3 ms·

I still use a food pyramid as a reference to date! Is there any particular food pyramid you’re thinking of? The idea in itself seems very reasonable to me.

by F3nd0 3y ago

ricardobeat 3y ago
Read the book “Death by food pyramid”. The pyramid you know is almost entirely wrong, carbs should not be the base, and fats should not be the tip.
- F3nd0 3y ago
  The pyramid I know? For what it's worth, the pyramid shown on the cover of the book you mention is quite different from the one I know best. The one I use goes like this, from base to tip: 1. fruits, vegetables, lentils, wholegrain bread 2. rice, oats, fish, oil, margarine, yogurt, milk, pasta 3. meat, eggs, cheese, white bread 4. sugar, candy, sausages, pastry, butter I have no doubt that it is possible to build a food pyramid wrong, but again, the idea seems entirely reasonable, so it should be possible to build one that's actually useful. What I'm curious about is if this belief is fundamentally flawed and food pyramids are just a poor way to convey nutritional advice (for a reason I'm not seeing at the moment), or if the idea itself is perfectly fine and all this criticism is being made with regard to some particular misguided pyramid (which I might not be all that familiar with, seeing as multiple variations of 'the pyramid' exist, some of which might be way better than the others).
  - ricardobeat 3y ago
    My apologies, shouldn’t have assumed. Usually when people talk about “the” food pyramid being wrong, they are referring to the USDA version from the 90s [1], with bread/rice/pasta at the base, that ended up being replicated in textbooks all around the world. Most countries have moved on since, but the effect in popular culture remains. [1] https://cdn.britannica.com/12/73412-004-8D081488/grain-products-intake-USDA-Food-Guide-Pyramid.jpg?s=1500x700&q=85 https://cdn.britannica.com/12/73412-004-8D081488/grain-produ...
hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
I'm specifically referring to this food pyramid, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/media/File%3AUSDA_Food_Pyramid.gif https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/me..., which was well-known by the US populace at large (as well as taught in schools) in the early 90s. There were subsequent US food pyramids and then a new "MyPlate" program in the US after that, but none that were as widely known/discussed as the original one. The basic problem of the original food pyramid is that the base is essentially "tons of processed carbohydrates" (flours, bread, pasta), while it says to minimize oils and fats. But I think the biggest crime of the original food pyramid, and honestly much nutrition "science", is that it was not scientifically based. There were never any studies that said, for example, that mono-unsaturated fats were bad for you (the opposite is true), but the food pyramid made broad assumptions without any actual studies to back it up. The flip-flop on dietary cholesterol is another good example. There is evidence high LDL in the blood is associated with higher rates of cardiovascular disease, but never evidence that eating cholesterol leads to higher LDL levels, except in certain genetic circumstances. For decades nutritionists told us "eggs are bad for you" based on this theory without any evidence to back it up.

I still use a food pyramid as a reference to date! Is there any particular food pyramid you’re thinking of? The idea in itself seems very reasonable to me.

by F3nd0 3y ago

I still use a food pyramid as a reference to date! Is there any particular food pyramid you’re thinking of? The idea in itself seems very reasonable to me.

ricardobeat 3y ago

Read the book “Death by food pyramid”. The pyramid you know is almost entirely wrong, carbs should not be the base, and fats should not be the tip.

F3nd0 3y ago
The pyramid I know? For what it's worth, the pyramid shown on the cover of the book you mention is quite different from the one I know best. The one I use goes like this, from base to tip: 1. fruits, vegetables, lentils, wholegrain bread 2. rice, oats, fish, oil, margarine, yogurt, milk, pasta 3. meat, eggs, cheese, white bread 4. sugar, candy, sausages, pastry, butter I have no doubt that it is possible to build a food pyramid wrong, but again, the idea seems entirely reasonable, so it should be possible to build one that's actually useful. What I'm curious about is if this belief is fundamentally flawed and food pyramids are just a poor way to convey nutritional advice (for a reason I'm not seeing at the moment), or if the idea itself is perfectly fine and all this criticism is being made with regard to some particular misguided pyramid (which I might not be all that familiar with, seeing as multiple variations of 'the pyramid' exist, some of which might be way better than the others).
- ricardobeat 3y ago
  My apologies, shouldn’t have assumed. Usually when people talk about “the” food pyramid being wrong, they are referring to the USDA version from the 90s [1], with bread/rice/pasta at the base, that ended up being replicated in textbooks all around the world. Most countries have moved on since, but the effect in popular culture remains. [1] https://cdn.britannica.com/12/73412-004-8D081488/grain-products-intake-USDA-Food-Guide-Pyramid.jpg?s=1500x700&q=85 https://cdn.britannica.com/12/73412-004-8D081488/grain-produ...

hn_throwaway_99 3y ago

I'm specifically referring to this food pyramid, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/media/File%3AUSDA_Food_Pyramid.gif https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_pyramid_(nutrition)#/me..., which was well-known by the US populace at large (as well as taught in schools) in the early 90s. There were subsequent US food pyramids and then a new "MyPlate" program in the US after that, but none that were as widely known/discussed as the original one. The basic problem of the original food pyramid is that the base is essentially "tons of processed carbohydrates" (flours, bread, pasta), while it says to minimize oils and fats. But I think the biggest crime of the original food pyramid, and honestly much nutrition "science", is that it was not scientifically based. There were never any studies that said, for example, that mono-unsaturated fats were bad for you (the opposite is true), but the food pyramid made broad assumptions without any actual studies to back it up. The flip-flop on dietary cholesterol is another good example. There is evidence high LDL in the blood is associated with higher rates of cardiovascular disease, but never evidence that eating cholesterol leads to higher LDL levels, except in certain genetic circumstances. For decades nutritionists told us "eggs are bad for you" based on this theory without any evidence to back it up.