Live data from Hacker News

Eat Real Food

realfood.gov

431–440 of 1001 posts

Re: Eat Real Food

#431

Speaking from personal experience, this is consistent with multiple doctors over the years recommending high-protein, low carb diets. (Clarification: low does not mean no carb.) I don't understand people freaking out over this - outside of a purely political reflex - hell hath no fury like taking away nerds' Mountain Dew and Flamin' Hot Cheetos. Nor do I understand the negative reactions to new restrictions on SNAP -…

The mythical "doctors" recommending high protein.. Yeah okay bud.

Re: Eat Real Food

#432
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pure partisan spite. The gov't not spending money on candy and sugary drinks is good. Just like when Michelle Obama pushed for better school lunches.

One of the best litmus tests for Democrat or Republican I have found is "Should people on food stamps be able to buy mountain dew / candy / etc with them?", very low false positive rate in either direction. But regardless I have it on very good authority that with the BBB some within the Republican party wanted to limit EBT to only be able to purchase healthy food. No soda, no candy, no chips, etc. A couple calls fro…

People should be able to get cash transfers to buy goods on the general market. There shouldn't be food stamps.

The success of SNAP comes despite its inherent inefficiency, friction, and the indignity of its limitations. We structure the program the way we do in order to mollify voters who twitch at the idea of the poor ever enjoying anything.

Inequality isn't just about healthcare costs, biological metrics, etc. It is also deeply corrosive socially and psychologically, and this side of things is systemically underappreciated in policy circles.

To be sure, our food and diets are bad. Americans broadly should eat healthier. But are society's interests really better served by insisting that a poor child not be allowed to have a cake and blow out the candles on his birthday, the way all of his friends do?

Re: Eat Real Food

#433

For all the lunacy of RFK this somehow is actually a really good set of guidelines? Certainly better than the previous version. I didn't expect that to be honest.

I’m pinning the blame for the frustrating animate-while-you-scroll design squarely on RFK.

Re: Eat Real Food

#434
post #324

I don't think it's even about low carb vs. high protein to begin with. Many countries and regions in the world are fine with a high-carb diet, and people there live long, healthy lives. Americans eat so much processed food simply because it is much cheaper than fresh food. Processed food is made to get consumers addicted (through convenience, taste, etc.) and encourage them to consume much more. Fresh food is almost…

> Americans eat so much processed food simply because it is much cheaper than fresh food.

I don't understand how people come to this conclusion

Beans/grains/legumes are cheap

Frozen veg is dirt cheap (and retains its nutrition as good as, or better than fresh). In-season fruit and veg

Which foods are more expensive?

People are door-dashing their salaries away and complaining about the price of fresh food...

Convenience and addiction makes more sense, certainly not price

Re: Eat Real Food

#435

Unfortunately there seems to be no good aligned definition of what (highly) processed food is. 1,2 Whole grain bread or infant formula can be “highly processed” despite very healthy. In the end someone else cooks for you and packages it. They can cook healthy or not or in between, add a lot of salt or little, .. as always it’s more complex. 1: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41430-022-01099-1 2 https://www.cambridge…

They can also be a machine that might add a non-negligible amount of mineral oils and possibly other stuff to your food. The guideline to use should be that the ingredient list should be as short as possible. If it has more than 5 ingredients, that's already incredibly suspicious in my opinion. The problem is that some stuff (like a mineral oil contamination) doesn't even have to be declared on the ingredient list.

For example, normal simple bread should only have 4 or maybe 5 ingredients.

Re: Eat Real Food

#436

Of note: the US's per capita consumption of meat has increased by more than 100 pounds over the last century[1]. We now consume an immense amount of meat per person in this country. That increase is disproportionately in poultry, but we also consume more beef[2]. A demand for the average American to eat more meat would have to explain, as a baseline, why our already positive trend in meat consumption isn't yielding p…

I'm a weightlifter and as part of my training, I eat pretty close to about a pound of meat a day during bulk, usually about 12-14oz. This is because I need to eat about 200g of protein a day. I supplement it with protein shakes. I find that to be a challenging amount of meat. It's a lot! And to find out that's average ??? Americans eat way too much meat. Cheese, too.

The thing is though you’ll be eating (I presume) mostly lean meat. Chicken breast, white fish etc.

When you compare the macros of that to sausages or ribs or even steak it’s quite drastically different.

Also I’d guess you aren’t covering your meat in thick sugary sauce every time…

Re: Eat Real Food

#437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the US's per capita consumption of meat That number seemed unreal to me, so I looked it up. I think it represents the total pre-processing weight, not the actual meat meat consumption. From Wikipedia: > As an example of the difference, for 2002, when the FAO figure for US per capita meat consumption was 124.48 kg (274 lb 7 oz), the USDA estimate of US per capita loss-adjusted meat consumption was 62.6 kg (138 lb) P…

Interestingly, ~12% of humans in the US are responsible for ~50% of beef consumption. > The US is the biggest consumer of beef in the world, but, according to new research, it’s actually a small percentage of people who are doing most of the eating. A recent study shows that on any given day, just 12% of people in the US account for half of all beef consumed in the US. > Men and people between the ages of 50 and 65 w…

[flagged]

Re: Eat Real Food

#438
> Protein target: 1.2–1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight per day.

Since this is an official US government website, are we now officially using metric?

Re: Eat Real Food

#439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a weightlifter and as part of my training, I eat pretty close to about a pound of meat a day during bulk, usually about 12-14oz. This is because I need to eat about 200g of protein a day. I supplement it with protein shakes. I find that to be a challenging amount of meat. It's a lot! And to find out that's average ??? Americans eat way too much meat. Cheese, too.

Would be important to see how that number is being computed? If it is the amount of meat sold divided by number of people it may be misleading since there is a fair amount of wastage particularly in places like schools etc with kids filling plates that are never consumed.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. There is even more trimming that goes on as well. Chefs trim what's ordered, tallow may be rendered for non-consumptive reasons, and so on. Like a poster above, as an athlete I eat more meat than most people, and I don't seem to eat those numbers... I feel like we are missing some data points.

Re: Eat Real Food

#440

Speaking from personal experience, this is consistent with multiple doctors over the years recommending high-protein, low carb diets. (Clarification: low does not mean no carb.) I don't understand people freaking out over this - outside of a purely political reflex - hell hath no fury like taking away nerds' Mountain Dew and Flamin' Hot Cheetos. Nor do I understand the negative reactions to new restrictions on SNAP -…

Nutrition science has come up with acceptable macronutrient distribution ranges (AMDR). The recommendation for adults is 45-65% of total calories from carbohydrates, 20-35% from fat, and 10-35% from protein. That is definitely not low carb.

The sources of those macronutrients also matter. The ideal range for saturated fat is 5-10% of total calories. Meat consumption, especially red meat, is associated with higher risk of colorectal cancer. Dairy consumption is associated with higher risk of prostate cancer.

I haven't read the new guidelines in detail but if they're recommending red meat and whole milk as primary foods, then they are not consistent with the research on cancer and cardiovascular disease risk and I doubt that people following them would meet the AMDRs or ideal saturated fat intake.

Post reply on HN