4 ms·

> instead of promoting whole grains Telling people to eat fewer, not more, whole grains to prevent T2DM and cancer is peak HNism: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

> instead of promoting whole grains Telling people to eat fewer, not more, whole grains to prevent T2DM and cancer is peak HNism: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5506108/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5506108/ https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.31198 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.31198 and high-fat, high-saturated fat diets actually make insulin sensitivity worse: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/

astura 3y ago
It's peak Reddit bro-science, it's just Reddit bro-science has leaked into HN last several years.
- jamiek88 3y ago
  The Overton window of weird dietary approaches shifts too. It started with ‘Atkins’ which became lo carb when he was debunked, which became paleo ‘cos that is cooler for the bro’s then this got more extreme as a carnivore only diet and some of those weirdos have moved onto only raw meat. Every internet meme gets more and more extreme.
  - grecy 3y ago
    If we’re lucky the next one will be ‘No calories. Ever.’
    - shard 3y ago
      As promoted by Famine in the book 'Foodless Dieting: Slim Yourself Beautiful ("The Diet Book Of The Century!")' https://wiki.lspace.org/Famine_(Good_Omens) https://wiki.lspace.org/Famine_(Good_Omens)
    - talldatethrow 3y ago
      You might be kidding, but extended fasting, water fasting, and fasting while drinking salt/potassium water have millions of followers. I have personally tried fresh vegetable juice only for 30 days and I think it's amazing. I didn't even drink any actual water for 30 days, since I was drinking 1 gallon+ of vegetable juice a day (fresh juiced at home, not pasteurized garbage). I personally think the ideal diet would be vegetable juice plus some beef. Which is what most people would say ("hey, just eat a lot of salad and some meat sparingly"). Except it's way easier to drink 8 lbs of vegetables than it is to eat them.
      - grecy 3y ago
        I meant forever in the literal sense. Then we won't have to deal with these bro scientists anymore.
        talldatethrow 3y ago
        I'd prefer a bro scientist to a morbidly obese person to be honest.
  - EatingWithForks 3y ago
    I wish there was serious consideration that this might be a kind of manifestation of disordered eating. Being overly extreme about your diet can be a form of disordered eating, especially if it's unconnected to underlying condition like keto for epilepsy, gluten free for celiac's, etc. If you're a completely healthy man eating only raw meat, are you seriously any different from a woman who insists on eating only cabbage? I've seen people talk about how great their fasting diet is-- going days, upwards over a week without eating at a time-- and how amazing their feel not eating, etc. That basically also sounds like disordered eating.
  - J_Shelby_J 3y ago
    Maybe, but cultural opinion about diets has always been shifting and multifaceted. For example, the high carb SAD being defacto is a new thing. It became the default around the same time as the agricultural revolution and mass media. Before that, there were lots of of options. During the period where mass media ruled, their was only one zeitgeist (brought to you by Kellogg’s!), but now with the internet we are back to historical norms where those with means are able to find advice free of commercial incentives and regulatory capture. For example, low carb has been around for centuries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet#history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet#histor...
Helmut10001 3y ago
Are you sure? Citation from your first link > Six out of the 12 food-groups showed a significant relation with risk of T2D, three of them a decrease of risk with increasing consumption (whole grains, fruits, and dairy),
- 876978095789789 3y ago
  > Are you sure? Citation from your first link I think you misread my post, or misread the study. Whole grains are some of the healthiest foods you can eat, especially when it comes to reducing your risk of T2DM, while the person I was replying to implied the opposite: > Thirteen studies with 29,633 T2D cases were included in the high vs. low intake meta-analysis (overall intake range: 0–302 g/day). Comparing extreme categories, a strong inverse association between T2D and whole grain intake was observed (RR: 0.77; 95% CI 0.71–0.84, I2 = 86%) (Supplementary Figure S1). Each additional daily 30 g of whole grains was inversely associated with T2D risk (RR: 0.87; 95% CI 0.82–0.93, I2 = 91%, n = 12 studies) (Supplementary Figure S2). The inverse associations and heterogeneity persisted in additional analyses stratified by sex, age, follow-up length, geographic location, number of cases, dietary assessment, and outcome assessment (Supplementary Table S14). Evidence of heterogeneity between subgroups in stratified analyses was observed for geographic location, dietary assessment method, and outcome assessment. There was significant evidence for small study effects in the high versus low meta-analysis, but not in the dose–response meta-analysis. Visual inspection of the funnel plot suggests that small studies showing positive association may be missing (Supplementary Figure S25). There was evidence of a non-linear dose–response association; the risk of T2D decreased by 25% with increasing intake of whole grains up to ~50 g/day. Small benefits for increasing intake above this value were observed (Fig. 2).
  - Helmut10001 3y ago
    Ah, yes, what you say makes sense now reading your post again: So I can happily continue eating my naked oats..
throwbcuzbusy 3y ago
I don't have an HN account, because it is a poor use of my time, but I made one to counter your points (which date back decades, and have been already debunked by those more eloquent than I). 1. High-fat diets, as done in your 3rd paper and as done in most "high fat" studies, are incorrectly labeled such. "High-fat diet (HFD, n = 10: 55 % fat/25 % saturated fat/27 % carbohydrate)"[0] is not what the parent meant by "reducing sugar and carbs altogether instead of promoting whole grains as they do." A more honest interpretation would be "max 40g carbs, the rest fats and proteins." This is because the main benefits of such a diet only come out when carbohydrates are severely restricted -- as has been known for a while now. 2. Linking papers, without any sort of commentary or notion as to the reason for their inclusion, is in poor taste. In most cases this is done when the poster themselves haven't thoroughly read the articles in question. I won't go so far as to say this has been done today, but I will say it is a disrespect of our time to post lengthy papers without any sort of reasoning behind why they've been posted. 3. The first two links (technically one paper)[1][2] are statistical analyses of different food groups and their association with type 2 diabetes. The same error is done here as has been mentioned in my first point: without controlling for the whole diet, and using a very low carb, high fat/protein diet, the findings are irrelevant. Risk ratios are a notable finding, not a be-all end-all. Correlation is not causation. Continue platitudes ad infinitum and ad nauseam. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5506108/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5506108/ [2] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.31198 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.31198
- 876978095789789 3y ago
  > 1. High-fat diets, as done in your 3rd paper and as done in most "high fat" studies, are incorrectly labeled such. "High-fat diet (HFD, n = 10: 55 % fat/25 % saturated fat/27 % carbohydrate)"[0] is not what the parent meant by "reducing sugar and carbs altogether instead of promoting whole grains as they do." A more honest interpretation would be "max 40g carbs, the rest fats and proteins." This is because the main benefits of such a diet only come out when carbohydrates are severely restricted -- as has been known for a while now. Where's the evidence? I linked to a study, one that isn't confounded by weight-loss (unlike the studies you people like to cite) demonstrating that as the fat (especially saturated fat) content of the diet increased to an absurd degree (55%!), insulin sensitivity tanked. Why would insulin sensitivity, when measured by an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test, suddenly improve if you restricted carbohydrate even further? Yeah, at some point your intake will be so low that you can "game" an HbA1c or fasting BG test, but underlying insulin sensitivity will be trash (which an OGTT would show), unless maybe you lose enough bodyfat to offset it. Why do so many people on keto develop "physiological insulin resistance?" Why does all of the epidemiological evidence show strong inverse correlations between low-fat carbohydrate consumption (like whole grains and fruits) and T2DM, but the reverse for high-fat "carbs" like cookies or pizza? The most reasonable interpretation of the data right now is that high-fat diets make you less insulin sensitive.

astura 3y ago

It's peak Reddit bro-science, it's just Reddit bro-science has leaked into HN last several years.

jamiek88 3y ago
The Overton window of weird dietary approaches shifts too. It started with ‘Atkins’ which became lo carb when he was debunked, which became paleo ‘cos that is cooler for the bro’s then this got more extreme as a carnivore only diet and some of those weirdos have moved onto only raw meat. Every internet meme gets more and more extreme.
- grecy 3y ago
  If we’re lucky the next one will be ‘No calories. Ever.’
  - shard 3y ago
    As promoted by Famine in the book 'Foodless Dieting: Slim Yourself Beautiful ("The Diet Book Of The Century!")' https://wiki.lspace.org/Famine_(Good_Omens) https://wiki.lspace.org/Famine_(Good_Omens)
  - talldatethrow 3y ago
    You might be kidding, but extended fasting, water fasting, and fasting while drinking salt/potassium water have millions of followers. I have personally tried fresh vegetable juice only for 30 days and I think it's amazing. I didn't even drink any actual water for 30 days, since I was drinking 1 gallon+ of vegetable juice a day (fresh juiced at home, not pasteurized garbage). I personally think the ideal diet would be vegetable juice plus some beef. Which is what most people would say ("hey, just eat a lot of salad and some meat sparingly"). Except it's way easier to drink 8 lbs of vegetables than it is to eat them.
    - grecy 3y ago
      I meant forever in the literal sense. Then we won't have to deal with these bro scientists anymore.
      - talldatethrow 3y ago
        I'd prefer a bro scientist to a morbidly obese person to be honest.
- EatingWithForks 3y ago
  I wish there was serious consideration that this might be a kind of manifestation of disordered eating. Being overly extreme about your diet can be a form of disordered eating, especially if it's unconnected to underlying condition like keto for epilepsy, gluten free for celiac's, etc. If you're a completely healthy man eating only raw meat, are you seriously any different from a woman who insists on eating only cabbage? I've seen people talk about how great their fasting diet is-- going days, upwards over a week without eating at a time-- and how amazing their feel not eating, etc. That basically also sounds like disordered eating.
- J_Shelby_J 3y ago
  Maybe, but cultural opinion about diets has always been shifting and multifaceted. For example, the high carb SAD being defacto is a new thing. It became the default around the same time as the agricultural revolution and mass media. Before that, there were lots of of options. During the period where mass media ruled, their was only one zeitgeist (brought to you by Kellogg’s!), but now with the internet we are back to historical norms where those with means are able to find advice free of commercial incentives and regulatory capture. For example, low carb has been around for centuries. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet#history https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-carbohydrate_diet#histor...

Helmut10001 3y ago

Are you sure? Citation from your first link > Six out of the 12 food-groups showed a significant relation with risk of T2D, three of them a decrease of risk with increasing consumption (whole grains, fruits, and dairy),

876978095789789 3y ago
> Are you sure? Citation from your first link I think you misread my post, or misread the study. Whole grains are some of the healthiest foods you can eat, especially when it comes to reducing your risk of T2DM, while the person I was replying to implied the opposite: > Thirteen studies with 29,633 T2D cases were included in the high vs. low intake meta-analysis (overall intake range: 0–302 g/day). Comparing extreme categories, a strong inverse association between T2D and whole grain intake was observed (RR: 0.77; 95% CI 0.71–0.84, I2 = 86%) (Supplementary Figure S1). Each additional daily 30 g of whole grains was inversely associated with T2D risk (RR: 0.87; 95% CI 0.82–0.93, I2 = 91%, n = 12 studies) (Supplementary Figure S2). The inverse associations and heterogeneity persisted in additional analyses stratified by sex, age, follow-up length, geographic location, number of cases, dietary assessment, and outcome assessment (Supplementary Table S14). Evidence of heterogeneity between subgroups in stratified analyses was observed for geographic location, dietary assessment method, and outcome assessment. There was significant evidence for small study effects in the high versus low meta-analysis, but not in the dose–response meta-analysis. Visual inspection of the funnel plot suggests that small studies showing positive association may be missing (Supplementary Figure S25). There was evidence of a non-linear dose–response association; the risk of T2D decreased by 25% with increasing intake of whole grains up to ~50 g/day. Small benefits for increasing intake above this value were observed (Fig. 2).
- Helmut10001 3y ago
  Ah, yes, what you say makes sense now reading your post again: So I can happily continue eating my naked oats..

throwbcuzbusy 3y ago

I don't have an HN account, because it is a poor use of my time, but I made one to counter your points (which date back decades, and have been already debunked by those more eloquent than I). 1. High-fat diets, as done in your 3rd paper and as done in most "high fat" studies, are incorrectly labeled such. "High-fat diet (HFD, n = 10: 55 % fat/25 % saturated fat/27 % carbohydrate)"[0] is not what the parent meant by "reducing sugar and carbs altogether instead of promoting whole grains as they do." A more honest interpretation would be "max 40g carbs, the rest fats and proteins." This is because the main benefits of such a diet only come out when carbohydrates are severely restricted -- as has been known for a while now. 2. Linking papers, without any sort of commentary or notion as to the reason for their inclusion, is in poor taste. In most cases this is done when the poster themselves haven't thoroughly read the articles in question. I won't go so far as to say this has been done today, but I will say it is a disrespect of our time to post lengthy papers without any sort of reasoning behind why they've been posted. 3. The first two links (technically one paper)[1][2] are statistical analyses of different food groups and their association with type 2 diabetes. The same error is done here as has been mentioned in my first point: without controlling for the whole diet, and using a very low carb, high fat/protein diet, the findings are irrelevant. Risk ratios are a notable finding, not a be-all end-all. Correlation is not causation. Continue platitudes ad infinitum and ad nauseam. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5291812/ [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5506108/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5506108/ [2] https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.31198 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ijc.31198

876978095789789 3y ago
> 1. High-fat diets, as done in your 3rd paper and as done in most "high fat" studies, are incorrectly labeled such. "High-fat diet (HFD, n = 10: 55 % fat/25 % saturated fat/27 % carbohydrate)"[0] is not what the parent meant by "reducing sugar and carbs altogether instead of promoting whole grains as they do." A more honest interpretation would be "max 40g carbs, the rest fats and proteins." This is because the main benefits of such a diet only come out when carbohydrates are severely restricted -- as has been known for a while now. Where's the evidence? I linked to a study, one that isn't confounded by weight-loss (unlike the studies you people like to cite) demonstrating that as the fat (especially saturated fat) content of the diet increased to an absurd degree (55%!), insulin sensitivity tanked. Why would insulin sensitivity, when measured by an Oral Glucose Tolerance Test, suddenly improve if you restricted carbohydrate even further? Yeah, at some point your intake will be so low that you can "game" an HbA1c or fasting BG test, but underlying insulin sensitivity will be trash (which an OGTT would show), unless maybe you lose enough bodyfat to offset it. Why do so many people on keto develop "physiological insulin resistance?" Why does all of the epidemiological evidence show strong inverse correlations between low-fat carbohydrate consumption (like whole grains and fruits) and T2DM, but the reverse for high-fat "carbs" like cookies or pizza? The most reasonable interpretation of the data right now is that high-fat diets make you less insulin sensitive.