Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Trying to Eat Better - Getting Fatter

Options
1235

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,938 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    2 slices wholegrain bread have a higher gi than a snickers bar.

    Which wholegrain bread?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #123
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,560 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    People usually use the GI comparison when comparing different types of a food.

    Not sure how many people would be puttering a Snickers or two for a sandwich.


    My beloved ignore function is being undone by the quote function over and over *sad face*


  • Options
    #124
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Brian? wrote: »
    Which wholegrain bread?

    any


  • Options
    #125
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Oryx wrote: »
    I realise this is another blind alley youre going down, but anyway. From my reading, same GI, snickers has a much higher GL.

    Correct but the poster specifically mentioned GI. Everything I said with evidence is correct regarding wholegrain bread.


  • Options
    #126
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,938 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    any

    You're 100% sure of that?

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Brian? wrote: »
    You're 100% sure of that?

    Yes


  • Options
    #128
    Brian?
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators Posts: 20,938 Mod ✭✭✭✭Brian?


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Yes

    So every whole grain bread, of every brand has the same GI? So you see why people get frustrated debating with you?

    You deal is absolutes, the world doesn't work like that.

    they/them/theirs


    And so on, and so on …. - Slavoj Žižek




  • Options
    #129
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Brian? wrote: »
    So every whole grain bread, of every brand has the same GI? So you see why people get frustrated debating with you?

    You deal is absolutes, the world doesn't work like that.

    No. Lowest gi is 51, many higher.


  • Options
    #130
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,106 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Brian? wrote: »
    The push for wholegrain etc. encourages eating low GI carbs. A good thing IMO.
    To be fair, wholegrain breads, on average, aren't significantly lower GI that white bread. The difference between white/brown pasta/rice is equally insignificant also.

    Sweet potatos are high GI than white potatos when roasted.

    The previous poster was right, there's a lot of dated and incorrect info in the stickies. And a lot of the stuff that regularly touted as a fitness myth is touted there.


    That said, Bruno's Snickers bar statistic is nonsense.
    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Here

    http://www.health.harvard.edu/newsweek/Glycemic_index_and_glycemic_load_for_100_foods.htm
    That's the same table referenced in the article Oryx posted.
    So either you happened to randomly find the same source data, and randomly choose a snickers (out of 100+ options) to compare to wholewheat bread.
    Or you did actually get it from that same biased article but decided to cover it up. I wonder why.


  • Options
    #131
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Mellor wrote: »
    To be fair, wholegrain breads, on average, aren't significantly lower GI that white bread. The difference between white/brown pasta/rice is equally insignificant also.




    That said, Bruno's Snickers bar statistic is nonsense.

    That's the same table referenced in the article Oryx posted.
    So either you happened to randomly find the same source data, and randomly choose a snickers (out of 100+ options) to compare to wholewheat bread.
    Or you did actually get it from that same biased article but decided to cover it up. I wonder why.

    Not exactly sure what you ranting about. I was responding to someone saying wholegrain is a good thing to point out its not as good as we are led to believe.

    What was wrong with the Harvard link- never saw the other link before.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Mellor
    Registered Users Posts: 39,106 ✭✭✭✭Mellor


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Not exactly sure what you ranting about. I was responding to someone saying wholegrain is a good thing to point out its not as good as we are led to believe.
    Rant? Where?
    I was saying whole grain isn't significantly different that white bread.

    But taking GI in isolation as a measure of "heathiness" is pretty stupid.
    What was wrong with the Harvard link- never saw the other link before.
    I was pointing out that the Harvard link is also the one used in the article.


  • Options
    #133
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Mellor wrote: »
    Rant? Where?
    I was saying whole grain isn't significantly different that white bread.

    But taking GI in isolation as a measure of "heathiness" is pretty stupid.


    I was pointing out that the Harvard link is also the one used in the article.

    Yes pretty much just as bad.

    I didn't. Another poster said wholegrain is good.

    So what was wrong with Havard link. How was the comparison of GI nonsense?


  • Options
    #134
    SteelyDanJalapeno
    Registered Users Posts: 14,243 ✭✭✭✭SteelyDanJalapeno


    Bruno,

    Any disadvantages to High fat low carb?


  • Options
    #135
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    TiltedBrain wrote: »
    Bruno,

    Any disadvantages to High fat low carb?

    Decreased profits for processed food companies and supermarkets.


  • Options
    #136
    Oryx
    Subscribers Posts: 19,425 ✭✭✭✭Oryx


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Decreased profits for processed food companies and supermarkets.

    Rather than a glib reply, are there any implications for say, heart health?


  • Options
    #137
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,560 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    Oryx wrote: »
    Rather than a glib reply, are there any implications for say, heart health?

    Or for an athlete that needs a lot of ATP to be produced by glycolisis.

    Or just your common-or-garden person with poor lipase production or poor bile secretion.

    That's ignoring the link between people with a certain form of the apolipoprotein gene and a high-fat diet to certain diseases.


  • Options
    #138
    SteelyDanJalapeno
    Registered Users Posts: 14,243 ✭✭✭✭SteelyDanJalapeno


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Decreased profits for processed food companies and supermarkets.

    You know what I meant, surely you dont think it's a wonder diet, there's obvious disadvantages, do you know what they are?


  • Options
    #139
    ford2600
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,457 ✭✭✭ford2600


    Oryx wrote: »
    Rather than a glib reply, are there any implications for say, heart health?

    Your right to ask the question. Recommending diet as a one size suits all is wrong.

    As someone who eats hflc, I'm as interested as anyone as to long term effects. It suited yhe ultra endurance events I was doing, but even then I was using lots of carbs post exercise with plenty protein.

    If your doing very intense training of any serious duration, then you'll need to add plenty carbs.

    I don't know the reasons why, but it doesn't suit lots of people. Why you would persist with something that doesn't work in order to follow a dogmatic approach I don't know.

    Noakes is an interesting/engaging person on many topics; but he had a life changing experience as a result of diet change. He seems to suggest diet is for everyone which imho is dangerous and irresponsible. His preaching and the following/cult which has built around him is not unlike a religious one; and even the most ardent believer would admit rational thought can often be a dirty word in such groups.


  • Options
    #140
    jtthom
    Registered Users Posts: 39 ✭jtthom


    I wouldn't be crazy about counting calories/macros but a quick look at that stuff tells me that I take in approx fat 55%/carbs 20%/protein 25%, take it that this is consider HFLC? Pushing carbs closer to 200g for what it's worth.


  • Options
    #141
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,560 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    jtthom wrote: »
    I wouldn't be crazy about counting calories/macros but a quick look at that stuff tells me that I take in approx fat 55%/carbs 20%/protein 25%, take it that this is consider HFLC? Pushing carbs closer to 200g for what it's worth.

    Probably too high to be considered LC.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    Alf Veedersane wrote: »
    People usually use the GI comparison when comparing different types of a food.

    Not sure how many people would be puttering a Snickers or two for a sandwich.


    My beloved ignore function is being undone by the quote function over and over *sad face*


    Someone put a script in feedback somewhere that removes all references in the quotes also and doesn't give you the notification that the ignored poster has posted


    I would have thought LC would be 150g or less, even better 100 or less?


  • Options
    #143
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,560 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    bluewolf wrote: »
    Someone put a script in feedback somewhere that removes all references in the quotes also and doesn't give you the notification that the ignored poster has posted

    That's the stuff dream sequences are made of.


  • Options
    #144
    coffee_cake
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Politics Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 81,309 CMod ✭✭✭✭coffee_cake


    Alf Veedersane wrote: »
    That's the stuff dream sequences are made of.

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=90291041&postcount=23


  • Options
    #145
    jtthom
    Registered Users Posts: 39 ✭jtthom


    Alf Veedersane wrote: »
    Probably too high to be considered LC.

    I've gone between 50g-100g in the past and always felt a little bit sluggish. Now that I'm a lot more active (including running three times a week) I felt the need to up my carb intake, which is usually a daily 400g portion of white potatoes soaked in butter.


  • Options
    #146
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,560 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    jtthom wrote: »
    I've gone between 50g-100g in the past and always felt a little bit sluggish. Now that I'm a lot more active (including running three times a week) I felt the need to up my carb intake, which is usually a daily 400g portion of white potatoes soaked in butter.

    Well, that's the key really. If something doesn't work for you, alter it until it does!


  • Options
    #147
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    TiltedBrain wrote: »
    You know what I meant, surely you dont think it's a wonder diet, there's obvious disadvantages, do you know what they are?

    No. No such thing. Now I actually don't eat enough fat to be considered high fat. However eating real food is surely considered the best way to eat. For example I believe meals should be 2/3 veg and 1/3 meat / fat. Regarding disadvantages I'm sure there are some. A new book called the Big Fat Surprise addresses concerns over this way of eating. Conclusion nothing harmful eating butter, eggs, grass fed red meat, etc.


  • Options
    #148
    davmol
    Registered Users Posts: 883 ✭✭✭davmol


    Sorry to jump in late on this thread but when you say fat,are you referrig to good sources of fat or just fat in general regardless of category ie bacon fat?

    isnt there literature going round now about fat being de-demonised and all the myths being debunked of fat causing heart disease etc ?

    On my iphone and couldnt be arsed to search for the studies.


  • Options
    #149
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    davmol wrote: »
    Sorry to jump in late on this thread but when you say fat,are you referrig to good sources of fat or just fat in general regardless of category ie bacon fat?

    isnt there literature going round now about fat being de-demonised and all the myths being debunked of fat causing heart disease etc ?

    On my iphone and couldnt be arsed to search for the studies.

    Yes good sources of fat- butter, cream, eggs, coconut oil, avocado, meat, etc. Nothing wrong with bacon fat.

    Yes lots of literature suggesting that fat is not the source of these problems.


  • Options
    #150
    jtthom
    Registered Users Posts: 39 ✭jtthom


    davmol wrote: »
    Sorry to jump in late on this thread but when you say fat,are you referrig to good sources of fat or just fat in general regardless of category ie bacon fat?

    isnt there literature going round now about fat being de-demonised and all the myths being debunked of fat causing heart disease etc ?

    On my iphone and couldnt be arsed to search for the studies.

    When I say 55% fat I'm talking the following:

    Whole eggs
    Butter
    Double cream
    Whole milk
    Meat (chicken legs with skin, ground beef, ground pork)
    Dark chocolate (85%)
    Cocoa butter
    Fish (typically sardines in olive oil)
    Handful of almonds

    Not sure if you were specifically asking me but anyway.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    generic2012
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭generic2012


    davmol wrote: »
    Sorry to jump in late on this thread but when you say fat,are you referrig to good sources of fat or just fat in general regardless of category ie bacon fat?

    isnt there literature going round now about fat being de-demonised and all the myths being debunked of fat causing heart disease etc ?

    On my iphone and couldnt be arsed to search for the studies.

    I wouldn't say debunked, not as bad as it was once thought but still lots of evidence/reasons to believe that it shouldn't make up the bulk off your diet out there. Coming more and more to light that too many calories are unhealthy regardless of source. One of the reasons it is demonised is because it is so high in calories.

    It was demonised so much before it was practically eradicated, now there is a new wave of idiots taking it to the other extreme.

    Human nature: If doing this a little bit of this is good, as much as possible must be best!


Advertisement