JGL53

As Gurdur remarked, those in third world countries who are rich enough to afford to eat an Americanesque high fat, high sugar, highly processed/refined food diet many times chose to do so, with a resulting high incidence of obesity and diabetes.

Many people in the third world who are fashionably thin get that way from an utterly unintentional LACK of food, not some rational adherence to any type of diet theory. And if the Atkins type of diet is Amero/Eurocentric, then what's the problem? I live in America.

BTW, I've already discussed in a previous thread (mentioned by Godot) that the Masai in Africa, the 'Native' Alaskans, the Italians and the French 'anomaly' are good examples of non-American cultures that deal with a high fat, non-processed food, non-sugary diet quite well.


Now WHO can argue with that? Viva la France!

Nuno Figueira

Amazing. And to top it all, know that the 6 % reduction in dietary nutritionists managed to "impose" on the average joe in the past few decades resulted in a whoping 200% INCREASE in obesity rates due to the ridiculous notion that carbs are not fattening that resulted from it.



And guess what, there isn't a single shred of evidence about dietary fat making you fat, it's all about calories.

"Dietary fat is not a major determinant of body fat.

Willett WC, Leibel RL.

Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA.

The percentage of energy from fat in diets has been thought to be an important determinant of body fat, and several mechanisms have been proposed. Comparisons of diets and the prevalence of obesity between affluent and poor countries have been used to support this relationship, but these contrasts are seriously confounded by differences in physical activity and food availability. Within areas of similar economic development, regional intake of fat and prevalence of obesity have not been positively correlated. Randomized trials are the preferable method to evaluate the effect of dietary fat on adiposity and are feasible because the number of subjects needed is not large. In short-term trials, a modest reduction in body weight is typically seen in individuals randomized to diets with a lower percentage of calories from fat. However, compensatory mechanisms appear to operate, because in randomized trials lasting >or=1 year, fat consumption within the range of 18% to 40% of energy appears to have little if any effect on body fatness. The weighted mean difference was -0.25 kg overall and +1.8 kg (i.e., less weight loss on the low-fat diets) for trials with a control group that received a comparable intensity intervention. Moreover, within the United States, a substantial decline in the percentage of energy from fat during the last 2 decades has corresponded with a massive increase in the prevalence of obesity. Diets high in fat do not appear to be the primary cause of the high prevalence of excess body fat in our society, and reductions in fat will not be a solution."

Your statement about the 80 % of the population being on a low fat diet is amazing. Do you have any evidence or is it just something from the top of your head??


If you want to see truly lean people go see the australian aborigenes, the jivaros or other populations that have up to 65% of their calories from animal sources. Then come and talk to me again.

Gurdur

Damn, I missed that thread. I'll go back and look at it. Interestingly, the Masai are an anomaly in another aspect; unlike almost all the surrounding tribes, the Masai do not regard obesity as a mark of staus/power. They have nothing against obesity, they simply don't value it.
I've never seen an obese Masai, though I suppose with changing times and diets that probably has also changed.
However, I've seen tons of obese people from surrounding tribes.
The Masai moran (young warriors) used to live off pure blood and milk diets for long periods, as I assume you're hinting at.
Seemed to work for them very well.
By the way, the Norse used to eat almost pure flesh diets too.

Also, Farley Mowatt, the writer, has some good information on Native Alaskan (actually Labrador) dietry habits and adaptions, as well as the encroachment of tuberculosis, vitamin deficiencies and diabetes when the Inuit were forced by the government "aid" onto a very inappropriate Western diet, or Western idea of what (enforced) beggers should eat.

Darren S.

There are no studies suggesting that low carbing is safe over the long term. There is a study which suggests that 6 months of low carbing won't hurt your cardiovascular system, but thats it.

On the other hand, a very low fat, high carb diet, in combination with exercise and yoga, has a proven ability to reverse already existing coronary artery disease.

JGL53

You are referring to Dean Ornish's regimen, I presume.

Well, one of the things that most people require of a diet is that it be palatable, at least in the long term. Do you really consider a ten per cent fat diet palatable?

Most Americans would rather die now than try to subsist on a diet of steamed veggies, bread, fruit, tofu and steamed skinless chicken breasts. Such a diet seems to me almost - what's the word I'm looking for here, Free Thinkr? - oh, yeah, MASOCHISTIC.

- But to each his own - if you dig very low fat, Darren, chow down. But to paraphrase The Brothers Johnson, "Get the Tofu Out My Face!".

Nuno Figueira

No but there's quite a lot of anedoctal eivdence from many that have been on it for a long time and had no problems.

And of course there's all the hunther gatherer populations on a low grain/moderate carb diet that show much better health indicators than most western population.

High carb diets also increase risk of diabetes.

JGL53

We don't want to hurt anyone's feelings here, NF. Better change that to a more qualified "Some types of high carb diets increase the risk of diabetes".

Claudia

Even if the number of obese people in France is increasing due to more "American like" eating habits, we still have a far lower rate of obesity than US. But there are several differences in the standard eating habits:
-We eat more often with family, everybody seated at the same.
-Our biggest meal is at noon.
-We eat less candies and sweet food (even if we have wonderful pastries)
-We drink a lot less cola and sweet drinks, especially at meals
-Food is more often home processed.
-We do not eat so much fried food (fired chicken is not a French reciepe), even if we do eat some.
-We eat a lot of fruits and vegetables (raw or cooked) but we still eat a lot of starch charged vegetables (potatoes, pastas, rice, beans,...)
-School restaurants offer full meals, and not MacDonalds-like hamburgers or candy bars.

For example, at home, the base of evening winter meal (for approximately half of them) is home made vegetables soup. And I usually drop candies packs in the trash bin several years after they have reached their limit date, when I retrieve them in the back of the cupboard (kids forget to eat them!)

So our diet is not low carbs. It is low processed sugars, which is quite different.

Nuno Figueira

Portuguese on the hand, are getting fatter and fatter.....

nermal

Huh? You're saying the average joe is eating less now than before? No, seriously. Look at what the average joe considers a serving size today--32 oz. coke, 12 oz. mashed potatoes, 12 oz steak. Been to a restaurant that serves a proper serving size any time in the past 20 years? None do, because they'll go out of business. The meals at most chain restaurants are a daily portion--in one meal! And people don't only eat like that at restaurants.

It's a nice round number pulled from a general study of cultural trends. There aren't many hunting societies left, there isn't enough game to support them. The asian diet is based on rice, a starch. The African diet is based on yams and other starches. The South/Central American diet is based on rice and beans. The Indian diet includes many things, but is starch based. There is some meat in most of these diets, but very little comparatively. The point is not that meat is bad, but that carbs are not bad either. But that's not what Americans in particular want to hear. They want to hear that they can eat a 16 oz steak, cheese, chicken, bacon, eggs, etc., not worry about portion size, and loose weight because a certain type of food is "bad."

Sure, and you're not likely to find fat Laplanders either. 65% of their calories is what? 900? They walk how many miles a day? They occasionally go how many days without food? Show me an Aborigine that eats 65% of his calories from animal sources, lives in a city, watches 3 hours of tv a day, works at a desk, and I'm betting you'll be showing me a fat Aborigine. It's certainly true of the Aborigines here in the states.

Bottom line: We're too sedentary, we eat too many calories period. There's no "bad" food that makes you fat. Eliminate all protien from your diet, you'll lose weight. Eliminate all carbs from your diet, you'll lose weight. Doesn't mean it's good for you.

Ed