Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Recent editorial from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition page

  1. #1
    Bisous's Avatar
    Bisous is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    468

    Recent editorial from American Journal of Clinical Nutrition

    Primal Fuel
    Closer to correct... but not all the way there yet:

    Am J Clin Nutr doi: 10.3945/ajcn.2010.29622. Printed in USA.  2010 American Society for Nutrition

    This is just an excerpt of the last few paragraphs:
    "Unfortunately, most carbohydrates in Western diets are highly
    processed, including bread, rolls, pizza, white rice, and most
    ready-to-eat cold cereals and sugar. Prior studies show that these
    types of carbohydrates are particularly harmful for overweight
    and obese individuals, suggesting that adverse effects of carbohydrates
    are aggravated by underlying insulin resistance (7).
    The obesity epidemic and growing intake of refined carbohydrates
    have created a ‘‘perfect storm’’ for the development of cardiometabolic
    disorders. For this reason, reduction of refined
    carbohydrate intake should be a top public health priority. Several
    dietary strategies can be used to achieve this goal. These include
    replacing carbohydrates (especially refined grains and sugar) with
    unsaturated fats and/or healthy sources of protein and exchanging
    whole grains for refined ones. A combination of these approaches
    can increase flexibility in macronutrient composition and thus
    long-term adherence. In addition, limiting sugar-sweetened
    beverage consumption, a major source of dietary GL and excess
    calories, has been associated with lower risk of obesity, type
    2 diabetes, and IHD (8).
    A very-low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet (eg, percentage of energy
    , 20% from fat and .70% from carbohydrates), once typical
    in traditional Asian populations, has the potential to be
    cardioprotective if most of the carbohydrates come from minimally
    processed grains, legumes, and vegetables and if the population
    is lean and active (and thus has low insulin resistance).
    However, such a diet is difficult to maintain long term. A
    very-low-fat diet may also increase risk of hemorrhagic stroke
    (9). On the other hand, recent clinical trial and epidemiologic evidence
    suggests that a diet with moderately restricted carbohydrate
    intake but rich in vegetable fat and vegetable protein
    improves blood lipid profile (10) and is associated with lower risk
    of IHD in the long term (11). Benefits of the plant-based, lowcarbohydrate
    diet are likely to stem from higher intake of polyunsaturated
    fats, fiber, and micronutrients as well as the reduced
    GL in the dietary pattern.
    Clearly, diets high in either saturated fats or refined carbohydrates
    are not suitable for IHD prevention. However, refined carbohydrates
    are likely to cause even greater metabolic damage
    than saturated fat in a predominantly sedentary and overweight
    population. Although intake of saturated fat should remain at
    a relatively low amount and partially hydrogenated fats should
    be eliminated, a singular focus on reduction of total and saturated
    fat can be counterproductive because dietary fat is typically
    replaced by refined carbohydrate, as has been seen over the past
    several decades. In this era of widespread obesity and insulin resistance,
    the time has come to shift the focus of the diet-heart
    paradigm away from restricted fat intake and toward reduced
    consumption of refined carbohydrates."

  2. #2
    Jason VT's Avatar
    Jason VT is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    136
    The proposal breaks down to: eat lots of whole grains and lots of polyunsaturated fatty acids. Which, while healthier than the SAD, it's still going to cause insulin resistance and lots of oxidative stress; meaning that NOTHING will change with America's health epidemic.

  3. #3
    Bisous's Avatar
    Bisous is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    468
    I am personally baffled by the pro PUFA stance. And the grain stance.

  4. #4
    Stabby's Avatar
    Stabby is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Stabsville
    Posts
    2,462
    Nutritional "science" sucks. Eat beef. Mmm.

    edit: actually mainstream nutritional science sucks. I'm all for good science. Advising a "plant-based, lowcarbohydrate
    diet" (wtf) because it "improved lipid profiles" (meaning lowered that nasty nasty LDL) and is therefore healthy because we all know that the key to good cardiovascular health is lowering our total LDL via lots of omega 6, oh and also that the only thing we should consider with regards to human health is heart disease risk.

    Mainstream science's problem is that when they're wrong for so many years and harm so many people with bad advise, it looks really bad when they admit that they were wrong so they don't and just kind of weasel their way around it.
    Last edited by Stabby; 05-10-2010 at 03:10 PM.
    Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

    Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

  5. #5
    Bisous's Avatar
    Bisous is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    468
    Well, a couple things about this editorial really piss me off. Though we must put it into context - this editorial discussed a diet for people with ischemic heart disease, which (along with advanced diabetes) was one of two conditions where there have been two rather large studies that actually showed a disadvantage for saturated fat. Of course, in one of those studies at least, carbohydrate intake was not controlled, and the "saturated animal fat" in the study was mostly fat from lunchmeat, delis, that kind of thing - highly processed meats. What pisses me off is that the nutrition scientists and public health people assumed that we would all benefit from the same diet that *might* be good for a small, very sick and definitely hormonally skewed portion of the population (at least in comparison to a diet that is high in processed meats AND grains AND sugar...), and also the little bit about how the mainstream is too stupid or lazy to stick with the low fat diet (I suppose I'm inferring that but that's my impression from reading it). Blame the people for the obesity, with clear evidence of many peoples who live with plenty of food and are effortlessly thin and healthy! I just don't understand it. Some of these are smart, smart people, but it is as if they checked their brains at the door.

  6. #6
    Stabby's Avatar
    Stabby is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Stabsville
    Posts
    2,462
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    I'm all too familiar with the "do but don't think types". These people are knowledgeable in the sciences and can perform lab work but when it comes to integrating it all and deriving some sort of normative proposition from it that is going to reflect actual knowledge, and therefore beget a successful interaction with reality, they fail miserably because they're looking at it with tunnel vision and not seeing the big picture, the multiple factors that are required for good health. I haven't read any of that but usually when there is a "saturated fat" and a "polyunsaturated fat" group, the saturated group is horrendously deficient in omega 3 (as is anyone who doesn't take fish oil or eat pastured animal products) but the polyunsaturated group is sufficient. And then they blame it on the saturated fat. That's why I suppose we have a bit of an advantage because we don't necessarily have to appeal to absolute 100% facts and can make certain assumptions like luncheon meat is not equal to real meat, omega 3 deficiency causes disease etc, oh no that would be far too much integration on their part.
    Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.

    Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •