPEOPLE is a registered trademark of SparkPeople, Inc. in the United States, European Union, Canada, and Australia. All rights reserved.