Sweet tooth or fat tooth?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Toonces, Jan 22, 2004.

Does food preference affect dietary beliefs?

  1. I have a fat tooth and believe in low carb

    6 vote(s)
    24.0%
  2. I have a fat tooth and believe in low fat

    4 vote(s)
    16.0%
  3. I have a sweet tooth and believe in low carb

    8 vote(s)
    32.0%
  4. I have a sweet tooth and believe in low fat

    7 vote(s)
    28.0%
  1. franklin

    franklin

    For the benefit of others, I will address this nonsense once (hey, its Friday, and this will keep me from responding to Jack's latest stuff).

    - I watch my own blood lipid profile and several others on lower-carb diets, and can attest that the results are not spurious or short-term.

    - Lower-carb does not mean higher-fat.

    - I agree that very low fat, low calorie diets (with occassional starving) will increase one's life span (assuming you get all the nutrients you need). However, I have no interest in being on such diets because they suck. Instead, I eat a balance of good fat, protein, and good carbs that is filling and tastes good.
     
    #11     Jan 23, 2004
  2. Look, it seems you're confusing the issues by talking apples and oranges. I have no idea what diet you're on or even what you're speaking to specifically but you do people a great disservice with your vague suggestions.

    Yes, lower carb does not mean higher fat but you are either replacing the fat with something else, and if not then you're drastically reducing your cals which may be the factor behind your alleged results.

    Furthermore, unless you have recored carefully your results over years and years you really can't draw good conclusions.

    Very low fat diets "suck" in your opinion, but actually those diets can be very tasty and nutritious to those of us whose palates have not been perverted. If it increases your lifespan then it certainly doesn't "suck". What ssucks is a diet that robs you of years off your life, now that sucks!

    You eat a "good balance" by what or whose standards??
     
    #12     Jan 23, 2004
  3. franklin

    franklin

    A surprisingly level-headed response from LongShot!

    Relative to my previous (low-fat) diet, I replaced a lot of carbs with more fiber and protein, not fat. (BTW, that is my biggest criticism of low-carb diets: they do not adequately specify what it is you should be replacing carbs with, and by what amount.)

    The reason I applaud the low-carbers is because they are finally making a dent in the obesity of "normal" people, whereas the low-fatters have spent most of their time scolding others for lack of discipline.

    On the other hand, all the diets converge to a similar solution when you take seriously all their exceptions and extra recommendations, so we may even agree on many nutritional details. Nonetheless, I think it is a big mistake to downplay the importance of lower-carb diets, and the low-fatters usually do this because they don't really understand the tricks involved with the diet.

    There are several such tricks to discuss. Let me just mention one to give you an example: By specifying that carbs (flour, sugar, starch) should be replaced with fiber and protein, the dieter is led in the direction of nuts and (colored) vegetables, which contain built-in combinations of such. The trick working here is that it turns out that the best carbs are almost always associated with fiber and protein. (BTW, I obviously realize that fiber is carbs - what I'm referring to here is the fact that low-carbers get to subtract fiber from their net carb count.)

    Anyway, based on science (not Atkins et al.), I've developed a lower-carb, higher-fiber, higher-protein diet based on a few simple rules. Its biggest benefits came from limiting carbs, so I call it "low-carb", but its also higher-protein, and not high-fat. For that reason I applaud low-carb diets in general, since I think that they are the best starting point for making changes, and I also want to see more low-carb offerings from food distributors.

    To give you a better sense of what I'm talking about, and for the benefit of other low-carbers. in the next post I'll give a lower-carb recipe for pancakes and sausage. (You can also search my very early ET posts for more info about the diet.)
     
    #13     Jan 25, 2004
  4. franklin

    franklin

    makes 2 servings

    1/2 of 12 oz. package of Louis Rich Original Turkey Sausage
    cut into patties and cook in skillet while mixing pancake stuff

    1/2 C Arrowhead Mills Perfect Harvest Pancake & Waffle Mix
    1/2 C milk (or soy milk)
    1 egg
    1 T canola oil
    1 tsp cinnamon (optional)
    mix thoroughly and use same skillet, on lower heat, to cook pancakes, flipping them once

    top with light margarine (trans fat-free), sugar-free syrup, and/or blueberries (Wyman's Wild Blueberries in water have about as much fiber as carbs)

    for each serving (half of above recipe, w/o toppings):
    375 cal
    18 g fat
    28 g carb
    5 g fiber
    22 g protein

    Tastes great and is filling (due to protein). The sausage is lower-fat, and the pancake mix is higher-fiber and higher-protein, relative to "normal" versions. However, the biggest difference in this meal is that it is MUCH lower in all the bad carbs, which came about because we were specifically looking for pancake mix with more fiber and protein, and because we chose sugar-free or high-fiber toppings.

    Eating filling, tasty, lower-carb meals like this will indeed improve your blood chemistry, help control your weight, etc. Could it be further modified to extend my life even further? Sure. But I'm not interested if it doesn't also satisfy my taste and appetite.
     
    #14     Jan 25, 2004
  5. welo, 43 % of your cals from that recipe come from FAT. dont you think this is a bit high?? :eek:

    you've replaced the carbs with FAT it seems not fiber [just as i suspected]

    :-/
     
    #15     Jan 25, 2004
  6. furthermore,

    why you guys have to smother everything in margarine or butter is beyond me.

    why can't you enjoy the taste of foods in their natural states.

    :-/
     
    #16     Jan 25, 2004
  7. One thing that gets consistantly overlooked in these low carb vs low fat discussions is the differences in fats.

    There is a huge difference in the way your body deals with, say, butter, and the way it deals with something like hemp seed oil which has a mix of omega 3, 6, and 9 fatty acids.

    The body must have EFA's (essential fatty acids) to function properly. These are found in flaxseed oil, evening primrose oil, safflower oil, and hemp seed oil. What it does not need in any way are trans fatty acids found in margarine, and many baked or processed goods, and saturated fats.

    Genetic considerations aside, serum lipids are influenced most strongly by the type of fat eaten, as well as the type of carb eaten. The wrong type of carb (high glycemic) raises blood sugar levels, and consequently, blood insulin levels. Add high insulin levels to high serum lipds, and you've got the perfect combo for clogging arteries and adding lots of body fat.

    Ok, so what's the bottom line:
    *The type of fat is much more important than the amount
    *The wrong type of carb causes problems
    *The combination of high serum insulin and bad fats is something to avoid

    By the way, there are essential fatty and amino acids (meaning they must come from your diet as your body cannot produce them), but there are no essential carbs. People can, and do, live healthy lives without carbs.
     
    #17     Jan 25, 2004
  8. Who is living a healthy life without carbs?
     
    #18     Jan 25, 2004
  9. franklin
     
    #19     Jan 25, 2004
  10. bobcathy1

    bobcathy1 Guest

    My favorite things to eat have both high fat and sugar.
    Cheesecake
    Ice Cream
    Puddings

    Thank goodness they came out with low fat and no sugar versions of them....otherwise I would be the lady in the picture with FasterPussyCat

    http://elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=416448
     
    #20     Jan 25, 2004