Forks Over Knives (Or, the Western diet vs. a plant-based diet)

[cartman]

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

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

[Kodos]

More Realistic Meat Substitute Made From Soy Raised In Brutally Cruel Conditions - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

[lighthousekeeper]

Originally Posted by Kodos

More Realistic Meat Substitute Made From Soy Raised In Brutally Cruel Conditions - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

love it

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

More Realistic Meat Substitute Made From Soy Raised In Brutally Cruel Conditions - The Onion - America's Finest News Source

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

kidding, kind of/

[QuikSand]

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

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

[Kodos]

This is pretty funny.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Kodos

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

[Kodos]

Glad I could help!

[QuikSand]

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.

[Kodos]

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.

[PilotMan]

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.

[BishopMVP]

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.

[Kodos]

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.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Kodos

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.

[Kodos]

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.

[QuikSand]

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.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

and it's not unreasonable to ask for growing respect on the menu.

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 (

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.

[QuikSand]

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.

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

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

I can handle that.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

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.

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.

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.

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.

In 10 years, I expect that 15 percent or more of all meat, dairy, and egg consumption will be plant-based or cultured,” he predicts. “That will have a dramatic positive effect on the health of consumers, the global poor, our climate, and animals — in fact, that will spare about 1.4 billion land animals and more than 2 billion sea animals every single year. This is the single-minded focus on GFI, to accelerate the cultured and plant-based sectors of the market,

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.)

[nol]

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.

[digamma]

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

[nol]

Originally Posted by digamma

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.

[Kodos]

This is pretty funny.

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

[QuikSand]

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

[CrescentMoonie]

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).

[thesloppy]

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!

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

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

[digamma]

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.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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

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?

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by digamma

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.

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.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by digamma

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.

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

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

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.

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

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

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.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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

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?

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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.

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.

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.

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.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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

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.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Radii

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.

[tarcone]

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.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

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?

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.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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

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.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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.

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.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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.

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.

[Radii]

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.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by digamma

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.

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.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by digamma

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.

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

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Radii

You've got to be fucking kidding me. Dieting once you've overweight and have issues is a very individualized thing.

Evidence?

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Radii

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.

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.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by Radii

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.

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.

[digamma]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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

You didn't know that in your first post.