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

USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

unsettledscience.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 296 posts

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#211

Post by malfist »

goodpoint wrote: post #169
thelittleone wrote: post #32

Even without the science... for me personally at 47 and a life long sugar addict (used to eat tablespoons of white sugar from pantry), a low carb (keto) diet has been a complete game changer. I kept my weight in check by doing 6 days of exercise a week, but I was on an energetic roller coaster. 3 months in, no sugar, no cravings (I crave oils sometimes) and damn I just feel well in a way I haven't for long before I c…

> eat tablespoons of white sugar from pantry), a low carb (keto) diet You jumped from an extreme diet to the opposite. Some societies (mostly US) have a very unhealthy sugar addiction and it should be avoided. Equally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet is meant to ameliorate epilepsy and it's not a safe diet to be adopted without medical supervision or without a real need. It had been turned into an intern…

100% agree with you. If you listen to what food scientists are actually saying, they're almost always espousing fractional improvements with small tweaks to diets and the media runs with "You should stop eating X because Y" or "You should only eat Z" stories.

Any dietitian will tell you, the key to a healthy diet is moderation and variety.

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#213

Post by itsoktocry »

thelittleone wrote: post #32

Even without the science... for me personally at 47 and a life long sugar addict (used to eat tablespoons of white sugar from pantry), a low carb (keto) diet has been a complete game changer. I kept my weight in check by doing 6 days of exercise a week, but I was on an energetic roller coaster. 3 months in, no sugar, no cravings (I crave oils sometimes) and damn I just feel well in a way I haven't for long before I c…

>Even without the science... for me personally at 47 and a life long sugar addict

This is the tricky thing with a lot of health science., mainly diets or supplementation. In a random sample, and in aggregate, a lot of these things have little to no effect on the population studied, so we dismiss them. And yet, on an individual level people claim huge benefits. I fall into that latter group for some things myself.

Our biology is complex. How do we reconcile this? Doctors don't want to be recommending snake-oil, and yet it's possible some of these things could work for "you".

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#214

Post by speeder »

slowhand09 wrote: post #203

The unspoken truth here... The USDA doesn't represent the consumer. The USDA represents the agriculture industry. Source: I worked on contract there for a couple of years.

This issue is really, really old. Well, the bible starts with it!

Hebrews had a predominantly meat-eating culture, where at first, roaming semi-nomadic herds dominated, and later ranching was important. Of course this also means their diet was skewed toward proteins.

The second "human" action in the bible (ie: not something God did), was when the first farmer, murdered the first rancher out of jealously.

A lot of people remember "Cain and Abel" and whatnot and forget that detail, that is very important, in fact it was the reason for the murder (Cain was upset sacrifice of meat was accepted and vegetables weren't).

The two cultures generate a lot of other political conflicts we have now.

For example: when you are a rancher, if someone breaks into your property, that someone can literally walk off with your food before police arrives. Thus they are pro private guns. While if you are a vegetable farmer the way to 'steal' from someone is taking their land, thus they aren't afraid of small individuals, they are afraid of corporations and countries, thus they favor the government having the guns, to be able to retake territory if needed.

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#215

Post by itsoktocry »

malfist wrote: post #211
goodpoint wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> eat tablespoons of white sugar from pantry), a low carb (keto) diet You jumped from an extreme diet to the opposite. Some societies (mostly US) have a very unhealthy sugar addiction and it should be avoided. Equally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet is meant to ameliorate epilepsy and it's not a safe diet to be adopted without medical supervision or without a real need. It had been turned into an intern…

100% agree with you. If you listen to what food scientists are actually saying, they're almost always espousing fractional improvements with small tweaks to diets and the media runs with "You should stop eating X because Y" or "You should only eat Z" stories. Any dietitian will tell you, the key to a healthy diet is moderation and variety.

>If you listen to what food scientists are actually saying

"The science" again.

Food scientists say all kinds of things, including promoting vegetarian or ketogenic diets. Which ones are the true scientists here?

>Any dietitian will tell you, the key to a healthy diet is moderation and variety.

What does "moderation" and "variety" mean in scientific terms? Global nutritional availability varies drastically across the globe, and I'm not just talking about poor versus rich countries.

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#216

Post by nradov »

goodpoint wrote: post #175
xkbarkar wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. When it comes to your eating habits listen to your body and ignore well meant but oftesn outright dangerous comments like this. Especially from anyone that has a “miracle” cure just for you. I have never eaten breakfast, always hated eating before lunch. Having had this exact comment thrown in my face for 30 years. Turns out ignoring everything and doing whatever fit me was not only healthy but has strong…

No, this is a false dichotomy: "listen to your body" VS "follow fad diets from random strangers". Both options are dangerous. There's a third option: actual nutritional science.

Most nutritional science is basically junk. Mostly observational studies with multiple uncontrolled confounding factors, especially the healthy subject effect.

A better approach is to conduct your own informal n=1 experiments. Try different diets or eliminating certain foods. Keep records of your athletic performance and of how you feel to find what works best for you.

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#217

Post by [deleted] »

recyclelater wrote: post #202
akakacase wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dr. Kempner would disagree with that conclusion if he were alive: https://www.drmcdougall.com/newsletters/walter-kempner-md-fo...

So what? So does my diabetic aunt who has had half her intestines removed because she can’t respect her dietary needs. Doesn’t make it true.

[deleted]

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#218

Post by tpush »

bpizzi wrote: post #207
tpush wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the diet is high in (processed) red meat: higher cancer risk. If the diet is (too) high in saturated fat, increased cardio vascular risk.

> If the diet is (too) high in saturated fat, increased cardio vascular risk. You may want to take a look at this meta-study [0]. > “A meta-analysis of prospective epidemiologic studies showed that there is no significant evidence for concluding that dietary saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of CHD or CVD.” [0] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20071648/

The authors of that meta-analysis adjusted for serum cholesterol, which defeats the entire point. Saturated fat intake above a certain threshold is associated with CVD because it causes an uptake in serum cholesterol, eventually leading to atherosclerosis.

Saying saturated fat intake doesn't correlate with CVD when ignoring serum cholesterol is entirely uninteresting, and not what anyone's claiming.

See also this[0] comment on that flawed meta-analysis.

[0] https://academic.oup.com/ajcn/article/92/2/458/4597393

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#219

Post by itsoktocry »

goodpoint wrote: post #169
thelittleone wrote: post #32

Even without the science... for me personally at 47 and a life long sugar addict (used to eat tablespoons of white sugar from pantry), a low carb (keto) diet has been a complete game changer. I kept my weight in check by doing 6 days of exercise a week, but I was on an energetic roller coaster. 3 months in, no sugar, no cravings (I crave oils sometimes) and damn I just feel well in a way I haven't for long before I c…

> eat tablespoons of white sugar from pantry), a low carb (keto) diet You jumped from an extreme diet to the opposite. Some societies (mostly US) have a very unhealthy sugar addiction and it should be avoided. Equally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet is meant to ameliorate epilepsy and it's not a safe diet to be adopted without medical supervision or without a real need. It had been turned into an intern…

>Equally, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketogenic_diet is meant to ameliorate epilepsy and it's not a safe diet to be adopted without medical supervision or without a real need.

So a ketogenic diet can affect a human body as drastically as controlling a specific debilitating disease, but has no other benefits (or, of course costs)? I find those sorts of claims really hard to believe.

Re: USDA ignoring the science on low-carb diets

#220

Post by drycobbler »

joobus wrote: post #199
jasonhansel wrote: post #181

A reminder to those who demonize carbs: as Stephan Guyenet points out, restricting your consumption of any category of food--whether you're avoiding carbs, or fat, or meat, or plants--will reliably cause weight loss by removing some highly rewarding/palatable foods from your diet. So we shouldn't be surprised that both low-carb and vegetarian diets can produce weight loss, and that many people have had success with e…

You're missing a very key point of this work: > Carbohydrate restriction is currently the only whole-foods approach that can reverse a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. Carbohydrates break down to glucose in the bloodstream, the same as pure sugar. For a large and growing number of people, low-carb diets are not simply a means of weight loss.

No post body was provided.
Post reply on HN