5 ms·
> AFAIK, butter is still worse then no butter (and more calories from whole plant foods instead). Many would dispute this if you're alluding to it being heavy
by 1stranger 8y ago
> AFAIK, butter is still worse then no butter (and more calories from whole plant foods instead).
Many would dispute this if you're alluding to it being heavy in saturated fat which there's heavy dispute over.
> Margarine may or may not be worse than butter (I think it is worse).
Doesn't seem consistent with your logic of less refined is better.
> If you want to eat for health, look into WFPB, they have a lot of science on their side.
So basically veganism. Pretty much a non-starter for most people.
- cies 8y agoI see a many clear reasons to avoid/reduce any processed fat (oils, butter, etc). It is not part of what primates ate, so good chance we're not well adapted to it. It is too calorie dense. It blocks insulin. It becomes fat (carbs barely become fat), especially when combined with carbs (as is common). It often comes with cholesterol. > Doesn't seem consistent with your logic of less refined is better. That's why I continue to say its better to avoid both. More or less as bad as butter is still quite bad either way. > So basically veganism. Yeah. When applied for health reasons, it's called a plant based diet. Since you can make junk-food from plants, the WFPB word came about. > Pretty much a non-starter for most people. Stopping smoking is also hard. Wanne live longer/healthier? Look into WFPB. Wanne do what you always did? It is still legal, no worries as of yet.
- barry-cotter 8y ago> It is not part of what primates ate, so good chance we're not well adapted to it. It’s animal fat. It gets broken down into glycerides. > It is too calorie dense. If you need fewer calories eat less. > It blocks insulin. Insulin is part of glucose metabolism. Dietary fat does not effect it. > It becomes fat (carbs barely become fat), especially when combined with carbs (as is common). Untrue. If you have a calorie deficit you’ll lose weight, a surplus you’ll gain it. Whether the energy comes from fats or carbs is irrelevant. > It often comes with cholesterol. Serum cholesterol and dietary cholesterol are unrelated.
- cies 8y ago> If you need fewer calories eat less. It's about the other nutrients that come with the calories. If you eat cal dense foods you will not consume enough (micro/phyto) nutrients. Think lettuce/fruit vs oil/butter. Throw 2500 kcal of each group into cronometer.com and see for your self. > It blocks insulin. On the cell, so cell become insulin resistant: > It blocks insulin. https://youtu.be/fRZduVxlP_U https://youtu.be/fRZduVxlP_U > > It becomes fat (carbs barely become fat), especially when combined with carbs (as is common). > Untrue. If you have a calorie deficit you’ll lose weight, a surplus you’ll gain it. Whether the energy comes from fats or carbs is irrelevant. True, but I'm talking about having a surplus. In that case very little carbs can be turned into body fat, while consumed fat is easily turned into body fat. > Serum cholesterol and dietary cholesterol are unrelated. Some studies may show that, but many other do not. Looking at the methods they use it is clear to me which studies to trust...
- cies 8y ago> It’s animal fat. It gets broken down into glycerides. How does that make it healthy?
- acchow 8y agoHow does fat block insulin?
- cies 8y agohttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRZduVxlP_U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRZduVxlP_U Here you go. I hope it helps someone, because I took a bit karmic penalty on HN spreading what I think is proven truth. (still worth it for me)
- amanaplanacanal 8y agoLooks like nonsense to me. You can find other people saying the exact opposite. Nutritional research is unfortunately in a pretty bad state, and I don't know how it is ever going to get better.