Counterpoint on the eggs

Food Myths Debunked: Eating Eggs Raises Your Cholesterol Level / Nutrition / Healthy Eating

A pretty good public radio show/podcast worth listening to anyway... their most recent offering was a discussion on plant-based diets. It's worth a listen, especially if you are not completely embedded into one camp or the other.

Don't Eat Anything With A Face – IQ2 Debates

The comments on the page are the usual vitriolic spew, sadly, but the debate itself is pretty interesting. I think both sides managed to steer onto some unwise tangents, but I think that's close to inevitable when on stage and in person, rather than in the cool comforts of your internet hovel of choice.

I'm curious what you folks doing the plant based diet do about fears over pesticides. My wife and I are taking the leap and it is a big concern for my wife, and myself to some extent.

Do you buy mostly organic? I've read that washing doesn't get rid of hardly any pesticides. I've also read there are some concerns over vegetarians having some higher rates of children with birth defects (specifically one effecting boys), with the link possibly being higher exposure to pesticides. With us planning on having another child very soon it is a concern.

We don't mind going for organic, though it will be more expensive and harder to find everything we want.

I haven't read/heard the specifics you describe, but I'd be interested.

Off the top of my head, I'm not really persuaded that moving to a plant-based diet really exposes one to more pesticides and genetically modified organisms than a standard diet would. If you're eating factory farmed animals and their products, what do you think they are being fed day after day? Pesticide-laden, genetically-modified corn and other plants. Eating meat doesn't get you out of this mix, it just puts you higher into the food chain -- and with a lot of the worst toxins that tend to be cumulative in nature, it gets like STDs, where once you eat an animal, you're eating all the toxins he ever ate, and so forth.

For our family, we eat mostly organic (which gets you at lest lower in pesticides, away from GMOs, and in some cases away from BPA). There are some guidelines on ways to do this reasonably (the "dirty dozen" would come up on a quick search) - but it is definitely more expensive and limiting. We have several things we will buy conventional, but many others where we stick to the organic. I am the most lax one in my family, mostly out of laziness/expedience.

I like your last line because I am much the same way. Here is the video I saw about the pesticides regarding washing and birth defects. It is not a high quality one but I think the site it is from has solid info. I found it originally searching for how well you can rinse off pesticides and was surprised the video had the extra bits about the birth defects.

Can Pesticides Be Rinsed Off? | NutritionFacts.org

I like another video on that site that was linked in this thread already about abdominal aortic aneurysm and its link with meat based diets. That one really hit home because that is what my dad died from much too early.

My dad died of the same thing a few years ago, too young. My search for a better way of living is very connected.

Alright,

I figured I would ask in this thread since I have seen several different diets talked about / posted.

I am leaning towards the Paleo diet. For those who are on it, what online resources are you using / have used for the diet?

I'm not doing Paleo, so if someone comes along with a better idea, jump on it, but for things like this, the more specific subreddits on reddit are often good launching points. Probably not the individual submissions themselves, but for medium popularity subs, there will usually be a really solid collection of information on the right side of the page.

For the paleo subreddit, two places stand out. First is an announcement thread at the top of the page (stickied, basically): STICKY: NEWBIES, START HERE! : Paleo Second is the r/paleo FAQ: faq - Paleo which seems to offer lots of basic info and links to other places.


I started a low carb/high fat diet myself a couple weeks ago, and used the FAQ in the keto subreddit (http://www.reddit.com/r/keto/wiki/faq), and it felt like a very good launching point and served me well for getting started info.

Who Says Eggs Aren't Healthy or Safe? | NutritionFacts.org

A nice addition to the egg discussion. ;)

Here's an article that made me think about this thread: Lizzie Widdicombe: Could Soylent Replace Food? : The New Yorker

The story of Soylent the company (basically Ensure with most of its calories coming from grains rather than sugar, making you feel more full) is a pretty entertaining read as a kind of tongue-in-cheek "Silicon Valley start-up aiming to 'disrupt' food" profile.

As a concept, it was interesting how the product itself (which in true techie fashion is open-source, endlessly modular, has a hyper-futuristic 'endgame'/insert other catchphrases here) is mostly agnostic about being vegetarian/vegan/paleo/etc., but still touches on a lot of the topics we debate when discussing different diets - finding the best balance of macro and micronutrients, whether something natural/organic is intrinsically better for you, the land/carbon cost of modern agriculture and what that means from a climate perspective, how feasible it is for people from lower economic strata to eat healthily, to name a few.

I don't think I could personally be a Soylent user since I'm more of a novelty seeker when it comes to food, but I could think of a few people I know for whom eating/preparing food tends to be too much of a chore who'd appreciate the step up in nutrition from eating out/pizza/ramen in addition to the time/money savings.

I had similar thoughts when I read that article in the Times, and one other, about Soylent. Oddly intriguing. Even if not attractive.

I love Dr. Greger. Delivers important information with humor.

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/more...mmon-diseases/

So I think I might buy some Soylent after reading that article. Fascinating.

Hey Quik: What are your thoughts on Dr. John McDougall and his whole starch-heavy diet?

I don't claim enough expertise to have a firm opinion, really.

Mrs Q is fiddling with a high carb vegan diet right now, with the overwhelming share of her calories coming from fruit, veg, and starch; very little grain but some rice. Many people seem breathlessly excited about the 80-10-10 fruitarian approach, but I don't vest much faith in that meaning anything. They seem to be gorgeous people, though, if that matters.

McDougall seems pretty plain that his approach is geared primary toward weight loss (that's where the real money is, as we know), and from what I have read it seems a little bit thin with regard to it being a more comprehensive good health strategy. I consider that a weakness in a number of diet approaches.

Among my many complicated views on the topic, I am leaning toward "sugar-is-the-enemy" enough that a starchy, bready, carby diet seems like it can't make sense. So I think I have a bias against it, and that has kept me from digging too deeply.

Thanks for your thoughts, Quik. I really value your opinion on this topic, as you are one of the folks who helped nudge me onto my current path.

I'm continually trying to nudge down my meat intake and have made good headway, and I have really cut down on dairy (which was actually pretty easy). I don't know if I'll ever make it to the vegan state, but I figure any movement in that direction is a positive. If I can boost my starches (especially potatoes) as part of my fruit- and veggie-heavy diet, that works for me.

Just as an update, roughly 2.5 years later, I am in the low 180s after starting out around 215 in December of 2011. I still eat some meat, but most of my diet now comes from veggies, fruits, nuts and whole grains. If a veggie alternative to a meat dish is available, I usually take it.

Recently, I hit 500 days without soda, although that has been an ongoing struggle. I've been good, but that doesn't mean I haven't been tempted to give in now and then. I've largely eliminated dairy. I still have cheese on occasion, but a lot less than I used to consume. Mostly on pizza. I have fruit smoothies or whole wheat bagels instead of cereal for breakfast, so milk is almost completely out of my diet now. Except for the occasional ice cream.

As some know from the Strava thread, I started out walking a couple of years ago and then moved into running. Combining the exercise with the dietary changes has made a real positive difference in my health. If anyone else has stories about how changing their diet has helped, I'd love to hear them. I find them pretty inspiring. I'm still working toward 175...

Very gratifying to hear that, particularly since it seems to be working for you as part of a larger smarter approach.

I'm basically still in the same orbit I have been in for a while - down about 50 pounds from pre-diet, all my bloodwork very good, and no medication other than occasional B-12 and iodine supplements. I have fallen short of some goals for this summer, but hope that a recent intra-family challenge might provide the swift kick I need to get back out running. Maybe this thread and mini-confession could help too.

I'm still guilty of too much bad food in my generally good approach. I order fried potatoes more than is reasonable, often for lack of good options, and still eat more grains (even white grains) than I wish I did. So, I still consider myself a work in progress on those fronts. But I have not deliberately broken the "no animal products" pledge for more than 3 years - for me, I think that clarity of that as a rule has been important, as a pledge to "do better at this" or "eat less of that" doesn't have the same pull, I think. I am not a very disciplined person - my relative success at this is an aberration, basically.

Cheers!
(lifts a spinach smoothie glass)

I've been adding spinach to my smoothies too. And I recently discovered that the veggie delight at Subway is pretty decent with spinach instead of lettuce.

French fries are a weak point for me too, although baked fries from the oven are a step in the right direction. For soda, trying to cut back didn't work for me. Like you, I needed a firm "can't have it ever" rule. I've stuck to it, but boy have there been days where I wanted to break it. It doesn't help that I hate tea and coffee. Chocolate is really my only source of caffeine now.

I think I could fairly easily go no dairy. I use silken tofu instead of yogurt in my smoothies. That was an easy enough change. Cheese, outside of pizza, is easy to ditch. No cereal makes no milk easy enough. On the other hand, with meat, every now and then, I just want to enjoy a good steak or some chicken wings. Which is why I doubt I'll ever go full vegetarian. Still, my diet is so much better than it used to be. And it shows. For a while, I was getting "have you lost weight" remarks on a regular basis. It was pretty gratifying.

In my work life, I'm a fairly public figure and do a bit of speaking, so I still get a fair number of the "you look great" stuff, with some of them (amusingly, but understandably) coming to me with a bit of hesitation, as people worry that my somewhat drastic weight loss might have arisen from illness.

I still desire foods I no longer eat. While I have found that my sympathies for animal rights arguments in general have grown once I had less personal guilt/stake in them, I'm still in this for health reasons, and the moral arguments enough would not be enough to prevent me from drifting back, I don't think.

My funniest weak moments are actually with smells - particularly fried chicken. I wasn't a huge fan back when I ate plenty of meat (even when I was doing low carb to varying degrees) but now I don't think there's a more provocative smell. I recently traveled on an all-inclusive cruise and separately to NOLA, and both settings were tempting, but I managed without major difficulty.

I have mostly given up soda as well. I occasionally get the Zevia brand of stevia-sweetened stuff (not exactly sure why I bend there) and I have moments of weakness in bars when I order a diet cola infused drink. Yeah, alcohol is another area where I could really afford to do better if I were really being honest with myself and serious about things. I joke that I was on a "bourbon and french fries" diet during my last super busy stretch of a few months at work. More true than I'd like to admit (the new bourbon-themed bar with great fries and no other vegan options 150 yards from my office is a curse, I say).

I listened to this and I was surprised at how lopsided the final vote turned out to be. I thought the 'against' side had made a pretty good case.

..and at the risk of overstaying my welcome...

Understandably, most of the talk here has focused on weight and cardio health. It's the most visible dividend from a change in diet (and exercise) to lose weight, and to appear to be making strides with your bloodwork, etc.

A significant part of this, in my mind, is also trying to manage toxins and the potential for cancers. Eating lower on the food chain seems (okay, seems to some, I know there are doubters in all crevasses) to play a real role on those fronts as well.

I'll go to Greger again, as his post from today hits right in this wheel house:

Cancer and the Animal-to-Plant Protein Ratio | NutritionFacts.org

I love Dr. Greger.

Not sure if this is an appropriate thread but wanted to share something. When I got back from a long road trip in June, decided to make several major changes to my lifestyle starting the first of July. I got back to swimming laps 4-5 days a week and significantly changed my eating habits to healthy foods consistently. For breakfast, it's always a protein/fiber fruit/yogurt smoothie (thanks to Magic Bullet); for lunch, low carb sandwich, unsalted cashews and granola/yogurt; and for dinner, usually a large salad (occasional fish or meat) - not to mention continuing to drink plenty of water. It's amazing how I had eliminated the need and interest in snacking and how I have developed a craving for healthy (i.e., non-processed, low fat and sugar) foods. The result of all this has been a BMI in the normal range for the first time in many years and my cholesterol going from 232 to 171.

Awesome! Great News!

Nice job, Bucc!

That's a great update, Bucc.

Has anyone tried one of the offerings from "Beyond Meat"? I had read a few articles and was curious, so I picked up a pack of the chicken strips at the store and cooked them up last night for chicken soft tacos. They do a great job of emulating the texture of chicken meat, but the taste was just off. I'd read where people were saying they couldn't tell the difference between real chicken and Beyond Meat, but it wasn't anywhere close for me.

I'm a pretty big fan, but I always dress stuff up a bit anyway. For me, piled under a bunch of beans and peppers and guac and olives, I really like their faux chicken strips. I make a pretty solid chicken salad with them, too, using Just Mayo.

There's certainly a lot of priming involved, though. If you're told you will not be able to tell any difference at all, I think that's unreasonable. But to me, they are close enough. I've served both items to non-vegetarian friends, without any pushback.

Just ordered Proteinaholoic after positive reviews from Dr. Greger and others. Has anyone here read it yet?

Thoughts on the Pritikin Diet

This doesn't specifically discuss vegetarian diets and isn't the most scientific thing in the world but at its core is a topic that I'm interested in frequently, especially when reading this thread.

My diet is dominated by high fat meats. I don't intentionally eat any vegetables (I do eat some but I have no rule about getting x number of servings of vegetables a day). There are some guys I look up to who have gone literally 100% carnivore for 6+ months at a time (Zero Carb Interview: Kevin Fenderson | Eat Meat. Drink Water. <-- this guy mods the low carb forum on myfitnesspal that I'm very active in).

Recently, there was chatter about a diet involving obtaining 90% of their calories from (good/non-refined) carbs, almost entirely rice I believe, and seeing the exact same benefits as low carb diets offer.

Frequently I see posts in this thread talking about the benefits of limiting or completely eliminating meat with regards to heart health, insulin health markers, even the potential to limit cancer risk. I find this fascinating, because I eat almost literally the exact opposite diet as advocated in the original discussion here, and I see consistent research on a low carb, high fat diet dominated by eating meat offering the exact same benefits, including benefits with regard to cancer: Ketogenic Diets and Cancer - The Current State of Research. Anecdotally in addition to my weight loss so far, I've also achieved normal blood pressure, normal cholesterol, normal markers for diabetes and more generally and more importantly insulin resistence... getting ~70% of my calories from fat, much of it saturated fat, and not caring at all about my vegetable intake. Most folks in this thread achieve the exact same results by limiting their meat intake massively, focusing on lean meats (which I shun), and eating a heavily plant based diet. I find this fascinating.


I'm not really going anywhere with this, I was just thinking about the general idea when I saw this thread bumped today, and then saw this post about insulin linked in a low carb forum and figured I'd ramble a bit here. I enjoy reading the stuff that gets posted when this thread is bumped, and love seeing the different ways that different folks are able to find the best ways to get healthy. It sometimes feels to me like, as long as you ignore the shit that comes out of FDA recommendations, you'll be A-OK :P

It is frustrating and fascinating. Even within the plant-based community, we see stark differences and their adherents basically shouting one another down -- over whether to include things like nuts and seeds, fruit smoothies, whole grain products, sugars generally, and gluten. It's downright perplexing, especially while nearly every faction claims studies and results to back up their argument.

So there are now schools of thought telling us to avoid too much fat, to avoid too many carbs, and to avoid too much protein.

Other than that, though, we can eat whatever we want.

Go easy on the water there, buddy.

On this front, one of my takeaways is that pretty much every thought-out diet plan urges its followers to avoid massive sugar bombs, and to avoid highly processed foods (loaded with way too much sodium, preservatives, and other additives). I also think that people who are thoughtful enough to follow any given approach are more likely to be watching and reducing calories, even if they aren't obliged to do so under their program.

All told, I think a good deal of the positive outcomes on the weight/cardio front might come from those items, independent of the route taken to get there. Cut out the white bread baloney sandwiches and hot fudge sundaes, and it might not matter that much what you sub in for them, at least on those superficial levels.

While I have not committed to such an approach (and suspect I lack the discipline to do so), I find the logic here pretty interesting and relevant to this conversation:

Why I am a Pegan – or Paleo-Vegan – and Why You Should Be Too! - Dr. Mark Hyman

Might be worth a read Radii

Processed meats do cause cancer - WHO - BBC News

Overview is that sausages, ham, bacon etc are in their eyes definitely linked to cancer, and unprocessed red meats probably are.

Although immediate reaction is eating small amounts of each is unlikely to be an issue, and branding them carcinogenic is probably a step too far, as clearly not in same league as tobacco. No-one ever got cancer from sitting next to someone eating a rare steak :D

Maybe if they were smoking while they had the rare steak.

Yeah I've read that and read some discussions on it (which is virtually worthless, as everything about every individual study just gets attacked like crazy by people who may not like the results).

I don't smoke any meats I cook myself, and bacon is the only thing I eat that falls into the processed category, though I admittedly do quite enjoy my bacon.

Currently my feeling on that is really simple. This is the only way of eating that's ever worked for me, and its benefits due to reduced weight and reduction in insulin resistance outweight any possible negatives. So I'm absolutely content for now. I have a layman's understanding that there are cancer starving and cancer preventing benefits to eating a ketogenic diet, even if its done via lots of red meat, that make it a net positive overall. I have seen conversations in low carb forums settle on the idea that based on trying to aggregate all of the current research out there, a ketogenic diet that involves lots of red meat probably increases the likelyhood of some types of cancers and decreases others and overall decreases the likelyhood compared with the standard american diet. I can definitely admit that its a lot more straight forward when analyzing cancer research on vegetarian diets.


There are other options for me while still remaining ketogenic. There is actually a subset of folks who eat a vegetarian ketogenic diet. I suspect I will never be one of those people, but I do try to avoid saying "I would NEVER do that" and being overly resistant to something different. I could dramatically increase my intake of green veggies and lower my intake of meat and remain ketogenic. One thing I'll very likely do at some point is experiment with less saturated fat, which for me would basically mean lowering bacon intake and eating a lot of avocado, which would cut down/out my biggest source of processed stuff. I like experimenting at times within the ketogenic realm, but I've been trying to stick with what I know works lately since I spent too much of the summer off plan and stalled myself out a good bit.

Between this new report and the video I saw on FB of a pig doing a puzzle...I might be out on meat. Uggggh.

Edit. Perhaps same article as the one above...

Breaking News: World Health Organization Says Processed and Red Meats Can Cause Cancer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/articl...ave-the-planet

I guess this could have gone in the Global Warming thread too.

Since he has gotten a bit of run in this thread:

How Not to Die: Discover the Foods Scientifically Proven to Prevent and Reverse Disease: Michael Greger, Gene Stone: 9781250066114: Amazon.com: Books

I'm reading that book currently, having finished Proteinaholic a week or two ago.

Mrs Q is immersed, too. I am debating whether it would make any sense as an audiobook listen, but am leaning against.I very rarely actually heft books in hand to spend time reading, but I listen voraciously to both audiobooks and podcasts in the car and during exercise.

I assume the conclusion here is going to be pro-vegetarian, which is fine. But I'm curious about the macronutrient breakdown since protein is specifically mentioned in the name of the book. Is there a set amount of protein/fat/carbs this book recommends, or is it a more general "you just don't need much protein".

FWIW, even though I nearly all of my calories come from meat and dairy, I probably eat far less protein than the average person, even healthy person who is obsessed with their bonless skinless chicken breasts. So I'm curious about the macronutrient recommendations that come from that.

Finally hopped on the oatmeal bandwagon over the holidays. Tried the quick oats version first. Buried them in berries and added some brown sugar. Great way to start the day. Even tried your steel-cut oats. More effort, but still pretty tasty when you throw in fruit and brown sugar to taste.


I've done a lot of reading over the past few years too, and I am thoroughly convinced of the health benefits of a plant-based whole food diet. I lost 30 pounds and have maintained it for 2 years with no "dieting" to speak of. I don't eat salads, I don't starve myself. I feel so much better than I did at 215 pounds. Two plus months ago, I took the plunge and went from eating meat occasionally to not eating meat at all, and managed to lose a little weight over the holidays in the process. I occasionally get the hankering for chicken wings or something, but on a day-to-day basis, I don't feel like I'm missing out. I've also cut out dairy, except for what I refer to as "incidental dairy" like milk chocolate bars. I don't eat cheese or milk, but if there is a little butter in the mashed potatoes, that's okay. I won't put it in myself, but if it's already there, I usually won't let that stop me from eating them.

Oops. I didn't want to respond to this without looking at the book because I didn't want to misrepresent what he wrote. I'll try to remember to look this up at home. He's definitely pro-vegetarian, and says there is no need to eat meat to get protein. I'll see if I can find you a more specific response later.

I had similar results with the plant-based whole food diet when I started it pretty much exactly 2 years ago. I just changed my diet and did not even add any exercise and I still lost about 25 lbs in around 6 months.

What got me, however, was around that 6th month my wife was pregnant with our second. That really threw a wrench into things as we slowly fell off the diet as she gained her pregnancy weight and I gain my "sympathy" weight :) . Then of course once we had the baby (in addition to a toddler) there was no time get back on the diet.

Now we're finally at a place where we are trying the diet again as we started Monday. I am really excited to be on it again. Unfortunately over the last year and a half I did gain all of the 25lbs back, almost exactly. I've also felt like shit, especially recently and I know a big reason is my diet. I felt really good last time on the diet so I am looking forward to it.

As with you I am a real believer in the plant-based whole food diet. I think the proof is there in how you feel after making the change. It wasn't only the weight loss but there was a noticeable difference for my whole body and mind.

I think I may have found a food regimen that I can stick to.

The Taco Cleanse | The Last Diet You'll Ever Need

love it

I wonder if soy that is cruely mistreated will still destroy testosterone production and increase estrogen conversion or if the abuse will make a man out of itt :D

kidding, kind of/

Big Vegan's inevitable slide to the dark side continues...

Vegetarian food companies finally get their own lobbyist in D.C. | Grist

This is pretty funny.

Competely stolen.

I mean, I haven't upset my vegan social media friends since maybe my last empassioned discussion on the virtues of potted meat, so this is perfect :)

Glad I could help!

Will adding a veggie burger to the In-N-Out menu destroy the country? - LA Times

Sort of an interesting storyline... of course her take is lots of hyperbole, but I think there's a kernel of this that does embody this whole debate. Basically the force-your-lifestyle argument. And I personally think In-N-Out Burger is a perfectly fair place to wage that battle, oddly enough.

Holy crap. God forbid someone ask for a non-meat alternative. As someone who tries to eat as little meat as possible, having a veggie burger available on the menu is often the difference between my family going to a restaurant or going elsewhere.

Agree with you Kodos. The Mrs always struggles to find places to eat, but by fact that Burger King and not McD's has a Veggie Burger insures that we never eat at McDonalds. It's a smart move to have them as options. Many times I will order one as an alternative when I don't want the red meat and fat myself.

It's probably a smart business move to add one (long term - short term you possibly get a bigger boost from 'holding the line'), but it's a private business. People can ask them, and then it's up to the business, just like Chick-Fil-A etc choosing to close on Sundays.

And if you actively believe in your (& your family's) health that much, I'm not sure why you want to eat at an In-N-Out place anyways. Though admittedly I'm an East Coast guy, so I don't have much experience with that specific chain.

Certainly. I'm just saying that it's smart to have something on the menu that makes you a viable choice for people who are trying to avoid meat. I can vouch that it is a pain in the ass to find places with good non-meat options. Especially when you are trying to also please someone who always eats meat like my father.

Fast food places, or just places in general? Because every actual restaurant I've worked at or eaten at with my vegan friends has had many a non-meat option. And if I'm with them it wouldn't even cross my mind to suggest a place with "burger" in the name. Worst case there's always a burrito place, sub shop, or pizza place available.

Restaurants in general. I should mention that I hate salads, and I don't like my vegetables raw. Some places have veggie burgers, some have veggie sandwiches, some have pasta with veggies. If none of those options are available at a place, I will push against going there. At a place like Chili's, I'll get a veggie burger or I'll order a fajita and substitute broccoli for the meat that would usually come with the fajitas.

My family is a difficult crew to please: I try to avoid all meat and dairy; my father is a meat + side dish guy; my kids are very picky eaters. It just makes it hard to find a place we all can agree on. Having a "safe" option on the menu like a veggie burger (even if they aren't my favorite) keeps your restaurant in the mix.

Well, In-N-Out does have a sort of cult-like following, that's part of the backlash, right? And the fact that they take pride in their very tiny menu gives them a stronger practical defense, I think, than someone like McDonald's who will clearly (and wisely) find menu space for whatever moves product.

As for "why would a vegan want to go to a place like In-N-Out Burger" -- I think there are two answers. First is the specific -- I personally LOVED In-N-Out prior to my dietary change (more than 5 years ago) and I sincerely would be thrilled if I could get the attention to detail they offer their products to something I could/would eat now. If they made a vegan-friendly burger with fresh toppings that was parallel to their outstanding fast food burger -- I'd greedily become a huge fan and customer when I could.

The second is the broader argument. Plant-based dieters are a growing share of the overall market, and it's not unreasonable to ask for growing respect on the menu. If I get a Subway sandwich, I end up basically ordering a "black forest ham and cheese, hold the ham and cheese" but paying full price, since there's no discount (there are several lowest-price subs there, the closest they make to an accommodation is putting double cheese at no charge on your "veggie delite" sandwich).

So... no, I am not mounting a civil right campaign decrying unfair treatment. But I do _want_ Subway to offer falafel (and why the fuck not, by the way) or a vegan friendly protein of some sort. And when i call places in advance to ask about the menu, I usually let them know if I won't be coming there due to my misgivings (lard in the beans, chicken in the rice, I'll get my Mexican food elsewhere).

Maybe some think that makes me an activist/terrorist, but I don't think so. It's just very small-scale agitation for positive change.

I dont mean this as a personal attack, but the two snippets I quoted above are part of the reason many vegans get a bad reputation, imho.

In the first you ask for "respect" on the menu. I cant even wrap my head around that concept. Its a business. They offer what they want. Either you choose to patronize them or not, they owe you nothing and you owe them nothing. Respect doesn't come into the equation. Let's say I don't eat sushi. (I do) Should I say it isnt unreasonable to demand respect and have beef offered at "Just Sushi" restaurants? Of course not. Again not trying to pick on you, but that is a horrific word choice at best. A menu doesn't show respect. It has no emotion. It simply lists the offerings of the proprietor.

On the second point. You think its a small scale agitation to effect change. I think its useless harassment of the lowest common denominator at a restaurant. Look the person who answers the phone or takes you order has less than a .0000001% chance of ever affecting the menu offerings of any restaurant. (With the lone exception of a small 1 off cafe type place where the phone is answered, the orders taken and the food made by the owner) If you want any chance of agitating and causing change, you would be much better served by asking the hostess for the store manager or better yet the district manager's email address and writing a brief email expressing your desire for an extended menu, and possibly highlighting how many were in your party and how much revenue they forfeited by not having an offering that met your dietary needs. Instead you chose to add some small level of stress to a person making $2.12/hr (plus tips) that they promptly ignored and went back to tending their tables.

To me the second statement kind of cements your status as a douche nozzle to me.

Maybe my word choice is imperfect, granted, and "respect" isn't the ideal term.

I teach economics. I am pretty comfortable with the notion that a profit-making business doesn't "owe" me anything but their best profit-making offerings. Gotcha there.

I'm not trying to call on the government to force a company to do anything they don't want to do. And I'm not suggesting that your "all-sushi" place has any obligation to offer stuff they don't want to offer.

I do, also, believe in the use of market power. It's fair game for people, as a subset of the marketplace, to express their views - even in an organized way. I don't picket out in front of Subway (my example above) for the lack of falafel, I just don't eat there hardly at all. I vote with my wallet, and I occasionally let them know that I have done so, in the hopes that it might influence their own best profit-making decisions on their offerings. Nothing more subversive than that.


I can handle that.

I respect that line of thinking, though I know from chefs some of them have a lot of trouble finding a recipe for tofu-based alternatives that tastes as good, so I could see a place that's somewhat known for higher quality offerings to want to stick to what they do well instead of trying to please everybody.
This is where you lose me a bit. Not militantly, because like you I just don't care enough about this stuff to protest or seek it out outside of a random thread & thought exercise here, (I went to Subway today, apparently they don't stock Honey Oat bread anymore, which lessens the chance I'll go there in the future but I'm not going to write them a letter), but while I disagree with the backlash that author experienced I don't believe she's honest about her motivations.
If plant-based dieters are such a big segment of the market, then companies will pander to them or new ones will emerge and gain market share. But there are definitely the more militant groups who have ulterior motives that are driving the movement here & creating the backlash. It's nanny statism on a micro scale, so of course there will be push back. And in the end I'll support your right as a potential consumer to fill out comment cards or email them, but at a certain point isn't the answer a healthy large scale chain organically growing instead of trying to jam it into a niche restaurant? (PS I have never been to an In N Out Burger, so didn't realize just how small that menu was until looking now. After seeing it, I'm 100% on their side.)

In-N-Out's niche is based on having a tiny inventory that does not necessitate a wide variety of kitchen equipment like freezers or heat lamps. If it doesn't make economic sense for them to have bacon as an option for $1 extra or whatever, I don't see how a veggie burger that they have to make on site with fresh ingredients would be remotely feasible.

Until then, vegetarians can probably make do with a grilled cheese animal style.

That solves for vegetarians but not the vegan desires of Quik.

Yeah, but looking at the article it seemed to address vegetarian, not vegan, which is a much more realistic starting point when considering that the vegan options at fast food restaurants across the board are incredibly slim. I'd be very confident that the veggie burger at Burger King is not vegan either.

This is pretty funny.

https://www.facebook.com/ArmyAnonymo...7137554108860/

For those either interested in, or following the actual FoK train of thought... one element that many supporters advance is to focus on whole grains wherever possible. I've been a brown rice guy (when I can) for years now.

And, so... there's an arsenic issue. As in, there's a lot of it in rice, especially brown rice. Ugh.

Greger video and lots of links below:

Do the Pros of Brown Rice Outweigh the Cons of Arsenic? | NutritionFacts.org

I don't know how anyone could believe anything said by these guys when their entire premise comes from the completely discredited China Study (see Denise Minger's work).

My doc recently put me on the 'whole 30' diet which makes paleo seem like self-indulgent hedonism. No sweeteners of any kind! No grains! No legumes (including peanuts) No dairy! No sulfites! No fun!

Um...go see a registered dietitian (not any kind of "nutritionist" or any other unprotected term). Whole 30 was started by two people with literally no background in nutrition at all. Your doc shouldn't be prescribing anything like that.

The Whole 30: A Dietitian Review

Presumably thesloppy's doctor is an expert, having gone to medical school and all and has some reason for placing him on the diet. Without knowing any of the reasons behind thesloppy's condition (other than his username of course), might it make sense to trust the expert, or at least learn more, before we kill the expert.

I have no idea who is right, but when a doctor is placed up against Jen the nutritionist make-up artist (your link, in spite of the warning not to trust nutritionists), I'm gonna lean to the doc most times.

Meh. I certainly appreciate skepticism in matters of healthcare, but that dietitian's 'analysis' wasn't particularly enlightening or really all that critical in the slightest. Her only criticism of the diet seems to be that it is too exclusionary and isn't much use to a healthy person, long term....which is such a misunderstanding of the the diet's stated purpose/rules (it's a 30 day long, intentionally exclusionary diet, with gradual re-introduction of the banned foods after 30 days) as to render all of her following analysis worthless.

...to paraphrase Digamma, with diet in particular, why let the perfect be an enemy of the good? If the most damning criticism a dietitian can come upwith against a diet is 'it's pretty good' (even after inventing her own rules), should I really abandon all my efforts up until this point in order to pursue a definition that has a certain seal attached to it?

To be entirely clear, in this case my doc is a Naturopath, which wouldn't meet some folks/states' definition of a primary care doc...but it's good enough for the State of Oregon, for whatever that's worth.

And yet the first thing she says in her review is to talk to only trust things from registered dietitians.

How about a ranking that is derived from a panel of 20 registered dietitians, academics, and doctors? It puts Paleo at 36 and Whole30 at 38 which is dead last. It's a BS diet made up by two people with literally no background at all in nutrition.

Rankings
Methodology
Experts

Ah, so not a real doctor. That explains it.

Sigh. Your mileage may certainly vary, but in my experience the only folks with such rabid hard-ons for traditional Western medicine have either very little experience going to a doctor, no medical issues of their own, or are studying to be doctors themselves. For whatever it's worth, I have a 'traditional' MD as well, who has signed off on everything my ND has prescribed as well. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. The State of Oregon and Medicaid certainly approve of them as 'real' doctors.

Do you have any chronic health problems? I have chronic back pain, for which the Western medical approach is A) take pharmaceutical pain-killers for the rest of your life, B) incredibly expensive and invasive back surgery or C) A+B. In exactly one visit to your MD for chronic pain you will have completely researched & exhausted all of the traditional, Western solutions. Conversely, I have very little faith in most of the fufu , pseudo-scientific stuff that my naturopath tries on me, but entirely regardless of your level of knowledge & faith in the scientific method, something (even if it's only placebo) has an infinitely better chance of working than nothing.

1. I get the desire for anything that works. Nobody has been able to fix my reflux issue so I've taken Prilosec every day for years and still had to get an upper denture this year due to the damage the reflux did.

2. Oddly enough, I have had pretty serious back problems and have chronic pain even after surgery. I was still able to find legitimate medical means to improve my health to the point of running a half and full marathon in the last 18 months. By far the best thing was learning stretching and strengthening techniques from a rehab clinic for sports injuries and carrying those forward over the years.

3. On the levels of quackery, naturopath is the bottom of the barrel for me, just barely above acupuncturists. I have done a couple of visits to chiropractors, but only with clear instructions to them that they're not allowed near my neck since chiropractic strokes are becoming more common.

4. A state allowing something is meaningless. Kansas allows school districts to decide whether or not to teach evolution or creation in public schools. Elected officials are largely willing to allow whatever brings them the most local support and funding.

This is still a meh for me. Sure this ranking is 'derived' from a panel of dietitians, academics and doctors, but it's still compiled by usnews and ranked almost entirely in terms of weight-loss and ease-of-use, which has absolutely no bearing on my personal issues. Additionally, couldn't I apply the same
simple science and say that America obviously has the most/worst diet & health problems of the civilized nations, to the point of cultural corruption, and as such American doctors and dietitians are actually some of the worst recognized references one could get diet advice from?

It's awesome that you were able to find some relief, as that seems to be the exception rather than the rule, when it comes to surgery. I'm jealous.

My pain is actually caused by my connective tissue being more flexible than my muscles (same syndrome TK has), so stretching and strengthening will generally tend to exacerbate the pain rather than bring any relief. As it relates to the MD/Naturopath discussion, the lowest-common denominator brand of treatment employed by Western medicine is counter-productive when dealing with the more unique syndromes as you have to exhaust all the general treatments/diagnoses before you can address specifics, whereas NDs are happy to treat each person uniquely.


For whatever it's worth, you can find physical therapists who have been particularly trained in manipulation and adjustment, if you want to avoid the realms of alternative health entirely. My personal experience with PTs and Chiros has been entirely unique to each practitioner, even regardless of any common modalities/trainings, which can be frustrating unless you just happen to stumble on a good one immediately.

My mom was a chiropractor for whatever that's worth...and while one might think that would pre-dispose me towards alternative health, I didn't have a great relationship with my mom, and it probably resulted in just as many long-standing resentment and resistances to that kind of practice. That said, I did see how long it took for the AMA to get from decrying all chiropractors as the spawn of Satan with absolutely zero value to healthcare, or society in general, during the '70s...to regularly referring patients to their care, and even adopting some of their techniques today...and as such I don't pay much attention to calls of quackery that I think largely emanate from those same political grounds.

A diet that says:

Eat real foods
Cut down significantly on carbohydrates
No junk/baked crap
Eat some fruit and lots of veggies


That seems pretty damn good to me. I never cut out dairy myself, though I know of many people who had specific issues that were exacerbated by dairy so cutting it out benefits them.

And yet it's not. Read the rankings by the panel US News put together. It's the worst of the worst diets and cuts out a ton of healthy foods because two idiots with no background in nutrition decided to piggyback off the garbage Paleo diet.

I want to try the steak and eggs diet.
1 to 1.5 pounds steak and 6 eggs twice a day.
Do this for 6 days. On the 7th you eat whatever.

I love steak and eggs.

That doesn't follow at all. The only way it would be true is if Americans actually followed good dietary habits, and I think we both know that's not remotely true.

The problem isn't the food recommendations, it's the personal and societal factors that have the average American consuming $1200 worth of fast food per year with 20% of meals eaten in the car. Even worse is the "healthy" options at those places. A chicken salad at BK is arguably worse than 3 hamburgers there. Don't get me started on the "healthy" organic and clean garbage of places like Chipotle and Panera.

Again, my point was more about jumping to a conclusion that you knew more about the situation than the person treating thesloppy. Maybe the diet is terrible, but the person recommending it met with thesloppy and had some reason to recommend it. We can make all sorts of declarative statements that may or may not fit the individual circumstance. Your mileage may vary.

You've got to be fucking kidding me. Dieting once you've overweight and have issues is a very individualized thing. What works for one person may not work for another. Its completely fucking ridiculous to me to "rank" diets for a generalized population and just expect that to be the end. They immediately appear to be using outdated and improper methodolgoies just based on my own personal area of expertise, diabetes. If you rate the low carb diets at the bottom of your "diabetes" ranking, your ranking is immediately worthless.

Other diets are ranked lowl becuase they're "hard", but the people that do them successfully find them to be miracles.

Basically, who the fuck are you to tell some random stranger on the internet who is trying his best to work out his own problems, categorically, that a recommendation to follow a diet recommending whole foods and cutting sugar as its base, is full of shit and he should immediately re-think and re-do his entire support system. That's horseshit.

We all have our own struggles and experiences. I'm happy to hear yours and see if it relates or resonates with me and my experiences and my own research. But if you are gonna interact this way as an authority out of nowhere with a bunch of strangers, don't expect to be listened to in the slightest.

And yet you immediately and categorically shit on a recommendation that starts by recommending you fix the exact societal factor you're pointing out... eat real foods. cut your carbs down. eat veggies. maybe the entire diet doesn't work out for thesloppy. But maybe he develops a few new good habits from the core of it.

double dola, I eat a ton of meat when I'm eating well for me and losing weight, this is a thread dedicated to a vegetarian way of eating. Over the past couple years I've been able to come into this thread and learn things from people like Kodos and Quik even though their path is drastically different than mine. I've been able to share my own experiences and not had them shit on. That's generally the spirit of health and wellness threads on this board over the years. Express a concern if you see fit, but I'd SERIOUSLY recommend linking to scientific studies and not US News and World Report if you're going to try to tell someone that they're about to undertake on something disastrous. And generally, lay the fuck off of someone trying to work on themselves.

Different things work for different people. There is no one size fits all solution for health, especially at the age most of us are at on this board, with different health issues and life situations based on dumb shit we did awhile back.

That kind of breaks down my complaints about Western-style lowest-common-denominator approach to medicine. An MD is always going to make recommendations based on what works for the most people the most of the time....which sounds perfectly logical until you know you're outside of those lines, but your MD has to finish coloring in each and every picture before he can actually address your personal issues. Comparatively, an ND is going to make recommendations based on who-the-hell-knows-what, unique to every individual practitioner...but I'm going to get personalized serviced tailored to my specific problems, from the get go.

My ND spends 20 minutes giving me personally tailored acupuncture that I have absolutely no faith in, as part of her practice. My MD spends the first 15 minutes of literally every appointment staring into his computer, very obviously trying to remember who the fuck I am and what my problems are. Which one's a quack? Which one's giving less respect to me and my issues? My personal healthcare journey has rendered any kind of judgment based on a person's certification as useless. Someone being a 'good' doctor or a 'bad' doctor generally has very little to do with their training (especially in the case of GPs), and much more to do with their manner and ability to communicate. Your mileage may certainly vary.

That person is a naturopath. I'm as much of a doctor as a naturopath.

Evidence?

Low carb diets are garbage. Every legitimate group of people that looks at diets destroys these types of fads because they have no scientific basis at all. I'll take the views of actual doctors, dietitians, and academics over hearsay and the latest gimmick diet that removes a variety of healthy foods because two completely unqualified jackoffs came up with a good marketing scheme.

Ah yes, ignore the actual people involved with that ranking and pretend that it's not legit because of whatever reason you want to. I'll take that panel of people with actual credentials over the known frauds that created the Whole30 diet and some pseudoscientific bullshit naturopathic "doctor."

Real dietary recommendations are based on decades of peer reviewed research. It's not something that some random government flunky just put together in a powerpoint presentation and got rubber stamped. If a real doctor recommends a change, go for it. That's not what happened here.

You didn't know that in your first post.