I really liked this bit, I think plenty of times we will just wait for someone else to come up with the "answer" and just happily go along without taking the time to look into it ourselves.
I really liked this bit, I think plenty of times we will just wait for someone else to come up with the "answer" and just happily go along without taking the time to look into it ourselves.
Yep.
I read it (didn't like the dig though Patience). But I have to quibble that most experts agree. if they did, we wouldn't get such different opinions from doctors etc.
And, many, many people "learned one way - not going to unlearn it" because I KNOW now... Like with fats, and salts, and eggs. Sigh.
Berry you read it not because i said that lots of people wouldn't read it. So its not at you is it.
Just noticed that people here don't read articles i suggested regardless of how many times i recommended it and no matter how i tried to impress upon people that this would really help with the dieting process.
Berry - I'd bet that the overlap of things that experts agree on would far outweigh the overlap of things that this bunch would agree on Doctors will never agree completely, there will always be new information, new studies and will be ever changing, but at least if we take it upon ourselves to learn what we can and do our own due diligence, we will be that much better off.
Pattience - Perhaps you deter people with the way you approach "recommending" things...
Berry - I'd bet that the overlap of things that experts agree on would far outweigh the overlap of things that this bunch would agree on Doctors will never agree completely, there will always be new information, new studies and will be ever changing, but at least if we take it upon ourselves to learn what we can and do our own due diligence, we will be that much better off.
Pattience - Perhaps you deter people with the way you approach "recommending" things...
True on both parts.
About doctors... at least the low carb this is picking up with doctors - finally!
Now if I could just convince my MIL that it's the carbs and lack of activity that is raising her cholesterol - not the cholesterol in foods - like eggs.
Berry you read it not because i said that lots of people wouldn't read it. So its not at you is it.
Just noticed that people here don't read articles i suggested regardless of how many times i recommended it and no matter how i tried to impress upon people that this would really help with the dieting process.
Maybe its just due to what or how you post vs people's possible aversion to reading whatever you think would really help them.
I read it. The end was the best bit, so I repeat it here:
"The big lessons here though are ones you probably knew already: Eat smart, cook your own food, and think critically when someone tries to sell you a diet or lifestyle. Think just as critically when someone is trying to sell you fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Do your own research, challenge your confirmation bias, and be willing to change your mind as new evidence arises (don't fall for the "I've done this my whole life and I'm fine" excuse.) Finally, and most importantly, remember that what works for you may not work for someone else. Nutrition is never a one-size-fits-all science."
I read it. The end was the best bit, so I repeat it here:
"The big lessons here though are ones you probably knew already: Eat smart, cook your own food, and think critically when someone tries to sell you a diet or lifestyle. Think just as critically when someone is trying to sell you fear, uncertainty, and doubt. Do your own research, challenge your confirmation bias, and be willing to change your mind as new evidence arises (don't fall for the "I've done this my whole life and I'm fine" excuse.) Finally, and most importantly, remember that what works for you may not work for someone else. Nutrition is never a one-size-fits-all science."
Interesting. The tone of the article is "do what you already know you have to do" and talks about all the fads and such people fall for, even though they already know what to do. I think that something that could be drawn from this is that people, despite knowing what to do, choose not to because they would rather take that shortcut anyways, so informing them to following the sound advice that the article assumes that they already know (which is likely true) to at least achieve moderate goals - is kind of pointless if people despite knowing better still want what is exciting.
Its like...when i was reading some article about Thanksgiving dinner - a chef had to write up some "new exciting menu" and confessed his frustrations that it was pointless - at the end of the day, whether tasty to that individual or not, people wanted the same old thing, so what was the point of writing up new-fangled ideas? Which applies to me - I hate turkey and yet if I'm attending a Thanksgiving dinner, yes I want it the way that I'm used to having it just cause "that's just how its supposed to be and what I overall prefer is doing what I'm used to for that holiday vs something I find tastier but too unfamiliar."
Dull and familiar for the holidays, new and exciting fad for the diet afterwards. Not too different from let's say, knowing what to do because I've lost successfully before, but consciously choosing not to follow that route even though its better for me in the long run.
Last edited by pixelllate; 05-07-2014 at 02:44 PM.
I took Pattience's challenge (okay, I haven't finished reading the WHOLE article yet but I did click on it, read some, and bookmarked for later!).
I have had so many people who claim I wasn't being a critical thinking enough reader argue with me that they only "believe the science" and you should do whatever your doctor says is right. I always look at everything I read skeptically and you should always know who is behind any study and yet I have come to different conclusions than people who "believe the science". Yeah, I'M the lemming.
I hardly think the article is a waste of time or pointless. It will work on people's psyche a little bit if not a lot. Repeated common sense, clear and well argued points do get through, if not to everyone, then certainly to many.
I don't think the article was saying low carb is the way to go. She/he said there has been no adequate studies done it yet and explained the reasons why. She also said, that 2-3 servings a day is about right. I wouldn't think that was low carb but then i haven't done any sums.
i don't know what the traditional american food pyramid looks like yet but i never got the idea that the australian food pyramid was suggesting we overeat grain and i suspect that people who get overweight get there by not following the food pyramids but eating whatever they want, whenever they want and as much as they want.
Food pyramid aside another way it is often translated is into percentages of macronutrients so that there is 55% or so carbs, 35% or so proteins 25% or so fats. If people are not overeating this would not cause weight gain.
Our food pyramid does not tell you how many serves to have of anything. It just proportionalises the options. But focusing on the need to reign in out of control carb eating, is still a good idea. As is improving the quality of the foods eaten.
Well there are many thing well said in the article but i feel you can't really go too far wrong health wise if you focus your eating on predominantly whole foods. I know you can still get overweight that way but nutritionally you are far better off and are not likely to become morbidly obese and probably even obese.
I don't think that the article is pointless. As the article correctly says, many people also know in general what to do, or at least do something different. Telling them to do what they already know to do is a nice summation. However, it'd be interesting to read an article talking about why people choose completely fad diets instead. The social benefits of it (bonding together at the office doing half starve, half eat junk - def in the work places I've been in, its been awkward socially for me losing weight the old fashioned way, the desire for the excitement of something radical and an inclination to search for something new without even giving the old tried and true, but not as glamorous as a fad diet and overall, the fear of the social repercussion of admitting "I know better but I prefer trying to lose weight in this way anyways"). Its the same pressure I see with people I am close to who don't actually care about smoking but they make sure to always say "oh i should quit sometime" instead of daring to say "eh I don't care." I mean, I've done the same - and it was fun and easier to socialize and network. There's a bigger group of the people who always need to lose 20 lbs than the group that did lose it.
Or the regain of successful dieters who have demonstrated to themselves and absolutely know what to do down the T, and totally don't do it at all as they regain. I've been at that point - where I reach a point of depression (due to other things in my life) and I know "better" I know that I will hate every lb later on that I'll have to relose, not to mention the health repercussions of what I do to my body, but I do it anyways. I know all the things in the article, but to be honest, if I reach That Point again, I'm not sure if I would care. Its a nice message, and I think it holds true, but if that message of the article is sinking it - its preaching to a choir of people who are already following it.
Why There's So Much Confusion Over Nutrition and Health
Doctors will never agree completely, there will always be new information, new studies and will be ever changing, but at least if we take it upon ourselves to learn what we can and do our own due diligence, we will be that much better off. 
