Like xab said
there are many better things you could be eating
let’s compare bread to broccoli just for the hell of it
so the last whole wheat bread I checked on in store had the following stats
for 2 slices
150 calories
240mg of sodium
3 grams of fibre
3% of calcium and iron
well go look at 150 calories worth of broccoli
enough said
The point being that sure you could eat it but will it do you any good?
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]Xab wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Only 10,000 years of agriculture, a blip on the radar. Yeah, and? How does this explain why bread isn’t meant for consumption? What are the adverse effects of consuming bread? What’s going to happen?
[/quote]
Acute:
Blood sugar swings
Immune suppression from insulin swings
Thyroid suppression
Systemic endocrinological disruption
Chronic:
Insulin resistance
Fatty liver
Long term damage to cells due to high sugar content in the blood
Damaged insulin receptors
[/quote]
Citations.
[/quote]
Can you refute any of the rest of his post? (Or anyone else for that matter.)
I’m not challenging you or anyone. This is just turning out to be a good thread, and I know you know your shit on the subject from what I can tell.
I mean, I eat bread. I fucking love sammichs & bagles & pizza. It’s not really killing me is it, lol?
[/quote]
Well, his assertion that ALL nutritionists, strength coaches, and researchers are on board with the paleolithic diet he is describing is laughable.
I asked for citations because I have a feeling most of his “information” is from alarmists and conspiracy wingnuts with feeble scientific backing at best.
He also makes the assertion that the body just does nothing when glucose is released into the bloodstream. Perhaps if you are a type 1 diabetic this is true, but the body has mechanisms by which to deal with such things. He also implies that starches produce a singular spike in BG levels when the truth of the matter is that grains (especially when consumed with their fibrous components) provide a more sustained release of BG than he is implying.
His reference to fatty liver is something that can occur with MASSIVE (think 500g/day for years) consumption of fructose, which is not found in significant quantities in any of the grains consumed by humans.
He is essentially making the argument that since MASSIVE levels of consumption are bad, then MODERATE levels of consumption are also bad. This is akin to suggesting that, since extremely high intake of b-vitamins has been linked to the development of lung cancer, that moderate b-vitamin intake is also dangerous. It’s either ignorant or severely dishonest. I imagine in his case it is ignorance and in the case of many of the authors that the paleo crowd cites, it is dishonesty. Weight loss books that say “eat less than you consume and base your diet around nutrient dense whole foods” don’t sell as well as the ones with wacky evolutionary rationales and alarmist rhetoric.
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
Like xab said
there are many better things you could be eating
let’s compare bread to broccoli just for the hell of it
so the last whole wheat bread I checked on in store had the following stats
for 2 slices
150 calories
240mg of sodium
3 grams of fibre
3% of calcium and iron
well go look at 150 calories worth of broccoli
enough said
The point being that sure you could eat it but will it do you any good?[/quote]
Go fucking eat 5 cups of raw broccoli at a sitting and get back to me. Be sure to consume some quantity of protein with that too, since we are on a bodybuilding website. Assuming a caloric requirement of 3,000 kcal for a hard training individual weighing roughly 190 lbs at a moderate/low body fat. We’ll put them on the high side of protein intake at 300g, or 1200 kcal, 900 of which is net after factoring in TEF. This leaves 2100 kcal to fat and carbohydrate substrates. We’ll also put them on the high side of fat intake at roughly 100g of fat, or 900 kcal (we won’t even get into the issue of micronutrient density in fats vs. carbohydrate sources, despite the fact that micronutritent density seems to be the basis of your argument). This leaves 1200 kcal to carbohydrate consumption, or 300g carbohydrate. That means that, at 6g carbohydrate per cup of raw broccoli, you will need to eat 50 cups of broccoli to fulfill your caloric needs. But wait, we haven’t factored in fiber content to this equation, a cup of raw broccoli has 2g of fiber, so at 4g of digestible carbohydrate/cup, you will actually need to eat 75 cups raw measure of broccoli JUST TO MAINTAIN BODYWEIGHT.
Totally realistic.
I feel like people are obviously divided on this question, and the only thing that will really change that is some well founded research articles and discussions. There is no point bantering without and credible evidence to back up your claims.
~
Rocks are not meant to be eaten.
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
I feel like people are obviously divided on this question, and the only thing that will really change that is some well founded research articles and discussions. There is no point bantering without and credible evidence to back up your claims.
~
Rocks are not meant to be eaten.[/quote]
Unless they’re made of candy and brightly colored.
I’ll get my books out when I get home tomorrow. I’m on the road for the evening so I don’t have anything with me.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
Like xab said
there are many better things you could be eating
let’s compare bread to broccoli just for the hell of it
so the last whole wheat bread I checked on in store had the following stats
for 2 slices
150 calories
240mg of sodium
3 grams of fibre
3% of calcium and iron
well go look at 150 calories worth of broccoli
enough said
The point being that sure you could eat it but will it do you any good?[/quote]
Go fucking eat 5 cups of raw broccoli at a sitting and get back to me. Be sure to consume some quantity of protein with that too, since we are on a bodybuilding website. Assuming a caloric requirement of 3,000 kcal for a hard training individual weighing roughly 190 lbs at a moderate/low body fat. We’ll put them on the high side of protein intake at 300g, or 1200 kcal, 900 of which is net after factoring in TEF. This leaves 2100 kcal to fat and carbohydrate substrates. We’ll also put them on the high side of fat intake at roughly 100g of fat, or 900 kcal (we won’t even get into the issue of micronutrient density in fats vs. carbohydrate sources, despite the fact that micronutritent density seems to be the basis of your argument). This leaves 1200 kcal to carbohydrate consumption, or 300g carbohydrate. That means that, at 6g carbohydrate per cup of raw broccoli, you will need to eat 50 cups of broccoli to fulfill your caloric needs. But wait, we haven’t factored in fiber content to this equation, a cup of raw broccoli has 2g of fiber, so at 4g of digestible carbohydrate/cup, you will actually need to eat 75 cups raw measure of broccoli JUST TO MAINTAIN BODYWEIGHT.
Totally realistic.[/quote]
you totally missed the point. From a nutritional point of view it doesnt make sense. Sure if you’re a bodybuilder requiring 6000 calories a day but for the average person it doesn’t make sense to fill 700 of your 2000 daily calories with stuff that’s not going to provide any nutrition. Heck most people nowadays have a hard time getting one portion of veggies into their bodies.
Even for bodybuilding you could eat more fatty meat, or foods that are calorie dense like coconuts cashews etc if you want to add calories in a cleaner way. but don’t quote me on that since I am not a bodybuilder
[quote]Artemisia wrote:
[quote]WestCoast7 wrote:
I feel like people are obviously divided on this question, and the only thing that will really change that is some well founded research articles and discussions. There is no point bantering without and credible evidence to back up your claims.
~
Rocks are not meant to be eaten.[/quote]
Unless they’re made of candy and brightly colored.[/quote]
Well played…
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
Like xab said
there are many better things you could be eating
let’s compare bread to broccoli just for the hell of it
so the last whole wheat bread I checked on in store had the following stats
for 2 slices
150 calories
240mg of sodium
3 grams of fibre
3% of calcium and iron
well go look at 150 calories worth of broccoli
enough said
The point being that sure you could eat it but will it do you any good?[/quote]
Go fucking eat 5 cups of raw broccoli at a sitting and get back to me. Be sure to consume some quantity of protein with that too, since we are on a bodybuilding website. Assuming a caloric requirement of 3,000 kcal for a hard training individual weighing roughly 190 lbs at a moderate/low body fat. We’ll put them on the high side of protein intake at 300g, or 1200 kcal, 900 of which is net after factoring in TEF. This leaves 2100 kcal to fat and carbohydrate substrates. We’ll also put them on the high side of fat intake at roughly 100g of fat, or 900 kcal (we won’t even get into the issue of micronutrient density in fats vs. carbohydrate sources, despite the fact that micronutritent density seems to be the basis of your argument). This leaves 1200 kcal to carbohydrate consumption, or 300g carbohydrate. That means that, at 6g carbohydrate per cup of raw broccoli, you will need to eat 50 cups of broccoli to fulfill your caloric needs. But wait, we haven’t factored in fiber content to this equation, a cup of raw broccoli has 2g of fiber, so at 4g of digestible carbohydrate/cup, you will actually need to eat 75 cups raw measure of broccoli JUST TO MAINTAIN BODYWEIGHT.
Totally realistic.[/quote]
you totally missed the point. From a nutritional point of view it doesnt make sense. Sure if you’re a bodybuilder requiring 6000 calories a day but for the average person it doesn’t make sense to fill 700 of your 2000 daily calories with stuff that’s not going to provide any nutrition. Heck most people nowadays have a hard time getting one portion of veggies into their bodies.
Even for bodybuilding you could eat more fatty meat, or foods that are calorie dense like coconuts cashews etc if you want to add calories in a cleaner way. but don’t quote me on that since I am not a bodybuilder[/quote]
NEARLY ALL bodybuilders have an offseason diet consisting of 50 percent carbohydrate. Dorian had a diet consisting of 60 percent carbohydrate at 6000 calories in his later years of competition. That’s 900 grams of carbs! How can this be met by fruit and vegetable consumption, not to mention someone would feel DISGUSTING doing it that way!
[quote]Xab wrote:
… grains have so many anti-nutrients… [/quote]
This also goes for nearly everything we eat these days.
No. Why would we?
Not gonna happen because we don’t eat raw wheat.
[quote]
You have roughly a gallon of blood in your body. In that gallon of blood you have about one teaspoon of glucose. If you increased that to about a tablespoon and a half of glucose, you would go into a hyperglycemic shock and die if your body were not to quickly intervene. [/quote]
But it does intervene - every time you consume food or drugs.
[quote}Your body abhors excess blood sugar. So why the hell would you continually and systematically subject it to this extreme that it can barely tolerate? [/quote]
What person with half a brain intentionally abuses their bodies? We on here don’t. You don’t.
[quote]
The USDA’s ass-backwards nutritional guidelines suggest a daily intake of two cups of glucose. Are you trying to defend that? [/quote]
No.
[quote]
When it comes down to it, there’s just way, way better stuff you can be eating in place of bread. [/quote]
Perhaps. But a few servings of bread in a WHOLE, GREAT, nutrient-dense diet - I can almost guarantee it does no harm.
What does that say for us on this site who only work out 6 to 10 hours per week (not near work loads of elite athletes), have a job, maybe a wife and kids, and other life stressors, but who consume grains regularly and have good body composition and excellent health indicators and quality of life?
Who are these nutritionists and strength coaches and idiotic dietitians? Name some.
By the way, ANYONE can call themselves a nutritionist, even if they never stepped foot in a college classroom - even if they never spent one day in nursery school or kindergarten, which just goes to show why I don’t take nutritionists’ words seriously - people with no formal education that is overseen by a governing legal or academic body - unless they are very, VERY good!
I particularly would like for you and Chris Shugart (and a few others) to NAME–that is give me the first and last names in the way we name anybody–of idiotic dietitians.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]Xab wrote:
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
Only 10,000 years of agriculture, a blip on the radar. Yeah, and? How does this explain why bread isn’t meant for consumption? What are the adverse effects of consuming bread? What’s going to happen?
[/quote]
Acute:
Blood sugar swings
Immune suppression from insulin swings
Thyroid suppression
Systemic endocrinological disruption
Chronic:
Insulin resistance
Fatty liver
Long term damage to cells due to high sugar content in the blood
Damaged insulin receptors
[/quote]
Citations.
[/quote]
Can you refute any of the rest of his post? (Or anyone else for that matter.)
I’m not challenging you or anyone. This is just turning out to be a good thread, and I know you know your shit on the subject from what I can tell.
I mean, I eat bread. I fucking love sammichs & bagles & pizza. It’s not really killing me is it, lol?
[/quote]
It may not be killing you (debatable) but how in the hell are you supposed to get down to 7% bodyfat year round with a shit diet like that? I mean, don’t people look at you funny when you are eating sammiches or pizza? You might as well finish those off with a pack of cigarettes, chased by a tin of skoal and a liter of vodka. You should be ashamed of yourself for posting on a bodybuilding website and spouting this “eat bread” bullshit. I’m going to go tell the mods on you, you know people have been banned for less.
I hope your hapy with yourself. Your proabbly crying right now reading this, after all, grains drop your testosterone 100% and increase your estrogen 160% so you are now like a little crying bitch girl. Normally I’d advise a cold shower in this situation, but seeng as how bread also makes your penis shrink, a cold shower may make it dissapear forever. Avoid that. Instead, why don’t you throw all your bread out and get yourself back on track by buying 50Lbs of chicken breasts and some steroids and creatine. That should get you back on your feet.
V
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]rehanb_bl wrote:
Like xab said
there are many better things you could be eating
let’s compare bread to broccoli just for the hell of it
so the last whole wheat bread I checked on in store had the following stats
for 2 slices
150 calories
240mg of sodium
3 grams of fibre
3% of calcium and iron
well go look at 150 calories worth of broccoli
enough said
The point being that sure you could eat it but will it do you any good?[/quote]
Go fucking eat 5 cups of raw broccoli at a sitting and get back to me. Be sure to consume some quantity of protein with that too, since we are on a bodybuilding website. Assuming a caloric requirement of 3,000 kcal for a hard training individual weighing roughly 190 lbs at a moderate/low body fat. We’ll put them on the high side of protein intake at 300g, or 1200 kcal, 900 of which is net after factoring in TEF. This leaves 2100 kcal to fat and carbohydrate substrates. We’ll also put them on the high side of fat intake at roughly 100g of fat, or 900 kcal (we won’t even get into the issue of micronutrient density in fats vs. carbohydrate sources, despite the fact that micronutritent density seems to be the basis of your argument). This leaves 1200 kcal to carbohydrate consumption, or 300g carbohydrate. That means that, at 6g carbohydrate per cup of raw broccoli, you will need to eat 50 cups of broccoli to fulfill your caloric needs. But wait, we haven’t factored in fiber content to this equation, a cup of raw broccoli has 2g of fiber, so at 4g of digestible carbohydrate/cup, you will actually need to eat 75 cups raw measure of broccoli JUST TO MAINTAIN BODYWEIGHT.
Totally realistic.[/quote]
you totally missed the point. From a nutritional point of view it doesnt make sense. Sure if you’re a bodybuilder requiring 6000 calories a day but for the average person it doesn’t make sense to fill 700 of your 2000 daily calories with stuff that’s not going to provide any nutrition. Heck most people nowadays have a hard time getting one portion of veggies into their bodies.
Even for bodybuilding you could eat more fatty meat, or foods that are calorie dense like coconuts cashews etc if you want to add calories in a cleaner way. but don’t quote me on that since I am not a bodybuilder[/quote]
NEARLY ALL bodybuilders have an offseason diet consisting of 50 percent carbohydrate. Dorian had a diet consisting of 60 percent carbohydrate at 6000 calories in his later years of competition. That’s 900 grams of carbs! How can this be met by fruit and vegetable consumption, not to mention someone would feel DISGUSTING doing it that way![/quote]
ok now that post wast just plain f@cking stupid
read my post again
I agree that when uneducated people say not meant, what they are TRYING to say is that the body is not well adapted to x, or are simply referring to some imaginary past free from disease and suffering. That being said, our bodies are VERY adaptive, as is our behavior.
No, we cannot eat grains without certain processing, so we adapted to cook and process them so they are edible and even nutritious. Should they be the primary source of nutrients for most people? Maybe not, but the human body, and human behavior is amazingly flexible.
“Not meant” also goes along with a creationist view, as if we were meant to eat some things and not others by a divine being. I’m not saying I’m an atheist (and I’m not), but we must recognize that this is a view through theism that is not backed by any theistic text I have run across (In the old testament, for instance, God basically says eat grains, eat animals, eat whatever you want as long as it doesn’t poison you).
I, too, hate the expression though.
Mid
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
Since you are so concerned about insulin, I assume you are aware that beef elicits a greater insulin response than a calorically equal serving of oatmeal, right?
“100g of grains” is woefully unspecific. Like I said, 100g of carbohydrate from oatmeal has a lesser effect on fasted BG and insulin levels than a comparable serving of beef.
[/quote]
As everyone likes to say, show me some references. It totally fly’s in the face of the fact that my father was able to reduce his insulin by 3/4 when he went on a high protein/fat (meat) diet.
A 100gram serving of oatmeal has 61 calories, and a glycemic load of 6 (that’s prepared, which would largely be water)
A 3 oz serving of beef has 164 calories, and a glycemic load of 0.
I know the insulin index may be different, but this just doesn’t make sense to me! Maybe I’m just missing something!
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
[quote]Xab wrote:
… grains have so many anti-nutrients… [/quote]
This also goes for nearly everything we eat these days.
No. Why would we?
Not gonna happen because we don’t eat raw wheat.
[quote]
You have roughly a gallon of blood in your body. In that gallon of blood you have about one teaspoon of glucose. If you increased that to about a tablespoon and a half of glucose, you would go into a hyperglycemic shock and die if your body were not to quickly intervene. [/quote]
But it does intervene - every time you consume food or drugs.
[quote}Your body abhors excess blood sugar. So why the hell would you continually and systematically subject it to this extreme that it can barely tolerate? [/quote]
What person with half a brain intentionally abuses their bodies? We on here don’t. You don’t.
[quote]
The USDA’s ass-backwards nutritional guidelines suggest a daily intake of two cups of glucose. Are you trying to defend that? [/quote]
No.
I don’t know what happened - I thought I was quoting properly, but it didn’t come out right.
Keep in mind I don’t say these things for confrontation’s sake because at this point of my life I think being confrontational for shits and giggles is mean spiritied.
I say it because when people criticize “moronic and idiotic dietitians” it gets quite annoying considering I am one and Sky will be one.
Why not name some idiotic dietitians and quote the idiotic things they say. Most don’t even work in sports dietetics, so I don’t know how most of their information even applies to what’s on this board.
I also don’t know what kind of dietitians people on here know, because ALL of my professors were up to date and understood and explained that a diet TOO HIGH in starchy carbs isn’t good. In my internship, my director had us designing and calculating diets with as little as 30% carbs.
For all the folks claiming humans have not had enough time to evolve to our diet… how do you reach this conclusion? On what evidence? I don’t want links to the newest guru site about the evils of grains I want cold science.
What is the incidence of type II diabetes in Native Americans living on reservations with western diets? What are the rates in Sweden, Norway, Germany, Swizterland, Austria, Italy, Spain, France, Greece, Israel, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Romania, Bulgaria, etc. What does this tell you?..
If you think 10,000 years is not a long of time in evolutionary terms I have some woeful news for you:
You are simply ignorant.
I think everyone should be on the exact same diet regardless of their goals, genetics, ancestors, budget, lifestyle, training and likes/dislikes.
Slimfast 3-2-1
So there.
[quote]Bricknyce wrote:
I say it because when people criticize “moronic and idiotic dietitians” it gets quite annoying considering I am one and Sky will be one.
Why not name some idiotic dietitians and quote the idiotic things they say. Most don’t even work in sports dietetics, so I don’t know how most of their information even applies to what’s on this board.
I also don’t know what kind of dietitians people on here know, because ALL of my professors were up to date and understood and explained that a diet TOO HIGH in starchy carbs isn’t good. In my internship, my director has us designing and calculating diets with as little as 30% carbs. [/quote]
Me, too - I went back to school and am working on a graduate degree in addition to second degree in Food/Nutrition and will be applying to a coordinated program to become a dietitian this coming winter. I don’t plan on spontaneously becoming an idiot.
The only instructor I had tell my peers and I that white pasta is good for you was a little old lady who formerly taught middle school home economics and was there to teach us how to plan menus and how to choose a beef fat content for hamburgers versus meatloaf. My sports nutrition instructor studied with Dr. Lonnie Lowery and was amazing. The others try to keep up with current research, and though I have come across a couple who sometimes peddle old Dr. Ornish-style diets, they are are always open to hearing about this or that study and admit that athletes are a different animal. I have had to plan diets that adhere to ADA guidelines, but those were for basic coursework - I expect to have more leeway in upper-level classes.
I HAVE seen lots of crap from my peers who have misconceptions about healthy eating because their information came from mass media instead of clinical studies. I expect that to change for many of them as their college career progresses. Usually after they take sports nutrition, they stop complaining at me - “ur proteinz r too high!” - because they’re learning beyond strict ADA meal-planning.
Great post!
I’m just still waiting for Chris Shugart and others to start dropping names - dropping diet-related dimes on RD’s!
I want their first and last names and the idiotic things they say.
White pasta isn’t nutrient dense. Does this make it BAD? In what situation is it BAD?