PDA

View Full Version : Charlie Rose Diet Roundtable


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums

Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!



tom sawyer
Tue, Jun-26-07, 08:13
Anybody see this episode? It was interesting. There was a fairly distinguished group discussing the issues.

http://www.dietdetective.com/content/view/2422/82/

There's probably a better link, if anyone has it please post.

They sort of danced around the evolutionary aspect of diet without ever coming to specifics, which was maddening. I kept waiting for LC to come out as the proper diet form an evolutionary perspective. There was a lot of discussion about genetics versus environment, and one interesting point was that there is a feed-forward mechanism going on that sort of appears to be genetic, but isn't. Specifically, in utero a fetus is exposed to nutrition of the mother and is influenced, possibly for life. So a mother with diabetes, passes it on to her child through this influence in the womb. The child then does the same, creating a cycle that mimics inheritance.

David Ludwig was the proponent of a low carb diet, he calls it low glycemic index but he practices this and has seen the benefits in his own health. Apparently is the researcher who recently reported that people with a certain type of insulin response, do much better on a LC diet. His comment was that we may be able to do tests and prescribe individualized diet advice in the future. Not a bad idea, except that the LC diet was as good as low fat in the other group so why do you need to "individualize" a diet when one diet does show best results? He did write a book on nutrition in children which I might get because I think it lends validity to the way my wife and I are raising our kids. That is, not totally LC but much moreso than the way the average kid eats.

Marion Nestle was the same old tired diatribe of "eat well", which to her mind meant whole grains and watching fats. Guess you don't expect an old dog to learn new tricks.

Rudy Liebel was all about the money in my opinion. His idea was that once we understand more about the molecular mechanisms dealing with weight, then we might expect to come up with treatments. Yep, give him money to do research and eventually he'll come up with that magic pill. Ludwig did call him on that though, asking if he was prepared to medicate people starting at childhood, for life. Liebel of course sidestepped that, saying it wasn't for him to determine the ethical aspects. No, he justs need more funding.

Gina Kolata said she eats lots of pasta, so I basically think she is part of the problem not the solution. As a reporter, I don't expect much of her though.

Paul Nurse sort of led the discussion, didn't get the sense that he had much inthe way of substantive input.

So, what were your thoguhts?

tom sawyer
Tue, Jun-26-07, 08:22
http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/070622/nef048.html?.v=11

Another article. I keep trying to get on the CharlieRose.com website but it keeps crashing. I wonder if the site is being inundated with people interested in finding out what went on with the program?

tom sawyer
Tue, Jun-26-07, 09:16
Another very interesting point discussed by the panel was the effectvieness of exercise. The consensus was that exercise has less of an effect on weight loss, than diet. One described exercise as more of a condiment, a witty and appropriate choice of words. I felt like I was on the right track on this, because I've said before that I thought exercise was maybe 15% of the equation for weight loss, with diet being the primary contributor to weight.

They did say that exercise seems to have effets over and above simply burning x number of calories. One said it might be that exercise, over the course of time, can help to reset the muscle's metabolic setpoint and make them burn calories less efficiently. This would help overcome the body's overall weight setpoint. I think that is the gist of their coments.

Gostrydr
Tue, Jun-26-07, 09:50
Tom Sawyer..are you a Rush fan?

I love Charlie Rose but did not see the episode.

ceberezin
Tue, Jun-26-07, 10:33
I watched it for a while, but it just got too frustrating. I was wanting someone to break through the medical-pharmaceutical- health insurance complex party line, but in vain. There was a lot of talk about too much food, and very little about too much of the wrong kind of food. I finally turned ot off when one of them, I think it was Paul Nurse, said that eventually the obesity problem would get handled in the same way as the cholesterol problem, in which it turned out that there was a simple pharmaceutical solution, i.e., statin drugs, that made a lot of difference. When no one challenged him on that, it was clear which paradigm they were working from and that very little of interest was going to be said.

tom sawyer
Tue, Jun-26-07, 11:52
Yes that was Liebel who was drawing the parallel between statins and potential drug therapies for obesity. He did mention briefly that the effect of statins was slightly questionable, but then proceeded on as though there was no question that statins are having a beneficial effect on humans. I mysself think the parallel is accurate inasmuch as both blood lipid problems and obesity are symptoms of the same underlying cause. And I have no doubt that pharmaceutical companies will convince people that they are benefiting from anti-obesity medications that are actually unneccessary. After all, Pfizer is the one sponsoring Charlie Rose's Science series.

The one accruate statement that Marion Nestle made, was that in the 80's there was a glut of grain that needed to be sold, so big business geared up and marketed larger portions and more calories most effeectively, often targeting children with their campaigns. So the finger was pointed at big business and the quarterly profit report needing to show an increase to be considered successful. As their profits expanded, so did our waistlines.

I was glad I hung on through all the BS, it was worth hearing what Ludwig had to say. He was certainly not outspoken in his assertions, but he did contribute and was on the right track. There was so much more that could have been said though, that wasn't.

ceberezin
Tue, Jun-26-07, 12:35
After all, Pfizer is the one sponsoring Charlie Rose's Science series. Hmm, I didn't know that. That explains a lot.

tom sawyer
Tue, Jun-26-07, 13:27
I like Rush and saw them in concert once. My monicker is in honor of Twain's character though, I feel like I have some of that good-natured rambunctiousness with just a hint of book smarts. That and I live in Hannibal.

LilithD
Tue, Jun-26-07, 19:01
The names crack me up. So Nestle and Pina Colata were all for carbs, Liebel liebs research funding, Nurse knew nothing about health, and only David challenges the Goliath of the health party line??

tom sawyer
Wed, Jun-27-07, 07:36
That was a good one Lilith.

Charlie was the only one who came out smelling like a Rose.