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

Eat Real Food

realfood.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

711–720 of 1001 posts

Re: Eat Real Food

#711

Post by WA »

overgard wrote: post #87
criddell wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the zeitgeist is starting to turn on the high-protein diet recommendations: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/11/looking-to-bu... There was a story about this in the NYT recently (can't find it) and IIRC, it basically said protein is out and fiber is in. It wasn't that simple, but that was my takeaway.

Honestly, you can find studies to prove just about anything when it comes to nutrition. Too much money involved. Sometimes you have to use common sense or try different diets to see how your body reacts. I find "high fiber" and "low protein" to be a suspicious suggestion though. Protein generally has a small insulin response, your body actually needs protein, and if things like the "protein leverage hypothesis" are c…

Too much protein is bad for your kidneys.

Re: Eat Real Food

#712

Post by spiderfarmer »

deathanatos wrote: post #710

… eggs are $6.50/dz at my local grocer, this week. Hand-printed sign on the door apologizing for the shortage. Tyson bought a more local company, and the prices of the product I had bought from the local producer went up like 50%. We bought a soft drink for holiday game watching — Dr. Pepper with berries or something — and despite a shrink-flated can, it had something like 71% DV of sugar in it. That seemed excessive…

Move to Europe.

Re: Eat Real Food

#713

Post by telmo »

stef25 wrote: post #692
kristopolous wrote: post #581

Tyson foods and other meatpacking companies lobbied and funded RFK... Here's industry reports https://www.nationalbeefwire.com/doctors-group-applauds-comm... https://www.wattagnet.com/business-markets/policy-legislatio... And straight up lobbying groups https://www.nationalchickencouncil.org/new-dietary-guideline... https://www.meatinstitute.org/press/recommend-prioritizing-p... Lobbying groups, putting out press rel…

It's crazy how people are incapable of seeing something positive in the actions of the tribe they don't belong to.

If the actions and beliefs of a group are fundamentally morally repugnant to me, I think that it is reasonable to not expect me to be able to find "something positive" in it. We are not amoral automata with grocery-list style utility functions.

I have people in my personal sphere that make this sort of argument and it honestly feels like gaslighting. The undercurrent is: "Look, you don't like this guy, I get it. But if you can't see that he does some good, then you are the one who is irrational and not really in a sound state of mind." Meanwhile completely preventable, life-threatening, life-destroying diseases such as measles are back because of the obscurantist beliefs that come with this "new refreshing outlook". This is a bit like saying: "look, you can say what you want about the Spanish inquisition but they kept rates of extra-marital affairs down."

Corporations love this sort of feel-good campaign (the same way they love performative LGBTQ / feminism / diversity when the culture wars swing the other way) for two main reasons: (1) they distract from fundamental issues that threaten their real interests; (2) they shift the blame on big societal issues completely to the public. They do this with climate change, they do it with increase of wealth inequality and they most certainly do it with public health.

All developed nations have a problem with processed food. Granted, it is particularly severe in the USA, but the ONE THING that separates the USA from almost every other developed nation in our planet is the absence of socialized healthcare. This is the obvious salient thing to look at before all others, so also obviously, a lot of money will be spent to misdirect and distract from this very topic.

Re: Eat Real Food

#714

Post by Cthulhu_ »

woodruffw wrote: post #236

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…

At least the page mentions alternatives - plenty of other sources of protein, like dairy, eggs, legumes, etc.

Re: Eat Real Food

#715

Post by WA »

overgard wrote: post #38
galoisscobi wrote: post #9

Ironic that a steak is one of the three things showing up on the landing page. Is that the beef lobby money coming in? I enjoy an occasional steak but if the goal is to improve diet of masses, it’s not the food I’d put at the center.

High protein, nutrient dense. Definitely want to get grass-fed or pasture raised though. Shouldn't eat it all the time because it has a high calorie content, but steak isn't bad. They're probably showing a steak to indicate that eating meat is good, not just steak in general. Keto and carnivore diets have been shown to be pretty good for people with inflammatory conditions.

> Keto and carnivore diets have been shown to be pretty good for people with inflammatory conditions

No. The scientific evidence of a carnivore diet reducing inflammation is pretty weak. The scientific evidence of a vegan diet reducing inflammation is way stronger.

Re: Eat Real Food

#716

Post by meeq »

sallveburrpi wrote: post #338
overgard wrote: post #25

I'm pleasantly surprised, this is actually really good. The reason I'm surprised is because of how corrupt the creation of the previous food pyramid was (the sugar industry likely paid to downplay the danger of sugar[1]) I find when it comes to health advice, generally government sources can't be trusted because there's too much special interests and money involved. You really have to do your own research. [1] https:…

The biggest issue with sugar is that it makes stuff taste better which leads to overeating. Incidentally it’s also the only downside of glutamate, it just makes stuff taste so good you’ll eat much more than your appetite would guide you to

It‘s not just the better taste that causes the overeating. Sugar and refined carbs cause blood glucose levels to spike, giving you a surge of energy. That spike is very short-lived, resulting in a sharp drop that then causes cravings for more refined carbs/sugar. This blood glucose rollercoaster can cause all kinds of bad effects like mood swings and brain fog. The problem about refined carbs is that they never truly satiate your hunger. Once you add them to a meal, you get into the loop of chasing the glucose high which is horrible for your body and mind.

Re: Eat Real Food

#718

Post by zkmon »

So, humans lost all of their evolutionary learnings and confused about what to eat. This doesn't happen with any other animal. And humans call themselves as an advanced race of animals. Not knowing what to eat is regress, not progress.

Things went well as long as mind was a servant of the body. Then it became the master and dictator of body. The mind started posing itself as a scientist and started questioning everything that were well-tested over centuries. It came up weird things such proteins, vitamins etc, but it forgot that what mattered was the big picture.

Body suffered silently as it lost it's most critical servant whom it trained over millennia.

It was enough to know that water flows down the slope, apple falls to ground, Sun goes around the Earth and life follows a rythm of seasons. Human life never needed Kepler's laws, relativity, quantum physics, computers, cars or sugar.

It's not too late. Listen to your instincts and body signals. Live on a farm (farm means crops and gardens, not just animals). Eat like your ancestors did. Eat less, eat varied food, more of greens and grains, mostly raw with a bit of cooking or heating.

Re: Eat Real Food

#719

Post by ruszki »

overgard wrote: post #25

I'm pleasantly surprised, this is actually really good. The reason I'm surprised is because of how corrupt the creation of the previous food pyramid was (the sugar industry likely paid to downplay the danger of sugar[1]) I find when it comes to health advice, generally government sources can't be trusted because there's too much special interests and money involved. You really have to do your own research. [1] https:…

Have you just called a 50 years old food pyramid as previous? This guideline has been released every 5 years.

Re: Eat Real Food

#720

Post by PaulRobinson »

uoaei wrote: post #421
woodruffw wrote: post #236

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…

Wouldn't it be more likely that it's calories, not meat per se, that is the main proxy for measuring our health decline?

There is a lot of research that shows the type of calorie you consume determines to some extent the next calorie you want to consume. You are more likely to be "sated" (i.e. not want to eat more calories), if you eat protein than you are ultra-processed carbohydrates, low calorie soda will leave your body yearning sugar, and so on.

When you couple this with the motivations of industrial food companies (some of whom are now owned by tobacco companies), and the research they do into the neuroscience effects of flavour, texture, even packaging of food, you'll start to spot that a push to "Real Food", and for that food to be less processed and more inclined towards protein, is more likely to result in overall calorie reduction.

One of the things that isn't cutting through on this program is saying "eat protein" is assumed to mean "eat meat", which some assume means you can eat burgers. Nope. Healthy protein is not red meat that has been fried - that's going to take a bit more education, I expect.

Post reply on HN