Active Low-Carber Forums

Active Low-Carber Forums (http://forum.lowcarber.org/index.php)
-   LC Research/Media (http://forum.lowcarber.org/forumdisplay.php?f=4)
-   -   Huff Post: Why We Actually NEED To Eat Fat In Our Diets (http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=482009)

Calianna Thu, Feb-14-19 07:21

Huff Post: Why We Actually NEED To Eat Fat In Our Diets
 
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/why-we-need-to-eat-fat_l_5c531852e4b0ca92c6de420c


This starts out ok -
Quote:
The message around fat is a confusing one.


For decades, we were told by professional health organizations and food companies that fat was the enemy, the “evil” force behind the obesity epidemic and heart disease. Fat was high in calories, experts theorized, and if we wanted to achieve a leaner body mass, consuming high-calorie foods simply didn’t make sense. By the time the ’90s rolled around, Americans were consuming low-fat, high-sugar snacks and refined carbohydrates around the clock.



After further research, it became clear that this theory was all wrong. In fact, it was found that regular consumption of healthy fat is crucial to overall health.


“We’ve finally started to recognize that certain fats are actually beneficial for weight loss, heart health and balancing hormones,” nutritionist Tamar Samuels told HuffPost.







But then it loses steam when it gets into what's healthy fat and what fats to avoid:


Quote:
On the note of keeping an eye on what type of fat you’re consuming, here’s an important news flash: Not all fats are created equal. A few examples of “bad” fat include certain meats (pork, fatty beef), butter and margarine, and vegetable oils like canola, vegetable and safflower oil. This isn’t to say you should never consume these items ― you just shouldn’t have them very often.



Now, the good news: There are tons of delicious fatty foods that are actually really great for you. These generally fall under the category of monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats and omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids like salmon, avocados, olive oil, whole eggs and nuts.







The dividing line between what's considered healthy fats and unhealthy fats is becoming quite blurred: vegetable oils are bad, even though they're very high in the polyunsaturates that are considered good. Canola oil is bad, even though as a vegetable oil, it has a very good ratio of omega 3:6. Eggs are good, but butter, pork, and beef fat are all bad for you, even though they have a better 3:6 ratio than most of the nuts that are considered good for you.



Do they have any idea just how contradictory their advice is becoming?

GRB5111 Thu, Feb-14-19 09:59

Probably no idea at all. Fats are still confusing to most, and people are still struggling to put fats into the good and bad categories. I believe the perception will still persist that any fats from red meat whether it's beef or pork or other that they fall into the bad category. It's hard to unlearn this stuff and the current conflicting messages about good and bad fats aren't helping.

uberfat Thu, Feb-14-19 14:22

haha
2 year ago i told my friend eat fat to lose kg.
2 month later he called me he didn't lose any but gain weight by eating too much lamb and butter.
It turns out he eat his FATY food with Fresh baked BREAD non stop.
When you eat your fat with buns (big mac) it means disaster ...:)

for most people it is not possible to eat fat without some side help(pasta-rice bread potato corn)

Meme#1 Thu, Feb-14-19 14:30

That's the part where friends who I'm explaining to, what good and bad fats are and their eyes begin to cross when I get to the part that good fats are those rendered from meats. They're OK with the olive oil and even butter but the animal fats sends their brain into orbit....

Calianna Fri, Feb-15-19 13:05

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meme#1
That's the part where friends who I'm explaining to, what good and bad fats are and their eyes begin to cross when I get to the part that good fats are those rendered from meats. They're OK with the olive oil and even butter but the animal fats sends their brain into orbit....




It will continue to totally confuse them until the tide turns, and the dietary nonsense currently being pushed is finally abandoned.


I can imagine people 100 years from now will laugh when describing the low fat, high carb dietary dogma common to the late 20th and early 21st centuries. They'll view it as the craziness of avoiding real food, especially meat with it's inherent fat, while gorging on nutritionally deficient grain products. Future generations will be shaking their heads and wondering how the people of this era could possibly fall for such nonsense, just as we shake our heads and wonder how people could ever believe that bleeding a sick patient was the best way to cure all ills.

Dodger Fri, Feb-15-19 14:23

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calianna
I can imagine people 100 years from now will laugh when describing the low fat, high carb dietary dogma common to the late 20th and early 21st centuries. They'll view it as the craziness of avoiding real food, especially meat with it's inherent fat, while gorging on nutritionally deficient grain products. Future generations will be shaking their heads and wondering how the people of this era could possibly fall for such nonsense, just as we shake our heads and wonder how people could ever believe that bleeding a sick patient was the best way to cure all ills.
Or that statins were considered a medicine.

bevangel Fri, Feb-15-19 21:02

Quote:
I can imagine people 100 years from now will laugh when describing the low fat, high carb dietary dogma common to the late 20th and early 21st centuries. They'll view it as the craziness of avoiding real food, especially meat with it's inherent fat, while gorging on nutritionally deficient grain products. Future generations will be shaking their heads and wondering how the people of this era could possibly fall for such nonsense, just as we shake our heads and wonder how people could ever believe that bleeding a sick patient was the best way to cure all ills.


Either that or a few thousand years from now our descendants will have evolved down two distinct paths and there will be two branches of humanoids. One, branch will become soft, gentle doe-eyed creatures - not too terribly smart - who live in herd like groups, perhaps in slowly-decaying cities, cared for by the machines set into motion by far distant ancestors that they scarcely remember. They spend the vast majority of their days chewing and digesting the grains they subsist on.

The other branch become tough, independent carnivorous hunters. They are the descendants of meat-eaters cast out of the cities when even the mere thought of eating meat became too TERRIBLE for the increasing effete vegan city dwellers to accept. And as machines put more and more of the earth under mono-culture grain cultivation to feed the ever increasing numbers of grain-eaters, there will be less and less "wild space" and fewer and fewer other species of animals to hunt. Eventually the hunters will turn to hunting and eating their cousins, the grain-eaters.

Oh, wait? Didn't I just describe a distant future very similar to the one H.G. Wells described in The Time Machine. Eloi or Morlocks? Which will your 137th generation grandchildren become? :lol:

GRB5111 Fri, Feb-15-19 23:11

Quote:
Originally Posted by bevangel
And as machines put more and more of the earth under mono-culture grain cultivation to feed the ever increasing numbers of grain-eaters, there will be less and less "wild space" and fewer and fewer other species of animals to hunt. Eventually the hunters will turn to hunting and eating their cousins, the grain-eaters.

Yes, they called it Soylent Green.

WereBear Sat, Feb-16-19 07:25

Let's see if a corporation has trademarked the name Long Pig!

Meme#1 Sat, Feb-16-19 11:57

Quote:
Originally Posted by GRB5111
Yes, they called it Soylent Green.


Keeping the population weak and dumbbed down and unmotivated so that they remain submissive! :agree:

bevangel Sat, Feb-16-19 18:16

Quote:
GRB5111 (Rob) said Yes, they called it Soylent Green.

No Rob, I'm pretty sure Soylent Green was a "highly processed food" found in another SciFi story entirely. No self-respecting Morlock would ever eat that! No, my Morlockian descendants are gonna their Eloi-meat will be fresh, and probably cooked medium rare! . :roll::lol: :roll:


On a side note tho, that reminds me.....in case any of you have missed it, there is now a corporation called Soylent that sells "meal replacement" shakes and powders made with soy protein. I kid you not. You can find their website here. Honestly, I do think they should have picked SOME OTHER name for their company and product but apparently they chose the name deliberately. I, for one, won't EVER be trying their product tho.

WereBear Sat, Feb-16-19 18:39

I remembered this review and tracked it down.

I tried Soylent. It didn't go well.

Squarecube Thu, Feb-21-19 05:08

Quote:
Originally Posted by WereBear
I remembered this review and tracked it down.

I tried Soylent. It didn't go well.


This was my first laugh of the day, thanks.

M Levac Sun, Mar-17-19 21:37

Quote:
and helps us absorb essential fat-soluble vitamins like vitamin A, D, E and K.

Nah nah nah nah nah...

Fat contains essential fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, K. Fat is required for obtaining essential fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, K. Fat is required for absorption of essential fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, K. Fat is required for metabolism of essential fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, K.

Without dietary fat, we ain't getting any of that. Period.

Ergo, "healthy fats" are the fats that contain these essential fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, K - naturally. What kind of fats are those, we might ask? Animal fats. Oh yeah, did I say that fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, K were essential? Yeah, I think I did. I definitely did.

Ms Arielle Mon, Mar-18-19 08:42

:daze:

ROFL


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 20:55.

Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.