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

[Radii]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Low carb diets are garbage.

If you claim that lowering carbohydrate totals is universally garbage... again, for type 2 diabetics, then you are just proving yourself to be truly ignorant.

The case for low carbohydrate diets in diabetes management

This article references 88 studies done on low carb diets as it relates to diabetes, glycemic control, insulin resistance, and cardiovascular disease.

Postprandial hyperglycemia is a risk factor for CVD, particularly in diabetic patients. Many studies including the Nurses Health Study [36] have suggested a link between dietary carbohydrates (measured in terms of glycemic load) and CVD risk. Furthermore, control of postprandial hyperglycemia has been shown to provide cardiovascular benefits, and to contribute to the overall decrease of hemoglobin A1c, something that has been clearly shown to reduce microvascular disease in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Dietary carbohydrates are the major determinants of postprandial glucose levels and LoCHO diets have been reported to lower postprandial glucose levels directly and indirectly by way of weight loss and may have beneficial effects on CVD risk factors. Significant reductions in postprandial plasma glucose and plasma insulin levels with LoCHO diet have been demonstrated in many studies. Furthermore, control of postprandial hyperglycemia with acarbose, an α-glucosidase inhibitor, has been demonstrated to significantly decrease the risk of diabetes in patients with impaired glucose tolerance.

Boden et al. demonstrated significant improvement in insulin sensitivity, up to 75%, with a low carbohydrate diet as measured by euglycemic hyperinsulinemic clamp method [9]. In another study [29], significant decreases in insulin to glucose ratio were seen in the LoCHO group suggesting improved insulin sensitivity, especially in subjects with insulin resistance and higher baseline insulin levels. Similar improvement in insulin sensitivity was reported by Gannon, et al [45]. In the studies by Samaha et al. [10] and by Foster et al [8], carbohydrate restriction was associated with a significant increase in insulin sensitivity at 6 months (measured only in non-diabetic subjects) although the difference between the low fat and low carbohydrate groups was not statistically significant at 1 year [27]. Notably, again, these studies allowed increasing carbohydrate in the LoCHO group with time thereby reducing the effectiveness of this group. Reduction in visceral obesity and omental fat may be important since LoCHO diets have been reported to reduce fat mass including truncal fat over long term in many studies. Finally, a recent study showed that effectiveness of low carbohydrate diets was more visible in a group that was insulin-resistant

Conclusion:

Low carbohydrate diet compares more favorably, at least over the short term, to traditional low fat for improving glycemic control, insulin sensitivity and dyslipidemia of diabetes with reduction in triglycerides, increase in HDL cholesterol and modification of LDL to less atherogenic form. The need of the hour is to accept the benefits of carbohydrate restriction with reservation and to establish guidelines for its use, especially emphasizing use of mono and polyunsaturated fats as the way to achieve caloric balance since these have been inversely linked with CVD risk in various studies.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

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.

I agree with you, and I don't think that our opinions are exclusive. The intersect is that I think American food culture is entirely fucked up, and that extends to doctors and dietitians. Americans are obsessed with the idea of the calorie, and have abstracted all food into abstract numbers that can be moved around and manipulated in ways that make mathematical sense, but at some point we lost the lead and began judging food and nutrition by the numbers entirely...and we're just not very good at it. Whatever numeric indicator we were using for health 5-10 years ago is no longer considered accurate, just like whatever came before it, and just like whatever will come after.

And if we acknowledge that personal and societal factors are what drives a nation's health than how is a nation's collective health care providers not partially responsible for driving that health? We have entire national agencies staffed by doctors and dietitians specifically charged with regulating the quality of the nation's foods and health, how can the nation's health and diet not be considered a reflection and result of their collective actions? In some way American culture has failed uniquely, crucially and historically at recognizing the benefits of food and diet, and if that's the case who cares what an American licensed dietitian has to say if that license is based entirely inside a culture that has demonstrated repeatedly over the course of history that they understand and/or care less about food & diet than any other culture on the planet? Would you trust the advice of THEE MOST WELL RESPECTED & CREDENTIALED North Korean agriculturalist?

Again, I'd point to your own example of that USNews report which ranks all of those diets worth on caloric intake, weight-loss, and ease of use, which are all particularly American obsessions that don't even necessarily apply to the stated purpose of each particular diet in the first place. There is a category for 'safety' which massively downgrades the Whole30 simply for excluding whole groups of foods, with a similar criticism to that of the nutritionist you sent out earlier "Why exclude grains and legumes when you could get some of the same nutrients that you get from vegetables?". Sure, I absolutely could be getting the same nutrients in grains in legumes that I am already getting from fruits and vegetables, but to point to that as a safety issue is absolute bullshit that makes me question the entire process (as I hope it would anybody who claims to think 'scientifically')....there is no claim that I could be getting more, better or different nutrients, just that I COULD be getting them from somewhere else, and downgrading the diet massively as a result.

Lastly, I am very resistant to Science as faith, and right now that's how your argument is striking me. I don't consider myself anti-science, but in these days where so many folks seem to treat Science as 100% reliable without looking at anything but the results, I think it's worthwhile to consider that scientific fact is actually fluid and history has shown that likely 20% of what we think of as proven fact today will turn out to be flat out wrong in the future. You're pointing to scientists and dietitians as proof that your opinion is correct, but haven't cited any actual content/science to give any clue as to whether you yourself have any experience (or even interest) with what you're talking about. Obviously, dismissing everything confirmed by science is even more of a fool's game, but that said if I were to look around at all of history's evidence piled up and guess at something that American science probably has wrong right now, I don't think it would be a bad bet to go with 'diet'.

[Radii]

I should point out that I'm not arguing for or against any the Whole30 diet in particular. I'm arguing against aggressive blanket statements made by assholes in health and wellness threads that have, for nearly 2 decades on FOFC, been very supportive environments and have been a part of many here becoming healthier.

[thesloppy]

I do have to agree, that CM going out of his way as to dismiss the folks who have put the most time and effort into supporting me personally, with the most positive results, as "bullshit", non-doctors, and quacks, in a thread built around support, is some grade A bullshit.

...that said, I pretty much baited him into it, as I've had this conversation a million times over, and I went out of my way to make it clear I was talking about an ND as soon as he made a judgmental comment about the diet, and pretty much prodded him through the motions from then on. He did choose to double down on being a butt-hole, every step of the way though.

[CrescentMoonie]

Originally Posted by digamma

You didn't know that in your first post.

I did know that a "doctor" was recommending Whole30. That was a giant warning flag to anyone who knows anything about the diet. I haven't encountered a single real doctor who recommends any of the low carb diets, especially not the worst one of the bunch.

[CrescentMoonie]

https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/nat...facts-edition/

Naturopaths aren't doctors. Whole30 is bullshit. Forks over Knives is based on the China Study that has been completely dissected as comically bad research where the raw data doesn't support the bullshit that Campbell and others have profited off of for years.

[digamma]

No one is arguing this point with you. radii and I are saying basically the same thing. You come in firing with blanket statements without knowing really any of the facts. That's it. That's all we're arguing against.

[albionmoonlight]

Originally Posted by 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

Is that as much of an issue if you are eating a variety of grains?

I've heard of the arsenic thing, but mainly for people eating gluten free who are replacing most/all of their wheat with rice (including rice flour, etc.).

It would seem hard to eat enough rice for this to be a problem if you are also getting calories from other grains.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

Forks over Knives is based on the China Study that has been completely dissected as comically bad research where the raw data doesn't support the bullshit that Campbell and others have profited off of for years[/url].

So you're citing a non-scientist blogger's analysis of the China Study as evidence that Campbell's work is invalid?

Campbell's response

Ignore the over-the-top intro at the top. For some reason, they felt it was necessary to talk about Campbell's epic slapdown of the blogger, rather than just post his response.

Edit: I tried copying Campbell's whole response, but something keeps making it disappear when I try to post it. So here is what a professional epidemiologist had to say about the blogger's analysis.

"Your analysis is completely OVER-SIMPLIFIED. Every good epidemiologist/statistician will tell you that a correlation does NOT equal an association. By running a series of correlations, you've merely pointed out linear, non-directional, and unadjusted relationships between two factors. I suggest you pick up a basic biostatistics book, download a free copy of "R" (an open-source statistical software program), and learn how to analyze data properly. I'm a PhD cancer epidemiologist, and would be happy to help you do this properly. While I'm impressed by your crude, and - at best - preliminary analyses, it is quite irresponsible of you to draw conclusions based on these results alone. At the very least, you need to model the data using regression analyses so that you can account for multiple factors at one time."

[Radii]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

I haven't encountered a single real doctor who recommends any of the low carb diets

You're not looking. Again, I don't eat Whole30, but I swear by my (diabetic) life on low carb diets, as do MANY diabetics, as *should* all of them. Many doctors are coming around to this idea.

I'm not going to bother spending any more than a few seconds this time looking up information to dispute your ridiculous blanket claims, but it doesn't even take more than a second to prove that "a single real doctor" statement wrong:

https://www.dukehealth.org/find-doct...westman-md-mhs

I am an associate professor of medicine, the director of the Duke Lifestyle Medicine Clinic, and medical director of the Duke Center for Smoking Cessation. I am board certified in internal medicine and obesity medicine, and I have a masters degree in clinical research. My clinical research and clinical care relate to lifestyle treatments for obesity, diabetes, and tobacco dependence, and I have over 90 peer-reviewed publications. I am currently the president of the American Society of Bariatric Physicians, and a fellow of the Obesity Society and the Society of General Internal Medicine.

This guy is a huge proponent of low carb diets, google his name and one of the first results will be a youtube video with him explaining a ketogenic diet to a bunch of diabetics. The "president of the american society of bariatric physicians" is one of the biggest proponents of low carb diets in the world.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

I haven't encountered a single real doctor who recommends any of the low carb diets,

I present to you, Dr. Michael Eades, Dr. Salim Yusuf as just 2 obvious world renowned MDs that recommend exclusively a low carb diet.

[Subby]

Do this and ride or run incessantly (or both!) and you'll be just fine: The Best Fat Loss Article on the Motherfuckin'™ Internet

[CU Tiger]

This is an article/journal that really helped me from a mindset standpoint, maybe it will do the same for others:

https://medium.com/gethealthy/i-just...l-c9d7de4f64a7

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Subby

Do this and ride or run incessantly (or both!) and you'll be just fine: The Best Fat Loss Article on the Motherfuckin'™ Internet

This pretty much ends the thread imo. All of the information there is outstanding.

[Subby]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/is-a-ve...art-1512491418

Is a Vegan Diet Good for Your Heart?

A vegan diet did better than an American Heart Association regimen in reducing inflammation during a clinical trial but doctors say more research is needed

[CU Tiger]

Bumping this back up.

So I've long been an opponent of vegetarian diets as a "lifestyle" and have repeatedly argued (both here and elsewhere) against much of the propaganda out there regarding vegetarian/vegan lifestyles as the be all end all health choice.

And that hasn't changed, but...

Doing some year end introspection and self evaluation, the one area of my life I fail repeatedly in is my health and weight management. Put simply I'm a fatass and a compulsive eater.

So I am going to try and bunch of crap this year and see what if anything sticks. I made some progress last year, albeit minor. Last January I was ~315 lbs. I got as low as 273 this past year but have slid back up to about 290. I have totally eliminated soft drinks from my diet. This was a huge thing. Last January I was consuming 10 2 Liter Diet Mtn Dew's per week....plus numerous other 20 oz in daily store stops. Gave those up in April and havent touched one since. I still cheat and allow myself a max on 1 zero sugar energy drink (monster red bull etc) a day but dont drink one ever day. A few other changes and have been working out regularly again. My strength is back with a vengeance and my cardio is improving. I still cant get my 5k time under 35 minutes but I can run/jog the whole damn thing now.

So anyway...

I realized that I dont think there is a DAY in my life past say 18 months old where I havent eaten meat. I am not sure there is a meal in the last 5 years that Ive eaten that hasnt included meat much less a day for that matter.

So I decided this week I am going quasi vegetarian. I apologize Im not hip to the various degrees and nuances, but no meat or fish for a week. Still eating cheese and yogurt. Dont drink milk so that isnt a thing either way.

Im starting day 3 here. Just wanting to see if I feel anything...different...dont really have an end game goal in site with this. Planning on running it 7 full days and see how I feel next week.

Food cravings have sucked. Wife made a huge pot of delicious home made broccoli soup last night, and my kids ate hot dogs and chips. I hate hot dogs, but I was so tempted to eat a hot dog instead of a bowl of soup. Anyway...dont want to take over this thread just wanted to post some thoughts here and plan on updating at the end and see if my opinion changes any.

[Kodos]

An interesting development... I hope it works out well for you.

[korme]

Go buy you some beyond burgers this week CU!!

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by korme

Go buy you some beyond burgers this week CU!!

Actually this is what I'm trying to avoid,.
I don't want to eat fake meat. I want to incorporate some meals that are meat free. I don't see this as a long term life style just a trial. Monday night I ate 2 sweet potatoes from the grill. I love grilled sweet potatos. They didnt need a side and were quite filling.

The hardest thing I'm struggling with right now is protein. Not sure how to get "enough" without chicken and fish. Long term shakes may be the answer, but as a house rule for this weeks challenge protein shakes have been banned. Workout recovery is noticeably tougher.

[Kodos]

From what I've read, if you eat enough veggies to fill you, you'll get enough protein. FWIW. Could always focus on beans if you're really worried. And nuts.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Kodos

From what I've read, if you eat enough veggies to fill you, you'll get enough protein. FWIW. Could always focus on beans if you're really worried. And nuts.

With as heavy as Im lifting right now, Ive been focusing on 1.5-1.75 grams of protein per lb. Or 450-600 grams of protein per day. Thats a lot of beans, wife might make me move out

Again...open mind here. Just going to see how the body adapts a bit, as much for self experimentation as anything else.

Maybe a mental placebo affect. But Monday workout was great. Yesterday felt sluggish. Today it was like I had no juice...and a ton of muscle soreness.

I ate an entire container of zero fat unflavored greek yogurt this afternoon and it seems to be helping. When I started looking for vegetarian protein sources, everything points initially to soy - which I am avoiding as much as possible. Never had quinoa before but its on the sample plate for tonight.

[QuikSand]

A 3 or 4 bean chili can make for a pretty appetizing, high-protein option that is pretty satisfying for omnivores and carnivores.

[Kodos]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

With as heavy as Im lifting right now, Ive been focusing on 1.5-1.75 grams of protein per lb. Or 450-600 grams of protein per day. Thats a lot of beans, wife might make me move out

Again...open mind here. Just going to see how the body adapts a bit, as much for self experimentation as anything else.

Maybe a mental placebo affect. But Monday workout was great. Yesterday felt sluggish. Today it was like I had no juice...and a ton of muscle soreness.

I ate an entire container of zero fat unflavored greek yogurt this afternoon and it seems to be helping. When I started looking for vegetarian protein sources, everything points initially to soy - which I am avoiding as much as possible. Never had quinoa before but its on the sample plate for tonight.

So, how did the experiment go?

[CU Tiger]

In short I made it the whole week, but was battling a cold/bug the whole time and generally felt like crap. Felt constipated which doesnt seem to jive with anything Ive read regarding plant based diets, thought it could be attributable to the medicine I was taking. So I decided to push it another week just to see how I felt when I wasnt sick.

Went all last week as well, with no real guidelines except "no meat" and actually went decent enough. Didnt feel like I uncovered the secret to life and other than a little extra recovery time after workouts no real negative diff either. (Lots of variable there. I'm in a heavy loading cycle on my workout regiment so the extra soreness can be attributable there.)
Saturday evening my daughter had a volleyball tourney and a couple team mates of hers rode home with us and they were all clamoring for Buffalo Wild Wings..so we ate dinner there. There wasnt really a vegetarian option on the menu except a black bean burger and I was starving and not in the mood for that experimentation...so I ate a dozen chicken wings. Didnt feel any major difference after that either. Havent had any meat since then.

Not really sure what the end goal is right now. Whats interesting is outside of meat Ive eaten like shit. Ice cream once, drank lots of beer, bread, you name it. And in 2 weeks I lost 1 lb. Now at my weight 1 lb is just static noise and not indicative of anything. But in the past with the crap Ive eaten I would have expected to pick up a couple lbs....so who knows.

Im really struggling with what to eat though. So I'd welcome any suggestions there. It's been hard just to figure out meal ideas. Last night the wife and I basically made Japanese Hibachi veggies and rice and that was good. Have had potato and broccoli soup. Grilled sweet potatoes one night. Made pasta and tomato sauce...homemade 4 cheese calzones.

Never did try quinoa...havent figured out what to do with it yet. lol

Long answer to a short question...

[albionmoonlight]

You are smart to look at Asian cooking. It has a lot of meatless options and it is not afraid of flavor. Might want to just google Asian/Indian vegetarian recipes and see if anything strikes your fancy.

[cuervo72]

Thai food!

[Kodos]

My staples are:
Red potatoes with onions and peppers
Veggie chili
Minestrone soup
Veggie burritos
Chinese food

[Subby]

Amazing that this thread recently turned eight years old! I'm not old, you're old.

Just watched FoK again yesterday. Mostly renewed my desire to lower my meat and dairy consumption. Giving up refined sugars coming into the new year has helped a lot with the latter. Also moving toward narrowing my eating window during the day to 10 hours (and hopefully eventually 8). Intermittent fasting has had great results for folks and for someone like me I like the idea of relying more on burning fat for energy (being fat adapted).

Impetus for re-visiting all this was 2018 - a year where I rode 10,000 miles on my bike, ran almost 500 miles, and still managed to gain 10-15 pounds during the year. That's comically undisciplined eating. Yes, 179 pounds (where I ended up on January 1) is a lot lower than my highs 4-5 years ago (210s) or early aughts (240s), but I want to get down to 150 and see what kind of racing damage I can do with single digit percentage body fat.

Anyway that's all. Just a random rambling self-aggrandizing post. Insert emoji here.

[QuikSand]

Bumping an old fave.

The Impossible Whopper at Burger King could be a "next step" sort of thing. First and probably most importantly, it is pretty convincing as tasting good. I'm not saying it's indistinguishable from the real thing, but it's close enough that if they accidentally served 100 of them to people ordering Whoppers (meaning no leading questions or context for there being a difference), I doubt a ton would notice it. It's a little less greasy than real beef, but if you get it with the usual condiments, it's not that noticeable. (Contrast with the White Castle "Impossible Slider," that i tried for the first time in Vegas last week, and which was only accompanied by steamed onions - there, I found the taste/texture difference much more noticeable.

Anyway, what I think it nearly as important as the widespread distribution BK affords, is the pricing. Here, it was just a dollar more than the standard Whopper, and it's the same size bun, etc. So, that's a conscious decision to attack the main market, rather than just the fully-fenced-in market. I'm not sure it's the best business decision for Impossible (it likely is for BK), but I think it does keep this as a serious possibility to grow and grow. At only 6 bucks or so, it seems likely that in addition to my category (menu-limiters who would like a good fast food option and will seek this out), they are going to at least get some business from the health-conscious spouses, and there-with-friends types giving it a try, at least. Maybe even a wave of "this can't be any good, right?" They're marketing it as if it's a wide-appeal offering, for sure.

Anyhow, if you haven't done the research: the patty is all plant-based, the bun is not whole grain but is vegan-friendly, the BK standard Whopper offering is LTMPOK so to veganize it, hold the mayo (I add mustard, which I would anyhow). I think without the mayo, it's roughly 500-550 calories, not atrocious.

I'm a fan. Have tried Impossible in 4 locations with big jacked-up pricing, and BK is as good as them all, and much cheaper. It's not super healthy, but I will be a regular for a while, at least. Even bought a BK gift card (at a discount).

[QuikSand]

Oh, and in business context... my recent visits ere probably the first non-breakfast BK visit I have made in 15-20 years. Used to swing by a BK for breakfast sandwiches outside Atlantic City (the only easy place around) but past that, I can't recall the last time I ordered a burger or other dinner food there. Years and years. Been there three times in the last three weeks, with wife, then mom, then daughter.

[albionmoonlight]

Also seems smart for BK to try to do something to distinguish itself. McDonalds is McDonalds. And other fast food places have taken the corner of "high end fast food burger."

In my mind (and I think a lot of other people's minds) BK is in the "McDonalds but not as good" box (whether that's fair or not).

Going all-in on the impossible burger gives them something different, which I think can only be a good thing for them.

[MrBug708]

I've had the Beyond Burger at Carl's Jr and love it. I dont avoid red meat because I want to, I do because I have food allergies to it. I'd say that it's a pretty close resemblance to beef, to the point where I'd scarely say you'd know the difference unless looking for it. But in the end it's not the same. But for someone who is tired of chicken and turkey patties, it's a welcomed change.

[stevew]

I just got an email that on 8/8 BK goes live with the impossible burger everywhere.

[QuikSand]

It also sounds like Impossible finally got their final FDA approval, and should be on store shelves before long.

Actually, I feel like this restaurant-only roll-out has worked for them, even if unplanned... in my mind I think of that brand as having the higher prestige, even if it's available at a fast food joint now.

Hard to complain with the Beyond IPO results, though.

[albionmoonlight]

Just tried the Impossible Whopper. Had I not known, I would have not noticed a thing.

Because I was looking for a difference, I could tell that it was less greasy than normal Burger King (which is actually a good thing).

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Because I was looking for a difference, I could tell that it was less greasy than normal Burger King (which is actually a good thing).

Yep, exactly. I don't like Whoppers because they are too greasy and upsets my stomach. No issues with the Impossible Burger and it tasted almost exactly the same.

[Subby]

So okay!

Avoiding red or processed meat doesn't seem to give health benefits | New Scientist

[Arles]

I'm late to the party here, but trying to catch up. My issue is anything fried, but if I grill - I'm pretty good on red meat (but it still can upset my stomach). My solution has been to pretty much avoid fast food and when I eat out - I tend to stick to cobb or chicken salads. If I do get a burger, I try to get a salad or atleast avoid the fries (I also have had good experiences with Turkey burgers at places). A new place called "Salad and Go" has had a bunch of locations pop up in Phoenix and I really like it. You can customize your salad for about $6 (I usually get the Cobb with grilled chicken, bacon, egg and a reasonable dressing). You can add a 24-oz cold brew for just $1 more so that's been my fast food sub when I'm in a hurry.

Still, none of this is an exact science. I grilled steaks and veggies on Sunday night and felt great after dinner. Last night, the wife made a grilled chicken salad (using the bagged salad setups from Fry's) and I was as gassy as I've ever been (I think there was a lot of cabbage in it). So, I just try to limit the fried food and that seems to be my best course of action.

[Kodos]

The NYT article below goes into why it's difficult to do randomized, clinical trials that are the gold standard for science when it comes to dietary questions. To me, it feels like this new study is just another attempt to muddy the waters enough that people give up.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/h...section=Health

Here's another article.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/30/h...section=Health

The new analyses are among the largest such evaluations ever attempted and may influence future dietary recommendations. In many ways, they raise uncomfortable questions about dietary advice and nutritional research, and what sort of standards these studies should be held to.

Already they have been met with fierce criticism by public health researchers. The American Heart Association, the American Cancer Society, the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and other groups have savaged the findings and the journal that published them.

Some called for the journal’s editors to delay publication altogether. In a statement, scientists at Harvard warned that the conclusions “harm the credibility of nutrition science and erode public trust in scientific research.”

Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, a group advocating a plant-based diet, on Wednesday filed a petition against the journal with the Federal Trade Commission. Dr. Frank Sacks, past chair of the American Heart Association’s nutrition committee, called the research “fatally flawed.”

While the new findings are likely to please proponents of popular high-protein diets, they seem certain to add to public consternation over dietary advice that seems to change every few years. The conclusions represent another in a series of jarring dietary reversals involving salt, fats, carbohydrates and more.

The prospect of a renewed appetite for red meat also runs counter to two other important trends: a growing awareness of the environmental degradation caused by livestock production, and longstanding concern about the welfare of animals employed in industrial farming.

[QuikSand]

Pretty good overall take, in the wake of the maybe-meat's-fine stuff:

The Latest Fight Over Eating Meat Ignores These 4 Essential Nutrition Truths – Reason.com

[Kodos]

Journal Advice to Eat Cancer-Causing Meats: Science or Clickbait?

The Physician's Committee for Responsible Medicine weighs in and suggests this is a flawed study that is serving mostly as clickbait for the journal that it was published in. (FWIW, the PCRM was founded by Dr. Neal Barnard, who is a proponent of a plant-based, whole-food diet.)

Who is criticizing them?

Prior to publication, the Annals editor, Christine Laine, was contacted by Neal Barnard, MD, FACC, of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, who also serves on the adjunct faculty of the George Washington University, David L. Katz, MD, MPH, of Yale University, and Walter C. Willett, MD, DrPH, of the Harvard School of Public Health, who pointed out that the journal’s press release would garner widespread media attention and promote the false notion that reducing red and processed meat intake does not lead to health benefits. The editor responded, agreeing that the press release was misleading and needed to be changed, but did not distribute a corrected release to the press.

What’s wrong with the Annals articles?

Apart from the fact that the recommended dietary guidance was contrary to the identified benefits of reducing meat consumption, the articles had several methodologic problems. They left out key data, used inappropriate analyses, and allowed their own unverified guesses about public resistance to diet changes to influence their recommendations.

Missing data. Numerous key studies were excluded from the NutriRECS analysis. The PREDIMED (Prevención con Dieta Mediterránea) study was the large and well-known study that established the ability of a Mediterranean diet that replaced red meat with more healthful foods to reduce cardiovascular risk. Those whose diets tended most toward vegetarian patterns had the largest reductions in all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.

The DASH (Dietary Approaches to Stop Hypertension) study is the classic study showing that diet changes reduce blood pressure. The study’s dietary program specifically shifted the diet away from red meat toward more healthful choices.

The Lifestyle Heart Trial showed that a low-fat vegetarian diet, as part of an overall healthy lifestyle, could reverse the progression of even severe coronary heart disease. Many other randomized clinical trials—summarized in meta-analyses—have shown that replacing meat and other animal products with healthier choices consistently improves blood cholesterol, body weight, blood pressure, and blood sugar control.

Problems with analyses. In conducting its meta-analyses, the Annals articles used only the most heavily adjusted findings from the studies that were reviewed. For example, a study assessing meat’s association with heart attack risk might be adjusted for cholesterol levels, overweight, and blood pressure. However, if meat causes heart problems because it increases cholesterol, body weight, and blood pressure, adjustment for these factors could cause meat’s deleterious effects to be no longer noticeable in reported statistics. While statistical adjustments are often necessary and appropriate, if used injudiciously they obscure real findings.

Guessing about reluctance to change. Perhaps the most controversial aspect of the Annals articles was that they based their recommendations on the authors’ assumptions about people’s attitudes toward meat. The idea was that, if people enjoy meat, they should not be encouraged to eat less of it, even if it causes cancer or heart disease.

While a case can be made for adjusting recommendations to avoid violating cultural taboos, attitudes toward meat-eating are not in that category and, in fact, are already changing rapidly. Despite the massive increase in popularity of meat substitutes in recent years, the authors estimated that cultural attachment to meat is too great to be influenced by healthful recommendations.

Were that the case, the authors could have concluded that there is no benefit to encouraging people to reduce meat intake. But they went further and encouraged the public to continue current unhealthful dietary practices, despite their associations with cancer and other risks.

If guidelines reinforcing meat-eating are applied also to children and to people who are unaware of meat’s risks, the opportunity to help these populations learn healthful eating habits is forfeited.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Pretty good overall take, in the wake of the maybe-meat's-fine stuff:

The Latest Fight Over Eating Meat Ignores These 4 Essential Nutrition Truths – Reason.com

Most diet advocates are uncompromising zealots. The best diet is the one that works for you.

I have a good friend who lost 100 pounds eating vegan. I lost 90 pounds eating pork chops for breakfast and meat at every meal, lots of vegetables, but almost no grains, pasta, rice, or fruit. Both of us have sustained our weight loss for many years by continuing to eat our respective diets, and both of us have optimal blood pressure, blood glucose levels, and cholesterol panels.

Yesss so much this. Its not a religion.

[QuikSand]

The backlash against Impossible and Beyond Meat burgers going mainstream - Vox

[QuikSand]

The Experiment on Twitter: "We heard you like Forks... so we got you some Forks! For one day only, our @ForksOverKnives #Cookbook Ebook will be available for the promo price of $2.99. #HealthyEating should be available to everyone! https://t.co/6KlbFEAJtQ
#Vegan #VeganEats #PlantBasedDiet… https://t.co/OYybzmcKIu"

[Edward64]

Not sure if this will be as successful as the impossible burgers out there.

https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/e...rnd/index.html

You scream, I scream, we all scream for... plant-based ice cream?

Look, we know the phrase "plant-based ice cream" seems odd, but if Impossible Foods is able to create plant-based burgers that can "bleed," the idea of ice cream that uses a dairy replacement made primarily of plants should sound pretty normal by comparison.

Eclipse Foods, a startup founded Thomas Bowman and Aylon Steinhart, aims to develop a more sustainable, responsible, and humane food system.
They've created a product which is meant to replace dairy, and they've partnered with New York-based OddFellows Ice Cream Co. and San Francisco-based Humphry Slocombe to offer its version of dairy-free ice cream in stores.

That product, the founders tell CNN, is made from a mix of ancient corn, potato, cassava, oats, canola oil, cane sugar and water.

[QuikSand]

It seems pretty obvious that there's a market for this sort of thing. Every fast food joint is either testing or developing an offering, same for all the fast casual players. The market might turn out to be smaller than it seems right at this moment, but I think this is a one way street. We're not going to see all this just fold up and disappear after the "fad" wanes... it's here for good. And one there are easy-to-find offerings all over the place, a share of reluctant plant-based-curious will find it easier to try or commit to.

[Subby]

Just watched the Game Changers documentary on Netflix. Might be the final push that I needed. Pretty interesting either way.

[Subby]

About a week into eating 99.8% plant-based. The small fraction of a percentage is honey, and I am still on the fence whether eating raw honey is good or bad for the bee population. Probably good.

Anyway, here are my main observations:

1. I don't miss meat. At all. I would list a good bacon cheeseburger as probably my all time favorite food, and a breakfast omelet with bacon and cheese as my almost daily go to breakfast meal. Haven't thought twice about either other than in the vein of "I can't believe I don't miss this stuff!".

2. Instant Pot makes this easier. Not that it is hard, but I want to explore new (to me) flavors and spices. Being able to dump and go with an instant pot means I am eating solid meals while also avoiding eating out. Plus google is the world's easiest to use cookbook.

3. Soreness. This is one of those things that could be false causation, but almost immediately I have noticed that I am WAY less sore in the mornings. It took me a good 15 minutes every morning to get to the point where I was walking around like a normal human being, and in the past I just chalked it up to being pretty active. Hopefully this is actually a result.

4. BEET JUICE - falls under one of those things that I never would have considered before, but it is really good!

Ok I have probably lost people at this point. Anyway Tl;dr it's way less of a deal than I thought it would be and I generally feel better!

[Subby]

And on cue, I received my test results from my annual checkup on Tuesday. Lowest cholesterol ever for me, so obvious connection. Hah.

Report Result
CHOLESTEROL, TOTAL 182
TRIGLYCERIDES 39
HDL CHOLESTEROL 88
VLDL CHOLESTEROL CAL 8
LDL CHOLESTEROL CALC 86
T. CHOL/HDL RATIO 2.1

[JPhillips]

I still eat meat, but my instant pot makes everything easier and I eat more vegetables when I'm using it. I've found I'm a fan of almost any culture's peasant food.