[csu87]

Originally Posted by antych

WTF, did you live under a rock? Do you know how dietary guidelines are established and their effect on government policy and food industry? Ever heard of diet heart hypothesis? That's how they are responsible. They changed what we eat decades ago.

Blaming the "patient" is exactly what food industry and incompetent health "professionals" do. Give people bad diet advice, then blame them for being fat because they don't exercise more.

So current dietitians and doctors are to blame for something done decades ago?

Maybe you are confusing nutritionists and unlicensed "Dietitians" with licensed professionals. The former, I could claim to be a nutritionist with no training or certification, the latter, i could not. Unfortunately, the former are the ones who end up creating these "diets" and giving the advice, while the latter try and fix the issues made by the former.

Hell, the very 1st google result for ketogenic diet is an article written by the former. An unlicensed "Nutritionist" who has a worthless certification. At least he does have a degree in sports and nutrition science... As for the certification though, heres the requirements.

Mandatory Requirements

Current paying member of ISSN.
Must have the CISSN or SNS certification. (Note: exceptions will be made for active ISSN members who have advanced degrees). (Note: ANYONE can take this test)
Have attended one of the ISSN National Conferences in the past 3 years.

But go on, Id love to hear more.

[Merlin_83]

I did a version of the Keto type diet with Ideal Protein, it was through my doctor....wow! It was and still has been a super effective way (for me) to lose weight, or in my case get back down to where I should be.

I did Ideal Protein for 3 months, lost 26 lbs. - food was awesome ! And super easy to do. I was at 233 lbs. - then lost 26 lbs. That was about 3 months ago, been able to maintain at or around 210/212 lbs.

I plan on going back on to really slim down - ideally want to be at 205. I will say, it was NOT cheap to do. The food is $30 each box of whatever, and was $400 to 'start-up' -- anyway was overall really good program.

Cheers,
Merlin

[antych]

Originally Posted by csu87

Ill leave it at Ketogenic works for some, but not everyone. You can choose to disagree all you want and call the science that doesnt follow your agenda as BS, but that doesnt mean it isnt accurate.

Eating Natural Food has nothing to do with a Ketogenic Diet either. Any diet plan you want to go on that is all natural and uses portion control is going to help you lose weight and be overall healthier.

And FYI, several of my wife's teachers while getting her Masters were Ketogenic Dieters, as well as a number of the DRs she works with. But youre right, the "crooked" science they teach is all BS...

Of course the studies aren't accurate, because they conflict with each other. If someone says low fat high carb is best and someone says the opposite, they can't be both right. This field is full of special interest, studies sponsored by food industry and people pushing their agendas. Yes, it's crooked.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by antych

Of course the studies aren't accurate, because they conflict with each other. If someone says low fat high carb is best and someone says the opposite, they can't be both right. This field is full of special interest, studies sponsored by food industry and people pushing their agendas. Yes, it's crooked.

you dont understand, its ok.

[antych]

Originally Posted by csu87

So current dietitians and doctors are to blame for something done decades ago?

I didn't say that. I would only blame current doctors for perpetuating false information that has already been debunked. That's unprofessional and damaging.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by antych

I didn't say that. I would only blame current doctors for perpetuating false information that has already been debunked. That's unprofessional and damaging.

maybe the UK has issues with this. Dont see much of it around here. Colorado is the Health Capital of the US with every fad diet being popular around here.

[JohnnyCanuck]

Originally Posted by antych

WTF, did you live under a rock? Do you know how dietary guidelines are established and their effect on government policy and food industry? Ever heard of diet heart hypothesis? That's how they are responsible. They changed what we eat decades ago.

Blaming the "patient" is exactly what food industry and incompetent health "professionals" do. Give people bad diet advice, then blame them for being fat because they don't exercise more.

And you completely discount personal accountability. How exactly is a medical professional supposed to fix socioeconomic issues, cultural imperatives, and environmental factors? These are all contributors to obesity (and other health issues).

Simply put, if someone is committed to being healthy, health professionals have all the tools necessary to assist them (and csu's point about dietician vs nutritionist is completely valid). If they don't however, there's nothing that the medical profession can really do. The addiction analogy is entirely appropriate in that context.

Is the food industry deplorable? Pretty much ... you get no argument from me. But that doesn't make them responsible for parents completely abdicating their responsibility to help their children grow up healthy and that doesn't give obese adults a pass for not taking ownership of their situation.

I know SFA about the ketogenic diet and am not passing judgement. It may be entirely effective, but only if the individual is committed to being healthy. That's true of any other published diet. However, it is also true that many of these diets are no healthier for people than "The Biggest Loser" is. I don't know (or care) which group the ketogenic diet falls into. I'm healthy and lean because I eat relatively well, don't drink to excess, don't smoke, and am somewhat active. Guess what? I know that doesn't work for everyone because obesity is a complex psychological and physical issue. IF someone's obesity is rooted in psychological overlay, there is no diet that's going to help and guess what ... the "junk science" professional who can treat the underlying cause is the right answer when the patient is committed to their own good health.

[antych]

Originally Posted by JohnnyCanuck

And you completely discount personal accountability. How exactly is a medical professional supposed to fix socioeconomic issues, cultural imperatives, and environmental factors? These are all contributors to obesity (and other health issues).

Simply put, if someone is committed to being healthy, health professionals have all the tools necessary to assist them (and csu's point about dietician vs nutritionist is completely valid). If they don't however, there's nothing that the medical profession can really do. The addiction analogy is entirely appropriate in that context.

I'm more interested in root cause, than trying to help individuals who aren't interested in following health advice. The obesity epidemic is something that affects entire populations. It didn't happen because suddenly millions of people decided they don't care about their health. The most probably cause is decades of pushing low fat high carb diets as result of flawed diet heart hypothesis which has been later debunked. It became government policy and food industry was more than happy to oblige feeding us frankenfood stuffed with sugar. It's slowly changing now, but most people are still given bad advice. Your blood results are bad? Eat less fat. Ohh they are still bad, here are some statins for you to take for the rest of your life... Yes, it's medical professionals that got us into this mess in the first place, and most of them are still making us sick by their ignorance.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by antych

I'm more interested in root cause, than trying to help individuals who aren't interested in following health advice. The obesity epidemic is something that affects entire populations. It didn't happen because suddenly millions of people decided they don't care about their health. The most probably cause is decades of pushing low fat high carb diets as result of flawed diet heart hypothesis which has been later debunked. It became government policy and food industry was more than happy to oblige feeding us frankenfood stuffed with sugar. It's slowly changing now, but most people are still given bad advice. Your blood results are bad? Eat less fat. Ohh they are still bad, here are some statins for you to take for the rest of your life... Yes, it's medical professionals that got us into this mess in the first place, and most of them are still making us sick by their ignorance.

the bigger epidemic is less activity and more eating of unhealthy foods. Has nothing to do with the medical profession and this "Agenda" you think they are pushing. It is pretty easy to not get fat. Its easy to not eat a ton of crappy foods and drink crappy drinks. Its easy to exercise regularly. Just have to want to not be lazy. The lazy persons excuse for being fat is to blame someone else.

It is a proven fact that people are less active now, then they have been in the past, and unhealthy foods are easier/cheaper than healthy foods.

[antych]

Originally Posted by csu87

the bigger epidemic is less activity and more eating of unhealthy foods. Has nothing to do with the medical profession and this "Agenda" you think they are pushing. It is pretty easy to not get fat. Its easy to not eat a ton of crappy foods and drink crappy drinks. Its easy to exercise regularly. Just have to want to not be lazy. The lazy persons excuse for being fat is to blame someone else.

It is a proven fact that people are less active now, then they have been in the past, and unhealthy foods are easier/cheaper than healthy foods.

You have no idea what you're talking about and just wasting my time. Exercise is proven to be completely ineffective in controlling weight gain (population studies, not individuals). And if it was easy to not get fat, then people wouldn't get fat, ffs. If anything, people are more obsessed with dieting and exercise than they ever were.

I used to say the same before I looked at the evidence. I worked out all my life and thought fat people are just lazy. So I don't blame you for being misinformed and ignorant, it happens to the best of us. And here lies the problem, most people are like you and your wife, sadly many of them practice medicine and make things worse.

[Frozen]

Originally Posted by csu87

the bigger epidemic is less activity and more eating of unhealthy foods. Has nothing to do with the medical profession and this "Agenda" you think they are pushing. It is pretty easy to not get fat. Its easy to not eat a ton of crappy foods and drink crappy drinks. Its easy to exercise regularly. Just have to want to not be lazy. The lazy persons excuse for being fat is to blame someone else.

It is a proven fact that people are less active now, then they have been in the past, and unhealthy foods are easier/cheaper than healthy foods.

You're wrong.

How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat

The sugar industry paid scientists in the 1960s to play down the link between sugar and heart disease and promote saturated fat as the culprit instead, newly released historical documents show.

The internal sugar industry documents, recently discovered by a researcher at the University of California, San Francisco, and published Monday in JAMA Internal Medicine, suggest that five decades of research into the role of nutrition and heart disease, including many of today’s dietary recommendations, may have been largely shaped by the sugar industry.

“They were able to derail the discussion about sugar for decades,” said Stanton Glantz, a professor of medicine at U.C.S.F. and an author of the JAMA Internal Medicine paper.

Read More:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/13/we...-fat.html?_r=0

[Frozen]

Regarding the "special" coffee. It contains a C8 version of MCT oil which are extracted from coconut oil. Those C8 medium chain triglycerides are basically liquid ketones. If you following the keto diet properly and drink the coffee it will enhance and speed up the results. And more importantly than losing weight, most people feel and perform great on it as well. Tons of energy. That's the most important measure for me.

[brianeck]

Originally Posted by csu87

the bigger epidemic is less activity and more eating of unhealthy foods. Has nothing to do with the medical profession and this "Agenda" you think they are pushing. It is pretty easy to not get fat. Its easy to not eat a ton of crappy foods and drink crappy drinks. Its easy to exercise regularly. Just have to want to not be lazy. The lazy persons excuse for being fat is to blame someone else.

It is a proven fact that people are less active now, then they have been in the past, and unhealthy foods are easier/cheaper than healthy foods.

They are also more "pushed" by big sugar and society though than they ever have been, so unhealthy/high in sugar foods are more prevalent in the subconscious subliminal advertising way as well.

A healthy balanced breakfast includes honey nut cheerios, an orange juice, a banana, a coffee with milk and sugar, and 2 slices of toast? That's more carbs and sugar than I eat in a week when I'm trying to lose weight, and its the same message on all the kids cereal/breakfast commercials.

Its unfair to blanket medical professionals as evil, but I think its totally fair to blanket any company that profits from a product that lists any of the following as one of their primary ingredients as unethical to say the least. . . Since they are just different disguised names for sugar that the common consumer doesn't know about:

Agave nectar
Barbados sugar
Barley malt
Barley malt syrup
Beet sugar
Brown sugar
Buttered syrup
Cane juice
Cane juice crystals
Cane sugar
Caramel
Carob syrup
Castor sugar
Coconut palm sugar
Coconut sugar
Confectioner's sugar
Corn sweetener
Corn syrup
Corn syrup solids
Date sugar
Dehydrated cane juice
Demerara sugar
Dextrin
Dextrose
Evaporated cane juice
Free-flowing brown sugars
Fructose
Fruit juice
Fruit juice concentrate
Glucose
Glucose solids
Golden sugar
Golden syrup
Grape sugar
HFCS (High-Fructose Corn Syrup)
Honey
Icing sugar
Invert sugar
Malt syrup
Maltodextrin
Maltol
Maltose
Mannose
Maple syrup
Molasses
Muscovado
Palm sugar
Panocha
Powdered sugar
Raw sugar
Refiner's syrup
Rice syrup
Saccharose
Sorghum Syrup
Sucrose
Sugar (granulated)
Sweet Sorghum
Syrup
Treacle
Turbinado sugar
Yellow sugar

I'll let you guys keep bashing each other from the sidelines here now that I weighed in again

[trixdout]

I've done not so much a regimented diet as just restricting certain foods from my meals. I almost completely stopped eating carbs (potatoes, bread and pasta). I may eat it once a week or 2 times a month at most. Other than that, I eat all proteins, nuts, meats and fish. I also exclude rice from my meals. I paired this diet along with exercising (weight lifting and running). Since October of 2015, I went from 210lbs to 188lbs. I am much much leaner. Getting more lean as the days go on and how much I limit the carb intake.

[JohnnyCanuck]

Originally Posted by brianeck

They are also more "pushed" by big sugar and society though than they ever have been, so unhealthy/high in sugar foods are more prevalent in the subconscious subliminal advertising way as well.

A healthy balanced breakfast includes honey nut cheerios, an orange juice, a banana, a coffee with milk and sugar, and 2 slices of toast? That's more carbs and sugar than I eat in a week when I'm trying to lose weight, and its the same message on all the kids cereal/breakfast commercials.

Its unfair to blanket medical professionals as evil, but I think its totally fair to blanket any company that profits from a product that lists any of the following as one of their primary ingredients as unethical to say the least. . . Since they are just different disguised names for sugar that the common consumer doesn't know about:

Agave nectar
Barbados sugar
Barley malt
Barley malt syrup
Beet sugar
Brown sugar
Buttered syrup
Cane juice
Cane juice crystals
Cane sugar
Caramel
Carob syrup
Castor sugar
Coconut palm sugar
Coconut sugar
Confectioner's sugar
Corn sweetener
Corn syrup
Corn syrup solids
Date sugar
Dehydrated cane juice
Demerara sugar
Dextrin
Dextrose
Evaporated cane juice
Free-flowing brown sugars
Fructose
Fruit juice
Fruit juice concentrate
Glucose
Glucose solids
Golden sugar
Golden syrup
Grape sugar
HFCS (High-Fructose Corn Syrup)
Honey
Icing sugar
Invert sugar
Malt syrup
Maltodextrin
Maltol
Maltose
Mannose
Maple syrup
Molasses
Muscovado
Palm sugar
Panocha
Powdered sugar
Raw sugar
Refiner's syrup
Rice syrup
Saccharose
Sorghum Syrup
Sucrose
Sugar (granulated)
Sweet Sorghum
Syrup
Treacle
Turbinado sugar
Yellow sugar

I'll let you guys keep bashing each other from the sidelines here now that I weighed in again

The problem has been the lack of clarity in labelling between added sugars (bad) and naturally occurring sugars (generally good). The body does need sugar to function properly.

I believe in the US, regulations are pending requiring the disclosure of sugar to include both the quantity of added and natural sugars (unfortunately in Canada, we have not crossed that regulatory barrier yet). That places the responsibility back on the consumer to pay attention to what they're eating/buying.

[antych]

Originally Posted by JohnnyCanuck

The problem has been the lack of clarity in labelling between added sugars (bad) and naturally occurring sugars (generally good). The body does need sugar to function properly.

No it doesn't need sugar. Your body needs tiny amount of glucose that it can produce from protein through gluconeogenesis as required.

That's the irony of it, vilified fat is essential to life, where carbs that people eat the most aren't actually needed at all.

[angelr]

Originally Posted by antych

No it doesn't need sugar. Your body needs tiny amount of glucose that it can produce from protein through gluconeogenesis as required.

That's the irony of it, vilified fat is essential to life, where carbs that people eat the most aren't actually needed at all.

Very true.

[Frozen]

Originally Posted by JohnnyCanuck

The problem has been the lack of clarity in labelling between added sugars (bad) and naturally occurring sugars (generally good). The body does need sugar to function properly.

Sugar is sugar. Granted high fructose corn syrup is especially bad since it spikes your insulin a bit more than other sugars, but natural sugars in fruit are fructose. Look at some of the recent studies on fructose and fatty liver disease and fructose's ability to feed cancer cells and you'll see that natural sugars aren't much better. The only benefit you get from fruit is the additional fiber, but you can get that elsewhere. I'm not a big fan of fruit. It should be treated like a dessert if anything, but I rarely eat it.

[Frozen]

Originally Posted by antych

No it doesn't need sugar. Your body needs tiny amount of glucose that it can produce from protein through gluconeogenesis as required.

That's the irony of it, vilified fat is essential to life, where carbs that people eat the most aren't actually needed at all.

[The Chaddening]

I was ketogenic for about 3 months, it worked fairly well for getting lean. My strength went down for sure without any carbs though. Not something I would want to maintain.

[csu87]

Originally Posted by antych

You have no idea what you're talking about and just wasting my time. Exercise is proven to be completely ineffective in controlling weight gain (population studies, not individuals). And if it was easy to not get fat, then people wouldn't get fat, ffs. If anything, people are more obsessed with dieting and exercise than they ever were.

I used to say the same before I looked at the evidence. I worked out all my life and thought fat people are just lazy. So I don't blame you for being misinformed and ignorant, it happens to the best of us. And here lies the problem, most people are like you and your wife, sadly many of them practice medicine and make things worse.

I eat like shit but workout a lot and have a bf% in the low teens. Must just be a freak of nature if exercise is ineffective.

Lay off the conspiracy theories for awhile. Next thing you'll say is fat people aren't fat, they're just big boned.

[antych]

Originally Posted by csu87

I eat like shit but workout a lot and have a bf% in the low teens. Must just be a freak of nature if exercise is ineffective.

Lay off the conspiracy theories for awhile. Next thing you'll say is fat people aren't fat, they're just big boned.

You're not a freak, just an uneducated fool who can't read. I said it's population studies and it's proven not to work. Some people manage to burn off excess glucose while they are young and their metabolism is high, but it does nothing in stopping obesity epidemic. At worst you waste a lot of time and can injure yourself, trying to fix a problem you created in the first place. It's just dumb and you will eventually get fat as you get older.

Your best argument so far was "my wife is a dietitian". What are you still doing here?