Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach
From: cde (cde_at_cde.org)
Date: 07/31/04
- Next message: Robert: "Re: Put your babies on statins"
- Previous message: Beachhouse: "Re: Iron deficiency/low red blood cell count"
- Next in thread: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Reply: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Reply: Jan: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Maybe reply: Mouldy Mouse: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2004 05:32:20 GMT
Mirek Fidler wrote:
> Zero association for cholesterol.... direct opposite to what dr. Ornish
> tries to say us....
It's probably oxidized cholesterol, not dietary cholesterol itself, that
is a problem.
>>But, increased intake of unrefined carbohydrate sources,
>>more preferrably from vegetables than domesticated fruits
>>or whole grains, in the context of a diet adequate in protein,
>
>
> Do you realize how many vegetables you need to eat to gain any
> significant carbohydrate calories?
Yes. A lot! This is precisely the point. In the Jenkins very high fiber
diet intervention I cited, subjects consumed 5 kg/vegetables and fruits
per day. He called the diet "essentially starch-free", and 38% of calories
were derived from sweet fruits, 22% from fats, largely nuts and seeds.
The diet included 55g/fiber per 1000 kcal. Serum lipid profile and
colonic function measures were stellar after only one week, far superior
to the starchier alternatives he used as comparisons.
http://www.canoe.ca/Health0104/02_diet-cp.html
I quote him:
"The significance levels, when you get 33 per cent reduction in
cholesterol,
are off the page," he insisted. "You're talking about, as they say in
the trade,
a no-brainer."
> Of course, eating tons of veggies leads to calorie restriction and good
> healts and that is a good thing, but if you go on high vegetables diet,
> you will automatically cut carbohydrates portion of your diet....
I think that you mean non-fiber carbohydrate. It is not neccessarily
true, however, when fruit and vegetable intakes are very high,
as they probably ought to be--as high as one can tolerate. This paper
used 20 servings per 1000 kcal. Since fiber intakes were so high, he
had to increase kcal proportionately, compared to the starchier diets,
just to break even with them.
A very high fruit/vegetable intake makes sense not only for the heart but
also for protection from certain types of cancers and very likely diabetes
and overweight as well, not to mention osteoporois and macular
degeneration.
It is difficult to gain weight or maintain overweight when the calorie
density of
one's food is so low.
In the Jenkins paper, total carbohydrate and sugar intakes were very high,
but these were all from fruits, vegetables, legumes, and to a lesser extent,
nuts and seeds.
It is time for the world to become aquainted with: the vegetable! And the
fruit! In a major way. And to stop demonizing the dreaded carbohydrate,
which can come along in some very healthy packages.
:)
- Next message: Robert: "Re: Put your babies on statins"
- Previous message: Beachhouse: "Re: Iron deficiency/low red blood cell count"
- Next in thread: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Reply: Mirek Fidler: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Reply: Jan: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Maybe reply: Mouldy Mouse: "Re: Whole dietary patterns vs. reductionist approach"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|