Just for fun, I've been reading up the LFHC diet, the one completely opposite from my LCHF diet. LFHC is promoted by Ornish, Mcdougall, Esselstyns, etc. This is the kind of diet Bill Clinton is on now. Hey, guess what! These low fat high carb guys also claim their diets will cure you of death and unattractiveness! And just to prove it, they too have millions of personal testimonies on their sites from formerly diabetic fat people with rashes who are now thin, healthy, and rash free. Just like on LCHF sites.
How can this be? One diet advocates fat as 75% of your diet and no carbs, the other no fat and mostly carb. Yet both claim to be the perfect diet for humans! Ahhhhh! Let's look very shallowly into some of their claims and see where they differ.
1) Both claim science is unequivocally on their side.
LCHF: Man descended from the trees carrying tongs and hickory wood chips, ready to grill.
Agriculture wasn't a thing until 10,000 years ago, when man was snookered into high interest mortgages, attending early morning religious functions on his one day off, and monogamy.
Obviously, we were better off as hunter gatherers.
LFHC: Ha! Man shares 99% of his DNA with apes, and apes love whole grain pasta with butternut squash. What, you think you're betta than an ape? Get outta here.
Man lived nasty, brutal millennia eating grubs, bark, and grass seeds while hiding in caves from predators until someone finally figured out walls and industrial farming.
Thank God. Now man could stop skulking around in fear of being eaten and instead learn to fear other men.
Pre agriculture LCHF man
Pre agriculture LFHC man
Diet Ruminations, Part I
I'm eating so much fat on my diet! I drink coffee with cream now. And I'm talking 1/2 cup or so of cream. I slather on the mayo, baste in butter, cook with bacon lard, eat marrow, eat liver, and chew the fat, literally, off my rare steaks. So far, not fat. My dh thinks it's because I'm genetically unable to gain weight. I don't think so. I like to think Taubes and company are correct and a LCHF diet is nourishing while not being fattening.
I've always been someone interested in eating for health. I believe that food acts on us like any chemical or drug. One has to eat well to be healthy. The trick is to figure out what to eat!
But at the same time, I fully appreciate eating for pleasure. I like virtually all foods. Name it. Kimchi, umi, natto, intestine, marrow, liver, roe, brussel sprouts, sauerkraut, raw oysters (God's food), fish eyes, tongue, and so on. Good luck finding something I don't like to eat. So, for me, being vegetarian became too limiting. I needed to find a new philosophy for eating.
And it's too easy to say, "Eat moderately, not too much, move more, etc." But what's moderate? If one was raised on the pyramid eating scheme moderate is different than if one was raised before the 70's. One has to have a baseline to determine moderate. And what to make of our ever increasing rates of obesity and diabetes? I suspect many of us are already trying to eat "moderately." Many of us are watching what we eat, choosing low fat alternatives, eating skinless chicken breasts, and getting enough fiber.
Yet we're getting fatter and sicker. What's up? Maybe it's the junk food and processed foods. Many of us eat mainly by fat and calorie counts. If it comes in a box but is low fat, it's alright. If the calories are around 100 per serving, we throw it in the cart. A "moderate" diet based around skim milk, low fat yogurt, and Special K doesn't appear to be working. So, as Taubes called his original essay for the NYT's, What if It's All Been a Big Fat Lie?
What if everything we were told about what is healthy to eat is not true?
Posted at 03:37 PM in LCHF, Thoughtful Commentary | Permalink | Comments (2)
| Reblog (0)