Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

michaelpollan.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 191 posts

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#91

Post by lukevdp »

sametmax wrote: post #62
xaviers wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can generalise diets pretty easy. Eat less calories than you burn and loose weight. Eat whatever you want if you can abide by this rule you will loose the weight. But to be healthy. Well you have to eat healthy to be healthy. And that means getting all the fat, carbs and protein your body needs. And what your body needs I agree you can't generalise.

Not exactly true. For the same amount of calories, the quality of food may or may not impact your weight. You can eat 4000 calories/day in banana and loose weight, but eat 2500 in cheese burger and gain. I tested that on myself. The body does not blindnessly store excess in absorbed energy. It stores fat for many other reasons. One of them is to regulate the blood PH: if you saturate your organism with too much toxic…

Not true. Check out the Twinkie diet: https://www.google.com.au/search?q=twinkie+diet&rlz=1C9BKJA_...

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#92

Post by ENTP »

philfrasty wrote: post #84
ENTP wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure if i fully understood you correctly, but yes, I feel a lot more hungry when eatinv more carbs. A good example of this is toast: no matter how many slices i eat, i'm never full. It actually makes me just want to eat more....

„when eating more carbs...toast“ You eat the wrong kind of carbs. The kind of carbs you eat have ZERO fiber...so of course you will be hungry. Eat a bowl of oatmeal (100g) with a banana and milk, add a little cinnamon, heat on the stove or in the microwave and you are set for the next 8 hours.

I so wish that were true. I experience crashes on a regular basis when eating such food. There is no way i can go more than 4-6 hours without eating, apart from sleeping. My crashes come quick and once almost lead to a blackout. I don't experience this eating high fat/protein food.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#93

Post by sametmax »

tomp wrote: post #68
sametmax wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not exactly true. For the same amount of calories, the quality of food may or may not impact your weight. You can eat 4000 calories/day in banana and loose weight, but eat 2500 in cheese burger and gain. I tested that on myself. The body does not blindnessly store excess in absorbed energy. It stores fat for many other reasons. One of them is to regulate the blood PH: if you saturate your organism with too much toxic…

I'd like to read more about this. Are there any sources/studies/articles of these mechanisms?

Some good starting point:

- The classic "Samson Wright's Applied Physiology, Thirteenth Edition". It's very broad, but a strong base is always nice : https://www.amazon.com/Wrights-Physiology-Thirteenth-Medicin...

- How not to die. A good balanced between scientific references and averge joe explanations: https://www.amazon.com/How-Not-Die-Discover-Scientifically/d...

- The China Study. Live study on millions of people to correlate quality of food and health instead of just quantity : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study)

- "Constitution des organismes animaux et végétaux Causes des maladies qui les atteignent" is a fantastic complement but I don't know if it exists in english. Careful though, it has a controversial point of view on vaccines. Still worth it: https://www.amazon.fr/Constitution-organismes-bact%C3%A9rien...

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#94

Post by coldtea »

problems wrote: post #31

Some of the conclusions seem a little quacky here to me - like "avoid ingredients you can't pronounce" and a lot of "avoid processed anything". While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway? All our food is processed in one form or another and nothing about something being more process…

>While I'm sure there's some arguable benefits to these things, I think it's paranoid or stupid to dismiss something just for being "processed". What the heck does that mean anyway?

It mostly means, "a whole industry of greedy scum that added all kinds of useless and often harmful crap to the food it sells to make it last longer -- and increase their margins--, be more addictive --and increase their margins--, be prettier looking --and increase it's margins--, be more sugary and/or salty --and increase their margins. People that will outright lie about what they sell you all the time [1]. People that would add melamine to infant milk if it made a profit and they could get away with it [2]. People that would sponsor fake science [3].

Unfortunately a lot of people are so naive as to think that corporations are basically ethical and would never do those things, or that if something involves technology (e.g. food chemistry) it is necessarily good, even if said technology is used against them to pad profits.

[1] https://priceonomics.com/the-truffle-oil-shuffle/ ("Despite the name, most truffle oil does not contain even trace amounts of truffle; it is olive oil mixed with 2,4-dithiapentane").

[2] https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/news-blog/why-is-melami...

[3] https://arstechnica.com/science/2016/12/the-food-industry-is...

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#95

Post by Illotus »

theparanoid wrote: post #22

Gary Taubes "What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?" [1] is worth reading. Previously he wrote about bad science. [1] https://nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-bee...

Not much benefit in reading old stuff like that. Some of it has been validated, some not. Insulin as the great cause for fat gain hasn't really panned out. On the other hand now we've had some large studies that give an inkling that eating a lot of fat can be healthy for the heart and on the other hand replacing saturated fats with carbs(instead of unsaturated fats) is basically status quo.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#96

Post by raverbashing »

coldtea wrote: post #83
ENTP wrote: post #28

When I eat carbs, I put on weight. When I don't, I lose weight. However, other people I know are the opposite. Quite honestly, I think you can't generalise 'diets' or eating advice as, frankly, it would appear that different people's bodies work in slightly different ways. This could explain the vast array of different advice that, often times, seems contradictory.

> When I eat carbs, I put on weight. When I don't, I lose weight. However, other people I know are the opposite. I doubt so. If you stick to protein and vegetables with no carbs and sugars in general, you get lots of filling fiber, and fewer calories, unless they consume huge quantities of lard or bacon every day, or drink sugars (e.g. in juices or sodas), etc. So those people are doing something wrong.

> vegetables with no carbs

Unless you're eating something that's (almost) 100% cellulose, that's not correct. Most plants have carbs

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#97

Post by igravious »

dualogy wrote: post #49
sebleon wrote: post #45

"When William Prout isolated the big three macronutrients, scientists figured they now understood food and what the body needs from it; when the vitamins were isolated a few decades later, scientists thought, O.K., now we really understand food and what the body needs to be healthy; today it’s the polyphenols and carotenoids that seem all-important. But who knows what the hell else is going on deep in the soul of a c…

> today it’s the polyphenols and carotenoids that seem all-important What a joke, the only thing that's known for sure about "polyphenols" (and practically all non-vitamin "antioxidants", that was the previous hype) is that a healthy human body rapidly excretes them, as well it should. The rest is hype, speculation, and the everlasting quest for the next "superfood".. Carotenoids, okay, anything that's in egg yolks g…

Anybody who eats shark or eats any other sea creature that eats fish.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#98

Post by dualogy »

to3m wrote: post #88
dualogy wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> today it’s the polyphenols and carotenoids that seem all-important What a joke, the only thing that's known for sure about "polyphenols" (and practically all non-vitamin "antioxidants", that was the previous hype) is that a healthy human body rapidly excretes them, as well it should. The rest is hype, speculation, and the everlasting quest for the next "superfood".. Carotenoids, okay, anything that's in egg yolks g…

Carnivore meat you can eat: cat, crocodile, alligator. I'm sure there are others. Not very common in the west - if nothing else, herbivores and omnivores are easier to factory farm - but people do eat them. What about fish? Tuna, salmon, shark - they all eat meat.

My bad, I meant mostly the carnivore livers but failed to spell this out properly

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#99

Post by sametmax »

coldtea wrote: post #86
sametmax wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again I tested it on myself. I tried so many diets it's not funny: - full prot diet; - mono-diet; - fasting; - raw food diet; - veggie; - vegan; - classic 'balanced diet'; - body-building diet where you weight your chicken; - and of course the good old "student-fast-food" diet. I usually take blood samples before and after and graph my weight and IMC.

> Again I tested it on myself. It doesn't matter, it's still not true. And there are tons of ways the measuring can go wrong or be misleading.

In the bottom comment I provided links to resources dealing with food toxicity. Part of them deal with toxicity and weight.

Would you provide the resources to counter examples ? It's only fair to have literature to compare the 2 point of views.

Re: Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. (2007)

#100

Post by thomasahle »

raverbashing wrote: post #96
coldtea wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I eat carbs, I put on weight. When I don't, I lose weight. However, other people I know are the opposite. I doubt so. If you stick to protein and vegetables with no carbs and sugars in general, you get lots of filling fiber, and fewer calories, unless they consume huge quantities of lard or bacon every day, or drink sugars (e.g. in juices or sodas), etc. So those people are doing something wrong.

> vegetables with no carbs Unless you're eating something that's (almost) 100% cellulose, that's not correct. Most plants have carbs

Cellulose is a carbohydrate too.
Post reply on HN