Low carb eating is very controversial issue for me. There’re pros and cons. That what Ellis said in the interview makes some sense for me, but I can’t agree with his claims at all. After reading that I was confused. What do YOU think about that? Maybe someone tried his way of dieting. It’s very interesting for me. I’m still ‘high-protein, moderate-carb moderate - fat believer’, however I’m looking for the best way of eating possible.
PS: Sorry for my poor English. I’m not from US
[quote]Junior__23 wrote:
Low carb eating is very controversial issue for me. There’re pros and cons. That what Ellis said in the interview makes some sense for me, but I can’t agree with his claims at all. After reading that I was confused. What do YOU think about that? Maybe someone tried his way of dieting. It’s very interesting for me. I’m still ‘high-protein, moderate-carb moderate - fat believer’, however I’m looking for the best way of eating possible.
PS: Sorry for my poor English. I’m not from US[/quote]
Nor are the English ?!
I don’t agree with much of what he said, can someone also point me towards the T-Mag Caffeine article he is taking a knock at ?
The bit about people eating mainly carbs for 10,000 years is wrong as high carb diets largely came about when people started to process their food highly, and yes making bread would what I would call highly processing something.
Also I don’t think there was an issue with mineral competition in absorption in ancient times as food was not generally combined as it is today. For instance people would eat what was going, a fish, some berries, goats milk, a tuber without combining it.
[quote]Dr Stig wrote:
Junior__23 wrote:
The bit about people eating mainly carbs for 10,000 years is wrong as high carb diets largely came about when people started to process their food highly, and yes making bread would what I would call highly processing something.[/quote]
No, it’s largely true. Until industrialization brought about efficient slaughter of animals for food, meat was mostly a luxury item that only the rich could afford. The poor almost never ate meat.
[quote]PublickStews wrote:
No, it’s largely true. Until industrialization brought about efficient slaughter of animals for food, meat was mostly a luxury item that only the rich could afford. The poor almost never ate meat.[/quote]
Right. They ate grains, vegetables, fruit, etc. Not Snickers, Big Mac’s, Twinkies, Mountain Dew, etc. So the statement that people mainly ate carbs for 10,000 years is “somewhat” true, but it requires less emotion (as in the usage in the article) and more actual common sense. It’s not related to meat/protein consumption at all, as milk and eggs were never considered luxuries.
[quote]eengrms76 wrote:
PublickStews wrote:
No, it’s largely true. Until industrialization brought about efficient slaughter of animals for food, meat was mostly a luxury item that only the rich could afford. The poor almost never ate meat.
Right. They ate grains, vegetables, fruit, etc. Not Snickers, Big Mac’s, Twinkies, Mountain Dew, etc. So the statement that people mainly ate carbs for 10,000 years is “somewhat” true, but it requires less emotion (as in the usage in the article) and more actual common sense. It’s not related to meat/protein consumption at all, as milk and eggs were never considered luxuries.[/quote]
Thats also only since the advent of Farming as well. agriculture the thousand of years prior well it was meat would the day be better spent searching for a small basket of berries fruit and veggies that MUST be in season. Or go tackle a huge beastie and eat that sucker for a few days.
Phill