Carb Counters - Two remarkable articles about going grain free




diamondgeog
02-13-2014, 07:07 PM
These are simply fantastic. And funny. I especially like the Mark's Daily Apple one about sandwiches.

Enjoy.

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/top-8-most-common-reactions-to-your-grain-free-diet-and-how-to-respond/#axzz2tDmypiwC

http://detoxinista.com/2012/04/going-grain-free/


Locke
02-13-2014, 07:38 PM
"Well, you see, all you gotta do for a bread-free sandwich is spread a little mayo on your right hand, some mustard on the left, and pile on the avocado, the deli slices, and the tomato slices in between. Easy as pie."

LOL! :lol:

diamondgeog
02-13-2014, 08:01 PM
I found those articles really helpful. I learned a lot more about grains in them. Especially thinking that fruits and vegetables 'want to be eaten'. But grains 'do not'. Because it helps a fruit but hurts a grain.

I hadn't given up corn tortillas or chips yet. Today we had a lunch at a Mexican restaurant. Zero chips. And a fajita salad. So corn is the last grain on my journey.

I can't even explain to people how wonderful the journey has been though. I would have been ecstatic to loose 50 lbs in a year. Now it looks like there is a good chance I will go sub 200 in a year or less. But beyond that I can run now, I am strong, clear. I feel better than ever and will be 49 in not too many more months.

I just hope people are open to info on grains and low carb and fat.


diamondgeog
02-14-2014, 07:44 AM
And another good story.

http://wellnessmama.com/575/how-grains-are-killing-you-slowly/

I wish everyone had this info. As the article mentioned could happen, my allergies have virtually disappeared.

diamondgeog
04-06-2014, 12:52 PM
I came across another couple of articles. I also want to keep this thread alive. I've found on the Internet incredible passion about going grain free.

Why? It completely transforms people's lives for the better. And keeps you away from so much bad stuff. Words cannot describe even close the positives going grain free has been for me.

http://www.thepaleomom.com/2011/11/why-grains-are-bad.html
http://www.thepaleomom.com/2011/12/why-grains-are-bad-for-you-part-2.html

BTW I personally have sworn off posting in Weight Loss Support. I feel, rightly or wrongly, just too much flack anytime I post anything about Low Carb. Might be ironic if people feel the exact opposite. In any case it isn't much fun. That is just an aside.

But it does point to an important detail. Moderation is still an important concept within a low carb high fat approach. You still don't want to eat 2 pounds of meat a day. Or two sticks of butter. And I suppose the eat everything folk do not consider grains poison so they aren't telling themselves to eat poison. What the reality is though, well I feel they are even if they don't think so.

But an all foods are OK completely misses the point of so many people reclaiming their health on low carb, Paleo, Primal, whatever particular grain free approach they are taking for their well-being. If you read all the articles in just this thread and still are eating grains, well at least you are doing so with information. But to me they are clearly 'poison'. Pretty much they are. At least that is my experience from the theories presented in the article and what actually happened to me when I cut them out. My body and mind reacted like a poison had been taken away.

So telling people that a moderate amount of poison is OK is how it sounds when talking about eating grains to Primal or Paleo folk. Especially when just a little can undo a lot of your hard work, it is completely senseless. Say I could lose weight eating grains. That would still be besides the point. I could be 170-180, but I don't feel I would be healthy at that weight or any weight if I was still eating grains. This is my health journey not my weight loss journey per se.

yoyoma
04-06-2014, 01:16 PM
I found those articles really helpful. I learned a lot more about grains in them. Especially thinking that fruits and vegetables 'want to be eaten'. But grains 'do not'. Because it helps a fruit but hurts a grain.

Legumes, nuts, other seeds (sesame, poppy, chia...), spices, root vegetables, leafy/stalky vegetables, and animals are like grains in that they "do not want to be eaten." They have evolved various defenses and humans have had various levels of success at breeding those defenses back out of them. Some foods were originally poisonous and some domestically bred foods that we eat should still be approached with caution (think rhubarb leaves, green potatoes, etc). If we only ate things that originally wanted to be eaten, we would have extremely restrictive diets.

That said, I am sure that many people are happy and healthy on grain-free diets.

kaplods
04-06-2014, 01:41 PM
I came across another couple of articles. I also want to keep this thread alive. I've found on the Internet incredible passion about going grain free.

Why? It completely transforms people's lives for the better. And keeps you away from so much bad stuff.

Unfortunately passion often gets in the way of facts, sometimes intentionally - people with good intentions, thinking the ends justify the means, so it's ok to exagerate and even lie outright.

Neither are all grains, nor all people created equal. There are some grains that everyone should probably limit or avoid. There are some grains nearly everyone can eat in moderation occasasionally, if not regularly (depending on their weight goals, activity level and overall health).

There's ample research that conflicts. I think a grain-free diet is worth trying, but it isn't necessary for everyone. A lot of the antigrain articles are well-written, but factually inaccurate.

Testimonials are awesome, when they're not trying to masquerade as good science. Even science-based arguments are almost worthless if the conflicting science is not also presented (which it almost never is, so the reader has to take it upon himself or herself to seek out and read, to get an accurate picture).

I an not pro-grain, I'm pro truth, especially in nutritional science, because the science is not nearly as advanced as other areas of science, and it's high time that change.

I have autoimmune disease, which some scientists believe is caused by a high grain, or high carb diet. Other scientists believe the cause for AI issues lie elsewhere, but grains and sugars exacerbate the disease. Others (fewer and fewer) believe there's no connection. Only by reading all the opinions and research supporting all sides, was I able to get a half-way accurate picture of reality - before, during, and after my own self-experimentation.

Unfortunately, dietary intervention is almost never approached by the nonscientist end-user in a rational mindset. Instead passion is in the driver's seat, and opposing science is conveniently ignored (or unknown because the end user relies on incomplete or inaccurate information from someone else who is passionate).

I am not pro-grain by a long shot. I think the SAD (standard American diet) relies far too heavily on carbs (grains and sugar,.especially), salt and fats (and I think the combination of all three is especially deadly and addictive).

Because of my autoimmune issues, I try to avoid most high carb foods, and because of my addiction to them, fail often with unpleasant and deleterious consequences., but just because I need to avoid grains doesn't mean everyone else has to. I wouldn't know that though unless I had read the science on both sides of the aisle. To get a balanced view, you have to read all the science and ignore passion, because passion is closely tied to the placebo effect.

diamondgeog
04-06-2014, 02:13 PM
I do agree people vary, so the impacts would also differ.

I do think many people who say they do 'fine on grains' never say went 3 or 4 or more months without them to see. So they will never truly know.

I guess it depends on the individual if they ever feel the need or desire to see. And I understand that. A year ago it would have sounded nuts to me. It's worth a try, I feel for most, if its never been tried.

And true negative impacts to many foods, even healthy ones. I just think grains have a prominent role in many individuals health problems.

BTW I have gone to the Whole Grains Council website. There are no studies showing grains are healthy. Everytime they do a short term RCT it 'fails'. It shows worse outcomes on grains. So they can only point to broad stastics which could mean anything. Ie whole grain eaters also exercise and don't smoke as much.

The worse one was trying to say whole wheat doesn't have a high glycemic index. They compared it to pure glucose and found it was less. If the most pro grain people in the world, the ones who make their money off it have to point to that? Wow. But pretty fascinating stuff. Like white rice people doing better than brown rice because the brown rice leeched even more nutrients.

free529
04-07-2014, 11:59 PM
helpful articles.
Thanks! :)

kaplods
04-08-2014, 01:52 AM
BTW I have gone to the Whole Grains Council website. There are no studies showing grains are healthy.

Actually there are many, many studies that find health benefits to grains - empirical research too, not just correlational or anectdotal testimonials. As for the Whole Grains Council website, I certainly wouldn't go to a commercial organization's website for unbiased scientific research.

If you read low-carb, anti-grain books, articles, and blogs, you will be inundated with anti-grain arguments and references to research. If you read pro-grain, whole grain, vegan, and vegetarian materials, you will be inundated with the pro-grain arguments and research references.

Often supporters of a theory will make the accusation that there is no research supporting the opposing viewpoint(s), conveniently ignoring or dismissing what does exist.

Before you know it, the statement, "There is no legitimate research evidence to support the opposing theory," starts getting passed along as fact when it is not.

If you go directly to professional journals (in the field of clinical nutrition, especially) you will find decades and decades of research on both sides of the grain debate.

There are also multiple debates and documentary videos available, including, I believe a TEDs talks series on both sides of the issue (probably available on Netflix). I haven't seen the TEDs talks series yet, but a friend was telling me about it, so I've added it to my "find and watch" list.

Much of this information was once a bit difficult to find outside of a university library or clinical nutrition conference, but with online search options, it shouldn't be difficult to find transcrips of some of these awesome debates, as well as journal article abstracts, if not the full articles (for the full articles, you often have to subscribe to the journal in question, but some offer a trial or short-term subscription rate).

I am not pro-grain, but I am pro-truth. Some of the anti-grain research evidence is very compelling, and I've found reducing grains and carbs very gelpful overall, but I don't believe there is any advantage to conveniently ignore conflicting viewpoints and factual information. It does a great disservice to us all by hindering our anility to understand the big picture.

The villification of red meat and low-carb diets came directly from research that supported that position. Conflicting evidence was conveniently ignored or discredited or explained away with a plausible, but untested (or worse, untestable) counter-theory.

The low-carb, paleo, and anti-grain communities are, by and large, making the same error.

Theory advancement and supporter recruitment has taken precedence over presenting unbiased information. Every time evidence is convenienty ignored or dismissed, a little bit of the truth dies.

We need to be able to integrate the conflicting evidence to develop theoried that account for all the evidence. Instead we play dueling theories.

Pattience
04-08-2014, 02:24 AM
There's a fair dose of bullshit in the second article. I'm not going to get embroiled in yet another debate. I'm just saying - misinformation!

kaplods
04-08-2014, 03:24 AM
There's a fair dose of bullshit in the second article. I'm not going to get embroiled in yet another debate. I'm just saying - misinformation!

I agree. I would technically classify both as primarily opinion pieces, heavy on myth and anectdotal testemonial and light on factual, science-based information. Some of the information that is fact-based is dumbed down to the point that it becomes misleading.

Unfortunately, it's very difficult to find written material (outside of text books and academic publications) that even attempts to present an unbiased presentation of multiple theories. Rather one theory is advanced, and all others rejected (or worse, ignored and never even mentioned, so to the reader, conflicting information doesn't exist unless they happen to read material from the "other" viewpoint(s).

Since theories tend to wax and wane in popularity, and authors jump on the popularity bandwagon, it always seems like there is more evidence for the theory that is currently most popular (because that's all you read). Then when the opposing viewpoint becomes most popular, the only evidence you read about is that which supports the popular theory and refutes the previously popular theories.

Debates from recognized, and credentialed experts (and not set up for popular daytime tv hosts) are the most informative and interesting, but the hardest to find outside of the university and PBS arenas.

diamondgeog
04-08-2014, 02:12 PM
I've yet to find a single source that is good science showing grains are healthy. Not one. At least not any RCT. They all 'fail' (people don't do well on grains or whole grains compared to refined grains) as far as I've found. So they fall back on large swaths of data that could mean anything.

I know there are two true things though. And you are correct Kaplods the two things I know do not encompass the whole by far. But they are very important.

One you do not need grains. Many cultures have no access to grains. You will die without protein and fat. Not so with grains.

The second truth I know is that I (my sample size of one) do phenomenally well without grains and my wife does as well and our three year old daughter does with us cutting back for her (really awesome improvements in everything). That is a fundamental importance. And again you cannot know that unless you give them up for two to three months.

My back pain has gone away. My allergies have gone away. I don't get sick anymore. I am strong and able to run now. I feel better than ever before at 48. So I feel, I don't know, but I feel that there is science showing they are harmful to most people, and at best a calorie source that will hurt some people more slowly than others.

But beyond that and most importantly to me: I am thriving without them.

Feel those two articles are 'myths' as much as you want. It is ironic to me when there is not a single source, reputable that I've found, that has been able to show grains are healthy.

And what I mean by reputable if that all the times they try to do RCT studies on grains, they fail to show they are healthy.

But in the end it is still an open question and people can disagree. So what is the deciding vote for me? I was miserable, sick, overweight, with allergies and back pain on grains. Now I feel incredible. So EASY way for me to go.

Pattience
04-09-2014, 07:57 AM
You lost weight, you feel better. Its a no brainer.

What helped you do that was the no grain approach. Good for you. But grains do not cause tooth decay, not to mention a few other myths in those articles.

Tooth decay is caused by sugar and many carbs are not broken down in the mouth so cannot cause tooth decay. Milk for example actually directly helps prevent decay through calcification. I have always drunk tons of milk and the dentist has at times told me about the calcification in my teeth.

that was the myth that really struck me and i can't remember the others. I'm not going to bother rereading it.

Today i picked up the no-grain diet book. What i've read so far includes a fair bit of misinformation and bias but i'm not saying its wrong, so much as the book does not get off to a very credible start. I"m hoping chapter 2 is better.

diamondgeog
04-09-2014, 10:50 AM
A couple of very important points. Going grain free isn't just about weight loss. I was still eating corn up until this past January. I didn't actually know it was a grain. Yep, I have learned a lot.

My back pain went away right after I stopped. Virtually the same weight. Also allergies can happen at any weight. They stopped after grain.

I think this is vital for anyone reading this. Grain consumption, the stuff I read state, lead to inflammation. Well both allergies and back pain are inflammation based so this is born out in my experience. But inflammation also leads to obesity, heart disease, and cancer.

Is this 'true'? Or will some people be more susceptible to grains impacts than others? We don't know. But I do urge people to give a solid 2 to 3 months without grains if they think they can do it. They can always go back.

But weight loss and reduction of hunger and less insulin spike (remember whole wheat bread is worse than regular soda) are all important to me. But the no back pain, allergies, less inflammation in my body, no mineral leeching, not ingesting anti-nutrients are equally or more important.

So many factors for me going grain free.

If anyone sees no improvement, just doesn't work for their lives, they can always go back. But anyone will never know how they do without trying it for a few months.

kaplods
04-09-2014, 04:59 PM
I've yet to find a single source that is good science showing grains are healthy. Not one. At least not any RCT.

This is just as true of grain-free diets. RCT diet studies using human test subjects are exceedingly rare, because they're impossible to do outside of a secure laboratory, and by secure, I mean, locked down, no visitors allowed, because even in locked hospital wing experiments, visitors (and even staff) have been known to smuggle in patients/participants nonallowed foods.

Creating a secure, closed environment, with measures in place to prevent smuggled in foods, is not only difficult and of questionable ethics, it's also prohibitively expensive.

Personal experiences of "feeling better" is subject to placebo effect, and are not proof. At my last physical, I remarked to my physician that I sometimes wondered whether my own relief from eliminating wheat and other grains was psychosomatic, and his reply was that it was always difficult to tell, and recounted a case in which people were flocking to Mexico to get surgery to remove their gallbladders from a doctor with an amazing "cure rate" Patients all reported feeling amazing, and it turned out the doctor didn't remove anything, he just made an incision and stitched it up again.

Because of placebo effect, and the dearth of RCT, all nutritional theories need to be evaluated by correlational data and trial and error, because that's all there is.

I do support self-experimentation, because there is no alternative, but there just isn't enough evidence to claim that grain-inclusive and grain-exclusive diets are universally healthy (or unhealthy).

And when I use the word myth, I do not mean that the assumptions cannot be true, only that the assumptions are asserted without proof. Urban legends are myths, even those with a basis in a factual event. The myth doesn't lie in the fact that the situation ight not have happened to someone, somewhere, sometime. The myth lies in the fact that there is not enough evidence to prove the situation true. It's the belief without evidence that makes a myth.

Annik
04-09-2014, 05:23 PM
Aside from 'nutritional' issues alone, there are problems with modern grains caused by hybridisation.

Grains have been modified so as to, eg, make them resistant to certain kinds of pests or diseases, make them more hardy for short growing seasons, etc, etc.

The result is that many grains are no longer recognised as food by our bodies. Some people with sturdy digestive systems can handle them. Others (some might call them the canaries in the gold mine) cannot. They experience inflammation and digestive challenges.

Sadly, the same thing is being done to fruit. It's called 'the candification of fruit' where hybridisation is being done to produce more intensely sweet produce. Some people's bodies can't cope with the increased sugar content.

Besides this, there is an issue of depletion of soil content. Erosion caused by outdated and sometimes irresponsible farming . Some grains just don't have the same nutritional content they once used to have on account of the fact that soils are depleted.

And finally, there is the issue of poisoning of produce that happens from use of herbicides and pesticides that are not friendly to the system.

People question grain free and so they are entitled to do. Some people will not move forward with an idea until proofs are hammered out ... which often takes years.

I can only speak for myself. 40 years of struggling with weight loss and now I have given up grains and sugars. In less than 10 months, I lost more than 100 pounds. I could literally feel the fat burning happening inside me.

Call this placebo effect if you want. The reality is that my doctor tells me that my blood profile is now one 'to die for.' All health indicators, contrary to what they were 1 year ago, have turned around. He says that whatever I am doing, I should keep doing it!

He also now points out that modern day food guides are not scientific but instead produced by governments aiming to support various industries and economies. Where do human beings come into the equation?

I don't need to 'weight' for more evidence than this.

Go, Diamondgeog, go and keep spreading the word. Let s/he who has ears let them listen!

diamondgeog
04-09-2014, 05:51 PM
Thanks Annik, and very big congrats to you as well. Kaplods I can assure you it is not placebo effect. I thought my back pain was from running.

But we still go to a great taco place by us a lot. A few months ago I was still getting corn tortillas and chips with the guac (great food for me).

It was my last grain. Somehow I thought it was 'different' from other grains. And a year ago I didn't even know it was a grain. Well I cut it out. The back pain went away and never came back.

My allergies have gone away. I can run now and yes that was with practice. But I tried before and failed. I think my lower inflammation from no grains helped me become a runner this time around. Annik touched on so many good points but didn't even also mention the anti-nutrients. Or no one on the planet needs grains, no one. There are better sources for the minerals and vitamins without the anti-nutrients.

As I said before, it isn't even close for me. Nor for thousands on the Internet thriving without grains. And I haven't heard anyone really say yeah I cut out grains for three months and I feel horrible. I am sure they exist. And I am sure people can't make the change.

I understand that. It would have seemed absurd to me a year ago that I could give up just wheat not to mention corn and rice and oatmeal also. Spaghetti. I used to love that. Pizza. Yes I haven't forgotten. But you adapt and find other things you love. And I still have cheese and tomatoes two of my favorite parts of pizza.

Why would I err on the side of them not being harmful when all my experiences point the opposite way? And thanks to pointing out that is important. Especially when they are not essential. It makes no sense at all to me to keep them in my diet if I am thriving without them. And all I am proposing for people reading this who haven't done it, is to try. It might change their lives.

Oh and I should say I've goofed a few times the last 4 or 5 months and had them and each time I felt awful afterward. Perhaps placebo on that but I doubt it. Anyhow the internet is chocked full of personal accounts of people just thriving (best word I can think of) going grain free.

kaplods
04-10-2014, 06:29 AM
I've benefited greatly from grain reduction, and I think it's more than placebo, but just because grains are unhealthy for me, doesn't mean they are for everyone. And just because a healthy grain-free diet is possible, doesn't mean a grain-inclusive diet is inherently unhealthy.

There is evidence on both sides of the grain argument, and it's hypocritical to discount the pro-grain evidence for lack of RCT while accepting the anti-grain theory which is subject to all of the same weaknesses, including a lack of RCT.

If we accept anectdotal and correlational evidence for anti-grain arguments, and dismiss the possibility of placebo effect, then we have to do the same for pro-grain arguments.

I'm just saying that the standard of proof needs to be the same. If anti-grain theories are to be believed on anectdotal and correlation evidence alone, then the pro-grain theories need to be judged by the same standards.

Pattience
04-10-2014, 06:38 AM
Aside from 'nutritional' issues alone, there are problems with modern grains caused by hybridisation.

Grains have been modified so as to, eg, make them resistant to certain kinds of pests or diseases, make them more hardy for short growing seasons, etc, etc.

The result is that many grains are no longer recognised as food by our bodies. Some people with sturdy digestive systems can handle them. Others (some might call them the canaries in the gold mine) cannot. They experience inflammation and digestive challenges.

Sadly, the same thing is being done to fruit. It's called 'the candification of fruit' where hybridisation is being done to produce more intensely sweet produce. Some people's bodies can't cope with the increased sugar content.

Besides this, there is an issue of depletion of soil content. Erosion caused by outdated and sometimes irresponsible farming . Some grains just don't have the same nutritional content they once used to have on account of the fact that soils are depleted.

And finally, there is the issue of poisoning of produce that happens from use of herbicides and pesticides that are not friendly to the system.

People question grain free and so they are entitled to do. Some people will not move forward with an idea until proofs are hammered out ... which often takes years.

I can only speak for myself. 40 years of struggling with weight loss and now I have given up grains and sugars. In less than 10 months, I lost more than 100 pounds. I could literally feel the fat burning happening inside me.

Call this placebo effect if you want. The reality is that my doctor tells me that my blood profile is now one 'to die for.' All health indicators, contrary to what they were 1 year ago, have turned around. He says that whatever I am doing, I should keep doing it!

He also now points out that modern day food guides are not scientific but instead produced by governments aiming to support various industries and economies. Where do human beings come into the equation?

I don't need to 'weight' for more evidence than this.

Go, Diamondgeog, go and keep spreading the word. Let s/he who has ears let them listen!


I am sorry Annik but there is so much self-delusion going on in this post.

First of all you cannot literally feel the fat burning in your body. Its beyond possibility. Where you feel it is in your imagination. That's what's happening.

Clearly you have limited understanding of how bodies work and how science works if you can say something like that. The body just does not have the sensory capacity to detect fat burning and convey that information to the brain.

As for the claims you make in the first few sentences of your post. Again these are unsubstantiated claims. Show the evidence. I know there are certain people making such claims all the time. It does not make them true.

Its good the diet is working for you annik. I am not suggesting the diet would not work. But i contend the diet is not necessary for most people - myself included.

The idea that fruit is bad for you because its sweeter than it was in the past is a dangerous idea. I don't dismiss the claims that fruit is sweeter or that hybridisation of grains has changed them but i do doubt the notions that this means they are no longer digestible by people. I think that's not possible. I do not think the changes in fruit and grains through breeding has been of such a kind that would make them into something so different that makes them indigestible to humans or would cause digestive difficulties that did not occur before.

I say that because as with animal breeding, a cow is still a cow until it can no longer breed with a bull and a dog is still a dog so long as it can breed fertile offspring with another dog. For all the hybridisation of domestic animals, people who've always eaten meat do not suddenly become unable to eat meat. Ditto for grains and fruits.

Again its simply your imagination in play. The placebo effect is such a phenomenon also. People are by nature prone to flights of fancy over acute rationality. People are just not good at objective aberration - correction, observation - that's why we have double blind studies.

So unless you can come up with some solid scientific evidence for the claims you make, i urge people to disregard your assertions.

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 07:49 AM
There is a huge and growing body of evidence grain consumption leads to leaky gut which is then a root cause of a lot of serious maladies for lots and lots of folk. From cancer and heart disease on down.

If anyone wants to still eat grains, their choice. I think in 10 years this will be 'common knowledge'. I'd personally chosen not to wait.

Pattience
04-10-2014, 08:38 AM
Diamond, Saying that grains lead to leaky gut is not the same thing as saying that because of hybridisation grains are no longer healthy for some people when grains would have been in the past.

If someone is getting leaky gut now, then they were more likely to always have been susceptible to it.

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:26 AM
Diamondgeog,

Just a ps ...a good friend who is afflicted by multiple sclerosis has been advised by her medical team to go grain free. The reason given by her physicians: grains especially those with gluten cause inflammation.

Annik

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 09:36 AM
Grains were NEVER healthy for anyone. Humans first started eating them around 12,000 to 10,000 years ago. If you take how long we have been human and make that a 24 hour clock, that is 5 minutes ago. Not long enough for them to be healthy.

But they were a source of calories and calories are important. I suspect a lot of humans died out 10,000 years ago so we are the most adapted. But I still think they are fundamentally unhealthy for humans.

It is interesting to me that in Africa, India, Asia, the Americas early cultures all fermented, soaked, and sprouted their grains. People had a lot more time to be intimate with food 10,000 years ago. They probably observed all the negatives grains were having on them. They found these three methods made the negatives less harmful.

Asian countries also have one of the highest per capita diabetes rates and it is soaring. I have a friend from Nepal. He is very interested in this. He says his mom would never change, just past the point of change, and she eats a lot of rice. I asked does she have arthritis? He said yes, everyone in my family gets it. Not proof of anything but interesting.

Speaking of proof all the studies on grains are healthy are associational studies. No RCTs. Granted they are, as Kaplods says, very hard to do. Especially long term ones. But all the short term RCTs show grains are harmful and whole grains are the most harmful.

I am very glad for this discussion. I am glad people are reading it. I have I think 5 links now. Everyone should research themselves. If you don't believe me, go grain free for two to three months. See. Read on the Internet. Read people's stories of going grain free and how it has transformed their lives. These stories are at least as good as any of the science out there since there aren't any RCT long term on grains being healthy.

And also realize since they became officially recommended as the base of our food pyramid obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer have soared. Does it prove they are the main or a big culprit? No. But more than enough combined with all the knowledge in those articles, and my own personal experiences to stay away from them forever.

I know you eat them Pattience, and you think those articles are BS in your own words. That is your choice. Everyone reading this thread has to make their own choices.

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:50 AM
I am sorry Annik but there is so much self-delusion going on in this post.

First of all you cannot literally feel the fat burning in your body. Its beyond possibility. Where you feel it is in your imagination. That's what's happening.

You can think whatever you want Pattience. The experience is mine. In the weeks when I was losing more than 3 pounds/week I could feel the internal combustion. No question about this. It was not water weight that was coming off because this was happening well into the process...not the first week. And many weeks when there were more than 3 pound losses. It happened repeatedly.



Clearly you have limited understanding of how bodies work and how science works if you can say something like that. The body just does not have the sensory capacity to detect fat burning and convey that information to the brain.

When I reported the symptoms of feeling Heat to both my physicians and pharmacist, their observations were that it was the result of fat metabolisation. You can take it up with them if you like. I know what I felt.


As for the claims you make in the first few sentences of your post. Again these are unsubstantiated claims. Show the evidence. I know there are certain people making such claims all the time. It does not make them true.

I am not asking you to accept anything I say. For those who have ears, let them hear.



Its good the diet is working for you annik. I am not suggesting the diet would not work. But i contend the diet is not necessary for most people - myself included.


The diet works for anyone who suffers from insulin resistance, leptin resistance, and metabolic syndrome.

Because allopathic medicine is philosophically highly conservative, it takes many years before new science breaks through barriers of resistance to acceptance. Some years ago, no one had any idea about any of these things ... Or for that matter even any notion about insulin. They did know that ants were attracted to the urine of people with a particular kind of condition (which later turned out to be identified and named diabetes) because of the high sugar content of the urine.


The idea that fruit is bad for you because its sweeter than it was in the past is a dangerous idea.

A bad idea? Sugar consumption is one of the most serious nutritional issues going today. Increasing the sugar content of anything for any reason is a bad idea when it comes to nutrition! Leads me to suspect you really don't know what you are talking about!

I don't dismiss the claims that fruit is sweeter or that hybridisation of grains has changed them but i do doubt the notions that this means they are no longer digestible by people. I think that's not possible. I do not think the changes in fruit and grains through breeding has been of such a kind that would make them into something so different that makes them indigestible to humans or would cause digestive difficulties that did not occur before.



You are free to think what you like. The increase in digestive system illnesses like crohns, colitis, and celiac disease are connected to questions about modifications in food sources -- it's not rocket science. Make something so hardy that it is resistant to all kinds of weather and plague means it also becomes resistant to human digestion.

The rise in arthritis, osteoarthritis, spondylosis, irritable bowel syndrome, and other inflammatory conditions (some types of ms included) are thought to be connected to this.


I say that because as with animal breeding, a cow is still a cow until it can no longer breed with a bull and a dog is still a dog so long as it can breed fertile offspring with another dog. For all the hybridisation of domestic animals, people who've always eaten meat do not suddenly become unable to eat meat. Ditto for grains and fruits.


Ok that's just funny! You are joking right?


Again its simply your imagination in play. The placebo effect is such a phenomenon also. People are by nature prone to flights of fancy over acute rationality. People are just not good at objective aberration - correction, observation - that's why we have double blind studies.



Mmm hmmm


So unless you can come up with some solid scientific evidence for the claims you make, i urge people to disregard your assertions.

:) Most of my weight loss record is below. It speaks for itself.

time2lose
04-10-2014, 02:28 PM
I want to point out that this is the low carb section of the forum and as such it is an appropriate place for the discussions on the benefits of going grain free. If this were the general weight loss sections, I would expect the types of arguments that this thread has evolved into.

Pattience, you may not have intended it this way but it sounds to me like you are attacking Annie on this subject in a way that is not appropriate for this support forum. It would be like going to the Weight Loss Surgery support forum and ridiculing weight loss surgery.

Radiojane
04-10-2014, 02:33 PM
Bottom line: Low carb/ketogenic works for some, and it's been proven that it is not dangerous to general health in the short term (it takes decades to prove the long term effects of anything) and well being, unless you take it to impractical extremes. Same as calorie counting, which also works for some. If you're trying to lose weight, pick a side you can succeed on.

I don't understand the energy invested in disproving it's efficacy. I certainly don't argue that calorie counting is bad or flawed science. When did discussing our weight loss techniques become as volatile as discussing our political affiliations?

Annik
04-10-2014, 02:55 PM
If you're trying to lose weight, pick a side you can succeed on.

Well said, Radiojane! And why badger someone as to personal views as to what does or doesn't work when it clearly is working for that person!

I am not asking anyone to accept what I say.

I am just so darned sincerely grateful that someone told me about 'a way' that turns out to works so well for me. I have struggled with weight loss all my life. Lost weight many times and gained back all plus more.

I had all but given up on weight loss... virtual surrender/resignation to being morbidly obese... when my brother shared with me his experience with ketogenic nutrition.

It is the first time in my life that there was no teeth clenching clawing struggle to stay true to a programme. Ketogenic nutrition is obviously addressing something that was going wrong inside me.

And now in less than 10 months, its 100 pounds off plus more. These kinds of results often make the news... evidence Diamondgeog!

My results speak for themselves and in no way will I waste my breath or my time on trying to defend it.

Either believe or reject it. It's your choice.

Annik

Annik
04-10-2014, 03:01 PM
It is interesting to me that in Africa, India, Asia, the Americas early cultures all fermented, soaked, and sprouted their grains. People had a lot more time to be intimate with food 10,000 years ago. They probably observed all the negatives grains were having on them. They found these three methods made the negatives less harmful.



I've read that, too. Fermenting, soaking, sprouting ... all helps start the process of digestion. Sprouting also ... brings the product 'to life' ... more vitality entering the system!

Sidebar to your comment about soaring diabetes rates: The same thing has happened here in Canada among many Aboriginal peoples. Their traditional diets did not include grains and sugars. Now their diets do and diabetes rates are soaring in this population.

Go figure.

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 03:12 PM
I like counter points even here.

Radiojane I do have to fundamentally disagree with you though. And I think why I disagree will be very helpful for people.

There is a TON of evidence for the safety of low carb no grains long term. Just one of many: the Inuit. They eat no grains just fat and protein and have incredibly low rates of modern diseases. Little heart attacks and cancers.

The whole world is evidence of long term low carb. For thousands of years NO ONE was eating sugar, no one eating processed foods, and before 10-12 thousand years ago no one was eating much grains if any.

This is one of the fundamental, to me, realities people have to wrap their heads around to regain their health: THE FAD, the only fad diet ever is the low fat high carb diet. That has only been tried the last 50 years. And it is killing people left and right. Since that time heart disease has skyrocketed as had diabetes and cancer and obesity.

If you want to call 12,000 years a fad, I could argue that also. Compared to a million years it is. Humans have eaten meat cooked in animal fat for millions of years. Or just raw along with eating animal fats. I'm not making a moral statement about it, I am saying what we've eaten and why it is good for us: it is what our bodies are used to thriving on. Just like bears eating salmon, I am sure that is the perfect bear diet for Alaska bears.

There, of course, is much more than meat we were eating. And non-starchy veggies, eggs, some nuts, dairy, is as big a part of my diet as meats.

But the fat is low fat high carbs for sure. The fad is clearly man-made vegetable oils.

People have been doing great long term on LCHF though. Don't kid yourself. Plenty of evidence for that. Mark Sisson of Mark's Daily Apple is in his late 50s: A male model in his early 20s would be lucky to look as good. He has been doing Paleo for decades.

Here is a link on the Inuit. I don't agree with it all especially on saturated fats. Also note I try to eat only grass fed beef because of the omega 3 to omega 6 ratio being so much better.

http://www.theiflife.com/the-inuit-paradox-high-fat-lower-heart-disease-and-cancer/

And another one: http://discovermagazine.com/2004/oct/inuit-paradox

Note I don't eat meat like them. But I make sure to get my veggies because of that and I am starting to eat more grass fed liver. It is a transition. But yes no grain, for sure (I am not no vegetables at all they are my main thing) has been proven healthy. My goodness you reading this would not be here if that wasn't true. ALL your ancestors up to 12,000 or so years ago ate little or no grain.

And the personal messages of thanks, thank you all, that helps.

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 03:19 PM
Let me also say calorie counting is clearly a fad.

Think about it. No one even knew what a calorie was till a few hundred years ago. As I've found and Annik found, no calorie counting is necessary on low carb.

Why? If done right it is high fat and fat fills you up. Study after study shows people do less well on low fat with calorie counting as compared to high fat and eat as much as you want.

Fat is just naturally filling. Why would it be naturally filling and people all over the world being healthy on it if it was bad for you? Perhaps it isn't bad for you but great for your?

NOTE: vegetable oils ARE bad for you. But coconut oil, macadamia nuts, avocados, grass fed butter, lard, tallow? All good. And super filling and super metabolism, and well just super good.

Obviously for 99.9999% of human history no one counted calories. We didn't even know what a calorie was. Now to be fair there was the concept of gluttony. I wonder how many of those were early partakers in high carbs?

Carbs were around in the form of grains when writing came in. And starchy vegetables.

Annik
04-10-2014, 03:22 PM
I am on The Ideal Protein Diet which is low carb, low fat and moderate protein.

Given the results from blood tests and other profiles, I am never going back to my old way of eating. I was morbidly obese despite trying to manage; my blood pressure and blood sugars were starting to climb; etc, etc, etc.

I don't struggle with cravings. I have a high level of satiation. I feel 100% better all around. My doctor says my blood profile is one 'to die for!'

I just can't justify going back.

I want to speak about the programme. If my words can help someone else the way my brother's words helped me, then YAY!

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 03:24 PM
Hum...See well different strokes. I wonder if you eat food naturally high in fat? You can have a high fat diet without 'adding fats'. For instance cheese, nuts, avocado, eggs, bacon, meats in general, etc.

I think it is harder to succeed with low carb low fat, and you might have too much protein if not careful. But that is my personal experience and take on things.

kaplods
04-10-2014, 03:28 PM
Even within the low-carb forum, there is room for a discussion and even debate of the merits and detriments of exclusion/inclusion of whole grain and fruit. Afterall, this is the low-carb forum, not the no-carb forum.

Even a diet of 40% carbs such as the Zone or a whole-grain-allowing diet like South Beach are a carb-conscious diabetic diet allowing up to 200 g of carbohydrare are all so much lower in carbs than the typical American diet.

That doesn't mean everyone has to agree that higher carb diets or small amounts of whole grains or white rice are dangerous for everyone on the planet. Even Atkins, one of the stricter low-carb diets allows for the reintroduction of legumes, fruits, starchy veggies, and whole grains (rungs 6-9 on the carb ladder).

I find some of the pro- whole grain arguments persuasive, especially for people with low inflammation lifestyles (such as very lean, athletes, with low-stress lifestyles, and no family history of autoimmune diseases or chronic health issues).

That doesn't mean I should be eating them, because the deleterious effects for a person in my situation.

In the pro-grain community, anti-grain science is largely dismissed, ignored, and discredited. Exagerated and inaccurate claims are made that have NO basis in fact.

The anti-grain (only some of which are low-carb) community, treats the pro-grain science the same way and misleading information is just as prevalent.

There's nothing wrong with considering and questioning ALL of the evidence both inside and outside your chosen community.

Annik
04-10-2014, 04:33 PM
Hum...See well different strokes. I wonder if you eat food naturally high in fat? You can have a high fat diet without 'adding fats'. For instance cheese, nuts, avocado, eggs, bacon, meats in general, etc.

I think it is harder to succeed with low carb low fat, and you might have too much protein if not careful. But that is my personal experience and take on things.

Too much protein... yes, that's a definite concern. For that reason, this is a 'moderate protein' diet (unlike Atkins which I understand says go freely on protein). From what I have read, too much protein can cause weight loss to stall.

When I get to maintenance, more fats will come in to the picture. For now, things are working very well on this protocol.

Annik

JerseyGyrl
04-10-2014, 05:51 PM
Too much protein... yes, that's a definite concern. For that reason, this is a 'moderate protein' diet (unlike Atkins which I understand says go freely on protein). From what I have read, too much protein can cause weight loss to stall.

When I get to maintenance, more fats will come in to the picture. For now, things are working very well on this protocol.

Annik

Not trying to start another debate here....but, Atkins is not a high protein diet.
http://www.atkins.com/Program/Overview/How-and-Why-Atkins-Work/Atkins-Is-Not-a-High-Protein-Diet.aspx#
With so many misconceptions about Atkins, with all due respect, I just wanted to clarify this one:)

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 06:47 PM
This is devolving. I've had it happen on other threads. Lets say there are many passions on nutrition and weight loss.

Back to the high fat low fat. I don't know much about Atkins. I do know after induction more carbs are allowed. In sites I go to I've heard it called high fat. And the sites I go to make VERY clear it is low carb HIGH fat. The approach is not intended to be high protein.

Now I do not much about Ideal Protein so this could be completely wrong. But it seems to be the high protein variant among low carb approaches.

Suzanne 3FC
04-10-2014, 07:50 PM
I want to point out that this is the low carb section of the forum and as such it is an appropriate place for the discussions on the benefits of going grain free. If this were the general weight loss sections, I would expect the types of arguments that this thread has evolved into.

... It would be like going to the Weight Loss Surgery support forum and ridiculing weight loss surgery.

I completely agree. We do have an unspoken rule that we are not to go into other forums to debate their diet of choice, because that forum was created for support.

I would like to ask that any further replies to this thread be in the spirit of support, not debate, because we are in the Low Carb forum. A little bit of positive debate is good, but not when it results in insults and arguments.

Anyone is welcome to create a thread in a non-specific forum to debate diet approaches.

Thanks :)

Annik
04-10-2014, 08:23 PM
Not trying to start another debate here....but, Atkins is not a high protein diet.
http://www.atkins.com/Program/Overview/How-and-Why-Atkins-Work/Atkins-Is-Not-a-High-Protein-Diet.aspx#
With so many misconceptions about Atkins, with all due respect, I just wanted to clarify this one:)




Thanks JerseyGyrl. My information about Atkins comes from the Jimmy Moore Livin Lavida Low Carb website (I am going on his cruise in May!)

He is a person who lost a lot of weight on Atkins and then started gaining it back. He says that he found that it was too much protein that was causing the gain (I could be mistaken but I think the liver has the capacity to convert protein to sugars ... which are responsible for the gain).

He says that when he started cutting back on the protein, he started to lose weight again.

I wonder if the Atkins diet at some point had a revision in its programme? There is the new and the old Atkins?

And speaking of fats, Diamondgeog, it is on the Low Carb Cruise that I hope to start learning about the consumption of fats. Jimmy Moore, as far as I know, eats healthy fats freely. They talk about 'Bullet Coffee' which sounds appealing to me.

I wonder how much mental illness like depression and anxiety can be attributed to the low fat regimes that have been for so long been pushed at us by allopathic medicine. Allopathic doctors themselves are starting to come on board with the idea that low fat is not necessarily good for the body... and especially the brain which has fat as one of its major components. No good quality fat in the diet = no good brain chemistry = leads to depression, anxiety?

Ketogenic nutrition is now being used in some cases for treatment of depression. It is also used in some cases for the treatment of epilepsy.

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 08:30 PM
I have bulletproof coffee every morning. And perhaps Atkins is too much protein. The sites I went to all made it the correct approach was high fat not high protein.

I am closest probably to Primal, but really just kind of cobbled info together. Tell us about the cruise. That is exciting. I want to hear about it.

Fats have so many positive benefits. Good quality fats.

Annik
04-10-2014, 08:32 PM
There's nothing wrong with considering and questioning ALL of the evidence both inside and outside your chosen community.

There's wisdom in this kaplods.

Unfortunately, people often are just completely dismissive of new points of view.

I see Joseph Mercola dismissed outright by some people yet many of his articles are well documented by independent sources.

It's the usual way -- demonization of someone who is bringing a new idea into a community that is resistant to change.

I am not a Mercola apologist. There are question marks about some of his ideas. But so too are there question marks about some practices of modern medicine.

Everyone has to keep her or his thinking cap on in the journey of life. Important to be asking questions and considering things all the time.

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 08:54 PM
Annik,

You are a lot more understanding than I am. Since this is a support group I have A LOT of anger. My uncle has diabetes and dementia. He was brilliant and now he has essentially been taken from me. He followed the standard advice. Was given statins. He even contributed to American Heart Assoc and Diabetes Assoc for decades. And as I see it they helped give him debilitating diseases.

The standard nutrition advice is to sell commodities. Our deaths are not only just a by product but a useful opportunity to make more money along the way: medicine, operations, hospitals. I am not saying everyone knew what was happening at first, but they do now. And they know LCHF will save people and take their money away.

Thank goodness social media exists now. I think this is why low carb and grain free is going to be bigger this time.

Oh and we were infertile. I'd not trade my daughter for anything but adoption is hard when you go through foster system. We had a placement go back. When we were dating we talked about having one biological child and one adoptive child. That should have been our choice. Would we have been infertile without all the nutrition misinformation spewed for corporate benefit? Maybe. Maybe not.

So this is not minor stuff. How many of us have has our lives or our loved ones lives diminished/altered by the high carb low fat 'madness' of the last 50 years?

But I have channeled that anger to transforming my mind and body and helping others. My wife has already lost over 25lbs this year which is almost more exciting than me. And I try to help and on twitter and am getting involved in changing our school district.

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:12 PM
You make so much sense, Diamondgeog. I am so sorry for your challenges. The health care system has saved me in some emergencies ... but on the other hand, sometimes it has been the doctors who created the emergencies!

It is good to work with our doctors but at the same time, we have to be questioning them. PErsonal experience tells me that story. And believe me, they are not always receptive to questions!

Information about the Low Carb Cruise is here (http://www.lowcarbcruiseinfo.com/)

I became intrigued by it when I learned physicians from Sweden participate on it (Sweden has moved its official food guide to a low carb model). The cruise brings together experts from across the field to teach, learn and have fun. And people who are doing low carb as a way of life (or interested in learning about it) are invited to come along.

I think this is its 7th year of sailing.

Links to past talks are available on the website and on Jimmy Moore's home page, too. Livin La Vida Low Carb (http://www.livinlavidalowcarb.com/)

Jimmy Moore's story in a nutshell is here: 'In January 2004, Jimmy Moore made a decision to get rid of the weight that was literally killing him. At 32 years of age and 410 pounds, the time had come for a radical change of lifestyle. A year later, he had shed 180 pounds, shrunk his waist by 20 inches, and dropped his shirt size from 5XL to XL. After his dramatic weight loss, Jimmy was inundated with requests from friends, neighbors and complete strangers seeking information and help. Jimmy is dedicated to helping as many people as possible find the information they need to make the kind of lifestyle change he has made. To that end, he has started a blog and a number of web-sites to get out the message of lifestyle change and healthy living. On his website you will find links to Jimmy's blog, his YouTube videos and all of the websites he contributes to.'

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 09:21 PM
Thanks. Jimmy has tweeted with me a couple of times. Professor Tim Noakes is remarkable.

http://thenoakesfoundation.org/ he just started a foundation. In the connect section there is a link to the foundation YouTube station. Great videos.

This isn't from that but a great one of his. Essentially humans have become zoo animals being fed a non natural diet. What happens to zoo animals fed the wrong stuff? They die or become infertile.

http://youtu.be/vdrEiu6aaVM

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:43 PM
Now I do not much about Ideal Protein so this could be completely wrong. But it seems to be the high protein variant among low carb approaches.

Ideal Protein is a moderate protein approach.

All varieties on the same spectrum: ketogenic nutrition.

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:46 PM
Thanks. Jimmy has tweeted with me a couple of times. Professor Tim Noakes is remarkable.

http://thenoakesfoundation.org/ he just started a foundation. In the connect section there is a link to the foundation YouTube station. Great videos.

This isn't from that but a great one of his. Essentially humans have become zoo animals being fed a non natural diet. What happens to zoo animals fed the wrong stuff? They die or become infertile.

http://youtu.be/vdrEiu6aaVM

My partner is a cattle farmer. My observation: vets know a whole more about nutrition than human doctors do.

And it's true: a friend who is a physician says that when he took his 7 year training, they had an hour and a half lecture on nutrition. That's it.

Insulting really to the human body and our health 'if and when' any of them hold themselves out to be any kind of expert in the field.

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:47 PM
Noakes Foundation webpage looks really interesting. Going to spend some time there. Thanks, Diamondgeog!

He asks a good question on his opening page: What if everything we know about a healthy diet is wrong?

One thing I know for sure now and that's the fact that vigorous exercise is not needed for weight loss.

I'll keep exercising moderately but not for weight maintenance. I'll do it for cardio-vascular health and a general sense of well being.

But to lose weight? Now that I know what to eat that's in tune with my body, my weight has come down ... now to almost normal!

Annik
04-10-2014, 09:52 PM
'There are solid scientific reasons why LCHF works. When you avoid sugar and starches your blood sugar stabilizes and the levels of insulin, the fat storing hormone, drops. This increases your fat burning and makes you feel more satiated.'

LCHF for Beginners

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 10:02 PM
I just finished the Noakes video I linked. It is long but lots of good info.

There is a lot of info coming here now. The Noakes Foundation youtube channel is a great place to start. They break up the videos to part 1, part 2, etc. Easier to digest.

Noakes foundation YouTube page link:
https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL3CiEXCPlGu6Nqnvj9K6EdNObEwXz-iEK

Annik
04-10-2014, 10:11 PM
I just finished the Noakes video I linked. It is long but lots of good info.

There is a lot of info coming here now. The Noakes Foundation youtube channel is a great place to start. They break up the videos to part 1, part 2, etc. Easier to digest.

Sidebar observation: Diamondgeog, why don't you show your high weight of 340 on your ticker? Your accomplishment is amazing! You've got bragging rights!

diamondgeog
04-10-2014, 10:38 PM
That was back around 2000/2001. Then I spent the last more recent years 270 to 300. I was 285-290 when I started in May. It was a definite I am starting point. At least for exercise. Diet stuff kind of evolved.

But it was a clear/clean I am starting point. So started the ticker from there.

time2lose
04-10-2014, 10:41 PM
I am hopeful that the medical profession is moving towards acceptance of low carb diets. My daughter's family practice doctor started her on a low carb diet a couple of years ago because of a couple of conditions she had. At the time I was really concerned because it seemed so extreme. Fortunately, she ignored my advice and followed her doctor's. The change in diet did her a world of good. She is happy and healthy now.

Fast forward a year, I was feeling desperate so I went to a doctor who specialized in weight loss. To my surprise, she wanted me to go on a low carb diet. I am so glad that I gave it a chance. It has been truly life changing. I would not call my diet high fat but this doctor does have me adding a tablespoon of coconut oil to my coffee every morning. :)

Annik
04-10-2014, 10:46 PM
Cheryl,

That's fabulous. Sometimes it can be scary to go against conventional wisdom. So glad for both you and your daughter that there are medical professionals who are willing to move forward!

Your ticker tells me you've been on an amazing journey, too! Bragging rights belong to you also! 119 lbs...WOW! Congratulations!

xoxo
Annik

time2lose
04-10-2014, 10:59 PM
Thanks, Annik

I lost over a 100 pounds counting calories but I was hungry the whole time. Then I regained more than half. I have been on the low carb diet for a year now and have lost about 80 pounds. A couple of months ago I started adding carbs back into my diet and gained 5 pounds. That really drove the point home that this is for life. Even though I hated to, I added the 5 pounds to my ticker. :) I am back to my low carb diet and will take those 5 pounds back off!

BTW, you have bragging rights too!! Congratulations on your 108 pound loss.

Annik
04-10-2014, 11:06 PM
Your signature says it all! Persistence is more important than perfection!

Besides the rapid weight loss, I'd have to say the cessation of cravings is the other big highlight of the low carb weight.

I've never been on a weight loss programme where I have experienced such high levels of satiation.

Plus, plus!

Mad Donnelly
04-11-2014, 12:12 AM
Annik,

You are a lot more understanding than I am. Since this is a support group I have A LOT of anger. My uncle has diabetes and dementia. He was brilliant and now he has essentially been taken from me. He followed the standard advice. Was given statins. He even contributed to American Heart Assoc and Diabetes Assoc for decades. And as I see it they helped give him debilitating diseases.

The standard nutrition advice is to sell commodities. Our deaths are not only just a by product but a useful opportunity to make more money along the way: medicine, operations, hospitals. I am not saying everyone knew what was happening at first, but they do now. And they know LCHF will save people and take their money away.

Thank goodness social media exists now. I think this is why low carb and grain free is going to be bigger this time.

Oh and we were infertile. I'd not trade my daughter for anything but adoption is hard when you go through foster system. We had a placement go back. When we were dating we talked about having one biological child and one adoptive child. That should have been our choice. Would we have been infertile without all the nutrition misinformation spewed for corporate benefit? Maybe. Maybe not.

So this is not minor stuff. How many of us have has our lives or our loved ones lives diminished/altered by the high carb low fat 'madness' of the last 50 years?

But I have channeled that anger to transforming my mind and body and helping others. My wife has already lost over 25lbs this year which is almost more exciting than me. And I try to help and on twitter and am getting involved in changing our school district.

Loved this entire post, too.

diamondgeog
04-11-2014, 08:48 AM
Thanks Mad.

I wish I had never had to write that post, but it is what it is.

We aren't passive lemmings anymore though. We are transforming our health and helping others. And no media onslaught with misinformation about low carb and fat is going to work this time because of social media and people able to share success stories peer to peer.