Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 110

Thread: The 80/10/10 Diet by T. Colin Campbell (The China Study) page 7

  1. #61
    Grokkette's Avatar
    Grokkette is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    27
    Shop Now
    10% Protein?! That would mean roughly 40g of protein a day for me... no thanks!! I need much more than that!

    Sent from my DROID RAZR using Marks Daily Apple Forum mobile app

  2. #62
    Black Timber's Avatar
    Black Timber is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Finnegans Wake View Post
    Every thread becomes the same thread, with the same players.
    Quite a few "experts"
    Some of you may die, but that is a risk I'm willing to take.

  3. #63
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,731
    How on Earth does a thread about 80/10/10 get so many responses? Baffling.

  4. #64
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,627
    Quote Originally Posted by YogaBare View Post
    Not coconut, but here's an organic pig farm in south africa that raises a particular breed of little piggies on their natural diet: acorns. Oak Valley

    South Africa is ahead of the game with this food stuff.
    This article may be worth a read for you.

    Good Lard, Bad Lard: What Do You Get When You Cross a Pig and a Coconut? | Mother Nature Obeyed - Weston A Price Foundation

    Ironically, pastured pigs fed on a diet of acorns had more PUFA in their tissues than grain fed pigs.

    Raising pigs on pasture isn’t in itself a very effective way to reduce the PUFA content of lard. In one study (2), lard from pigs fed pasture and acorns was 8.7 percent PUFA while lard from pigs fed barley, wheat bran, soy meal, lard, and nutritional supplements was 6.9 percent PUFA. Grass has many benefits, but including it doesn’t lower the PUFA content of lard beyond what could be accomplished simply by banishing vegetable oils from these poor piggies’ diets.
    Remember, acorns are nuts, so they are rich in polyunsaturated fats. Grains are low fat, so pigs likely synthesize fats in their tissues similar to humans on low fat diets. Humans tend to synthesize mostly SFA's with some MUFA's, so perhaps pigs are similar. We definitely have similar tissue.

    Organic grain fed pigs aren't any worse than pasture raised pigs in terms of lipid profile. They may even be superior. I'm not sure what the micronutrient content is - while grain fed pigs may have a slightly better lipid profile, I'd venture pastured pigs are more nutritious, but that's just a guess. The issue with CAFO pigs are they are literally fed soybean oil to fatten them up and that destroys their lipid profile.

    I can find organic chicken. I can find organic beef. I can find organic lamb. I've never seen organic pork. I really try to avoid pork, it's a junk meat.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  5. #65
    eKatherine's Avatar
    eKatherine is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    5,394
    Quote Originally Posted by Grokkette View Post
    10% Protein?! That would mean roughly 40g of protein a day for me... no thanks!! I need much more than that!
    Don't forget, he is recommending vegan sources of protein, which are less bioavailable.

  6. #66
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,390
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    You will not ever, ever, ever get me to smoke. We don't live on Kitava segregated from the rest of the world in a comparatively protective bubble. We don't have clean air. We don't have clean water. We have cellular and radio towers everywhere. Thousands of satellites orbit above us blasting us with God knows how much radiation. The foods we buy are regularly cross-contaminated with pesticides. We store our foods in plastics. There is literally an infinity of variables you cannot compensate for. Regardless of the PUFA content of your diet, cigarettes have been proven over and over again to be highly mutagenic. It is absolutely foolish to smoke in 100% of all cases, and even if you don't develop cancer, you still have to deal with the fact that you stink, your breath stinks, your teeth are yellow, the majority of the public hates your second-hand smoke and you piss away countless dollars on something that gives you absolutely nothing positive in return.


    Smoking for health is like fucking for virginity.
    Not really, smoking increases serum hemoglobin (oxygen transporter in red blood cells), increases testosterone and DHEA, raises gluthione and catalase, and stimulates the thyroid in addition to numerous neurological benefits.

    And, it lowers serotonin and raises dopamine.

    Smoking brain scans - Stock Image M370/0778 - enlarged - Science Photo Library

    This is usually why in a stressful state I naturally gravitate towards cigarettes. Of course, you could just chew nicotine gum too.
    Longing is the agony of the nearness of the distant

  7. #67
    diene's Avatar
    diene is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Northeastern U.S.
    Posts
    1,660
    I think that there are situations in which smoking may be more beneficial for a specific person than not smoking. Tobacco has different alkaloids (other than nicotine, but nicotine is a big one) that are neuroprotective. The neuroprotective properties of tobacco cannot be understated. It protects against neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, and it protects against chemically induced neurodegeneration (usually caused by consuming certain drugs). Of course, it also increases the risk of developing cancer. So there are definitely pros and cons. In some situations, for some people, I believe that the pros may outweigh the cons. You can get some benefit by chewing nicotine gum or wearing a patch but not 100% of the benefit because there are other alkaloids in tobacco that work synergistically with nicotine to produce a neuroprotective effect.

  8. #68
    Derpamix's Avatar
    Derpamix is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    5,390
    Quote Originally Posted by serenity View Post
    I think that there are situations in which smoking may be more beneficial for a specific person than not smoking. Tobacco has different alkaloids (other than nicotine, but nicotine is a big one) that are neuroprotective. The neuroprotective properties of tobacco cannot be understated. It protects against neurodegenerative disorders like Alzheimer's and Parkinson's, and it protects against chemically induced neurodegeneration (usually caused by consuming certain drugs). Of course, it also increases the risk of developing cancer. So there are definitely pros and cons. In some situations, for some people, I believe that the pros may outweigh the cons. You can get some benefit by chewing nicotine gum or wearing a patch but not 100% of the benefit because there are other alkaloids in tobacco that work synergistically with nicotine to produce a neuroprotective effect.
    Good post, I agree completely.
    Longing is the agony of the nearness of the distant

  9. #69
    jackaaron's Avatar
    jackaaron is offline Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    US
    Posts
    64
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    I'm going to go ahead and cherry pick this one sentence.

    What you should have is an overall low PUFA diet. However, modern foods being the way they are, it rules out a lot of paleo foods. Not much fatty poultry, fatty pork, fatty fish, nuts or avocado. Ruminant meats, grassfed dairy, some eggs and coconut are fair game, but you have to get your calories from somewhere. In order to minimize PUFA, the best way is to overall cut fat from your diet. Since you need to get your calories from somewhere, fruit and starch are the logical choices. Glucose is, simply put, a superior fuel to fat. It is a much more efficient fuel source than fat, it is easier for the body to process, it better supports your thyroid function and due to the way the body converts glucose into fat in times of excess, it stores mostly as saturated fat with some monounsaturated fat.

    The problem with your post is you put sugar in the context of being bad. Well, it's superior to fat, and you need your energy from somewhere.

    I could just as easily say "Please provide any evidence that we need the high fat diet typical to MDA."
    Okay, I don't get it. I thought Paleo people don't like PUFA's either (I"m still learning, please take that FWIW).

    For example, this link from a Pro-Paleo website is against PUFA's as well (I wanted to find a link outside of this community, although I thought the rest of the Paleo community was anti-PUFA):
    The Many Dangers Of Excess PUFA Consumption | Paleo Diet Lifestyle

    I do see where you differ from this overall forum. You claim low fat, they claim high.

  10. #70
    thriveful's Avatar
    thriveful is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    167
    As that article mentioned, 'excessive' PUFA's is the issue. A historical ratio of 1:1 or 1:2 of O3:O6 is now in the 1:15 or even 1:30 range in the western diet. These PUFA's are highly oxidative, so you don't want too many. Cutting O6 is generally considered the best way to balance the ratios

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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