5 ms·

> "you could avoid processed and fast food and still have a problem." Citation needed. In general cultures that don't eat much processed food are very lean co

> "you could avoid processed and fast food and still have a problem." Citation needed. In general cultures that don't eat much processed food are very lean compared with the West and there are dozens of indigenous populations studied that were lean and free of chronic diseases and that got sick and obese after being switched to a Western diet. N.B. science has been very reductionist. People are waking up to the fact that not all calories are equal, but now we need to wake up to the fact that not all carbohydrates are equal either. There is a huge difference between glucose and fructose and how our body reacts to them. Fructose gets harmful and fast. There is also a huge difference between safe starches like potatoes versus grains such as wheat. Seeds have natural toxins in them to protect against insects and animals that can be toxic for us too and wheat is one of the worst offenders, not to mention the fact that white flour is stripped of any micro-nutrients or fiber, being just empty calories, but with toxins. No, I don't believe that traditional Chinese food is as obesogenic as Western diets are.

KozmoNau7 8y ago
>"There is a huge difference between glucose and fructose and how our body reacts to them. Fructose gets harmful and fast." I suppose you're primarily basing this on Dr. Robert Lustig's claims, correct me if I'm wrong. You should know that his claims are questionable, containing a lot of spurious speculation and dubious interpretations of statistics. >"Seeds have natural toxins in them to protect against insects and animals that can be toxic for us too and wheat is one of the worst offenders" You need to bring some citations to the table, particularly for this claim, because it is factually incorrect. Those compounds that are found in edible grains are not harmful to humans. >"white flour is stripped of any micro-nutrients or fiber, being just empty calories, but with toxins." White flour has less fiber and a worse nutritional profile when compared to whole grain flour, but to claim that it is "just empty calories" is factually incorrect. Even the whitest white flour naturally contains vitamins, minerals and protein, among other useful nutrients. Do we westerners consume way too many empty calories in the form of sugar-laden drinks and candy? Yes, absolutely. But that does not make sugar a poison, it is merely a highly non-optimal source of nutrition. We're hard-wired by evolution to consume energy-rich foods and only slowly get sated by them, because food used to be a scarce resource. So when a bush brimming with sweet berries was available, it was best to eat as much as possible, to build up energy reserves. We don't need to do this anymore, but we're fighting a natural impulse.

KozmoNau7 8y ago

>"There is a huge difference between glucose and fructose and how our body reacts to them. Fructose gets harmful and fast." I suppose you're primarily basing this on Dr. Robert Lustig's claims, correct me if I'm wrong. You should know that his claims are questionable, containing a lot of spurious speculation and dubious interpretations of statistics. >"Seeds have natural toxins in them to protect against insects and animals that can be toxic for us too and wheat is one of the worst offenders" You need to bring some citations to the table, particularly for this claim, because it is factually incorrect. Those compounds that are found in edible grains are not harmful to humans. >"white flour is stripped of any micro-nutrients or fiber, being just empty calories, but with toxins." White flour has less fiber and a worse nutritional profile when compared to whole grain flour, but to claim that it is "just empty calories" is factually incorrect. Even the whitest white flour naturally contains vitamins, minerals and protein, among other useful nutrients. Do we westerners consume way too many empty calories in the form of sugar-laden drinks and candy? Yes, absolutely. But that does not make sugar a poison, it is merely a highly non-optimal source of nutrition. We're hard-wired by evolution to consume energy-rich foods and only slowly get sated by them, because food used to be a scarce resource. So when a bush brimming with sweet berries was available, it was best to eat as much as possible, to build up energy reserves. We don't need to do this anymore, but we're fighting a natural impulse.