REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum

SkinnyPupp · 05-30-2009, 06:17 AM

This thread spawns from the Fish N Chips thread, where an ignorant person argued with me that saturated fat is bad for you, and we should be eating more vegetable oil. He went on to turn stupid on me when I tried to tell him wrong, and used the American Heart Association of all places (they basically only exist to sell their logo so cereals can put it on their boxes of sugar and say "hey look, we're HEALTHY)

I am NOT against ignorant people. We all have the ability to learn. And the definition of ignorant is that you just don't know any better. But when you are going to start turning on someone who is trying to teach you something, and spout of the same incorrect information, you go from being ignorant to being stupid.

So I gave up on that thread. Besides, it was too far deviated from the original intention of the thread (to discuss fish n chips)

Anyway, I came across this video on a friend's site (she is a trainer, future nutritionist, and future olympic athlete) and noticed that it pertained to our discussion perfectly. Basically, the point I was trying to get across that fat doesn't cause cholesterol problems (and besides, cholesterol doesn't cause heart problems wither) the real enemy is insulin. Anyone telling you otherwise is going on sham science from the 50's that the government latched onto.

The video is an excerpt from the great documentary "Fat Head".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8WA5wcaHp4

I just finished watching the entire movie, and it was GREAT! It basically tells us what I already knew, and what many ignorant people didn't know - that saturated fat is NOT bad for you - sugars and grains are. Cholesterol isn't the enemy, inflammation and insulin are.

You might remember the documentary "Supersize Me". In that one, the guy said he would only eat at McDonald's for a month, and would super size his meals only if asked. His argument is that McDonalds basically forces people to eat at their restaurants, tricking kids into wanting to go there, and preying on stupid, poor people to eat there every day. Obviously this is bullshit. And if you do the math, the diet he did was bullshit too (to gain the weight he claimed in the movie, he would have had to eat 5000 calories a day, which would be impossible in most combinations of the menu available at McDonald's. Especially if he only Super Sized his meal when asked - which happened 9 times over the month).

The star of Fat Head did his own version of the diet - he only ate at fast food restaurants for a month. However he did one thing different - he kept his calories at 2000 kcal per day, and carbs down to 100g a day. In addition, he went for a walk each night. He ended up eating everything you would expect - chicken mc nuggets, double quarter pounders, big macs, etc. Not just salads and crap. He was taking in like 100g of fat per day, 50g of which was saturated.

At the end of the month, the look on his doctor's face was priceless. He couldn't believe what he saw! The guy lost 12 lbs over the month!

Obviously that he is not trying to make the case that you should eat fast food to lose weight and be healthy. (his LDL went up, because of the vegetable oil these restaurants are now forced to use for their fried food thanks to the ignorance such as what I witnessed in the fish n chips forum).

Instead, his point is that saturated fat does NOT kill you. Saturated fat does not even "make you fat". The real problem is that we are eating too many grains such as wheat and corn, causing insulin spikes and other issues. That, and lack of activity are what make you fat. Not saturated fat.

Please try not to be stupid. Please pay attention to new research and studies. Please don't simply blindly follow what special interest groups like the AHA and ADA have to say, who are simply there to make money licensing their logos.

Give this movie a watch if you have the time. It should be on DVD (or torrents, if that's how you obtain your movies). You'll be a better person for at least looking more into 50 year old bullshit science.

mickz · 05-30-2009, 09:34 AM

I believe it's the Heart & Stroke Foundation that allows food companies to buy their Health Check logo for their packaging.

You have to blame the media for this situation, fat is marketed like poison. People cringe when they hear it and stay away.

!SG · 05-30-2009, 09:34 AM

certain grains are bad, whole grains with hearty tough exteriors are good.

i learned this stuff going to diabetics class.

the issue is that a lot of what we eat nowadays is sooooo processed, that the amount of energy your body takes to break it down to usuable food (simple sugars) is so minimal that its no different than simple sugars themselves.

my understanding is not just how accessable the food we eat becomes workable energy, but also how hard the body has to work to break down that food into becoming workable energy.

cut out the sugar in ur diet, and just watch how food tastes so much more dynamic.

and you will need to rip my bare hands away from a juicy steak anyday!

hal0g0dv2 · 05-30-2009, 10:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mickz

I believe it's the Heart & Stroke Foundation that allows food companies to buy their Health Check logo for their packaging.

You have to blame the media for this situation, fat is marketed like poison. People cringe when they hear it and stay away.

ya the companies spend stupid money to put that logo on

SkinnyPupp · 05-30-2009, 10:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by !SG

certain grains are bad, whole grains with hearty tough exteriors are good.

i learned this stuff going to diabetics class.

the issue is that a lot of what we eat nowadays is sooooo processed, that the amount of energy your body takes to break it down to usuable food (simple sugars) is so minimal that its no different than simple sugars themselves.

my understanding is not just how accessable the food we eat becomes workable energy, but also how hard the body has to work to break down that food into becoming workable energy.

cut out the sugar in ur diet, and just watch how food tastes so much more dynamic.

and you will need to rip my bare hands away from a juicy steak anyday!

Yeah Glycemic Index is important with insulin. They talk about that in the movie. I believe sugar is 65 or so? Coke is about that, and so is bread, and most "healthy" cereals. These cereals that shoot your insulin just as much as drinking a can of Coke, or eating a cup of pure sugar, are considered A-OK by the "Heart & Stroke Foundation" or whatever.

That is such a sham, and irritates me to no end (in case you couldn't already tell

)

SkinnyPupp · 05-30-2009, 10:45 AM

If you were wondering what makes many "vegetable oils" so disgusting, watch this (bonus footage from the DVD)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=flLwKQGm43A

Great68 · 05-30-2009, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

This thread spawns from the Fish N Chips thread, where an ignorant person argued with me that saturated fat is bad for you, and we should be eating more vegetable oil. He went on to turn stupid on me when I tried to tell him wrong, and used the American Heart Association of all places (they basically only exist to sell their logo so cereals can put it on their boxes of sugar and say "hey look, we're HEALTHY)

*sniff I love you too SkinnyPupp

CorneringArtist · 05-30-2009, 11:33 AM

Damn this is an eye-opener, thanks for posting this up! I should get the DVD for this.

SkinnyPupp · 05-30-2009, 11:39 AM

Be sure to read the author's blog, it is full of information and links to resources.

I have been reading about the whole saturated fat thing for a while now, but this movie/blog is the one place I can direct people to that will tell them all they need to know about the crap that we've been fed all our lives.

Even if you can't convince your mom to stop buying "vegetable" oil to cook with, at least see if you can get her to switch to a nut oil! Coconut would be best, but peanut is great. We started using lard to fry veggies with, and it makes everything taste light and crispy.

SkinnyPupp · 05-30-2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CorneringArtist

Damn this is an eye-opener, thanks for posting this up! I should get the DVD for this.

It is worth the price of the DVD, just to see the expression on his doctor's face when he looks at his fat measurement with full knowledge of his 1 month diet plan.

waddy41 · 05-30-2009, 04:04 PM

awesome post....many thanks

check out underground wellness on youtube.....sean's awesome...

taylor192 · 06-02-2009, 08:49 AM

Please don't believe the Michael Moore propaganda in this video.

Do you know why he lost 12 lbs? A 150lb, 5'8" 30yo sedentary male requires 2000kcal daily. Anything other than sitting on the couch will require more than 2000kcal, and thus result in a net loss of calories and weight.

How many here can eat 2000kcal/day? I'll give you a hint of how hard it is:

Quote:

Fat: 1 gram = 9 calories
Protein: 1 gram = 4 calories
Carbohydrates: 1 gram = 4 calories
Alcohol: 1 gram = 7 calories

The more fat you eat, the less you can eat. Moreso, carbs fill you up, while high fat consumption leaves you hungry. How effective is a diet where you're always hungry and have to eat minuscule sized portions? Not very, most people aren't filming a video and have an invested reason to stick to the diet.

Carbs are an essential source of energy, how motivated are you going to be to hit the gym if you're letharghic? Low car diets leave people feeling tired, and I doubt this is how a lazy fat person on a diet wants to feel while trying to find motivation to exercise.

Proper carbs (read complex carbs) are what you want to eat. Sugar has a GI of 68, while an apple has a GI of 38 or a potatoe has a GI of 85! Duh, we've been told to avoid potatoes as sources of carbs, yet avoiding all carbs is not good advice. Whole grains and fruits are low on the GI.

willystyle · 06-02-2009, 08:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkinnyPupp

Yeah Glycemic Index is important with insulin. They talk about that in the movie. I believe sugar is 65 or so? Coke is about that, and so is bread, and most "healthy" cereals. These cereals that shoot your insulin just as much as drinking a can of Coke, or eating a cup of pure sugar, are considered A-OK by the "Heart & Stroke Foundation" or whatever.

That is such a sham, and irritates me to no end (in case you couldn't already tell

)

If I remember correctly from the Keto Diet that I was on, Simple sugar aka. Glucose is actually 100 on the Glycemic Index, but nonetheless, I totally agree with you.

I was on a HIGH FAT/LOW CARB diet (similar to Atkins, but not exactly like it, we were restricted to 50g carb or LESS/day, with all coming from Dietary Fibre) and I dropped alot of weight.

SkinnyPupp · 06-02-2009, 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by taylor192

Please don't believe the Michael Moore propaganda in this video.

Do you know why he lost 12 lbs? A 150lb, 5'8" 30yo sedentary male requires 2000kcal daily. Anything other than sitting on the couch will require more than 2000kcal, and thus result in a net loss of calories and weight.

How many here can eat 2000kcal/day? I'll give you a hint of how hard it is:

The more fat you eat, the less you can eat. Moreso, carbs fill you up, while high fat consumption leaves you hungry. How effective is a diet where you're always hungry and have to eat minuscule sized portions? Not very, most people aren't filming a video and have an invested reason to stick to the diet.

Carbs are an essential source of energy, how motivated are you going to be to hit the gym if you're letharghic? Low car diets leave people feeling tired, and I doubt this is how a lazy fat person on a diet wants to feel while trying to find motivation to exercise.

Proper carbs (read complex carbs) are what you want to eat. Sugar has a GI of 68, while an apple has a GI of 38 or a potatoe has a GI of 85! Duh, we've been told to avoid potatoes as sources of carbs, yet avoiding all carbs is not good advice. Whole grains and fruits are low on the GI.

OK you know what, I think I will respond to this. But not because I think there's hope for you, and that you will suddenly "get it". You clearly show that unlike Great68, who was just ignorant and thought he "knew it all", you have the comprehension skills of a 7 year old at best. You are not ignorant, you are stupid (and that's with louvred sunglasses notwithstanding).

But still, there are a lot of other people who are ignorant, and have the ability to learn. They may come across your brightly worded post, and think it makes sense. However, the problem is that you are not even arguing with me. You are not arguing any points I make, and you are not making a rebuttal of the video. You are just spewing confused statements that have nothing to do with the matter I am discussing in this thread.

Let me just make a few quick points, that will hopefully clear up any confusion.

I have nothing against carbs. You're right, we need sugar for quick energy, and we need carbs. I will eat plenty of carbs when I am not cutting weight. However, the issue is where the carbs come from. You said that what I am talking about is a "fad". Well if it's a "fad" then this "fad" has been going for about 2 million years or so, or the entire history of our species. No, the "fad" is not to avoid starches and sugar. The "fad" is what they started a few hundred years ago, and what the government drilled into our parents' heads: That a huge portion of our diet should consist of grains and starch, which is hardly different from eating pure sugar.

My argument is, that prior to the invention of easy-to-grow-and-eat grains like corn, wheat, and rice, we got our carbs from fruits and vegetables, and maybe a little bit of edible starches. And this has been going on for millions of years, so it's no fad.

So yes, we need carbs. Eat carbs every day! But don't get them from garbage sources like what the "Canadian Food Guide" tells you. You wanna know of some more "fads"? How about obesity, diabetes, and heart disease. Oh look, those happened right when we started consuming huge amounts of sugar! Not fat, which as I mentioned, has been a large part of our diet for many thousands of years.

If you are dieting, and trying to lose fat, that's a whole other issue. But it doesn't relate to the matter at hand (except the fact that you inexplicably brought it up). However I will tell you that I have been eating next to no carbs for the last month (with the exception of after workouts, when you do want to have an insulin spike), and I have been kicking ass in the gym. Am I able to lift as much weight as I normally do? No, but that doesn't matter. I burn a shitload of calories, my BMR stays up, I gain muscle which burns more calories, and the fat just melts off. With no cardio. The way to lose fat is not to "just lower your caloric intake" or to "do more cardio" or to "cut fat out of your diet". But I digress...

So this isn't Atkins, this isn't a "fad diet". It is people who know what proper nutrition is supposed to be, and trying to share that information with other intelligent people who are willing to learn. Willing to go against the special interest groups, against the government, and listen to science and history instead. Maybe you will learn, maybe you won't. In any case, I hope other people do.

SkinnyPupp · 06-02-2009, 09:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by willystyle

If I remember correctly from the Keto Diet that I was on, Simple sugar aka. Glucose is actually 100 on the Glycemic Index, but nonetheless, I totally agree with you.

I was on a HIGH FAT/LOW CARB diet (similar to Atkins, but not exactly like it, we were restricted to 50g carb or LESS/day, with all coming from Dietary Fibre) and I dropped alot of weight.

Table sugar is sucrose, not glucose. It is around 68 or 70. You're correct, glucose is 100

SkinnyPupp · 06-02-2009, 09:06 PM

Here's another video to check out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozC5BYOgoNE

hal0g0dv2 · 06-02-2009, 10:17 PM

good information thanks

SkinnyPupp · 06-03-2009, 02:17 AM

Here's another excellent video, which clearly explains the philosophy behind eating like a human:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uCFZoqmKf5M

kazuki · 06-03-2009, 04:12 AM

Is there a possibility that over 10,000 yrs, humans have adapted to eating cultivated grains such as rice.

Lets use China as an example. Since you keep on insisting that insulin is the problem, how do Chinese people get away with eating rice all day everyday for the past couple thousand years in ancient China without a problem with diabetes/heart disease.

SkinnyPupp · 06-03-2009, 06:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kazuki

Is there a possibility that over 10,000 yrs, humans have adapted to eating cultivated grains such as rice.

Lets use China as an example. Since you keep on insisting that insulin is the problem, how do Chinese people get away with eating rice all day everyday for the past couple thousand years in ancient China without a problem with diabetes/heart disease.

Just about every Chinese person you know probably has some form of insulin resistance or diabetes, or is related to someone who does. I can pretty much guarantee that.

The problem didn't start 50 years ago, or 2000 years ago. It started about 10,000 years ago. This isn't a "fad" and this isn't something "new". Blame the Egyptians for making it so easy to stuff yourself with grains

PS: I believe this thread is important, so troll attempts will be dealt with strictly. If you want to argue/learn, by all means do so. But if you're going to just post stupid crap, don't bother unless you want points.

kazuki · 06-03-2009, 07:14 AM

I was talking about ancient china. Not chinese ppl right now who have adapted high calorie diets today. I find it hard to believe the Chinese from 2000 years ago would have a problem with diabetes. I could be wrong but I dont think I am.

SkinnyPupp · 06-03-2009, 07:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kazuki

I was talking about ancient china. Not chinese ppl right now who have adapted high calorie diets today. I find it hard to believe the Chinese from 2000 years ago would have a problem with diabetes. I could be wrong but I dont think I am.

You are. Someone in another thread pointed out a study that showed South Asian people to be among the first to have problems with diabetes, and it was attributed directly to the fact that they relied so much on agriculture (rice).

SkinnyPupp · 06-03-2009, 12:20 PM

OK I decided to prune out all the crap, let's start this thing over again. All posts from taylor will be deleted (so please just stop), and all troll posts will lead to points.

Anyone else who can think with a functioning brain, please feel free to ask questions, bring up any points, and generally discuss healthy eating here.

!SG · 06-03-2009, 01:29 PM

diabetes has been on the rise amongst asians, specifically china asians.

those that seem to fight against diabetes are those that are physically hard working, thus farmers in china.

however, the general modern chinese now have diabetes on the rise. actually a lot of chinese ppl have cut back on their rice consumption.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kazuki

Is there a possibility that over 10,000 yrs, humans have adapted to eating cultivated grains such as rice.

Lets use China as an example. Since you keep on insisting that insulin is the problem, how do Chinese people get away with eating rice all day everyday for the past couple thousand years in ancient China without a problem with diabetes/heart disease.

!SG · 06-03-2009, 01:34 PM

like i stated, the issue is that todays food, is all highly processed. fruits have been engineered to have better taste, bigger crop, bigger yields, higher starch content made for certain applications.

compare say an apple today, to an apple 10,000 years ago. betcha the apple 10,000 years ago looks something similar to our organics nowadays. not the best looking, probably smaller...

an average male needs about 1800 calories to survive a regular day which is full of regular activities. a femail needs about 1400. if you do dick all, then you can probably get away with less than 1000 calories a day, assuming all u do is fart, move as little as possible, and remain brain dormant.

the argument is carbs. doesnt matter if they say its complex carbs, or whatever, unless the food u bought actually grew on a tree untouched by human technology, hands and further enhancements, it is and will be up there with straight out eating regular sugar by the spoon full.

the growing movement is eating natural unprocessed foods. doesnt always taste the best, but arguably better for your body.

steak still rocks!