|
6925. thoughtful - 4/11/2007 3:14:45 PM clydefo, I should've been more specific. Though technically not correct, when I think complex carbs, I think carbs that come with more fiber to slow down digestion, though clearly not all complex carbs are high fiber. And that's the difference.
See this article which does a good job of explaining the difference between simple sugars, complex sugars and dietary fiber and the impact on insulin levels.
Including:
Excess carbohydrates also causes generalized vascular disease. The high-carbohydrate diet which is now so popular causes the pancreas to produce large amounts of insulin, and if this happens for many years in a genetically predisposed person, the insulin receptors throughout the body become resistant to insulin. Because insulin's action is to drive glucose into the cells, this results in chronic hyperglycemia, also called "high blood sugar." A large portion of this sugar is stored as fat resulting in obesity. Excess insulin also causes hypertension and helps initiate the sequence of events in the arterial wall which leads to atherosclerosis and heart disease.
Adult onset diabetes is known to be greatly benefited by the adoption of a low carbohydrate diet, moderate in fat, which stresses the importance of a regular intake of sufficient protein. You will not hear this advice from the American Diabetes Association, (or from most doctors) since they are still operating on the research as it was twenty years ago.
You might ask yourself why pritikin has to go back to 1982 to find ironmen following his diet....they've learned a lot in the last 25 years.
Further, you keep talking about protein and fat as "bad" sources of energy. The fact that the body has to do more work means the energy gotten out of those foods is acquired more slowly, thus reducing insulin rush. But the nutrition story is not only about energy. It is also about necessary amino acids and essential fatty acids and other nutrients that are required for body function. Yes a body can live on a lot of different diets ... it does a terrific job of accommodating whatever deprivations it can, including leaching calcium from bones and teeth if it's not getting enough of it in the diet. But that is not the same as feeding it well. Consider, (from the same article linked above):
While it is true that fiber is an important part of your diet, even necessary to protect you from some diseases, carbohydrates themselves are not necessary. There are "essential" fatty acids and "essential" amino acids (from protein), however there are no known essential carbohydrates.
I'm far from recommending a low to no carb diet. I am however recommending a balanced diet. Pritikin, as by your own admissions, is not balanced...it is significantly biased to carbs, with the consequent damage to the body. 6926. clydefo - 4/11/2007 6:57:41 PM Pritikin died in 1985. Show me a modern marathon runner on a high fat diet and I'll show you a Jim Fixx waiting to happen. He proved you can't "outrun" a bad diet.
Dr. Kennedy at your link is sadly misinformed. (ask to see his diploma) He said:
...There are two groups of complex carbs: high fiber and low fiber. High-fiber, complex carbs are not digestible, at least not by human beings...
This foolish statement is contradicted at the start of his next paragraph; to wit:
"High-fiber (high-cellulose) vegetable foods are the healthiest choices for human nutrition, and intake of these foods is associated with lowered incidences of hypertension, cancer, arthritis, diabetes, etc. Examples are lettuce and broccoli. Examples of low-fiber, complex carbs are banana, tomato, squash and all cereals and grains (therefore bread and pasta), potatoes and rice...
He obviously is unaware of the difference between soluble and insoluble fiber and their sources. The banana he calls low-fiber has the same amount as his "high fiber" broccoli. He seems not to recognize that it is the soluble fiber that plays the greater role in regulating sugar digestion. His cellulose, or roughage, mostly serves to keep things moving along through the gut.
...Most of our carbohydrates come from cereals and grains, both products of the agricultural revolution. Our bodies are not genetically designed to thrive on large amounts of these fiberless complex carbs..."
Fiberless? This is incorrect even using his erroneous definition. Grains are an excellent source of "high fiber cellulose". (I would also ask to see his credentials in Anthropology and Genetics)
...While it is true that fiber is an important part of your diet, even necessary to protect you from some diseases, carbohydrates themselves are not necessary. There are "essential" fatty acids and "essential" amino acids (from protein), however there are no known essential carbohydrates.
Why this disingenuous nonsense? "Essential" means that it is not synthesized in the body. What part produces the "necessary", essential anti-disease fiber? Fiber comes with carbohydrates and so is in fact "essential" by his own fractured logic.
Frankly, "balanced diet" is a meaningless phrase because it has so many meanings. A little of everything on the smorgasbord? Moderation in all things? To look at them, most Americans seem to think it means a third each of calories from fat, protein and carbs. I prefer a weighted diet. Enough of all that's needed with more of the good and less of the bad. 6927. judithathome - 4/11/2007 8:27:28 PM helps initiate the sequence of events in the arterial wall which leads to atherosclerosis and heart disease.
This is what my son's vascular surgeon told him was one of the contributing factors of his almost losing his leg...too many carbs in his junk food diet. He told him to eat lower fat protein, vegetables, fruits, high fiber cereals and whole grain bread products.
To me, what he recommended is a fairly balanced diet. 6928. thoughtful - 4/11/2007 10:45:10 PM clydefo, I had a long response and my browser crashed. Let me try again.
Yes kennedy has issues...my fault for posting quickly after a search looking for someone who seems to make my point, but not vetting the source carefully enough.
Clearly the point he was making is that cows can eat corn stalks, humans can't. He was making the point that processed grains such as found in white bread provide less dietary fiber than whole grain bread. E.g., white bread is 1g dietary fiber, but the whole grain stuff I buy is 3-4g. But i don't think we're disagreeing that whole grains and nonstarchy vegetables are better than refined grains or sugars. At least I think we agree on that point.
The more important point and why i selected his piece was that just because a carb is complex, meaning it is made up of more than 2 monosaccharides, does not necessarily mean it is slow to digest or provides dietary fiber. So for example, white potatoes are a starch, a complex carbohydrate, but the starch is rapidly absorbed and it has a higher glycemic index than does the simple carb, table sugar. Not that potatoes don't provide more nutrients than table sugar, but that they do encourage a greater insulin rush than simple sugar.
Let me try again with another more mainstream source that discusses the latest thinking on carbs.
I guess I can't fault pritikin for being out of date seeing he died a long time ago. I wonder if he would have changed his mind by now with the new research and evidence on heart health and diabetes. I guess we'll never know.
IAC, I don't think our disagreement is about the benefits of dietary fiber or the importance of carbohydrates in the diet. (As you know, I am NOT a proponent of low carb dieting like Atkins.) What I'm suggesting is that a high carb diet is not capable of providing "enough of all that's needed" because it shortchanges proteins and fats and it isn't necessarily "more of the good and less of the bad" given the impact carbohydrates have on insulin and the damage insulin does to the body.
From the same source as above, I'll include this tidbit:
What happens when we get too much fructose?
Most of the carbohydrate we eat is made up of chains of glucose. When glucose enters the bloodstream, insulin release is stimulated, which is the key mechanism regulating glucose in the body. Fructose, on the other hand, is processed in the liver. To greatly simplify the situation: when too much fructose enters the liver, the liver can't process it all fast enough for the body to use as sugar. Instead, it starts making fats from the fructose, and sends them off into the bloodstream as triglycerides.
Why is this bad?
This is potentially bad for at least three reasons:
1. High blood triglycerides are a risk factor for heart disease.
2. The fructose ends up circumventing the normal appetite signaling system. Instead of triggering hormones that regulate appetite (such as leptin, ghrelin, and insulin), this doesn't happen with fructose, so the calories from fructose don't make us feel satisfied. This is probably at least part of the reason why excess fructose consumption is associated with weight gain.
3. There is growing evidence that excess fructose consumption may facilitate insulin resistance, and eventually Type 2 diabetes. 6929. clydefo - 4/12/2007 12:37:00 AM Yes thoughtful, I hope we're way past white bread.
...given the impact carbohydrates have on insulin and the damage insulin does to the body.
Insulin is a natural digestive hormone, not a poison. It prevents damage to the body by facilitating the production of a steady supply of clean fuel. A normal daily caloric intake on the Pritikin regimen never comes close to producing any "excess" insulin, no surges or spikes.
...What happens when we get too much fructose?
Pritikin advises that we avoid "too much" of anything, including water. Eating fruit and other CC food to satiety throughout the day is perfectly safe.
I suppose our main disagreement is over the desirable percentage of fat and protein calories. Looking at the nutrition chart recommendations for fatty acids and amino acids I'm confident I eat enough for my body's needs with little excess to get rid of. 6930. clydefo - 4/12/2007 5:38:14 AM Typical daily Pritikin fare: Protein grams.
One cup broccoli................4
One 6 inch ww pita bread...6
One cup oatmeal (dry).......13
Banana................................1
Two cups skim milk...........16
One cup pinto beans .........16
One cup sweet potato..........4
Total..................................60 grams
The RDA for protein for men is 60 grams. The other fruits and vegetables eaten through the day also contain some protein, so the beans can be every other day. Up to one pound of lean animal protein per week is o.k. but not needed as a source.
It's very easy to eat more than is needed because it's found in most all foods.
It's basically the same with fatty acids. Easy to get what we need for cell maintenance, metabolic chemistry, etc., from a variety of whole grains and vegetables. 6931. thoughtful - 4/12/2007 6:16:40 PM My comments:
1) clearly I think 60 g per day, especially for a man, is too low...double or triple that for my likes. Schwarzbein recommend 6-8 ozs protein a day for women, 8-12 for men
2) i don't know enough about all the required amino acids to know if you're hitting all of them in the diet as listed. I know only that rice and beans together and soy are complete proteins.
3) more power to you if you can stick to such a diet and find it satisfying. I never could. In order for any diet to be successful, it has to be one you can live with for the long term. That diet would leave me feeling hungry and deprived and my ability to stick with it would quickly drain.
In fact, the study that was posted way above that compared the success of the various diets found that none of the participants were faithful to the diet over the test period. So any diet that is too restrictive is likely to fail.
Let me share with you a typical day (for a man, portions of protein and carbs would be increased):
Bkfst: V8 juice, 2 eggs scrambled with sauteed peppers, onions, mushrooms, (using canola oil), whole grain english muffin with butter
Am Snack: handful of walnuts
Lunch: 2 ozs turkey on a slice of whole grain (reduced carb) bread with a slather of mayo, lettuce, and a carrot
Pm snack: 1 oz cheese with an apple
Dinner: Grilled pork chop, sweet potatoes, zucchini sauteed in olive oil with garlic and parmesan cheese and a tossed salad with vinagrette dressing
Approx total calories is about 1400 calories with a balance of protein, fats, carbs, nonstarchy vegetables and a balance of fats. This would be sufficient to lose weight. To maintain one's weight, carbs would be added.
6932. judithathome - 4/12/2007 6:49:12 PM Sounds like a plan to me!
I eat a handful of walnuts every day...very satisfying. 6933. clydefo - 4/12/2007 8:19:04 PM The RDA for protein has been established for years. Why haven't Nutritionists who challenge it been able to present enough evidence to get it changed? They would certainly have the meat and dairy lobbies behind them. The RDA was set at about twice what science shows is actually needed as as arbitrary "margin of error".
The acidity associated with excess protein consumption may cause calcium to leech from bone and contribute to osteoporosis. The nutritional jury isn't in on this, but why risk it if the extra amino acids aren't needed?
There are only so many "essential" fatty acids and all are provided by a Pritikin diet. Any more is "gravy". Nutritionists who recommend more from a variety of high-fat sources are not basing it on any scientific evidence. They only offer generalizations about "balance" and the "value of anti-oxidants", etc. You can OD on that stuff and upset the normal body chemistry. Fat is seductive. It adds richer taste, mouth-feel, etc. But one only needs what's in the whole wheat toast, not in the butter.
Low sodium V8 tastes as briny as seawater to me. 6934. thoughtful - 4/12/2007 9:14:02 PM Well, there is this article suggesting that extremely low fat diets (less than 25% fat) can put you at risk for heart disease if you are of a certain genetic type.
As I mentioned from personal experience, I did not do well on a low fat high carb diet and neither did my hubby. We both feel and do much better on our current diet. Interestingly, my cholesterol levels remain unchanged despite the diet change. Total is 208, but that's because my HDL, the good stuff is very high. My triglycerides are very low.
So I think an important element to keep in mind is individualized medicine. The main question is, in following this pritikin thing, how do you feel? how do you look? how do you sleep? and so on.
I think it's really important to listen to your body. It will let you know if what your doing is working, just like mine did with my low fat issues.
BTW, do you take any vitamin or other supplements? 6935. thoughtful - 4/12/2007 9:36:59 PM The jury is out on the impact of protein on bone. See this article which reviews several recently done studies and how contradictory their results are. Further this study suggests that with adequate calcium consumption, protein does not impact the bones.
6936. arkymalarky - 4/13/2007 12:12:37 AM Well, back from my doctor's appt, and I have hypothyroidism. Explains a lot, and it's apparently something that sometimes happens to women after menopause. 6937. arkymalarky - 4/13/2007 12:14:19 AM My mother has it as well, and my dad's doesn't work any more at all, so it's not all that surprising, though I wasn't thinking about it being a possibility.
And I'm typing this on my WildBlue internet using my new router.
When I get my meds, I should become as zippy as my computer. They have to do more bloodwork first. 6938. judithathome - 4/13/2007 12:17:41 AM Low sodium V8 tastes as briny as seawater to me.
Well, fresh tomatoes taste salty to me...do you think it's better to get 880mgs in the regulare V8 or to get 80mgs in the low salt V8? And I know you abhor juices but sometimes, people want the juice and I'd rather have the low salt V8 than the regular.
I'd be willing to put my numbers with regard to cholesterol, HDL, LDL, blood sugar, and my blood pressure up against yours anyday...and I will be 64 next month.
6939. arkymalarky - 4/13/2007 3:57:45 AM I meant to mention that I also started my allergy shots back today. Now I get two (divided dose according to the allergy), one in each arm, and it's MUCH better. No more sore punk-knots and bruises. At least not until they start going up on the dosage. Between that and treating the thyroid issue, I'm hoping to feel LOTS better by the time I finish school at the end of June. I was on allergy shots for a year, and though they take a long time to work, they made my sinuses better than they've been since I moved to AR when I was 12. Now they're pretty much back like they were before I started the shots, which were the worst they'd been since I'd moved here. I also brought an air purifier to work and put one in my bedroom along with my dehumidifier, and that's helped a whole lot more than I thought it would.
If anyone has any personal knowledge or experience with hypothyroidism, I'm very interested. The rest of what I've been doing, especially diet-wise, is going well. I also understand why I could hardly do anything the first exercise day, though after my surgery (just two years ago today, which I wouldn't remember, but Mazie was born the day I had my hysterectomy) once I was able I could fairly easily do 30 minutes of exercise with the Basic Training tapes. And I did lose a pound. My doctor--who's great--said go ahead and exercise and change my diet, but I won't feel very good until I get the right dosage of meds. Bottom line, I'm going to keep plugging on the program without expecting to up my exercise until I get my thyroid under control, and look forward to feeling better than I have in years. The hysterectomy began that, the allergy shots continued it, and this will top it all off. I'm glad to finally know what's been causing me to not want to move for the last year or so, at least. I've always been something of a slug, but this past year has been very noticeably different, which I attributed to too heavy a school/work load.
Thoughtful, I know you have Graves disease, which causes the opposite (right?) wrt thyroid. Any other issues with that or ways of dealing with it? 6940. arkymalarky - 4/13/2007 4:00:09 AM I meant I did lose a pound this week, not two years ago. Then I lost around 10 with surgery alone, and now I'm back to that pre-surgery weight (and look). 6941. betty - 4/13/2007 4:03:36 AM I have a friend who developed hypothyroid in her late 30's. Once it got treated things got better for her. This is probably good news. best with this. 6942. arkymalarky - 4/13/2007 4:10:49 AM That's what my doctor said. Did I mention she's great?
You weren't posting when I posted here that my doctor, whom I'd gone to off and on since we moved to AR when I was 12, died suddenly of a heart attack at age 75 early this fall. This woman, a former math student of my husband's, was scheduled to work with him, and now she's the only doctor in the office. My doctor was fantastic, old-school, and knew me and all my fears and idiosyncracies so well. He agreed to deliver my daughter long after he'd quit delivering babies. I went into panic mode when he died, because I was under huge stress from graduate school and a full load at work, among other things. Now Mose and virtually all of Bob's family who lives here--including his mother, whose previous doctor sucked--goes to her. 6943. arkymalarky - 4/13/2007 4:12:42 AM Not to sound like a selfish clod, I cried when he died, too. Still do when I think about it. The first time I called for an appointment, several weeks later, I choked up on the phone, but so did his receptionist. 6944. concerned - 4/13/2007 5:57:18 AM I just took my first pill to control hypertension today (20mg lisinopril). In the doctor's office before it was prescribed, I measured 180/112. Several hours after I took it and ran 3 1/2 miles, I measured myself at 122/63. One pill, seven hours.
|
 |
Go To Mote #
|
|
