Helsing posted:

WampaLord posted:

Tell that line about sugar calories to a diabetic.

quote:

How about the part where they add high fructose corn syrup to it? Why does a sugar substitute need to be in bread?

Helsing posted:

I feel like I'm debating a martian who has never actually eaten human food or been in a grocery store. You do understand part of why doctors recommend fresh fruits and vegetables is because in addition to having a good calorie to nutrition trade off, they also promote a sense of satiety? Whereas sugar is the opposite: many food items with added sugar will actually make you hungrier despite being full of calories.

Obdicut posted:

And yet, if you eat the same amount of non sugar calories, you will be just about as likely to develop type 2. If a diabetic follows your mystical beliefs in fresh food and eats a ton of nuts, or a bunch of boiled potatoes, or anything else calorie dense they will have the same outcomes.

the entire reason those fresh vegetables are recommended is because they are not calorie dense. That doesn't mean there aren't "fresh" things which are calorie dense: there are a ton of them. Replacing soda with milk is not good. Replacing wonder bread with potatoes is not good. There are possibly some benefits to doing so but we do not have solid science about this. The video you are citing is a correlation, and you are treating it as a causation. People who eat processed meats may have other attributes in common, may eat salt in over proportion from other sources. Etc. it is likely that eating preserved foods has some negative effects but we do not know the strength of them, and calories total are a far, far bigger problem--and that is only in the context of lack of activity.

PT6A posted:

The bad diet is the problem, not any individual component thereof.

Helsing posted:

So far as I can tell this has been universally and explicitly agreed on by everyone posting here for the entire discussion.

PT6A posted:

If no food can in and of itself be bad for you (and excepting trans fats and literal poison, this is the case), then how can you call something "junk food?" That's what people are arguing with you about.

Helsing posted:

So in addition to reversing your position on sugar you're now rehashing stuff that was already addressed, in tedious detail, pages ago.


So far as I can tell this has been universally and explicitly agreed on by everyone posting here for the entire discussion.

Helsing posted:

I feel like I'm debating a martian who has never actually eaten human food or been in a grocery store. You do understand part of why doctors recommend fresh fruits and vegetables is because in addition to having a good calorie to nutrition trade off, they also promote a sense of satiety? Whereas sugar is the opposite: many food items with added sugar will actually make you hungrier despite being full of calories.

Also I can't even begin to comprehend the level of idiocy that claims only calories matter. The logical conclusion of that position is that you could eat or not eat literally anything you wanted and as long as you watched your calories it wouldn't matter whether you were getting protein, fibre, vitamins, etc. Is that seriously the position you are defending?


The video showed a strong association between eating large amounts of processed meats and the risk of diabetes or heart disease. There's no ambiguity there. The exact relationship of the association is where the "may" comes up, there's no question that an association exists. More importantly, the video is exhibit A in the massive pile of evidence showing that people who actually know what they are talking about regularly use the term "processed" when advising consumers about food and nutrition, which was the original point of contention in this debate.

BarbarianElephant posted:

"Fresh" as opposed to processed, I'd assume. It's a good rule of thumb. A pizza might have more tomates than a salad, but that doesn't mean it's better for you.

BarbarianElephant posted:

"Fresh" as opposed to processed, I'd assume. It's a good rule of thumb. A pizza might have more tomates than a salad, but that doesn't mean it's better for you.

PT6A posted:

What's wrong with a pizza?

WampaLord posted:

Jesus Christ can you be more disingenuous? He said "Pizza is not better for you than a salad" and your response is "Well, what's wrong with pizza?"

I swear to god, people in this thread can't get over the idea that "Well I eat this thing and I am healthy, therefore that thing can't be unhealthy!"

WampaLord posted:

Jesus Christ can you be more disingenuous? He said "Pizza is not better for you than a salad" and your response is "Well, what's wrong with pizza?"

I swear to god, people in this thread can't get over the idea that "Well I eat this thing and I am healthy, therefore that thing can't be unhealthy!"

Obdicut posted:

A pizza can be a lot better than a salad.

Examples:

Here's a horrible lovely frozen pizza for one, you can't get more processed than this:

http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-frozen-pizzas-deluxe-pizza-for-one-frozen_f-ZmlkPTgwMzcw.html

Here's a slices from a famous new york place:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/30966587

And two slices would be a hefty lunch.

And here's a vegetarian salad from Au Bon Pain with a sesame ginger dressing

http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-salads-vegetarian-deluxe-salad_f-ZmlkPTE5NDU2Ng.html
http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-salad-dressings-sesame-ginger-dressing_f-ZmlkPTE2MzUwMQ.html

And the chicken salad from some salad joint:
http://www.saladworks.com/salad/mediterranean


Salads would be much better if we didn't put dressing on them, but we do.

Obdicut posted:

I didn't reverse my opinion though. Eating straight sugar is bad for diabetics since it spikes their blood sugar. Eating white bread or a bunch of fruit is bad for the same reason. I can't tell if you are pretending not to understand this or really don't. And the rehashing is stuff that you are still wrong about, so it's probably going to keep happening.

DARPA Dad posted:

Why do you keep saying "fresh" fruits and vegetables? What's wrong with frozen varieties or canned tomatoes from a respected brand? You type that exact phrase so often I'm surprised it hasn't overtaken your auto complete.

Helsing posted:

The point, which you seem to simultaneously grasp and yet not grasp, is that food is more than just an empty and neutral vessel for a certain number of calories. Depending on how it's prepared and what's in it the human body responds differently, and these different responses are very relevant to a discussion about diet and health.

quote:

This is one of the reasons why doctors tend to recommend that a large part of our daily food intake come from plants. Because they tend to not only have high nutritional value but also because they promote a feeling satiation. The chips and cola you drink, by contrast, don't make you feel full and you're a lot more likely to eat more of it.

quote:

Usually there's no meaningful difference between, say, a bag of frozen fruit vs. a piece of fresh fruit. Sometimes canned foods can have additives like sodium for preservation.

Obdicut posted:

A pizza can be a lot better than a salad.

Examples:

Here's a horrible lovely frozen pizza for one, you can't get more processed than this:

http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-frozen-pizzas-deluxe-pizza-for-one-frozen_f-ZmlkPTgwMzcw.html

Here's a slices from a famous new york place:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/food/calories/30966587

And two slices would be a hefty lunch.

And here's a vegetarian salad from Au Bon Pain with a sesame ginger dressing

http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-salads-vegetarian-deluxe-salad_f-ZmlkPTE5NDU2Ng.html
http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-salad-dressings-sesame-ginger-dressing_f-ZmlkPTE2MzUwMQ.html

And the chicken salad from some salad joint:
http://www.saladworks.com/salad/mediterranean


Salads would be much better if we didn't put dressing on them, but we do.

nigga crab pollock posted:

yeah, it has 800 calories if you empty the entire half cup of dressing made of pure liquid fat onto your salad

nigga crab pollock posted:

im pretty sure its from supersize-me, but the often quoted anectode of mcdonalds salads having the most calories out of any menu item is one of the more amazing things to me. not because it's true, but because people repeat it as if its useful dietary information

yeah, it has 800 calories if you empty the entire half cup of dressing made of pure liquid fat onto your salad

wateroverfire posted:

I didn't think any topic could provoke more spergposting than Uber, but apparantly nutrition is that special unicorn.

Obdicut posted:

Not really, though. Calories in and out are by far the biggest nutritional deal as long as you're not deficient in any vitamins, and very few people eating a modern diet are. For diabetes, for heart conditions, etc. by far the main driver is obesity and for obesity by far the main driver is calorie count rather than calorie makeup.

quote:

I don't know why you keep referencing doctors. Do you think doctors are an authority on nutrition for some reason? Anyway: Yes, compared to chips, vegetables produce satiety. So does crappy 'hungry man' processed food. And 'plants' is a silly thing to say: wheat is a plant and eating bread does not produce satiety. I think you mean 'vegetables'. A lot of the problem with what you say is you seem completely careless about your terminology and get irritated with other people for not continually discerning what you really mean rather than what you actually said.

quote:

And usually when you prepare fresh vegetables, you use salt. Harping on 'fresh' the way that you were is a distraction, and really makes this more of a cultural issue than an actual nutrition issue.

wateroverfire posted:

I didn't think any topic could provoke more spergposting than Uber, but apparantly nutrition is that special unicorn.

Obdicut posted:

Not really, though. Calories in and out are by far the biggest nutritional deal as long as you're not deficient in any vitamins, and very few people eating a modern diet are. For diabetes, for heart conditions, etc. by far the main driver is obesity and for obesity by far the main driver is calorie count rather than calorie makeup.

Obdicut posted:

And 'plants' is a silly thing to say: wheat is a plant and eating bread does not produce satiety. I think you mean 'vegetables'.

Helsing posted:

That's not actually true though, or if it is then it contradicts the studies I've heard about. Huge numbers of Americans are thought to be deficient in vitamin D, people don't generally consume enough fibre, etc. Where exactly are you getting this idea that only calorie counting matters?

quote:

Because doctors can also be researchers and I'm not just referring to some family doctor but rather the general consensus among a large number of health agencies and practitioners. I'm curious about where your ideas and thoughts are coming from?

quote:

Also in light of my numerous previous comments on the importance of including whole foods in your diet it's hilariously dorky and pedantic that you're now complaining that my comment on plants could be interpreted as meaning "it's fine if you just eat bread." Is it hard for you to understand that each post I make builds on my previous posts rather than negating them?

quote:

This is yet another thing that was discussed upthread which you either missed or forgot. The vast majority of the salt in American diets comes from processed foods or dining at restaurants, less than 10% is typically added during home cooked meals.

BarbarianElephant posted:

Junk food is very calorie-dense, making it hard to moderate your intake. Most vegetables have so few calories that they are practically a rounding error. You'd have to eat a bucket of carrots to get the same calories as a serving of potato chips, and by that time your stomach would be groaning and bloated and you'd swear never to do it again. But a serving of potato chips slips down easily. I don't know any fat people who got that way by gorging on plain vegetables.

Baronjutter posted:

I'm curious who's doing all the household food wasting. People far richer than me or my peers who can afford to buy fancy food then throw it away? Poor people too stressed/disorganized to keep tabs on what they have and need to cook? Is it a cultural thing not an income/class thing? I know I saw a lot more food waste when visiting friends and family down in the US, but it's hardly a big enough sample group to say "americans waste more food!" or "suburban folk waste more food"

BarbarianElephant posted:

I definitely waste plenty of food. Fresh food comes in big portions. I buy an iceberg lettuce every week and after 3 family salads there is still half a lettuce left. Out it goes. My local supermarket only sells celery in bundles of two, and I can only use one before it is limp. Out it goes.

And I get food poisoning extremely easily, much more than you probably, so if something looks off, I dump it. No guilt, I can't afford to be ill.

So it is me doing the food wasting. Sorry.

Baronjutter posted:

You don't think to change your diet/cooking to suit the portions and ingredients available? If I was regularly throwing out half a something I'd just stop eating it all together out of shame for the waste, and cheapness. I guess there's plenty of people like you though so that drives up the stats. Of course you're mostly a victim of hosed up portions at the market. I buy celery by the one, or in bunches. Can buy most "head" style veggies in halfs or even quarters. I guess if you can afford it it's probably not that bad (financially), but if I threw away half my produce I'd have to get a 2nd job.

Also when they give food waste stats is that by weight, or by value? Throwing away half a head of cabbage because you can't possibly eat it all fast enough is one thing, throwing away a big thing of meat or cheese or something very expensive is another.

Obdicut posted:

From the way that you actually develop diabetes. Vitamin D is not something you readily get from plants, fiber isn't a nutrient the body uses int he same way as others. Are you saying that nutritional deficiencies are in any way comparable to obesity in terms of health problems in the US?

And please, cite your studies.

quote:

I work and study at a school of public health and this is an area that I work in. You are falsely representing a consensus. There is huge, huge, huge contention over what recommendations we should make both at a scientific level and a policy level.

quote:

Yeah, it is hard for me to understand why you are so insanely sloppy with your language and do not give a poo poo about communicating well. Saying stuff like 'fresh' and 'plants' and then saying 'Oh that's not what I meant' is dumb. As I said, nobody should have to be able to figure out what you really mean, the onus on you is to actually say what you mean. Instead of whining about it, take the incredibly minimal amount of time and effort to actually speak accurately.

quote:

Yeah, but the amount of salt in a can of tomatoes is tiny, which is part of why lumping all 'processed' food together is dumb. The amount of salt in a can of tomatoes is trivial compared to what you'd use in cooking.

Helsing posted:

Here's a little canned summary from NPR on the CDC's report and here's a link to to the executive summary. And yes I'm well aware that you don't get vitamin D from plants, whether or not you think I'm totally wrong here you could at least acknowledge that I'm saying a bit more than "eat plants".

(Edit: to be clear, read past the headline, which confirms the average American is doing allright, and look at the numbers for certain minority populations, such as African Americans)

quote:

So, for the benefit of some neutral observer, what evidence can you point to suppoting your arguments? You asked me to cite a study just now and that was fair enough, but where's your source of data here? From the perspective of an outsider all you've done is make a series of raw assertions. Try to imagine this from the perspective of someone who has no knowledge of your qualifications, whatever they may or may not be. Where do they turn to verify some of the things you've claimed?

quote:

I guess we'll have to let anyone else reading this make but their own minds but when I say "you should eat plants", in the context of a conversation where I've repeatedly advocated that people should make whole foods a part of their diet, and your response is "Heh, you mean like bread?" I think that makes you look like an idiot. If someone else has a different take away then so be it but I don't think you scored the brilliant point that you seem to think you did.

quote:

Sorry but I'm going to go ahead and say you should buy some rice, some veggies, and some dry pasta, familiarize yourself with the stove and oven, and maybe leave the TV off for the evening and crack open a book when you're all done.

quote:

Did you just start reading the thread in the last page or two and completely ignore the preceding discussion where it was made clear that the reason one lumps together "processed food" is literally just because consumers should scrutinize the label for ingredients more closely? No one has ever claimed there's anything wrong with processed food. The point is that knowing something has been processed should invite much greater scrutiny about what's been added or done to the food, it doesn't mean you should never eat it.

Obdicut posted:

So in other words, no, nutritional deficincy in the US is nowhere near, at all, the problem of obesity. Thank you.

quote:

I'm claiming the null hypothesis for most things. For "Calories are what matters for developing diabetes":

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa010492

Obesity/BMI the sole biggest predictor, with other factors coming before the diet composition.

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/73/6/1019.short

Relationship between fat consumption and diabetes remains unclear

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/25/3/417.short

Relationship between fat intake and diabetes disappear when corrected for BMI. Be happy with this one, they also found that consumption of processed meats is related, but don't indicate if they corrected for BMI on that one.

quote:

I didn't think you meant bread. I was saying that spreading the message 'eat plants' is dumb, and you shouldn't do it, because it's massively inaccurate. Is there some reason you are just refusing the idea that maybe it might be useful to be accurate when you speak? You seem to have almost contempt for the idea that you should bother to use the right words to say stuff.

quote:

ANd also, this was your first post:


Rice and pasta are both equivalent to bread in terms of being high glycemic index foods. Pasta and rice are not good foods to recommend for healthy eating, they are calorific and easy to eat a lot of. If you're going to take the stances you are, it is nuts to recommend eating pasta and rice.

quote:

But they're not going to. We know how human beings are actually going to behave when presented with complex nutritional information. Putting the calorie count on McDonald's menus goddamn backfired--people ordered more high calorie stuff. A lot of prepared food having high sodium levels is worth looking at even without a really significant finding about sodium, but that doesn't mean that prepared foods are bad.

quote:

If we want to stop food waste, the absolutely best way to do that is prepared foods, frozen foods, canned foods, etc.

Helsing posted:

This is pathetic. Your original claim was that no American is at serious risk of vitamin deficincies.

quote:

Calories in and out are by far the biggest nutritional deal as long as you're not deficient in any vitamins, and very few people eating a modern diet are.

quote:

That's all very interesting but actually what I meant was that I was hoping you could demonstrate that "processed food" is a hugely controversial label rather than a term that practically all health care experts seem to use regularly. Given that even here you're posting a study using the term "processed meats" I feel like you're just demonstrating that actually there's nothing controversial about using that kind of language.

quote:

What stance do you think I'm taking and why does it make what I said there "nuts"?

quote:

This is actually a really great illustration of why nutritional guides use simplified heuristics such as advising people to balance between processed foods and whole foods. While these guides all make clear that processed food isn't inherently bad and that the main thing to do is to check the label for ingredients, they also provide a straight forward and easily actionable plan that, if followed through, will reliably help you ensure you strike a reasonable balance in your diet between caloric intake, satiety, and getting the right mix of micro and macro nutrients.

quote:

Sure, but I never claimed that food waste is reduced by eating more fresh food.

WampaLord posted:

The over consumption of sugar is one of the biggest problems we have and explains much of America's obesity epidemic.

And no, unless you're going to sperg out and say that baking a loaf of bread is processing it. I am not the one claiming "unprocessed" means "one ingredient."

Obdicut posted:

No, it wasn't.

That's what I said. Why on earth would you try to claim otherwise?

quote:

Processed meats is a meaningful term, barely. Processed foods isn't. And they operationalized it in the study. There have been very good reasons given to you why 'processed' is overly broad, and I don't get why you refuse to acknowledge them.

quote:

But anyway, yeah, all those studies were showing that composition of diet does not matter nearly as much as BMI/obesity for diabetes formation.

quote:

You've changed your stances back and forth at a whim, abandoning 'fresh', for example, but in general you're advocating people don't eat 'unhealthy' prepacked foods and were offering rice, veggies, and pasta as the better alternative. Veggies are good, but the other two are unhealthy in terms of glycemic index, lack of other meaningful nutrients, and being calorific. I'm sorry, I should have twigged to this earlier.

quote:

But what actually happens when you provide people with that guide? What is the actual, real-world result?

quote:

This was all an intentional derail?

Helsing posted:

I don't know why processed meat is fine but processed food is somehow bad in your mind, but I'm honestly just glad you're willing to acknowledge that "processed meat" is a useful category for analyzing food health. No one else on your "side" or this debate has actually been willing to acknowledge that up to this point.